Affirmation
and Discovery: Learning from Successful
Community College Developmental Programs in
By Hunter R. Boylan & D. Patrick Saxon
Introduction
The State of
In 1987 the state legislature established the Texas Academic Skills Program, probably the most advanced developmental education system in the country at that time. This program required that:
Along
with these features, the TASP also included comprehensive reporting, data
collection, analysis, and feedback procedures.
At each campus a “TASP Liaison” officer was appointed who monitored
student performance and insured that the campus program complied with state
requirements.
The TASP remained in effect until 2003 when it
was eliminated by the Texas Legislature.
At that time, the TASP was replaced by the Texas Success Initiative, a
program requiring all
In addition to providing courses and
services, the evaluation of developmental education has also been a priority in
It has now been seven years since
the last external study of
The purpose of the study was
threefold:
·
to
affirm best practices in
·
to
discover promising practices in
·
to
learn how assessment and placement is done at community colleges that have been
successful in developmental education.
These purposes are consistent with the title of
this report “Affirmation and discovery: Learning from successful community
college developmental education programs in
Section Two
For the time period
under consideration (2000-2003), the measure most commonly used by the State of
Institutions were selected
to include rural, urban, and suburban colleges and both community and technical
colleges. The major ethnic groups represented
in the study included White, African-American, and Latino.
Using data from the
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, 10 institutions were selected with
the highest post-developmental education TASP pass rates generally and by
subject area. A tally was then compiled
to determine the number of times a particular institution appeared on the list
from 1999 to 2003. This is shown in
Table 1.
|
Table 1 Tally of Institutions |
|
|
Institution |
Tally |
|
Lamar Institute of Technology |
6 |
|
South Plains College |
5 |
|
Wharton County Junior College |
4 |
|
Alamo CCD NW Vista College |
4 |
|
Grayson County College |
4 |
|
North Central Texas College |
4 |
|
Temple College |
4 |
|
Weatherford College |
4 |
|
Texarkana College |
4 |
|
Midland College |
4 |
For the institutions
that were represented more frequently, a final list was selected based on considerations
such as location, size, and student ethnic diversity. Given these criteria, the following
institutions were selected: Lamar
Institute of Technology (Beaumont), Northwest Vista College (San Antonio),
South Plains College (Levelland), Temple College (Temple), and Texarkana
College (Texarkana).[1] A detailed discussion of each institution’s
inclusion in the study follows.
Lamar Institute of Technology
Lamar
Institute of Technology ranked seventh in 2001, twelfth in 2002, and fifth in
2003 in first year TASP completions following remediation. They also ranked fifth in writing, seventh in
mathematics, and seventh overall in TASP retake attempt pass rates for the
academic year 1999-2000.
The College has a technical mission focus and represents the eastern most section of the state. Forty-four percent of the students enrolled at Lamar Institute of Technology are ethnic minorities.
Northwest Vista College
This institution is
a comprehensive community college located in southern Texas. It was designated as urban because it is
located within the San Antonio City Limits.
Fifty-three percent of those attending Northwest Vista are ethnic
minorities.
South Plains College
South Plains College
ranked 11th in 2002 and 9th in 2003 in first year TASP
completions following remediation. It
ranked ninth in writing, sixth in mathematics, and fifth overall in TASP test
retake attempt pass rates for the academic year 1999-2000.
South Plains is a
comprehensive community college. It
represents moderate to large size institutions and is located in Northwestern Texas. Twenty-nine percent of South Plains Students
are ethnic minorities.
Temple College
Temple College
ranked 11th in 2003 in first year TASP completions following
remediation. It also ranked 12th
in mathematics, 5th in reading, and 4th overall in TASP
retake attempt pass rates for the academic year 1999-2000.
Temple College is a
relatively small comprehensive community college located in central Texas just
outside of Waco. Thirty percent of its
students are ethnic minorities.
Texarkana College
Texarkana
College ranked eighth in 2001 and ninth in 2002 and fourth in 2003 in first
year TASP completions following remediation.
It also ranked eighth in mathematics in TASP retake attempt pass rates
for the academic year 1999-2000.
Texarkana College is
a comprehensive community college. It is
a relatively small institution located in northeastern Texas. Nineteen percent of its students are ethnic
minorities.
Site Visit Methodology
Upon identification of potential exemplary programs, personal contact
was made with administrators of these programs to clarify what was found in the
review of the THECB reports and to make arrangements for site visits. A letter was sent to each college president
explaining the study and soliciting their participation (see APPENDIX 1). Telephone contact was then made with the
president of each college. Following
initial contact, a listing of administrators and faculty to be interviewed was
provided (see APPENDIX 2). The president
of each college or someone designated by the president made arrangements for
these individuals to be available for interviews during the site visitation.
Two researchers from
the National Center for Developmental Education were sent to each institution
to conduct the interviews. For purposes
of consistency, the same two individuals (Dr. Hunter R. Boylan, Director of the
National Center and Mr. D. Patrick Saxon, Assistant Director for Research and
Services) made all five site visits.
The data were collected
through note taking and audio recording of the interview sessions. Information was collected by meeting with
developmental program administrators, faculty, and staff. The visitation team also met with the
presidents and deans of instruction at each campus.
A series of structured
questions were used to guide the interview process. This document was entitled “Questions for
Texas Site Visits” (see APPENDIX 3). It
was compiled from a series of program evaluation questionnaires that were developed
from past National Center for Developmental Education research studies with
additional questions included that were intended to be specific to Texas
institutions. This document offered
general structure and guidance to the interview process, yet allowed for
flexibility to examine particular areas of interest that may have been
identified during the interview process.
Some of the broad topics that were investigated included the
organization and administration of the program, program structure and
components, and instructional practices.
The notes and
recordings from the interview process were reviewed by research staff to
identify common patterns of activity that appeared to contribute to positive developmental
education outcomes. During the site
visits, program brochures, evaluation reports, and other information were
collected. Program administrators were
also contacted by telephone and email to collect additional information
following site visits.
Limitations
Measures of Success
The
measure of developmental program success employed for this study may be
considered narrow and, to some extent, obsolete. During the observed time period (2000-2003),
developmental program success in Texas was defined by student success at
passing the TASP test. There are many
other measures of program success that were not considered. Therefore, one cannot ascertain with
certainty if the programs identified are truly outstanding in all facets of
developmental education. We can only say that they ranked in the top
percentiles of students’ post-developmental TASP test pass rates.
Changes in Assessment and Delivery Practices
Also, during the
time data was collected, the TASP was a required assessment for program
completion; that is no longer the case.
Institutions now have a choice whether to use the Texas Higher Education
Assessment (THEA, formerly the TASP) or some other assessment instrument. Since institutions have been offered the
flexibility to change their student assessment and developmental education
delivery practices, program performance may have been altered, for better or
worse, since the time period under investigation. In most cases, however, it was the consensus
of both the researchers and those interviewed that few major changes had taken
place in developmental education delivery at these institutions during the past
five years.
Self-Reported Data
The limitation of
self-reported data is also inherent in this study. The interviewees may have exhibited bias in
their opinions or they may have provided incomplete information,
misinterpretations, or inaccuracies in their reporting. It is hoped that by interviewing several
professionals associated with the programs examined in this study that this
limitation was minimized.
Sample Size
A combination of financial and time constraints
limited the number of institutional site visitations to five. The small number of case studies that
resulted from this study limited the scope of the findings. However, this sample is consistent with other
published studies of community college developmental education (Boylan, Bonham,
Keefe, Drewes, & Saxon, 2004; McCabe & Day, 1998; Roueche & Snow,
1977).
Data Collection Procedures
All data utilized in identifying exemplary institutions were obtained from THECB reports. Whatever limitations exist with regard to their data collection and reporting during the time period under consideration would apply as limitations to this study as well.
Section Three
The
emphasis of this report is on the identification of practices that contribute
to effective developmental education.
Consequently, site visit findings focus on each institution’s
developmental education activities rather than on the institution in general.
The findings of this
report are presented in two categories:
research-based best practices and promising practices. The research-based best practices section
describes the major consistent findings of this study generated from site
visits. These findings meet the
following criteria:
Promising
practices are those not well-grounded in research but, nevertheless, appear to
contribute to program success. There is
a minimal amount of previous research support for some of these practices. There is no previous research to validate
others. However, these practices are
considered by campus faculty and administrators to contribute to effective
developmental education. Promising
practices meet the following criteria:
Research-based best practices
There was remarkable consistency in the organizational patterns,
leadership styles, and support for developmental education encountered at the
institutions studied. Each of the study
institutions had a relatively flat organizational structure. Their administrators expressed considerable
confidence in their faculty, considered them to be professionals, and avoided
micromanaging their efforts. These
administrators also expressed a high degree of commitment to developmental
education and the success of developmental students.
Generally, the key
academic administrative officers at the institutions studied were the
president, the dean of instruction or its equivalent, and three or four
division chairs.[2]
There were few vice presidents or deans
or program directors.
As
a result of this flat organizational pattern, there were fewer layers of
bureaucracy to deal with before one reached the president’s office. At most, a faculty member would have to go
through one level of administration to get a hearing from the dean of
instruction. This contributed to clear
communication from developmental educators to administrators, to faculty
perceptions that their opinions were valued, and to a cooperative work environment.
All of these characteristics have been
cited in the literature as characteristics of successful organizations (Boylan,
Bonham, Keefe, Drewes, & Saxon, 2004).
This flat organizational pattern allowed
administrators to be quite responsive to the needs of developmental
education. As one faculty member put it,
“We know that if we have a serious concern, it will either be addressed or be
on the president’s desk within forty eight hours.” Another stated, “We don’t always get what we
want but we always feel that we’ve had a fair hearing.”
It is possible that
this organizational pattern contributes to successful developmental education
by enabling the concerns of developmental educators to be brought to the
attention of those who can do the most to address those concerns. It is also likely that this pattern allows
key administrators to have a better grasp of the problems and issues confronted
by faculty on the “front line.” Finally,
it is likely that this flat organizational pattern promotes better communication
throughout the institution.
Servant leadership styles
All
the campuses in this study were lead by presidents and vice presidents or deans
whose characteristics exemplified servant leadership as described by Greenleaf
(1991; 1996). These characteristics
included collaboration, trust, listening, and ethical behavior (Greenleaf,
1991). Research indicated that such
leadership characteristics were associated with successful organizations
(Kezar, 1998; Schuetz, 1999).
The leaders of these
institutions emphasized collaboration by working directly with individuals and
groups of faculty members to solve problems.
They considered faculty and staff of the institution to be colleagues as
well as employees. As the president of
one institution stated, “We believe that we get better solutions to our
problems when we work collaboratively.
There are no ‘lone rangers,’ everyone here is part of our team…
including me.”
The leaders of these
institutions listened to what faculty had to say and acted upon it. When questioned about why faculty felt they
had responsive leadership at one institution, a vice president said, “They can
see it in our actions. We usually do
what our faculty recommends, and they can see the results for themselves.”
These leaders also
inspired the trust of faculty and administrators by talking and acting
consistently. Their actions and their
words were consistent. One president was
described by a faculty member as a man who “not just talks the talk but also
walks the walk.”
Strong leadership support
The
characteristics of flat organizational patterns and servant leadership all came
together in support of developmental education at the campuses studied. All of the presidents, vice presidents,
deans, and division chairs indicated that developmental education was a major
priority for the institution. As one
senior administrator stated, “Most of our students are developmental. It would be foolish for us not to see their
needs as a top priority for the college.”
Another said, “We are here to provide developmental education. That’s why we exist.”
As
Robert McCabe points out, “developmental education is one of the most important
services provided by the community college” (2003, p. 13). Apparently the leaders of these campuses
agree with this statement and have acted accordingly. Leadership support is recognized in the
literature as one of the keys to successful developmental education (McCabe
& Day, 1998; McCabe, 2003; Roueche & Roueche, 1999).
At study
institutions, leadership support for developmental education is exemplified by
the following:
These characteristics were consistently found at
the institutions studied. Furthermore,
the leaders of these institutions made it very clear that these characteristics
were present because they valued developmental education.
Required assessment, placement, and advising
Texas
has had a strong commitment to assessment in its colleges and universities since
the late 1980s when it implemented the Texas Academic Skills Program (now known
as the Higher Education Assessment). It
was no surprise, therefore, that all of the institutions visited had
well-organized assessment procedures.
The NES instrument,
THEA, and the ETS instrument, Accuplacer, were the most common assessment
instruments used for initial placement.
It was also interesting to note that every institution in the study also
had some additional assessment, either cognitive or affective, to validate or
improve placement decisions.
Most of the faculty
members interviewed believed that the THEA did the best job of measuring
college level skills. However, they
felt that other instruments were easier to administer. Content from the THEA
was also used at two campuses for exit testing or to validate instructional
objectives.
In addition to
well-organized assessment procedures, the campuses in this study also had
strong advising and placement processes.
During the 1999-2003 period from which data was drawn, each of these
campuses put a great deal of emphasis on personalized student advising. Each entering student at these campuses spent
half an hour or more with an individual advisor before registering for classes. During this time, student scores were
interpreted, educational goals discussed, and options for placement
considered.
Each campus had
written rubrics to guide placement decisions.
Each campus made special efforts to train advisors, particularly with
regard to placement of students in developmental courses. Faculty and administrators generally
considered the training of academic advisors to be an essential feature of
successful developmental courses. As one
administrator stated, “We want all of our advisors to be positive about
placement in developmental education so students understand that it’s an
investment in their success.” The
importance of advisor training is validated by a substantial amount of research
(Boylan, 2002; Casazza & Silverman, 1996; McCabe, 2000; Maxwell, 1997).
Learner centered philosophy of operation
Developmental
educators at each of the study institutions had an intensely learner-centered
philosophy that governed their interactions with students. They were not simply student-centered but
learner-centered. Instructional, policy, and administrative decisions were made
based on the decision’s potential impact on student learning. Decisions ranging from the arrangement of
tables in classrooms to the type of software used in laboratories were made
based on the question, “How will this help or hinder student learning?”
This
philosophy appeared to be pervasive at the study institutions. Faculty interviewed frequently expressed
their commitment to student learning and were able to back this up with
examples of how they put the learner first in making classroom decisions. As one faculty member put it, “We do whatever
is necessary for our students learn.”
Another said, “When I ask my dean for something… ‘How will this help
students learn better?’ is what he always says.” At the study institutions faculty were held
accountable for student learning rather than just being accountable for
teaching.
The
use of such a learner centered philosophy is supported by the research on
developmental education. This research
consistently indicates that outcomes are improved when a learner centered philosophy
is central to program operations and decision making (Boylan, 2002; McCabe,
2000; Siliverman & Casazza, 1996).
Consistent formative evaluation
Each
of the study institutions placed a great amount of emphasis on data collection
and analysis. They also put great
emphasis on formative evaluation.
Formative evaluation takes place when faculty and administrators use
data to find out how well they are doing, to identify ways of improving what
they are doing, and by using data to see if the changes implemented have worked
or if modification is needed. Formative
evaluation has frequently been found to contribute to successful developmental
education (Boylan, Bliss, & Bonham, 1997; Casazza & Silverman, 1996;
McCabe, 2000).
At
study institutions with institutional research offices, these offices
frequently worked with developmental educators to identify data necessary to
make decisions. Most of the faculty
teaching developmental courses had at least a general knowledge of pass rates
and retention rates for developmental students and were aware of any campus
studies done on developmental education.
Several of the faculty interviewed kept their own records on student
persistence, grades, and pass rates in developmental courses which they used as
a baseline to evaluate their own performance.
One faculty member said, “I try to get as much information as I can
about my students’ performance… that helps me evaluate my own teaching.”
Data and evaluation
reports were regularly shared with developmental educators who were also asked
for their opinions in analyzing this data. One department chair made sure that everyone
received data on their students’ grades and pass rates and then had a
discussion with faculty individually and in groups at the end of each year to
help everyone understand the meaning of this data.
Careful hiring of developmental educators
Every
administrator interviewed emphasized that careful hiring of developmental
educators was a critical element in the success of developmental education at
their campuses. As one administrator put
it, “Most people think that anyone with a college degree can teach developmental
courses. I think that if we hire someone
who can teach developmental courses well, they can teach anything well.” This sentiment was echoed by faculty members
who served on hiring committees.
There
was a rigorous hiring process at the study institutions. At most of these institutions prospective
faculty members were asked to give a demonstration presentation as part of the
hiring process. They were also
frequently asked to direct this presentation to a hypothetical audience of
developmental students. Usually the
president or the dean of instruction would attend this presentation.
Candidates
for developmental education faculty positions were always interviewed by the
president or the dean of instruction.
They were also interviewed by a panel that included developmental
educators. During interviews, candidates were regularly
asked about their views of developmental education and developmental students
and their experiences in teaching these students.
Careful
hiring of developmental educators has support from the literature. A benchmarking study by the Continuous
Quality Improvement Network (2000) suggested that only those who were
interested in teaching developmental students should be assigned to do so. Roueche & Roueche (1999) argue that
community college developmental programs must “Recruit, develop, and hire the
best faculty (p. 32)” if they are to be successful.
Ongoing communication among developmental educators
At
each of the institutions studied, there was a great deal of communication among
those who taught developmental courses. This was true in spite of the fact that most
of the study institutions had decentralized developmental programs.
The lack of
centralization at these campuses is more than compensated for by the fact that
all those teaching developmental courses have regular communication with each
other. Such communication is essential
to successful programs (Boylan, 2002; McCabe & Day, 1998; Casazza &
Silverman, 1996). This communication
takes place through formal and informal meetings, email, and hallway
discussions. At each study institution
there are regular formal meetings of developmental education faculty within and
between disciplines.
Faculty at these
institutions also appeared to be genuinely interested in communicating with
each other about students and about teaching and learning issues. Consequently, there was not only strong
communication between developmental educators; there was strong communication
between developmental educators and other campus faculty.
The emphasis on
collaboration exemplified by the leaders of these institutions also
characterized the developmental education faculty and staff of these
institutions. There were many instances
of inter-disciplinary programming and innovations at study institutions. Such collaboration would be unlikely to take
place if good communication were not present to begin with.
Limited use of adjuncts
Two
of the institutions studied used adjuncts to teach developmental courses only
sparingly. At one institution, the
president proudly affirmed that, “Ninety percent of our developmental courses
are taught by full-time faculty.” It
appeared that, to the extent possible, the study institutions tried to staff
developmental courses with experienced full-time faculty.
Although all the
institutions in this study employed adjuncts to teach some developmental
courses, they made very serious efforts to orient and train these
adjuncts. Each of the institutions had
either a formal or an informal mentoring program for adjunct faculty. In these programs, adjunct faculty members were
paired with experienced full-time faculty who served as their mentors. These mentors met regularly with adjuncts,
visited their classes, provided constructive feedback, and were available to
answer questions.
The
study institutions had both formal and informal orientation programs for
adjunct faculty. Most of these
institutions also had manuals available for adjunct faculty that described the
institution’s teaching philosophy, provided guidelines for instruction, and
explained campus policies and procedures.
The
research is consistent in recommending that adjunct faculty not be the primary
providers of developmental education (Boylan & Saxon, 1998; McCabe,
2000). It is also consistent in
recommending that adjunct faculty teaching developmental courses be carefully
trained (Boylan, 2002; Grubb and associates, 1999; Neuburger, 1999). The institutions in this study have taken
these recommendations seriously and acted accordingly.
Aggressive professional development
Professional
development for developmental education personnel is generally considered to be
one of the most important characteristics of successful programs (Boylan,
Bliss, & Bonham, 1997; Grubb, 1999; McCabe, 2000; Roueche & Roueche,
1999). All of the institutions in this
study emphasized professional development for developmental educators in
particular and for faculty and staff in general.
Each
institution made funds available for developmental educators to attend
professional conferences. Almost all of
them had sent faculty to participate in one or more professional training institutes. Each institution sponsored regular
professional faculty development workshops that emphasized innovative
instructional methods. These
institutions also used local faculty to run mini-workshops for developmental
education instructors.
One
institution had a “Developmental Education Update” each semester describing
issues, trends, and techniques in the field.
Another institution established a local email network to discuss
instructional issues, methods, and techniques.
As one developmental educator explained, “The dean has always found
resources to support our (developmental educators’) professional
development.” Another said, “Training
counts here. We get supported and
rewarded for it.”
The
institutions in this study were very serious about developing the professionals
who worked with developmental students.
They used a wide variety of techniques, invested institutional funds in
conference and workshop attendance, and rewarded participation in professional
development. As noted earlier, they also
paid a substantial amount of attention to orientation and training for adjunct
faculty teaching developmental courses.
Promising Practices
Connecting
with high schools
Although Rainwater & Venezia
(2003) have described several approaches to improved high school/college
collaboration, there is little evidence as yet to suggest that these result in
improved student performance. Faculty
and administrators at many of the institutions in this study, however, believe
that making connections with high schools can reduce the need for remediation. As one administrator put it, “We may not
completely eliminate the need for recent high school graduates to take
developmental courses but we can at least try to make sure they place into the
highest levels of developmental education.”
Institutions in this study had various sorts of
liaisons with local high schools that were designed to clarify college
requirements and reduce the need for developmental education. At one institution, developmental education
faculty met with high school faculty from “feeder schools” to discuss
college-level requirements in English and mathematics. The objective of these
discussions was to insure that high school students would not be “surprised” by
college level requirements. Another
institution sponsored meetings of high school and college faculty in an attempt
to promote better alignment between the high school and college curricula.
Some institutions in the study
allowed high school students to take the college placement test in their
sophomore or junior years. The results
pointed out student’s academic shortcomings in time for them to take advanced
mathematics or composition courses during their high school years, thus
insuring they were better prepared for college.
Limiting class
size in developmental courses
There is at present little research
indicating that smaller class sizes in developmental courses contribute to
better student performance. However,
many of the faculty and administrators interviewed believed that smaller
classes do contribute to the success of developmental students. As a Dean of Instruction explained, “Having
lower class sizes in developmental education allows our faculty to give more
individual time to the students who need it most. That’s a priority for us.” As a result, many of the institutions in this
study made it a point to deliberately limit the enrollment in developmental
courses.
Typically, enrollment in developmental reading
and English classes at
Using values to drive operations
The developmental programs at
institutions participating in this study were typically driven by values. By this, we mean that the programs had a
clearly articulated set of student and learning centered values that were not
only understood by all personnel but also used consistently to make decisions. In some cases, the programs had written
values statements designed to guide operations.
In others, these values were simply understood by all parties and
reinforced verbally on a regular basis.
One faculty member stated that, “We see that part of our responsibility
is to inculcate our institutional values into new faculty members.”
As a result, policies and decisions
tended to be guided by the values of the program rather than having the values
of the program guided by policies. Typically, these values were learning centered and emphasized such
things as:
o
committing
to student success,
o
honoring
students’ worth as individual human beings,
o
accepting
students where they are and moving them as far as they can go,
o
emphasizing
the importance of student attendance and participation in class,
o
utilizing
active learning techniques in classrooms,
o
encouraging
students to become autonomous,
o
respecting
colleagues and students,
o
treating
students holistically, and
o
creating
a safe environment for learning.
Several
of these principles were part of the values driving operations at each of the
participating institutions.
Establishing
baselines for formative evaluation purposes
Two of the institutions in this
study developed baseline data to guide formative evaluation and program
improvement activities. They collected
data from the most recent three-year period on such things as: (a) student
completion rates in developmental courses,[3]
(b) students completing developmental courses with a C or better, and (c) semester
to semester retention for developmental students.
Faculty might then use this
information as a way of evaluating their own performance in teaching
developmental students by comparing it to the performance baseline. These baselines also served as a target for
improvement from year to year. Each
year, faculty would review the data and determine what actions or changes might
contribute to improving upon baseline performance.[4]
It also is important to note that
none of the formative evaluation activities of participating institutions were
undertaken for punitive purposes. To the
extent possible, data was anonymous and faculty and administrators agreed that
it would only be used to improve program performance.
Building valued activities into the reward system
Grubb,
et. al. (1999), point out that although community colleges ostensibly value
teaching, they rarely build good teaching into the reward system of the
institution. This shortcoming was not
discovered at any of the institutions participating in this study. Almost all of them had systematic processes
in place for promoting and rewarding quality instruction at some level. One of the administrators interviewed pointed
out that, “We don’t leave good teaching to chance. We try to put our money
where our mouth is by rewarding people for doing things right.”
These
institutions not only provided frequent professional development opportunities,
they also encouraged those who had participated in these activities off campus
to mentor others upon their return. At
one institution, instructors who participated as volunteer assistants in the
learning center in order to understand student problems first hand were later rewarded
with their choices of courses and schedules.
Another institution highlighted the successful teaching practices of
individual instructors in a campus newsletter.
Another developed a teaching techniques web site for adjunct faculty
while another established a “best practices” web site for developmental
faculty. In some cases, showing
evidence of using best practices or recommended techniques were built into the
salary, tenure, and promotion system.
A key characteristic
of these activities was that they were systematic. They were undertaken on a regular basis, they
were reviewed at the end of each year, and they were part of an overall campus
program for the improvement of instruction.
Encouraging students to take college level courses immediately following
completion of developmental courses
In
support of this, instructors of the highest level developmental mathematics
course would explain to students that their chances of passing college level
mathematics increased if they took it the semester following completion of
developmental mathematics. The college
had data to validate this point and this information was shared with students
on a regular basis. The data was also
used by college advisors to encourage students to follow up completion of
developmental mathematics with college level mathematics courses. Instructors, advisors, and administrators
worked together on a systematic basis to encourage students to do this. As an academic advisor at one college stated,
“We want our students to be successful and we have data to show them that if
they take these courses right after remediation, they’re more likely to be
successful.”
The
available data suggests that such actions contribute to an improved passing
rate among developmental students who take the first college level mathematics
course. It seems reasonable to assume
that encouraging early completion of the first college level course for those
who complete developmental courses would also work on other developmental
subject areas as well.
Providing aggressive mentoring for new developmental faculty
Most
of the faculty and administrators interviewed were in agreement that proper
orientation of new developmental faculty was essential to the success of the
developmental program. The prevailing
opinion was that it was far easier to get new developmental faculty started off
in the right direction than to attempt to change their behavior later on. As one senior faculty member noted, “We
consider mentoring new faculty to be a basic part of our job. Why let them make the same mistakes we did?”
Consequently, the
institutions in this study put a great deal of emphasis on the orientation of
new developmental faculty. The most
common way in which this orientation was delivered was through structured
mentoring programs.
Typically,
every new developmental instructor was assigned to a senior faculty member with
experience in teaching developmental courses.
The senior faculty member met with the new faculty member at the
beginning of each academic year to provide initial orientation. The senior faculty member subsequently visited
with the new faculty member on a regular basis throughout the semester to discuss
problems and issues and to provide guidance.
In addition, the senior faculty member also observed classes and
provided feedback for the new instructor.
At the institutions in this study, this process was typically supervised
by either a department chair or by another individual appointed specifically
for this purpose. It did not happen
randomly, but as part of a planned, consistent, and systematic mentoring
program.
Section 4
Conclusion
In an earlier study of developmental education in Texas colleges
and universities, the authors of this report found that outcomes for
developmental education varied dramatically from campus to campus (Boylan &
Saxon, 1998). Even when results were
compared for similar institutions with similar populations, there was an
extraordinary range in outcomes. At some
institutions, more than 70% of students passed the TASP on their first attempt
following participation in developmental education. At other, similar institutions, fewer than
30% of students passed the TASP on their first attempt following participation
in developmental education.
Our explanation for this at the time
was that the quality of developmental education in Texas colleges and
universities was uneven. Some
institutions gave it priority and put serious effort into doing it well. Other institutions did not consider it a
priority and put little effort into doing it well.
Among the things we consistently
encountered at the institutions described in this report was that they
considered developmental education to be a priority. This was made clear by the words and actions
of presidents, vice president, deans, division chairs, and faculty.
Because it was a priority, developmental
education was supported with resources, facilities, and personnel. Because it was a priority, providing quality
developmental education was rewarded both formally and informally. Because it was a priority, data was gathered
on developmental education outcomes and this data was used for program
improvement. Because it was a priority,
faculty and administrators talked with each other about how to do it better. Because it was a priority, a culture
emphasizing quality developmental education emerged at each of the institutions
studied. Ultimately, this culture served as a foundation for the excellence in
developmental education attained by the institutions included in this study.
Our conclusion, then, is that quality
developmental education results from an institutional culture that values
developmental education and considers it a priority. It is possible that, if this culture does not
exist, any number of best practices might be implemented without obtaining
significant improvement in developmental education. Where
the use of best practices is combined with a culture that values developmental
education, however, excellent developmental education is likely to result.
References
Boylan,
H.R., Bonham, B.S., Jackson, J., & Saxon, D.P. (1995).
Staffing
Boylan,
H.R., Bliss, L.B., & Bonham, B.S. (1997).
Program components
Boylan, H.R., &
Saxon, D.P. (1998). An
evaluation of developmental education in Texas colleges and universities. Austin, TX: Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board.
Boylan, H.R.
(2002). What works: Research-based best practices in developmental education. Boone, NC: Continuous Quality Improvement
Network/National Center for Developmental Education.
Boylan, H.R., Bonham,
B.S., Clark-Keefe, K., Drewes, S., & Saxon, D.P. (2004, December). Forging
new partnerships in community college adult and developmental education. New York, NY: Council for the Advancement of
Adult Literacy.
Casazza,
M., & Silverman, S. (1996). Learning assistance and
Conference
on College Composition and Communication (1989, October).
Continuous
Quality Improvement Network (CQIN)/American Productivity and Quality Center (APQC). (2000).
Benchmarking best practices in
developmental education. Houston,
TX: American Productivity and Quality
Center.
Donovan,
R. (1974). FIPSE National Project II: Alternatives to the
Greenleaf,
R. (1991). Servant as leader.
Indianapolis, IN: Robert K.
Greenleaf,
R. (1996). On becoming a servant leader.
San Fransico, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Grubb,
N. (1999). Honored but invisible: An inside look at community
Higbee,
J., & Dwinnel, P. (1998). Developmental education: Preparing
Kezar, A. J. (1998). Exploring new avenues for leading community colleges: The paradox of participatory models. Community College Review, 25(4), 75-87.
Legislative Budget Board.
(n.d). Data resources for the 2004 LBB performance measures Texas community,
state, and technical colleges. Austin,
TX: Texas Higher Education Coordinating
Board. Retrieved from http://www.thecb.state.tx.us/CTC/IE/ctclbb/Lbb2004.pdf
Maxwell, M. (1997). Improving student learning skills. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
McCabe. R., & Day, P. (1998).
Developmental education: A twenty
first century social and economic imperative. Mission Viejo, CA: League for Innovation in
the Community College.
McCabe, R. (2000). No one to waste: A report to public decision
makers and community college leaders.
Washington, DC: Community College Press.
McCabe, R. (2003). Yes we can!
A community college guide for developing America’s underprepared. Phoenix, AZ:
League for Innovation in the Community College.
McClenney, K., & Waiwaiole, E. (2005, June/July). Focus on retention: Promising practices in
community colleges. Community College Journal, 37-41.
Morante, E. (1989). Selecting
tests and placing students. Journal of Developmental Education, 13(2),
2-6.
Neuburger, J. (1999). Executive
board position paper, research and recommendations for developmental education
and/or learning assistance programs in the state of New York. Research
and Teaching in Developmental Education, 16(1), 5-21.
Perin,
D. (2001, August/September). Making
remediation more learner-
Raindwater, T., & Venezia, A. (2003,
May). Strategy briefs: Early outreach. Denver, CO: State Higher Education
Executive Offices.
Richardson,
R.C. (1983). Literacy in the open access college. San
Roueche,
J.E., & Snow, G. (1977). Overcoming learning problems. San
Roueche, J., & Roueche, S. (1993 ).
Between a rock and a hard
place: The
Roueche, J., & Roueche, S. (1999).
High stakes, high
performance:
Spann,
M.G., & Thompson, C. (1986). A directory of exemplary
Shuetz,
P. (1999). Shared governance in community college. ERIC Digest
Shults, C. (2000).
Institutional policies and
practices in remedial
Silverman, S., & Casazza, M. (2000). Learning
and development. San
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (THECB). (n.d.).
Texas academic skills program
(TASP) summary of TASP/Alternative Test (TASP/A) results academic year
1999-2000. Austin, TX: Author.
Retrieved from http://www.thecb.state.tx.us/reports/pdf/0451.pdf
Wallin, D.L. (2005). Adjunct faculty in community colleges: An academic administrators guide to
recruiting, supporting, and retaining great teachers. Williston, VT: Anker Publishing.
Weimer,
M. (2002). Learner-centered teaching: Five key changes to
Weinstein,
C. (1985). Comprehension monitoring: The
neglected learning strategy.
Journal of Developmental Education,
9(1), 6-9,28-29.
Weinstein,
C. (1988). Executive control process in
learning: Why knowing
Weinstein,
C., Dierking, D., Husman, J., Roska, L.,
& Powdrill, L. (1998). The impact of a course on strategic learning on
the long-term retention of college students.
In J. Higbee & P. Dwinnel (Eds.),
Institutional findings
For each institution
a set of “Fast Facts” is provided to orient readers to its type, demographic
characteristics, and budget. A brief
“Context” statement is also provided describing the institutional context in
which developmental education is provided.
The developmental
education practices of these institutions are then described under two
categories, “Research-Based Best Practices” and “Promising Practices.” The Research-Based Best Practices category
describes developmental education practices that have been validated by
previous research. Although evidence
already exists attesting to the efficacy of these practices, the literature of
the field identifies a myriad of such practices. Given the broad range of research-based best
practices that might be implemented, it is useful to note the particular
practices engaged in on campuses that have been successful in their
developmental education efforts.
Promising
practices are those for which there is little or no current research support
but which appear to contribute to the success of the programs studied
here. These practices were identified
during interviews and met three criteria:
Findings for Institutions
LAMAR INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
Beaumont, Texas
FAST FACTS
|
Type
of Institution |
Public Technical/Vocational
2-year |
|
Location |
Urban/Southeastern
Texas |
|
Credit
Enrollment |
2540 |
|
Full-Time
Faculty |
85 |
|
Developmental
Education Faculty |
Full-Time n.a.
Part-Time n.a |
|
Developmental
Education Students |
n.a. |
|
Institutional
Budget |
n.a. |
|
Developmental
Education Budget |
n.a. |
|
Cost
Per Developmental Student |
n.a. |
|
Ethnicity
of Students |
White = 55% Latino = 7% African-American = 32% |
Context
Lamar Institute of Technology (LIT)
offers vocational and technical education programs that lead to applied science
degrees and certificates. It is an urban
institution located in Beaumont. The
largest minority group at LIT is African-American. The primary goal for students at Lamar Tech
is a terminal technology degree. The
leadership does not consider the college as having a “feeder” mission to 4-year
colleges.
The developmental education program
is centralized and placed under the Department of Supervision. Student support is offered through the
Learning Support Lab. Developmental
courses are supported by subject based learning laboratories.
Research-based
Best Practices
Administrative
support for developmental education
The administration at
LIT appears strongly committed to offering quality developmental
education. It is suggested to be a vital
part of the “care of students” mission of the college, and something that is
reflected in the expressed values of the faculty and administration. The developmental faculty members feel that
they have the professional support and appropriate funding to manage an
exceptional program. The developmental
program is represented in the Executive Council through the Director of the Department
of Supervision. Research supports that
developmental education as an institutional priority contributes to student
success (Roueche & Roueche, 1993; Roueche & Roueche, 1999).
Centralized
developmental education
There is much support in the literature that centralized
developmental programs are more effective, likely due to the increased
coordination that coincides with this particular structure. (Boylan, Bliss, & Bonham, 1997; Roueche
& Snow, 1977; Roueche & Roueche, 1993).
The developmental program at LIT is centralized and effectively
coordinated through many formal and informal means of communication and
protocol. The unit has a planning
process applied within the context of the Institutional Master Plan that offers
formative guidance for program improvement.
This planning process is performed on a systematic basis.
Communication is also facilitated by
the centralized structure. Developmental
faculty work and reside in close proximity, enhancing the formal and informal
flow of communication. In addition to
the planning process, the faculty also engages in regular, informal lunch
meetings where instructional ideas and teaching strategies are shared and
discussed.
Formative
evaluation for program improvement[5]
A particular sentiment echoed by
faculty and administrators at LIT is that strategic decisions tend to be data
driven. This appears endemic to the
institution from the top down. It is
indicative of this that the college president is evaluated on performance
measures as reported by the Legislative Budget Board. Subsequently, decisions that affect the
operation of developmental education are based on the consideration of
particular outcomes from past performance.
This is also referred to as “management by exception.” Here, performance data are used to identify
strengths and opportunities for improvement.
These opportunities are then addressed in the
strategic plan. The effectiveness of
this process may also imply an effective working relationship between the
developmental education program and the institutional research function. The use of evaluation data for program
improvement is frequently cited as an activity associated with successful
developmental education (Boylan, Bliss, & Bonham, 1997; Maxwell, 1997;
Casazza & Silverman, 1996).
Aggressive
professional development
The LIT developmental education
faculty mentioned that professional developmental activities are encouraged and
in many cases funded by the institution.
These opportunities are quite diverse, ranging from conferences and
planning retreats, to foreign language skills courses aimed at improving
communication with minority students.
Many of the faculty participated in a retention enhancement initiative
delivered at LIT by the Noel-Levitz company.
There is evidence in the research literature suggesting that an emphasis
on professional developmental contributes to student success (Casazza & Silverman, 1996; Maxwell,
1996; McCabe, 2000) and a previous study of developmental Education in Texas
found this to be true (Boylan & Saxon, 1998).
Mandatory
assessment and placement
All students entering a degree program take the
COMPASS test, though other accepted testing instruments include the THEA, ASSET
or Accuplacer. Assessment exemptions may
be allowed based on SAT, ACT, and TAAS scores.
Developmental students are required to see an advisor. This is an important process because research
has shown the advising by trained academic advisors is related to the success
of developmental students (Boylan, Bliss, & Bonham, 1997; Boylan, 2002). The administration expressed confidence that
their advising staff are aware of the need for and the benefits provided by
developmental education. This promotes a
consistently positive demeanor expressed by advisors in conveying information
about developmental education to students.
Placement in the appropriate developmental
courses is mandatory based on assessment.
If developmental students do not successfully complete their
developmental courses, they are dropped from any college curriculum courses
they are enrolled in. This feature of
mandatory assessment and placement is associated with developmental student
success (Roueche & Roueche, 1999; Boylan, 2002).
Integrated
courses and laboratories
Several of the developmental education
instructors and the staff of the Learning Support Lab expressed that there was
a strong link of communication and coordination between the two entities. One faculty member referred to the lab as
“the cornerstone of developmental education.”
It was suggested that there was a coordinated effort to show every
developmental student the lab facilities.
Writing and reading instruction had regular, coordinated lab activities,
and mathematics examinations were scheduled to take place there, as well. The integration of classrooms and
laboratories is cited in the literature as a contributing factor in successful
developmental education (Boylan, Bliss, & Bonham, 1997; Continuous Quality
Improvement Network/American Productivity and Quality Center, 2000).
Promising
Practices
Laboratory
activities matched to TAS-based curricular objectives
An interesting feature of assessment and
placement process is that the objectives measured by the TASP Test are also
matched to appropriate sections of PLATO.
The PLATO system is used as an instructional support program for classes
and laboratories. Because the TASP was
originally referenced to the Texas postsecondary curriculum, this practice
insures that material learned in laboratories is consistent with the college
curriculum.
The practice of matching laboratory
activities to curricular objectives may help to insure that what students spend
time on in laboratories is exactly what they need to master in order to be
successful in the college curriculum.
This probably strengthens the performance of developmental students in
later courses and is, therefore, considered to be a promising practice.
“Customer orientation”
toward students
During interviews, the developmental faculty described a
student-centric approach that is supported and encouraged by the
administration. The students are viewed
as “customers” who ultimately have a choice as to where they purchase their
education services. Feedback from these
“consumers” in the form of evaluations (also referred to as “customer
satisfaction surveys”) is taken seriously and used for improvement. The retention of these consumers is a high
priority.
Collaborative
interaction with high schools
LIT has in place an Advanced Tech Credit program whereby
certain college-credit courses are offered to high school students. Here, “Tech Prep” recruiters and faculty work
with high school administrators and faculty in order to align high school
course work with college-level work.
Working with local high schools to
insure an alignment between secondary and postsecondary curricula is a
promising practice. It has the potential
for insuring that high school graduates are better prepared for college. It may also contribute to students having a
better understanding of the differences between high school and college
academic expectations.
Careful hiring of developmental educators
The LIT Director of Supervision believes that
the hiring of quality faculty is important to the success of working with
developmental students. A teaching background
is required of all applicants. Hiring
committees actively seek and recruit those individuals with exemplary
credentials and references with respect to their teaching. The candidate must demonstrate an enthusiasm for
teaching and learning, and an understanding of the importance of developmental
education in the context of the college’s mission. LIT also emphasizes the training of adjunct
faculty as well. Upon hiring, adjunct
faculty members are assigned to a senior faculty mentor who provides training,
advice, and consultation.
Administrators at LIT also make sure that only
those who actually want to teach developmental courses are assigned to
them. As one administrator said, “We
won’t put our developmental students in the hands of faculty who don’t want to
teach them.” This was found to be a
practice consistent with exemplary programs in the Continuous Quality
Improvement Network study of developmental education (2000) which gives further
support to the importance of assigning only those who want to teach
developmental education to these classes.
Professional
treatment of developmental educators
It was clear from interviews with
administrators and faculty that developmental educators were considered to be
expert professionals. As one administrator
put it, “We hire quality people and assume that, with the proper resources,
they will do a quality job of teaching developmental students.” This sentiment was echoed by faculty who
claimed that “Our administration does not micromanage us – they look at
outcomes” and that “Our leadership is good about seeing that we get the
resources we need.”
This practice of acknowledging
developmental educators as professionals has been noted in other studies, but
not necessarily cited as a best practice (CQIN/APQC, 2000; Boylan, Bonham, Keefe, Drewes, & Saxon,). It stands to reason, however, that where
developmental educators are considered to be expert professionals and regarded
as making an important contribution to the institutional mission, their efforts
are more likely to be successful.
Values
driven operations
It is difficult to quantify the values that
appeared prevalent at Lamar Tech but they certainly appear to contribute to the
program’s success. As one interviewee
described it, “Caring for each other and students, being receptive and willing
to share information, having an accessible administration, and motivated
faculty are what makes this program work.”
The developmental educators interviewed were genuinely committed to
student success and sincerely cared for their students and each other. They enjoyed working with and collaborating
with each other. These factors probably
contributed to the high level of achievement and motivation among developmental
educators at Lamar Tech.
Caring, collaboration, and a concern for student
success were particularly evident at LIT and Northwest Vista, but to one degree
or another they characterized developmental educators at all of the
institutions visited. Operating on the
basis of these values can, therefore, be suggested as a promising practice for
developmental education.
NORTHWEST VISTA COLLEGE
San Antonio, Texas
FAST FACTS
|
Type
of Institution |
Public Comprehensive
2-year |
|
Location |
Urban/Southern Texas |
|
Enrollment |
7530 head count |
|
Full-Time
Faculty |
78 |
|
Developmental
Education Faculty |
Full-Time 11
Part-Time 64 |
|
Developmental
Education Students |
6095 |
|
Institutional
Budget |
$16,544,921 |
|
Developmental
Education Budget |
$1,027,710 |
|
Cost
Per Developmental Student |
$169.61 |
|
Ethnicity
of Students |
White = 46% Latino = 45% African-American = 6% |
Context
Northwest
Vista College is a comprehensive community college offering a wide variety of
vocational and technical programs as well as college transfer programs. It is an urban institution located within the
city limits of San Antonio. As might be
expected given its location, the largest minority group at Northwest Vista
College is Latino.
Established in 1995,
Northwest Vista is one of the newest colleges in Texas. During the data collection period for the
study, 1999-2003, Northwest Vista was, according to its president, “the fastest
growing college in the country.”
The college was
organized around the principles of learning, creativity, community, openness,
integrity, caring, joy, synergy, and diversity.
These values were reflected in the college’s organizational framework
and in the philosophy of its operations.
There is no
centralized developmental program at Northwest Vista College. Instead, developmental courses are taught
through the appropriate academic “cluster.”
The Academic Foundations Cluster includes the college’s reading,
mathematics, English, and ESL courses.
Student support is
provided by the Developmental Advocacy Center, a learning assistance program
offering academic counseling, tutoring, and individualized instruction. Developmental courses are also supported by
subject-based learning laboratories.
Research-based Best Practices
Administrative support for developmental education
There
is no question that developmental education has substantial administrative
support at Northwest Vista College.
Administrative support is considered by many researchers to be a key
factor in the success of developmental education on any given campus (Boylan,
2002; McCabe, 2000; Roueche & Roueche, 1999).
Administrative
support is illustrated by the President of Northwest Vista’s statement that “We
take pride in the fact that we’re the only place you can go to obtain quality
developmental education. Universities
can do the easy work of teaching prepared students.”
Faculty
consistently indicated that the chief administrators of the college regularly
made public statements supporting the importance of developmental education to
the institution’s mission. Faculty also
indicated that chief administrators regularly praise the efforts of
developmental educators on the Northwest Vista campus.
According
to administrators, the needs of developmental education are given high priority
in the resource allocation process. As a
result, faculty claim that they are provided with all the resources they need
to do developmental education effectively.
Several administrators echoed the sentiment that “We have excellent
faculty and my job is simply to insure they have the tools needed to put their
excellence to work.” Further evidence of
administrative support is found in the fact that developmental education
courses and services are housed in the institution’s newest and best
facilities. Finally, developmental
education is also embedded in the college’s strategic plan for the future. All these factors are indications of
considerable administrative support for developmental education at Northwest
Vista College.
Mandatory Assessment
and Placement
All
students entering Northwest Vista College are placed in courses based on their
performance in assessment. Mandatory
assessment and placement has long been considered a best practice in successful
developmental education (Casazza & Silverman, 1996: Morante, 1989; Roueche
& Snow, 1977).
The
Accuplacer, an ETS product, is the primary assessment instrument, but the
college also uses THEA scores for assessment and placement.[6] Assessment testing is done either by
appointment or on a “walk in” basis for all entering students. Students placed in developmental writing
courses are also given a writing sample to validate placement and students are
then reassigned to higher or lower level courses as necessary. According to college officials, 85-90% of
incoming students place in one or more developmental courses.
Once
students have completed the assessment, they go immediately to group advising
sessions. During the data gathering
period for this study, 1999-2003, students also received a thirty minute
individual advisement session from trained academic advisors. According to
advisors, a critical component of the advising process is that students are
encouraged to accept placement decisions as “an investment in their future”
rather than as a punishment for poor high school performance.
Students
are not permitted to bypass developmental education. The registration system has built in
prerequisite codes that prohibit students from entering courses for which
developmental education is a requirement.
There
is also a strong academic advising program for developmental students provided
through the Developmental Advocacy Center (“DAD”). For example, students may not drop
developmental courses unless they first consult with DAD advisors. These advisors may move students to different
sections of classes to accommodate life or work schedules. They may also assign tutors or recommend
other forms of extra assistance.
Strong coordination and communication in developmental education
Strong
coordination and communication among developmental educators is also a well
documented characteristic of successful programs (Boylan, 2002; Casazza &
Silverman, 1996; McCabe, 2000). A great
deal of communication takes place within the Academic Foundations Cluster and
among those teaching developmental courses within the cluster. There are meetings of cluster faculty two or
three times a semester. The faculty in
each discipline meets at least eight times per semester and those teaching
developmental courses meet at least four times a semester. There is also an extraordinary amount of
informal communication among faculty in the Academic Foundations Cluster and
between cluster faculty and the Developmental Advocacy Center. In fact, many of the reading and English
faculty also serve as tutors in the center.
Although
there is no official director of developmental education, the Academic
Foundations Cluster leader considers coordination of developmental education to
be one of her major priorities. This
coordination, however, is accomplished through collaboration in identifying and
using innovative teaching strategies, reviewing developmental education courses
and syllabi, and analyzing data on the performance of developmental students.
Formative evaluation for program improvement
The
use of evaluation data for program improvement is recognized as an activity associated
with successful developmental education (Boylan, Bliss, & Bonham, 1997;
Maxwell, 1997; Casazza & Silverman, 1996).
Developmental educators at Northwest Vista have access to excellent data
and consistently use it to make decisions about their courses and
services. According to one of the
mathematics instructors, “We never stop looking at data to see how we can
improve student success.”
Macro-level
data on long term student performance and retention is collected by the
institutional research office of Northwest Vista. Micro-level data on student performance in
individual developmental courses is collected by individual program areas. Through a Title V grant, the college is also
developing a “Data Warehouse” that will systematically collect essential data
on student performance in developmental education.
Grades in follow-up
courses, GPA data, and the retention and graduation rates of developmental
students are collected and shared with faculty on a regular basis. The mathematics faculty use data from final
examinations to insure that there is consistency between the exit standards for
one level of mathematics and the entry standards for the next level.
The culture of the
college appears to support the use of formative evaluation for program improvement
purposes. According to the president of
the college, “We try to make data-driven decisions about our courses and
services on a continual basis. It’s
something we value as part of the college’s character.” At Northwest Vista College, the use of evaluation
feedback for the improvement of developmental education is part of the
college-wide continuous quality improvement process.
Aggressive professional development
Professional
development for faculty and staff has consistently been reported as a characteristic
of successful developmental programs (Boylan, 2002; Casazza & Silverman,
1996; McCabe, 2000). Faculty and
administrators at Northwest Vista take professional development seriously. They regularly attend workshops, institutes,
and conferences and participate in graduate courses. Each year, for instance, five or six
administrators and faculty attend the National Association for Developmental
Education Conference. Faculty at
Northwest Vista also place a high value on sharing information learned through
professional development with each other and on collaborating to put learned
concepts into practice.
Administrators
noted that, at Northwest Vista, 20% of the work week
is devoted to faculty development. Fridays
are set aside for faculty developmental activities and it is expected and
encouraged that faculty use this time to get training on topics such as
critical thinking, learning styles, or classroom assessment techniques. Funding for these activities is considered a
priority by administrators.
Adjunct faculty training
Most
community colleges rely heavily on adjunct faculty to teach developmental
courses (Shults, 2000). Northwest Vista
is no exception. However, the college
makes extensive efforts to insure that adjuncts are well trained and well
oriented to the college’s student centric mission. This is consistent with recent research on
best practices in the community college generally and developmental education
in particular (Boylan, 2002; McCabe, 2003; Wallin, 2005).
Each
full-time faculty member in the Academic Foundations Cluster is assigned to
work with four or five adjunct instructors in orienting them to the college’s
student-centered philosophy and encouraging them to use active and
collaborative learning techniques in the classroom. Adjunct faculty are observed by the cluster
leader and given feedback as to how to improve their instruction. Adjuncts are also encouraged to attend
subject area and cluster meetings and participate in “brown bag” discussions on
teaching and learning, faculty lead workshops, and other faculty development
activities. An orientation is provided
for adjuncts at the beginning of each semester and an adjunct faculty manual is
available as a reference for part-time faculty.
New adjunct faculty members are also encouraged to spend 90 minutes a
week working in the Developmental Advocacy Center to gain familiarity with
Northwest Vista students. Adjunct
faculty members are rewarded for participating in professional development
activities by being given a choice of teaching times and assignments.
The college makes it
a point to see that adjunct faculty are regarded as equal partners in the
learning venture and treated accordingly by their full-time colleagues. According to the Dean of Instruction, “We go
to great lengths to make the adjuncts feel like part of the college and we
include them in all cluster meetings and problem solving meetings.”
Collaborative learning in developmental classrooms
There
is a considerable body of research indicating that collaborative learning
contributes to student success (Grubb, 1999; McKeachie, 2000; Perin, 2001;
Weimer, 2002). It also appears to
contribute specifically to student success in developmental courses.
There
is a substantial emphasis on collaborative learning in developmental courses at
Northwest Vista. New faculty and
adjuncts are trained in the use of collaborative learning techniques. All faculty members are encouraged to use
these techniques in their teaching. In
fact, a recent survey of Northwest Vista students reported that collaborative
learning was used in 94% of classes.
The faculty believes
that this emphasis on collaborative learning is one of the reasons students are
successful in developmental courses. As
one instructor put it, “Getting students to collaborate with each other
improves the quality of learning that goes on here.” Another said, “Students can tell that we’re
serious about collaborative learning because we model it in our own practice.”
Promising Practices
Baseline data for formative evaluation
As
noted earlier in this report, the use of data for formative or continuous
quality improvement purposes is well documented in the literature as a best
practice in developmental education (Boylan, 2002; Casazza & Silverman,
1996; Maxwell, 1997; McCabe, 2000).
Northwest Vista College, however, has a particularly interesting way of
doing this. Data on pass rates and
persistence rates in developmental mathematics courses is collected at the end
of each semester. Baseline data averaging
past years’ performance is also calculated.
This baseline data is then shared with Academic Foundations mathematics
faculty.
The data is used by
instructors to identify where their particular classes fall along this
baseline. It is also reviewed by the
lead instructor in developmental mathematics, who provides advice and
encouragement to improve the baseline performance where necessary. Although the mathematics instructors look at
this data for all courses, they regard developmental mathematics courses as a
priority. This appears to be a promising
technique for using data to focus developmental instructors’ attention on areas
or courses where improvements might be made.
Valued activities integrated into the rewards system
At
Northwest Vista College, there is a clear understanding of what activities and
values are considered most important in developmental education. According to one administrator, “An emphasis
on values overarches everything that we do.”
As translated in operational terms, these values include such things as
participating in professional development, using collaborative learning in
classrooms, identifying and applying innovative learning strategies, and
collaborating with colleagues. Considerations
such as these are then taken into account in the rewards system of the
college.
For
example, participation in activities recognized as part of the college’s
primary values is built into the salary, tenure, and promotion system. Adjuncts participating in training activities
are given their choice of courses and schedules. Faculty members who are engaged in innovative
projects receive professional development support. All of these things function to encourage and
reward the use of best practices in developmental education among faculty.
Formal and informal structures supporting quality instruction
Norton
Grubb (1999) points out that, even though community colleges claim to value
good teaching, few colleges actually have structures in place to encourage and
support good teaching. Northwest Vista
College, however, has a variety of mechanisms in place to promote quality
teaching in general and for developmental students in particular.
Regular
faculty meetings in the Academic Foundations Cluster are devoted to the
discussion of teaching and learning issues.
Faculty members are encouraged to share successful techniques for
teaching developmental students and to engage in collaborative projects to
field test innovative practices. At
least once each year, departmental meetings are held to share and discuss
course syllabi. A systematic process is
in place for reviewing and changing syllabi based on data and experience.
As noted earlier,
Fridays are devoted to faculty development activities. Faculty members are encouraged to develop and
deliver workshops for each other and are rewarded in various ways for doing
so. There are a variety of formal and
informal opportunities for faculty to discuss and demonstrate how their
teaching reflects the values of the college.
All of these activities are part of a systematic effort to promote
quality instruction at Northwest Vista.
These activities are purposeful, consistent, and ongoing. As such, they represent a good model of
promising practice for developmental education.
Careful hiring of developmental educators
Administrators
and faculty alike were consistent in emphasizing that hiring the right faculty
is critical to the success of the college.
The hiring process is considered essential for insuring that new faculty
members represent the right “fit” with the college. This is particularly true
for developmental education. According
to the President of Northwest Vista, “The one thing we can’t teach someone is
how to fit into our culture. They have
to be able to do that from the start.”
The
credentials of all those applying for developmental education positions are
carefully reviewed by teams of faculty and administrators. All developmental education faculty members
are encouraged to participate in the interviews of new faculty. Applicants for faculty positions are required
to teach a demonstration lesson with particular attention to how this lesson
could work for developmental students.
It
was also interesting to note that many new faculty members are hired directly
out of graduate school. According to one
campus administrator, “We value youth and innovation.” This very careful attention given to the
hiring of new faculty appears to contribute to the success of developmental
education at Northwest Vista. As such,
it represents a promising practice.
SOUTH PLAINS COLLEGE
Levelland, Texas
FAST FACTS
|
Type
of Institution |
Public Comprehensive
2-year |
|
Location |
Rural/West Texas |
|
Credit
Enrollment |
9,585 |
|
Full-Time
Faculty |
297 |
|
Developmental
Education Faculty |
Full-Time
48 Part-Time 10 |
|
Developmental
Education Students |
2,909 |
|
Institutional
Budget |
$6,866,853 |
|
Developmental
Education Budget |
$2,083403 |
|
Cost
Per Developmental Student |
$716 |
|
Ethnicity
of Students |
White = 61% Latino = 32% African-American = 7% |
Context
South Plains College is a rural
comprehensive community college located in Levelland. The college offers a full range of career and
college transfer programs and has a long history of providing developmental
education. Before the TASP was initiated
in the late 1980s, South Plains was already assessing its students and placing
them in developmental courses based on this assessment.
South Plains has a decentralized
developmental program, in that courses are taught in their respective academic
departments. These courses include
developmental reading, English, and mathematics. They are supported by learning laboratories
and the Teaching and Learning Center.
The Teaching and Learning Center provides advising, tutoring, study skills
assessment, and individualized instruction.
The Center also offers learning strategies courses, a critical thinking
course, and a student success course.
The college also has a federally funded student support services program
and a program for students with disabilities.
Research
based best practices
Limited
use of adjuncts
An earlier study of developmental
education in Texas found that those institutions using the fewest numbers of
adjuncts to teach developmental courses had the highest post-developmental
education TASP pass rates (Boylan & Saxon, 1998). Similar findings were noted in the CQIN/APQC
study (2000) and in research by McCabe (2000).
South Plains College faculty and
administrators believe that full-time faculty should teach developmental
courses. They further believe that the
use of full-time faculty to teach developmental courses helps reinforce their
importance to the college community and to the students. As a result, 90% of
the college’s developmental courses are taught by full-time faculty.
Another advantage of using full-time
faculty to teach developmental courses is that, because the faculty understands
what is required in upper level courses, they know how to prepare students
better in developmental courses. One
department chair stated that, “We have great people in the classroom. We rotate courses so that all faculty members
teach some developmental education.”
This also helps to insure that the exit standards for developmental
courses are consistent with the entry standards for college level courses.
Learning
strategies instruction
The college offers several learning
strategies courses taught through the Teaching and Learning Center. Students are advised to take these courses if
their assessment test scores suggest they might profit from it. These courses follow the model used by Dr.
Claire Ellen Weinstein at the University of Texas – Austin (Weinstein, 1985;
1988). Unlike study strategies courses,
strategic learning courses use a holistic approach to learning, emphasizing
such concepts as metacognition, skill, will, and environment. This model has proven to be one of the most
effective methods available to enhance the performance of underprepared
students in colleges and universities (Weinstein, Dierking, Husman, Roska,
& Powdrill, 1998).
Strong
coordination and communication in developmental education
There is a high degree of
communication among developmental educators at South Plains College. Faculty meet every year in subject centered
groups to insure that, as department chair put it, “the curriculum is
constantly lining up.” Faculty members
review course syllabi, student evaluations, and course outcomes to insure that
there is a seamless transition between various levels of developmental
education, as well as between developmental education and the college
curriculum.
At the beginning of each academic
year, the Teaching and Learning Center brings developmental faculty together
for the “Developmental Educators’ Update.”
In this meeting, faculty members are provided with information on
national trends and issues, conferences, workshops, and teaching and learning
methods.
All instructors in the Teaching and
Learning Center meet monthly to discuss issues, problems, and solutions. At the beginning of each year the college
sponsors two days of faculty meetings to address teaching and learning
issues. In addition, a great deal of
informal communication takes place among developmental faculty including such
things as luncheon discussions and email discussions.
Tutor Training
Research consistently indicates that
tutor training is essential to a successful tutoring program (Boylan, 2002;
Boylan, Bliss, & Bonham, 1997; Casazza & Silverman, 1996; Maxwell,
1997). The Teaching and Learning Center
has a strong tutoring program that serves developmental students in a variety
of subject areas. Tutoring is also
offered by individual departments.
Developmental courses are supported by a strong
tutor training program that is recognized as a statewide model for tutor
training. This training program has been
certified at the highest level by the College Reading & Learning
Association (CRLA). CRLA provides the
oldest and most prestigious tutor certification program in the country.
Aggressive
professional development
Having well trained faculty members
teaching developmental students is essential to a successful developmental
program (Boylan, 2002; McCabe, 2000). There is a substantial emphasis on
professional development at South Plains College. Professional development is supported by the
administration through grants to attend professional conferences and
workshops. Professional development is
also supported through the college’s Title V grant.
Faculty members are surveyed each year to
determine their professional development needs.
Based on results from this survey, a variety of professional development
activities such as local workshops and conference attendance are planned. The Teaching and Learning Center also
provides updates and information for developmental educators, and departments
have their own newsletters or on-line discussion groups. The college has also provided a great deal of
technical support for faculty, including developmental educators. This support is designed to help faculty
improve the use of technology in their classrooms.
Early academic
advising for developmental students
Early and ongoing academic advising
for developmental students is a well known best practice in developmental
education (Casazza & Silverman, 1996; McCabe, 2000; Roueche & Roueche,
1999). The Teaching and Learning Center
at South Plains provides advising for all students who do not pass one or more
sections of the placement test. The
Center also provides specific training to help advisors work with underprepared
students. A rubric for assigning
students to courses based on test scores and other criteria has been designed
by advisors and is used regularly to guide students in selecting courses.
Developmental students are required to see a
trained advisor to develop what the college refers to as an “Individual Plan
for Success.” Guidelines for this plan
were developed in consultation with developmental educators. The plan outlines courses and other activities
that students will engage in each semester until the students have attained
“TSI success.”
Promising
Practices
Professional
treatment of developmental educators
College administrators place a
rather substantial amount of power in the hands of individual faculty,
particularly developmental educators. As
one administrator put it, “We hire very strong faculty through a very strong
selection process. We can’t turn around
and not allow them to make professional decisions.”
Another said that developmental
“faculty are the ultimate authority on a student’s grade. A grade of B or better says that student is
absolutely prepared for college level work.
Our faculty members understand and feel that professional accountability
and we trust them to exercise it.”
Administrators claimed that they
made a point to listen to faculty and be guided by what they heard. And, in fact, the faculty interviewed pointed
out many instances where the college administration had made major decisions
based on faculty input.
The faculty members interviewed
indicated that they, indeed, felt empowered by their administrators. They indicated that they knew they had the
power to make whatever decisions were necessary to promote student
learning. Faculty did not feel that any
of their efforts were micromanaged by their administrators.
Small
class size for developmental courses
Faculty and administrators at South
Plains both agreed that maintaining relatively small class sizes for
developmental courses was important.
Administrators particularly recognized that developmental writing
classes require that faculty spend a great deal of time grading and correcting
written assignments. Although
administrators acknowledged that capping enrollments in developmental courses
was expensive, particularly when these courses are taught by full-time faculty,
they felt that maintaining small classes was required by the institution’s
commitment to developmental education.
Generally, class sizes were kept to the following numbers of students
for each subject:
Although
class sizes for mathematics might occasionally reach thirty students, this is
an exception.
New
faculty mentoring programs
The college has a formal mentoring
program for newly hired faculty. In the
English and mathematics departments, new faculty members are assigned to a more
experienced faculty member for mentoring.
These mentors meet regularly with the new faculty, provide advice and
counsel, and are available to discuss problems encountered.
In addition, all new faculty hires
are required to attend an orientation program that emphasizes the college’s
learner-centered developmental education philosophy. As one faculty member said, “At South Plains
we improve every student’s life. We want
our new faculty to understand this completely.”
A great deal of emphasis is placed on this philosophy and there is
considerable formal and informal peer pressure for new faculty members to
follow it.
TEMPLE COLLEGE
Temple, Texas
FAST FACTS
|
Type
of Institution |
Public Comprehensive
2-year |
|
Location |
Rural/Central Texas |
|
Credit
Enrollment |
4,068 |
|
Full-Time
Faculty |
85 |
|
Developmental
Education Faculty |
Full-Time n.a.
Part-Time n.a. |
|
Developmental
Education Students |
748 |
|
Institutional
Budget |
$20,149,035 |
|
Developmental
Education Budget |
n.a. |
|
Cost
Per Developmental Student |
n.a. |
|
Ethnicity
of Students |
White = 70.4% Latino = 14% African-American = 14% |
Context
Temple College is a 2-year public community
college which offers Associate of Arts and Associate of Applied Science
degrees, as well as community education and public service courses. It is a suburban institution located in
Temple. It is relatively small in size,
and Hispanic and African-American students constitute the largest minority
student groups. Developmental education courses and services are integrated into
their respective academic departments.
Research-based
best practices
Administrative
Support for Developmental Education
First and foremost, Temple College exemplifies
strong administrative support for developmental education. The president states that developmental
education is one of the college’s major priorities. This is also reflected in print via a “values
statement” in the college catalog. The
developmental faculty also expresses confidence in the professional and funding
support they receive from administration.
Research supports the contention that making developmental education an
institutional priority contributes to student success (Roueche & Roueche,
1993; Roueche & Roueche, 1999).
Strong coordination
and communication in the developmental program
Although Temple has a decentralized
developmental program, there are features in place that contribute to a
coordinated effort and increased effectiveness.
The following is a list of some of these features.
The president stated his belief that the integration
of developmental education into the academic departments is an advantage. In this case, it appears that this practice
is much more than mere relegation of developmental education to academic
departments, but an effort to have increased communication and collaboration
among the developmental and regular curriculum faculty. There appears to be a high level of
integration between developmental education and regular curriculum courses at
Temple. The developmental faculty
expressed the sentiment that their efforts were valued and respected by the
academic disciplines in which they are a part.
This practice is consistent with findings from the CQIN/APQC (2000)
study whereby effective decentralized programs were characterized by high
levels of integration and communication.
The developmental faculty meets regularly with
college curriculum faculty in order to address the issue of linking
developmental course content to college curriculum course requirements. The proximity of these entities lends itself
to more informal discussion of these matters among the faculty. The research strongly supports that a
seamless transition between developmental and college-level courses contributes
to student success (Roueche & Roueche, 1993, 1999; Boylan & Saxon, 1998;
CQIN/APQC, 2000).
Mandatory Assessment and Placement
All students entering a degree program take the THEA. However, exemptions are allowed based on SAT,
ACT, and TAAS scores. Developmental
students are prevented from participating in electronic registration and are
required to see an advisor. This is an
important feature because research has shown that advising by trained academic
advisors is related to the success of developmental students (Boylan, Bliss,
& Bonham, 1997). Temple College
faculty and administrators are committed to insuring that developmental
students receive personal advising from advisors who are consistent in
directing students to take the developmental courses into which they are
placed. Although advisors may make
exceptions to students’ developmental education placement, these exceptions are
few and are carefully implemented. There
is a great deal of consistency in the messages provided by advisors regarding
the importance of developmental education.
Placement in the appropriate developmental
courses is, therefore, mandatory based on assessment. If developmental students do not successfully
complete their developmental courses, they are dropped from any college
curriculum courses they are enrolled in.
This feature of mandatory assessment and placement has consistently been
associated with developmental student success (Roueche & Roueche, 1999;
Boylan, 2002).
Mastery-based
instruction
Developmental mathematics courses at Temple
College are taught as lab-based courses.
The lab will accommodate 30 students at a time, with three full-time
faculty members present to serve as tutors.
Students may progress in developmental mathematics at their own paces;
however, the software has encryption features embedded that will alert faculty
members if and when required remediation in particular content areas is
necessary. Required remediation is a
component of mastery learning and generally associated with improved student
pass rates in developmental courses (CQIN, 2000; Boylan, 2002).
Students are required to attend the lab sessions
on a weekly basis, but they have flexibility in determining their own
schedules. The mathematics faculty feels
that students are more engaged in active learning in the laboratory environment
than so in traditional classroom instruction.
Careful
hiring of developmental educators
Temple college administrators feel that the
hiring of quality faculty, both full-time and adjunct, is vital in upholding an
institutional developmental philosophy. As
the college’s Vice President for Educational Services states, “Everything we do
later will be made harder or easier by the decisions we make now.”
In the selection process, candidates are
required to deliver a teaching demonstration to the hiring committee. The committee looks for teaching techniques
and strategies that would serve underprepared students effectively. The candidate must also demonstrate an
enthusiasm for teaching and learning, the knowledge and attitudes to appropriately
address the needs of traditionally underserved student populations, and a
student-oriented philosophy consistent with the values of the college.
As do many programs, Temple must rely on adjunct
instructors to teach developmental education.
Adjunct faculty members are placed in a situation that fosters a
mentoring relationship between themselves and veteran faculty. Each adjunct faculty member is assigned to a
senior faculty mentor who is available to provide advice and consultation.
Promising
practices
Small
Class Size
Temple College falls at or below the national
averages (Boylan, Bonham, Jackson, & Saxon, 1995; Shults, 2000) for student
class sizes in their developmental reading and writing courses, as well as
developmental English. Typical class
sizes for these courses are 15-20 students.
This allows instructors to offer greater attention and increased
individualized assistance to developmental students. Most instructors of these courses considered
small class size to be a contributing factor in the success of their
students.
Regular
use of administrators as instructors
The administration of Temple College
demonstrates their commitment to teaching by serving as instructors on a
regular basis. Faculty members feel that
the administrators remain empathetic to and aware of the issues that teachers
face because they are spending time in the classroom. The faculty suggests that this gives them an
implicit sense of support for their efforts.
Although no research-based information is available to support the idea
that having administrators teach classes is associated with student success,
when administrators do teach, it makes a statement about the importance of the
instructional mission of the college.
Immediate
enrollment in college mathematics following completion of developmental mathematics
Although there is no empirical evidence to
support this, anecdotal evidence suggests that this contributes to improved
student performance in later mathematics courses. Furthermore, the notion that student
performance is improved by taking college mathematics courses immediately
following developmental math courses is certainly not counter-intuitive. This is a potentially important finding
because it would be a cost effective way of improving student performance in
mathematics, the area in which developmental students are typically the weakest
(National Center for Education Statistics, 2003; Boylan, 2002).
Focused
use of technology
With regard to this use of technology, the mathematics
labs contain computers dedicated specifically to the task at hand; that is,
teaching developmental mathematics. The
computers will not allow access to any other programs than the mathematics
software utilized for developmental mathematics. Students, therefore, are not distracted by
temptation to access the Internet, play games, or check email while in the
mathematics lab. This appears to
reinforce the notion of why students are in the lab and may contribute to a
more focused learning experience.
TEXARKANA COLLEGE
Texarkana, Texas
FAST FACTS
|
Type
of Institution |
Public, 2-year |
|
Location |
Northeastern Texas |
|
Credit
Enrollment |
4,217 |
|
Full-Time
Faculty |
108 |
|
Developmental
Education Faculty |
Full-Time 2
Part-Time 8 |
|
Developmental
Education Students |
1040 (duplicated) |
|
Institutional
Budget |
$14,231,549 |
|
Developmental
Education Budget |
n.a. |
|
Cost
Per Developmental Student |
n.a. |
|
Ethnicity
of Students |
White = 81% Latino = 2% African-American = 16% |
Context
Texarkana College offers a variety
of vocational, technical, and transfer programs. The campus is located in Texarkana, an urban
area of Northeast Texas and serves students from a variety of backgrounds. Ethnic minorities constitute approximately
19% of the student population. A scholarship
program (Rising Star) that has recently been implemented has significantly
increased the college’s enrollment, as well as participation in developmental
courses and services. Adult and
continuing education and cooperative education are emphasized as vital parts of
Texarkana’s program offerings.
Developmental education courses and activities are organized in a
decentralized fashion and cited as being “vital to the success of the
institution.” Developmental education is
included in the mission statement of the college as well. Learning assistance is offered through
Student Support Services and a TRIO grant funded lab.
Research-based
Best Practices
Administrative
support for developmental education
A strong commitment to developmental
education is apparent at Texarkana College.
At every administrative level, the personnel feel and express that their
professional success is contingent upon student success. The president suggests that everyone at the
college is “in one way or another involved in developmental education.” He emphasizes that Texarkana College is the
“go to” college for students to develop and succeed. There is also careful attention paid to
remove any stigma associated with developmental education. Every effort is made to uplift and assist
students who need to develop their college skills. Administrators and faculty do not want
students to feel that they are not “college material” just because their skills
are weak in a particular subject area. Research
supports that developmental education as an institutional priority contributes
to student success (Roueche & Roueche, 1993; Roueche & Roueche,
1999).
Decentralized
(but coordinated) developmental education
Texarkana College offers developmental education courses through
their respective academic departments.
The faculty and administration feel that this particular structure aids
in the alignment of developmental and college-level curriculum courses, and it
may serve to reduce the stigmatization of developmental students and activities.
Another benefit suggested by the faculty is that students may be able to take
both developmental and college-level courses from the same instructor. This facilitates the alignment of content,
the development of adequate developmental course standards, and builds rapport
between the instructor and student. The
president suggests that the institution is “pretty thin administratively,” and
that this contributes to more effective communication. Boylan, Bliss, and Bonham (1997) suggest that
programs with a high level of coordination among its developmental courses and
services are more successful. The
organizational structure and the commitment to a developmental philosophy at
Texarkana College lend itself to effective coordination of its developmental
program.
Mandatory
Assessment and Placement
According to the Texas Success Initiative (TSI),
all students entering a degree program take either the THEA or the Accuplacer. Assessment exemptions may be allowed based on
SAT, ACT, TAKS, and TAAS scores. Students
exempt from TSI are assessed in order to make placement recommendations, as
well. Students assessed as developmental
are required to see an advisor. The
research literature suggests that advising by trained academic advisors is
related to the success of developmental students (Boylan, Bliss, & Bonham,
1997; Boylan, 2002). Advisors are required
to attend an orientation session which, among other issues, addresses the need
for and the benefits provided by developmental education. This training promotes a consistently
positive demeanor expressed by advisors in conveying information about
developmental education to students.
Placement in the appropriate developmental
courses is mandatory based on assessment.
If students do not successfully complete their developmental courses,
they are dropped from college curriculum courses. This feature of mandatory assessment and
placement is associated with developmental student success (Roueche &
Roueche, 1999; Boylan, 2002). Students
admitted under exemptions to TSI are assessed using one of the aforementioned
examinations. Should it be deemed
necessary, those students needing developmental courses are encouraged in a
positive manner to enroll in them.
Tutor
Training
Texarkana College implements
research proven measures to develop the effectiveness of their tutoring
program. All peer tutors are trained in
effective tutoring techniques. Peer
leaders are given the opportunity to attend the annual National Tutoring
Association conference. Boylan, Bliss,
and Bonham (1997) find the training of tutors working with developmental
education students contributes to student success.
Integrated
courses and laboratories
Many of the developmental education
instructors and the staff of the Learning Lab suggested that there was a strong
connection between courses and lab activities.
Developmental mathematics courses had regular, coordinated lab
activities. Computer and video resources
in the laboratory were “keyed” to the classroom instructional materials. The integration of developmental courses and
laboratory activities has been cited in the literature as a contributing factor
to successful developmental education (Boylan, Bliss, & Bonham, 1997;
Continuous Quality Improvement Network/American Productivity and Quality
Center, 2000).
Entering
student orientation programs for academic credit
Entering students are required to
take an orientation course designed to acclimate them to campus life, college
issues, and expectations. A variety of
resources are used in this course that help students understand the difference
between high school and college and familiarize them with college level
expectations. The course also emphasizes
study strategies and personal planning.
Completion of the course offers one hour of academic credit.
Student orientation courses have consistently
been recognized as contributing to student success (Casazza & Silverman,
1996; Higbee & Dwinnell, 1998; McCabe, 2000). They are particularly helpful to first-generation
college students, who are frequently the majority of developmental students.
Promising
Practices
Developmental
mathematics emphasis
Since a majority of developmental
students participate in developmental math, administrators and faculty feel
that math is the foundation of college success.
This provides the impetus for careful attention to the way courses are
structured and taught and how resources are allocated to the department. The following list sums up many of the
techniques and practices developed by the mathematics department to promote
student success in developmental mathematics.
Techniques
& Practices that Promote Success in Texarkana College
Developmental
Mathematics Program
•
Strict classroom attendance policy
•
Required 1 hour per week tutorial lab attendance
•
Required participation
•
All of above or be dropped - if dropped then dropped from all enrolled
courses
•
Departmental common text and curriculum for all full- and part-time
faculty
•
Departmentalized final exam ensures same curriculum goals and definition of success
for all faculty/students
•
Provide access to practice test packets and practice final exam
•
Quality teachers - regular availability, approachable, caring, provide encouragement,
diversity and flexibility in teaching styles which accommodates many different
learning styles
•
Math Lab for tutorial experiences - one-on-one with personal tutors (qualified,
caring and willing to help, make students work to learn, variety of help
styles), computer resources keyed to text, video resources keyed to text,
accessible hours for students to seek help
•
Design of curriculum - use same text for 2 semesters, keep course load lighter
per semester and at a manageable pace
•
Faculty teach both remedial and college-level courses so they understand what
is needed in a remedial course to succeed in a college math course
•
Keep remedial area integrated within regular Math department - students feel
less stigmatization, have common instructors with college-level students, and
can follow same instructor from remedial courses to college credit courses to
build rapport
•
The department has realistic goals for getting these students through
remediation without lowering standards
Source: Mathematics department, Texarkana College.
Careful
hiring of developmental educators
The Dean of Instruction states that “The most
important step we take is in hiring (developmental faculty).” It is emphasized that that every faculty
member is part of the developmental program.
Either they are working directly with developmental students or, at the
least, they work to design developmental courses and align the developmental
curriculum with the college-level curriculum.
All applicants must have a teaching background and a commitment to
student success. Developmental education
is specifically addressed and discussed in job interviews.
New faculty hires and all part-time faculty members
are assigned to a veteran faculty member for training, mentoring, and
evaluation purposes. Only the faculty
members who want to teach
developmental courses are assigned to them.
This was found to be a practice consistent with exemplary programs in
the Continuous Quality Improvement Network study of developmental education
(CQIN/APQC, 2000).
Values
driven operations
Many statements were apparent during the
interviews which suggested embedded values of commitment, caring, and
community. These values may be
difficult to quantify, however they are likely to contribute to the motivation
to succeed and the maintenance of high morale.
Administrators and faculty consistently stated that they are strongly
committed to student success. They
expressed concern and care for their students and for each other. They enjoyed working with and collaborating
with one other. Once again, these values
appeared prevalent in all institutions that participated in this study. The association of these values with
successful programs may suggest that they represent a promising practice for
developmental education administration.
Customer
orientation in assessment
The director of assessment at Texarkana College
maintains what may be considered as a “students-as-customers orientation” in
her approach to managing operations.
There is formal training provided to staff that emphasizes customer
service skills, as well as functional provisions of the department. The reasoning behind a service orientation is
that all prospective students must initially visit the Assessment Office. The director emphasizes that “The first
impression makes all the difference in the world.” Formal lines of communication are
established through staff meetings which are held every 2-3 weeks. If student “consumers” are treated well by
the staff in this office, they may be more receptive to the outcomes imposed by
assessment activities.
Professional
treatment of developmental educators
It is apparent through interviews
that developmental educators at Texarkana College are respected and considered
to be experts and professionals in their work.
They are given autonomy with regard to decision making and budget
control. Their efforts and experience
are valued by the administration. Their
mission is clearly delineated and supported.
This is a characteristic that turned up at all institutions in the study
and has been mentioned in other qualitative studies, as well (CQIN/APQC, 2000; Boylan, Bonham, Keefe, Drewes, & Saxon, 2004). It seems intuitive that where developmental
educators are valued in this fashion, their efforts are more likely to be
successful.
APPENDIX 1
President’s Letter
January
12, 2005
______________
______________
______________
______________
Dear
President _______:
Congratulations!
Following first stage analysis of data from the Texas Higher Education
Coordinating Board, XXX Community College, has
been identified as having one of the most effective developmental education
programs in the State of Texas.
As
you may know, the Texas Association of Community Colleges has commissioned the
National Center for Developmental Education to conduct a study of high
performing developmental education programs in Texas community colleges. The initial part of this study involved an
analysis of post developmental education TASP pass rates from 1999 to
2003. Using this measure, your
institution was one of the top ten performers among Texas community colleges.
The
second stage of this project involves site visits to five colleges with high
performing developmental programs. These
institutions have been selected to represent various types of institutions and
regions within the State of Texas. XXX Community College is one of the
institutions selected for a site visit.
The
purpose of site visits is to identify what your college is doing to promote
success in developmental education.
Based on our findings, we will prepare a presentation to the Texas
Association of Community Colleges at this summer’s conference. We will also be publishing a report
highlighting our findings in the fall of 2005.
To
this end, we would like to visit your campus and meet with you as well as with
faculty and administrators involved in developmental education at XXX Community College.
We hope to conduct these visits between March and April of
2005. One of our research assistants
will be contacting your office shortly to make arrangements for this visit.
Should
you have any questions about this project, our site visits, or our report,
please feel free to call me at 828-262-6100.
I look forward to meeting with you and your colleagues in the near
future.
Sincerely,
Hunter
R. Boylan, Ph.D.
Professor
and Director
APPENDIX 2
List of Interviewees
Interviews were arranged
with the following people at each institution:
President of the College
Director of
Institutional Research
Director of Testing
Director of
Developmental Education
Developmental Education
Faculty (lead full-time faculty)
APPENDIX 3
Questions For Texas Site Visits
NAME OF INSTITUTION_______________________________________
NAME/TITLE OF THOSE INTERVIEWED_________________________
DATE OF VISIT_______________________________________________
ORGANIZATION AND ADMINISTRATION
1. Please describe the structure
of your developmental education program, including how it receives funding, its
placement within the organization’s administrative structure, and any
collaborative approaches/relationships with internal and external
organizations.
§
centralized developmental education program?
§
highly coordinated developmental education
program?
2. What are the greatest
strengths of your DE program?
3. Describe how you integrate
the various functions of your institution’s DE program.
4. How is the developmental
education program included in the institution’s overall strategic planning
process?
6. Are there any key lessons
that you have learned from your developmental
education program?
§
Are there any lessons that may be of benefit to
others?
7. What role does adjunct faculty
play in your program? What type of
orientation/professional development opportunities are they offered?
8. What innovations have you
implemented that you consider “best practice?"
9. What are the five most
critical steps your institution took to establish developmental education as a
successful program? What steps is it
taking to ensure its continued success?
10. What aspects of your
developmental education curriculum contribute most to your program’s success?
PROGRAM COMPONENTS
1. Is a systematic plan in place
for the evaluation of developmental education courses and services?
Do you collect data on
faculty satisfaction with your DE program?
Is it collected from dedicated DE faculty only, or from faculty members
who also teach college-level courses?
What methods are you using to collect this data? What have the results been? Please explain.
2. Is professional development
available for developmental educators? What activities in this area have been
the most successful and why?
How are these
opportunities typically provided (e.g., workshop format, in-service, ongoing
informal sharing of resources, etc.)?
3. Is there a written philosophy
statement that guides the provision of developmental education courses and
services? What is it?
Could you describe the
values and beliefs that you believe are associated with your program?
4. Describe the curriculum
development process for your DE program and how this process is supported by
the institution (e.g., through faculty release time, curricular design
assistance, technology support, etc.).
5. How is student performance
monitored in your DE program for intervention purposes?
INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICES
1. How does your institution
assess learner skills and abilities? How
are students placed in developmental education courses?
2. Why that particular
instrument (the THEA in all cases according to our records)?
3. What do you do to ensure
consistency between exit standards of developmental classes and curriculum
entry classes?
4. What pedagogical approaches
or methodologies have you found work best with developmental education
students? Please explain.
§
learning communities
§
different instructional methods
§
instructors regularly use active learning
techniques
5. Describe all of the support
services (academic and personal intervention) provided to students in your DE
program? Which have contributed the most
to the success of your institution’s developmental education students?
6. What role does technology
play in the overall structure of your developmental education program?
7. What %
of DE students take classes on-line?
Footnotes
[1]
[2] For instance, the person occupying the
role comparable to a dean of instruction at one college was titled “Vice
President for Academic Affairs,” at another that person was titled “Vice
President of Educational Services.”
[3] Completion rates and “C or better” rates
were usually based on the number of students still officially enrolled in the
course as of the last day of the semester.
[4] It should be noted that the use of baseline data
will always result in eventually reaching a point of diminishing returns where
further improvement would be unrealistic given available time and
resources. It is unlikely, however, that
this point will be reached quickly.
[6] Although the THEA is not the college’s
primary assessment instrument, the core skills measured by the THEA are used in
developing final examinations.