The document discusses the New Mathways Project (NMP), which promotes math pathways and redesigned developmental math courses to improve student outcomes. It covers: 1) What math pathways and the NMP are, including defining math pathways as course sequences aligned to programs of study and the NMP's four-pronged redesign model. 2) The positive impact of the NMP on student outcomes like developmental education completion rates doubling in half the time. 3) Best practices for institutions implementing math pathways, such as defining back-to-back math and regional transfer agreements.

1. To Infinity and Beyond with the
Right Mathematics Pathway
New Mathways
Jeff Shaver, Course Program Specialist
The Charles A. Dana Center
Paula Talley, Veteran NMP Faculty
Temple College

2. #AACC2016
• What Math Pathways and the New
Mathways Project (NMP) are
• The impact this pioneering redesign model
is making on students
• Best practices, lessons learned, and
recommendations for institutions
embarking on their own redesign journeys
2
The Places We’ll Go
Today’s presentation will cover:

3. #AACC2016
• What Math Pathways and the New
Mathways Project (NMP) are
• The impact this pioneering redesign model
is making on students
• Best practices, lessons learned, and
recommendations for institutions
embarking on their own redesign journeys
3
The Places We’ll Go
Today’s presentation will cover:

4. #AACC2016 4
Noun │ math · path · way │ math ‘path-,wā
Definition:
A mathematics course or sequence of courses that
students take to meet the requirements of their
program of study.
The concept of math pathways applies to pathways for
college-ready and underprepared students.
1:
Math Pathway

5. #AACC2016 5
National Organizations
Supporting Mathematics Pathways

6. #AACC2016 6
The Case for Math Pathways
Mathematics is a barrier for students
80%
45%
40%
Of the 4.6 million community college students placed in remedial
math sequences fail to complete them and their gateway math
course.
Of students fail college algebra with even higher failure rates for
minority students, 58% for African Americans and 51% for Hispanics
Of students entering college with an interest in STEM fields
complete a degree
EdSource. (2012, February). Passing when it counts: Math courses present barriers to student success in California
community colleges. Retrieved from http://edsource.org/wp-content/publications/pub12-Math2012Final.pdf

7. #AACC2016 7
A Common Visions
For the Undergraduate Math
Program in 2025
“Mathematics courses are the most significant barrier
to degree completion in both STEM and non-STEM
fields. For example, each year only 50 percent of
students attain a grade of A, B, or C in college algebra,
and fewer than 10 percent of the students who pass this
class enroll in a calculus course.”

8. #AACC2016 8
Unfortunately, there is often a serious mismatch
between the original rationale for a college
algebra requirement and the actual needs of
students who take the course.
A critically important task…is to clarify the rationale
for requirements, determine the needs of students,
and ensure that department’s courses are aligned
with these findings.
Mathematics Association of America,
Committee on the Undergraduate Program in Mathematics, 2004
Tackling the Disconnect
“
“

9. #AACC2016 9
What is the “Right” Math?
Require
Calculus
20%
Do not
require
Calculus
80%
Community College Student
Enrollment into Programs of Study
Require
Calculus
28%
Do not
require
Calculus
72%
Four-Year Student Enrollment into
Programs of Study
Burdman, P. (2015). Degrees of freedom: Diversifying math requirements for college readiness and
graduation. Oakland CA: Learning Works and Policy Analysis for California Education.

10. #AACC2016 10
Aligned Pathways

11. #AACC2016
NATIONAL
STATE
INSTITUTIONAL
FACULTY & CLASSROOM
11
1
2
3
4
Multiple pathways aligned
to specific fields of study
Acceleration that allows most students
to complete a college-level math
course in one year or less
Intentional use of strategies to help
students develop skills as learners
Curriculum design and pedagogy
based on proven practice
utdanacenter.org
New Mathways Project Model
A
systemic
approach
to
improving
student
success
and
completion
by
reforming
developmental
and
gateway
mathematics,
based
on
four
principles.

12. #AACC2016 12
Scaling the NMP Model
in Texas
2012 2013 2014 2015
Colleges
engaged in
training and
coaching
Colleges
implementing
the NMP
Model
9
21
31
40
23
34
9

13. #AACC2016 13
Students Supported by NMP
Or Other Accelerated Math Pathways
Fall 2013
244 Students
Fall 2014
1,306 Students
Fall 2015
4,558 Students
= 50 students, NMP
model with curriculum
= 50 students, NMP model

14. #AACC2016 14
NMP Courses
Supporting Math Pathways
Recommendedtobetaken
concurrently(1item)
Foundations of
Mathematical Reasoning
Recommended 4 contact
hours; non-transferable course
Frameworks for Mathematics
and Collegiate Learning
Quantitative
Reasoning
(1 item)
Statistical Reasoning
Recommended 4
contact hours (1 item)
Reasoning with
Functions I
Recommended 5
contact hours (1 item)
Reasoning with
Functions II
Recommended 5
contact hours (1 item)
STEM-Prep Pathway
Students enter Calculus sequence

15. #AACC2016
• What Math Pathways and the New
Mathways Project (NMP) are
• The impact this pioneering redesign
model is making on students
• Best practices, lessons learned, and
recommendations for institutions
embarking on their own redesign journeys
15
The Places We’ll Go
Today’s presentation will cover:

16. #AACC2016 16
NMP Emerging Results
Developmental
Education
Completion
Gateway Course
Completion
24%
In one year
(n=32,624)
8%
In one year
64%
In one semester
(n=1,306)
23%
In one year
43%
In one year
All FTIC, Community
College Students
AY 2013 AY 2014
Subset Using Back-
to-Back Math
AY 2013

17. #AACC2016 17
Why the NMP:
A Student’s Perspective

18. #AACC2016 18
NMP: A Student’s Perspective

19. #AACC2016 19
Building Evidence
NMP Evaluation
MDRC and the Community College Research Center are conducting a
rigorous evaluation of the New Mathways Project course sequence.

20. #AACC2016 20
Building Evidence
NMP Evaluation
MDRC and the Community College Research Center are conducting a
rigorous evaluation of the New Mathways Project course sequence.
Timeline:
Spring
2015
Fall
2015
Spring
2016
Fall
2016
Spring
2017
Fall
2017
Spring
2018
2019
Enrollment of students for random
assignment evaluation
Tracking of student outcomes and dissemination
of findings
Final
Report

21. #AACC2016 21
Building Evidence
NMP Evaluation
Critical Areas:
• Advising
• Curriculum & Pedagogy
• Alignment
• Scalability
• Transferability

22. #AACC2016 22
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2013-2014 Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Fall 2014 Spring 2015
Percentage Completing Developmental Math
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
1 Year 1 Semester 1 Semester 1 Semester 1 Semester
24%
Of all TX Dev
Ed Students
65%
Of 244 NMP
Students
64%
Of 110 NMP
Students
63%
Of 915 NMP
Students
62%
Of 570 NMP
Students
Building Evidence
Foundations
curriculum has
doubled the
completion
rates in half
the time.

23. #AACC2016 23
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2013-2014
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
1 Year
8%
Of all FTIC TX
Dev Ed Students
30%
Of 233 NMP
Students
Building Evidence
%
Percentage Completing College-level Courses

24. #AACC2016 24
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2013-2014
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
1 Year
8%
Of all FTIC TX
Dev Ed Students
30%
Of 233 NMP
Students
Building Evidence
%
Percentage Completing College-level Courses
49%
Of 136 NMP
Students
Dev Course
Lined to
College
Course

25. #AACC2016 25
Staying the Course
NMP students were
more likely to…
• Complete developmental math
requirements
• Enroll in a college-level math
course
• Pass a college-level math course
NMP Texas Student Outcomes

26. #AACC2016 26
Students
and
faculty
reported
that
students
were
highly
engaged
with
math
content
and
students
built
stronger
learning
communi2es.
NMP Texas Student Outcomes

27. #AACC2016
• What Math Pathways and the New
Mathways Project (NMP) are
• The impact this pioneering redesign model
is making on students
• Best practices, lessons learned, and
recommendations for institutions
embarking on their own redesign
journeys
27
The Places We’ll Go
Today’s presentation will cover:

28. #AACC2016 28
Defining Back-to-Back Math
Recommendedtobetaken
concurrently(1item)
Foundations of Mathematical
Reasoning
Recommended 4 contact hours;
non-transferable course
Frameworks for Mathematics and
Collegiate Learning
Quantitative
Reasoning
(1 item)
Statistical Reasoning
Recommended 4
contact hours (1 item)
Reasoning with
Functions I
Recommended 5
contact hours (1 item)
Reasoning with
Functions II
Recommended 5
contact hours (1 item)
STEM-Prep Pathway
Students enter
Calculus sequence
Back-to-Back Math: Encouraging students to enroll in a college-level math
course in the semester immediately following the completion of their
developmental coursework.

29. #AACC2016 29
Strategies for Promoting
1. Establish a culture of successive semester enrollment with clear,
timely, and consistent communication.
2. Make successive semester enrollment easy and appealing.
3. Encourage students to enroll as a cohort.
Advisors Faculty Administrators
• Communicate to
establish the
expectation of 2-
semester course
• Student contracts
• Build enrollment into
class activities (time,
assignments,
connection to
curricular materials)
• Use the strength of
relationships to
encourage enrollment
• Use parallel and
“prime-time”
scheduling
• Permit early
registration
• Offer small, targeted
scholarships
Back-to-Back Math

30. #AACC2016 30
Regional Transfer Agreements
Transfer Champions
• Stephen F. Austin State University
• Texas Tech University
• University of Houston-Downtown
• University of North Texas
• The University of Texas at Austin
• The University of Texas-Pan
American
• The University of Texas at Tyler

31. #AACC2016 31
Selecting Math
Pathways Curricula
Consider:
• Students/programs served by each pathway
• Learning outcomes for each step in the pathway
• Who is leading and who is involved in the work of setting
or reviewing learning outcomes?
• Who is leading and who is involved in the work of
selecting or revising curricular materials?

32. #AACC2016 32
Emerging TX Math Pathways
Meta-Major Math Pathway

33. #AACC2016 33
Emerging TX Math Pathways
Meta-Major Math Pathway

34. #AACC2016 34
The needs of
“metamajors”
Type and content
of gateway
mathematics
courses
Learning
outcomes of
developmental
math courses
Backward Mapping
To Define Content

35. #AACC2016 35
Backward Mapping

36. #AACC2016 36
Defining the content of prerequisite and
co-requisite courses:
• How do we take students from where they are to a level
of preparedness for the college-level course?
• Rather than requiring prerequisite or co-requisite
courses that are historical artifacts, consider what is
essential to success in the college-level course.
Supporting the Desired
Student Experience

37. #AACC2016 37
Course Structures
A variety of methods can accelerate students to and through
a college-level course, increase access, and support student
learning.
Examples of acceleration and delivery methods:
Acceleration Models Delivery Methods
Modularization Classroom-based
Year-long or 2 semester pathways Online synchronous/asynchronous
1 semester co-requisites Self-paced instruction
Compressed courses Hybrid courses

38. #AACC2016 38
• Structure and organization of curricular materials
• Active learning
• Constructive perseverance
• Problem solving
• Context and interdisciplinary connections
• Use of terminology
• Reading and writing
• Technology
NMP Curriculum Design
Standards

39. #AACC2016 39
Curricular Design Principle Standard Courses
Average Rating
NMP Courses
Average Rating
Context & interdisciplinary
connections
Low High
Structure & organization of
course materials
Moderate High
Reading Low High
Use of technology Moderate High
Active learning Above Average High
Problem solving Moderate High
Constructive perseverance Moderate Above average
Writing Low Above average
Use of discipline-specific
terminology
Moderate Above average
Building Evidence
NMP Evaluation (MDRC)

40. #AACC2016 40
Curricular Design Principle Standard Courses
Average Rating
NMP Courses
Average Rating
Context & interdisciplinary
connections
Low High
Structure & organization of
course materials
Moderate High
Reading Low High
Use of technology Moderate High
Active learning Above Average High
Problem solving Moderate High
Constructive perseverance Moderate Above average
Writing Low Above average
Use of discipline-specific
terminology
Moderate Above average
Building Evidence
NMP Evaluation (MDRC)

41. #AACC2016 41
Curricular Design Principle Standard Courses
Average Rating
NMP Courses
Average Rating
Context & interdisciplinary
connections
Low High
Structure & organization of
course materials
Moderate High
Reading Low High
Use of technology Moderate High
Active learning Above Average High
Problem solving Moderate High
Constructive perseverance Moderate Above average
Writing Low Above average
Use of discipline-specific
terminology
Moderate Above average
Building Evidence
NMP Evaluation (MDRC)

42. #AACC2016 42
Selecting Math Pathways
Curricula
• Dana Center NMP courses on Pearson
• Carnegie Foundation Statway and Quantway
• Commercial textbooks
• Develop your own

43. #AACC2016 43
Selecting Math Pathways
Curricula
Dana Center NMP Courses from Pearson

44. #AACC2016 44
Founda'ons
of
Mathema'cal
Reasoning:
0134310977
Quan'ta've
Reasoning:
0134391373
Reasoning
with
Func'ons
I:
0134446348
Reasoning
with
Func'ons
II:
contact
Pearson
rep.
Sta's'cal
Reasoning:
0134391683
Accessing NMP Courses on
MyMathLab or MyStatLab

45. #AACC2016 45
• NMP Institutional Scaling Toolkit, includes:
• Readiness Assessment
• Sample Math Pathways List
• High Impact Practices Resource
• Back-to-Back Mathematics Brief
• Modernizing Mathematics Pathways at
Texas Universities: Insights from the New
Mathways Project Transfer Champions
• NMP Curriculum available via Pearson’s
MyMathLab & MyStatLab
NMP Resources to Explore
www.utdanacenter.org

46. #AACC2016 46

47. #AACC2016 47
• General information about the Dana Center:
www.utdanacenter.org
• Higher Education work:
www.utdanacenter.org/higher-education/
• For questions or to receive monthly updates about the NMP,
contact us at: mathways@austin.utexas.edu
Contact Information

48. #AACC2016 48
About
the
Dana
Center
The
Charles
A.
Dana
Center
at
The
University
of
Texas
at
AusFn
works
with
our
naFon’s
educaFon
systems
to
ensure
that
every
student
leaves
school
prepared
for
success
in
postsecondary
educaFon
and
the
contemporary
workplace.
Our
work,
based
on
research
and
two
decades
of
experience,
focuses
on
K–16
mathemaFcs
and
science
educaFon
with
an
emphasis
on
strategies
for
improving
student
engagement,
moFvaFon,
persistence,
and
achievement.
We
develop
innovaFve
curricula,
tools,
protocols,
and
instrucFonal
supports
and
deliver
powerful
instrucFonal
and
leadership
development.

49. #AACC2016
Dana Center’s State Mobilization
49
www.utdanacenter.org