Raise the Bar Transfer Summit

Today, November 9th, CCRI Director Lia Wetzstein joins fellow delegates selected to represent Washington state at the Raise the Bar Transfer Summit where over 200 higher education professionals are gathered. This summit brings together state, institution, and other leaders in the field and is part of the Raise the Bar: Attaining College Excellence & Equity series: Tackling Transfer to Increase Access, Improve Completion, and Prepare Today’s Workforce. https://lnkd.in/gQ7N3j-4

Literature shows that transfer disproportionately impacts students of color and other underserved students including those from low-income backgrounds. Despite the national statistic that 40% of students transfer at some point in their higher education journey, the barrier of credit loss has yet to be resolved. The impact on these students is that their degree will cost more, take more time, and for some not be able to earn the credential they sought in the first place.

To that end, the intention for this immersive summit is to make progress toward increasing access and completion for all transfer students.

The day-long summit will take place at Northern Virginia Community College in Annandale, Virginia.

NTSW: Prioritizing Student Input- Key Components of Our Dedication to Transfer Success

As our main goals are dedicated to supporting our transfer students in their journeys, we highly prioritize student input on how we can better our program. As such, we made sure to expand our outreach to our students, inquiring about improvements for the pathway and any and all adjustments we could make that would allow our students every opportunity for success in their respective goals.

Team members Leandra Cate, Lia Wetzstein, and Katie Kovacich created intricate surveys and structured feedback from students to gain both formal and informal data regarding how best to support the transfer student population. Emphasis on one-on-one faculty connections, degree specific inquiry, and navigational avenues to understand their educational requirements were just a few of the dynamic pieces that students provided. All of these components lend themselves to the important success of the Transfer Partnership success, lending stronger promise for the continuance and future of others within the program.

You can read more about this process HERE

20230420_Lettuce Eaters_2169.jpg

NTSW: STEM Transfer Partnership Engineering Pathway Access Increase

ChemE Capstone project

Team members Matthew Ford, Aleya Dhanji, Kira Glynn King, Jie Sheng, Skyler Roth, and Emese Hadnagy have been looking into increasing and consistently expanding outreach to minority serving 2-year and 4-year institutions to promote engineering pathways for increasing students’ upward mobility. Through countless trials and tribulations, this incredible group of individuals focused on identifying shared data needs around student success barriers, established inter-institutional data sharing protocols, and developed a framework to significantly increase, diversify, and enhanced existing outreach, recruitment and academic advising practices in support of these students.

Such work is extensively crucial in promoting equity-based educational protocols for transfer students moving through STEM pathways. Many of these students face disproportionate experiences of adversity and barriers to their success as minority students, let alone being transfer students. As such, the team’s development and utilization of a new, holistic data model for transfer pathways has been extensively successful in expanding Moser’s Transfer Student Capital model, leading to potential expansive increases in student accessibility of support during their transfer STEM experiences and prospective, successful outcomes. Such work lends a promising outlook for the future of transfer partnerships along the road, hosting great impact for student support and STEM engagement.

You can find the full journal article HERE

Listening to Students: New Data Note on Getting Student Input

As STP teams have been working on action plans to expand STEM equity at their institutions, CCRI has documented the process of their efforts through a variety of data collection efforts, including participant observation in coaching sessions and convenings, surveys, and interviews. Analysis of this data reveals the challenges and creative innovations embedded in the process of developing a plan for student input and turning that input into student-centered programs and process improvements. The most recent data note shares findings about the iterative process of developing these plans, as teams use both formal and informal learning from students to inform and refine subsequent efforts. We find that teams are thinking creatively not only about how to get student input but also what defines input and how to interpret and apply what they learn from students.

A common experience for STP teams in the initial period of the program was grappling with how to define student input. Many of the STP participants have years, if not decades, of experience working with students in the STEM pathway, but does that experiential knowledge constitute data? Similarly, many participants were learning from students informally at events and in classroom settings but wondered how to synthesize and interpret those informal interactions. One of the key lessons of the first half of the program was that experiential knowledge and informal feedback from students matter a great deal in the action research process. Teams tuned into this information and used it as the basis for initial student engagement events as well as to inform more systematic data collection efforts for student input.

Teams are also thinking outside the box about collecting student input, often combining student engagement with gathering input. Teams hosted hands-on events like building rockets and soldering hearts while also cultivating feedback through conversation, focus groups, and/or exit surveys. Most importantly, teams are not relying exclusively on one stream of student feedback or input but, rather, combining multiple methodologies, both formal and informal, to develop a robust understanding of the student experience and to inform improvements in STEM education and transfer.

Overall, what we learned in this analysis is that STP teams are thinking creatively to develop new strategies for student input, focusing on student engagement in combination with data collection efforts. Each step of the process informs the next, working holistically with both formal and informal information sources. Ultimately, this approach results in interventions and process improvements that are sensitive to the students in a particular context, providing students with the resources and supports they need.

Institutional coaching publication in New Directions for Community Colleges

CCRI (Community College Research Initiatives) had the privilege of working for several years with Student Success Center (SSC) partners and Jobs for the Future (JFF) on coaching programs to facilitate institutional change. The result of that work was several briefs and tools to support coaching and state coaching programs. A recent article, authored by Jennifer Miller (NY SSC), Lia Wetzstein (CCRI), and Amy Girardi (formerly JFF) in New Directions for Community Colleges titled Creating a culture of student success innovation through institutional coaching, discusses this work. It describes how coaches support institutional reform efforts, the history of coaching support of guided pathways implementation, and how CCRI supported the Student Success Center Network Coaching Program.

The article discusses the multiple ways coaching supported institutional leaders’ change efforts. These include coaches being resource hubs by providing information, strategies, and professional development; fostering collaboration; providing external perspectives; moving ideas into actions with knowledge of best practices; and being thought partners (p. 85). It also shares resources that exist for coach professional development and different state examples of how coaches are trained and utilized.

We invite you to use this shareable link to access a free copy available to the first 100! https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/share/author/BKIGTXWA5WYXPIHAEFUP?target=10.1002/cc.20562

This link to the article gives access to the abstract and to access a paid copy: https://doi.org/10.1002/cc.20562.

Transformative partnership praxis for equitable STEM transfer

As the STEM Transfer Partnership (STP) program approaches the one-year mark, we are able to reflect on the strategies for success that our two-year and four-year institutional partners have developed in their work to advance their partnerships and increase STEM transfer success for low income students. In our second data note on the STP program, we describe the ways STP partnership teams are dismantling barriers through networks of transformative partnership praxis, building multi-layered and flexibly structured communities.

Over the course of 12 months, CCRI has supported the progress of STP teams and their plans of action aimed at improving STEM transfer for students at their institutions. Teams have engaged in two full-community gatherings as well as monthly coaching sessions. Throughout, CCRI has collected data on their experiences through participant observation, survey, and document analysis. Examining this data, we find that teams often experience similar barriers in their efforts to implement systemic change in STEM transfer processes, most notably low-income student recruitment and long term program sustainability. In our recent data note, we look at how partnering institutions respond to these challenges. We find that taking steps toward institutional transformation requires participants to build flexible and multi-layered communities, networks that draw upon resources and expertise from beyond the team membership.

At this intermediate stage of the program, many STP teams are working on the big problems that make the work of expanding STEM access and supporting transfer students so challenging. One central challenge is the question of how to recruit students from low-income backgrounds to STEM fields and how best to support them through transfer and degree completion. What are the best ways to reach out to these students in the early years of their college education? How can support programs engage these students as they juggle the competing priorities of school, family, and work schedules? In tackling these questions, teams are often prompted to expand the boundaries of their networks of praxis, connecting with programs such as TRIO and MESA that have a well-established set of strategies for engaging and supporting low-income students. Rather than trying to ‘reinvent the wheel’ as several participants phrased it, teams are joining forces with partners across their institutions in collaborations that benefit low-income students in many ways. Teams are also extending their networks to engage institutional leaders, finding ways to engage college and university administrators in ways that broaden the impact of their work.

STP teams are not limiting their outreach to their respective institutions but, rather, reaching beyond the college and university of their partnership to include not only other institutions but also policymakers, students and families, and professional networks. The STP program is designed to embed the work of partnerships within a community of practice, invested professionals committed to interventions to improve STEM transfer. The purpose of the biannual convenings is to foster cross-community collaboration and learning. The most recent data note describes how these kinds of connections are helping teams identify resources and solve complex problems. As they look to the future to map out a plan for long term sustainability, they draw upon ideas from other teams, using those ideas to connect with policymakers, industry partners, and others in ways that support programs and interventions that will continue to improve STEM transfer success beyond the life of the STP grant.

Each reconfiguration and expansion of community creates new opportunities for equitable STEM access. While the data reported here demonstrate how networks of praxis support problem solving for STP teams, the impact of expanding the community goes beyond finding solutions to specific problems. Teams are learning new skills, developing new partnerships, and incorporating new resources into their work in ways that create benefits for the college and university beyond STEM programs.

IDEAL Fellowship Program

With excitement, CCRI is looking forward to providing the Washington State Board for Community and Technical College’s evaluation of cohort 4 of the Initiative in Diversity, Equity, Antiracism & Leadership (IDEAL) fellowship program. The IDEAL fellowship program is designed to empower community college students with knowledge, critical discussions, and experience doing research to advance equity projects on their own campuses.

IDEAL provides fellows a place to learn about racial justice and share their own stories while being paid a $1000 stipend. Participants learn how to use tools to research equity issues on their campus and provide their community colleges with suggestions about how the institutions can increase educational access and supports to move them toward a more equitable education environment.

This pioneering student empowerment program was created by the IDEAL facilitators and educators Dr. Jeremiah and Rachel Sims. CCRI has had the privilege of talking to students from the first 3 cohorts and learning about the unique experience of being in a space anchored in openness, acceptance, and transparency, where they felt safe to share their personal narratives, listen actively to others, create friendships, learn, and gain confidence in how to be advocates for social justice. In interviews, participants shared how the Sims’ provide knowledge and understanding of systemic structures that perpetuate racial, social, and economic inequity while also creating a safe space for tough conversations. These conversations helped create community, increased participants’ equity focus within their academic journeys and careers, and helped to create change agents.

The structure of each cohort has changed to continue to support students and their projects to create institutional change. Cohorts 2 and 3 accepted students at 4-5 participating colleges and added Senior Fellows, alumni of the program, who helped students work on their institutional projects and final presentations. Cohort 3 also added institutional representatives, to provide fellows with an insider perspective of organizational change efforts, where to find data, and to help move the proposed work forward. In our most recent evaluation effort, we describe what we learned from cohort 3 students and the potential for institutional change.

Cohort 4 will begin in February 2023 and will consist of students from Yakima Valley College, Lake Washington Institute of Technology, Bellevue College, South Puget Sound Community College, and Grays Harbor College. We look forward to learning about the experiences of the newest IDEAL fellows and how participating in IDEAL affects their education journeys and their institutions.

STEM Transfer Partnership: Advancing our Community

As we embark on the second year of the STEM Transfer Partnership (STP) initiative, we finally got our first chance to come together in person at our October convening in Ellensburg, Washington. Because our first convening had to be held remotely due to continuing pandemic precautions, we were thrilled to be able to finally meet everyone in person and make our community stronger through the informal exchanges that are difficult to facilitate in virtual settings.

The October event built upon all the previous work of the STP teams. It included celebrating progress since the April convening and moving forward within each partnership to advance interventions to engage and support low-income students and create innovative, durable transfer pathways. The teams presented a variety of different interventions they were working on. Many institutional pairs discussed new curricular structures while others described the steps they had taken in establishing undergraduate research experiences, creating transfer maps, mentorship networks, and inter-institutional student engagement programs.

Highlights of the day included roundtable discussions across topics such as curriculum, data sharing, low-income student support, and gathering student input. We also learned about STEM communities of transformation from our guest speaker, Dr. Sean Gehrke, Director of the Office of Educational Assessment at the University of Washington. Working in their teams, partnerships had opportunities to identify and dissect current barriers to their work and develop strategies to garner external support for their programs. Each team produced a poster that summarized and motivated their partnership initiatives, articulating an “elevator pitch” designed to engage stakeholders outside their partnership. We concluded the day with a lively ‘gallery walk,’ where teams shared their posters and their elevator pitch among all the convening participants.

One of the key goals of this convening was to foster a cross-partnership exchange of ideas and community building. To that end, the convening agenda balanced sessions dedicated to work within teams and in ones that involved interaction with other teams. Teams had opportunities to brainstorm creative solutions with other teams and learn about the many different strategies for low-income student support and enhanced transfer processes. For many participants, this dynamic was the key benefit of the convening. One post-event survey respondent commented, “It was really nice just to meet people who are interested in similar things across the state and feel like we have allies.” Another respondent identified their key benefit from the convening, “Having a community to consult with and bounce ideas off of – we are able to streamline a bit more, not everyone re-inventing the wheel. Having engaging discussions about why this is important and creating that community culture.” We were excited to see and later hear about these productive exchanges and will continue to strengthen and expand our community of practice.

We are so gratified to be a part of this process, working with dedicated professionals who took time out of their overcrowded schedules to come together in community with us. Together we are advancing equity by expanding STEM education opportunities for low-income students across the state.

CCRI racial equity publications

As we continue to engage in racial justice and student success work during these unprecedented times, we invite you to read and utilize our collection of equity-minded coaching briefs and tools in your transformative change efforts using a racial equity lens.

Brief: Coaching for More Equitable Student Outcomes
Brief: Integrating Racial Equity into Guided Pathways
The Equity Tool Guide gives an overview of the six equity-minded coaching tools.

Our partner, Jobs for the Future (JFF) has recently posted CCRI’s briefs, tools and resource recommendations created on their Student Success Center Network Coaching Toolbox along with other useful coaching materials. JFF’s publication of this treasure trove of documents is timely as they emphasize the critical role of racial equity in reforming community college education. These resources are directed at coaches who work with community colleges to engage in transformative change and reduce disparities in student success among racial groups, with valuable insights for any community college reformer.

Given recent unrest due to COVID-19 and police violence, constructive dialogue is more critical than ever to support a race-conscious approach to achieving more equitable outcomes for America’s students of color, and these tools provide guidance to accomplish this critical goal.

Join us! Twitter chat on racial equity in education reform

We’re hosting our next Twitter chat! And we are excited to invite you to join us Friday, July 10, 10 -11 a.m., Pacific Standard Time, with an optional extra 30 minutes for questions. Please follow us on Twitter to see updates and use the hashtag #CCRIchat in your tweets along with A1 (answer 1 for question 1 and so on…) For example, to respond to question 1, tweet: #CCRIchat A1 [your response up to 280 characters].

The focus for our discussion:
We’ll be chatting about how to use a racial equity lens in coaching for college reform along with how to talk about racial equity in coaching colleges.

One of our partners, Jobs for the Future (JFF) has recently posted CCRI’s briefs, tools and resource recommendations created on their Student Success Center Network Coaching Toolbox. JFF’s publication of this treasure trove of materials is timely as they emphasize the critical role of racial equity in reforming community college education. These resources are directed at coaches who work with community colleges to implement guided pathways and reduce disparities in student success among racial groups, but they have valuable insights for any community college reformer.

Given recent unrest due to COVID-19 and police violence, constructive dialogue is more critical than ever to support a race-conscious approach to achieving more equitable outcomes for America’s Black and Brown students, and these tools provide guidance to accomplish this critical goal.

To prepare for the Twitter chat, here are the materials we invite you to read. Our team has published the resources listed below. Closer to the chat, we will also be publishing a blog with Community College Research Center (CCRC) focusing on these two briefs that weave together coaching, guided pathways and equity, and we’ll link to it in our Twitter feed, LinkedIn and website.

Resources:
CCRI’s equity-minded coaching briefs and tools
Brief: Coaching for More Equitable Student Outcomes
Brief: Integrating Racial Equity into Guided Pathways.

New to Twitter chats? Read this short article about how to participate in one.