This study adds to the literature exploring how mathematics learning assistantships can influence community college student development as explored through the lens of value. Thus, the research question for this study was: What types of value do undergraduate students at community colleges find engaging as learning assistants in mathematics courses?
Methods/Results:
This study utilized qualitative data collection and analysis, exploring value through a theoretical framework comprised of five value cycles ranging from “immediate” to “transformative.” Participants primarily identified finding immediate value in learning about teaching, helping students, and developing personal skills through their experiences as learning assistants.
Conclusions:
Findings suggest that learning assistantships can be beneficial to community college students, even when they are not pursuing a pathway in education. Learning assistantships provide a supportive environment for students to learn a number of transferrable skills, such as confidence, communication, and leadership experience.
BaileyT. R.JaggarsS. S.JenkinsD. (2015). Redesigning America's community colleges: A clearer path to student success. Harvard University Press.
3.
BealsR.ZimnyS.LyonsF.BobbittO. (2021). Activating social capital: How peer and socio-emotional mentoring facilitate resilience and success for community college students. Frontiers in Education, 6, 672977.
4.
BeanJ.MetznerB. (1985). A conceptual model of nontraditional undergraduate student attrition. Review of Educational Research, 55(4), 485–540.
BurlisonM. (2015). Nonacademic commitments affecting commuter student involvement and engagement. New Directions for Student Services, 150, 27–34.
7.
CatalanoA. (2015). The effect of a situated learning environment in a distance education information literacy course. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 41(5), 653–659.
8.
CauseyJ.GardnerA.PevitzA.RyuM.ShapiroD. (2023). Some college, no credential student outcomes, annual progress report–Academic year 2021/22. National Student Clearing House Research Center.
ChaseA.RaoA.LakmalaP.Varma-NelsonP. (2020). Beyond content knowledge: Transferable skills connected to experience as a peer-leader in a PLTL program and long-term impacts. International Journal of STEM Education, 7, 29.
11.
ChickeringA.ReisserL. (1993). Education and identity (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
12.
CliffordV. (1999). The development of autonomous learners in a university setting. Higher Education Research & Development, 18(1), 115–128.
13.
CloseE.ConnJ.CloseH. (2016). Becoming physics people: Development of integrated physics identity through the learning assistant experience. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 12(1), 010109.
14.
CohenA. M.BrawerF. B.KiskerC. B. (2013). The American community college (6th ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
Deil-AmenR. (2011). Socio-academic integrative moments: Rethinking academic and social integration among two-year college students in career-related programs. The Journal of Higher Education, 82(1), 54–91.
17.
DikaS. L.WangY.D’AmicoM. M.SerrataC.BohligE. M. (2023). A critical examination of perceptions of supportive institutional environment among transfer-seeking community college students. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 48(7), 453–470.
18.
DonovanC.Erskine-ShawM. (2019). “Maybe I can do this. Maybe I should be here”: Evaluating an academic literacy, resilience and confidence programme. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 44(3), 326–340.
19.
EllerbrockC.MainK.FalbeK.Pomykal FranzD. (2018). An examination of middle school organizational structures in the United States and Australia. Education Sciences, 8(4), 168.
20.
EvansN. (2010). Student development in college theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
GoffC.LahmeB. (2003). Benefits of a comprehensive undergraduate teaching assistant Program. Problems, Resources, and Issues in Mathematics Undergraduate Studies, 13(1), 75–84.
23.
Gomez JohnsonK.JakopovicP.RechJ.ZickermanA. (2021). Learning assistants in college mathematics classes: Value for future teachers?Transformative Dialogues, 14(2), 75–92. https://doi.org/10.59236/td2021vol14iss21487
24.
GongH.KwonJ.BrockM. (2022). Experiential learning through a peer learning assistant model in STEM. Educational Research, 64(3), 317–333.
25.
HsiehH.ShannonS. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288.
26.
JakopovicP.Gomez JohnsonK. (2021). Beyond traditional teacher preparation: Value-add experiences for preservice secondary mathematics teachers. Mathematics Teacher Education and Development, 23(1), 5–31.
27.
KarpM.HughesK.O’GaraL. (2010). An exploration of Tinto’s integration framework for community college students. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 12(1), 69–86.
28.
LaveJ.WengerE. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press.
29.
LeCompteM. D.SchensulJ. J. (2013). Analyzing and interpreting ethnographic data: A mixed methods approach (2nd ed.). AltaMira Press.
30.
LundbergC. (2014). Peers and faculty as predictors of learning for community college students. Community College Review, 42(2), 79–98.
31.
MalmJ.CollinsJ.NelC.SmithL.CareyW.MillerH.KhagramK.ZaccagniniM. (2022). Transferable skills gained by student leaders in international SI-PASS programs. The International Journal of Learning in Higher Education, 29(1), 65.
32.
MartinL. (2000). The relationship of college experiences to psychosocial outcomes in students. Journal of College Student Development, 41, 292–301.
33.
MerriamS. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. Jossey-Bass.
34.
MilesM. B.HubermanA. M.SaldanaJ. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. Sage.
35.
MilesM. B.HubermanA. M.SaldanaJ. (2020). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (4th ed.). Sage.
36.
MoschettiR.PlunkettS.EfratR.YomtovD. (2017). Peer mentoring as social capital for Latina/o college students at a Hispanic-serving institution. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 17(4), 375–392.
37.
MyersB.StarobinS. S.LaananF. S.RussellD. (2012). Examining student engagement and transfer intentions among community college STEM students. The OCCRP Research Brief, 6. Ames, IA: Office of Community College Research and Policy.
38.
NicholsonL.PutwainD.ConnorsL.Hornby-AtkinsonP. (2013). The key to successful achievement as an undergraduate student: Confidence and realistic expectations?Studies in Higher Education, 38(2), 285–298.
39.
OrtagusJ. C.KelchenR.RosingerK.VoorheesN. (2020). Performance-based funding in American higher education: A systematic synthesis of the intended and unintended consequences. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 42(4), 520–550.
40.
OteroV.PollockS.McCrayR.FinkelsteinN. (2006). Who is responsible for preparing science teachers?Science, 28(5786), 445–446.
41.
PennanenM.BristolL.WilkinsonJ.HeikkinenH. (2016). What is ‘good’ mentoring? Understanding mentoring practices of teacher induction through case studies of Finland and Australia. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 24(1), 27–53.
42.
PetersonS. (2015). Community college student-parents: Priorities for persistence. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 40(5), 370–384.
43.
PriceD.TovarE. (2014). Student engagement and institutional graduation rates: Identifying high-impact educational practices for community colleges. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 38(9), 766–782.
44.
RobnettR. (2012). The role of peer support for girls and women in the STEM pipeline: Implications for identity and anticipated retention. International Journal of Gender, Science, and Technology, 5(3), 232–253.
45.
SchneiderD. (2022). Understanding and improving community college student retention: A review with recommendations for developing institutional attachment. Community College Enterprise, 28(1), 28–40.
46.
SinclairA. (2017). Enhancing students’ confidence in employability skills through the practice of “recall, adapt and apply”. Higher Education Studies, 7(3), 55–63.
47.
SpitzigJ.RennerB. (2025). Student engagement and retention of adult learners at community colleges. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 26(4), 1010–1027.
48.
StankovL. (2013). Noncognitive predictors of intelligence and academic achievement: An important role of confidence. Personality and Individual Differences, 55, 727–732.
49.
StankovL.MoronyS.LeeY. P. (2014). Confidence: The best non-cognitive predictor of academic achievement?Educational Psychology, 34(1), 9–28.
50.
TintoV.PusserB. (2006). Moving from theory to action: Building a model of institutional action for student success. National Postsecondary Education Cooperative, 1(51), 89–125.
51.
WangY. (2024). Advancing community college student engagement and success: Validation study of community college survey of student engagement [Doctoral dissertation, The University of North Carolina at Charlotte]. https://ninercommons.charlotte.edu/islandora/object/etd%3A3742
52.
WebberK. L.KrylowR. B.ZhangQ. (2013). Does involvement really matter? Indicators of college student success and satisfaction. Journal of College Student Development, 54(6), 591–611.
53.
WeidertJ.WendorfA.GurungR.FilzT. (2012). A survey of graduate and undergraduate teaching assistants. College Teaching, 60(3), 95–103.
54.
WengerE.TraynerB.de LaatM. (2011). Promoting and assessing value creation in communities and networks: A conceptual framework. Open University of the Netherlands.
55.
Wenger-TraynerE.Wenger-TraynerB. (2014). Learning in a landscape of practice: A framework. In Wenger-TraynerE.Fenton-O’CreevyM.HutchinsonS.KubiakC.Wenger-TraynerB. (Eds.), Learning in landscapes of practice: Boundaries, identity, and knowledgeability in practice-based learning (pp.13–29). Routledge.
56.
YinR. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). Sage.
57.
ZaniewskiA.ReinholzD. (2016). Increasing STEM success: A near-peer mentoring program in the physical sciences. International Journal of STEM Education, 3(14), 1–12.
58.
ZimmermanB. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(2), 64–71.
