The University of Texas at Brownsville KNOWLEDGE KNOWS NO BOUNDARIES. INCREASING STUDENT RETENTION AND ACADEMIC SUCCESS: STEM LEARNING COMMUNITIES Sponsored

The University of Texas at Brownsville

KNOWLEDGE KNOWS NO BOUNDARIES.

INCREASING STUDENT RETENTION AND ACADEMIC SUCCESS: STEM LEARNING COMMUNITIES

Sponsored by Title V

Presented by:

Oralia De los Reyes, Ph.D.Director of Title V

Rosalinda GarzaStudent Support Service Coordinator

David BoonResearch Assistant


PRESENTATION OVERVIEW

- Institution Demographic Profile- Project Overview

- Project Goals- Expected Impact

– 360° Program Assessment (Direct and Indirect Measures)

– STEM Learning Communities– Student Performance Indicators– Survey Results

– Intervention for Math Readiness– Conclusions


INSTITUTIONAL PROFILE

• UTB/TSC is located in South Texas--right on the border of the U.S. and Mexico – STUDENT BODY PROFILE:

– Total Enrollment 13,836 (without dual enrollment)– 83.4% (11,545) Undergraduate– 6.8% (937) Graduates– 46.9% (6,495) Full Time– 57.7% (7,990) Females– Average Age is 25 years old– 92.7% are Hispanic– 90% are awarded Financial Aid– 63% of freshmenplace in at least one developmental area


PROJECT OVERVIEW


•Restructure curricula and academic support to achieve improvedstudent learning outcomes• Implement a culture of evidence that identifies and aligns best practices for student

learning outcomes• Study the effects of redesigned curriculum and assessment measures in STEM

learning communities

TARGET POPULATIONS•Students in STEM fields

• Increase the number of students interested in STEM fields • Increase the success rate of students pursuing STEM fields (Specifically in the math sequence)

• Faculty• Increase the number of faculty who integrate instructional innovations for improved student learning outcomes• Increase the use of assessment of student learning outcomes to guide curricula improvements

PROJECT GOALS


•Establish STEM learning communities with intrusive academic support• Developed Peer Mentoring and Tutoring Programs• Integrated advising, service learning and career counseling

• Implement instructional innovations that have demonstrated success in increasing student learning and retention

• Integrated assignments in writing, critical thinking, scientific reasoning and problem solving• Integrated learning and study strategies• Integrated digital communication tools

• Implement assessment protocols that are used regularly to improve student learning outcomes

•Conducted all assessment protocols electronically on BlackboardOutcomes System (course, program and institution)•Establish student e-portfolios as assessment mechanism (In progress)

EXPECTED IMPACT


360° ASSESSMENT


360° ASSESSMENT ON THE FOUR PROJECT COMPONENTS

FACULTY DEVELOPMENT

ASSESSMENTREENGINEERING

CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT

INTEGRATION OF TECHNOLOGY INTO THE CLASSROOM

ACADEMIC SUPPORT (TUTORING & MENTORING)

Measuring Student Success

Passing RatesHrs Attempted Vs Completed

Letter Grade DistributionPersistence/Retention Rate

Students’ Satisfaction Test Scores

O


360° PROGRAM ASSESSMENT •FACULTY FEEDBACK

•Annual Faculty Survey and Focus Groups

•STUDENT FEEDBACK•Student Surveys (ROVI & LC) and Focus Groups•National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE)

•STUDENT PERFORMANCE DATA• Critical Thinking Assessment Test (CAT) •Attitudes Toward Science Assessment Instrument (ATSI) •Learning and Study Strategies Inventory (LASSI)•Course Embedded Assessment - Actual Student Work (papers and assignments designed to assess critical thinking and communication skills)

•PROGRAM ASSESSMENT•Blackboard Outcomes Systems- Program & Course Level Assessment


STEM LEARNING COMMUNITIES: STUDENT PERFORMANCE

INDICATORS


LEARNING COMMUNITIES FORMAT

• Types of Learning Communities:• Integrated• Cohorted• Stand Alone Courses

• All STEM learning communities have Integrated Academic Support:• Set tutoring times are assigned and

announced in the course schedule• All learning communities have a tutor and

a peeradvisor


STUDENTS ENROLLED IN STEM LEARNING COMMUNITIES

Source: Learning Communities Student Tracking Database, compiled by Title V, Spring 2012.

Fall '09 Spring '10 Fall '10 Spring '11 Fall '11 Spring '12 Fall '120

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

1425

237

171

212

162

340


40%

22%

7%

13%

4%

5%

2%

5% 2%College of Science, Math, and Technology

College of Liberal Arts

Undeclared

AA.GEN

College of Nursing

College of Education

College of Biomedical Studies and Health Professions

School of Business

Interdisciplinary Studies

LEARNING COMMUNITY STUDENTSBY COLLEGE, N=839

Source: Datatel Database, Management and Reporting Office, compiled by Title V, Fall 2011.

CSMT

CLA


PERFORMANCE MEASURES: LC STUDENTS’ RETENTION BY COHORT FALL 2009 TO FALL 2011

Pilots

UTBFT Freshmen Fall ‘10to Fall

‘11 Retention61

%

FALL 2009 SPRING 2010 FALL 2010 SPRING 2011 FALL 2011 SPRING 2012

FALL 2009 -13 Stu-dents

1 0.923 0.54 0.62 0.85 0.77

SPRING 2010 - 26 Stu-dents

NaN 1 0.46 0.62 0.58 0.46

FALL 2010 - 237 Stu-dents

NaN NaN 1 0.93 0.77 0.75


NaN NaN NaN 1 0.72 0.71

FALL 2011 - 212 Stu-dents

NaN NaN NaN NaN 1 0.87


NaN NaN NaN NaN NaN 1

10%

30%

50%

70%

90%

110%


CONTROL AND COMPARISON GROUPS

• The CONTROL GROUP was drawn from a database provided by the office of Institutional Effectiveness and was defined by random selection of non LC students...• with same classification• taking same courses in the same semester

• The COMPARISON GROUP was drawn from 2009 FoE Freshmen Cohort, DFWI Grade Distribution Report, published by the office of Data Management and Reporting, Spring 2010


FALL 2010-SPRING 2011 LC STUDENTS’ DEMOGRAPHICS

Source: Learning Communities Student Tracking Database, compiled by Title V, Fall 2011.

LC’s Control Group

Age Average 19 20

GenderFemaleMale

53% 47%

51% 49%

Ethnicity

HispanicWhite Non HispanicAsian/Pacific IslanderBlack Non HispanicOther

93% 3% 2%1%1%

95%3%1%0%1%

GPA Average 2.48 2.21

Classification

FreshmanSophomoreJuniorSenior

76%18%4%2%

NOTE: Control Group was defined by Student Classification and Non LC students taking same courses during the same semester


GRADE DISTRIBUTION: FALL 2010, n=526

Comparison Group Source:Office of Data Management and Reporting Database, Fall 2011

A B C % of ABC D F W I NG % of DFIW

LEARNING COMMU-NITY

13.1% 24.1% 27.4% 64.6% 17.7% 9.1% 8.4% 0.2% 0.0% 35.4%

CONTROL GROUP

0.08935361216730

05

0.20912547528517

1

0.26806083650190

1

0.56653992395437

3

0.18250950570342

2

0.18631178707224

3

0.05513307984790

88

0 0.00950570342205

323

0.43346007604562

7

5.0%

15.0%

25.0%

35.0%

45.0%

55.0%

65.0%

13.1%

24.1%27.4%

64.6%

17.7%

9.1% 8.4%

0.2% 0.0%

35.4%

8 pts.


GRADE DISTRIBUTION: FALL 2010, PRE-CALC, n=21


A B C % of ABC

D F W I NG % of DFIW

LEARNING COMMUNITY

19.0% 42.9% 23.8% 85.7% 14.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 14.3%

CONTROL GROUP

0.23809523809

5238

0.0952380952380953

0.38095238095

2381

0.71428571428

5714

0.19047619047

6191

0.0952380952380953

0 0 0 0.28571428571

4286

5.0%

15.0%

25.0%

35.0%

45.0%

55.0%

65.0%

75.0%

85.0%

19.0%

42.9%

23.8%

85.7%

14.3%

0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

14.3%

14 pts.

33 pts.


A B C % of ABC

D F W I NG % of DFIW

LEARNING COMMUNITY

13.8% 22.4% 30.9% 67.1% 17.1% 4.6% 10.5% 0.7% 0.0% 32.9%

CONTROL GROUP

0.072368421052

6317

0.25 0.25 0.572368421052

631

0.138157894736

842

0.25 0.026315789473

6842

0 0.013157894736

8421

0.427631578947

368

5.0%

15.0%

25.0%

35.0%

45.0%

55.0%

65.0%

75.0%

13.8%

22.4%

30.9%

67.1%

17.1%

4.6%10.5%

0.7% 0.0%

32.9%

GRADE DISTRIBUTION: ENGL 1301-FALL 2010, n=152


10 pts.

6 pts.

20 pts.


A B C % of A B C D F W % of DFIW0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

15%

23%27%

65%

17%

12%

6%

35%

15%

22% 23%

60%

12%

19%

9%

40%

LC'sCOMPARISON GROUP

GRADES1415 grade records for LC's vs. 4945 grade records for Comparison Group for 17 Courses

Perc

enta

geGRADE DISTRIBUTION: FALL 2010 AND SPRING 2011

Comparison Group Source: DFWI Grade Distribution of FY2009 Freshmen Cohort (Fall 2008, Spring and Summer 2009) for FoE, Office of Data Management and Reporting, Spring 2010


HIGH PERFORMANCE LC’SFALL 2010-SPRING 2011: COLLEGE ALGEBRA


10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

8%

21%

28%

57%

10%

21%

12%

43%

7%

17%21%

45%

16%

27%

12%

55%

LC'sComparison Group

GRADES119 grade records for LC's vs. 799 grade records for Comparison Group

Perc

enta

ge

12 pts.



HIGH PERFORMANCE LC’SFALL 2010-SPRING 2011: CALCULUS I


10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

10%

35%40%

85%

15%

0% 0%

15%21%

24%

12%

57%

24%

17%

2%

43%



Perc

enta

ge

28 pts.

28 pts.11 pts.



HIGH PERFORMANCE LC’SFALL 2010-SPRING 2011: CHEMISTRY I


10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

9%

29%26%

64%

13% 11% 13%

36%

4%

26%23%

53%

22%

8%

17%

47%



Perc

enta

ge

11 pts.



FALL 2011 LC STUDENTS’ DEMOGRAPHICS

Source: Learning Communities Student Tracking Database, compiled by Title V, Fall 2011.

LC’s Control Group

Age Average 20 21

GenderFemaleMale

45% 55%

51% 49%

Ethnicity

HispanicWhite Non HispanicAsian/Pacific IslanderBlack Non HispanicOther

95% 2% 1%1%1%

97%1%1%<1%<1%

GPA Average 2.38 2.11

Classification

FreshmanSophomoreJuniorSenior

79%16%4%1%

72%24%3%<1%

NOTE: Control Group was defined by Students taking same courses during the same semester


A B C Total Pass D F W Total DFWI0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

18%

39%

27%

84%

11%6%

0%

16%

9%12%

20%

41%

16%

42%

0%

59%

LCControl

HIGH PERFORMANCE LC’SFALL 2011: COLLEGE ALGEBRA (n=85)

43pts.

Comparison Group Source: Office of Institutional Effectiveness and Planning-Informer Report, Spring 2012, compiled by Title V Office

28 pts.


A B C Total Pass D F W Total DFWI0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

25%

31%

23%

79%

2%

17%

2%

21%

8%

27%23%

58%

17%

25%

0%

42%LCControl

HIGH PERFORMANCE LC’SFALL 2011: PRE-CLCULUS (n=48)

21 pts.

Comparison Group Source: Office of Institutional Effectiveness and Planning-Informer Report, Spring 2012, compiled by Title V Office

17pts.


STUDENTS’ SURVEYS AND FOCUS GROUPS RESULTS


POSITIVES•Peer mentoring and tutoring programs• Block schedules• Quality of instruction• Flexibility: improvement of tutoring based on mid- semester student

feedback

AREAS TO IMPROVE•Course integration• Tutor Training to develop strong, engaging, friendly, knowledgeable

leaders• More student activities

Student Feedback: Focus Group Summary


Fall 2011 Rovai Results: Sense of Community1=Strongly Disagree – 5=Strongly Agree

Mean Std. DeviationTutor appeared to have knowledge of the subject. 4.27 0.87Tutor was able to speak clearly and write legibly 4.21 0.90Tutor was helpful and effective in helping me with course material. 4.08 0.99Tutor sessions were organized and clear, and explanation were understandable. 4.02 0.96I feel that I am given ample opportunities to learn. 4.01 0.91I feel that I am encouraged to ask questions. 4.00 0.92I feel connected to others in this course. 3.97 0.96I feel isolated in this course (REVERSE CODED). 3.92 1.01

N=154


Fall 2011 Rovai Results: Sense of CommunityCCS Results Continued: Fall 2011

Mean Std. Deviation

I feel confident that others will support me. 3.81 0.97

I feel that I can rely on others in this course. 3.76 1.04

I do not feel a spirit of community (REVERSE CODED) 3.72 1.05

I feel that it is hard to get help when I have a question (REVERSE CODED) 3.69 1.06

I feel that my educational needs are not being met (REVERSE CODED) 3.67 1.11My experience in the linked courses made me more comfortable meeting with my instructors outside of class. 3.67 1.06

I feel that I receive timely feedback. 3.55 0.99

I feel reluctant to speak openly (REVERSE CODED) 3.23 1.10

I feel uneasy exposing gaps in my understanding (REVERSE CODED) 3.09 0.98

I feel that this course results only in modest learning (REVERSE CODED) 2.82 1.00

I feel that members of this course depend on me. 2.72 1.00

N=154


Learning Community Experience Satisfaction

N %Satisfied 110 35%Very satisfied 97 31%Neutral 84 27%Very Dissatisfied 11 4%Dissatisfied 13 4%Total 315 100 %


LC Survey Top Rated ItemsMean Std. Deviation

Formed one or more friendships that I will maintain after the semester. 3.83 1.14Exchanged ideas with students whose views are different from my own. 3.63 1.06Became more effective in analyzing and understanding readings in essays articles, and textbooks. 3.60 0.99Understood connections between different disciplines and courses. 3.59 0.95Became more effective with communicating my thoughts in speaking. 3.57 0.96Developed a better understanding of complex real world social problems and issues. 3.57 0.98

N=312 to 315


LC Survey Results Continued…

Mean Std. Deviation

Actively discussed complex issues and ideas.3.44 1.00

Discussed ideas from the LC courses with peers outside of class.3.42 1.08

Became more effective with communicating my thoughts in writing.3.42 0.99

Applied what I learned in one course to another course in my learning community. 3.39 1.01Applied knowledge gained in learning community courses in service to broader community and social issues. 3.39 0.97Made connections with faculty outside of class.

3.24 1.11Discussed connections between any LC courses with faculty.

3.10 1.12

N=314


National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE)

• The NSSE assesses the extent to which undergraduate students are involved in educational practices empirically linked to high levels of learning and development.

• Random sample of first-year students and seniors.• Oversampled first-year students and administered to

students in the LCs in the spring.


NSSE Items Significantly Different (p. < .05)

Item Learning Community

Mean SD Effect Size

Worked on a paper or project that required integrating ideas or information from various sources

Yes 3.21 .89 .18

No 2.89 .88

Put together ideas or concepts from different courses when completing assignments or during class discussions

Yes 2.98 .84 .23

No 2.49 .88

N=54 to 165


NSSE Items Significantly Different (p. < .10)Item Learning

CommunityMean SD Effect Size

Worked with classmates OUTSIDE OF CLASS to prepare class assignments

Yes 2.67 1.05 .18

No 2.31 1.00

Had serious conversations with students who are very different from you in terms of their religious beliefs, political opinions, or personal values

Yes 2.55 1.10 .15

No 2.21 1.10

Coursework emphasized: APPLYING theories or concepts to practical problems or in new situations

Yes 3.15 .88 .12

No 2.93 .96

Institutional contribution: Using computing and information technology

Yes 3.45 .84 .12

No 3.24 .88

N=49 to 164


LC Student Focus Groups • A total of 9 students were recruited to voluntarily

participate in an hour long semi-structured interview regarding learning communities.

• The interview was tape-recorded and subsequently content analyzed.

• The qualitative results were analyzed for content and coded into individual thematic theme categories.


High Praise to the Tutoring Support• “They (tutors) explained everything. They had patience.”• “They helped to introduce good study habits.”• “The tutors they really helped in helping us become individual(s) off of them. Like

they kind of helped us to get our sea legs you could say.”• “Chem. and Pre-Cal. They’re pretty hard classes, and even Bio, knowing that you

have the option for tutors and knowing that there’s a set time for you to study…. I think that helps a lot.”

• “At the time when you would go (tutoring) – they would always go over a chapter they would give you like an overview on every chapter. That was really helpful too. And they would always ask us like if you guys want during lecture -- write questions that you want to know-- bring it to the tutoring session -- and we’ll answer them there.”

• “Linked actually makes it more easier since the tutoring is there. If you take them separately having like that time setup for studying makes it more difficult.”


Improving Critical Thinking • “I also liked the fact that I had to look at it through two different

philosophies. I mean the philosophy of English and Biology. I felt that it helped with a deeper understanding. It just reinforced it.”

• “Seeing them spending more time with both of them (Chemistry and Math). You’re understanding more. You’re not just understanding Chemistry better--you are understanding Chemistry and Math.”

• “I don’t know if this one counts but the big thing that framed the beginning part of our semester was ‘What is science? What do we consider science? And what is considered science?’ And we basically went through the scientific process as well which eventually led to us forming our own opinion of what science (is).”


Developing a Sense of Community• “For me I think for both classes we had the same classmates… and I know that’s a

lot of fun because you form like a little community amongst each other. So once you get that confidence of like knowing everybody for both classes you feel more free to like ask more questions or ask each other questions that we don’t understand.”

• “This is my first semester so like I didn’t know anybody and just being in the learning community and meeting new people and having them there with me - helping me… Instead of those classes that I didn’t have with other students that I know. I think it just helped me more.”

• “Having the same students and actually going to the other classes with those students was extremely helpful. And I’m a pretty open person but in other classes you could see people shut down because they’re afraid…because they don’t know their peers. And so they’re afraid to ask questions.”


FACULTY SURVEY AND FOCUS GROUP RESULTS


Using Assignments To Improve General Education Outcomes

Note: N/A removed from analyses N=227

How often have you developed the following assessments that assess students’…

% Often or Very Often

Critical Thinking Levels 75%Communication Skills 69%Writing Skills 65%Information Literacy 63%Scientific Reasoning 47%


Annual Faculty Survey Results: Integration of Technology

Note: N/A removed from analyses N=227

To what extent do you use the following teaching methods in your courses with undergraduates?

% Often or Very Often

Technology (e.g. web, DVD, computers, Podcasts, clickers, digital technology, etc.)

68%

Electronic quizzes with immediate feedback in class 31%

Blackboard Management System's Outcomes Platform 28%

Electronic portfolios 15%


Annual Faculty Survey Results: Supporting a Culture of Evidence

N=277, Note: N/A removed from analyses

UTB/TSC does a good job: % Agree or Strongly Agree

Providing a good general education for all students 60%Providing a clear curricular plan for students 55%Systematically assessing students’ learning outcomes. 50%Using what we learn from those assessments to strengthen courses. 44%Creating a culture of evidence to guide curricular reform 41%Systematically assessing students' experiences. 39%


Lessons Learned To Help Faculty Design And Implement Assessment Plans To Improve Student Learning

• The overriding issue for faculty is to understand what assessment is and why the institution must undertake it. If assessment is simply seen as externally driven by accreditation demands, its use for program review will be severely limited.

• “It is a huge battle. It is a lot to do. How to have adequate assessment for science is an issue. Reluctance of faculty to use makes standardization of courses very hard.”

• “We need to understand assessment before attempting to write SLO’s. There are a lot of pieces to this puzzle. We need to have grounding in what is assessment and why we are doing it.”


INTERVENTIONS TO INCREASE MATH READINESS


SUMMER 2010 & 2011: COLLEGE ALGEBRA & PRE-CALCULUS BOOT CAMP

• 101 students have participated in the two week summer boot camps• 67 students did the pre and post test• 70% passed their math course in fall 2011 (with “C” or better) • 31%tested out

SUMMER 2010:• 80% were successful in their next math course in fall’10 (“C” or better)• 78% were successful in their next math course Spring 2011

• From the ones that did not pass the post test:• 40 to 60% take the same course next semester• 46% did not enroll in a math course


SUMMER 2010 PRE-CALCULUS BOOT CAMP

No Math College Alge-bra

Pre-Calculus Calculus I Calculus II

SPRING 2011

0.347826086956522

0.0434782608695652

0.173913043478261

0.391304347826087

0.0434782608695652

FALL 2010

0.130434782608696

0.173913043478261

0.608695652173914

NaN NaN

5.0%15.0%25.0%35.0%45.0%55.0%65.0%N %

Total Students Participating 32 100%Pre and Post Test 23 72%Tested out of Pre-Calc 4 17%Increased Test Scores between 130 and 200%

4 17%

Increased Test Scores between 50 and 94%

9 39%

Increased Test Scores by 50% 6 26%

12 of 15 students (80%) were successful in the course (fall’10)

NO MATH A B C D FFALL 2010 8 4 5 3 3 0SPRING 2011 3 10 5 3 1 1TOTAL 13 14 10 6 4 1

27% 29% 21% 12% 8% 2%

18 of 20 students (78%) were successful in the Spring

Math Enrollment after BootCamp


SUMMER BOOT CAMP 2011

• SUMMER 2011:• 66% were successful in their math course in

Fall 2011 • 68% were successful in their math course in

Spring 2012• From the ones that did not pass the post test:

• 52% took the same course next semester• 22% did not enroll in a math course


COLLEGE ...

PRECALC...

CALCULU

S I

NO MATH

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Courses

Stud

ents 23%

20%17%

40%

SUMMER 2011 PRE-CALCULUS BOOT CAMPMath Enrollment after BootCamp, n=35

N %

Total Students Participating 35 100%

Pre and Post Test 22 63%

Tested out of Pre-Calc 10 45%

Increased Test Scores over 100% 5 23%


6 27%


NO MATH A B C D F NGFALL2011 7 12 6 4 1 4 1SPRING 2012 7 7 7 7 2 5 0TOTAL 14 19 13 11 3 9 1


BASIC MATH

INTTRO ALGEBRA

COLLEGE ALGEBRA

MATH LIB-ERAL ARTS

PRECAL-CULUS

CALCULUS I

NO MATH

Fall 2011

1 1 14 1 3 1 13

1

3

5

7

9

11

13

15

Stud

ents

SUMMER 2011 COLLEGE ALGEBRA BOOT CAMPMath Enrollment after BootCamp, n=34

41% 38%

9%

N %

Total Students Participating 34 100%

Pre and Post Test 22 65%

Tested out of College Algebra 7 32%

Increased Test Scores over 100% 3 14%


7 32%


NO MATH A B C D F NGFALL2011 8 4 6 3 3 1 3 5

SPRING 2012 18 1 5 3 1 5 0 1

TOTAL 26 5 11 6 4 6 3 6


CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS


WHAT IS GOING WELL…

• LC students are improving retention rates and

GPAs

• building connections and community

• developing communication and critical

thinking skills

• Faculty are participating in PD initiatives and

they are finding it useful.

• integrating technology in their classroom

to improve teaching and learning.


WHAT IS NEXT…

• Find ways to institutionalize effective initiatives

• Blocked schedule by discipline (establishing cohorts)

• Integrated Academic Support (tutoring) to gatekeeper courses

• Sustaining interventions to improve math readiness because math is an

impediment to attaining a STEM degree.

• Expand Math Boot Camp for STEM disciplines

• Making sure that progress on retention and academic achievement translates into

degree attainment in STEM fields/graduation

• Continue to measure progress in student degree attainment


QUESTIONS & ANSWERS


http://www.utb.edu/vpaa/TitleV/Pages/2011report.aspx

For Electronic Newsletter and Full Presentation go to:

Thank YOU!!!!!



Documents

The University of Texas at Brownsville KNOWLEDGE KNOWS NO BOUNDARIES. INCREASING STUDENT RETENTION AND ACADEMIC SUCCESS: STEM LEARNING COMMUNITIES Sponsored