Retention Studies
Roxbury Community College
Three semesters after completing LTL, 70% of the former LTL students were either still in college or had graduated, as compared with 40% for students receiving 30 hours of subject-matter tutoring. A six-year follow-up study showed that LTL-trained students were retained through graduation at a rate of 80%.
Shorter CollegeRetention in the sophomore year was improved by 38% when the freshman seminar changed from Becoming a Master Student to LTL.
University of New HampshireThe withdrawal rate for LTL students was 3% between freshman and sophomore years, as compared with 9% withdrawals for the non-LTL control group. Thus, students enrolling in LTL were three times less likely to leave the university after their freshman year than were non-LTL students.
State University of New York at Buffalo3-year study on 1,000 students funded by the U.S. Department of Education's Fund for the Improvement of Post-Secondary Education (FIPSE), found that LTL had a significant impact on the grade point averages, academic motivation, and retention of average college freshmen.
Boston College
Three semesters after completing LTL, 100% of the experimental subjects were still in college and performing, as compared with 80% for normally-admitted students. These results are striking at Boston College, a private, Jesuit institution which is 90% Caucasian, with normally admitted students' SAT's at 1060, and where the majority of students are second-generation college students.
LTL Subjects: Three Semesters After Completing LTL Follow-up% Minority
Combined SAT
GPA
Retention at B.C.
75%
812
2.58
100%
The LTL students, while significantly more disadvantaged than normally-admitted Boston College students, performed as well academically and their retention was higher: Retention for normally-admitted, non-LTL students at Boston College was approximately 80%.
A six-year follow-up study showed that educationally disadvantaged students taking LTL at Boston College had a 98% retention rate through graduation, while the normally-admitted BC students maintained an 80% retention rate.
Grade point average studiesIs Learning to Learn® (LTL) effective for average college students?
At the Universities of Wisconsin and New Hampshire, studies were done of normally-admitted freshmen enrolled in four-week, non-credit LTL courses. Experimental and control groups were statistically equated on a number of variables, including high school rank, college entrance test scores, and types and levels of college courses carried. The experimental treatment was students' attendance in a four-week LTL class. All studies showed a significant difference in favor of the experimental groups' grade-point average. For example, in a study of 200 freshmen at the University of Wisconsin, LTL was taught to heterogeneous groups of students. While low-achieving students made greater gains with LTL than did high-achieving students, all groups benefitted:
First Semester Grade Point Averages of LTL and Non-LTL Students
LTL students
Non-LTL students
Low-achieving students
1.72
1.00
Average students
2.54
2.00
High-achieving students
3.125
3.00
The statistical significance of these differences was .01.
Learning to Learn has won official recognition as an Exemplary Program by the U.S. Department of Education. Since 1974, the U.S. Department of Education has funded a panel of research and program design experts to evaluate the effective-ness of educational programs at all levels. The panel meets monthly to evaluate three promising programs; program assessment is very rigorous. In 21 years, LTL is the only postsecondary program this panel found that reliably produces both significant increases in (1) college students' grade point averages in all content areas and (2) retention in college through graduation.
The U.S. Department of Education's approval of LTL for national dissemination was based on data from studies at Boston College and Roxbury Community College. At both colleges, the target population was a group of students who were educationally and economically disadvantaged relative to the college population as a whole. For example, at Roxbury Community College, the treatment group entered the program reading at the sixth grade level. At Boston College the treatment group's mean combined SAT was 812, as contrasted with a mean SAT score of 1060 for normally-admitted freshmen at the university.
U.S. Department of Education-validated studies
These government-validated LTL studies controlled for the following variables: college entrance test scores, previous semester's grade point average, race, sex, year in school, and number of credits taken. That is, experimental and control groups were equivalent on all of these dimensions. The dependent variable was grade point average. The LTL grade was not included in the data analysis, and content course instructors were not aware that some of their students were receiving LTL instruction.
Results were as follows:
Boston College
Roxbury Community College
Experimental Subjects' mean GPA
2.44
2.89
Control Subjects' mean GPA
1.97
2.22
N = 74
N = 62
F(1,76) = 4.616, p = .035
F(1,56) = 5.939, p =.018
Credits completed by:
Experimental Subjects 15.10
10.45
Control Subjects 12.60
7.40
F-test significance
.001
.001
These studies indicate that LTL students achieved significantly higher grade point averages, while they also completed more course credits. The control group dropped the courses they were failing, thus the difference in grade point averages is even higher than it appears.
Reading ImprovementAt Eastman Kodak, a group of workers was instructed in LTL; at the same time, another, similar group of workers was entered into a traditional reading improvement program. Both groups were given 13 weeks of instruction, 3 hours per week. Results are shown below:
Reading Skills Improvement with LTL*Results are for trainees who entered the training program with entry scores on the TABE reading inventory between 8.0 and 11.9.
**The actual reading gain for LTL trainees was probably greater than 86.4 weeks: 46% of these LTL-trained participants scored at the top of the TABE (12.9). This suggests that a true assessment of the gains can only be done with a reading test which goes beyond 12.9.
DiscussionThe data show that changes occurred in students receiving LTL instruction, and that these changes were statistically significant. There are, however, more than numbers here. The studies show changes which are educationally significant. They indicate that LTL can be effectively taught to students with different skill-levels &sky; both average college students and economically/educationally disadvantaged students who are at risk for failure. LTL has a significant impact on students' grade point averages, number of credits completed per semester, and retention rates through graduation. The changes in students' grades are apparently stable over time.
Further, at Roxbury Community College (RCC), long-term retention data shows that nearly twice as many LTL students were retained in school as compared with students receiving subject-matter tutoring. The RCC study suggests that instruction in how to learn is more beneficial than instruction in what to learn. Instruction in learning strategies was significantly more effective than was subject-matter tutoring. At Boston College, where disadvantaged students were retained through graduation at a rate of 100% (20% higher than normally admitted students), it appears that academic mastery has powerful and lasting effects on the motivation of newly-competent students.
It is important to note that other remedial programs were not given to students who received LTL instruction. That is, LTL students in all of these studies did not receive subject matter tutoring or other special academic support services elsewhere while they received LTL instruction. The studies controlled for intervening variables which might account for differences in students' performance &endash; college entrance test scores, previous grade point average, year in school, number and type of academic courses taken, race, and sex. In addition, the RCC and Boston College studies used control groups where the motivation of both treatment and control groups was similar, since both self-selected academic support. Thus, the changes which occurred in students' learning and retention rates must be attributed to LTL intervention.
The reading improvement data from the Kodak study show that the LTL reading methods can improve learners' reading at 6 times the rate of traditional reading improvement programs.
Students given the entire LTL program in both (1) a student success or study skills course and in (2) a separate reading improvement course would make strong, lasting gains in their academic course work, retention through graduation, and reading comprehension skills.
Learning to Learn, Inc.
Box 38-1351
Cambridge, MA 02238Phone: 1-617-492-8477 or 1-800-28-THINK (1-800-288-4465)
