Christina Lambert

Coaching Services Manager, Making Waves Foundation
Inaugural AAPI Academic Coordinator & 
AAPI Success Coach, Advising and LifeMap
Bunker Hill Community College

Cherry Lim

AAPI Academic Coordinator &
Member, Multilingual Advising Group
Advising and LifeMap
Bunker Hill Community College

Zaida Ismatul Oliva

Interim Assistant Director, Dual Enrollment & 
Early College Program, Chelsea High School
Former Senior Special Programs Coordinator, ACE Mentor Program
Bunker Hill Community College

ABSTRACT

In the fall of 2016, Bunker Hill Community College (BHCC) received the Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander Serving Institution (AANAPISI) Grant. One important aspect of the grant and the success in its implementation is the development and expansion of a success coaching model that complemented the curriculum and students of the new English Language Learner (ELL) program, where Asian American students were overrepresented at BHCC. This article will present an outline of the work to create a new culturally responsive model for success coaching for Asian American students and the steps taken to fully expand the model across the ELL department. After creating a model that focuses on culturally relevant advising practices and a close working relationship with the ELL department, the work shifted to incorporating more sustainable practices to fully scale this model across all courses. This prompted the collaboration with BHCC’s ACE Mentor program to learn and perform selected ELL success coaching duties. Since the COVID-19 pandemic, success coaches switched to online advising, creating a series of videos that replicated key pieces of the coaching model while continuing to maintain a classroom presence. At the time of publication, 100% of ELL students receive culturally responsive success coaching. 

Keywords: culturally responsive, success coaching, English language learners, Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders

In the fall of 2016, Bunker Hill Community College (BHCC) received the Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander Serving Institution (AANAPISI) Grant. One important aspect of the grant and the success of its implementation is the development and expansion of a success coaching model that complemented the curriculum and students of the English Language Learner (ELL) program. This article will recount firsthand accounts of the development of the success coach model, adjustments that were made due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and adaptability to other colleges and programs. 

Initial Success Coaching Models at Bunker Hill Community College

BHCC received a Title III grant in spring 2010, which was used to create the LifeMap Initiative at the college. Part of the initiative created the success coach role within Life Map, the advising department at BHCC. A success coach was matched to different learning community seminars (more commonly known as first year seminars) and provided holistic, proactive, advising in the classroom setting. Faculty and success coaches collaborated to present both curricular and co-curricular information throughout the term, in addition to the contributions of student support services like peer mentors, or as we called them ACE mentors. 

In fall 2010, 75 sections were run, each matched with a success coach and an average of less than six visits per classroom. The success of the integration of success coaches was measured by the data collected by six of the coaches, which reflected data from 30 of the initial 75 sections. Below are some of the results documented by Whitman (2011):

• The overall pattern of the success coach work shifted as the semester went on. In September and into late October most of the work done fell into academic and self-management areas. By November, work began to be more about helping students with registration and tracking down students to urge them to attend and complete work. The communicative mode also shifted and larger numbers of emails and phone calls went out and there was a tailing off of face-to-face advising in the classrooms. There were still a large number of “connecting” kinds of visits as success coaches “checked in” or attended student final presentations.

• Most success coaches did not do many referrals – they handled major problem areas themselves. In some instances, where they did not have expertise, they referred students to the Writing Place, to professional counselors, and to Financial Aid.

• Success coaches used a combination of email, phone, letter writing and texting to try to keep students in class. Most students who received this kind of communication either had problems with attendance or with completing work.

The Title III grant and the implementation of success coaching bridged student success strategies and classroom instruction. Success coaches were thus written into the AANAPISI grant the college received in fall 2016 to specifically serve English language learners (ELLs). The focus on this population reflected the overrepresentation of Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders (AAPIs) in ELL courses and the need to provide culturally responsive student support to both AAPI and ELL populations. One current coach served on the AANAPISI committee in spring 2017 with two objectives: 1. Review research on best practices and survey current coaches and faculty members and 2. Write a job description for the new AAPI success coach. The first AAPI success coach was then hired in fall 2017.

Background Research

The fall 2017 semester was used to adapt the previous success coaching model and establish the framework for the ELL success coach model. The AAPI success coach continued research into culturally responsive coaching and advising models. There is limited research done on culturally responsive coaching - the articles and sources used were pulled from advising offices that either a. implement success coaching or b. support students of color by providing targeted, culturally competent support. Those two options are not bridged in the research; so much of what was developed was an innovative amalgamation of those two existing bodies of research. A summary of the key takeaways follows below:

a. Key takeaways from research on institutions that currently implement success coaching

A two-year technical college in Georgia realized a majority of students in developmental support courses were not retained in the six-term period following their initial enrollment, and seldom made it to their program courses or graduation. It led the college to conduct research on different success strategies, and a key point it brought up was that student engagement in “educationally purposeful activities” has a positive impact on grades and persistence. They found that relationships are also crucial since they “foster a stronger sense of integration into the college” (Allen & Lester, 2012). The college started a success coach program, and the role focuses on monitoring academic progress, establishing connections between students and faculty, teaching student success skills, establishing success benchmarks, and discussing topics pertinent to the student experience. After examining specific classes, the college found that students who took a course with a success coach were more likely to stay in classes and stay enrolled in programs: students state that efforts made by coaches improved their “sense of connectedness” (Allen & Lester, 2012).

b. Key takeaways from programs that provide targeted, culturally competent support

A Black student started the Black Male Initiative in 2005 at the University of Maryland, College Park. They were able to establish the initiative with the support of a small number of Black professors on campus. The initiative was started as a tool to help retain Black men on campus, but even more than that, it was to create community. According to a co-founder of the initiative, “It’s not just for academic reasons that students aren’t retained” (Gose, 2014). This is an example of an innovative program that is starting to emerge across the United States, particularly at community colleges. These programs are based on an intrusive advising model with strategies that focus on an individual when they are not being successful. These programs help students who have a range of needs, with different approaches depending on the student’s academic skills, motivation, and connection to professors and/or the college (Gose, 2014).

The last body of research that was considered focused on Asian American and Pacific Islander identity development and specific needs. The 1.5 generation is highlighted in this research due to their experience switching educational systems and many of them learning English while completing high school. These students are also continually “negotiating different cultural and social contexts” (Kodama & Maramba, 2017) as they switch back and forth from home life and their college institution. Race is also highlighted as a significant factor for all AAPI students’ college experiences, particularly when it comes to important outcomes like major/career choice, wellbeing, and leadership development. Student experiences range from the pressure to racially assimilate to the pressure to conform to the model minority myth. Career development is incredibly important to a student’s overall development in college. Asian American students’ career exploration is influenced by family, the racial context of their exploration, and their own self-efficacy. Several suggestions come out of this research for how colleges can support AAPI students: hire Asian American staff and students; ask students about their lives outside of academics, such as their family and college experiences; promote programs and services at Asian American student organization meetings; encourage Asian American students to get involved and take leadership positions; attend Asian American campus and community events; ensure that faculty and staff are familiar with Asian American resources on campus, in the community and nationwide; and look at media/curriculum/research with a critical eye (Kodama & Maramba, 2017).

While there was no specific research detailing the benefits of culturally responsive success coaching, this research demonstrated the value of this new model and provided guidance on how to best approach creating it. By responding directly to students’ cultural experiences in and out of the classroom, it is possible to improve outcomes such as persistence and graduation.