|
An ESL Learning Community: Successfully Bridging the Gap Between EAP & College
by Professors Hialeah
Abstract The goal of this Learning Community (LC) was to better prepare the
Hialeah Campus English for Academic Purposes (EAP) students for regular
college courses. It developed a concrete curriculum geared for EAP
students concurrently enrolled in three disciplines: social science,
information literacy, and EAP. This concrete curriculum and LC
addressed the EAP students’ real needs through collaboration with faculty and
students in both the EAP program and regular college disciplines. This LC sought to improve the performance and retention of EAP students in college courses in innovative ways. No other LC at MDC has involved Human Growth and Development, Internet Research, and Advanced EAP Reading, Writing, and Grammar. In addition, ongoing cross-disciplinary faculty collaboration, both before and during the LC, allowed the faculty to build a curriculum that reflected the genuine academic demands students face and would serve as a resource to other faculty. Finally, the project provided statistical information about EAP students in Hialeah, a unique group.
The Goals As described above, we wanted to develop a LC for EAP students in
EAP1620 (Reading 6), EAP1640 (Writing 6), and EAP1660 (Grammar 6) who would
also be enrolled in DEP2000 (Human Growth & Development) and LIS2004
(Internet Research). This way, students would be developing their
reading, writing, grammar, and information literacy skills while studying
human growth and development. The following are the original goals: 1.
To determine if students enrolled in the LC
would complete LIS2004 and DEP2000 at a higher rate (completion) than those
EAP students who were not. 2.
To develop a content-based curriculum for
the LC based on DEP2000. The curriculum would distinguish how the
competencies of each discipline are best incorporated into one, combined
curriculum. 3.
To develop a model for cross-discipline
faculty development based on the activities we found most useful during our
work together developing and teaching this LC. 4.
To determine what difficulties EAP students
faced once they were in credit courses.
As we worked on the LC, the following goals were added based on what we discovered as we planned together and worked with students: 1.
To assist EAP students to develop the skills
needed to enter college credit courses. 2.
To improve the performance and retention of
EAP students in college credit courses. 3.
To gather qualitative and quantitative
information on the student population at the Hialeah Campus (Currently, the information
that is available is limited). 4.
To increase the understanding and use of
technological skills in education.
Curriculum Development & Implementation For the six months prior to the 12-week summer semester, all four professors met every other week to develop a common, content-based curriculum based on the content and text of DEP2000. We also observed one another’s classes. This planning time allowed us to create a common curriculum based on the skills we observed in each other’s classes. It also allowed us to address logistical and institutional issues that arose pertaining to the development of a LC. Most importantly, we addressed issues about why students might not be entering AA and AS degree programs after EAP completion.
We realized, as we created the academic aspects of the curriculum, that we needed to address issues that would aid in the transition of students from EAP to regular classes. We decided to include time for advisement, career planning, PASS and CPT testing. Another aspect of the course that was developed during our planning time prior to actually teaching the course was the use of an Internet classroom space using WebCT.
During the Spring 2005 semester (prior to the 12-week summer semester), students were recruited from Level 5 EAP classes. All interested students were given an application and asked to get recommendations from their current teachers before registering for the summer LC. A cohort of sixteen English for Academic Purposes (EAP) students was finally enrolled in the LC that consisted of five classes in the 12-week semester of the Summer 2005 term: EAP1620 (Reading 6), EAP1640 (Writing 6), EAP1660 (Grammar 6), DEP2000 (Human Growth & Development), and LIS2004 (Internet Research). During the summer semester, we met weekly for several hours to discuss individual student progress and various curriculum adjustments.
Assessment & Results We assessed the LC based on the completion of our goals. The following are the results: 1.
Our EAP students completed DEP2000 at a
higher rate than the college-wide average for EAP students in DEP2000.
We had a 100% pass rate for our students as opposed to 86.5% college-wide. 2.
A shared syllabus was developed that
incorporated the competencies required in each of the 5 courses. 3.
Our model of class observation and
collaborative assignment development proved invaluable toward developing a
coherent curriculum. Pre-planning assignments based on individual
competencies enabled us to learn about each other’s disciplines. Moreover,
working together to enroll students and monitor their progress served as an
invaluable introduction to many aspects of the institution and administrative
procedures (e.g., registration, financial aid, testing, etc.) 4.
The hurdles for students were both academic
and personal. We learned that the amount of reading, writing, and
information literacy required in a credit course is far beyond what is
required in a normal Level 6 EAP course. Personal issues such as
balancing work, family, and school would have resulted in several
non-completers. However, we were able to support students due to our
familiarity with them and their problems. Students were also there to
encourage and assist one another. Therefore, we had 100% completion of
all students. This familiarity and attention would not have been
possible in five separate classes with different students and teachers who
did not know one another. We used a writing assignment to determine the
greatest difficulties students faced: workload, time commitment, and type
of assignments. 5.
We provided individual and group advisement
on the process of selecting courses. Students were prepared for entry
into college-credit courses through test preparation training and scheduling college
placement examinations (both CPT and PASS). We facilitated the
enrollment process upon completion of the LC by having advisement done in
class. These strategies proved useful. The college-wide fall-to-fall
retention rate of EAP Level 6 completers was 57% from 2003 to 2004. Out
of the sixteen EAP students who completed the LC, twelve of them enrolled in
credit classes for the fall semester and two for non-credit classes.
That means that fourteen of the sixteen enrolled in some course, which is a retention
rate of 88%, well above the college-wide fall-to-fall rate. 6.
We provided multidisciplinary support to
students on an individual and group basis via tutorials and lab activities
(e.g. math workshops), monitored performance closely and provided immediate
feedback on all LC tasks, distributed multidisciplinary midterm reports,
created and fostered a community and learning environment among students,
facilitated communication among students using technology through the WebCT
classroom, and provided students with four college credits that count towards
graduation (upon successful completion of the program). 7.
Qualitative information was gathered
through class observations and archiving of student writing on the WebCT
classroom Web site. In terms of quantitative information, we were able
to gather statistics about Hialeah students from research already completed
by institutional research as well as collect new stats.
By analyzing information about EAP students already completed by Institutional Research, the following portrait of the EAP students demonstrates the importance of finding ways for EAP students to be successful and complete regular classes: 1.
Only 31.3% of Level 6 reading students and
53.1% of Level 6 writing students in 2003 could enter regular courses after
graduating from the EAP/EAP program in Hialeah. 2.
91% of our roughly 6,000 credit students
are Hispanic; 78% declared Spanish as their native language; and the highest
proportion of Hispanics and native speakers of Spanish of any campus. EAP courses provided 53% of MDC credit growth during the period 1980-2001, and 62% of our non-credit growth. In 2001, 60.5% of all credits at the Hialeah Campus were from Second Language courses. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The following is
quantitative information based on this project that provides new information
about Hialeah EAP students: 1.
Our EAP students completed DEP2000 at a
higher rate than the college-wide average for EAP students in DEP2000—100%
pass rate for our students as opposed to 86.5% college-wide. 2.
In terms of grades, the LC students did
significantly better in the credit classes than students in those same
courses offered in Hialeah by the same professors (Institutional Research
Study).
Grades for Students in Summer 2005 EAP/Psychology LC
N=18 Except where indicated by * *N=16 as there were 2 students not involved in LC (controls)
3.
In terms of CPT placement results, we did
better than the level 6 Hialeah average of 53.1% for placement into the regular
writing. A little over sixty-six percent (66.7%) were exempt from the
writing course. Although 31.3% of those tested exiting Level 6 reading
last year in Hialeah placed into remedial reading, 60% of the LC students
did. (Institutional Research).
N=15; 2 students not tested for placement (controls); 1 student absent
Unexpected Outcomes 1.
We were able to offer more EAP courses
during the summer semester than the department usually can. 2.
Many students chose the Psych LC over
regular Level 6 courses. 3.
Most students came from Level 5 and 6 classes
with Professors Basinger and Thompson. 4.
LC ideal for advanced EAP levels (Levels 5
& 6). 5.
The Psychology professor noted how much
more interactive and participatory EAP students were compared to her regular
classes. 6.
Although we knew that students’ technology
skills were low, we didn’t realize the extent. 7.
Learning communities are a powerful faculty
development tool. 8.
Financial aid matters. Most students
have used up their financial aid money by summer. Other options
available are Institutional Funds, Short-Term Student Loans, etc. 9.
There is lot of administration. Each
of us learned more than we expected about departmental and administrative
procedures and protocols. 10. Protocols
for LCs don’t exist. Since there are no institutionalized procedures for how
learning communities should be created and administered, conflicts arise
around class selection, class posting, registration, cross-departmental
communication, etc. 11. Communication
should be centralized. Each department has idiosyncratic procedures
for enrollment, posting classes, stating requirements, etc. 12. Summer
EAP/Psychology LC students formed a strong support group and sub-groups
during the semester to deal with academic and personal issues, which carried
beyond class time or even the term. 13. The
summer term moved at a very fast pace and is probably not the best time for a
pilot project. 14. Speech
competence clearly hinders performance in college level courses.
However, speech competence is not tested by the CPT. The students with the
lowest grades in DEP2000 and LIS2004 had the most difficulty with speech and
listening skills of all the students. 15. There
needs to be time to address the increased pressures of deadlines, writing,
reading, etc. that develop given a course with this much work.
Recommendations 1.
Faculty must meet frequently and be open to
revision of planned curriculum. 2.
Explore the exemption of students who
receive a B or better in all five courses from reading and writing
remediation. Clearly, these students can do college level reading and
writing. 3.
Standardized tests should be completed
before leaving the LC. PASS, CPT and advisement should be part of the Level 6
curriculum. This encourages retention. 4.
Collaborative planning of reading and
writing assignments requires a high degree of coordination and communication
among faculty. Students depend on one teacher’s response and
preparation to complete assignments in another course. For this reason,
adequate prep time should be given to creating the curriculum and working
with one another during the semester. 5.
Because of the incredible amount of
cooperative planning both before and during the instruction, faculty must
want to work together. This type of work requires collaboration and
communication above and beyond normal collegiality. 6.
Faculty should most probably be full-time
instructors. 7.
Administration and faculty should work
together to institutionalize procedures and policies surrounding learning
communities. 8.
Until procedures are in place, departmental
chairs should be involved in decision making via periodic meetings with
faculty. Faculty should communicate directly with administration.
9.
Learning communities are a powerful faculty
development tool. Perhaps professional credit can be given to faculty who
participate to institutionalize participation.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||