Developing and assessing a holistic living -learning community for engineering and science freshmen.

摘要

Learning communities and their strategies for enrolling cohort groups of students in a common set of classes organized around a theme or linked with residence life have come to light over the past twenty years. However, living-learning communities (LLC) and their role in retention, engagement, and intellectual development for engineering and science students have yet to be fully explored. What aspects of a LLC are most beneficial to science and engineering students? What are the learning needs of engineering and science students that are best met with LLCs? These questions were the basis for assessment of a new LLC program developed at Washington State University specifically to increase retention, academic achievement, and engagement of engineering and science students.;A first-year semester-long pilot LLC program was developed at Washington State University specifically for entering engineering majors. The program was expanded the following year to include biotech science majors. The first LLC had 55 self-selected engineering participants. Students were housed in the same residence hall, registered for three common classes, and participated in a non-credit bearing weekly peer-facilitated study group. The second year 81 students self-selected into the program; 59 engineering and 22 biotech majors. Students were housed in a common residence hall and registered for three common classes. Students participated in a two-credit freshman seminar class instead of the once-weekly study group used the previous year.;Results indicate students were engaged with peers and in college activities, had mixed academic improvement, and engineering students were retained at higher rates in their major when compared to non-participating peers and biotech participants. Second year LLC students had higher grade averages than comparison peers despite lower incoming preparedness. Higher engagement levels were confirmed by triangulation with national survey comparisons, observations, focus groups, and student essays. The program was assessed using a mixed method approach including grade, retention, and survey comparisons with peers as well as focus groups and course evaluations.