An empirical analysis of factors that influence the first year to second year retention of students at one large, Hispanic Serving Institution (HSI) (Doctoral dissertation).
Wilkerson, S. L. (2008). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3333787).
-
examining1,296Students, 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
First-to-second year retention |
First year experience courses vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
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: 55%
Male: 45% -
Urban
-
- 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
Texas
-
Race Asian 7% Black 7% Native American 0% White 40% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 46% Not Hispanic or Latino 54%
Study Details
Setting
The study took place at the University of Texas at San Antonio. The university is a metropolitan, comprehensive public university that offers bachelor’s, master’s, and doctoral degree programs.
Study sample
Characteristics of the full sample are reported. The sample contained 55.3% females and 44.7% males. Of the sample, 46.1% were Hispanic, 39.8% were White, 7.2% were African American, 6.7% were Asian or Pacific Islander, and 0.2% were American Indian or Alaskan Native. In addition, 75% of the students were financial aid applicants, and 48.8% were first generation students.
Intervention Group
The first-year seminar was offered as a three-credit course and was considered a core requirement for students in the College of Social and Behavioral Sciences. No specific information on how the course is implemented is reported.
Comparison Group
The comparison group for the study is considered a business-as-usual comparison; these students did not participate in the first-year seminar. No information on monitoring this group is reported.
Support for implementation
No information was provided regarding support for implementation.
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).