Measuring the Impact of a University First-Year Experience Program on Student GPA and Retention
Jamelske, Eric (2009). Higher Education: The International Journal of Higher Education and Educational Planning, v57 n3 p373-391. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ825726
-
examining1,869Students, gradePS
First year experience courses Intervention Report - Supporting Postsecondary Success
Review Details
Reviewed: July 2016
- Quasi-Experimental Design
- Meets WWC standards with reservations
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Please see the WWC summary of evidence for First year experience courses.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
College GPA |
First year experience courses vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
College students;
|
N/A |
N/A |
Yes |
|
|
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Enrollment |
First year experience courses vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
College students;
|
N/A |
N/A |
Yes |
-- |
|
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
Female: 60%
Male: 40% -
- B
- A
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- I
- H
- J
- K
- L
- P
- M
- N
- O
- Q
- R
- S
- V
- U
- T
- W
- X
- Z
- Y
- a
- h
- i
- b
- d
- e
- f
- c
- g
- j
- k
- l
- m
- n
- o
- p
- q
- r
- s
- t
- u
- v
- x
- w
- y
Midwest
-
Race White 93%
Study Details
Setting
The study took place at a medium-sized public university in the midwestern United States. A total of 100 first year experience course sections were offered to students in the fall of 2006.
Study sample
In the overall sample of students, 40% were male, 93% were White, the average age was 18.6 (SD = .34) years, 16% were from low-income households, 42% were first generation college students, and the average ACT score was 24.3 (SD = 2.87).
Intervention Group
The first-year experience (FYE) program in this study was designed to offer academic and extracurricular services to first-time freshmen and to help integrate participating students into the university setting. The university offers 100 different FYE course sections, and almost all (> 85%) first-time freshmen enroll in an FYE course. The FYE courses are linked to a specific course topic (e.g., biology, economics, algebra, calculus, psychology, Spanish) and involve small group peer activities (FYEs were capped at 20 students for enrollment), close work with a faculty member, and a student peer mentor. The FYE program goals are to introduce students to core course content, enhance academic skills (including content knowledge, study skills, time management, etc.), strengthen connections to the university, engage students in out-of-class activities, and enhance student accountability. The FYE also aims to foster connections with at least one faculty member and provide a peer educational learning community. Regardless of whether teaching an FYE or non-FYE course, instructors must cover the same basic topical materials (i.e., both FYE and non-FYE biology must cover the same biology content), and grades must be determined on comparable assignments and exams. The author noted that integrating the FYE material without compromising the original core course was difficult, and that the time commitment for extracurricular activities was problematic for FYE faculty.
Comparison Group
Students in the comparison condition were full-time, first-year college students who did not enroll in any FYE course sections during fall 2006. These students enrolled in courses typical of first-year students at the university.
Support for implementation
Informal, voluntary faculty and peer mentor training workshops were provided, with no procedures to hold instructors accountable for meeting program goals. There was no formal application process for selecting FYE faculty and no added value placed on performance reviews for teaching FYE.
An indicator of the effect of the intervention, the improvement index can be interpreted as the expected change in percentile rank for an average comparison group student if that student had received the intervention.
For more, please see the WWC Glossary entry for improvement index.
An outcome is the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are attained as a result of an activity. An outcome measures is an instrument, device, or method that provides data on the outcome.
A finding that is included in the effectiveness rating. Excluded findings may include subgroups and subscales.
The sample on which the analysis was conducted.
The group to which the intervention group is compared, which may include a different intervention, business as usual, or no services.
The timing of the post-intervention outcome measure.
The number of students included in the analysis.
The mean score of students in the intervention group.
The mean score of students in the comparison group.
The WWC considers a finding to be statistically significant if the likelihood that the finding is due to chance alone, rather than a real difference, is less than five percent.
The WWC reviews studies for WWC products, Department of Education grant competitions, and IES performance measures.
The name and version of the document used to guide the review of the study.
The version of the WWC design standards used to guide the review of the study.
The result of the WWC assessment of the study. The rating is based on the strength of evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention. Studies are given a rating of Meets WWC Design Standards without Reservations, Meets WWC Design Standards with Reservations, or >Does Not Meet WWC Design Standards.
A related publication that was reviewed alongside the main study of interest.
Study findings for this report.
Based on the direction, magnitude, and statistical significance of the findings within a domain, the WWC characterizes the findings from a study as one of the following: statistically significant positive effects, substantively important positive effects, indeterminate effects, substantively important negative effects, and statistically significant negative effects. For more, please see the WWC Handbook.
The WWC may review studies for multiple purposes, including different reports and re-reviews using updated standards. Each WWC review of this study is listed in the dropdown. Details on any review may be accessed by making a selection from the drop down list.
Tier 1 Strong indicates strong evidence of effectiveness,
Tier 2 Moderate indicates moderate evidence of effectiveness, and
Tier 3 Promising indicates promising evidence of effectiveness,
as defined in the
non-regulatory guidance for ESSA
and the regulations for ED discretionary grants (EDGAR Part 77).