dr. nathaniel pugh, jr. vice president, planning and institutional effectiveness dr. christopher...
TRANSCRIPT
Dr. Nathaniel Pugh, Jr. Vice President, Planning and Institutional Effectiveness
Dr. Christopher ShultsDirector, Planning and Institutional Effectiveness
Assessment of Developmental Education Programs in Community
Colleges: Establishing a System
Table of Contents
The Status of Developmental Education
Developmental Education in SUNY and at SCCC
Developmental Education and the SCCC Institutional
Effectiveness Model
Progress in Establishing Developmental Assessment
Q&A
Developmental Education Nationally
Developmental Education is not new (UW in 1879)
Massive expansion by the turn of the century
Massification of higher education as a result of the GI Bill
Granted access to higher education to groups historically left
out
Levin 2001 – Legal and social mandate
Stigma increased based on two issues
Economic conditions
Student success concerns (nearly 50% nationally – higher in
community colleges)
State studies (TX, OH, FL) show lower success rates
Differential policies on remedial course-taking
Percentage taking developmental courses has nearly doubled
since 2000
Developmental Education in SUNY
Developmental education in SUNY limited to community
colleges
2006 system-wide study
37.5% of first-time freshmen were enrolled in developmental
coursework in
2004
More than ½ of the colleges saw increases
Percentages have increased dramatically and reflect national
averages
Developmental Education at Suffolk
Nearly 27,000 students
From 2,246 to 3,448 entering first-time freshman taking at least
one
developmental course from fall 2005-2010
An increase from 58 to 64 percent between fall 2005 and fall
2010
In fall 2008, 4,000 seats to developmental studies
In academic year 2010-2011, 500 sections and more than 7,000
seats
“We still do not know very much about the actual success of remedialprograms because colleges do not evaluate them very well. They
frequently collect inappropriate or poor-quality data and use inappropriatecriteria for measuring effectiveness…[the fact is] they do not know how toassess it” (Roueche & Roueche, 1999, p. 27 as cited in Romano, 2006).
Inside the Numbers at SCCC
Institutional effectiveness has been operationalized at Suffolk
County Community College as “the ability of an institution to
achieve its stated mission and goals. Given that SCCC, like nearly
all colleges mentions student success, to one degree or another,
it was decided that we must examine what impact developmental
studies is having on our institutional effectiveness efforts.
Inside the Numbers Continued
New Students Testing into Developmental Courses by Subject Fall 2006-2010
Writing Math Reading N Percent Percent PercentFull-Time Fall 2006 4152 21.1% 44.0% 29.2% Fall 2007 4340 26.1% 46.0% 32.6% Fall 2008 5058 28.0% 46.8% 36.9% Fall 2009 5074 31.2% 56.5% 39.7% Fall 2010 5487 31.0% 53.1% 37.9%Part-Time Fall 2006 1128 15.8% 34.2% 18.4% Fall 2007 1054 18.5% 36.8% 21.6% Fall 2008 806 30.6% 54.0% 34.2% Fall 2009 1675 19.3% 35.0% 20.4% Fall 2010 2799 10.6% 21.4% 12.3%Total Fall 2006 5280 19.9% 41.9% 26.9% Fall 2007 5394 24.6% 44.2% 30.5% Fall 2008 5864 28.3% 47.8% 36.5% Fall 2009 6749 28.3% 51.2% 34.9% Fall 2010 8286 24.1% 42.4% 29.3%
Inside the Numbers Continued
Developmental % of DWFs inCourses Required N (3,862) Graduation Transfer* Persistence Attrition Gateway Courses
0 1,616 26.4% 38.4% 18.6% 35.8% 35.2%1 581 20.3% 31.0% 20.3% 42.5% 40.4%2 700 13.9% 30.3% 18.4% 47.3% 45.7%3 395 11.7% 22.6% 23.3% 51.4% 47.3%
Fall 2005 Cohort of Entering Freshmen, Fall 2008
Developmental % of DWFs inCourses Required N (4,074) Graduation Transfer* Persistence Attrition Gateway Courses
0 1,668 23.0% 39.4% 17.6% 37.0% 35.2%1 634 19.6% 30.0% 20.2% 42.0% 40.4%2 714 12.3% 27.7% 21.0% 48.0% 43.0%3 432 9.7% 17.8% 24.1% 55.3% 48.7%
Fall 2006 Cohort of Entering Freshmen, Fall 2009
* Transfer rates include graduates** DWFI Findings are significant at .05
Inside the Numbers Continued
Fall 2007 Cohort of Entering Freshmen, Fall 2010
Developmental % of DWFs inCourses Required N (4,274) Graduation Transfer* Persistence Attrition Gateway Courses
0 1,640 22.2% 38.4% 18.7% 36.5% 33.6%1 636 18.7% 28.9% 19.0% 44.3% 39.9%2 771 12.9% 24.8% 20.6% 49.4% 41.9%3 500 12.2% 20.2% 22.8% 52.2% 43.7%
Inside the Numbers Continued
Semester of Enrollment First Second Third Fourth N Percent Percent PercentFall 2006 No Developmental 2095 79.3% 64.7% 57.6% Developmental 2524 78.2% 61.7% 55.1% Total 4619 78.7% 63.1% 56.2%Fall 2007 No Developmental 2024 81.5% 65.2% 58.7% Developmental 2798 80.2% 63.7% 55.7% Total 4822 80.7% 64.3% 57.0%Fall 2008 No Developmental 2315 82.5% 69.7% 63.6% Developmental 3477 79.0% 65.3% 56.7% Total 5792 80.4% 67.1% 59.5%Fall 2009 No Developmental 1901 82.9% 69.3% 64.0% Developmental 3907 77.3% 60.0% 53.8% Total 5808 79.1% 63.1% 57.2%
Pearson Chi-Square Tests Semester Second Third FourthFall 2006 Chi-square 0.922 4.535 3.006 df 1 1 1 Sig. 0.337 0.033* 0.083Fall 2007 Chi-square 1.391 1.253 4.389 df 1 1 1 Sig. 0.238 0.263 0.036*Fall 2008 Chi-square 10.979 12.207 27.33 df 1 1 1 Sig. 0.001* .000* .000*Fall 2009 Chi-square 24.079 47.855 54.253 df 1 1 1 Sig. .000* .000* .000*
Persistence of New Associate Degree Students – 2nd through 4th Semester
Inside the Numbers Continued
Transfer Rates for Students Taking at Least one Developmental Course
YearTotal # of transfers
Transfers who took at least one developmental course
Percent of transfers who took at least one developmental
course2006 4019 1301 32.4%2007 4204 1359 32.3%2008 4327 1559 36.0%2009 4466 1672 37.4%2010 3275 1172 35.8%
Total 20291 7063 34.8%
Given that around 60% of students take at least one developmental course, those taking developmental courses are less likely to transfer
Inside the Numbers Continued
Persistence Rates in STEM Programs by Developmental Course Taking: Fall 2006-2009
The persistence rates are higher for both categories with the only significant differences emerging in Fall 2009
Semester of Enrollment First Second Third Fourth N Percent Percent PercentFall 2006 No Developmental 199 83.9% 64.3% 55.8% Developmental 76 84.2% 71.1% 65.8%Fall 2007 No Developmental 168 85.7% 68.5% 64.3% Developmental 103 79.6% 62.1% 60.2%Fall 2008 No Developmental 186 88.2% 73.7% 63.4% Developmental 114 75.4% 69.3% 58.8%Fall 2009 No Developmental 161 85.1% 73.3% 68.3% Developmental 116 79.3% 60.3% 60.3%
Interpreting the Numbers
Students taking any developmental courses are less successful
Students taking between 1 and 3 developmental courses are
equally successful
The proportion of students taking developmental courses are
increasing even
as the population grows
Students taking developmental courses are having a greater
impact on overall
measures of student success (higher proportion and greater
numbers)
We have the data, now what?
Deploying a Comprehensive IE System at SCCC
Ahead of the 2007 reaffirmation, Suffolk Community College
began fully implementing a Comprehensive Assessment Plan for
Institutional Effectiveness. This plan has resulted in information
that has formalized and expanded assessment efforts and laid the
foundation for an extensive and integrated planning system that
will further enhance assessment activities and allow for expansion
of the initial assessments in developmental education. Regardless
of whether developmental education is a program or sequence of
courses, assessment of learning outcomes will be conducted and
the information will be used as part of the decision-making
process.
Planning Efforts and MSCHE Standards Strategic Planning
The preeminent planning process
Responsible for aligning college operations with external
conditions
Drives mission development/revision and creation of institutional goals (IGs) (Standard 1)
Operational Planning
Connected to strategic planning through the IGs
Includes assessment of student learning and the environment for
student learning (Standard 7,12, and 14 directly and 8,9,11, and 13
indirectly)
The planning effort rooted in daily activities
Budget Planning
Connected to operational planning through resource allocation (Standards 2 and 3)
Connects back to strategic planning through the IGs (Standards 2
and 3)
SWOT
STRATEGY
BUDGET
Plan
Implem
ent
Evaluate
Use
Res
ults
Plan
Implem
ent
Evaluate
Use
Res
ults
Plan
Implem
ent
Evaluate
Use
Res
ults
Institutional ActivitiesMajor Planning SystemsAssessment Efforts
Continuous ImprovementGear Movement
SCCC Institutional Effectiveness Model – Gears and Cogs
Env. Scan
Stake-holder input
OPERATIONS PLANNING
STRATEGIC PLANNING
BUDGETING
INSTITUTIONAL
EFFECTIVENESS
Academic Planning
AES Planning
State Budget
County Budget
Budget Requests
ASSESSMENT
Institutional Effectiveness System
Assessment is at the Core
Assessment and strategic planning
Assessment and operational planning
Assessment and budgeting
Assessment of the IE system
Assessment within an integrated system allows the college to move from data collection and information processing to informed and integrated planning that guides the evaluation of institutional effectiveness. The key is that information is evaluated for relevance and is filtered through systematic processes that link the institutional goals with resource allocation.
Developmental Education Assessment and Operational Planning
The SCCC Developmental Studies Advisory Committee
Current course-based assessment in developmental math
Connecting assessment in courses to the planning process
(SLOs)
Integration of developmental studies as part of academic
planning
Building up SLO assessment and program review in
developmental studies
Framework for Operational Planning in Developmental Education
What’s Next at SCCC?
Consensus that developmental studies needs more intensive
assessment
Consensus that current planning efforts need to continue
evolving based
on assessment of the IE system
Intense discussions about the status of developmental studies
– program or
a sequence of courses?
Assessment will be comprehensive whether as a program or
sequence of courses
Expansion of assessment activities in developmental English
and reading
Assessment of the impact of interventions (i.e. Title III,
program changes)
Increased focus on student success (CPT scores, placement,
outcomes)
Connecting developmental studies assessment into
operational planning
Questions?