Examining the impacts of intrusive advising on the retention and academic success of first-year, at-risk, community college students (Doctoral dissertation) [Intrusive advising vs. business as usual]
Rios, A. L. (2019). https://fisherpub.sjfc.edu/.
-
examining1,185Students, gradePS
Department-funded evaluation
Review Details
Reviewed: May 2021
- Department-funded evaluation (findings for Advising outreach)
- Quasi-Experimental Design
- Meets WWC standards with reservations because it uses a quasi-experimental design in which the analytic intervention and comparison groups satisfy the baseline equivalence requirement.
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.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
First Semester College GPA |
Advising outreach vs. Business as usual |
0 Semesters |
Full sample;
|
1.93 |
1.80 |
No |
-- | |
|
Percentage of credits earned |
Advising outreach vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
0.61 |
0.57 |
No |
-- | |
|
First Year College GPA |
Advising outreach vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Full sample;
|
1.87 |
1.78 |
No |
-- |
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: 45%
Male: 55% -
Suburban
-
- 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
New York
-
Race Asian 1% Black 17% Other or unknown 8% White 48% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 24% Not Hispanic or Latino 76%
Study Details
Setting
This study took place in a mid-sized, suburban, public community college located in New York State.
Study sample
The study focused on "academically underprepared" students, including students who placed into remedial coursework during their first semester and students whose high school GPA was below 3.0. These students were first-time, full-time college students in fall 2017. The total analytic sample size was 1,185. Of these students, 45% were female, 18% lived on campus, and 51% were Pell Grant recipients. In addition, 1% were Asian, 17% were Black, 24% were Hispanic, and 48% were White. (4% were two or more races, 4% were of unknown race/ethnicity, and 1% were international.)
Intervention Group
The intervention was an intrusive advising model. Full-time and part-time advisors were assigned to students at the beginning of the school year. They conducted preliminary outreach to their students during the first 6 weeks of the first semester. Students used an Early Alert System to schedule appointments with their advisor and communication with them throughout the semester. If students do not schedule appointment, advisors can use the Early Alert System to reach out to students. The Early Alert System also is used by faculty to flag early signs of academic struggle. Advisors use the information to follow-up with students and design interventions to support them as needed. Advisors also use the Early Alert System to refer students to other academic support services in the college. Advisors use the system to document outreach to students, maintain notes, and track progress.Finally, advisors use degree audit software to help students understand degree requirements and design academic plans for degree completion.
Comparison Group
Students in the comparison condition did not receive intrusive advising and continued the business-as-usual condition. The author does not provide a detailed description of the business-as-usual condition.
Support for implementation
Each of the five full-time advisors was given advisement responsibilities over students in designated majors within an academic department and was specialized in advisement for these curricula. The full-time advisors worked in conjunction with the faculty of their respective departments and provided training to all staff on any curricula information for their areas. In addition to full-time advisors, 12 part-time advisors were assigned a student caseload of 150-230 students. These students were also assigned based upon their academic major. Whenever possible, advisors were chosen to advise students within an academic major that was representative of their own educational background.
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).