using shared research to clear pathways to college-readiness - 2013 strengthening student success...

8/13/2019 Using shared research to clear pathways to college-readiness - 2013 Strengthening Student Success Conference

1/83

Using shared research to clearpathways to college-readiness

Thursday, October 10, 1:45-3:15p

RP Group Conference

Strengthening Student SuccessSFO Marriott

Mathematics from High School to Community College


2/83

Presenters

Dr. Louise Jaffe, Trustee

Santa Monica College

Dr. Roberto Gonzalez, Associate Dean

Santa Monica College

Dr. Terry Deloria, Assistant SuperintendentSanta Monica-Malibu USD

Ken Sorey, Project Director

Cal-PASS Plus

Using shared research to clear pathways to college-readiness


3/83

Building the Pipeline

3

College and workforce readiness begins with earlychildhood education and continues along the education-

to-workforce pipeline.


4/83

Math Functions As A Roadblock

Why Math?


5/83

Its going to take all of us.

Heavy liftingLeveraging.



6/83


Communicating Working together.



7/83


Working independently



8/83

Data can show us the way

Shared researchcross-systems analysescan help us increase college readiness

Collective and Collaborative Impact

If school districts and community colleges see the

same findings for shared students, they can

implement reforms and interventions that align

and increase student success, and work together more easily and more effectively.


9/83


10/83

To be covered

Research exampleLouise Jaffe

K-12 actionsTerry DeloriaCC actionsRoberto Gonzalez

Cal-PASS Plus Actionable DataKen

Sorey



11/83

Problem

Students are coming to community college

unprepared for college-level coursework

as determined by the community college

placement assessment.



12/83

Sample: 2920 12thGrade StudentsClasses of 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 from a single high school



13/83

CC Freshmen Ethnicity (N=953)

13

9%

35%

7%

48%

BlackLatino

A/PI

White

Other



14/83

High School Math Pathway Markers

Where students start: Grade 9 Math Geometry or Above

Algebra 1 or Below

When students stop: Math in Grade 12

Yes or No

Where students stop: Highest-Level Math Above Algebra 2

Algebra 2

Below Algebra 2

Every course beyond Algebra 2 doubles theodds of college completion (Adelman, 2006)



15/83

Students travel different pathways through

high school mathematics

PathHigh School Observed Math Pathways All

Students

N=2920

CC

Freshmen

n=953Grade 9 Math Class Math in

Grade 12

Highest-Level Math

1

2

34

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12



16/83




Students

N=2920

CC

Freshmen


Grade 12

Highest-Level Math

1 Geometry Yes Above Algebra 2 36.5% 17.7%

2

34

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12



17/83




Students

N=2920

CC

Freshmen


Grade 12

Highest-Level Math


2 Algebra 1 and Below No Algebra 2 12.4% 19.5%

3 48.9% 37.2%4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12



18/83




Students

N=2920

CC

Freshmen


Grade 12

Highest-Level Math



3 Algebra 1 and Below Yes Above Algebra 2 11.0% 11.6%4 Geometry No Above Algebra 2 9.6% 10.3%

5 Algebra 1 and Below Yes Algebra 2 6.0% 10.4%

6 Algebra 1 and Below No Below Algebra 2 2.0% 2.9%

7 Algebra 1 and Below Yes Below Algebra 2 1.5% 2.2%

8 Geometry No Algebra 2 .9% 1.3%

9 Geometry Yes Algebra 2 .4% .5%

10 Geometry Yes Below Algebra 2 .4% .6%

11 Algebra 1 and Below No Above Algebra 2 .2% .2%

12 Geometry No Below Algebra 2 .1% .2%

TOTAL 81%

(2363)

78%

(739)Using shared research to clear pathways to college-readiness


19/83

All 12 high school math pathways

lead to high school graduation

Path High School Observed Math Pathways AllStudents

N=2920

CCFreshmen


Grade 12

Highest-Level Math



3 Algebra 1 and Below Yes Above Algebra 2 11.0% 11.6%4 Geometry No Above Algebra 2 9.6% 10.3%

5 Algebra 1 and Below Yes Algebra 2 6.0% 10.4%

6 Algebra 1 and Below No Below Algebra 2 2.0% 2.9%

7 Algebra 1 and Below Yes Below Algebra 2 1.5% 2.2%

8 Geometry No Algebra 2 .9% 1.3%

9 Geometry Yes Algebra 2 .4% .5%

10 Geometry Yes Below Algebra 2 .4% .6%

11 Algebra 1 and Below No Above Algebra 2 .2% .2%

12 Geometry No Below Algebra 2 .1% .2%

TOTAL 81%

(2363)

78%

(739)Using shared research to clear pathways to college-readiness


20/83

The goalposts have moved



21/83

How do the different high school

mathematics pathways preparestudents for community college?



22/83

Enter Community College,

Take Math Placement Assessment

Assessment Placement

College-level Mathematics College-level Mathematics

1-level below Intermediate Algebra

2-levels below Algebra 1

3-levels below Pre-Algebra

4-levels below Basic Arithmetic



23/83

College Math Placement Results

All CC Freshmen CC Freshmen by Ethnicity



24/83

What predicts placing

into college-level or below-

college-level coursework on thecommunity college placement

assessment?



25/83

Variables Tested in Predictive Model

1. Gender2. Ethnicity

3. Parent Education

4. Low SES

5. Grade 9 Math Course

where students start6. Highest-Level Math Course where students stop

7. No Math in Grade 12 when students stop

8. Grade 9 Math GPA

9. Grade 10 Math GPA10. Grade 11 Math GPA

11. CAHSEE Math



26/83

Significant Predictors of Placement in Below

College-Level Mathematics

Delta-p

Variable1-level

below

2-levels

below

3-levels

below

4-levels

below

Grade 9 Math GPA 14.42**

Grade 10 Math GPA 16.74*

Grade 11Math GPA 14.96** 16.69**

Grade 9 Math 21.99** 22.27* 22.39** 21.38***

No Math in Grade 12 57.64** 45.66* 49.20**

* p < .05, ** p < .01, ***p < .001



27/83

Who Took No Math in Grade 12?All Students (N=2920)

CC Freshmen (N=953) By Ethnicity(N=2895)


28/83

How does not taking mathematics in

grade 12 negatively impact students

matriculating to community college?



29/83

Wherestudents stopped was determined in

part by whenstudents stopped

Students

Last

Grade

Above

Alg. 2

Alg. 2 Geom.Alg. 1 and

belowAll

(n=2920)12

11



30/83



Students

Last

Grade

Above

Alg. 2


belowAll

(n=2920)12 52% 9% 1% 2%

11 11% 15% 3% 1%

Total 63% 24% 4% 4%



31/83



Students

Last

Grade

Above

Alg. 2


belowAll

(n=2920)12 52% 9% 1% 2%

11 11% 15% 3% 1%

Total 63% 24% 4% 4%CC

Freshmen(n=953)

12 34% 14% 1% 3%

11 12% 23% 4% 2%

Total 46% 37% 6% 5%



32/83

Students who advanced beyond Algebra 2

were more frequently college-ready

Highest-Level Math with CC Math Placement

High School Math Community College Math Placement

NHighest-level GradeTaken College-level 1-levelbelow 2-levelsbelow 3-levelsbelow 4-levelsbelow

> Algebra 2 12

11

Algebra 2 12

11

< Algebra 2 12

11



33/83






> Algebra 2 12

11

Algebra 2 12

11

< Algebra 2 12

11



34/83






> Algebra 2 12

11

Algebra 2 12

11

< Algebra 2 12 2% 2% 5% 24% 67% 42

11 1.9% 3.8% 5.7% 34% 55% 53



35/83






> Algebra 2 12

11

Algebra 2 12 11% 8% 9.5% 32% 40% 12

611 11% 14% 16% 28% 31% 21

0

< Algebra 2 12 2% 2% 5% 24% 67% 42

11 1.9% 3.8% 5.7% 34% 55% 53



36/83






> Algebra 2 12 54% 16% 13% 11% 6% 30

7

11 48% 16% 15% 12.5% 8% 10

4

Algebra 2 12 11% 8% 9.5% 32% 40% 12

6

11 11% 14% 16% 28% 31% 21

0

< Algebra 2 12 2% 2% 5% 24% 67% 42

11 1.9% 3.8% 5.7% 34% 55% 53Using shared research to clear pathways to college-readiness

N M th i G d 12


37/83

No Math in Grade 12:

Different Students, Different Needs

HS

Path

High School MathematicsPathway Markers

CAHSEE

Math*

Grade 10

Community

College

Placement Level

%

of HS

Path

n

%

of

903Gr 9 Math*Grade 12

Math**

Highest-

level Math

2 Algebra 1 No Algebra 2 380+ College-level 9% 17 2%

4 Geometry No > Algebra 2 380+ College-level 46% 43 5%

60 7%


N M th i G d 12


38/83



HS

Path


CAHSEE

Math*

Grade 10

Community

College

Placement Level

%

of HS

Path

n

%

of


Math**

Highest-

level Math



4 Geometry No > Algebra 2 380+ 1-level below 13% 12 1%

4 Geometry No > Algebra 2 380+ 2-levels below 14% 13 1%

85 9%


N M th i G d 12


39/83



HS

Path


CAHSEE

Math*

Grade 10

Community

College

Placement Level

%

of HS

Path

n

%

of


Math**

Highest-

level Math





2 Algebra 1 No Algebra 2 380+ 1-level below 9% 17 2%

2 Algebra 1 No Algebra 2 380+ 2-levels below 11% 20 2%


14

115%


N M th i G d 12


40/83



HS

Path


CAHSEE

Math*

Grade 10

Community

College

Placement Level

%

of HS

Path

n

%

of


Math**

Highest-

level Math








2 Algebra 1 No Algebra 2 350-379 3-levels below 19% 34 4%


6 Algebra 1 No < Algebra 2 350-379 4-levels below 41% 11 1%

23

4 26%

N M th i G d 12


41/83



HS

Path


CAHSEE

Math*

Grade 10

Community

College

Placement Level

%

of HS

Path

n

%

of


Math**

Highest-

level Math










6 Algebra 1 No < Algebra 2 350-379 4-levels below 41% 11 1%

23

4 26%


42/83

79% of students who passed the CAHSEE

Math in Grade 10 placed 3- or 4-levels below

college-level math (n=340)

46%

33%

9%

10%

2%

PASS 350-379

college-level

1-level below

2-levels below

3-levels below

4-levels below



43/83

By not taking mathematics in grade 12,

the students in Groups 2, 3, and 4

did not just miss an opportunity;

they diminished their chances for post-

secondary success.



44/83

How is our school district

addressing these findings?

How is our community collegeaddressing these findings?



45/83

Different Worlds, Same Data



46/83

Santa Monica-Malibu USD

District Demographics

Multiple Measure of College Readiness

SMMUSD College Readiness Dashboard

SMMUSD Response

Using Shared Research to Clear Pathways to College-Readiness


47/83

SMMUSD Overview

PreK-12 District

Santa Monica AND Malibu

11,417

White 51% Black 6% Hispanic 30% Asian 6%

English Learners 9%

Socio-Economically Disadvantaged 27%



48/83

SMMUSD Overview

53 Administrators

66 Pupil Services

554 Teachers

663 Classified Staff



49/83

SMMUSD Overview

Child Development Services (0-Pre-K)

10 K-5 Elementary Schools

2 Middle Schools (6-8)

1 High School (9-12)

1 Middle/High School (6-8, 9-12)

1 Alternative (K-8)

1 Continuation High School (11, 12)

1 Adult School



50/83

So Many CR Metrics!

A-G completion rate

Early Assessment Program (EAP)

SAT CR

SMC Freshmen Course Enrollment Data

Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC)

All of them as each provides useful information


SMMUSD CR Dashboard (%)


51/83

75

39

2

26

58

32

A-G Rate EAP English EAP Algebra

2

EAP

Summative

Math

SAT CR CC College-

Level Math

SMMUSD CR Dashboard (%)

A-G is necessary and required BUT is

insufficient as a measure of CR.


52/83

SMMUSD Response

Goal: All seniors graduate prepared to enroll

in post-secondary, freshmen-level math

courses


Curriculum Alignment


53/83

SMMUSD Plan: IncreaseCollege Readiness in Math

Curriculum Alignment

Assessment

Professional Development

Equity and Access

Homework

Intervention & Enrichment

Parent Involvement

Program Monitoring

C i l Ali t Wh t d


54/83

Curriculum Alignment: What do we

want students to know?

Pre-K Alignment to K-5

K-12 Alignment: Curriculum AND Rigor

Vertically and horizontally

Standards-based (CCSS, NCTM, SAT, AP)

How?

Curriculum Guides

Teacher collaboration Data

Classroom Walk-Throughs


C i l Ali t Wh t d


55/83

Curriculum Alignment: What do we

want students to know?

Reshape school culture: Requireparents/caregivers to opt out of senior math

Create two new senior math electives

Review of math concepts required for placementin post-secondary freshman math courses

Intensive reteaching of math concepts requiredfor placement in post-secondary freshman mathcourses

Team with SMC to administer math placementtest at SMMUSD sites as appropriate


A t H ill k


56/83

Assessment: How will we know

if students learned?

FormativeUsed effectively twice a week forone school year resulted in a mean gain of 30percentile points over control group (Ahead of

the Curve, p. 106) Summative

Common, teacher-created (School & District)

Data used to inform teaching, interventionand enrichment

CR Diagnostic Tools beginning in grade 5



57/83

Professional Development: Teachers

Content

Cognitive Strategies (visualization, activeengagement, vocabulary, culturallyresponsiveness, etc.)

Non-cognitive strategies (grit, self-control,curiosity, conscientiousness, optimism, etc.)

RTI2, Differentiation and Small Group

Instruction

STEM Connections



58/83

Professional Development: Others

Who else?

Principals, Co-Administrators, District Leaders

Counselors/Advisors

Parents/Caregivers

Students

Focus

Rationale : Why all students need to be CR

Roles and Responsibilities



59/83

Equity and Access

Review of Board Policies and Administrative

Regulations

Review of school practices and traditions

Progress and Repeat rules

Grading policies

Homework policies

Reteach and Retest policies

Homework policies



60/83

Homework

Homework practices contribute to achievement gaps

Harris Cooper (Duke University)

Meta-analysis of empirical research

Class Comparison: homework vs. no homework

Grade Level Studies

Elementaryno academicgain

JHS12-15 percentile gains on nationally-normed tests

HS24-31 percentile gains on nationally-normed tests



61/83

Homework

Professional Development Effective homework

Differentiated homework

Monitoring completion rates

Comprehensive Response: The only consequencefor not doing homework is to do the homework!

Classroom

Department School


Intervention and Enrichment: How will we


62/83

Intervention and Enrichment: How will we

respond when students dont learn? What

if they already know the content?

Comprehensive system response

Classroom level

Department/grade level

School level

Data and Assessment

Small group instruction (practice, intervention,enrichment)

Timely, high-quality corrective action


Parent Involvement


63/83

Parent Involvement

Parenting: Help all families establish home

environments to support children as scholars

Communication: Design effective tools for school-to-

home AND home-to-school on programs, policies

and student progress Volunteer support

Learning at home strategies

Collaboration

Training



64/83

Program Monitoring and Refinement

Common District Assessments

Collaboration

Among teachers

Among leaders

Among partners

Classroom Walkthroughs

Data, data, data



65/83



66/83

Santa Monica College Programs

Prep 2 Test Early Assessment Program (June 2013)

Accelerated Math Pathways

SMC First Year Experience (FYE) SMC FYE Summer Bridge

Summer Jams

Supplemental Instruction



67/83

Overcoming Barriers to College

Success Through Actionable Data

and Collaboration

67

Finding Solutions:


68/83

Finding Solutions:

Using Actionable Data and Collaboration

Creating a shared pathway to college and careerreadiness by connecting Pre-K through 12 to post-

secondary education.

Increasing college completion by reducing the need for

remedial coursework through the use of effective

interventions and multiple measures of placement.

Targeting and improving the transition from post-

secondary education to the workforce.

68


69/83

New Website Preview

69


70/83

The Disconnect


71/83

The Disconnect

AcademicProficiency CollegeReadiness


72/83

The Challenge


73/83

Percent Socioeconomically Disadvantaged

Proficiency Scatterplot for Washington Academic Middle, Sanger Unified

Grade 8 Language Arts 2013


74/83

Percent Socioeconomically Disadvantaged

College Readiness Scatterplot for Washington Academic Middle, Sanger

Unified

Grade 8 Language Arts 2013


75/83


76/83

3 out of 4 Freshmen Need Remediation

Fewer Unprepared Students Complete


77/83

p p p

First-term Promise Pathways


78/83

First term Promise Pathways

Results in English

78

63.9% 62.0%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Transfer Level English(English 1, English 1H, English 3)

F2012 Success Rates in

Transfer Level English

Non-Pathways (n=2095)

Promise Pathways (n=516)

5.5% 3.8%

52.9%

32.8%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

AttemptedTransfer-Level

English

SuccessfullyCompleted

Transfer English

Early educational milestone

achievement rates

LBUSD F2011 (n=1660)


Source: Promise Pathways Board of Trustees Update, Long Beach City College, March

12, 2013 from http://www.lbcc.edu/promisepathways/

First-term Promise Pathways Results


79/83

First term Promise Pathways Results

in Math

5.2%

2.8%

16.0%

8.2%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

AttemptedTransfer-Level

Math

SuccessfullyCompleted

Transfer Math

Early educational milestone

achievement rates

LBUSD F2011 (n=1660)


79

55%51%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Transfer Level Math

F2012 Success Rates inTransfer Level Math

Non-Pathways (N=1803)

Promise Pathways (N=156)

Source: Promise Pathways Board of Trustees Update, Long Beach City College, March

12, 2013 from http://www.lbcc.edu/promisepathways/

Could this change how we understand


80/83

Could this change how we understand

college readiness

18%

6%

8%

6%

30%

27%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

English Math

College ReadinessS2012 Graduates, Unduplicated

Adding Alternative

Placement for all

Adding LBCC college-ready

(Accuplacer&Alternative)

EAP college-ready

80

Source: Hetts, J.J. (2013, May). Promising Pathways: The Potential of High School Data to Spur Student

Progress and Achievement. Presentation to the Second CCCLLI Institute, May, 6, 2013, Sacramento, CA

from http://www.careerladdersproject.org/initiatives-programs/california-community-college-linked-learnin -initiative-ccclli-2/ccclli-institute-2-ma -6th/


81/83

The data aligns our efforts.

The path is more clear andaccessible.


Shes on her way


82/83

She s on her way

to college completion!



83/83

Thank you!

Terry Deloria

Assistant Superintendent,

Educational ServicesSanta Monica Malibu USD

[email protected]

Roberto Gonzalez

Dean, Student Success InitiativesSanta Monica College

[email protected]

Louise Jaffe

Independent Researcher

Santa Monica College [email protected]

Ken Sorey

Project ManagerCalPASS-Plus

[email protected]

Contacts
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]

using shared research to clear pathways to college-readiness - 2013 strengthening student success...

Documents