EOP Transfer Bridge Program

1. EOP Transfer Bridge Program

2. Introduction • Majority of low-income, first generation students attend Community College. • Local colleges offer services/benefits not found at four year institutions • Yet few transfer to UC or CSU system

3. Introduction • Community Colleges are vital avenues for access • Benefits of a college: • Proved lower division courses • Open admissions • Small classes • Personalized attention

4. Introduction • Transfer students face myriad of challenges • Size of the campus • Faculty expectations • Campus culture • More expensive • Occurrence has been studied and identified • Transfer Shock—disconnection between student and university

5. Introduction • Rational for hosting Transfer Bridge Program • EOP has seen the results and affects of TB • However it has been difficult to prove success • Assessment tool was created to measure Program’s effectiveness • Mixed methods tool

6. Introduction • Purpose and goals of the Presentation • Program description • Transfer Bridge Staff • Mission Statement • Program Goals • Program Learning Outcomes • Theoretical Framework • Quantitative Assessment • Qualitative Assessment • Conclusion

7. Program Overview • Program assists new transfer students that come from low-income, first-generation backgrounds adjust to the academic and student life at SDSU through a series of workshops designed to prepare them for their successful transition to the university. • 1-week long summer intensive program • August 8-12, 2013 • Academic, cultural, & social workshops • EOP services, career services, financial aid • Summer 2013: 91 Participants • 8 Transfer Bridge Mentors

8. Program Staff • Robert Guzmán: Retention Coordinator • Cynthia Torres: Assistant Director • Brandi Tonne: Graduate Student • Fabiola Pimienta: Counselor • Lorena Malo: Outreach, Recruitment, and Admissions Coordinator

9. Division of Student Affairs Mission The Division of Student Affairs is a partner in the university learning community. Education is enhanced, both inside and outside of the classroom, through high-impact programs and services that enhance studentlearning, development and success. The Division facilitates the academic success, personal growth, and well-being of all students. Student Affairs transitions and connects students to the university and to their future, building communities that foster progress toward degree completion and lifelong Aztec affinity (SDSU, 2013, p. 4)

10. EOPMission The San Diego State University’s Educational Opportunity Program serves as a primary vehicle for the CSU in increasing the access, and academic success/retention of California’s educationally and economically disadvantaged students, thus working in the spirit and abiding by the legislative intent that originally established the Program in 1969 (SDSU, 2010).

11. Transfer Bridge Program Mission The mission of the Transfer Bridge program is to assist new transfer students in adjusting to the academic and student life at SDSU through workshops designed to prepare them for their successful educational and social transition to the university.

12. Transfer Bridge Program Goals • TBP did not have any articulated goals • Goals are important because they: • Measure success of mission statement • They enhance/further define mission statement • Not measurable • Incorporate essence of program • Express values that inspire the work

13. Transfer Bridge Program Goals • Goal of DSA—to foster a campus culture that will encourage the student to pursue excellence and be able to articulate his or her own goals (SDSU, 2023). • Goal of DSA—creating environments that influence the campus’s diversity to maximize the success of the student, staff member, faculty, and the administrator through intentional and integrative experiences (SDSU, 2013). • Goal of DSA—develop leaders who believe in leading others toward supporting civility and diversity in our society including the expansion of opportunities for all students inside and outside the classroom, promotes the sense of belonging that our program aspires to instill in the students(SDSU, 2013).

14. Transfer Bridge Program Goals • Transfer Bridge Goal—reduce Transfer Shock. Transfer Shock occurs when a student experiences a decline on grades or academic performance (Hills, 1965). • Bringing campus resources to TBP • These experiences will increase campus familiarity • Program teaches students to utilize services • Utilization of services enhances Campus Cultural Capital • Transfer Bridge Goal—Creating Cultural Capital—”possessing the ability to understand the dominant culture in the society and more importantly to use the educated language” to successfully transition to the university setting (Sullivan, 2001).

15. Transfer Bridge Program Goals • Transfer Bridge Goal—Increase Student’s Sense of Belonging • Sense of Belonging defined: • When students feel personally accepted, respected, included and supported in the school social environment (Goodenow & Grady, 1993). • If they feel connected, they will utilize campus resources to help them succeed

16. Transfer Bridge Program Goals • Repaso • What’s your mission? • What are your program’s goals? • Goals should be broad unmeasurable statements. • Match your goals with the Division’s

17. Transfer Bridge Program Goals • Transfer Bridge Program Goals: • Increase Student Familiarity to Campus Student Support Services • Reduce Transfer Shock • Increase Student Sense of Belonging • Increase Campus Culture Capital • Connect Student to SDSU Community and Expand Student Support Network • Create Strong Relationships Between Transfer Students and EOP Staff

18. Transfer Bridge Program Learning Outcomes • Learning Outcomes: • Need to be clearly defined • They need to be tied back to the goals • Need to measure a competency you want the students to accomplish • Data gathered assessment tools will be used to adjust program • create measurable, meaningful, and manageable outcomes

19. Transfer Bridge Program Learning Outcomes • Learning Outcomes: • Is it measurable? Is it identifiable? • Is it meaningful to the organization and students it serves? Is it a priority? • Is it manageable—do we have the means to deliver and evaluate the intended outcome? • Can I access the population I am measuring? • Will it provide me with evidence that will lead me to make a decision for continuous improvement? (Bresciani, Gardner& Hickmott, 2009)

20. Transfer Bridge Program Learning Outcomes Example of Learning Outcomes: To measure knowledge (recall of information, dates, names, major ideas) USE—list, define, tell, describe, show To measure comprehension (understanding of information, translate knowledge into new context, interpret facts) USE—summarize, interpret, contrast, associate, differentiate (Blooms Taxonomy, 2013).

21. Transfer Bridge Program Learning Outcomes • Transfer Bridge Learning Outcomes: • Students will be able to identify the EOP services available to the students (tutoring, academic advising, and counseling presentations) • Students will be able to identify SDSU services available to them (Library Services, Student Disability Services, and Career Services) • Students will be able to identify faculty expectations(faculty presentation) • Students will have an increase in sense of belonging (staff interaction, ice breakers, mentor bonding, campus visits) • Students will have increased familiarity about financial aid presentations (FA presentation) • Students will have increased familiarity with student service portals (Webportal, Blackboard presentations)

22. Transfer Bridge Program Learning Outcomes • Make sure Outcomes are connected with Goals: • Goal--Increase Student Familiarity to Campus Student Support Services • Students will be able to identify the EOP services available to the students (tutoring, academic advising, and counseling presentations) • Students will be able to identify SDSU services available to them (Library Services, Student Disability Services, and Career Services • Students will have increased familiarity about financial aid presentations (FA presentation)

23. TheoreticalFrameworks • Critical Race Theory (Solórzano, Yosso, Ceja, 2005): Inherent is the notion that racism exists in American society. In education, it has played an instrumental role in challenging our perspectives on how we understand and analyze inequalities in education. • Validation Theory (Rendón, 2002):Poses that college staff take a proactive role in reaching out to students to affirm them as being capable of doing academic work and to support them in their academic endeavors and social adjustment. • Both frameworks seem to align best with the program goals and outcomes.

24. Program Assessment • Assessment tools can be complicated to produce • Recommended to get assistance from institutional assessment • There are many different types of assessment tools • Experts can help you pick the right one

25. Program Assessment • We are not survey experts • Be careful of the loaded question • How important is education? • Should Americans buy imported cars and take away American jobs? • What should Americans do when shopping for a car? • How important is education compared to other major social issues?

26. Program Assessment • Questionnaire experts will ask you about your mission statement, goals, and outcomes • Then they will work on creating an assessment tool • Sources available: • Institutional assessment office • Academic departments—Sociology, Education

27. Methodology • Employed a mixed-methods design • Post quantitative survey • 1 qualitative focus group • Transfer Bridge Program Survey= 73 Likert-type items • 52 items measured campus cultural capital • 21 items measured sense of belonging • 4-point Likert-scale (1=not familiar at all- 4= very familiar) • 9 demographic questions (i.e., age, sex, race/ethnicity, major, GPA, etc.)

28. Participants • 32 former TBP students completed the survey via Qualtrics • n= 24 females, n= 8 males • Represented a convenient/random sample • 3=White/Caucasian, 1=Asian American, 1= African- American, 17=Mexican, Mexican-American, 6=Hispanic/Latino(a), 2=Middle Eastern, 2=Multiethnic • Age range= 26-32 years old • Focus group= 5 former TBP students

29. Procedures Quantitative • Solicited former TBP participants by email asking them to complete the TBP survey • Survey was opened for 2 weeks • Received a total of 32 responses Qualitative • Focus group • Convenient/purposeful sample • Semi-structured protocol • 1 hour long

30. SB Validity & ReliabilityFindings Wanted to test whether questions were measuring sense of belonging Conducted factor rotation and found that questions rotated in 3 factors. For each factor, the reliability index measured at .95, .96, .96 1 item was deleted

31. CC Validity& ReliabilityFindings

32. Partial Pilot FindingsSB-EOP Staff

33. Focus Group Findings “The bridge program gave me a community, it gave me so much knowledge about different programs. I knew everything that I had to do when I started.” “It helps you get acclimated to the campus. It takes out the anxiety before school starts.” “when I came [to transfer bridge] I didn’t know anything. Knowledge of services was the most helpful. I was thinking, how do people survive if they didn’t go to transfer bridge? I feel so lucky.” “it was helpful to know that you have others that are going through the same thing. The social bonding was great.” “We had speakers that told us that we could do it and then shared about their own struggles. It helped me.”

34. LessonsLearned Melissa: • Effective evaluation tools are difficult to create; they are time consuming, and you must involve all stakeholders. Lashae: • There is always the challenge of trying to remain objective in the process. Roberto: • There is limited professional development, knowledge and skills among stakeholders to effectively measure program success, which ultimately impacts students. • Need for staff training and accountability

35. References Brescianni, M.J. (2006). Outcomes-based academic and co-curricular program review. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing. Educational Opportunity Program at San Diego State University. (2010). Educational opportunity program mission statement and program history. Retrieved from: http://eop.sdsu.edu/Content/EOP.html. Goodenow, C. & Grady, K. (1993). The relationship of school belonging and friends’ values to academic motivation among urban adolescent students. The Journal of Experimental Education, 62(1), 60-71. Hills, J.R. (1965). Transfer Shock: The academic performance of the junior college transfer. The Journal of Experimental Education, 33(3), 201-215. Jain, D., Herrera, A., Bernal, S., Solorzano, D.G. (2011). Critical race theory and the transfer function: Introducing a transfer receptive culture. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 35(1), 252-266.

36. References Rendon, L.I. (2002). Community college Puente: A Validating model of education. Educational Policy, 16(4), 642-667. Solorzano, D. G., Ceja, M., & Yosso, T. (2000). Critical race theory, racial microaggressions, and campus climate: The experiences of African American college students. The Journal of Negro Education, 69(1/2), 60-73. Student Affairs at San Diego State University. (2013, August 11). The 2013-2015 strategic plan. Retreived from: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:EtQAA6Xf8SgJ:go.sdsu.edu/stud ent_affairs/files/02487-SDSU_SA_Strategic_Plan_for_2013- 2015.doc+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us Sullivan, A. (2001). Cultural capital and educational attainment. Sociology, 35(4), 893-912.