• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
RMCTA conference 09 14 12

RMCTA conference 09 14 12



Presentation at the RMCTA Sept 2012

Presentation at the RMCTA Sept 2012



Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



0 Embeds 0

No embeds



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

CC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    RMCTA conference 09 14 12 RMCTA conference 09 14 12 Presentation Transcript

    • THE PROBLEM “The more levels of developmental courses a student needs to go through, the less likely that student is to ever complete college English or math.” - Thomas Bailey (2009) CCRC Brief.
    • CCCS pipeline example for students beginning in MAT090 • Enroll in remedial math (6933) 100% • Do they complete MAT 090 (3053) 44% • If they pass, do they enroll in college math (1746) 25% • If they enroll, do they pass the course (1239) 18% • If they complete, do they graduate (558) 8% Nawrocki, Baker, & Corash (2009). Success of remedial math students in the Colorado community college system: A longitudinal study. HIGH ATTRITION RATES ARE A STRUCTURAL PROBLEM
    • For students placing two levels below a college course in English/Math, there are 5 “exit points” • Do they pass the first course? • If they pass, do they enroll in the next course? • If they enroll, do they pass the second course? • If they pass, do they enroll in the college-level course? • If they enroll, do they pass the college-level course? Students placing three levels down have 7 exit points. WHY?
    • THE BIG PICTURE • National • The current system doesn’t work • The pipeline • Assessment, curriculum and the great debate • College Completion Agenda • Non remediated 58% • Math 27% • Reading 17% • Organizing the effort: Complete College America • Supporters • Carnegie Corporation of New York, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Ford Foundation, The W.K. Kellogg Foundation and the Lumina Foundation for Education • Goal • By 2020 6 out of 10 young adults will have a college degree or credential of value www.completecollege.org
    • WHAT’S THE STORY IN COLORADO • CCCS 2009-2010 • 68,000 enrollments in remedial courses – 12% of all enrollments - - 60% in math classes 2006-2010 • Enrollment in remedial courses increased by nearly 65% • Recent HS grads (<18-20) are more likely to be enrolled in remedial courses than those from older age categories 2011 = 31.8% • Course completion rates • 61% of all remedial courses ended in successful completion • Math courses in general have the lowest pass rates REPORT: CCCS Remedial education and course completion rates, October 2010, www.cccs.edu
    • COLORADO PERCENT OF 09-10 ENROLLMENT IN DEVELOPMENTAL EDUCATION 27% 73% Enrollment Students enrolled in at least one DE course All other students
    • CCCS STUDENTS 61.6 25.3 13.1 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Students who place into Dev MAT Students who place into Dev ENG Students who place into Dev REA Percent of total 09-10 remedial enrollment Percent of total remedial enrollment
    • THE DEVELOPMENTAL EDUCATION TASK FORCE • State Board of Community Colleges and Occupational Education • Developed as part of the state plan to meet President Obama’s Completion Agenda • Colorado Community College System was charged with assembling a group of stakeholders from community colleges around the state • 18 month charge • Recommendations to the SBCCOE in February 2013
    • THE VISION The DETF has been charged with reviewing developmental education practices and with making recommendations about what steps the system will take to become the premier purveyor of developmental education in more streamlined and efficient ways, resulting in greater student success.
    • The group, comprised of faculty and administrators from across Colorado, will make recommendations about: Assessment, contextualization, online learning, student support services, modular options, accelerated/compressed/mainstreaming of developmental education, and options for students. THE GROUP
    • The DETF is working to identify the best practices in each area and then to make recommendations about implementation at the CCCS. The DETF will holistically examine the role that developmental education plays in overall student success. THE WORK
    • THE CHARGE • Review and clarify the purpose of developmental education and analyze implications for policy and practice resulting from a clarified purpose. • Review current system policies and practices related to developmental education and propose revisions that will promote greater student success in alignment with sound academic principles and practice
    • • On the basis of a comprehensive review, recommend broad strategies and specific initiatives related to developmental education that should be pursued by Colorado's Community College System Colleges, leading to enhanced outcomes for student learning and success. THE CHARGE
    • • Investigate and analyze measures of success, data reports and studies on success of developmental education students. • Examine structures for developmental education, highlighting innovative and successful strategies, improving the student experience and identifying barriers to success. THE CHARGE
    • WHERE ARE WE SO FAR? TAA and CCA grant CCA Initiative - $1million in 2011 to support reform Colorado Online Energy Training Consortium - $17.3 million Research – Presentations Reading Room Institutes, national and local innovations Discussion points Research is showing that students who test in at remedial levels and don’t remediate but complete, perform at an equal level to those who did remediate. Students entering at the lowest level rarely complete Assessment practices Curriculum content
    • EMERGING RECOMMENDATIONS Themes Multiple placement criteria - assessments, secondary diagnostics, HS transcripts Compression of English and Reading Contextualized curriculum – learning communities, writing across the curriculum Curriculum at all levels customizable to student needs – hybrid formats, modular labs Cognitive and non- cognitive supports Faculty Professional Development
    • MATH • Multiple developmental sequences/paths/branches available to students based on their career/major interest. • Non-credit “soft landing” including options for colleges to deliver depending on student and staffing needs - including referral to ABE programs, boot camp, AAA Accuplacer preparation, MFL, Aleks, MOOC’s, tutoring • Each course in each developmental sequence should be redesigned to only cover content necessary for the college level course success. • Co-requisite AAA requirement • Multiple models for delivery
    • ENGLISH AND READING • Develop a compression/co-requisite model that allows students to enter 100 level classes no later than the second semester • Mainstreaming - co-enrollment in 100 level course ex. ENG090 with ENG 121 • Compression - two sections of developmental coursework in one semester • Integration and compression ex. ENG/REA 060 • Secondary writing assessment – WritePlacer or writing sample scored with a standardized rubric
    • • Redefined full-time course load • Fund a system of faculty and staff support to carry out developmental education redesign. • Expand advising to all students who test into developmental math • Offer limited full time positions during the implementation phase of this work to stabilize our workforce to allow for program adoption to scale. FACULTY SUPPORT AND DEVELOPMENT
    • ASSESSMENT • An institutional administrator (IA) for Accuplacer is needed at the system level for all colleges instead of decentralized at each college. • This IA should monitor common multiple measures, consistent placement scores for all system schools, ensure consistent training for testing center directors, create uniform test delivery and scoring practices, and prepare all new Accuplacer testing platforms for college use. The IA should implement best practices for National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (NCCA) standards. • The CO Accuplacer scores should be validated every 3-5 years consistent with test recommendations from the College Board.
    • ASSESSMENT • Following a revision of all developmental education curriculum, develop a Colorado Accuplacer. • Have Testing Center Directors/designated experts meet to determine processes and procedures that can be standardized across colleges. To include but not limited to: Retakes, Common non-cognitive questions, and test cost.
    • ASSESSMENT • Accuplacer scores need to be re-standardized to a norm this should be done by a system IA. Knowing that faculty/chairs can still allow students to override into courses. • Calculators should be allowed on the Accuplacer to align our pedagogical framework with the K-12 and four-year system methodology. • Once the curriculum is developed for each area or concurrently we need to work with College Board to change the strands for our Accuplacer. This needs to be flexible and allow for changes over a period of time so we can see where students are successful and make amendments to the test as appropriate.
    • TIMELINE • DETF meets monthly on the first Friday of the month at the CCCS office at Lowry. • Recommendations are due to the SBCCOE for their February board meeting. • The SBCCOE will make decisions about the next steps based on the DETF recommendations • Implementation plans will be developed after the Board has met and decided on next steps
    • REFERENCES/RESOURCES • Bailey, T. (February 2009). Rethinking Developmental Education. CCRC Brief. Community College • Research Center. Teachers College, Columbia University. • Center for Community College Student Engagement. (2012). A Matter of Degrees: Promising practices for community college student success (A First Look). Austin, TX: The University of Texas at Austin, Community College Leadership Program. • Schwartz, B. (2004). The Paradox of Choice: Why More is Less. New York. Harper Perennial. • Websites • Developmental Education Task Force: ww.cccs.edu/detf • COETC Grant: www.cccs.edu/taa
    • CONTACTS • Bitsy Cohn bitsy.cohn@cccs.edu • Or • Casey Sacks casey.sacks@cccs.edu
    • CREATIVE COMMONS ATTRIBUTION Unless otherwise specified, this work by the Colorado Community College System http://www.cccs.edu is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License. The material was created with funds from the Trade Adjustment Assistance Community College and Career Training (TAACCCT) Grant awarded to the Colorado Online Energy Training Consortium (COETC).