What was the project?

As described above, we wanted to develop a learning community for EAP students in Level 6 reading, writing, and grammar who would also be enrolled in DEP2000 and LIS2004. This way, students would be developing their reading, writing, grammar, and information literacy skills while studying human growth and development. We worked together to create common assignments. 

We had 4 general goals when we submitted our proposal and a few more specific goals that developed along the way. Our original goals were:

1. To determine if students enrolled in the learning community would complete LIS2004 and DEP2000 at a higher rate (completion) than those ESL students who were not.

2. To develop a content-based curriculum for the learning community 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 learning community.

4. To determine what difficulties EAP students faced once they were in credit courses.

As we worked on the project, additional goals were added based on what we were discovering as we planned together and worked with students. They were:

1. To assist ESL students to develop the skills needed to enter college credit courses.

2. To improve the performance and retention of ESL 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.

How was the project accomplished?

A cohort of 16 English-as-a-Second Language (ESL) students enrolled in a learning community that consisted of five classes in the 12-week semester of summer, 2005: EAP 1620 (reading), EAP 1640 (writing), EAP 1660 (grammar), DEP 2000 (Human Growth and Development), and LIS2004 (Internet Research). Students were recruited from Level 5 EAP classes. All interested students were given an application and asked to get recommendations from their teachers during the spring semester.

For the 6 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 and address logistical and institutional issues that arose pertaining to the development of a learning community and to the issues we were discovering about why students may not be entering AA and AS degree programs after EAP graduation. We also met weekly to discuss the course and the students once the learning community was actually running.

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. 

Finally, the learning community was taught during the summer 12-week semester at the Hialeah Campus. While we were teaching the course, we met weekly for several hours to discuss individual student progress and various curriculum adjustments.

How was the project assessed and evaluated?

We assessed the project based on our completion of our original and secondary goals. Each is discussed below. Original General Goals:

1. To determine if students enrolled in the learning community would complete LIS2004 and DEP2000 at a higher rate (completion) than those ESL students who were not.

Result: Our ESL students completed DEP2000 at a higher rate than the college-wide average for ESL students in DEP2000. We had a 100% pass rate for our students as opposed to 86.5% college-wide.

2. To develop a content-based curriculum for the learning community based on DEP2000. The curriculum would distinguish how the competencies of each discipline are best incorporated into one, combined curriculum.

Result: A shared syllabus was developed that incorporated the competencies required in each of the 5 courses. The syllabus and writing assignments are contained on the disk that accompanies this report. In the original grant, we proposed revising the competencies. However, this was not necessary. The competencies are fine. More at issue is how those competencies are reached. 

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 learning community.

Result: 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.) Per our original commitment, this information has been presented at one conference and in one published article (see below). 

4. To determine what difficulties EAP students faced once they were in credit courses.

Result: 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 reading and writing 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 be possible in 5 separate classes with different students and teachers who did not know one another. Originally we hoped to collect this information through the use of a survey. However, we used a writing assignment to determine those issues which proved most difficult to students. In short: workload, time commitment, and type of assignments.

Secondary, More Specific Goals:

1. To assist ESL students to develop the skills needed to enter college credit courses beyond reading, writing, and information literacy (the original focus of the grant).

Result: We provided individual and group advisement on the process of selecting courses. Students were prepared for entry into college-credit courses by providing test preparation training and scheduling college placement examinations (both CPT and PASS). We facilitated the enrollment process upon completion of the learning community 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 16 EAP students who completed the learning community, 12 of the 16 enrolled in credit classes for the fall semester and 2 for non-credit classes. That means that 14 of the 16 enrolled in some course, which is a retention rate of 88%, well above the college-wide fall-to-fall rate. 

2. To improve the performance and retention of ESL students in college credit courses.

Result: We provided multidisciplinary support to students on an individual and group basis via tutorials and lab activities, including math, 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 college credits (4) that count towards graduation (upon successful completion of the program). 

3. To gather qualitative and quantitative information on the student population at the Hialeah Campus.

Results: 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.

Already Completed Institutional Research: By analyzing information about ESL/EAP students already completed by Institutional Research, the following portrait of the EAP students demonstrates the importance of finding ways for EAP and ESL students to be successful and complete regular classes.

- 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/ESL program in Hialeah.

- 91% of our roughly 6,000 credit students are Hispanic; 78% declared Spanish as their native language; and the Hialeah Campus has the highest proportion of Hispanics and native speakers of Spanish of any campus.

- ESL 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.

Original Research: The following is quantitative information based on this project that provides new information about Hialeah EAP students:

- Our ESL students completed DEP2000 at a higher rate than the college-wide average for ESL students in DEP2000—100% pass rate for our students as opposed to 86.5% college-wide.

- In terms of grades, the learning community 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 LC Students in summer PSYCH Community

N=18 Except where indicated by *
*N=16 as there were 2 students not involved in LC (controls)

- 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

- The college-wide fall-to-fall retention rate of EAP Level 6 completers was 57% from 2003 to 2004.  Out of the 16 EAP students who completed the learning community, 12 of the 16 enrolled in credit classes for fall semester and 2 for non-credit classes.  That means that 14 of the 16 enrolled in some course, which is a retention rate of 88%, well above the college-wide fall-to-fall rate. 

4. To increase the understanding and use of technological skills in education.