1. Julie Johnson Vice President | Complete College America COMPLETE COLLEGE AMERICA Scaling Corequisite Spanning the Divide jjohnson@completecollege.org

2. Remediation Too many students start college in remediation. 61% in 2-year institution 28% in 4-year, non- flagship institution

3. African Americans, Hispanics and Pell Students are Over Represented 2-year Students 4-year Non-Flagship Students

4. 2-year Students Most are in Math – Far Too Many Require Both Math and English

5. Access to College or Remediation For too many students, a remedial class is their first and their last college experience.

6. The System Does Not Work, Particularly for African Americans Gateway Course Completion in 2 years 2-year college remedial students

7. Few Graduate or Transfer Of 2-year students enrolled in remediation:  11% graduate in 3 years  18% transfer to 4-year institution (with or without a degree) in 4 years

8. 8 Remediation Student attrition is at the heart of the matter…

11. Provide Academic Support as a Corequisite, not a Prerequisite

12. More time on task and help for students when they need it (just in time) The Corequisite Strategy

13. One Semester Redesigned Gateway 13 Gateway Extra Time Mandatory Tutoring Sequenced Paired, proctored labs 45 minutes after class Additional class periods 5-week prep + 10 weeks of gateway content

14. Traditional Remediation Results English Math

15. One Semester Scaled Results 22% Traditional Remediation National Avg for Gateway Course Success English Math

16. Do Corequisite Students Continue to Succeed?

17. One Year later…. 45% 12% Tennessee Board of Regents, 2015

18. What about the lowest level students?

19. Completion of Gateway Math by ACT Sub-score Community College Pre-requisite Model vs. Co-requisite Model

20. Completion of Gateway English by ACT Sub-score Community College Pre-requisite Model vs. Co-requisite Model

21. Are Corequisites Quality Learning Experiences

22. ... students who took a corequisite course were more engaged learners, which means they're more likely to be successful in college Evelyn Waiwaiole, Center for Community College Engagement Inside Higher Ed, 2/23/2016 Corequisite Students are Engaged Learners

23. Corequisite Math Expectations meet Reality: The Underprepared Student and Community Colleges, Center for Community College Engagement, Feb. 2016

24. Math Pathways + Corequisite = Gateway Math Success

25. College Algebra’s Only Purpose: Preparation for Calculus 25 College Algebra Calculus

26. Math Is Aligned with Meta-Majors Quantitative Reasoning/ Statistics

27. Ivy Tech Remedial/Math Placement Post-Math Pathways

28. One Semester Scaled Results 22% Traditional Remediation National Avg for Gateway Course Success English Math

29. Pre-Major Advising Humanities STEM Social Sciences College Algebra Stats Advise and Assess Choose Meta-major Gateway Math in 1 st year Choose Major QR Coreq Major Coreq Major A Model Pathway

30. Corequisite at Scale 5 states have scaled corequisite support. –Colorado, Indiana, Georgia, Tennessee and West Virginia 13 states are developing plans to scale corequisite support. –Central Valley of California, Hawai’I, Illinois, Idaho, Massachusetts, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Ohio, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, West Virginia (4-year institutions), 30

31. Taking Corequisite to Scale  Set a goal to increase the number of students who complete college-level math and English and enter a program of study in one year.  Scale corequisite support for the vast majority of students.  End the use of a single exam to place students into remediation.  Adopt alternative gateway courses to college algebra for programs that don’t require calculus.  Immediately advise new entering students on their choice of program and appropriate college-level courses.

32. ENG 101ALP ALP at CCBC

33. passed ENG 052 3604 65% did not pass ENG 052 1941 35% took ENG 052 Fa07-Fa10 5545 100% took ENG 101 2661 48% took no more writing courses 943 17% passed ENG 052 485 82% didn’t pass ENG 052 107 18% took ENG 052 Fa07-Fa10 592 100% took ENG 101 592 100% took no more writing courses 0 0% traditional developmental students: fall 2007 – fall 2010 ALP students: fall 2007 – fall 2010 data from Cho, Kopko, & Jenkins, 2012 (CCRC)

34. passed ENG 052 3604 65% did not pass ENG 052 1941 35% took ENG 052 Fa07-Fa10 5545 100% took ENG 101 2661 48% took no more writing courses 943 17% passed ENG 052 485 82% didn’t pass ENG 052 107 18% took ENG 052 Fa07-Fa10 592 100% took ENG 101 592 100% took no more writing courses 0 0% traditional developmental students: fall 2007 – fall 2010 ALP students: fall 2007 – fall 2010 data from Cho, Kopko, & Jenkins, 2012 (CCRC) passed ENG 101 Fa07-Fa10 1829 33% didn’t pass ENG 101 Fa07-Fa10 832 15% passed ENG 101 Fa07-Fa10 438 74% didn’t pass ENG 101 Fa07-Fa10 154 26%

35. 10% 15% 20 % 5% traditional dev writing Fall 2008 ALP Fall 2009 Fall 2010 Fall 2011 Fall 2007 24 % N=34 7% N=68 11 % N=149 8% N=288 5% N=549 10 % N=966 6%6% N=1142 5%5% N=1406 5%5% N=1328 3%3% N=1043 Completion Rates (as of March 2015)

37. 5 0% Success Rates for 7 Participating Colleges 7 5% 2 5% comparison cohort ALP cohort 76% 37 % 86% 33 % 73% 3 8% 68% 48 % 94% 3 9% 51% 35 % 82% 47 % A 5-10000 suburbs Midwest B 10-20000 suburbs Midwest C 20000+ urban Southwest D <5000 small town Midwest E <5000 suburbs Southeast F <5000 rural Southeast G 5-10000 small town Mid-Atlantic

38. 200 100 0 1200 1400 80 0 60 0 40 0 Number Taking ALP or Traditional Each Fall Fall 2008 Fall 2011 Fall 2012 Fall 2013 Fall 2007 traditional dev writing ALP Fall 2014 Fall 2009 Fall 2010 Fall 2015 966 1142 1406 1328 1042 884 590 408 687 670 34 68 149 288 550 700 669 587

39. 200 100 0 1200 1400 80 0 60 0 40 0 Number Taking ALP or Traditional Each Fall Fall 2008 Fall 2011 Fall 2012 Fall 2013 Fall 2007 traditional dev writing ALP Fall 2014 Fall 2009 Fall 2010 Fall 2015 1406 1328 1042 884 687 966 1142 34 68 149 288 550 590 408 670 700 669 587

40. 2000 400 0 600 0 3000 8000 700 0 500 0 Analyzing Pass Rates number in cohort 2009-2013 1000 traditional ALP total 5343 7589 2246

41. 2000 400 0 600 0 3000 8000 700 0 500 0 number in cohort 2009-2013 1000 traditional ALP total 5343 number who passed 101 2009-2013 1584 30% 2246 1409 63% 7589 number who would have passed 101 if we had fully scaled up 4781 2993 Analyzing Pass Rates

42. 2000 400 0 600 0 3000 8000 700 0 500 0 number in cohort 2009-2013 1000 traditional ALP total number who passed 101 2009-2013 number who would have passed 101 if we had fully scaled up 4781 2993 1788 3576 Analyzing Pass Rates

43. 26 Boeing 737-700s 137 seats per plane

44. 200 100 0 1200 1400 80 0 60 0 40 0 Number Taking ALP or Traditional Each Fall Fall 2008 Fall 2011 Fall 2012 Fall 2013 Fall 2007 traditional dev writing ALP Fall 2014 Fall 2009 Fall 2010 Fall 2015 966 1142 1406 1328 1042 884 590 408 687 Fall 2016 100% 670 34 68 149 288 550 700 669 587

45. German Vargas Assistant Vice President for Academic Student Engagement Associate Professor of Mathematics Transformation at-scale across the University System of Georgia

46. University System of Georgia 29 institutions 320,000 students 4 Research Universities, 4 Comprehensive Universities, 10 State Universities, 11 State Colleges 6 year graduation rates range from below 30% to 83%

47. Introduction January 2013: The University System of Georgia (USG) establishes a system-wide Task Force on the Role of Mathematics in College Completion Task Force: How to dramatically increase success rates in mathematics gateway courses without compromising the integrity of the mathematical content 8 mathematics faculty from a wide spectrum of institutions, 4 USG specialists. Consultants: Uri Treisman, Jenna Cullinane from Dana Center and Bruce Vandal from CCA

48. Introduction July 2013: In its final report, the Task Force presents 8 recommendations to guide the transformative efforts throughout the system. September 2013: The USG appoints the Ad Hoc Steering Committee to direct the implementation of the recommendations. With a broad representation of faculty from every USG institutional classification, and in conjunction with the Advisory Committee on Mathematical Subjects (ACMS), this committee created an implementation plan to execute the Taskforce recommendations

49. Introduction February 2014: The Ad Hoc Steering Committee finalizes the implementation plan, and the plan is endorsed by the Academic Committee on Mathematical Subjects (ACMS). April 2014: After a series of regional workshops to discuss institutional ideas and concerns, the USG System Office hosts a system-wide Transforming Remediation Symposium. Fall 2014: Some institutions across the USG start ahead of the fall 2015 target for at-scale implementation: Albany State University Bainbridge State College College of Coastal Georgia Georgia Highlands College Gordon State College

50. Recommendation 1 Focus on supporting success in college credit-bearing, gateway mathematics courses for all students. Divert our focus from remediation in lower division courses to enhancing and supporting success in the college credit- bearing courses. Overarching recommendation.

51. Recommendation 2 Align gateway mathematics course sequences with academic programs of study. In particular, College Algebra should not be the default class for non-STEM majors. Two Pathways: STEM (1111) and non-STEM (1101 or 1001) MATH 1111 College Algebra: This course was designed explicitly to develop the algebra skills needed for success in calculus. Students who will not need these specific skills in a later course are usually better served in the other pathway. MATH 1001 Quantitative Reasoning or MATH 1101 Introduction to Mathematical Modeling: Both courses include the analysis of data–centered problems with the intent of developing appropriate mathematical models and communicating results in a clear and effective fashion.

52. Recommendation 3 Implement a co-requisite approach to support student success in gateway mathematics courses. Just-in-time support: "provide students in standard gateway college-credit courses with more learning time and intensive instruction explicitly designed to support mastery of college material as the need arises.“ Support courses aligned separately with STEM and non-STEM gateway courses Implementation Parameters well defined Common course numbering throughout the state Best Practices outlined Course descriptions, Sample Syllabi, and sample curriculum proposals provided to support the implementation at each institution

53. Recommendation 4 Develop year-long mathematics pathways for students with significant gaps in preparation. Year-long Pathways: First term: Foundations course Second term: Gateway + Co-requisite Foundation courses also aligned with STEM and non-STEM gateway courses Implementation Parameters well defined Common course numbering throughout the state Best Practices outlined Detailed course descriptions for each of the new foundation courses, including course content, course outcomes, and student learning objectives. Sample Syllabi, sample curriculum proposals, and sample year-long pathway curricular models (from other states) provided to support the implementation at each institution

54. Recommendation 5 Use multiple measures to place students in gateway courses and appropriate supports. A combination of high school GPA and a standardized test score is a better predictor of student success in a gateway math course than either measure alone Math Placement Index (MPI)

55. Recommendation 8 Develop advising systems and protocols for placing students in gateway mathematics courses and co- requisite supports that align with their intended programs of study Transitioning to the new system of gateway mathematics courses and course support systems demands significant change in long-established traditions of college advising by both faculty and professional staff.

56. Status of Implementation All the recommendation (with the exception of the MPI) have been implemented at-scale throughout the system. Data from the vanguard institutions that started in fall 2014.

57. Status of Implementation At the College of Coastal Georgia:

58. Status of Implementation Performance beyond the gateway courses (CCGA Data):

59. Lessons Learned to Date Importance of the role of faculty in the development of system-wide changes Consensus building from the start Faculty involvement from all types of institutions Used existing faculty advisory committees for implementation Importance of institutional data awareness Create a sense of urgency Contextualize the issues

60. Lessons Learned to Date The corequisite approach may be counterintuitive for some faculty Compare and contrast your internal institutional or state research to national research, and prepare to be challenged. Diagnosis and Treatment

61. Lessons Learned to Date Enlist your innovative and progressive faculty and empower them to be the change agents. Support institutional transformative efforts from the state level. Use structures and protocols from vanguard institutions to propel an at-scale transformation system-wide. Be agile to react and adapt emerging challenges.

62. Resources http://www.usg.edu/educational_access/complete_college _georgia/transforming_remediation http://www.usg.edu/educational_access/complete_college _georgia/transforming_remediation http://www.usg.edu/educational_access/documents/transf orming_remediation/TaskForceMath.pdf http://www.usg.edu/educational_access/documents/transf orming_remediation/TaskForceMath.pdf http://www.usg.edu/educational_access/documents/transf orming_remediation/AdHocSemiFinalMath050214.pdf http://www.usg.edu/educational_access/documents/transf orming_remediation/AdHocSemiFinalMath050214.pdf

63. Questions

64. THE OLD WAY TO NAVIGATE MATH AT OUR COMMUNITY COLLEGE R. Jeffs, Ivy Tech Community College- Muncie, (765) 749-8630

65. MATH015 122 MATH023 63 MATH035 72 MATH040 21 MATH043 32 MATH044 289 MATH050 1,078 MATH080 27 1,704 MATH107 10 MATH110 2 MATH111 708 MATH112 35 MATH115 7 MATH118 605 MATH121 35 MATH131 14 MATH132 2 MATH133 1 MATH135 38 MATH136 207 MATH137 13 1,687 MATH200 6 MATH201 4 MATH211 2 12 NONE 349 Courses Students Enrolled Fall 2011 with 20 Credits or More Have Attempted R. Jeffs, Ivy Tech Community College- Muncie, (765) 749-8630

66. Students Enrolled Fall 2011 With More than 20 Semester Hours and Not Completed Math AttemptedHC% Group% Enrolled* =>20 and <30 1,06228.3%12.1% =>30 and <40 71519.1%8.1% 40 and Greater 1,97552.6%22.5% Total 3,752100.0%42.7% * n = 8,793 R. Jeffs, Ivy Tech Community College- Muncie, (765) 749-8630

67. MATH PATHWAYS IVY TECH COMMUNITY COLLEGE OF INDIANA R. Jeffs, Ivy Tech Community College- Muncie, (765) 749-8630

68. Changing From Pre to Co-Req Model MATH COURSE SECTIONS SPRING SEMESTER 201130 DEVELOPEMENTAL COURSESTOTAL SECTIONS IN SYSTEM MATH015426 MATH023308 GATEWAY COURSES MATH118 (to be 123-QR)675 NEW 118 (to be 123-QR)426 TOTAL GATEWAY NEEDED1101 R. Jeffs, Ivy Tech Community College- Muncie, (765) 749-8630

69. COMPLETE COLLEGE AMERICA (CCA) DEFINITION Enrolling developmental education students in remedial and college-level courses in the same subject at the same time. Students receive targeted support to help boost their understanding and learning of the college-level course material. R. Jeffs, Ivy Tech Community College- Muncie, (765) 749-8630

70. INDIANA COMMUNITY COLLEGE DEFINITION Co-requisite means that two courses are offered in the same semester and through the deliberate, coordinated efforts of the faculty the sequence, objectives and assessments are linked to enhance student success R. Jeffs, Ivy Tech Community College- Muncie, (765) 749-8630

71. Course Scheduling and Delivery The pair of courses, Math 080 and 123, is offered in the following formats. In each case faculty work in a team. They communicate between meetings to fine tune curriculum, evaluate student success and focus instruction. Fall and Winter Days- The courses are scheduled to meet twice a week with Math 080 scheduled immediately before or after the Math 123 course. Fall and Winter Nights- The courses are scheduled to meet once a week with Math 080 scheduled earlier in the week than the Math 123 course. Regions that scheduled sections for both classes on two nights perceived that they penalized students not in the co-req making them come two nights a week for one class and losing the opportunity to enroll in another program course. R. Jeffs, Ivy Tech Community College- Muncie, (765) 749-8630

72. Course Scheduling and Delivery Summer Days- During an 8 week summer session, Math 080 is scheduled to meet on Monday and Wednesday with Math 123 offered on Tuesday and Thursday. All four class meetings start and finish at the same time on each day. Summer Nights- The co-req has not been offered on summer nights because it would require 3 or 4 nights a week. Students have not embraced attending that many nights a week. R. Jeffs, Ivy Tech Community College- Muncie, (765) 749-8630

73. Course Scheduling and Delivery Online- Because success in online courses has not been evidenced for 000 level courses the co-req does not have an online option. R. Jeffs, Ivy Tech Community College- Muncie, (765) 749-8630

74. Section Numbers Currently there are three section numbers associated with a single co-req pair. They are: Math 080 61f The co-req section with a cap of 15 students Math 123 61f The remediation gateway course with a cap of 15 students Math 123 10f The regular gateway section with a cap of 15 students The two 61f sections above have the same 15 students. A student cannot enroll in one without the other. The 10f section will allow students that have the pre-requisite or Accuplacer score to enroll. Regions may set the number of students in the Math 118 regular section. At this time we are manually combining the 61f and 10f sections just before classes start and are seeking an automatic way for this step. R. Jeffs, Ivy Tech Community College- Muncie, (765) 749-8630

75. Faculty Faculty teaching the gateway course are required to be SLAS Mathematics credentialed. The faculty teaching the Math 080 course may be an developmental math credentialed and experienced person. When scheduling the instructors consideration should be made to allow the paired instructors meeting time and the ability to visit each other's classes. R. Jeffs, Ivy Tech Community College- Muncie, (765) 749-8630

76. Faculty Development To enhance the success of students, faculty will be afforded professional development opportunities that will include: Team building for the paired faculty, Content knowledge, Technology, and Pedagogy R. Jeffs, Ivy Tech Community College- Muncie, (765) 749-8630

77. Students Registration If students do not meet the 100 level assessment or pre-requisite and qualify for the co-req options, they must enroll in both the 000 and 100 level class. If they drop a zero level course, they are no longer eligible to remain enrolled in the college level course. R. Jeffs, Ivy Tech Community College- Muncie, (765) 749-8630

78. Staff Development Staff in student services and in supporting areas to understand the significance of this project students and the College will receive professional development that will include changes in: Computer Advising policies, Curriculum, and Pedagogy. R. Jeffs, Ivy Tech Community College- Muncie, (765) 749-8630

79. CURRICULUM The corequisite course should support and coordinate with the college level gateway course to provide “just in time” remediation. The gateway level course should provide students with the same experience as non-co-requisite sections of the same course. The gateway course should maintain the same depth, rigor, and expectations as all other sections of that course. Pacing of the course particularly for topics that require mastery of prerequisite skills and calendar adjustments should be made by participating faculty to allow time to remediate these skills. R. Jeffs, Ivy Tech Community College- Muncie, (765) 749-8630

80. Textbook There is only one textbook used by the coreq and gateway course. If it is used there is only one MyMathLab code required. R. Jeffs, Ivy Tech Community College- Muncie, (765) 749-8630

81. Pedagogy Demonstrations and group projects provide the content in the gateway course. Faculty in the coreq course respond to student questions, remediate weaknesses, guide social learning. Questions answered Multiple representations Self corrections of tests Immediate feedback R. Jeffs, Ivy Tech Community College- Muncie, (765) 749-8630

82. RESULTS See attached.pdf R. Jeffs, Ivy Tech Community College- Muncie, (765) 749-8630