The Empirical Case for First-Year Seminars: Well-Documented Effects on Student Retention & Academic Achievement
Joe Cuseo
Marymount College
Introduction
It is reasonably safe say to say that there has been more well-conducted research on, and more compelling empirical gathered in support of the first-year seminar than any other course offered in the history of higher education. Traditional courses have never had to document their effectiveness because the sheer force of academic tradition and the potent power of departmental territoriality have assured their perpetual place in the college curriculum.
The two most significant and well-replicated effects of the first-year seminar have been on two important student outcomes: (a) retention (persistence) and (b) academic performance (achievement). Using virtually all major types of research methods (quantitative & qualitative, experimental & correlational), these outcomes of the seminar have been replicated for all types students (e.g., at-risk & well-prepared, minority & majority, residential & commuter) across institutions of all types (2- & 4-year, public & private), sizes (small, mid-sized, large), and locations (urban, suburban, rural). As Barefoot and Gardner note, �First-year/student success seminars are remarkably creative courses that are adaptable to a great variety of institutional settings, structures, and students� (Barefoot et al., 1998, p. xiv).
This short synopsis of specific retention and academic-achievement outcomes associated with the first-year seminar will showcase a sample of institutions across the country which have reported positive impact on these two critical student outcomes for seminar participants�relative to �matched� control groups of students with similar college-entry characteristics (e.g., high school grades/rank, SAT/ACT scores, and/or college placement-test scores)�who did not take the course.
STUDENT RETENTION OUTCOMES
1. Persistence to Completion of the First Semester/Quarter of College
Research conducted at Sacramento City College revealed that students who participated in the first-year seminar persisted to completion of the first term at a rate that was 50% higher than non-participants.
2. Persistence to Completion of the First Year of College
Research conducted at Miami-Dade Community College has shown that course participants display a 67% first-year retention rate, compared to a rate of 46% for non-participants. At the University of South Carolina, a series of separate studies of first-year student cohorts enrolled in University 101 (first-year seminar) revealed that, for16 consecutive years, students who took the seminar were more likely to persist to the sophomore year than first-year students who did not take the course; in 11 of the 16 years, these differences reached statistically significant levels, despite the fact that course participants had higher course loads and lower predicted academic potential (as measured by standardized-admissions test scores).
3. Persistence to Completion of the Sophomore Year
At the University of Maryland, students who participated in the first-year seminar displayed significantly higher retention rates throughout their first four semesters in college.
4. Cumulative (Total) Number of College Units/Credits Completed
Research conducted at Sacramento City College revealed that course participants completed 326% as many units as non-participants. At Oakton Community College (IL), course participants went on to complete 39 units, whereas non-participants completed 26.
5. Persistence to Degree/Program Completion
Research conducted at the University of Prince Edward Island in Canada, demonstrated that 49% of course participants persist to completion of the baccalaureate degree, versus 28% of non-participants. At Ohio University, 4-, 5- and 6-year graduation rates were higher for course participants than non-participants. At Dalton College (a 2-year commuter campus in the University of Georgia system), institutional researchers tracked students over a 5-year period and found that 30.8% of course participants met the 90 quarter-hour requirement for graduation, as compared to 19.4% of non-participants.
6. Time Taken to Degree/Program Completion
Research at Keene State College (New Hampshire) has shown that 29% of course
participants graduate within four years, versus 16% of non-participants; and 52% of course participants graduate within 51/2 years, compared to 35% for non-participants.
u ACADEMIC-PERFORMANCE/ACHIEVEMENT OUTCOMES
1. Cumulative GPA Attained at the End of the First Term or First Year of College
Research conducted at Genesee Community College (NY) revealed that course
participants earned a first-term GPA of 2.87 relative to a matched control group of non-participants who earned a 2.38 GPA. At Northern Illinois University, five consecutive first-year cohorts were compared with a matched group of non-participants, and it was found that students who took the course earned significantly higher first-term and first-year GPAs.
2. Cumulative GPA Attained Beyond the First Year of College
At Indiana University of Pennsylvania, high-risk students who successfully completed the first-year seminar achieved significantly higher GPAs (p<.01) over a 3-year period.
3. GPA Attained vs. GPA Predicted
At Indiana University of Pennsylvania, the predicted GPAs of course participants
and non-participants were found to be equal at the outset of college, yet the cumulative GPAs attained by course participants at the end of their first, second, and third years of college turned out to be significantly higher for course participants.
4. Total Number of First-Year Students in Good Academic Standing (i.e., not on
academic probation or academically dismissed)
At the University of Maryland, research has shown that the number of course
participants who completed the first two years of college in good academic standing was significantly higher than for students who did not participate in the course. At Northern Michigan University, significantly higher percentages of first-year seminar participants than non-participants maintained good academic standing (GPA of at least 2.0) over their first five semesters in college.
5. Total Number of First-Year Courses Passed (vs. dropped or failed)
Research conducted by a consortium of four community colleges in North Carolina revealed that course participants completed an average of nine more units by the end of their first year of college than did non-participants.
6. Total Number of First-Year Courses Completed with a Grade of �C� or Higher
Research conducted at Sacramento City College revealed that course participants
completed four times as many math classes, three times as many writing classes, and twice as many reading classes with a grade of "C" or higher than did a matched group of students who did not participate in the course.
7. Percentage of Students Who Qualify for the Dean�s List and Honors Program
At the University of Vermont (where the first-year seminar is taught as an introduction to the liberal arts and sciences, with an emphasis on critical/creative thinking, research skills, and oral/written communication skills), the percentage of students who made the Dean�s List and were accepted into the school�s honor program was significantly higher among course participants than non-participants.
Conclusion
Undoubtedly, positive outcomes of the first-year seminar have been the more carefully and consistently documented than have the outcomes of any single course in higher education, and its positive effects on student retention and academic achievement have been demonstrated in a wide variety of institutional settings. Moreover, there is reason to believe that there are other systemic outcomes fostered by the first-year seminar�in conjunction with its instructor training-and-development program�which have yet to be systematically assessed and replicated, but which the course may have the potential to achieve. For a complete listing and description of these possible systemic outcomes, see Exhibit B, �Campus-Wide Benefits of the First-Year Seminar: Potential Systemic Effects on Institutional Development.� Also, for a comprehensive summary of institutional research studies conducted by different colleges on the effects of their first-year seminars, including campus-specific contacts for follow-up information, see Exploring the Evidence (Barefoot 1993) and Exploring the Evidence, Volume II (Barefoot et al., 1998), both of which are available from the National Resource Center for The First Year Experience and Students in Transition at the University of South Carolina.
References
Barefoot, B. O. (Ed.) (1993). Exploring the evidence: Reporting outcomes of freshman
seminars. (Monograph No. 11). Columbia, SC: National Resource Center for The
Freshman Year Experience, University of South Carolina.
Barefoot, B. O., Warnock, C. L., Dickinson, M. P., Richardson, S. E., & Roberts, M. R.
(Eds.)(1998). Exploring the evidence, Volume II: Reporting outcomes of first-year
seminars. (Monograph No. 29). Columbia, SC: National Resource Center for The
First-Year Experience and Students in Transition, University of South Carolina.
Journal of The First-Year Experience and Students in Transition (1989-1999), volumes
1-10.
� 1999 [email protected]