Transfer Learning Community: Overcoming Transfer Shock and Increasing Retention of Mathematics and Science Majors
Abstract
The College of Science at Texas A&M University developed a transfer student learning community with one 2-year institution after receiving National Science Foundation funds for scholarships to support students majoring in engineering and science. To date, 89% of the students that matriculated to Texas A&M University under this grant have completed their degrees or are on target to do so. Eighty-three percent of historically underrepresented students supported through the grant have completed their degrees. Lessons learned from success of the grant have been implemented to create a mandatory learning community for every incoming transfer student. Hallmarks of the program include an Academic Boot Camp prior to the start of the semester and monthly meetings. Monthly meetings include intentional advising, campus resources, academic policies, access to peer mentors, and introduction to undergraduate research opportunities. Overall retention rates to the university have risen through this expanded learning community, as have overall grade point averages.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Interventions such as mandatory learning communities for transfer students might reduce attrition when students transfer to a 4-year college or university.
“Interventions such as mandatory learning communities for transfer students might reduce attrition when students transfer to a 4-year college or university (e.g., Scott et al., 2017).”
From A Meta-analysis of University STEM Summer Bridge Program Effectiveness (2021) · cites this paper as Scott et al., 2017
Cites
Ong, M., Wright, C., Espinosa, L., & Orfield, G. (2011) · Harvard Educational Review · doi:10.17763/haer.81.2.t022245n7x4752v2 · Cited by 974 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A Meta-analysis of University STEM Summer Bridge Program Effectiveness
Bradford, B. C., Beier, M. E., & Oswald, F. L. (2021) · CBE—Life Sciences Education · doi:10.1187/cbe.20-03-0046 · Cited by 73 · see citing works
- Authors
- Scott, T. P., Thigpin, S. S., & Bentz, A. O.
- Affiliations
- Texas A&M University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Scott, Timothy P.
- ORCID
- Scott, Timothy P.
- Venue
- Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2015-12-14
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 300-316
- ISSN
- 1521-0251 (ISSN-L)
- 1541-4167
- OpenAlex
- W2412850017
- Cited by
- 32
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1
- FWCI
- 1.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of College Student Retention Research Theory & Practice (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Higher Education Research Studies
- Social Sciences › Education › Education and Military Integration
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Career Development and Diversity
- Keywords
- transfer students, learning communities, student retention, transfer shock, mathematics majors, science majors, historically underrepresented students, academic advising, peer mentoring, undergraduate research, grade point average
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review