Advertisement

An intensive approach for course repeating students at a Chilean University

  • 10 Accesses

Abstract

Improved access to higher education can reduce social and economic inequality only if universities achieve equality in graduation rates of different groups of students. Concerned about first year failures among first-generation students, a university in Chile devised a between-semesters course intended to allow failed students to remain with their entering class. The course had three major elements: compression of a semester’s course work into 2 weeks; use of incentives to motivate students to prepare for classes; and “flipped class” participation. In 2014, this intensive course was offered in the break between the first and second semesters. Some 310 students in Health Sciences who had failed at least one of three required courses were invited to enroll; 140 signed up. At the end of the course, more than 90% of the students taking the intensive course passed the regular final examination they had previously failed and continued with their entering class. With no additional intervention, over the next seven semesters, students who had taken the intensive course performed as well in their courses as those who had not and were less likely to drop out. In 2017, more than 75% were still with their class, compared with 53% of those who had not taken the course.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant unlimited access to the full article PDF.

US$ 39.95

Price includes VAT for USA

Subscribe to journal

Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.

US$ 99

This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.

References

  1. Arango, M., Evans, S., & Quadri, Z. (2016). Education reform in Chile: designing a fairer, better higher education sytem. Graduate Policy Workshop Woodrow Wilson School of Public & International Affairs, Princeton University. Retrieved from https://wws.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/content/Chile%20Workshop%20Report_HigherEd%203.15.pdf.

  2. Bahr, P. R. (2008). Does mathematics remediation work? A comparative analysis of academic attainment among community college students. Research in Higher Education, 49(5), 420–450. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-008-9089-4.

  3. Bahr, P. R. (2013). The aftermath of remedial math:investigating the low rate of certificate completion among remedial math students. Research in Higher Education, 54(2), 171–200 Retrieved from https://www-jstor-org.ezp-prod1.hul.harvard.edu/stable/pdf/23355285.pdf?refreqid=search%3Af0da1715514f911ec647cf6372f24a84.

  4. Bassi, M., Busso, M., & Muñoz, J. S. (2015). Enrollment, graduation, and dropout rates in Latin America: is the glass half empty or half full? Economía. Washington DC: Brookings Institution Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/24570867.

  5. Bates, T. (2010). New challenges for universities: why they must change. In Changing Cultures in Higher Education (pp. 15–25). Berlin: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03582-1_2.

  6. Bettinger, E. P., & Long, B. T. (2009). Addressing the needs of underprepared students in higher education: Does college remediation work? The Journal of Human Resources, 44(3), 736–771.

  7. Bishop, J. L., & Verleger, M. (2013). The flipped classroom: a survey of the research. Proccedings of the Annual Conference of the American Society for Engineering Education, Atlanta. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2013.6684807.

  8. Bloom, B. (1982). All our children learning. a primer for parents, teachers, and other educators. New York: McGraw-Hill.

  9. Boatman, A., & Long, B. T. (2018). Does remediation work for all students? How the effects of postsecondary remedial and developmental courses vary by level of academic preparation. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 40(1), 29–58.

  10. Brunner, J. J., & Ferrada Hurtado, R. (2011). Educación superior en iberoamérica informe 2011. (J. J. Brunner & R. Ferrada Hurtado, Eds.). Santiago Chile.

  11. Calhoon, S., & Becker, A. (2008). How students use the course syllabus. International Journal for the Scholarship of Learning and Teaching, 2(1), Article 6.

  12. Castillo, J., & Cabezas, G. (2010). Caracterización de jóvenes primera generación en educación superior. Nuevas trayectorias hacia la equidad educativa. Calidad En La Educación, 32, 44–76 Retrieved from http://www.cl.undp.org/content/dam/chile/docs/pobreza/undp_cl_pobreza_publ2.pdf.

  13. Centro de Estudios. (2012). Deserción en la educación superior en Chile. Santiago: Ministerio de Educaciòn.

  14. Centro de Estudios. (2013). Serie evidencias: sistemas universitarios modernos: diversidad y calidad institucional. Santiago. Retrieved from http://centroestudios.mineduc.cl/tp_enlaces/portales/tp5996f8b7cm96/uploadImg/File/A2N16_Sistema_Universitario.pdf.

  15. Clark, M. H., & Cundiff, N. L. (2011). Assessing the effectiveness of a college freshman seminar using propensity score. Research in Higher Education, 52(6), 616–639 Retrieved from https://www-jstor-org.ezp-prod1.hul.harvard.edu/stable/pdf/41483806.pdf.

  16. Collier, P. J., & Morgan, D. L. (2008). “Is that paper really due today?” Differences in first- generation and traditional college students’ understandings of faculty expectations. Higher Education, 55(4), 425–446. https://doi.org/10.1007/sl0734-007-9065-5.

  17. Comisión de Financiamiento Estudiantil. (2012). Análisis y recomendaciones par el sistema de finaciamiento estudiantil. Santiago: Ministerio de Educaciòn.

  18. Corkin, D. M., Horn, C., & Pattison, D. (2017). The effects of an active learning intervention in biology on college students’ classroom motivational climate perceptions, motivation, and achievement. Educational Psychology, 37(9), 1106–1124.

  19. Cox, C. (2011). Currículo escolar de Chile: génesis, implementación y desarrollo. Revue International de Education de Sevres, 56, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.4000/ries.1047.

  20. Credé, M., & Kuncel, N. R. (2008). Study habits, skills, and attitudes: the third pillar supporting collegiate academic performance. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3(6), 425–453 Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.ezp-prod1.hul.harvard.edu/stable/pdf/40212266.pdf.

  21. Czworkowski, J., & Seethaler, S. (2013). Content-intensive courses in an undergraduate science education minor and impacts on participating students. Journal of College Science Teaching, 43(1), 48–53 Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.ezp-prod1.hul.harvard.edu/stable/pdf/43631721.pdf?refreqid=excelsior%3A226ce5bcb356e644c08ce3688340f755.

  22. Deroma, V. M., Bell, N. L., Zaremba, B. A., & Abee, J. C. (2005). Evaluation of a college transition program for students at-risk for academic failure. Research and Teaching in Developmental Education, 21(2), 20–33 Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/42802583.

  23. Dexter, K. M., Tai, R. H., & Sadler, P. M. (2006). Report different high school scheduling plans. The High School Journal, 89(4), 22–33 Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40364225.

  24. Engle, J., & Tinto, V. (2015). Moving beyond access: college success for low-income, first- generation students. Washington DC: Pell Institute Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED504448.pdf.

  25. Engle, J., Bermeo, A., & O’Brien, C. (2006). Straight from the source: what works for first-generation college students. Washington DC: Perll Institute Retrieved from www.pellinstitute.org.

  26. Flanagan-Borquez, A. (2017). Experiencias de estudiantes de primera generación en universidades chilenas: realidades y desafíos. Revista de La Educación Superior, 46(183), 87–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resu.2017.06.003.

  27. Flechsig, K.-H., & Schiefelbein, E. (2003). 20 Modelos Didácticos para América Latina. (K. H. Flechsig & E. Schiefelbein, Eds.). Washington DC: Organización de los Estados Americanos. Retrieved from http://www.educoas.org/portal/bdigital/contenido/interamer/interamer_72/indice.aspx.

  28. Friesen, S., & Scott, D. (2013). Inquiry-based learning: a review of the research literature. Calgary. Retrieved from http://galileo.org/focus-on-inquiry-lit-review.pdf.

  29. Gibbs, G., & Coffey, M. (2004). The impact of training of university teachers on their teaching skills, their approach to teaching and the approach to learning of their students. Active Learning in Higher Education, 5(1), 87–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787404040463.

  30. Guskey, T. R. (2007). Clasing the achievement gap: revisiting Benjamin S. Bloom’s learning for mastery. Journal of Adanced Academics, 19(1), 8–31 Retrieved from http://tguskey.com/wp-content/uploads/Mastery-Learning-5-Revisiting-Blooms-Learning-for-Mastery.pdf.

  31. Heckman, J. J. (2008). Schools, skills and synapses. Economic Inquiry, 46(3), 289–324. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-7295.2008.00163.x.

  32. Heiner, C. E., Banet, A. I., & Wieman, C. (2014). Preparing students for class: how to get 80% of students reading the textbook before class. American Journal of Physics, 82(10), 989–996. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.4895008.

  33. Henderson, C., & Rosenthal, A. (2006). Reading questions: encouraging students to read the text before coming to class. Journal of College Science Teaching, 35(7), 46–50 Retrieved from http://homepages.wmich.edu/~chenders/Publications/ReadingQuestions2005.pdf.

  34. Karabulut-Ilgu, A., Jaramillo Cherrez, N., & Jahren, C. T. (2017). A systematic review of research on the flipped learning method in engineering education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 49(3), 398–411. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12548.

  35. Kember, D. (2009). Promoting student-centred forms of learning across an entire university. Higher Education, 58(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-008-9177-6.

  36. Kidron, Y., & Lindsay, J. (2014). The effects of increased learning time on student academic and nonacademic outcomes: findings from a meta-analytic review. Washington DC: American Institutes of Research Retrieved from https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/appalachia/pdf/REL_2014015.pdf.

  37. Koontz, T. M., & Plank, K. M. (2011). Can reading questions foster active learning_: a study of six college courses. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 22(23–46).

  38. Kucsera, J. V., & Zimmaro, D. M. (2010). Comparing the effectiveness of intensive and traditional courses. College Teaching, 58(58), 62–68 Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/25763421.

  39. Kuh, G. D., Kinzie, J., Buckley, J. A., Bridges, B. K., & Hayek, J. C. (2006). What matters to student success: a review of the literature. In Commissioned Report for the National Symposium on Postsecondary Student Success: Spearheading a Dialog on Student Success. Washingtn DC: Ñ Natinal Postsecondary Education Cooperative Retrieved from https://www.ue.ucsc.edu/sites/default/files/WhatMattersStudentSuccess(Kuh,July2006).pdf.

  40. Landry, T. K. (2016). Block scheduling for the 21st century: a change leadership plan. St.Louis: National Louis University Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.nl.edu/diss.

  41. Lesik, S. A. (2007). Do developmental mathematics programs have a causal impact on student retention? An application of discrete-time survival and regression-discontinuity analysis. Research in Higher Education, 48(5), 583–608. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-006-9036-1.

  42. Martorell, P., & McFarlin, I. (2011). Help or hindrance? The effects of college remediation on academic and labor outcomes. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 93(2), 436–454 Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/23015946.

  43. Mccallum, S., Schultz, J., Sellke, K., & Spartz, J. (2015). An examination of the flipped classroom approach on college student Academic Involvement. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 27(1), 42–55 Retrieved from http://www.isetl.org/ijtlhe/.

  44. McGinn, N. F., & Schiefelbein, F. E. (2015). Getting students to read before class: innovation in a university in Chile. Prospects, 45(4), 447–464.

  45. McLean, S., Attardi, S. M., Faden, L., & Goldszmidt, M. (2016). Flipped classrooms and student learning: not just surface gains. Advances in Physiology Education, 40(1), 47–55. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00098.2015.

  46. McNally, B., Chipperfield, J., Dorsett, P., Del Fabbro, L., Frommolt, V., Goetz, S., et al. (2017). Flipped classroom experiences: student preferences and flip strategy in a higher education context. Higher Education, 73(2), 281–298. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-016-0014-z.

  47. Michel, N. (2009). Active versus passive teacing styles: An emirical study of student learning outcomes. Small Business Institute National Proceedings, 33(1), 55–67. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?.

  48. Mizala, A., & Torche, F. (2012). Bringing the schools back in: the stratification of educational achievement in the Chilean voucher system. International Journal of Educational Development, 32(1), 132–144.

  49. Moore, C., & Shulock, N. (2009). Student progress toward degree completion: lessons from the research literature. Sacramento: California State University, Sacramento Retrieved from http://lacccwc.com/CWE-Internship/Documents/LOWDL_Resources/R_Student_Progress_Toward_Degree_Completion1.pdf.

  50. Moravec, M., Williams, A., Aguilar-Roca, N., & O’Dowd, D. K. (2010). Learn before lecture: a strategy that improves learning outcomes in a large introductory biology class. CBE Life Sciences Education, 9(4), 473–481. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.10-04-0063.

  51. Mortensen, C. J., & Nicholson, A. M. (2015). The flipped classroom stimulates greater learning and is a modern 21st century approach to teaching today’s undergraduates. Journal of Animal Science, 93(7), 3722–3731. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2015-9087.

  52. O’Shea, S. (2016). Avoiding the manufacture of ‘sameness’: first-in-family students, cultural capital and the higher education environment. Higher Education, 72(1), 59–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-015-9938-y.

  53. OECD. (2016). Income inequality remains high in the face of weak recovery. Income Inequality Update. Paris. Retrieved from http://oe.cd/idd.

  54. Opdecam, E., Everaert, P., Van Keer, H., & Buysschaert, F. (2014). Preferences for team learning and lecture-based learning among first-year undergraduate accounting students. Research in Higher Education, 55(4), 400–432. https://doi.org/10.1007/sl1162-013-9315-6.

  55. Parkes, J., & Harris, M. B. (2002). The purposes of a syllabus. College Teaching. 50(2), 55–61.

  56. Pike, G. R., & Kuh, G. D. (2005). First- and second-generation college students: a comparison of their engagement and intellectual development. The Journal of Higher Education, 76(3), 276–300 Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3838799.

  57. Portales, J., & Vasquez Heilig, J. (2014). Understanding how universal vouchers have impacted urban school districts’ enrollment in Chile. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 22(70–72), 1–39. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v22n72.2014.

  58. Porter, S. R., & Swing, R. L. (2006). Understanding how first-year seminars affect persistence on JSTOR. Research in Higher Education, 47(1), 89–109 Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/40185885?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents.

  59. Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223–231 Retrieved from http://www.ydae.purdue.edu/LCT/HBCU/documents/Does_Active_Learning_Work_A_review_of_the_research.pdf.

  60. Puga, I. (2011). School and social stratification in Chile: what is the role of “muncipalización” and subsidized private education in the reproduction of social inequalities. Estudios Pedagógicos, 37(2), 213–232.

  61. Rodríguez, P., Brum, L., Correa, A., Laporta, P., Cantieri, R., et al. (2014). La desvinculación en la primera generación de estudiantes en un programa innovador de la Universidad de la Republica, Uruguay. Revista de la Educación Superior, XLIII(170), 113–134 Retrieved from http://www.cci.edu.uy/sites/default/files/AnexoXXVII.pdf.

  62. Schendel, R., & Mccowan, T. (2016). Expanding higher education systems in low-and middle- income countries: the challenges of equity and quality. Higher Education, 72(4), 407–411. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-016-0028-6.

  63. Schiefelbein, E., & Zuñiga, R. (2002). El syllabus: viviendo un aprendizaje autónomo. Santiago: Universidad Santo Tomàs, Unpublished.

  64. Soria, K. M., Nackerud, S., & Peterson, K. (2015). Socioeconomic indicators associated with first- year college students’ use of academic libraries. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 41(5), 636–643. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2015.06.011.

  65. Starcher, K., & Proffitt, D. (2011). Encouraging students to read: what professor are (and aren’t ) doing about it. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 23(3), 396–407 Retrieved from http://www.isetl.org/ijtlhe/.

  66. Toledo, R. G., Valenzuela, J. P., & Valenzuela, J. P. (2015). Over-estimating the effects of teacher attributes on school performance in the Chilean education system. Estudios de Economía (Vol. 42). Retrieved from https://scielo.conicyt.cl/pdf/ede/v42n1/art05.pdf.

  67. Zainuddin, Z. (2017). First-year college students’ experiences in the EFL flipped classroom: a case study in Indonesia. International Journal of Instruction, 10(1), 1694–1609 Retrieved from http://www.e-iji.net/dosyalar/iji_2017_1_9.pdf.

  68. Zepeda, S. J., & Mayers, R. S. (2006). An analysis of research on block scheduling. Review of Educational Research, 76(1), 137–170 Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3700585.

  69. Zepke, N., & Leach, L. (2010). Improving student engagement: ten proposals for action. Active Learning in Higher Education, 11(3), 167–177. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787410379680.

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Noel McGinn.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

McGinn, N., Schiefelbein, E., Froemel, J.E. et al. An intensive approach for course repeating students at a Chilean University. High Educ (2020) doi:10.1007/s10734-019-00460-x

Download citation

Keywords

  • Flipped class
  • Reading before class
  • Intensive instruction
  • Accelerated instruction
  • Retention rate
  • Chile