It’s a New Day!
From Abolishing Late Registration
to
Overhauling Student Support Services
Dr. Joy Gates Black
Dr. David Wells
Tarrant County College District
• Established in 1965
• 7th Largest College or University in Texas
• 1 College, 5 Campuses + Health Professions Campus
+ Multiple Community Ctrs
• 5 Campus Presidents
• 3,000 Employees Including Adjuncts
• 7 Member Board of Trustees (Single Member Districts)
• Service Area: Tarrant County, Texas – 900 Square
Miles 1.8 M Population
The Way We Were
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Silos, Silos, Silos
Allowed students to do optional
Enrollment driven
Primary use of data was for reporting to regulatory agencies – (Institutional
Research office was staffed accordingly)
Often employees did not understand the data they were getting
Most advising was done by counselors
No student success/orientation course
Few decisions made on the basis of disaggregated data
Administrators concentrated on their silo
Minimal professional development and faculty renewal
The Institution suffered from a lack of focus and a singular vision
Creating a Culture of Inquiry Evidence
and
Accountability
“The Rationale for Change”
Using Data to Inform
Decision-Making
TCC Students: Developmental Education
(Ranking Based on Big Ten Community Colleges)
Percentage of Developmental Students Who Met a
TSI Obligation within Two Years
Subject
2009
2010
Reading
9th
8th
Writing
8th
8th
Math
9th
9th
Texas Legislative Budget Board Report on Performance Measures
What We Learned
From Our Students
2009 TCC - SENSE
• Only 13% of students reported that someone was assigned to
them in case they needed information or assistance
Fall 2009 – Fall 2010
• First Time in College (FTIC) Student Retention = 57%
2010 TCC - CCSSE
• Only 23% of students indicated that they used peer or other
tutoring sometimes or often
• Only 43% of students indicated that they used skill labs (math,
writing, etc.) sometimes or often
• Only 49% of students indicated that they used academic
advising/planning services sometimes or often
What We Learned
From Our Students
2011 TCC CCSSE
Only 25% of students indicated that
they had completed a college
orientation program
34% of the students surveyed indicated
that they work more than 30 hours per
week
What We Learned
From Our Students
TCC 2011 CCSSE
Most Important Support Services
Academic Advising
Computer Labs
Career Counseling
Financial Aid Advising
Skill Labs (writing, math, etc.)
Peer or Other Tutoring
Job Placement
91%
84%
81%
81%
81%
73%
65%
WHAT WE LEARNED
FROM OUR STUDENTS
Students need more structure,
fewer options and clearer
pathways
Students don’t do optional
In community colleges
engagement is not likely to
happen by accident. It has to
happen by design
Creating a New
Day at
Tarrant County
College
Actions Taken
Fall 2010
Implemented a mandatory remediation
requirement for all students
Assigned advisors to FTIC students
required to enroll in developmental
courses, and required these students
to meet with their advisor twice each
semester
Implemented a mandatory Transition to
College Success course for FTIC
students requiring developmental
coursework in two areas
Spring – Fall 2011
Actions Taken
Increased peer tutoring and advising
through Title III grant
Expanded assigned advisors to all
FTIC students
Assigned advisors to Transition to
College Success courses
Expanded Transition to College
Success Course to FTIC students
requiring developmental coursework
in one area
Student Engagement:
Benefits of Changes
TO STUDENTS
TO THE COLLEGE
• Earlier completion of
developmental
coursework
• Intentional
connections with
advisors
• Successful acquisition
of the tools and self
confidence necessary
to succeed in college
• Increased student
engagement
• Increased interaction
with advisors and
faculty
• Increased persistence
and retention
• Improved completion
rates
Institutional Barriers
Late Registration and
Attendance
Using Data to
Inform Decision-Making
Institutional
Barrier:
LATE REGISTRATION
Students who register late often
enroll in any courses that are still
available without giving thought to
the course’s requirements, their
personal obligations, or their
academic preparedness.
Tarrant County College, 2010
Late Registration
“Students who procrastinate and wait until just
before the start of the term or after to enroll may not
be as motivated as students who enroll early and
this procrastination affects their overall chance of
passing their courses.”
Wetstein, Nguyen & Hays - San Joaquin Delta College, 2008
“Students who register late may be the most at-risk
students, but are admitted at a time when the system
is most overloaded and least capable of meeting
their needs.”
Sinclair College, 2003
Late Registration
“A student who registers during preregistration or regular registration has on
average a 27% higher GPA than a student who
registers during late registration.”
“A student who registers during late
registration drops nearly 11% more credit
hours before the six week census date than a
student who registers during pre-registration
or regular registration.”
Mississippi Gulf Coast Community College,
2006
The Impact of Late Registration
on Student Success at TCC
TOMORROW STARTS HERE
Students who registered late
had an average success rate
(receiving a grade of A, B, C) of
55% in their classes compared
to a success rate of 61% for
students who registered during
regular registration.
(Based on TCC Fall 2010 data)
Effective Fall 2011
TCC Discontinuation
of Late Registration
Using Data to
Inform Decision-Making
Institutional
Barrier:
ATTENDANCE
63% of students surveyed indicated
that they skipped class sometimes,
often or very often.
CCSSE, 2010
Attendance
“Higher levels of attendance were associated with greater course
success, especially for students with highly consistent attendance (2 or
fewer absences), who scored more than one-half letter grade higher on
average than those who attended less frequently.”
Stuckey, 2008
“Grand Rapids Community College believes that attendance is essential
to student success and sees excessive absenteeism as a very serious
matter, but also believes the classroom instructor is the best evaluator of
the impact attendance may have on student success in any given class.”
Grand Rapids Community College, 2010
“Students who do not regularly attend their classes are not able to
participate in classroom discussions and often do not complete their
assignments, which significantly impacts their academic success.”
Tarrant County College, 2011
Summer/Fall 2011
Instituted Attendance
Requirements For
Students Taking
Developmental Education
Courses
Spring 2012
Expanded Attendance
Requirements To
All Students
Late Registration and ATTENDANCE Requirements
Benefits of Changes
TO STUDENTS
•
•
•
•
Finalized schedule
before the start of
classes
More quality time for
staff to assist with
information and advising
Early attendance at the
start of the semester to
receive course syllabi,
materials and
assignments
Better understanding of
the College’s
expectations for
attendance and timely
registration
TO THE COLLEGE
• Earlier cancellation of
course sections can be
initiated
• Students can be
notified earlier of
course cancellations
• Faculty will have
accurate class rosters
and class sizes
• Bookstore can address
any additional textbook
needs in a more timely
manner
• More strategic planning
for enrollment,
instruction and staffing
STUDENT ENGAGEMENT
AND COMPLETION
Data Results
COMPLETION DATA
Number of Students Self Reporting
Completion of a Developmental Education
Course
Subject
2010
2011
Change
Reading
15%
17%
+2%
Writing
13%
15%
+2%
Math
40%
45%
+5%
CCSSE 2010, 2011
SUCCESS DATA
Southeast Campus Math Tutoring Center
Fall 2011
Success
Lab Use Courses
Yes (A, B, C)
No
Visited
Did not
Visit
Math
66%
34%
Other
71%
29%
Math
51%
49%
Other
63%
37%
SUCCESS DATA
South Campus Science Lab
Fall 2011
Lab Use
Visited
Did not
Visit
Courses
Success
Yes (A, B, C)
No
Science
69%
31%
Other
78%
22%
Science
57%
43%
Other
63%
37%
SUCCESS DATA
Northeast Campus Math Tutoring Lab
Fall 2011
Lab Use Courses
Visited
Did not
Visit
Success
Yes (A, B, C)
No
Math
58%
42%
Other
80%
20%
Math
51%
49%
Other
67%
33%
STUDENT RETENTION DATA
Student Advisement
Frequency of Advisement
None
One
Two
Three
Four
Five
Total
2010 FL
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
Percent
Retained
2011FL
29%
42%
50%
60%
67%
57%
43%
Loss
71.2%
58%
50%
40%
33%
43%
57%
Disruptive Innovations
What ATD
Leader Colleges
Do
Disruptive Innovations at TCC
Changes in Math Curriculum and Modes of Delivery
Mandatory New Student Orientation
Intentional Advising and Faculty Advising
Early Academic Alert System
Mandatory Professional Development
Mandatory Remediation
Mandatory Student Success Course
Discontinuation of Late Registration
Disruptive Innovations
Under Development
Academic Boot Camp
Review of Initial Student Assessment/Placement
Testing Criteria
District-wide Coordination of Dual Credit
P-16 Initiatives
Are the Disruptive Innovations
Making a Difference????
Percentage of Remedial Students
Who Met a TSI Obligation in Math
College District
Rank
Alamo Community College District
Austin Community College
Collin County Community College District
Dallas County Community College District
El Paso Community College District
Houston Community College System
Lone Star College System District
San Jacinto College
South Texas College
Tarrant County College District
Statewide
10
4
7
6
8
3
1
2
5
9
FY
2009
7.50%
31.00%
22.65%
28.10%
18.40%
34.30%
54.35%
39.95%
30.40%
11.24%
30.90%
Rank
7
6
10
1
8
3
2
4
5
9
FY
2010
19.90%
24.80%
12.10%
40.20%
16.70%
37.50%
38.40%
33.40%
28.00%
12.50%
27.00%
Rank
2
7
9
1
8
3
5
4
6
10
FY
2011
71.80%
31.10%
25.20%
76.30%
28.50%
71.50%
44.00%
47.30%
34.20%
21.50%
47.90%
Source: LBB Performance Measures Feedback Report
Percentage of Remedial Students
Who Met a TSI Obligation in Reading
College District
Rank
Alamo Community College District
10
Austin Community College
1
Collin County Community College District
Dallas County Community College District
El Paso Community College District
Houston Community College System
Lone Star College System District
San Jacinto College
South Texas College
Tarrant County College District
Statewide
7
6
2
3
8
4
5
9
FY
FY
FY
Rank
Rank
2009
2010
2011
31.10% 9
17.40% 5 64.30%
63.30% 1
57.70% 2 71.40%
50.53%
50.70%
61.50%
57.60%
45.70%
52.87%
52.60%
33.30%
49.40%
10
5
2
4
3
7
6
8
6.50%
44.60%
56.00%
44.90%
55.00%
40.60%
43.80%
25.20%
38.20%
9
8
6
1
3
4
7
10
45.80%
56.20%
62.30%
80.50%
67.70%
64.60%
57.30%
42.71%
60.90%
Source: LBB Performance Measures Feedback Report
Percentage of Remedial Students
Who Met a TSI Obligation in Writing
College District
Rank
Alamo Community College District
Austin Community College
Collin County Community College District
Dallas County Community College District
El Paso Community College District
Houston Community College System
Lone Star College System District
San Jacinto College
South Texas College
Tarrant County College District
Statewide
9
2
10
3
4
6
1
7
5
8
FY
FY
FY
Rank
Rank
2009
2010
2011
30.30% 9
20.00% 2 67.70%
62.10% 1
55.70% 5 58.40%
30.18% 10
7.30% 10 37.80%
50.80% 4
43.20% 6 57.30%
49.90% 6
40.00% 3 64.70%
44.80% 5
41.10% 1 82.80%
63.74% 2
46.90% 4 60.20%
41.80% 7
28.90% 7 49.40%
49.60% 3
44.70% 8 47.50%
34.98% 8
26.60% 9 44.44%
45.70%
36.00%
58.90%
Source: LBB Performance Measures Feedback Report

