{"title":"分班方法对多语种学生在高等教育中取得成功的影响","authors":"William Key","doi":"10.1002/tesj.835","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the United States, many actors are pushing for the use of grade point average (GPA) as the main placement tool for gatekeeper math and English courses for community college students (Quarles, 2022; Scott‐Clayton, 2018; Turk, 2017). One community college system (pseudonymously, SXCC) in a New England state has begun placing students in initial math and English classes based on self‐reported GPA. There have been studies on the effects of placement changes of this type (Belfield & Crosta, 2012; Hodara & Cox, 2016; Ngo & Kwon, 2014; Scott‐Clayton, 2012). However, studies have not included the effects of these changes on multilingual learners (MLLs).Using a census of every MLL placed in SXCC in the summer and fall of 2020 and the spring of 2021 (<jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 12,603), a MANOVA found that MLL students in the SXCC system who were placed using previous placement methods had a higher overall GPA than students placed using self‐reported GPA (<jats:italic>M</jats:italic> = 3.32, <jats:italic>SD</jats:italic> = 0.740; <jats:italic>M</jats:italic> = 2.01, <jats:italic>SD</jats:italic> = 1.27, respectively) and had higher satisfactory academic progress (SAP) (<jats:italic>M</jats:italic> = 102.98, <jats:italic>SD</jats:italic> = 51.52; <jats:italic>M</jats:italic> = 57.66, <jats:italic>SD</jats:italic> = 55.53, respectively), and took longer to enroll in English 101 (<jats:italic>M</jats:italic> = 5.11, <jats:italic>SD</jats:italic> = 3.55; <jats:italic>M</jats:italic> = 2.36, <jats:italic>SD</jats:italic> = 1.76, respectively).","PeriodicalId":51742,"journal":{"name":"TESOL Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The effects of placement method on multilingual learner success in higher education\",\"authors\":\"William Key\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/tesj.835\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In the United States, many actors are pushing for the use of grade point average (GPA) as the main placement tool for gatekeeper math and English courses for community college students (Quarles, 2022; Scott‐Clayton, 2018; Turk, 2017). One community college system (pseudonymously, SXCC) in a New England state has begun placing students in initial math and English classes based on self‐reported GPA. There have been studies on the effects of placement changes of this type (Belfield & Crosta, 2012; Hodara & Cox, 2016; Ngo & Kwon, 2014; Scott‐Clayton, 2012). However, studies have not included the effects of these changes on multilingual learners (MLLs).Using a census of every MLL placed in SXCC in the summer and fall of 2020 and the spring of 2021 (<jats:italic>N</jats:italic> = 12,603), a MANOVA found that MLL students in the SXCC system who were placed using previous placement methods had a higher overall GPA than students placed using self‐reported GPA (<jats:italic>M</jats:italic> = 3.32, <jats:italic>SD</jats:italic> = 0.740; <jats:italic>M</jats:italic> = 2.01, <jats:italic>SD</jats:italic> = 1.27, respectively) and had higher satisfactory academic progress (SAP) (<jats:italic>M</jats:italic> = 102.98, <jats:italic>SD</jats:italic> = 51.52; <jats:italic>M</jats:italic> = 57.66, <jats:italic>SD</jats:italic> = 55.53, respectively), and took longer to enroll in English 101 (<jats:italic>M</jats:italic> = 5.11, <jats:italic>SD</jats:italic> = 3.55; <jats:italic>M</jats:italic> = 2.36, <jats:italic>SD</jats:italic> = 1.76, respectively).\",\"PeriodicalId\":51742,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"TESOL Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"TESOL Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.835\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"TESOL Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/tesj.835","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
The effects of placement method on multilingual learner success in higher education
In the United States, many actors are pushing for the use of grade point average (GPA) as the main placement tool for gatekeeper math and English courses for community college students (Quarles, 2022; Scott‐Clayton, 2018; Turk, 2017). One community college system (pseudonymously, SXCC) in a New England state has begun placing students in initial math and English classes based on self‐reported GPA. There have been studies on the effects of placement changes of this type (Belfield & Crosta, 2012; Hodara & Cox, 2016; Ngo & Kwon, 2014; Scott‐Clayton, 2012). However, studies have not included the effects of these changes on multilingual learners (MLLs).Using a census of every MLL placed in SXCC in the summer and fall of 2020 and the spring of 2021 (N = 12,603), a MANOVA found that MLL students in the SXCC system who were placed using previous placement methods had a higher overall GPA than students placed using self‐reported GPA (M = 3.32, SD = 0.740; M = 2.01, SD = 1.27, respectively) and had higher satisfactory academic progress (SAP) (M = 102.98, SD = 51.52; M = 57.66, SD = 55.53, respectively), and took longer to enroll in English 101 (M = 5.11, SD = 3.55; M = 2.36, SD = 1.76, respectively).
期刊介绍:
TESOL Journal (TJ) is a refereed, practitioner-oriented electronic journal based on current theory and research in the field of TESOL. TJ is a forum for second and foreign language educators at all levels to engage in the ways that research and theorizing can inform, shape, and ground teaching practices and perspectives. Articles enable an active and vibrant professional dialogue about research- and theory-based practices as well as practice-oriented theorizing and research.