1 / 12

Preparing Underprepared Students for Success: A Collaborative Response to a Legislative Challenge

Preparing Underprepared Students for Success: A Collaborative Response to a Legislative Challenge James Gentile Ken Klucznik Manchester Community College, Manchester CT. Public Higher Education In Connecticut. From This:

luana
Download Presentation

Preparing Underprepared Students for Success: A Collaborative Response to a Legislative Challenge

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Preparing Underprepared Students for Success: A Collaborative Response to a Legislative Challenge James Gentile Ken Klucznik Manchester Community College, Manchester CT

  2. Public Higher Education In Connecticut From This: • University of Connecticut • Four State Universities • Twelve Community Colleges • Charter Oak College (online) • Each with its own administration, budget, support staff, faculty, and curriculum • Each with unique service areas (rather than curricular or vocational focuses) • CSUs and CCs with Chancellors and for CCs, President and Dean Councils

  3. To This: ConnSCU 12 community colleges 4 state universities (not University of Connecticut) online state university under a common Board of Regents

  4. PA 12-40: An Act Concerning College Readiness and Completion [N]o public institution of higher education shall offer any remedial support, including remedial courses, that is not embedded with the corresponding entry level course. . . . . . . except such institution may offer a student a maximum of one semester of remedial support that is not embedded. [I]f a public institution of higher education determines . . . that a student is below the skill level required for success in college level work, the public institution of higher education shall offer such student the opportunity to participate in an intensive college readiness program before the start of the next semester.

  5. Interpretation of Law Tiered System of Instruction In response to Public Act 12-40, the Connecticut State Colleges and Universities (ConnSCU) faculty is re-designing developmental education using a tiered system of instruction with three levels as described below. College Level College-level instruction; a course numbered 100 or higher Embedded Level College-level instruction with embedded developmental support designed for students with 12th grade skills (or close to that) who are approaching college readiness but require some remediation; college-level components must be numbered 100 or higher. Intensive Level A single semester of developmental education or an intensive readiness experience for students below the 12th grade level; if structured as a course, must be numbered below 100. In addition, institutions have joined together in four regional groups to devise strategies to address students who demonstrate significant gaps in skills levels or are unsuccessful in an initial attempt in an intensive-level offering. Transitional Strategies Strategies for students with eighth grade skill levels or below developed by groups from colleges and universities in each geographical region of the state. http://www.ct.edu/initiatives/dev-education

  6. Student Needs Pre PA 12-49 (MCC) Post PA 12-40 (MCC) One developmental course with outcomes leading to 101 (college-level 3 credits) 003 (3 hours) 066 (6 hours)  093 (3 hours)  101 (college-level 3 credits)

  7. 2012-2013 College Access Challenge Grant ConnSCU Remediation Redesign Support Outcomes • Created outcomes for a 6 credit developmental course • Created (identical) outcomes for Composition and Composition with embedded support • Proposed multiple measures for placement • Exchanged ideas on embedded models through meetings and a conference

  8. Faculty General Consensus • CCs reached consensus on outcomes and placement • Several CCs wanted to maintain autonomy on delivery methods due to • low-performing student populations • different philosophies (reading and writing split) • their institutions academic cultural norms and scheduling needs

  9. Administration Ambivalence • Approved of consensus on outcomes • Concerns over scalability • Financial impact • Enrollment impact • Faculty work-load • Dependence on part-time faculty

  10. Shared Concerns • Change in Mission • Distinct College Demographics and Student Needs • Distinct College Departmental Philosophies, Structures, and Resources • Elimination of developmental sequence  Less time to remediate significant deficiencies • Impact on prerequisites across the college—degree of student preparedness for college coursework • Scalability (Scheduling, Costs, Full-time Faculty Workload, Part-time Faculty Dependence)

  11. Positive Outcomes • Reflects cross-campus consensus on significant placement, curriculum, and assessment issues • Develops possibility for seamless transfer of developmental work across campuses • Emphasizes reading-writing connection • Accelerates student movement into college-level work • Provides individualized instruction / Provides reinforcement gauged to student needs • Creates an atmosphere of support and engenders confidence

More Related