Conference Session

Innovative Partnerships

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Christine Shaw, Museum of Science, Boston; Michael Pelletier, Northern Essex Community College

Tagged Divisions

Two Year College Division

Christine Group Closing Over AllKeynote Activity C/Ortiz Activity Remarks Conference 9.4 8.7 8.4 7.9 8.1 9.1Sixty two percent of the participants rated the opening keynote address a 10, and 77%of the participants rated the over all conference a 9 or 10. The group activity was theleast effective of all the activities, however this still averaged close to an 8 out of the 1 to10 scale. In reflection, this activity should have a specific task for the team to do, such asdevelop a marketing slogan or an ‘ad’ that could be presented to a chosen audience(student, parent, underclass, other educators, etc).Overall, the conference was well received. The comments listed below accentuate theimportance of the discussions and

Conference Session

Recruiting/Retention Lower Division

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Dan Dimitriu, San Antonio College; Jerry O'Connor, San Antonio College

Tagged Divisions

Two Year College Division

refining our program model inorder to improve our ability to attract and retain more students in math, engineering, science, andtechnology.An overview of the application and enrollment history of the EDGE Program is presented inTable 3. The trend in student participation reflects an evolving focus on the composition of thecurriculum and the readiness of our target population. EDGE Cohort Year: 2003 2004 2005 Applications received 32 112 52 Students accepted into the program 20 62 35 Students enrolled in the program 20 58 26 Students qualified for

Conference Session

Innovative Partnerships

Collection

2006 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Theodore Branoff, North Carolina State University; Pooneh Lari, North Carolina State University; Michelle Hsiang, Research Triangle Institute

Tagged Divisions

Two Year College Division

instructors typically connected from either home or work (Figure 5) using ahigh bandwidth connection (Figure 6). Figures 7 and 8 illustrate that participants felt that theywould use Centra again and that it met their expectations. Page 11.1029.8 Figure 5. Location From Which Students Connected. Figure 6. Bandwidth of Student’s Connection. Page 11.1029.9Figure 7. “I Would Be Interested in Using Centra Again”. Figure 8. “Centra Met My Expectations”.Reflections and ConclusionsAlthough the first cohort has not finished the fifth course, preliminary data give some indicationof the effectiveness of the program. Comments here