System Efficiency and Effectiveness Report
Curriculum Reform
Summary Report
Work Group Members:
Name
Boyoung Chae
Pam Dusenberry
Doug Emory
Rolita Ezeonu
Pam Foust
Paula Giroud
Carol Green
Kyle Hammond
Karen Johnson
Jon Kerr
Bridgett Kidd
Jean LeBauve
Monica Lemoine
Noreen Light
James Mulik
Eleni Palmisano
Susan Parker
Roz Spitzer
I.
Council /Affiliation
SBCTC
CBS
ATC
IC
IC
CBS
LMDC
CBS
SBCTC
WARP
CBS
CBS
Position
College
faculty training coordinator
English faculty
Shoreline
Dean, Gen. Ed.
Lake Washington
Dean, Transfer & pre-college Highline
graduate student
WSU
Basic Academic Skills Faculty Bellingham Tech.
VPI
Pierce
Dean of Instruction
Lower Columbia
Dean of Dev. Ed.
Edmonds
Dean of Inst. Pro. & Lib. Services Lower Columbia
Dean of Inst. & Basic Skills
Centralia
English Faculty
Spokane Falls
English Faculty
Highline
Faculty Dev. Coordinator, assessment, tchg & lrng
Dir. Eval. & Assessment
Edmonds
Math faculty
Centralia
Dean of Instruction
Bellingham Tech.
Basic Academic Skills Faculty Bellingham Tech.
Current pre-college education pedagogical practices in Washington Community
and Technical Colleges
Pre-college education can best be described as fragmented in Washington state in a variety
of ways. Many campuses artificially draw hard organizational boundaries between segments
of what should be coherent sequences of reading, writing, and mathematics curriculum.
Pre-college programs could be in any of a variety of administrative units in an institution and
housed either in instruction, student services or learning resources. This fragmentation
extends in some cases to differing workload requirements in faculty contracts for faculty
teaching at the lower ends of the curriculum sequence with the range of 15 classroom hours
a week in some schools to 25 or more classroom hours a week in others. Fragmentation is
also reflected in the high ratio of part-time to full-time faculty teaching in basic skills and
developmental education programs. Some programs only have part-time faculty teaching in
developmental education while others have a small core team of tenured faculty. In many
cases, developmental education is scattered across a range of departments. Sometimes it
can be found in English, math, humanities, learning resources, basic skills, and on occasion
developmental education. This lack of a unified management structure marginalizes both
the program and its students, and it makes significant, sustainable change extremely
challenging.
Colleges are designed to serve a wide variety of communities that are quite different based
on geography, economic base, population size and student and community demographics.
What we find is that pre-college programs are also unique to each college. Some are
running “open-enrollment labs” and others structured lecture classes. There is overlap
across Adult Basic Education and developmental education courses and the courses are
different at each institution in the ways students advance to the next level. Some colleges
have a fairly flat pre-college program with only two courses to move on to college-level, and
other colleges have pathways of courses that could take students a year or more to move
on to college level programming.
Currently there is much innovation at the local level. I-BEST Programs, the Transition Math
Project, Achieving the Dream colleges and those with Developmental IBEST pilots and other
colleges that have taken research and applied it to practice are showing signs of
improvement. While these innovations are often small in scale they show promise and an
active interest of institutions to reform their practices.
II. Summary of findings related to literature, research, and best practices regarding
pedagogy in pre-college education
The most recent SBCTC report available on pre-college education, “The Role of Pre-college
(Developmental and Remedial) Education for Recent High School Graduates Attending
Washington Community and Technical Colleges, System Summary for Students Enrolled in
2008-09, December 2009,” details that fifty-four (54) percent of community and technical college
students who graduated from high school in 2008 took pre-college (also known as remedial)
classes in 2007-08. These students – totaling 13,328 – enrolled in pre-college math(48%),
English(18%) or reading (10%). However, most of the students in pre-college courses (77%) are
older students who have been out of high school for at least three years before enrolling in their
pre-college class. Most of these students failed to take a college preparatory program in high
school.
The 2010-11 Academic Year Report shows that 9.4% of the system total headcount is in precollege and 14.5% in basic skills. The two areas combined account for nearly a quarter of the
system enrollment.
Much national attention has been given precollege education and accelerating community
college student entry into and completion of college. The Community College Research Center
at Teachers College, Columbia University has been conducting extensive research on and
publishing it via the Assessment of Evidence Series. The Developmental Education Initiative
and Achieving the Dream are also working with colleges across the nation to support the
acceleration of students earning college credentials. The Carnegie Foundation for the
Advancement of Teaching released in 2008 a report titled, “Strengthening Pre-College
Education in Community Colleges” that made five important recommendations to colleges.
Research describes most students entering college in need of developmental education failing
to achieve a degree or certificate. Recent research cites the fact that many of these students do
not have a clear goal for college or career and that colleges provide little guidance to help them
successfully navigate the number of programs and opportunities available. As a result, student
course taking behavior is random as they select from a potpourri of classes and often do not
follow their course placement guidelines. In addition, students placing into precollege classes
often experience the courses separately from disciplines they need the skills for to succeed in
college programs. Underprepared students are often instructed by underprepared teachers who
are part of a large adjunct faculty in pre-college education. Since developmental education is
often seen as the poor step-child to transfer programs, colleges have not made the investment
in programs or their instructors. Few colleges have had the opportunity to research and plan
innovations. Those who have, found that success comes from these elements of innovative
programs.
1.) Contextual/Integrated – an instructional approach that creates explicit connections
between teaching reading, writing, or math that is “anchored” in a college-credit content
area.
Model: Washington State I-BEST:
The Community College Research Center recently conducted an evaluation of I-BEST and
found, students participating in I-BEST did better than other basic skills students. I-BEST
students were more likely than others to:
 Continue into credit-bearing coursework
 Earn occupational certificates
 Make point gains on basic skills tests
 I-BEST students had a higher probability of persisting into the second year: 78 percent,
compared to 61 percent for the matched group.
http://www.sbctc.edu/college/e_integratedbasiceducationandskillstraining.aspx
2.) Outcomes-based and accelerated students are awarded credit for the level of learning
outcomes they have mastered and students may move as quickly through programming
as they have the time and inclination to do so; credit is awarded for outcomes achieved
Model: The Community College of Baltimore County’s Accelerated Learning
Program (ALP)
Results suggest that among students who place into the highest level of developmental writing,
participating in ALP is associated with substantially better outcomes in terms of English 101
completion and English 102 completion, the two primary outcomes ALP was designed to
improve. In the sample used in this study, 82% of ALP students passed ENGL 101 within one
year, compared with 69% of non-ALP ENGL 052 students. More than a third (34%) of ALP
students passed ENGL 102, compared with only 12% of the non-ALP ENGL 052 students.
http://ccrc.tc.columbia.edu/Publication.asp?UID=811
3.) Cohort building- students work within a learning community to develop academic
qualifications, professional skills and personal attributes necessary to succeed.
Integrated curriculum exposes students to reading, writing, math, group management
and personal efficacy via academic content. Curriculum focus needs to include
developing critical reading skills. Cohort groups should be developed around a theme
and have supports to help students identify goals and resources they might need to
succeed in college
Model: Academy for College Excellence (ACE) uses cohort building and acceleration to
achieve these results.
Non-Accelerated ACE
Comparison
Students
Group
College Credits Earned
49
37
28
Transfer Credits Earned
25
23
21
Chance of Persisting 1 Semester
95%
88%
80%
Chance of Persisting 2 Semesters
82%
74%
63%
65%
59%
33%
71%
26%
29%
68%
31%
37%
Accelerated ACE Students
Chance of Enrolling Full-Time in Second
Semester
Chance of Passing 1 Level Below
Transfer English
Passing Transfer-Level English
Navarro, D. (2010). Academy for college excellence: How ace works. Retrieved from ACE:
Academy for College Excellence: http://academyforcollegeexcellence.org/how-aceworks/
4.) Modularized- students can work their way through curriculum at their own pace within a
variable credit framework and master learning objectives via incremental assessments
rather that whole course completion.
.
Models: The impact of redesign, including modularization, on student success in nine collegelevel math courses and 13 developmental math courses showed an average improvement of
43% of students passing college level math courses with a C or better and 51% of students
passing math classes with C or better in developmental math courses.
http://www.thencat.org/RedMathematics.htm
5.) Inverted Classroom-- In the inverted classroom students are expected to review
materials that would normally be presented in class, including the lecture, outside of
class time. This frees class time up to focus on discussion, collaborative work, and
engagement with the other activities that are traditionally done outside of class.
Models: University of British Columbia used 850 undergraduate physics students taking a
compulsory physics course. Students were split into two groups at the start and all went to
traditional lecture classes. In the 12th week (they are on semesters), they shifted one group to a
“deliberate practice model, which inverts the traditional university model.” Class time is spent on
problem solving, discussion and group work, while absorption of facts and formulae is left for
homework. They spent time in class in small groups, discussing specific problems, with the
teacher roaming between groups to offer advice and respond to questions. AT the end of the
course all students completed a test. The results showed the traditionally instructed group’s
average score was 41% compared to 74% for the experimental group—even thought the
experimental group did not manage to cover all the material it was supposed to (the traditional
group covered it all).
http://www.economist.com/node/18678925?story_id=18678925
Math 051 – Real World Math 2-- Edmonds Community College’s youth re-engagement program,
EdCAP, in an effort to assist students who had varying math levels complete required OSPI end
of course math tests and earn HS math credit, employed an inverted model through the use of
The Khan Academy, a free dynamic open source technology, as a tool towards re-engagement
in mathematics with a most 'at risk' students in the EdCAP program. This project worked to
create a classroom environment that models the teamwork of a workplace while sharing the
responsibility to become 'evidence based' with the students. Students gather and report data on
a daily basis that details their learning while they compiled evidence to provide a backing for
what their technological reports indicated. It is a portfolio based inverted model where the
students have access to over 2000 lectures, and 130 dynamic exercise sections, covering all of
K-12 Mathematics and Science. Students get immediate feedback regarding accuracy and
proficiency, and can choose to view step by step hints and/or video lectures. Students are
intentionally partnered to check each other's portfolios and present learning on a daily basis. An
Americorps volunteer Student in Service work as a peer mentor and tutor in class. With this
inverted model, the teacher has moved to the role of coach and tutor who provides the map,
motivators, and biweekly checkpoints, and students are able to self place and, to a certain
degree, move at their own speed. Class and individual data is reported to them on a weekly
and biweekly basis, so the team can see where they stand.
Summary :
Based on best practice research, an ideal precollege program would have students start college
from their first developmental quarter in a cohort of students who have similar career or transfer
goals. They would take one level of math and English and a college success course together
their first quarter. The outcomes for the math and English courses would be preparation for
college level work in their goal-area and the courses will be contextualized in their career field or
academic transfer area and integrated with each other. These courses would be accelerated in
the sense that students would have the opportunity to meet those outcomes in one quarter no
matter what their college entry test placement. Students who are unable to meet the outcomes
in one quarter would join a new cohort the next quarter and continue working toward mastery of
their prerequisite skills. The second quarter of these classes will not be repeats as the content
would vary and/or the courses would be entirely modularized. The best of learner-centered
strategies would be used throughout the program. Colleges would have the freedom to
innovate based on their needs and student demographics; however, programs should have as
their base the principles identified in the Carnegie Report of high structure, high challenge,
intensity, intentionality and inquiry and assessment.
Selected References:
Bragg, D.D., Baker, E.D., Puryear, M. (2010) 2010 Follow-up of Community College of Denver
FastStart Program. University of Illinois, Office of Community College research and Leadership.
Carnegie Foundation. (2008) Basic Skills for Complex Lives: Designs for Learning in the
Community College. http://www.carnegiefoundation.org/publications/basic-skills-complex-livesdesigns-learning-community-college
Jenkins, D. (2011) Get with the Program: Accelerating Community College Students’ Entry into
and Completion of Programs of Study. New York, NY: Community College Research center,
Teachers College, Columbia University. http://ccrc.tc.columbia.edu/Publication.asp?UID=885
Jenkins, D. , Speroni, C., Belfield,C., Smith Jaggars, C. & Edgecombe, N. (2010). New York: Community
College Research Center, Teachers College, Columbia University.
http://ccrc.tc.columbia.edu/Publication.asp?UID=811
Navarro, D. (2010). Academy for college excellence: How ace works. Retrieved from ACE:
Academy for College Excellence: http://academyforcollegeexcellence.org/how-aceworks/
Perin, D. (2011). Facilitating Student Learning Through Contextualization. New York, NY:
Community College Research Center, Teachers College, Columbia University.
http://ccrc.tc.columbia.edu/Publication.asp?UID=866
SBCTC Research Report Building Pathways to Success for Low-Skill Adult Students
Lessons for Community College Policy and Practice from a Statewide Longitudinal Tracking
Study, by David Prince and Davis Jenkins, April 2005
http://www.sbctc.edu/docs/education/ford_bridges/bldg_pathways_to_success_for_lowskilled_adult_stdts.pdf
SBCTC Research Report no. 08-1 Increasing Student Achievement for Basic Skills Students
http://www.sbctc.edu/college/education/resh_rpt_08_1_student_achieve_basic_skills.pdf
SBCTC Research Report no. 09-5 http://www.sbctc.edu/docs/data/research_reports/resh095_role_of_pre-college_education.pdf
SBCTC 2010-11 Academic year Report, p13
http://www.sbctc.edu/college/documents/2enroll_0910.1.pdf
Zachary, E , and Schneider, E. (2008) Promising Instructional Reforms in Developmental
Education. MDRC http://www.deionline.org/resources/
III. Recommendations for curriculum reform in pre-college education
Recommendation 1: SBCTC should create a council for pre-college education
reporting to the Instruction Commission
Rationale: Developmental Education is fragmented not just on college campuses but at the
state level as well. No one entity is clearly responsible for pre-college education. Council for
Basic Skills meets the needs of colleges who receive federal Adult Basic Education
Funding, the Articulation and Transfer Council is responsible for arts and sciences and
transfer related programming, the Workforce Education Council focuses on professional
technical programming, and the other councils for their special areas. Developmental
Education needs to have a voice in the system if it is to serve students better and move
more of them to program completion.
Recommendation 2: Colleges need to make student success in Developmental
Education an institution-wide commitment.
Rationale: the work of colleges in the Achieving the Dream program and recommendations
from the Carnegie Foundation point to the fact that it is a college-wide effort that ensures
students stay in school and complete programs. Achieving the Dream program research
shows that colleges successful in retaining pre-college students to program completion will
have an integrated network of support for their students and they achieve this through
ensuring all services and programs are involved in working with pre-college students—
academic, financial aid, social support, security, etc. It solves the challenge that many
developmental programs face of being a step-child to other programs and an afterthought in
the funding allocation. It would allow for the incorporation of other best practices in precollege education from appropriate selection of pre-college faculty through, tutoring, student
programs, curriculum development, student advocacy, institutional effectiveness, and
student transition.
Recommendation 3: Colleges should use Institutional Research to support student
success by analyzing data on student retention and program completion of precollege students.
Rationale: A large number of colleges in the state have completed or are just joining
Achieving the Dream. They have analyzed their own college data to inform practice and
identify barriers to student success. College IR offices could work with the SBCTC research
office and WARP to standardize the way in which data is collected and used for pre-college
program analysis. SAI data could be used for evaluation. .Colleges who have worked with
Achieving the Dream have found data analysis essential to developing appropriate
strategies to move students forward. Using data to evaluate those practices is also essential
to college’s institutional effectiveness and accreditation processes. If you do not have data
to inform decision s and program, we are just groups with opinions
Recommendation 4: Colleges should review their own institution’s research and best
practices for pre-college education and develop programming that moves students
faster into college level programs on a large scale.
Rationale: Each college has its own unique variables and needs to make decisions on best
practices that meets the needs of their student population and community. Referenced
above are best practices that can meet the needs of most institutions. Recently, as part of
this pre-college system taskforce work, innovations in pre-college education were collected.
This information should be disseminated broadly to faculty, staff and administration to
provoke inquiry and thought.
Recommendation 5: SBCTC should provide system-wide professional development
for faculty, student services/advising, and administration in pre-college education.
Rationale: To implement the strategies identified as necessary to achieve student success
in moving to the Tipping Point and beyond, proper design and implementation of
professional development must be in place and include a broad team that includes
instructional as well as student service personnel. Achieving the Dream reminds us that
successful systemic changes are only brought about when the whole campus is involved.
Professional development pathway includes:


Design curriculum content, assessment and delivery
Implement professional development, incorporating hands-on application of Strategies
for Success


Provide ongoing professional development through Faculty Learning Communities and
online resources
Collect data, modify professional development, as needed, to implement identified
modifications to Strategies for Success
Strategies for Success Curriculum:





Underlying Principles:
o Carnegie Principles: high structure, high challenge, intensity, intentionality,
inquiry
Key Precollege Pedagogical Components:
o Contextualization, integration, competency-based/accelerated, cohort-building,
modularization, inverted delivery
Reading Apprenticeship Training and Support
Quality Matters rubrics to evaluate course structure
Accessing, evaluating, adapting, adopting and sharing open resources (particularly
those developed through the Washington Open Course Library project)
Incorporate Strategies for Success content in existing professional development structures:






New Faculty Institute – 2-day, annual
College Readiness Retreats – 2-day, semi-annual
Faculty Learning Communities – ongoing, year-long
eLearning Quality Matters online trainings and workshops – periodical, ongoing
Assessment, Teaching and Learning Conference – 3-day, annual
Adult Basic Education Rendezvous – 2-day, bi-annual
In addition to the above, two new professional development forums will be developed:


Precollege Faculty Institute – a week-long, hands-on training on Strategies for Success;
faculty completing the institute would be prepared to incorporate the strategies in their
own classrooms and teach the strategies to others on their campuses.
First Year “Getting Results” Faculty Cohorts – cohorts use the online “Getting Results”
modules, combined with synchronous discussions via Elluminate (customization of
existing “Getting Results” modules with infusion of Strategies for Success content to be
developed)
Example professional development pathway:
Year One
Academic Year: Faculty are introduced to Strategies for Success as the strategies are
incorporated in the New Faculty Institute. Faculty participate in the First Year “Getting Results”
Cohort where they learn about general instructional principles and practices as well as gaining
further knowledge and skill in the use of Strategies for Success.
Capstone: Faculty attend the Precollege Faculty Academy (late spring or summer)
Year Two
Academic Year: Faculty participate in a Faculty Learning Community focused on specific
Strategies for Success topic (preferably Reading Apprenticeship Training and Support, or
Quality Matters for Year Two and Year Three)
Faculty attend the College Readiness Retreats to learn about new state-wide and national
research, and to confer with colleagues from their own colleges and others across the system.
Capstone: Faculty attend the Assessment, Teaching and Learning Conference, presenting
during the FLC Showcase Poster Session.
Year Three and beyond
Academic Year: Faculty participate in, or facilitate, a Faculty Learning Community focused on a
specific Strategies for Success topic.
Faculty attend (and possibly present) at the College Readiness Retreats to learn about new
state-wide and national research, and to confer with colleagues from their own colleges and
others across the system.
Faculty attend, and present, other ongoing stand-alone trainings, as feasible.
Capstone: Faculty attend (and possibly present) at the Assessment, Teaching and Learning
Conference, or attend (and possibly present) at the ABE Rendezvous.
TIMELINE and COSTS
When
What
Who
Resources –staff
time and
approximate costs
Summer 2011
Develop Strategies for
Success
Curriculum/Modules;
and Train-theTrainers (precollege
faculty/peer
instructors)
Design team:
Precollege faculty,
instructional
designers, faculty
development leads;
prepare faculty to
teach peers
4 full-day planning
sessions
Fall 2011
College Readiness
Retreat; pilot half of
the Strategies for
Success modules
Attendees –
precollege faculty;
facilitators –
precollege
faculty/peer
instructors
Release time for
attendees and
facilitators; travel
costs vary; lodging,
meals and meeting
space at Dumas Bay
Centre, $85/per
person
Fall-Winter 2011-12
Modify, as needed,
modules piloted
Design team
Possible release time
Winter 2012
College Readiness
Retreat; pilot second
half of the Strategies
for Success modules
Attendees –
precollege faculty;
facilitators –
precollege
faculty/peer
instructors
Release time for
attendees and
facilitators; travel
costs vary; lodging,
meals and meeting
space at Dumas Bay
Centre, $85/per
person
Winter-Spring 2012
Modify, as needed,
modules piloted at
Winter College
Readiness Retreat
Design team
Possible release time
Winter - Spring 2012
Pilot Precollege
Faculty Institute
Attendees –
precollege faculty
(25); facilitators design team and
precollege
faculty/peer
instructors (5)
Cost for lodging,
meals, and meeting
space for 30
participants at Dumas
Bay Centre= $13,000
Spring 2012
Assessment,
Teaching and
Learning Conference;
preconference
workshop and
conference sessions
include Strategies for
Success modules
Attendees – primarily
CTC faculty, some
staff; presenters –
precollege
faculty/peer
instructors
Release time for
faculty and
presenters; travel
costs vary;
conference
registration fee is
$150-$200.
Preconference fee is
$50.
Spring 2012
Modify “Getting
Results” curriculum to
include Strategies for
Success
Design team;
eLearning
professional
development
members
Possible release time
Summer 2012
Precollege Faculty
Institute
Attendees –
precollege faculty;
facilitators –
Release time; travel
costs vary; lodging,
meals and meeting
4 week-long sessions
precollege
faculty/peer
instructors
Summer 2012
Adult Basic Education
Rendezvous; include
Strategies for
Success sessions,
possibly preconference workshop
Attendees – ABE and
ESL faculty
Fall 2012
New Faculty Institute;
foundational skills for
all new faculty, and
introduction to
Strategies for
Success
Attendees – all
faculty; facilitators –
select team
Fall 2012 – Spring
2013
Pilot “Getting Results”
cohort for new faculty
Fall 2012 – Spring
2013
Faculty Learning
Communities for
Precollege Faculty;
focused on further
exploration of topics
included in Strategies
for Success,
transitioning students
to college-level work,
and so forth.
Precollege faculty and
others (10-15 in each
FLC)
Ongoing
Collect data to inform
continual
improvement of
professional
development (student
achievement,
persistence,
satisfaction)
Institutional
Researchers and
SBCTC Research
staff
space at Dumas Bay
Centre, $13,000/per
session
Travel costs vary; NFI
registration fee $150
Open resource
curriculum; use
existing system-wide
license for Elluminate
(online conferencing
tool)
$5,000/each FLC