Literature Review - Summer Bridge Programs
- Jasmine Nguyen
- Mar 22, 2021
- 5 min read
Updated: Apr 11, 2021
Date: March 22, 2021
Description: In EDAD 510, students work together in an assigned group to use scholarly literature to answer questions. Each group chooses a student population that will be easily accessible next semester to assess in EDAD 522 for the qualitative research project. We were later given a choice to write the paper as a group or individually. Our group had been successful in our planning process and chose to continue as a group.
Learning Domains Addressed (Labels):
Leadership
Social Justice & Advocacy
Education
Learning Outcomes:
Student will be able to (SWiBAT) lead the literature review group in the completion of a literature review paper by March 22, 2021
SWiBAT synthesize ten themes from 40 literature articles/peer-reviewed articles by our second group meeting.
SWiBAT SWiBAT articulate common higher education student transition challenges and the value of learning service integration by our third group meeting.
Evidence:
Reflection:
SLO #1: SWiBAT lead the literature review group in the completion of a literature review paper by March 22, 2021.
The literature review is a challenging group assignment in a regular learning environment and becomes ten times more difficult in a virtual setting. This assignment was different from any of our papers we've written this far in MSHE. EDAD 510 challenged us to synthesize the information we learned from the numerous literature documents and combine the thoughts and ideas into a single paper written by five individuals with different writing styles. During my time in MSHE, I've been very cognizant of leaving space for my cohort mates to lead in projects so I can learn from their leadership styles. I realized very quickly for the literature review; I needed to utilize my logistics and procedural strength to organize our team in completing this assignment. I created scheduled Zoom meetings for all of our meeting sessions and organized action item documents. At our first meeting, each group member submitted eight peer-reviewed articles. We encountered our first hurdle with duplicate articles when more than one group member submitted the same article. Due to incorrect APA 7 citation, we easily overlooked duplication. Our team found that we had inconsistent search criteria at our second meeting, such as forgetting to check for peer-reviewed articles or full-text accessibility. Incorrect searches became an issue that needed correcting after our list of references was submitted. Before we each wrote our assigned section, we discussed and agreed upon using Grammarly and its "Set Goals" tool to ensure each member ran their section of the paper through Grammarly utilizing the same criteria (See image 1). These criteria were to ensure we had consistent grammar styles and tone throughout the paper. I struggle with passive voice in my writing, so I provided examples to my group to quickly fix passive voice. I instructed my group by switching the place of the nouns in the sentence and reworking the sentence to make sense again; this would correct most passive voice alerts in Grammarly. At our third and last meeting, we could make minimal corrections to our paper and submit it early!
SLO #2: SWiBAT synthesize ten themes from 40 literature articles/peer-reviewed articles by our second group meeting.
At our first meeting, each member wrote 3-4 sentences summarizing the article they submitted for the literature review. These short summaries were beneficial in our group discussion on common themes in all 40 literature articles. Our group was able to narrow our themes to Common transition challenges, Learning Service Integration, California State University Educational Opportunity Programs (CSU EOP) and Community College Extended Opportunity Programs and Services (EOPS), programs outside of California, First-Year Students, Transfer Students, Underrepresented groups/minority groups, Hispanic/LatinX students, STEM Majors, and Retention Rates. After agreeing to all of the themes, I set up a Google sheets document to categorize the 40 articles into themes (See Image 2). Each member was assigned to go through the articles they submitted and mark what theme the article discussed. I created a color-coding system to help indicate how many times our group utilized the article in our paper. We incorporated articles that weren't used by seeing the indication in our color-coding system. At our last meeting, we discussed the leftover articles and whether our sections could utilize the article. We were able to use each article on average two times throughout the paper. We modeled our writing and citation after how our textbook references multiple sources.
SLO #3: SWiBAT articulate common higher education student transition challenges and the value of learning service integration by our third group meeting.
Each group member was assigned two themes to write about; I wrote about common higher education student transition challenges and the values of learning service integration into Summer Bridge Programs (SBP) (See Literature Review Document). Of our 40 articles, 14 of the articles indicated common transition challenges as a common theme in students in SBP. Many articles indicated SBP demographic was predominantly underrepresented minority (URM) students and spoke about common transition issues many students face, such as finding a sense of belonging/community and being college-ready in math and English. SBP have historically shown better retention rates and higher student graduation rates. Although they are a successful program, the various articles discussed the students through a deficit lens. Only one article highlighted using student's community cultural wealth as a community connecting aspect of their programming. With the passing of AB705 in California, I'm curious to see if "college-readiness" continues to be a pillar of SBP if students are no longer required to take remedial Math and English courses (About AB 705 2018).
In my second theme, I focused on the value of learning service integration into SBP. SBP that incorporated library services, tutoring services, and technology into their programming had a higher success rate of students regularly utilizing the services throughout their academic career. Early exposure to these learning services can build confidence in students' ability to access these resources on their own. During the COVID-19 pandemic, it is very evident the need for more accessible virtual programming. If SBP can successfully run in a virtual setting, it could be a pivotal component to increase retention rates and graduation rates throughout the college departments and divisions. Meyers-Martin and Lampert (2013) suggest creating mobile-friendly websites and developing apps to keep up with students' academic needs and accessibility.
References or Sources:
Meyers‐Martin, C., & Lampert, L. D. (2013). Mind the gap: academic library outreach and EOP.
Reference Services Review, 41(2), 219–232. https://doi.org/10.1108/00907321311326156
No Author. (2018). About AB 705. https://assessment.cccco.edu/ab-705-implementation.
Soltani, P., Gutierrez Keeton, R., & Hoffman, J. L. (2016). Noncognitive Variables and Student
Learning in Extended Opportunity Programs and Services (EOPS). Community College
Journal of Research and Practice, 41(7), 405–421.
Question: What strength do you bring to a group/team? Please leave your answer in the comment section!
Comments