Developmental Math Options - · PDF fileDevelopmental Math Options ... •Piloted 2 modes...
Transcript of Developmental Math Options - · PDF fileDevelopmental Math Options ... •Piloted 2 modes...
Developmental Math Options
Developmental Math Options • Options:
1. Traditional Model 2. Self-Paced, Modularized Approach in a Lab Setting (Emporium
Model) 3. Summer Bridge Program (2015)
• Piloted 2 modes – workbook and EdReady (NROC)
• Assessment & Outcomes Data • Future Directions • Bottom Line: what works for our students is the fact that they
have options
• Our data do not show that one option is best (or worst) • Rather, we are using our data analytics to hone in on the best fit for
each student
Developmental Math Options 1. Traditional (2 courses)
2. Self-Paced, Modularized, Computer-Mediated (2-3 courses)
• Fewer credits than traditional • Potential for students to accelerate • STEM (7 credits) and Non-STEM (6 credits) tracks • Lower cost than traditional mode
3. Summer & Winter Bridge (20-hours)
• ACCUPLACER brush up
Note: At MCCC, Intermediate Algebra is a 100-level course and is not in our developmental math sequence
Developmental Math Options
Traditional Computer-Mediated (Emporium)
Accelerated (for some)
MAT 033, Pre-Algebra (4 cr.)
MAT 037, Beginning Algebra (4 cr.)
MAT 041, Foundation Math I (3 cr.; 6 lab hrs)
MAT 042, Foundation Math II (3 cr.; 6 lab hrs)
MAT 043, Foundation Math III (1 cr; 2 lab hrs) STEM pre-req
At MCCC, Intermediate Algebra is a 100-level course and is not in our developmental math sequence
Emporium Model • Development
• National Center for Academic Transformation (NCAT) Conference – 2010
• Implementation
• Pilot in Spring 2011 • New dedicated labs at both campuses - 2014
Emporium Model: MAT 041, 042, 043 • Teaching model
• 1 faculty member for 20 students • 1 tutor for each additional fraction of 20 students
• 20 students: 1 professor • 21-39 students: 1 professor + 1 tutor • 40-59 students: 1 professor + 2 tutors • Our largest section: 90 students – 1 professor + 4 tutors
• Changes to the courses based on assessment data • 15 week to 7 week back to 15 week semester • Addition of MAT 043 • Software change – from Carnegie Learning (2011-2014) to ALEKS
(2014-present) • Each semester 5-10% of students who start in the lower level
complete both levels in the same semester and go on to be successful in college-level math
Math Foundations (computer-mediated)
What advisors think students do What students think they do
What students actually do
• 75 hours in lab • 75 hours at home • Engaging • 1:1 assistance with
little to no wait-time • MAT 041+042 in one
semester
What faculty actually do
Curriculum Aligns to Majors Traditional - MAT 037
Re-Req for STEM and Non-STEM
Emporium – MAT 042 Pre-Req for Non-STEM
Equations and Inequalities Equations and Inequalities
Graphs of Linear Equations and Systems
Graphs of Linear Equations and Systems
Exponents and Polynomials Exponents and Polynomials
Factoring and Quadratic Equations
Factoring and Quadratic Equations
Rational Expressions and Radicals
Rational Expressions and Radicals
Success Rates in Developmental Math
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
2008Fall
2009Fall
2010Fall
2011Fall
2012Fall
2013Fall
2014Fall
PreAlgebraBeginning Algebra
Math Summer Bridge (2015) • Goal: Design a brush-up program to help students who
place into developmental mathematics improve their skills and place one or two levels higher
• Planning started in Fall 2014 • Planning team took ACCUPLACER • At League for Innovation Conference learned more about
NROC/EdReady (March 2015 in Boston) • June 1, 2015 Workshop with Bill Coe, designer of the Fast-Track
Math program at Montgomery College (MD) (supported by NJCCC Innovation Grant) • 8 NJ CCs participated
EdReady / NROC
• Used by 6 million+ students from Middle School to College
• A non-profit network that you join (not software that you purchase)
• Regional Membership Manager: Bryan Arvison [email protected]
• www.thenrocproject.org
Math Summer Bridge (2015) • 20 hour program (4 days/week for 2 weeks) • We offered 4 sessions (day, evening, each campus)
• 150 students signed up • Piloted 2 formats (concurrent meeting time &
place): 1. Basic Fast Track Workbook (Coe & Lovejoy)
supplemented with extra problem sheets • Primarily faculty-led instruction
2. EdReady • Primarily tutor-supported instruction
• First level students were randomly assigned a format
• Second level were assigned EdReady
Math Summer Bridge (2015) • Costs:
• Faculty were paid $800/session • Tutors - 100 hours (@ ~$10/hr) • Pilot was free to students (supported by a $5000
internal grant) • Data Collection
• Attendance • Challenge Test (final exam) • ACCUPLACER Post-Test • # hours in EdReady • Math enrollment in Fall 2015
Math Summer Bridge Results • 150 students signed up • 113 students attended at least 6 of 8 sessions • Of the 113 who attended:
• 96 students had pre-test information and at least one post-test score
• 51 out of the 96 (53%) had their math placement impacted by the program
• 44 placed out of one level • 31 first level to second level • 13 second level to 100 level
• 7 placed out of both levels
Workbook vs. EdReady Workbook Results
• First Level • Starting average
Computation: 38 • Starting average Algebra: 43 • 15 out of 27 (56%) moved
one level • 4 out of 27 (15%) moved two
levels • Second Level
• 2 second level students agreed to work on computation for a week.
• 1 moved to 100 level.
EdReady Results
• First Level • Starting average
Computation: 37 • Starting average Algebra : 46 • 16 out of 48 (33%) moved one
level • 3 out of 48 (6%) moved two
levels
• Second Level • Starting average Algebra
score: 57 • 12 out of 19 (63%) moved into
100 level
Math Summer Bridge (2015) • How we used results:
• Bridge Program improvement (for Winter 2016 and Summer 2016 sessions)
• To answer the big question: which students are candidates for a bridge program vs. a semester-length course
• To evaluate use for credit courses • To evaluate effectiveness for other populations (e.g., high school
College Readiness Now II partner) • To assess whether to continue our membership with EdReady
Summer Bridge – Lessons Learned • We held some of the sessions too close to the start of the
semester – students had difficulty getting the classes they needed • Session I – July 13-23, 2015 • Session II – August 10-20, 2015
• We could not follow up with all the students to make sure they signed up for Math in Fall: • Of the 96 who completed,
• 56 enrolled in a Fall 2015 math class • 34 enrolled at Mercer but are not taking math • 6 are not attending MCCC in Fall 2015
• A hypothesis: Students might take the program more seriously if they paid for it (150 signed up, several were no-shows, only 113 attended 6 or more sessions)
Developmental Math Options 1. Traditional Model 2. Emporium Model 3. 20-hour Bridge Program
• What works for our students is the fact that they have
options
• Our data do not show that one option is best (or worst) • Rather, we are using our data analytics to hone in on the
best fit for each student • And then clearly communicate with students (and
advisors) about strengths of each (and cost – in time and money) • Dev Ed Options Flyer
Future Directions • We are using what we learned to inform changes:
• Working on a policy to require students to spend ___ hours on EdReady prior to ACCUPLACER retest (no additional institutional cost beyond membership)
• Strengthening and Scaling for the 2016 Math Summer Bridge program
• Future Directions for Dev Ed Math (under discussion):
• Using EdReady as supplemental instruction for “decision zone” college-level math (STEM and non-STEM tracks)
• An additional Dev Ed Math pathway aligned to college-level Statistics
• Feasibility of using only Open Education Resources for all Dev Ed Math
Future Directions • Conversations about future directions informed by
• Guided Pathways to Success (GPS) implementation • Core Principles for Transforming Remediation with a
Comprehensive Student Success Strategy (Nov. 2015)
Core Principles for Transforming Remediation within a Comprehensive
Student Success Strategy 1. Every student’s postsecondary education begins with an intake
process to choose an academic direction and identify the support needed to pass relevant credit-bearing gateway courses in the first year.
2. Enrollment in college-level math and English courses or course sequences aligned with the student’s program of student is the default placement for the vast majority of students.
3. Academic and nonacademic support is provided in conjunction with gateway courses in the student’s academic or career area of interest through co-requisite or other models with evidence of success in which supports are embedded in curricula and instructional strategies.
Core Principles for Transforming Remediation within a Comprehensive
Student Success Strategy 4. Students for whom the default college-level placement is not
appropriate, even with additional mandatory support, are enrolled in rigorous, streamlined remediation options that aligned with the knowledge and skills required for success in gateway courses in their academic or career area of interest.
5. Every student is engaged with content of required gateway courses that is aligned with his or her academic program of study – especially in math.
6. Every student is supported to stay on track to a college credential, from intake forward, through the institution’s use of effective mechanisms to generate, share, and act on academic performance and progression data.
A Success Story