Report on Our Learning Communities

Washington Center for Improving the Quality of Undergraduate Education

NATIONAL LEARNING COMMUNITIES PROJECT

Supported in part by the Pew Charitable Trusts

October 8, 2003

We would like to begin this summary letter of our site visit to Cuesta College by thanking you for the extraordinary job you did of hosting and coordinating our visit and for providing us with the opportunity to share with colleagues interested in the principles and practices of learning communities. Indeed, the meetings scheduled for the site visit and the people we talked to in the various offices and programs provided a clear and detailed account of the status and development of Cuesta's learning community endeavors. Moreover, the meetings also demonstrated the level of support and enthusiasm by faculty, students and administrators.

SUMMARY OF OUR VISIT

Our visit, which took place on September 18 and 19, began with a meeting with Berta Parrish and Linda Long, who provided us with an overview of the visit and the status of the learning community initiative at Cuesta. This meeting was especially helpful in providing us with good insight into the culture of the college and the people with whom we would be meeting. Next we met with the team that participated in the summer institute at The Evergreen State College (Summer 2002) and who planned and implemented the first learning community at Cuesta College. The team of three faculty members--Allison Merzon, Cheryl Ziehl, Lynn Steiner--counselor Kate Keller and AS/DSPS director Linda Long, were successful in the planning and implementation of the first learning community at Cuesta: "Mixed Media Messages," integrating Basic English and Reading (ENGL 100), Reading Essentials (LRNSK 104) [renamed ACASK 36] and Health Education (HE ED 2). The instructors expressed a deep understanding and commitment to the practices of learning communities. They expressed a great interest in continuing to teach in a learning community and recommended additional support to faculty involved in these types of projects: co-validate (or trade) the time invested in learning community work for institutional committee work, greater communication among the faculty and the different offices relevant to learning communities, and effective time coordination of the counseling support services. Other challenges reported by the faculty were pedagogical: teaching and integrating a transfer course with basic skills classes, promoting retention, and meeting students' educational and personal needs.

It was a great pleasure to meet over lunch with previous and current learning communities students. Students from "Mixed Media Messages" and "Weaving the Web," a learning community for pre-nursing students, shared their experiences and challenges. Friendship, support, study groups, deeper communication, better grades and collegiality with faculty members and other students were some of the outcomes shared by the students. Some of the students' remarks were about the perception of the learning communities. Given that the coordination of the program is housed in the DSPS area, some students assume that learning communities are for disabled students. Other comments by students included the need for better understanding of what a learning community is; the effectiveness of the counseling support, better understanding of themselves as learners; and having excellent instructors who are flexible, friendly, yet demand high standards.

A formal meeting with the Learning Communities Task Force never materialized since most members of the task force had conflicting commitments. However, this allowed some of its members to assess the merits of a larger Task Force versus a smaller coordinated committee responsible for the ongoing decisions and functions of the LC program. The current task force, which is chaired by Berta, consists of a learning community faculty member, a learning community student, the dean of humanities, a faculty senate representative and three faculty representing English, Social Science, and Math. The logistics of coordinating frequent meetings with such a large and complex group of campus-wide collaborators proves to be a great effort for the benefits it may yield.

In the afternoon, the site visit team visited several offices whose services support the learning communities program. Marcos and Berta visited with Ryan Cartnal in the office of institutional research while Ana met with Cande Munoz, director of counseling. Ryan has given very strong support to the learning community program. He shared both the assessment plan for the three learning communities as well as a summary of both quantitative and qualitative assessment data from "Mixed Media Messages." Further discussion focused on how to best disseminate these findings as well as the possibility of running concurrent enrollment data to see general enrollment patterns in targeted classes. The meeting ended with a discussion of exploring learning community models that reduce costs and maintain the numbers of students in transfer-level courses.

The director of the counseling department, Cande Munoz, expressed great interest and support for the learning communities program and its need for counseling support services. The counselors are prepared to teach student success courses. Given the demands for counseling services, a part-time counselor was designated to teach in a learning community.

The meeting between Marcos and Kevin Botenbal in faculty development was cancelled since Kevin was called away on family business and was not available. Ana did meet with the dean of humanities, Harry Shade, who expressed support for the LC program. According to Mr. Schade, a learning community was taught by three former faculty members of his area and, because of the cost and due to lower enrollment (it required 90 students to allow three instructors to team-teach), this learning community was no longer offered. However, the dean is interested in fostering two types of learning communities: some with transfer courses and some for the ESL student population. He acknowledged a greater need for advanced ESL students to be mainstreamed to college life and recognized that the learning community model is an ideal teaching and learning environment for this population. Mr. Schade is a member of the learning community task force.

The meeting Friday morning with the college president, Dr. Marie Rossenwasser, and the Vice President of Instruction, Dr. Susan Dressler, along with two learning community faculty members (Allison Merzon and Cheryl Ziehl) and administrators provided an excellent arena for a constructive discourse to further advance the principles of learning communities at Cuesta. This was the first opportunity for learning community faculty to communicate their enthusiasm and concerns directly to higher administration. Both the president and vice-president were aware of the greater amount of time dedicated to the teaching and maintenance of the learning communities. The vice president recommended that faculty maintain a record of the amount of time dedicated to the learning community tasks that could be compensated as the required flex credit for faculty members. Other options of compensation were presented to the chief administrators. Both leaders understood the limitations of part-time faculty teaching and advising in learning communities and recommended the support of the counseling department as it can provide the inclusion of a full-time counselor. Other challenges affecting the campus in general, and thus impacting the learning communities were also mentioned; for instance, the automated registration system, WEBReg, available to any applicant to Cuesta College. The applicant can register for classes without the approval or guidance of counselors. Accordingly, it is difficult to target the population that could benefit from learning communities.

Dr. Rossenwasser commented on the importance of promoting academic success among the nursing students and how the learning community model can further nursing students' educational achievements. Moreover, according to the president, the regional (San Luis Obispo County) demands for more nurses and new grade requirements established by the state board challenge the current level of academic success of pre-nursing students. It was evident how well versed Dr. Rossenwasser was on the institutional impact of learning communities. Other issues shared in this important meeting were as follows: the campus' perception of the learning community enterprise (again, that learning communities are not just for the developmental-level students but for transfer-level students as well); the development of learning communities targeting ESL students and other campus minorities (African-Americans and Hispanics); the need to publicly acknowledge and applaud the faculty involved in learning communities; additional collaboration of the counseling department; and a continuing open advocacy and promotion of learning communities in the campus community at large by Cuesta's higher administration.

The second meeting Friday morning was with the learning community teams: "Scripting Success" (Berta Parrish, Ali Klinger and Katharine Blum) and "Weaving the Web" (Evy Cheatham and Mary Hastings). Faculty members shared with the visiting team the "nuts-and-bolts" of their respective learning communities. In "Scripting Success" the faculty team acknowledged that COUNS 52, Orientation to College for Re-entry Students, brought together two different types of students: the returning adult student and the first-time college student, creating a unique dynamic in the learning community. It was the consensus of the team they should re-think the cluster of classes and imbed in the basic skills classes the elements of counseling support, rather than having the additional counseling class. The faculty team will also explore changing the counseling component to a more appropriate class in keyboarding. The team from "Weaving the Web: Living, Learning and Nursing" targeting pre-nursing students considered additional steps to further strengthen their learning communities: visitation to the lectures and/or labs by the instructor of LS 93B [renamed ACASK 93B], Reading & Study Skills for Nursing, for more articulation between the subject of microbiology and study skills. Another idea proposed by the learning communities colleagues was to integrate both syllabi into a single document. The instructor of Bio 4, General Bacteriology, expressed great interest in continuing to foster superior academic success among pre-nursing students and was very pleased about participating in this learning community.

The site visit team shared some preliminary observations and recommendations during Friday's luncheon meeting. A summary of the visit was presented which included the areas of program sustainability and campus support, faculty recruitment, training and compensation, marketing and qualification of students for effective learning community enrollment, counseling support services, the nature of the program's task force and the program coordinator's time and responsibilities.

Friday afternoon's site visit culminated with two flex activities coordinated by the visiting team for Cuesta's faculty members: Learning Communities 101 and Designing Collaborative Work. The visiting team was very impressed with the faculty's participation in both workshops, especially on a Friday afternoon. Twenty-two faculty members attended Learning Communities 101 and the same number, although different faculty members participated in the collaborative work session. Although short, the Learning Communities 101 session produced creative and exciting possible learning communities. Learning Communities 101 will be replicated throughout different venues at Cuesta, including counselors, administrators and in the next faculty retreat. Finally, the workshop participants experienced the effectiveness of teaching and learning through the practice of collaborative work.

At the end of the visit, the visiting team and the program coordinators assessed the visit and acknowledged the level of organization, institutional commitment and personal passion for the learning community program at Cuesta College. The hospitality, graciousness and excellent support throughout the site visit were evident during the two days at Cuesta.

STRENGTHS

The learning communities program at Cuesta has made great strides in a relatively short period of time. The learning community faculty we talked to, in particular those who participated in the Washington Center Summer Institute, are firmly grounded in the theory and practice of learning communities. There is ample evidence of their dedication, enthusiasm, and energy. The leadership team is very strong and Berta and Linda work extremely well together and their strengths complement each other very effectively. They have made an excellent start at educating the faculty and administration about learning communities and at developing a college-wide network to support and promote the learning community initiative at Cuesta. All the learning community written materials, brochures and flyers, are of high quality and the development of a learning communities logo has been effective in giving the program its own identity.

The learning communities assessment efforts are very impressive. Assessment is an essential and highly visible part of the program and includes a detailed plan with goals, key research questions, quantitative and qualitative strategies, and dissemination. The May issue of Cuesta College News featured an outstanding article on the learning community program which highlighted a summary of their assessment data and recommendations for program improvement. Interestingly, the same issue included articles about special recognition given to three staff members, each of whom is actively involved in learning communities: Linda Long (Outstanding Management Senate Employee of the Year), institutional researcher Ryan Cartnal (a Cuesta Star exceptional employee) and Allison Merzon (Southern California Coach of the Year).

SUGGESTIONS FOR NEXT STEPS

The implementation of learning communities at Cuesta College is no more than one and one-half years old. Accordingly, many of the challenges faced by the faculty members and administrators with the planning and development of learning communities are the natural manifestations of the phases of growth and expansion of a new program. Moreover, the organizational level encountered in the visit provided evidence of the quality and efficiency of the management team. At the beginning of our visit, Berta and Linda requested that we pay special attention to six key issues: student recruitment, program sustainability and institutionalization, systematic approach to implement new learning communities, faculty incentives and compensation, options for faculty training, and the potential role of the learning community task force. The observations that follow are recommendations that can support and assist the expected challenges of a new program's development, especially within a complex academic environment.

Student recruitment

Comment: We identified three key issues regarding student recruitment. It appears that many students have no knowledge of the existence of learning communities at Cuesta and there is some uncertainty among students about what learning communities are. There also a misconception that, since the learning community program is housed in Academic Support/DSPSE, learning communities are primarily for students with physical or learning disabilities. Lastly, new and continuing students may register online without consulting a counselor and there is no "presence" of learning communities in the online registration process.
Suggestion: We recommend that a task group come together to evaluate the marketing strategies for student recruitment and develop a marketing strategy that addresses the registration patterns at Cuesta College. It is important that this group include the director of counseling, the registrar, the staff of the campus outreach and public relations office(s), and high school counselors.
Suggestion: We think the program visibility needs to be increased and the image of learning communities (i.e. not for disabled students) needs to be addressed through media directed at targeted student populations (i.e., transfer students, pre-nursing students, ESL students, basic skills students, etc.). These media could include print (student newspaper, banners), video, electronic (webpage) and personal contact (counselors, student testimonials, lunchtime information booth). We suggest that the marketing efforts emphasize that learning communities are for all students and focus on "student identified" benefits (work in groups, two teachers to help you, extra support, make good friendships, better chance of being successful, etc.)
Suggestion: We recommend that you continue looking at the academic areas where the learning community model can be of service to students' academic success, such as, but not limited to, ESL students, programs with large attrition patterns and classes that may naturally complement each other in the humanities, the arts and sciences. Ryan Cartnal has offered to help in this effort by running concurrent enrollment patterns.

Faculty incentives, compensation and training

Comment: Administrators and faculty concur that the current fiscal environment makes it difficult, if not impossible, for the college to adequately compensate faculty through reassigned time or stipends for their learning community work.
Suggestion: We recommend that faculty develop and maintain a recording system for the number of hours invested in the extra planning and ongoing maintenance of a learning community. This documentation can be used to explore with administrators alternative forms of compensation (flex credit, co-validation for institutional committee work, formal recognition, awards, educational supplies and textbooks, conference attendance) to officially recognize working in a learning community.
Suggestion: We suggest that the learning communities program continue to foster an effective culture of regular communication among faculty members, program coordinators and higher administration. This communication loop should also include faculty senate, support staff, and counselors.
Comment: Although we did not have the opportunity to talk with the faculty development coordinator, we were encouraged to hear that he is interested in promoting pedagogies that foster active learning and that members of the learning communities program will play a key role in the upcoming faculty retreat.
Suggestion: We recommend that the learning communities leadership "educate" the faculty development coordinator as to the potential of learning communities and the centrality of collaborative learning and other active learning pedagogies in the learning community initiative. It would be wise to work closely with the coordinator and to continue to offer further workshops on learning communities, such as Learning Communities 101, through faculty development.
Suggestion: We suggest that every effort be make to create a community of learners among the learning communities faculty by organizing regularly scheduled faculty gatherings to share pedagogical strategies, challenges, and successes. Such gatherings are also an opportunity to recruit and train other full-time faculty from the areas of humanities, science, and math who may be interested in teaching in a learning community.
Suggestion: We think that, at least at the beginning stages, the recruitment of more fulltime faculty (rather than part-time) will do more to enhance the credibility of the learning communities program across the college. We also suggest that the leadership team establish a recognizable process, including learning community curriculum proposals and guidelines for faculty participation, for full-time faculty interested in developing learning communities. (Marcos will send the leadership team documents currently in use at De Anza.)

Counseling

Suggestion: While the director of counseling seems supportive of learning communities, we suggest that the learning community leadership attend and participate in regular counseling meetings and request time at these meetings to inform counselors about learning communities, perhaps through a Learning Communities 101 workshop, and to invite a full-time counselor to be part of the learning communities executive team (see below under Task Force recommendations). We encourage the increased participation of counselors and the inclusion of other counseling classes besides COUNS 52.
Suggestion: We recommend that a full-time counselor (not part-time) assume some teaching responsibilities in the learning communities as part of their workload, so that counseling and guidance can be embedded in every learning community, though not necessarily as a stand alone course. We think this would provide more flexible hours and a greater variety of counseling services.

Learning Communities Task Force

Comment: As noted previously, we were unable to meet with the task force during our site visit due to their conflicting schedules. We foresee that this will be a continuing problem due to the large size of the task force.
Suggestion: We suggest that the learning community leadership reexamine the purpose and effectiveness of the task force. If a large advisory board is necessary due to the college culture, we recommend that a smaller executive team be establish to meet regularly and carry out the essential tasks necessary for the planning, development, and maintenance of learning communities.

Sustainability and institutionalization

Comment: Creating a solid foundation for learning communities requires an institutional investment and commitment to faculty and student recruitment, ongoing faculty training and support, marketing, assessment, and myriad tasks to support the infrastructure of such a program. The learning communities coordinator current receives 20 percent reassigned time to do this work.
Suggestion: Several areas of institutional need were identified during our visit and have been commented on previously in this narrative portion of this report. We recommend that the leadership and executive team work with higher administration to develop an explicit rationale for learning communities at Cuesta based on an identified area or areas of critical institutional need. This rationale would include a short-term and long-term strategic plan for addressing those needs.
Suggestion: We recommend that the leadership team develop a formal description of the duties and responsibilities of the learning communities coordinator position and that the institution reassess the program coordinator's reassigned time. Considering the amount of work to be done and the complexity of establishing a learning communities program at Cuesta, we recommend that the program coordinator receive at least 50 percent reassigned time.

In conclusion, we want to thank you again for an exceptionally interesting and enjoyable site visit. Everyone we met at Cuesta was extremely warm, welcoming, and enthusiastic about learning communities. We think you are off to a very strong start and have great potential to establish a solid, comprehensive learning communities program. We hope that our visit provided you with an opportunity to reflect on your efforts and to chart a course for future directions of your program. We look forward to a continued relationship and will be anxious to hear how Cuesta's learning communities program progresses. Again, thank you very much for welcoming us so warmly to Cuesta.

Sincerely,

Ana Torres Bower, Professor of Philosophy, Coordinator, First-Year-Experience (FYE), Cerritos College

Marcos Cicerone, Director, Staff & Organizational, Development, De Anza College

THE EVERGREEN STATE COLLEGE

OLYMPIA, WASHINGTON 98505

(360) 867-6910

FAX (360) 867-6662

www.evergreen.edu/washcenter

Barbara Leigh Smith, Co-Director

Jean MacGregor, Co-Director

Emily Decker, Senior Project Associate

Return to Top