Transcript Our old-old system English curriculum

Successful Acceleration:
Models and Data
Lisa Bernhagen
[email protected]
Wendy Swyt
[email protected]
Highline Community College
What problems does acceleration address?
 High attrition before students get to college level
 The college’s need to increase SAI points for students
earning 15 college-level credits in one year
 Unreliable placement scores that place students too
low
National Data on the Pipeline Effect
Students taking Remedial Reading courses
From Referral, Enrollment, and Completion in Developmental Education Sequences in Community
Colleges (CCRC Working Paper No. 15). By: Thomas Bailey, Dong Wook Jeong & Sung-Woo Cho.
December 2008. New York: Community College Research Center, Teachers College, Columbia
University. (Revised November 2009).
Student’s initial
placement
% of students who
successfully
complete college level
gatekeeper
course in subject
One level below college
42%
Two levels below college
29%
Three levels below college
24%
…students who are referred to developmental courses
two or three steps below college-level rarely complete
introductory college courses and are even less likely to
complete degrees.
Bailey, Thomas. (February 2009). Rethinking Developmental
Education. CCRC Brief. Community College Research Center.
Teachers College, Columbia University.
Our pipeline
English 71
“English For Nonnative
Speakers”
English 81
“Writing Skills”
English 91
“College Preparatory
Writing”
Exit Points…
 Will the student pass English 71?
 Will the student go on to English 81?
 Will the student pass English 81?
 Will the student go on to English 91?
 Will the student pass English 91?
 Will the student go on to English 101?
 Will the student pass English 101?
 More exit points = less chance of a student making it
to and through English 101.
Bailey’s recommendation:
Abandon the dichotomy between developmental and
college-ready students for a wide range of students above
and below current developmental cutoff scores by
opening college level courses to more students and by
incorporating academic support assistance into college
level courses.
Bailey, Thomas. (February 2009). Rethinking
Developmental Education. CCRC Brief. Community
College Research Center. Teachers College, Columbia
University
Acceleration Models:
Ways to Shorten the Pipeline
 Mainstreaming
 Place students directly into college level with support
(Baltimore, HCC)
 By-pass dev ed courses
 bridge courses, high school transcript placement, placement
prep/retake (Seattle CC and Highline)
 Compression
 Offer content of two courses compressed into one quarter
 Curricular redesign
 Change sequence and structure (TCC, Chabot)
 Embedded learning
 Dev ed courses linked to college level “content”, I-BEST
Accelerated Learning Project (ALP)
Community College of Baltimore County
 Students placing into the course below College English are
mainstreamed into a College English class.
 In each ALP section, there are 8 “dev ed” students with 12
“regular” English 101 students.
 Rather than taking English 101 as 3 credits (on a semester
system), the “dev ed” students enroll for 5 credits.
 The 8 students meet separately with the same instructor in
support course each week (2 credits).
 Completion statistics for college level English
 Non-accelerated sequence: 40%
 Accelerated course: 75%
Chabot Community College:
Open Access Developmental English
 At Chabot College in California, any student
scoring below college level English on their
placement exam (Accuplacer) can take an
accelerated four credit pre-college course instead
of the traditional 8-credit two semester sequence.
 “Open Access” college prep
 Completion statistics for college level English
 Non-accelerated sequence: 28-34%
 Accelerated course: 52-57%
Highline CC: What we are doing
 English 101 combined with extra support in 10-credit
course.
 Though students get 10 credits and a grade in 101 and 91
at the end, this is not a compression model.
 Students work on English 101 assignments and readings
 Support time is used for just-in-time remediation: what
do students need to do the readings and assignments?
 Completion statistics for college level English
 Non-accelerated sequence: 56%
 Accelerated course: 79%
Acceleration: Big ideas
 High challenge, high support.
 Meaningful and integrated with college content
 Outcomes measure college-readiness, not next-step
readiness.
 Acceleration doesn’t mean “faster”; it means deeper
and better learning.
The Data…
 All the acceleration models have data that show
students moving more effectively to the college level.
 What is happening to create this success?
Out of every 100 students …
90 retained
in 091
LOSE 10% in attrition
79 pass 091
(2.0+)
67 enroll in 101
within 3 years
LOSE 15% in the pipeline
60 retained
in 101
LOSE 10% in attrition
56 pass 101
(2.0+)
Office of Institutional Research, x3205
7/31/2012
Accelerated Pedagogy: Eng 101 with support (10 credits;
one quarter).
92 retained in
101 with
support
LOSE 8 % in attrition
Office of Institutional Research, x3205
7/31/2012
83 pass the
support
(2.0+)
79 pass Engl 101
(2.0+)
Traditional
100 start in
English 91
Acceleration
100 start in
Eng 101 with
support
41% increase in the college
course pass rate (23
percentage points).
56 pass Eng
101 (2.0+)
Modified 10/10/12 from the Office of
Institutional Research, created
7/31/2012
79 pass Eng
101 (2.0+)
What we want you to leave with…
It doesn’t matter how successful individual
developmental courses are; we must shorten the pipeline.
2. Acceleration takes many forms. Each institution must
work with their structures, advantages, and challenges to
develop what works.
3. Acceleration is not tied primarily to a curriculum
“model”; pedagogy must also be accelerated. We need to
consciously and intentionally work against placement
and traditional textbooks, both of which limit
developmental curriculum and do not effectively address
college readiness.
1.