Report on the Educational Impact and Effectiveness of the Learning Resource Centers
Date
Introduction
At the end of the fall 1997 semester, the Academic Services Subcommittee was given two charges related to the New Brunswick Learning Resource Centers:
| 1. | In consultation with selected undergraduate chairs and other appropriate faculty and administrators, assess the educational impact and effectiveness of the New Brunswick Learning Resource Centers, identifying successes and problem areas. Find ways to utilize the Centers’ resources more effectively in serving the faculty’s instructional goals. |
| 2. | In consultation with the Vice President for Undergraduate Education and the Director of the Learning Resource Centers, devise and implement an arrangement for ongoing faculty advice and oversight of the LRCs by this subcommittee. |
The Subcommittee intermittently worked on these charges during the spring 1998 semester and the 1998-99 academic year. This report is the result of those efforts. It is organized as follows: we first summarize faculty views and concerns regarding the LRCs, then briefly address the second charge above, and finally present two recommendations for the Council's consideration.
Faculty Assessment of the New Brunswick LRCs
In order to begin addressing the first charge, in spring 1998 the Subcommittee sent the attached questionnaire to 23 undergraduate chairs of selected FAS and Cook departments and spoke with a number of other faculty members concerning their interactions with the LRCs. Some observations and preliminary conclusions based on those conversations and on the 12 completed questionnaires received were presented to the Faculty Council in November 1998. Subsequently, the Subcommittee Chair spoke with a wide variety of faculty members who have had extensive interactions with one or more of the LRCs; with representatives of the Math and Science Learning Centers, the FAS Writing Program, and the EOF Program; with the Deans or Associate Deans of the Multipurpose Colleges and of Cook; with the University Director of the LRCs, Dr. Karen Smith; and with the Campus Directors of the Cook/Douglass, the College Avenue, and the Livingston and Busch LRCs. The assessment below is based on the Subcommittee Chair's synthesis of those conversations. It is in no way a comprehensive evaluation of the impact and effectiveness of the LRCs, a task far beyond the capabilities of the Subcommittee. We believe, however, that is is an accurate representation of the New Brunswick faculty's views of the strengths and weaknesses of various LRC programs and of the ways in which the LRCs interface with classroom faculty and with other academic support programs. Finally, it must be noted that the assessment is based solely on anecdotal evidence. To the best of the Subcommittee’s knowledge, there have been no controlled, statistically valid studies of the impact or effectiveness of the various LRC programs.
The LRCs provide the following services and programs for students:
| 1. | individual learning assistance in the form of one-on-one help in improving study and learning strategies in such areas as time management, reading skills, notetaking, concentration and memory development, information processing, higher-level organizational skills, and exam preparation and taking. |
| 2. | small-group workshops on study and learning strategies in the above areas. These may be tailored to a specific course or student group. |
| 3. | individual writing assistance for courses for which the English Department Writing Centers do not provide assistance. |
| 4. | peer tutoring in a variety of 100-, 200-, and occasionally 300- level courses which substantial numbers of students find difficult. Peer tutors are trained by the LRC staff. |
| 5. | supplemental instruction (SI) workshops for students in selected courses conducted by specially selected undergraduate or graduate students who are trained by the LRC staff and closely supervised by the faculty instructor of the given course. |
| 6 | provision of course reserve materials such as lecture notes, practice exams, homework solutions, and course-related videotapes, audiotapes and computer software. |
| 7. | individualized programs of services for students with learning disabilities.. |
In addition, the New Brunswick LRCs provide a number of services and programs for the New Brunswick undergraduate colleges.
Strengths
The most common way in which faculty use the LRCs is by referring individual students for assistance with learning strategies and study skills. Anecdotal information suggests that students are happy with the assistance provided. Faculty and students also appear to be satisfied with the course support materials available at the LRCs. Annual surveys of LRC users conducted by the LRC staff also indicate a high level of student satisfaction with the services provided. It must be noted, however, that the surveys have not been based on random samples of students. Anecdotal information also suggests that students with learning disabilities are quite satisfied with the individualized assistance provided by the LRCs and that this assistance is highly regarded by the decanal staffs of the undergraduate colleges.
In addition, the supplemental instruction (SI) program draws enthusiastic praise from the faculty who have been involved with it. The well-trained student SI leaders who lead the workshops are generally very strong upperclass students majoring in the department offering the course; they attend all the lectures of the given course and take notes and are carefully supervised by the faculty member teaching the course. Students who attend the workshops are also enthusiastic about them and there is some evidence to suggest that attendance improves student performance. However, grades of the participating students have not been compared with a statistically valid control group.
As noted above, the LRCs also provide a number of services to the undergraduate colleges in New Brunswick. These include time management and learning skills workshops tailored to the needs of particular groups and taught in dormitories, student centers, etc., workshops taught at night and tailored for University College students, participation by LRC staff members in collegiate recruitment, orientation, advising, and retention programs, and a number of special programs designed for particular colleges. As one example, the Douglass College Program for students on academic probation begins with an all-morning probation workshop held at the Cook/Douglass LRC and led jointly by a member of the Douglass Academic Affairs staff and a member of the LRC staff. Students then are required to speak with their faculty academic adviser and to meet with Pat Grove, the Cook/Douglass Campus LRC Director, to work out a detailed plan to improve their academic performance. As another example, at Livingston, LRC staff members provide the workshop component of the college orientation course Livingston 101 and the LRC conducts an intensive program for EOF students on probation which involves each student meeting a minimum of eight times during the semester with an LRC staff member or graduate student learning assistant. Assessments of these programs by the Deans/Associate Deans of the multipurpose colleges and Cook range from satisfied to enthusiastic.
Problems and Concerns
One area of concern to some faculty is peer tutoring, probably the LRC service most widely used by students. Faculty opinion is divided with respect to the quality and effectiveness of LRC tutoring services. While some faculty are quite happy with the tutoring provided, others have serious reservations concerning the preparation and effectiveness of the tutors. Problems cited include lack of appropriate discipline-specific and/or course-specific faculty input into the training of tutors; lack of coordination between faculty teaching large courses and the tutors for those courses; and inadequate ongoing supervision and evaluation of tutors by the LRC staff. The sort of generic, discipline-neutral training and supervision of tutors is apparently satisfactory for certain courses whose content does not change significantly from year to year and for which any good student who has taken the course can be trained to be an effective tutor. For other courses, the generic training and supervision are not adequate and result in tutors who cannot effectively help students and sometimes seriously misinform them. Other faculty complain of a lack of responsiveness by the LRC administration to faculty concerns regarding tutors and to suggestions for alternative ways to provide effective tutoring in courses for which the generic model does not work well.
Another major faculty concern with respect to the functioning of the LRCs is the lack of effective coordination and cooperation between the LRCs and department-based student support efforts and between the LRCs and other academic support and retention programs in New Brunswick, most notably the English Department Writing Centers and the Math and Science Learning Centers. The lack of cooperation and coordination with the MSLCs have impeded efforts to provide optimal support for students in courses in math and the physical and biological sciences. For example, the lack of LRC staff with expertise in math and science and the lack of cooperation with the MSLCs have prevented the LRCs from providing effective help to students in improving quantitative reasoning skills and have hindered effective supervision of math and science peer tutors. Similarly, the ongoing conflict and competition between the LRCs and the Writing Program is non conducive to providing the best possible writing assistance to all students seeking help. Finally, the lack of coordination with academic departments has hindered departmental efforts to integrate peer tutoring with faculty and graduate student efforts to provide extra help for undergraduates in their courses.
Many faculty are also disturbed by the lack of faculty input into the design and implementation of LRC programs to assist the faculty in their central role of educating students. Lack of meaningful faculty input to academic support programs is not, of course, unique to the LRCs. However, the more general concern with faculty disempowerment is exacerbated in the case of the LRCs by two factors: organizationally, the LRCs, unlike most other academic support and retention programs in New Brunswick, have no reporting relationship to any academic department or any faculty/collegiate dean; historically, the LRCs differ from a number of other support and enrichment programs (such as the Writing Program and the MSLCs) which grew out of "grass-roots" faculty efforts.
In addition, many faculty suspect that the LRC budget is overly generous in comparison to the resources available to other support programs (such as the Writing Centers) and in comparison to the extraordinarily tight instructional budgets of many New Brunswick academic departments; this belief is a contributor to faculty hostility toward the LRCs. Looking at the matter objectively, it is difficult to assess the cost-effectiveness of the LRCs, given the lack of reliable data on the outcomes of LRC efforts and a lack of sufficiently detailed information about the number of students served by various LRC programs. (How many students visit each LRC in a given semester is well-documented, but not how many students take advantage of each of the services offered.) An objective, comprehensive assessment of the impact and effectiveness of the LRCs is clearly needed.
Finally, the Subcommittee feels that the LRCs are addressing very real needs. As the number of regularly admitted students with serious gaps in academic skills has increased, faculty members have increasingly had to deal with students whose difficulties go beyond weak backgrounds in a given subject area or difficulties with mastering certain material, students who lack the basic study skills, organizational skills, and learning strategies to succeed at the university, without help and support outside of the classroom and faculty office hours. We also acknowledge that the LRCs have a number of highly competent and dedicated professional staff members. Our concern is with assessing how well the LRCs are currently meeting student and faculty needs and with finding ways for the resources of the LRCs and other academic support programs to be used more effectively in meeting those needs.
Comments on Charge Number Two
The Academic Services Subcommittee does not believe that it is the appropriate group to serve as an advisory/oversight committee for the LRCs, at least not at the present time. Rather, we believe that a broader faculty-administration dialogue is necessary to develop an effective mechanism for faculty input into and oversight of the LRCs. (See recommendation 2 below.)
Recommendations
In order to achieve the goals of evaluating the impact and effectiveness of the LRCs, finding ways to utilize their resources more effectively, and devising a mechanism for faculty advice and oversight, the Subcommittee would like to present the following recommendations.
| 1. | In consultation with selected undergraduate chairs and other appropriate faculty and administrators, assess the educational impact and effectiveness of the New Brunswick Learning Resource Centers, identifying successes and problem areas. Find ways to utilize the Centers’ resources more effectively in serving the faculty’s instructional goals. |
| 2. | In consultation with the Vice President for Undergraduate Education and the Director of the Learning Resource Centers, devise and implement an arrangement for ongoing faculty advice and oversight of the LRCs by this subcommittee. |
_________________________________________________________________________________
ATTACHMENT: QUESTIONNAIRE ON THE LEARNING RESOURCE CENTERS
| 1. | What services/resources of the LRCs does your department utilize?
____ refer individual students for assistance with study skills, etc. ____ tutoring for introductory courses in your discipline ____ Supplemental Instruction for introductory courses in your discipline ____ putting course support material on reserve in the LRCs ____ using LRCs for review sessions, faculty office hours, etc. ____ other ____ none |
| 2. | If the LRC provides tutoring for one or more of your courses, please answer the following.
Does your department actively participate in the selection of tutors? In their training? Do you consider the tutors for your courses to be well prepared? Do you communicate with the tutors for your courses during the semester? |
| 3. | What is your evaluation of the effectiveness of the various LRC programs/services with which you are familiar? Please address both strong points and weak points and include suggestions for improvement, if appropriate. |
| 4. | Can you suggest other programs/services the LRC could provide to serve the needs of your students better? |
Thank you very much for your assistance. Please return this questionnaire by campus mail or FAX to:
Martha Cotter
Department of Chemistry
Wright-Rieman Laboratory
Busch Campus
phone: 445-2259
FAX: 445-5312
e-mail: cotter@rutchem.rutgers.edu