1. Dissertation RESULTS by Erin E. Cooper
The Effectiveness of Developmental Education: A Review of Success and Persistence in Gateway Math and English Courses
Dissertation RESULTS by Erin E. Cooper

2. Developmental Education
What Developmental Education is:
Developmental education prepares students to be “college ready” in basic academic skills, such as reading, writing, and math.
Holistic Approach
Incorporates Additional Support
What Developmental Education is NOT:
Simply a remedial class…………….
Designed to make students better than “college ready”;;;………;;;;;;;;;;;
Comparable data because the two groups are inherently different.

3. Developmental Education
Developmental education is not a new concept.
1600s to 1700s: Tutoring
1700s to Mid 1800s: Preparatory Schools
Mid 1800s to Mid 1900s: Fully Integrated
Mid 1990s to Present: Criticisms

4. Developmental Education
Approximately 97% of all public, two year colleges in the U.S. offer developmental coursework (Trenholm, 2006).
About 42% of first-year undergraduates at a two year public institution enroll in at least one remedial (developmental) course throughout their time in college (Clotfelter, Ladd, Muschkin, & Vigdor, 2015).
Current research indicates that students who enroll in developmental coursework have higher drop-out rates and are less likely to persist to graduation (Bailey, Jaggars, & Jenkins, 2015; Belfield & Crosta, 2012; Clotfelter, Ladd, Muschkin, & Vigdor, 2015; Parsad & Lewis, 2003).

5. Changes to Developmental Education in North Carolina
From 2009 – 2015, the North Carolina Community College System worked towards improving a variety of programs to increase success and graduation which included developmental education.
Completion by Design
Achieving the Dream
Dev Ed Initiative Team (Nationwide)
DEI State Policy Council (NC)
NCCCSO established a State Advisory Board
NCCCSO Core State Policy Team
Fall 2011: Traditional Developmental Courses
Developmental Math
Developmental English
Developmental Reading
Spring 2012 – Fall 2014: Redesign
Spring 2012 – Fall 2013: Math
Fall 2012 – Fall 2014: English and Reading
Spring 2013 – Fall 2016: Multiple Measures Placement Policy
Incoming students placement based on High School GPA
Fall 2016: Full Implementation
Developmental Redesign
Multiple Measure Placement Policy

6. Changes to Developmental Education in North Carolina
The three main changes to developmental education include the following:
Developmental Math Redesign
Accelerated, Modularized, Mastery, Independent
Developmental Reading and English Redesign
Combined, Accelerated, Mastery
Multiple Measures Placement Policy
HS GPA primary placement
Fall 2011: Traditional Developmental Courses
Developmental Math
Developmental English
Developmental Reading
Spring 2012 – Fall 2014: Redesign
Spring 2012 – Fall 2013: Math
Fall 2012 – Fall 2014: English and Reading
Spring 2013 – Fall 2016: Multiple Measures Placement Policy
Incoming students placement based on High School GPA
Fall 2016: Full Implementation
Developmental Redesign
Multiple Measure Placement Policy

7. The research questions
In order to gain a better understanding of the Developmental Education initiatives in North Carolina, success rates, persistence rates, and demographic characteristics were examined for students who are currently enrolled in gateway English and math courses.
Using Student Departure Theory (Tinto, 2012) as a lens, this study sought to answer the following research questions:
Did traditional pathways or new pathways lead to greater success in gateway math and English courses?
Did traditional pathways or new pathways have an impact on persistence rates?
Did demographic characteristics impact the success of students enrolled in gateway math and English courses through Multiple Measures placement?

8. The research participants
Five community colleges in North Carolina were able to participate in the study.
Student records that were eliminated included those that did not take gateway English or math during their first year.
Records were separated into two distinct cohorts.
In total, 3,689 student records were collected.
31% Western Region; 33% Central Region; 26% Eastern Region
59% Female; 41% Male
51% Financial Aid; 34% No Financial Aid; 14% Unknown
63% Fall-to-Fall Enrollment; 7% Did not Enroll; 30% Unknown

9. The research participants
Cohort 1
Cohort 2
Region
n = 603 (C)
n = 518 (E)
n = 514 (W)
n = 607 (C)
n = 829 (E)
n = 618 (W)
Age
n = 138 < 18yrs
n = 1497 ≥ 18yrs
n = 461 < 18yrs
n = 1593 ≥ 18yrs
Gender
n = 974 (F)
n = 661 (M)
n = 1188 (F)
n = 865 (M)
Financial Aid
n = 901 (Y)
n = 567 (N)
n = 167 (UNK)
n = 993 (Y)
n = 703 (N)
n = 358 (UNK)
Income
n = 607 < $25,000
n = 695 ≥ $25,000
n = 333 (UNK)
n = 606 < $25,000
n = 786 ≥ $25,000
n = 661 (UNK)

10. The research participants
Cohort 1
Cohort 2
Race/Ethnicity
n = 21(AI) n = 17(AP) n = 184 (BLK) n = 74 (HIS) n = 218 (OTR) n = 1120 (WHT)
n = 40 (AI) n = 18 (AP) n = 368 (BLK) n = 164 (HIS) n = 128 (OTR) n = 1338 (WHT)
First Generation Status
n = 530 (Y) n = 108 (N) n = 997 (UNK)
n = 401 (Y) n = 409 (N) n = 1244 (UNK)
Course Load
n = 1028 (FT) n = 607 (PT)
n = 1234 (FT) n = 820 (PT)
Fall-Spring
n = 1421 (Y) n = 215 (N)
n = 1648 (Y) n = 406 (N)
Fall-Fall
n = 1021 (Y) n = 614 (N)
n = 1309 (Y) n = 745 (N)

11. The research study
This study used a non-experimental, causal-comparative research design
Assessed the Following Components:
Traditional vs. New Pathways
Final Grades in Gateway Courses
Fall-to-Fall Enrollment
Demographic Characteristics
Each research question used different statistical procedures
Question 1: One-way ANOVA
Question 2: Chi-Square
Question 3: Binary Logistics Regression

12. The research study per question
Did traditional pathways or new pathways lead to greater success in gateway math and English courses?
Quality Points in Math by Math Placement
Quality Points in Math by Cohort
Quality Points in English by English Placement
Quality Points in English by Cohort
Did traditional pathways or new pathways have an impact on persistence rates?
Persistence by Cohort
Persistence by Math Placement
Persistence by English Placement
Did demographic characteristics impact the success of students enrolled in gateway math and English courses through Multiple Measures placement?
Success in Math and English by Age, Gender, Federal Financial Aid, First Generation, Ethnicity, Region, Course Load, and Income

13. Did traditional pathways or new pathways lead to greater success in gateway math and English courses?

14. Results: Question 1
Question 1: Did traditional pathways or new pathways lead to greater success in gateway math and English courses?
Math Grade by Math Placement (Dev Ed or MM) was not significant.
Math Grade by Cohort (Traditional or New) was not significant.
English Grade by English Placement (Dev Ed or MM) was significant at the p <.05 level [F(1,1237) = , p = .000].
English Grade by Cohort (Traditional or New) was not significant.
Cohort  
Mean Quality Points
Cohort 1
DEV Math
DEV English
3.00
2.71
Cohort 2
MM Math
MM English
2.64
2.62
2.43
2.91

15. Analysis of results: Question 1
Success in Math
Results indicate that neither the developmental redesign nor Multiple Measures Placement Policy made students more successful.
Results indicate that the combination of the new placement methods and the new redesign are not making students more successful than the traditional pathways.
Success in English
Results indicate that students who placed into English 111 through Multiple Measures were more successful than those who placed through developmental courses at the p <.05 level [F(1,1237) = , p = .000] but the redesigned developmental students are doing worse.

16. Did traditional pathways or new pathways have an impact on persistence rates?

17. Did traditional pathways or new pathways have an impact on persistence rates?

18. Did traditional pathways or new pathways have an impact on persistence rates?

19. Did traditional pathways or new pathways have an impact on persistence rates?

20. Results: Question 2
Question 2: Did traditional pathways or new pathways have an impact on persistence rates?
Persistence rates by cohort (Traditional vs New) was not significant.
Persistence rates by Math Placement (Dev Ed or MM) was not significant.
Persistence rates by English Placement (Dev Ed or MM) was not significant.
Persistence
Cohort
Yes No
Total
Cohort 1
1021
(62.5%)
614
(37.5%)
1635
(100.0%)
Cohort 2
1309
(63.7%)
745
(36.3%)
2054
1358
(63.2%)
2330
(36.8%)
3689

21. Analysis of results: question 2
The results indicated that there was no significant difference in persistence from fall-to-fall enrollment based on cohort year.
This means that out of the sample colleges, retention has not increased regardless of the redesign or any placement method (included all student records, not just Dev Ed and MM).
Additionally, there was no significant difference in persistence based how students were placed into a gateway math or English.

22. Did demographic characteristics impact the success of students enrolled in gateway math and English courses through Multiple Measures placement?
MATH SUCCESS GROUP
ENGLISH SUCCESS GROUP
STUDENTS THAT DID NOT RECEIVE FIN AID WERE 1.75 TIMES MORE LIKELY TO BE IN THE SUCCESS GROUP THAN THOSE WHO DID
STUDENTS WHO WERE WHITE WERE 2.58 TIMES MORE LIKELY TO BE IN THE SUCCESS GROUP THAN THOSE WHO WERE AFRICAN AMERICAN

23. Results and analysis: Question 3
Did demographic characteristics impact the success of students enrolled in gateway math and English courses through Multiple Measures placement?
Success in Gateway Math Courses
Students who do not receive federal financial aid were 1.75 times more likely to be in the predicted success group than those who do receive federal financial aid.
Success in Gateway English 111
Students who were white were 2.58 times more likely to be in the predicted success group than students who were African American.

24. So, in general the results show:
Developmental math students are not more successful in gateway classes than they were before.
Developmental English students are not more successful in gateway classes than before; however, Multiple Measures students are doing better than the redesigned developmental education students.
Persistence has not improved, regardless of placement method.
Persistence is not better for Multiple Measures students or developmental education students.

25. So, in general the results ALSO show:
Certain demographic characteristics are notable in Multiple Measures students, which include the following:
Financial aid status impacted success in gateway math courses.
Race/ethnicity impacted success in gateway English courses.

26. Resources Cited in this presentation
Bailey, T.R., Jaggars, S.S., & Jenkins, D. (2015). Redesigning college for student success. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.
Belfield, C. R., & Crosta, P. M. (2012). Predicting success in college: The importance of placement tests and high school transcripts (CCRC Working Paper No. 42). New York, NY: Columbia University.
Clotfelter, C. T., Ladd, H. F., Muschkin, C., & Vigdor, J. L. (2015). Developmental education in North Carolina community colleges. Education Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 37(3),
Parsad, B., & Lewis, L. (2003). Remedial education at degree-granting postsecondary institutions in fall 2000 (NCES ). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences.
Tinto, V. (2012). Completing college: Rethinking institutional action. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press, Ltd.
Trenholm, S. (2006). A study on the efficacy of computer-mediated developmental math instruction for traditional community college students. Research & Teaching in Developmental Education, 22(2),

27. Questions