Nevada's Gateway Course Success Initiative: Policy Development and Corequisite Mandate

1. Nevada’s Gateway Course Success Initiative Crystal Abba, Vice Chancellor for Academic and Student Affairs Theo Meek, Research Scholar

2. Today’s Presentation • Part 1: Gateway Course Success • Policy Development • Implementation/Action Plans • Setting Enrollment Benchmarks • Evaluating Year 1 Outcomes • Part 2: Corequisite Mandate • Traditional Remediation Policy Paper • Policy Development

3. Part 1: The Gateway Policy

4. Policy Development: How it All Started • Driven by Data • Completion of gateway mathematics courses and student success • Are students on track to meet gateway requirements • Impact of remediation on completing the gateway mathematics within one year of enrollment • 2014 NSHE Gateway Mathematics Summit • Faculty Task Force developed policy recommendation • Clear objective based on data – increase the number of students that complete the gateway mathematics course within the first year of enrollment • Charles A. Dana Center/Complete College America • Support and guidance • Action plan review • Sounding board

5. The Driving Factor: Data Timely completion of gateway mathematics courses correlates with students persistence and degree completion

6. Magnitude of the Problem Too many students do not enroll in any math course in their first year

7. The Policy (Adopted June 2015) • Degree-seeking students that place below college level, but are at least high school ready, must be placed on a pathway for gateway course completion (English and mathematics) within the first year of enrollment • Exception for students in a STEM program– three-semester sequence permissible • All degree-seeking students must be continuously enrolled in the appropriate mathematics and English courses until the institutional core curriculum mathematics and English requirements are completed

8. Setting Enrollment Benchmarks • Estimate Cohort Size (denominator) • Estimate the Number of Students Enrolled (numerator) • Historical Data Considerations • Understanding the Cohort (first-time, degree-seeking students)

9. Setting Enrollment Benchmarks Benchmarks – 4 Year Institutions Historical Benchmark

10. Setting Enrollment Benchmarks Benchmarks – 2 Year Institutions Historical Benchmark

11. Institutional Approaches • Believed in the data and changed culture • Claimed to believe in the data but did not change culture • Complacent participants

12. Game Playing – Increasing the Numerator • Non-traditional gateway courses • Embedded curriculum • Certificates with no math requirement (ex., CNA) • Dual enrolled students excluded (with the exception of Jump Start) Losing Control: Student Success versus Data Outcomes

13. Setting Enrollment Benchmarks Benchmark vs. Actual for Year One UNLV Cohort: 3,200 103 students OVER benchmark • CSN • Cohort: 4,225 • 92 students OVER benchmark • TMCC • Cohort: 1,259 • 63 students SHORT of benchmark

14. College Level Completions By First Term Enrollment Levels Credit Load Matters!

15. Part 2: Corequisite Mandate

16. The Policy Paper • National look at trends of remediation • System-wide review of traditional remediation challenges • Too many students start in remediation • Too few successfully complete their remediation sequences • Too few complete gateway courses • Too few graduate • Successful corequisite scaling in Tennessee • Corequisite models within NSHE

17. A Nationwide Concern Brought Home • Within NSHE… • Placement rates are comparable • 67% of community college students • 27% of state & university students • Too many ethnic minorities are enrolled • 56% of Black students enroll in remediation • 45% of Hispanic students enroll into remediation • Degree completion rates are lower • 8% of students who place into remediation will graduate • Nationally… • Placement rates are high • 68% of community college students • 40% of public, four-year students • Too many ethnic minorities are enrolled • 56% of Black students enroll in remediation • 45% of Hispanic students enroll into remediation • Degree completion rates are low • Less than 10% of students who place into remediation will graduate Source: National Center for Education Statistics (2016) Source: NSHE Student Data Warehouse, Fall 2015 and 2016 Gateway Cohort

18. Mass Placement into Remediation Source: NSHE Student Data Warehouse, Fall 2016 Gateway Cohort

19. First Math Enrollment Source: NSHE Student Data Warehouse, Fall 2016 Gateway Cohort

20. Remediation Hinders Degree Completion Source: NSHE Student Data Warehouse, Fall 2014-15 Gateway Cohorts

21. Overrepresentation of Minority Populations National Data NSHE Data Source: NSHE Student Data Warehouse, Fall 2016 Gateway Cohort Source: Complete College America, “Corequisite Remediation: Spanning the Completion Divide”

22. Underprepared or Under Placed? Source: Tennessee Board of Regents, Denley 2016

23. NSHE Math Pathways are Long and Complex Institutions requiring high stakes placement exams have no guarantee of progression.

24. The Case for Corequisite Remediation • Corequisite Remediation at UNR • MATH 126E: Pre-Calculus Expanded (5 credits) • MATH 96D (2 credits) + • MATH 126E (3 credits) • MATH 120E: College Mathematics Expanded (4 credits) • MATH 96A (1 credits) + • MATH 120E (3 credits)

25. Conclusion • Traditional remediation is not working • Too many start in remediation and are unsuccessful in completing their gateway course • Psychological challenges and long pathways to gateway course completion • Closing the achievement gap starts with reinventing remediation • Corequisite remediation results in much higher student success outcomes • Placing students in a college-level course where academic support is provided just-in-time as students need it better facilitates long term student success • Success at UNR and NSC as well as nationwide support corequisite remediation • Regardless of academic preparation, success levels are higher for students in corequisite remediation • Even students at the lowest level of academic preparedness perform better in corequisite models

26. The Proposed Policy: Gateway 2.0 • Mandate corequisite remediation • Effectively eliminating traditional remedial pathways • Eliminate mandatory placement tests when used during course progression • Upper limit of corequisite remediation: 6 credits TOTAL • Maintain continuous enrollment • Reporting requirement to Board of Regents

27. Questions? Crystal Abba Vice Chancellor Nevada System of Higher Education cabba@nshe.nevada.edu Theo Meek Research Scholar Nevada System of Higher Education tmeek@nshe.nevada.edu