impacts of system and statewide developmental education ... · vfa cohort (n=13) passed...

Impacts of System and Statewide Developmental Education Reforms

Presenters:• Catherine Finnegan, Virginia Community College State System

• Jenny Schanker, Michigan Center for Student Success

• Shouping Hu, FSU

• Martha Ellis, Charles A. Dana Center

A Decade of Developmental Redesign In VirginiaCatherine Finnegan, Assistant Vice Chancellor, Research and Reporting, Virginia Community College System

• 23 Colleges (40 campuses)• 280,000+ credit and non-credit students annually• Chancellor reports to governor appointed state board• Presidents report to Chancellor

Virginia Community College System

Bailey, Jeong & Cho, 2010

Virginia has a long history redesigning developmental education.

2012

Developmental Math Redesign

2013

Developmental English Redesign

2016

Multiple Measures Placement Policy

2017

Co-requisite Math Curriculum

2020

Direct Enrollment Pilot

We have made some progress!

Fewer students are placed and enrolling in developmental courses

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Developmental VS College Ready Students Fall 2009-Fall 2018

Devevlopmental FTIC College Ready FTIC

More students are successfully completing college level math & English courses

0.0010.0020.0030.0040.0050.0060.0070.0080.0090.00

100.00

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Percentage of Entering Students Succesfully Completing Math and English During First Semester

Passed ENG OR MTH Passed ENG AND MTH

More students earn more credits faster• Fall 2009 – 25% earned 12+ credits first

semester• Fall 2018 – 54% earned 12+ credits

first semester• Fall 2009 – 23% earned 24+ credits first

year• Fall 2018 – 48% earned 24+ credits

first year

We have opportunity to do more.

Retention is stable, but it could be increased.

Spring 77%

Fall57%

2009 Spring77%

Fall58%

2018

More students are graduating on time, but more could.

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Three Year Graduation Rates of Developmental and College Ready Students

Developmental Students College Ready Students

We learned a few things along the way.

Here’s what we’ve learned in a decade.

• Develop shared understanding of problem using data

• Determine scope of solution and set clear goals

• Identify promising models• Secure support at all levels• Leverage faculty leaders• Examine policy for conflicts• Leverage governance processes and

existing structures• Adopt a continuous improvement

model with robust assessment• Communicate, communicate,

communicate!

Next Steps• Direct Enrollment Pilot• Self-Reporting of HSGPA • Informed Self-Placement• Just-in-time Instruction

Thank you!Catherine FinneganVirginia Community College State System

A Coalition of the Willing:The Landscape of Reform Efforts in Michigan

Jenny Schanker, Director of Research and Institutional PracticeCAPR 2019

Student Success Center

Network

Key Partners and Funders

Coherence Framework

Access & Alignment

• Placement Practices

• Multiple Measures

• Credit for Military Exp

Entry & Intake

• Guided Pathways

• Advising Redesign

Teaching & Learning

• ALP• RM@RT

Acceleration & Progress

• MTN• MTA• Advising

Redesign

Completion & Success

• Success Rates• MiTransfer

Pathways

Gateway Course Momentum in Michigan*

Fall 2016 MichiganVFA Cohort (n=13)

Passed College- Level English in Year 1

Passed College-Level Math in Year 1

Passed College-Level English & Math Y1

Count 11,034 5,592 4,438

Average % 52% 26% 21%

Range 40.5%-61% 16.8%-44.6% 13.8%-34.3%

*13 colleges submitted data for the Early Momentum Metrics (KPIs) for the Fall 2016 VFA cohort

College Piloting Co-Req Eng Scaling/At Scale Co-

Req EngPiloting Co-Req

Math (Any)Scaling/At Scale Co-req

Math (any)

Piloting Co-Req Read (inc.

IRW)Scaling/At Scale Co-Req Read (inc. IRW)

Multiple Placement Measures (beyond tests)

Interest in Support for Implementation

Alpena X X XBay X XDelta X X X X XGlen Oaks X X XGogebic X XGrand Rapids X X XHenry Ford X X XJackson X X X X XKalamazoo Valley X X XKellogg X XKirtland XLake Michigan X X X X XLansing X X X XMacomb XMid Michigan XMonroe XMontcalm X X X X XMott X X XMuskegon X XNorth Central Michigan X X XNorthwestern Michigan X XOakland XSchoolcraft X XSouthwestern Michigan X X XSt. Clair County Washtenaw XWayne County West Shore X X X

February 2019 Survey Results

Thank you!Jenny SchankerMichigan Center for Student Success

THE CENTER FOR POSTSECONDARY SUCCESS

Evaluation of Florida’s Developmental Education Reform

Shouping Hu, Ph.D.

Reimagining Developmental EducationCAPR 2019


26The research reported here was supported by the Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, through Grant R305A160166 to Florida State University, and in part by a grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not represent views of the Institute or the U.S. Department of Education, or the Gates Foundation.

• Overview of SB 1720 (Developmental Ed Legislation)

• Impact on student outcomes based on analyses of data from Florida K-20 Education Data Warehouse

• Conclusions and next phases of our work


Today’s Presentation

27


Prior to the Reform

28

44%

23%19%

0%

25%

50%

75%

100%

Math Reading Writing

2013 Developmental Education Course Enrollment Rates

• Required several significant changes simultaneously

• Developmental education tests and placement are optional for exempt students– Students who entered 9th grade in a FL public school in

2003/04 or later and earned a standard high school diploma

– active duty military


Senate Bill 1720

29

• Four modes for developmental education instruction– Modularized– Compressed– Contextualized– Co-Requisite

• Enhanced advising and student support services


Senate Bill 1720

30

• Six cohorts of first-time-in-college (FTIC) students who began their studies in fall semesters 2011-2013 (pre-reform) and 2014-2016 (post-reform)

• Outcomes – College course enrollment rates (math & English)– Shares of students in each cohort passing gateway

math & English – Credits attempted and earned in the first year of

enrollment

31


Data

COLLEGE COURSE ENROLLMENT RATES


32

0.00%

20.00%

40.00%

60.00%

80.00%

100.00%

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Enro

llmen

t ra

te, %

Fall cohort by year

English CompositionPooled Gateway Math Courses


33

College Course Enrollment Rates, Overall

College English Enrollment Rates, by Race/Ethnicity

0.00%

20.00%

40.00%

60.00%

80.00%

100.00%

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Enro

llmen

t rat

e, E

nglis

h Co

mpo

sitio

n, %

Fall cohort by year

WhiteBlackHispanic


34

College Math Enrollment Rates, by Race/Ethnicity

0.00%

20.00%

40.00%

60.00%

80.00%

100.00%

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Enro

llmen

t rat

e, G

atew

ay M

ath,

%

Fall cohort by year

WhiteBlackHispanic


35

SHARES OF STUDENTS IN EACH COHORT PASSING GATEWAY COURSES


36

Overall

0.00%

20.00%

40.00%

60.00%

80.00%

100.00%

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

% P

assi

ng

Fall cohort by year

English CompositionPooled Gateway Math Courses


37

English by Race/Ethnicity

0.00%

20.00%

40.00%

60.00%

80.00%

100.00%

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Engl

ish

Com

posi

tion,

% P

assi

ng

Fall cohort by year

WhiteBlackHispanic


38

College Math by Race/Ethnicity

0.00%

20.00%

40.00%

60.00%

80.00%

100.00%

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Colle

ge M

ath,

% P

assi

ng

Fall cohort by year

WhiteBlackHispanic


39

CREDITS ATTEMPTED & EARNED


40

THE CENTER FOR POSTSECONDARY SUCCESSTHE CENTER FOR POSTSECONDARY SUCCESS

41

Credits Attempted and Earned in First Year of Enrollment

9.9 10.0 10.1 10.7 11.6 11.6

4.0 4.2 4.45.0

5.1 5.113.8 14.2 14.515.7

16.6 16.7

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

2011 2012Pre-policy

2013 2014 2015Post-policy

2016

Credits earned Credits not earned


42

College Credits Attempted in First Year of Enrollment, by race

0.00

4.00

8.00

12.00

16.00

20.00

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Num

ber o

f cre

dit h

ours

Fall cohort by year

WhiteBlackHispanic


43

College Credits Earned in First Year of Enrollment, by race

0.00

4.00

8.00

12.00

16.00

20.00

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Num

ber o

f cre

dit h

ours

Fall cohort by year

WhiteBlackHispanic

• Increased momentum for postsecondary success

• Improved educational equity


Summaries

44

• Longer-term student outcomes (e.g., postsecondary credentials)

• Career readiness outcomes (e.g., attainment of computing related credentials)

• Institutional changes and continuous improvement (e.g., Guided pathways, math redesign)


Next Phases of Our Work

45

• Center for Postsecondary Success– centerforpostsecondarysuccess.org– Shouping Hu, Director ([email protected])


Questions

46

http://fsu.edu

Thank you!Shouping Hu Ph.D.Florida State [email protected]

http://fsu.edu

Leadership: Policy and Practice

Martha Ellis, Ph.D.Charles A. Dana CenterUT Austin

• Mathematics pathways are structured so that:• All students, regardless of college readiness, enter directly

into mathematics pathways aligned to their programs of study.

• Students complete their first college-level math requirement in their first year of college.

• Students engage in a high-quality learning experience so that:

• Strategies to support students as learners are integrated into courses and are aligned across the institution.

• Instruction incorporates evidence-based curriculum and pedagogy.

What are the Dana Center Mathematics Pathways (DCMP)?

• Arkansas• California• Colorado• Connecticut• Georgia• Hawaii• Indiana• Maine• Maryland• Massachusetts• Michigan• Minnesota• Missouri

• Montana• Nevada• New Mexico• North Carolina• Ohio• Oklahoma• Texas• Virginia• Washington• West Virginia• Wisconsin

States in which we work

Change at scale requires work at multiple levels of the system

• Empowering local leaders

• Honoring past work and building upon the knowledge gained from that work

• Establish inclusive and respectful structures and processes to engage people across systems, two–and four–year and K–12 sectors, and stakeholder groups.

Our Process

• Process that is:

• Student Centered• Faculty Led• Administratively Supported• Policy Enabled• Culturally Reinforced

Driving Systemic, Sustainable Change

Collaborators for Policy and Institutional Leadership• Achieving the Dream• American Association of Community Colleges• American Association of State Colleges and Universities• American Association of Public Land-Grant Universities• Aspen Institute• Complete College America• Education Commission of the States • HCM Strategists• Jobs for the Future• National Association of System Heads• NASPA• SOVA

Thank you!Martha Ellis Ph.D.Charles A. Dana Center

impacts of system and statewide developmental education ... · vfa cohort (n=13) passed...

Documents