Math Performance Success Program – 10 years of success!

Barbara IllowskyHerminio Hernando

De Anza College

1

Outcomes for Today’s WebinarParticipants will learn how to:• Develop and implement a model that works on their

campuses• Calculate the costs of running such a program• Market the course to their stakeholders, including

the high risk students• Navigate the internal political processes of piloting

a program• Assess and evaluate the program on their

campuses2

Background: challenges

Low developmental education mathematics single course success rate (pre-alg., elem. alg., interm. alg.)

Low progression rate through developmental ed courses to reach transfer course

Students starting in devel. ed. mathematics courses not reaching their educational goals

3

SolutionDevelop a program that incorporates

intensive student servicesSame course content at same level as

other sectionsSame faculty teach both MPS and non-

MPS sectionsThroughout: evaluate faculty success in

MPS versus faculty success in “status quo”

Must be sustainable, scalable and adaptable

4

History1999 – pilot for African-American

males2000 – opened to all students with 2+

failures in starting course2002 – CA Community Colleges

Exemplary Program Award2006 – added pre-algebra starting

course

5

History (cont.)2008 – added non-fall starting cohorts2008 – Hewlett Foundation Student

Success Award (statewide)2009 – part-time faculty offered

sections2009 – MPS listed as a BSI model

program

6

7

Program Structure

• Demonstrated history – lack of success in mathematics

• Low self-confidence• Majority of students from special programs

(EOPS, DSS, Puente, Umoja, …)• High percent of diagnosed & undiagnosed

learning disabilities• Over representation from under represented

groups• Referrals from instructors, counselors, …

8

Program Structure

• Application• Program Orientation• Contract• Explicit student expectations• In-class • Pull-outs• Academic & personal• Frequent contacts• Student success workshops• Noncompliance termination

Program Structure

• In-class: daily• Tutorial Center: ≈ 50 hours/week• Individual attention• Study groups• Consistent• Mandatory attendance when grades <

70% at any point in term• Many former tutors are former MPS

student10

Program Structure

• Mini-lectures followed by group work• Time for practice• Time for students to help each other• Small group discussion• Collaborative learning• Time for instructors to review work for every

student, every day11

Program Structure

• 2 course sequences• Elem. Alg. Interm. Alg.

Statistics (transfer)• Pre-Alg. Elem. Alg. Interm.

Alg. Statistics (transfer)• Start each quarter• Bonding & sense of common

purpose• Instructor follows cohorts• Relationships lead to motivation

to succeed12

Program Structure

• 2 hours per day• Double load for instructor• Same number of units for students• Double WSCH (CA funding)• Required student attendance

13

Program Structure

• Faculty: instructors & counselors• Faculty: weekly meetingsPlan activitiesDiscuss common problemsGive & get adviceSupport group• Common exams & assessments• Speakers

14

15

MPS video

http://nebula.deanza.edu/PSME_Division/MPS-Videos.html

(all part of URL with no spaces or returns)

16

Quote - counselor

“Students in MPS develop a higher level of self-confidence once they are successful in math.  This increase in self-confidence carries over to other classes they are taking.  In short, MPS students' success in math helps them to develop the skills, attitudes and self-confidence necessary to be successful in their other classes.”

Herminio Hernando, Counselor for MPS

17

Student testimonialSchool wise MPS is the best thing that has happened in my life. Math is a difficult subject, but thanks to the professor, tutors, and counselors, I am completing my math requirements for my major. The teachers and tutors really make math a lot less complicated and make it somewhat fun. I strongly recommend the program to students that don’t have a strong background in math.

Saul Gembe

18

Student testimonial

When I first started out, I had no idea how intense the class was going to be. The labs, Homework, projects, exams, quizzes, etc…were overwhelming to me, but, as the weeks went by I understood why all this was necessary. I began to understand why and how things in the program worked. I was no longer overwhelmed and felt confident again that I am smart enough for math.

Emily Ikuta

19

Student testimonial

The MPS Program has definitely helped me understand Math. In the past, it was very difficult to grasp different concepts. Now, I find myself at times helping other people with it.

Godfrey Ramos

Research questionsGiven that the same content and material must

be mastered:

1.How do the grades of students in the MPS program compare with the grades for students not in the program for the same course and term?

2.Do MPS students persist through to higher level math courses at a higher rate than students not in the program?

20

Cumulative data: 2001 – 2010

21

MPS non-MPS

Total Perc. Total Perc.

HC Pass HC Pass

Pre-Algebra 126 73.0% 1980 55.4%

F: 06-09  

Elem. Algebra 823 76.7% 9945 55.6%

F: 01-09, W: 07-10  

Inter. Algebra 850 82.1% 9419 57.9%

W: 02-10, S: 07-09  

Statistics 626 89.9% 7899 62.2%

S: 02-09, F: 08

Cumulative “Pass”: 2001 – 2010

22

Individual “Star” Faculty

23

24

Growing Pains

• Must commit to a cohort for year• Emotionally exhausting• 15 different full & part-time faculty

to date• Can’t do the “same ol’ thing”

25

Growing Pains

• Weekly – faculty & tutors• Common available times• Extensive for part-timer

faculty• Recruiting tutors

Growing Pains

• Need additional• Dilution of services • Fall 2010 – 750+ applications for 220 spots

27

Growing Pains

• Rooms needed for double time• Each additional MPS section means

another regular section NOT offered• Shortage of classrooms on campus• Evening sections means 4 nights/week

28

Growing Pains

• Conflicting philosophies among administrators

• Battle of turf – “mis”distribution of resources

• Need to admit that in expansion, lower success rates are inevitable

Math Performance Success Program:

Too Costly or Really Profitable?

30

31

Program costs:initial investment

• Double faculty time (double the load)

– But double the contact hours generated for state aid

• Dedicated counselor time (estimated at $100,000 per year)

• Peer tutoring dollars ($15,000 per year)

Traditional Economic Reality

• Colleges, especially community colleges, are set up to think in terms of fiscal periods (usually fiscal years)

• Simplistically, this year’s salaries, fixed costs, & variable costs seemingly need to be offset by this year’s revenues from FTES apportionment

32

Return on Investment ModelDeveloped by Dr. Robert Johnstone, RP

Group, as a part of the California Community Colleges Basic Skills Initiative

http://www.cccbsi.orghttp://rpgroup.org 33

A Different (?) Way of Thinking• We could think about deviating from our

“traditional” model toward a return-on-investment (ROI) approach

• Under this approach, we use our “traditional” model as the baseline for costs and revenue

34

Incremental Revenue

• Successful alternate programs have the following outcomes:– Increased course retention – Increased course success rates– Increased persistence– Increased progression to college-level work– Increase in overall units attempted / earned

35

How do we calculate ROI?

• FTES (full-time equivalent student)

• In California, community colleges generate ≈$4,500 per FTES in apportionmentNote: Model applies in states where state

apportionment is combined with tuition, etc.

• The incremental FTES generated in successful alternative programs can, in many cases, offset the incremental costs

36

Caveats …

• This approach runs into an issue if a system caps college enrollments and the college is at or near its enrollment cap

• Bumping up against the cap number as a result of newly successful basic skills students would be a good problem to have

37

Other disciplines

• English, reading, ESL

• Extra in-class time: peer editing, small group conversations, public speeches, research in libraries

• Other components remain the same

38

Planning for scalability, including navigating the politics

39

☺ EDUCATE, EDUCATE, EDUCATE!!!Student Body Grant fundersCounselors Administration

☺ Data – Institutional Researcher is BFF☺ ROI – dispute Perceived Cost of scaling

and show financial incentive☺ Moral, ethical and societal reasons☺ Concrete plan

Assessment

40

• Extremely complicated• Compare faculty against themselves• Goals: large nvariety of facultyvariety of times of day over several years

Assessment (cont.)

41

• Assistance of Instructional Researcher• Acknowledge non-randomness student self-selectionlower success rates than comparison

group (previous failures)• Try not to be defensive!

ResourcesFree downloads at:http://www.cccbsi.org/literature-reviewhttp://rpgroup.org

Literature Review:Basic Skills as a Foundation for Student Success in

California Community Colleges (pdf)Cost-Revenue Tool (Excel)

illowskybarbara@deanza.edu hernandoherminio@deanza.edu

You can do it!42