Successful Acceleration: Models and Data Lisa Bernhagen lbernhagen@highline Wendy Swyt

1. Successful Acceleration: Models and Data Lisa Bernhagen lbernhagen@highline.edu Wendy Swyt wswyt@highline.edu Highline Community College

2. What problems does acceleration address? • High attrition before students get to college level • The college’s need to increase SAI points for students earning 15 college-level credits in one year • Unreliable placement scores that place students too low

3. National Data on the Pipeline EffectStudents taking Remedial Reading coursesFrom Referral, Enrollment, and Completion in Developmental Education Sequences in CommunityColleges (CCRC Working Paper No. 15). By: Thomas Bailey, Dong WookJeong & Sung-Woo Cho.December 2008. New York: Community College Research Center, Teachers College, ColumbiaUniversity. (Revised November 2009).

4. …students who are referred to developmental courses two or three steps below college-level rarely complete introductory college courses and are even less likely to complete degrees. Bailey, Thomas. (February 2009). Rethinking Developmental Education. CCRC Brief. Community College Research Center. Teachers College, Columbia University.

5. Our pipeline

6. Exit Points… • Will the student pass English 71? • Will the student go on to English 81? • Will the student pass English 81? • Will the student go on to English 91? • Will the student pass English 91? • Will the student go on to English 101? • Will the student pass English 101?  More exit points = less chance of a student making it to and through English 101.

7. Bailey’s recommendation: Abandon the dichotomy between developmental and college-ready students for a wide range of students above and below current developmental cutoff scores by opening college level courses to more students and by incorporating academic support assistance into college level courses. Bailey, Thomas. (February 2009). Rethinking Developmental Education. CCRC Brief. Community College Research Center. Teachers College, Columbia University

8. Acceleration Models: Ways to Shorten the Pipeline • Mainstreaming • Place students directly into college level with support (Baltimore, HCC) • By-pass deved courses • bridge courses, high school transcript placement, placement prep/retake (Seattle CC and Highline) • Compression • Offer content of two courses compressed into one quarter • Curricular redesign • Change sequence and structure (TCC, Chabot) • Embedded learning • Deved courses linked to college level “content”, I-BEST

9. Accelerated Learning Project (ALP)Community College of Baltimore County • Students placing into the course below College English are mainstreamed into a College English class. • In each ALP section, there are 8 “deved” students with 12 “regular” English 101 students. • Rather than taking English 101 as 3 credits (on a semester system), the “deved” students enroll for 5 credits. • The 8 students meet separately with the same instructor in support course each week (2 credits). • Completion statistics for college level English • Non-accelerated sequence: 40% • Accelerated course: 75%

10. Chabot Community College: Open Access Developmental English • At Chabot College in California, any student scoring below college level English on their placement exam (Accuplacer) can take an accelerated four credit pre-college course instead of the traditional 8-credit two semester sequence. • “Open Access” college prep • Completion statistics for college level English • Non-accelerated sequence: 28-34% • Accelerated course: 52-57%

11. Highline CC: What we are doing • English 101 combined with extra support in 10-credit course. • Though students get 10 credits and a grade in 101 and 91 at the end, this is not a compression model. • Students work on English 101 assignments and readings • Support time is used for just-in-time remediation: what do students need to do the readings and assignments? • Completion statistics for college level English • Non-accelerated sequence: 56% • Accelerated course: 79%

12. Acceleration: Big ideas • High challenge, high support. • Meaningful and integrated with college content • Outcomes measure college-readiness, not next-step readiness. • Acceleration doesn’t mean “faster”; it means deeper and better learning.

13. The Data… • All the acceleration models have data that show students moving more effectively to the college level. • What is happening to create this success?

14. Out of every 100 students … • 90 retained in 091 • LOSE 10% in attrition • 79 pass 091 (2.0+) • 67 enroll in 101 within 3 years • LOSE 15% in the pipeline • 60 retained in 101 • LOSE 10% in attrition • 56 pass 101 (2.0+) Office of Institutional Research, x3205 7/31/2012

15. Accelerated Pedagogy:Eng 101 with support (10 credits; one quarter). • 92 retained in 101 with support • 83 pass the support (2.0+) • 79pass Engl 101 (2.0+) • LOSE 8 % in attrition Office of Institutional Research, x3205 7/31/2012

16. Traditional Acceleration • 100 start in Eng 101 with support • 100 start in English 91 • 41% increase in the college course pass rate (23 percentage points). • 56 pass Eng 101 (2.0+) • 79pass Eng 101 (2.0+) Modified 10/10/12 from the Office of Institutional Research, created 7/31/2012

17. What we want you to leave with… • It doesn’t matter how successful individual developmental courses are; we must shorten the pipeline. • Acceleration takes many forms. Each institution must work with their structures, advantages, and challenges to develop what works. • Acceleration is not tied primarily to a curriculum “model”; pedagogy must also be accelerated. We need to consciously and intentionally work against placement and traditional textbooks, both of which limit developmental curriculum and do not effectively address college readiness.