TIPSS #7 – A Closer Look at STOP OUTS — 3 Comments

  1. What correlation is there with the methods that are being used for the Academic Progress Standards system?
    As someone who sees many of the students who have APS holds, I can say that the majority of them see APS Alerts as “punishment” and there are real issues with the methods that impair, rather than enhance student success. Though APS is very well intentioned, after a few years, it seems time to look at the actual effects and make wise adjustments to some of the methods that–in practice–are working against the overall intent.
    Here are some suggestions:
    1) Make it easier to communicate with APS Team. a) rename email from (can you see how difficult this may be to write correctly) to, or even better, b) rename the entire thing, so it isn’t confused with SAP for financial aid students. Call it something like Lane Early Support or something similar. c) re-orient towards a service orientation rather than placing holds on students preventing them from moving forward–create a cohort and register these students automatically for it, giving them an online and an in-person option. d) “forgive” the level after a successful term, so it is not a static progression to dismissal. e) have a strong method for students to declare a reason beyond their control other than to request a refund through Enrollment Services–perhaps form a team between ESFS, FA, and APS to only determine “reason beyond control”, which can then be used on any type of appeal. Have team meet once per week. Students who are otherwise doing well, but have an injury, illness, death, family emergency, become homeless, etc, should not lose their opportunity to continue, but should be celebrated for doing so and offered support.

    • While I appreciate your thoughts on the APS system, I’m not sure how closely they relate to this TIPPS. I would suggest you forward these comments to Mary P who is in charge of APS.
      As far as a “correlation” with this TIPPS about stopping out, there is very little connection. The group of students being shown here started at Lane in fall 2010 and very few cases here would ever have been subject to the relatively new APS system. As noted here, half of the students shown here as Stop Outs never returned to Lane after the 2010/11 academic year. The system is really quite new, so we’ll have to see how it has affected recent cohorts of incoming students. I plan t odo such an analysis this summer.

  2. one of the problems that has not been acknowledged, in fact has been actively denied by administrators, is that increasing class sizes beyond teachable levels and decreasing the number of sections offered is a major detriment to students trying to get an education. a survey i did of my students showed that 85% have little or no flexibility in scheduling due to health, family, and jobs. when classes they want or need are not offered at times they can attend, they will simply stop coming.

    when i informed an administrator of the survey results i was told that since those students were already in my class they didn’t count. does that imply that all other students at lane do have virtually uninhibited flexibility to take classes whenever they want?

    what happened to the lcc mantra back when i first started teaching: come to lcc, small classes, lots of personal attention and help from highly qualified instructors, at low tuition rates.

    well, we still have a lot of highly qualified instructors but who have limited class offerings with too many students. no matter how much we want to give the needed personal attention it is not physically possible. especially since so many are part time instructors trying to do one or two jobs besides teaching at lane.

    when a class offering with 9 sections averaging over 18 students per class is reduced to 2 sections with just over 20 students, it does not take much of an observation to see why enrollment is declining.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *