Los Angeles Valley College
Student Learning Outcomes Assessment Report
Courses and Programs
Discipline: Department: General Tutoring/Math Lab/Writing Center/
Biology tutoring
Program/Course: Supervised Learning Assistance 001T Semester/Year: Fall 2012
SLO Representative: P. Yasuda Department Chairs: P. Yasuda/S. Weigand/S. Huang
Student Learning Outcome Assessed / Students who are tutored demonstrate improved performance in tutored subjectDescription of Assessment Method
a. Describe the assessment tool (e.g., student essay, performance, etc.)
b. Describe how the data was analyzed (rubric elements, etc.). Attach rubric if applicable.
*** Please keep all data for at least 3 years. / a. Success and retention data for General Tutoring, Math Lab, Writing Center, and Biology Tutoring, and student surveys for General Tutoring and Writing Center.
b. Student success and retention data was collected and analyzed by the Foundational Skills researcher, Office of Research and Planning, and lab supervisors for trends and any data anomalies.
Description of Sampling Methodology
a. Course Sections - How many sections of this course were offered? State if the sections were offered in the morning /afternoon /evening/ online. How many sections were assessed? Describe how these sections represent the diversity of students represented in the course.
b. Faculty - How many faculty (part-time and full-time) taught this course? How many faculty participated in the SLO assessment process?
c. Students - How many students in total were enrolled? How many students were sampled?
d. Random Selection (If this course offered more than one section, at least 1/3 of the total # of students must be assessed) - How was the random selection process conducted? (e.g., chose every 3rd student from roster) / Overview
Supervised Learning Assistance is a non-standard class where the Biology Tutoring Center, Writing Center, General Tutoring and the Math Lab teach different content under the direction of different departments. All four labs were assessed 4 labs for the SLO analysis. For each prompt, we will provide a general overview followed by any lab specific details.
Within each lab, we have collected all student success and retention data for any student who was enrolled in the Writing Center, General Tutoring, Biology Tutoring, and Math Lab for Spring 2012. In the Writing Center, General Tutoring and Math Lab, students were sampled with surveys in different manner as specified below.
General Tutoring
a. In fall 2011 and spring 2012, we offered four sections of SLA 001T. Our tutoring hours varied depending on the budget, but we were opened four days and two evenings a week during fall 2011 and spring 2012 semesters. Since we are a multiple subject tutoring center, we supported a diverse student population and a diverse discipline base. For fall 2011 and spring 2012 General Tutoring offered tutoring for approximately 39 subjects. Additionally, we collected student surveys to assess whether or not General Tutoring was meeting student needs.
b. P. Yasuda is the only full-time faculty responsible for General Tutoring and the SLO assessment process.
c. In fall 2011 General Tutoring assisted 1,490 students, and in spring 2012 it assisted 1,360 students. There were approximately 32,435 students enrolled at LAVC; therefore, General Tutoring assisted approximately 4% of the student population. In the past, the center was able to assist more students because hours of operation were 54 hours per week; however, at present, General Tutoring is opened approximately 24 hours per week.
d. Students were identified through the district data base, and the General Tutoring staff invited tutees to fill-out the student survey.
Math Lab
a. In fall 2011 and spring 2012, we offered two sections of SLA 001T per semester. Both sections from spring 2012 were assessed.
In fall 2011 and spring 2012, the Math Lab was open between 9:00 am to 6:00 pm with the lab closed midday between the hours of 2:00 pm and 4:00 pm, Monday through Thursday. There is no online component to the Math Lab tutoring services since there are no pure online Math courses provided at LAVC.
The success and retention data for all students who enrolled in the Math Lab in spring 2012 were analyzed. 11 foundational skills math classes were randomly selected for student surveys so cross course comparisons could be made. Students were surveyed by math class rather than only surveying students who were enrolled in the Math Lab in order to analyze why students did not use the Math Lab.
These sections cover the entire breathe of foundational skills courses including both day and night courses which make up the majority of the students who enroll in the Math Lab. In the future, we plan to sample students in GE math courses in a similar manner.
b. John Kawai is the only full-time faculty responsible for supervising the Math Lab and for participating in the SLO assessment process.
c. In total 828 students were enrolled in the Math Lab in spring of 2012. Every student’s success and retention information was taken into consideration.
d. All students in spring 2012 were analyzed for their success and retention rates. Out of the 262 math students surveyed, 80 attended the Math Lab which constitutes roughly 10% of the 828 students who were enrolled in the Math Lab.
Writing Center
a. In spring 2012, the Writing Center offered two sections of SLA 001T. The Writing Center was open four days a week and two evenings a week during spring 2012 semester. The Writing Center provides tutoring for Writing across the curriculum, and supported a diverse student population and a diverse discipline base, offering tutoring for students enrolled in foundational, CTE, and transfer level courses.
b. Scott Weigand is the only faculty member responsible for the Writing Center and the SLO assessment for this area.
c. In spring 2012, the Writing Center assisted 562 students and provided 2,700 hours of tutoring. All of the students enrolled were used for the assessment. In the past, we were able to assist more students because we were open forty hours per week, and at present, we are open 18 hours per week.
d. All of the students enrolled were used for the assessment. Students were identified through the district database, and the Writing Center staff invited tutees to fill-out the student survey.
Biology Tutoring lab
a. In fall 2011 and spring 2012, we offered two sections of SLA 001T per semester. Both sections from spring 2012 were assessed. Tutoring was provided for Anatomy, Biology, Microbiology, and Physiology.
Karen Roy was responsible for supervising face to face Biology Tutoring Lab. A few other faculty members helped out as well. Becky Green – Marroquin was in charge of on-line tutoring lab. Both sections participated in the SLO assessment process. Biology Tutoring Lab opened in the afternoons or evening from Monday till Thursday; 10 am -2 pm on Friday and Saturday in fall, 2011; noon- 6pm Monday through Thursday; 10 am – 2 pm Friday and Saturday in spring, 2012.
b. 1,464 students were enrolled in the Anatomy, Biology, Microbiology, and Physiology courses, and 422 students received tutoring.
c. All students in spring 2012 were analyzed for their success and retention rates.
Collaborative Review
a. Describe the norming process and how inter-rater reliability was achieved (if applicable). / a. Overview
Each lab works with a different demographic group and have different success and retention rates.
In order to cross compare lab data, we look at how much enrollment in the lab increases the student’s likelihood of success/retention with respect to success/retention rates without tutoring intervention.
success rate - success rate percent increase of a student
with tutoring without tutoring passing their class with tutoring
------= in comparison to a student with
success rate without tutoring no tutoring
Assessment Results
a. Describe the relevant findings according to the criteria set by the assessment tool. (e.g., report results according to rubric evaluation criteria)
b. What percentage of students achieved the SLO?
c. What percentage of students did not achieve the SLO? / Overview
Each lab improved student success by a similar rate.
General Tutoring increased student success rate by 13.6%
General Tutoring students were 20% more likely to pass their course than non-General Tutoring students.
Math Lab increased student success rate by 11.1%
Math Lab students were 21% more likely to pass their course than non-Math Lab students.
Writing Lab increased student success rate by 12.8%
Writing Lab students were 19% more likely to pass their course than non-Writing Lab students.
Biology Tutoring Lab increased student success rate by 17%.
Each lab improved student retention by a similar rate.
Math Lab increased student retention rate by 5.4%
Math Lab students were 7% more likely to finish their course than non-Math Lab students.
Writing Lab increased student retention rate by 4.7%
Writing Lab students were 5% more likely to finish their course than non-Writing Lab students.
General Tutoring increased student retention rate by 4.9%
General Tutoring students were 6% more likely to finish their course than non-General Tutoring students.
Retention data was not available for the Biology Tutoring.
General Tutoring
a. In spring 2012, students who received tutoring at General Tutoring increased student success rate by 17 percent, and LAVC retained them by 5 percent increase compared to students who were not tutored.
b. Student surveys (spring 2011) indicated that Ninety-seven percent of students indicated that the tutor changed his/her approach to fit [the student’s] understanding of the subject. Ninety-one percent of students who visited General Tutoring believed their academic performance in class improved as a result of tutoring.
c. Approximately, twelve percent of the students enrolled in General Tutoring were unsuccessful compared to 19 percent of non-General Tutoring students.
Eight percent of the students enrolled in General Tutoring did not remain in classes compared to 12 percent of the general student population.
Math Lab
a. Over 22% of the students who are enrolled in LAVC math classes have used the Math Lab. Of those 22%, they increased their success rate by 21% and their retention rate by 7%. I find these numbers to be very encouraging.
The student success rate did not change significantly course by course for any course that had a statistically significant number of students attending the Math Lab.
As the difficulty of the courses increased, a larger percentage of the course’s population attended the Math Lab. Nearly 40% of the students from Math 265 (Calculus I) and higher attended the Math Lab. The courses that attended the Math Lab the least were Math 105 (13%) and Math 112 (10%). We identify both courses as targets for more customized services from the Math Lab.
b. 63.9% of the students who enrolled in the Math Lab passed their math class.
86.1% of the students who enrolled in the Math Lab finished their math class.
c. 36.1% of the students who enrolled in the Math Lab did not finish their math class.
23.9% of the students who enrolled in the Math Lab did not finish their math class.
The Writing Center
a. In spring 2012, students who received tutoring at the Writing Center increased student success rate by 19 percent, and LAVC retained them by a 5 percent increase compared to students who were not tutored. Student surveys (spring 2011) indicated that 98% of students surveyed either strongly agreed or agreed that they felt more confident when facing writing assignments and 98% of students surveyed either strongly agreed or agreed that the Writing Center is helping them be successful with their writing assignments.
b. In spring 2012, 81.9% of students tutored at the Writing Center successfully completed their course and compared to 68.3% of students who did not receive tutoring.
c. 9.6% of students who were tutored at the Writing Center did not successfully complete their course and did not achieve the SLO. 7.6% withdrew.
Biology Tutoring Lab
a. Students from four disciplines of Biology attended tutoring. In spring, 2012, 29% of students who are enrolled in Anatomy, Biology, Microbiology and Physiology have used the Biology Tutoring Lab. Of those 29%, they increased their success rate by 17%
The student success rate differed significantly course by course. 70% of Anatomy students attended tutoring lab. The success rates for Anatomy students were only 38% without tutoring, 71% for those who attended tutoring.
b. Overall 78% of the students who enrolled in Biology Tutoring Lab completed their class.
c. 22% of the students did not complete their class successfully.
How Results were Used for Course/Program Improvement
a. Describe how the results are going to be used for the improvement of teaching, learning, or institutional effectiveness based on the data assessed.
b. How do your assessment findings contribute to the assessment of Program SLO’s? (To access the program SLO’s -http://lavc.edu/slo/programassessment.html/)
c. Describe how results will be shared with others in the discipline/area. / Overview
As in the past, General Tutoring, Math Lab, Writing Center and Biology Tutoring Center faculty and staff will request data from the Office of Research and Planning to identify the courses with the lowest retention and success rates. Each lab will continue to work very closely with other institutional committees, such as CARTS, Foundational Skills, SSC, and PASS to address and meet the needs of LAVC students, and utilize the guiding principles of the Educational Master Plan.
The implementations of these interventions are dependent on a stable
level of funding for all of the tutoring Labs.
General Tutoring
a. To address Foundational Skills Program Learning Outcomes Recommendations during General Tutor Training. For example, train all tutors how to address tutee reading skills, reasoning skills, and academic habit. Additionally, General Tutoring would like to participate with other department leaders when the Program SLO recommended Implementation Leadership Team is established.
b. General tutoring provides support to all three components of the foundational skills program SLO: communication skills, reasoning skills and academic habits of mind in the manner topics are taught.
c. The findings will be shared with CARTS, SSC, and with the Foundational Skills Pathway Implementation Team to address and meet the needs of LAVC students, and utilize the guiding principles of the Educational Master Plan.