1 / 47

Foothill College

Foothill College. Opening Day 2004 Selected Findings on Basic Skills. Rob Johnstone, 9/17/04. Section 1 Benchmark Statistics, Placement Testing. 1.1 – Placement Results for Students Taking Placement Tests in 2003-04. 1.2 – English Placement Results, 2003-04.

zalika
Télécharger la présentation

Foothill College

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

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Foothill College Opening Day 2004 Selected Findings on Basic Skills Rob Johnstone, 9/17/04

  2. Section 1 Benchmark Statistics,Placement Testing

  3. 1.1 – Placement Results for Students Taking Placement Tests in 2003-04

  4. 1.2 – English Placement Results, 2003-04 Note: Does not include students who were directed to take ESL test or to see Counselor/Division Dean.

  5. 1.3 – ESL Placement Results, 2003-04 Note: Does not include students who were directed to take English test or to see Counselor/Division Dean.

  6. 1.4 – Math Placement Results, 2003-04 Note: Does not include students who were directed to take another test and never followed through.

  7. 1.5 – What are the course-taking outcomes of students who have Pre-Collegiate placements?

  8. 1.5A – Course-Taking Outcomes for Pre-Collegiate English Note: Based on students taking placement tests in 2002-03; enrollments followed through 2004 Spring.

  9. 1.5B – Course-Taking Outcomes for Pre-Collegiate ESL Note: Based on students taking placement tests in 2002-03; enrollments followed through 2004 Spring.

  10. 1.5C – Course-Taking Outcomes for Pre-Collegiate Math Note: Based on students taking placement tests in 2002-03; enrollments followed through 2004 Spring.

  11. Section 2Basic Skills Task Force Key Questions

  12. Math 250: 65% 200: 58% 101: 57% 105: 69% 2.1 – What are the success rates of Basic Skills students? • English • 100: 75% • 110: 73% • ESL • 130s: 71% • 140s: 67% • 150s: 67% • 160s: 80% • 170s: 78% • 025: 81% Data Covers 2003-2004 School Year

  13. Math Asian: 71% Black: 46% Filipino: 68% Hispanic: 54% White: 68% Other/Unk: 68% 2.2 – What are the success rates in B.Skills courses by ethnicity? English • Asian: 76% • Black: 68% • Filipino: 65% • Hispanic: 68% • White: 80% • Other/Unk: 77% ESL • Asian: 82% • Hispanic: 64% • White: 84% • Other/Unk: 71% Data Covers 2003-2004 School Year

  14. Math 250: 88% 200: 85% 101: 86% 105: 79% 2.3 – What are the retention rates of Basic Skills students? • English • 100: 88% • 110: 88% • ESL • 130s: 90% • 140s: 86% • 150s: 88% • 160s: 92% • 170s: 93% • 025: 93% Data Covers 2003-2004 School Year

  15. 2.4A – What are the persistence rates of Basic Skills students? • Basic Skills English Students in 2003F • Persistence to 2004W in any course = 80% • Persistence within English in 04W or 04S = 67% • Basic Skills ESL Students in 2003F • Persistence to 2004W in any course = 76% • Persistence within English or ESL in 04W or 04S = 74% Note: For reference, campus-wide persistence from 2003F – 2004W in all segments was 65%, and in Segments 4 & 5 was 76%.

  16. 2.4B – What are the persistence rates of Basic Skills students? • Basic Skills Math Students in 2003F • Persistence to 2004W in any course = 77% • Persistence within Math in 04W or 04S = 59% Note: For reference, campus-wide persistence from 2003F – 2004W in all segments was 65%, and in Segments 4 & 5 was 76%.

  17. Any course in 04W Asian: 82% Black: 77% Hispanic: 80% White: 83% Other/Unk: 77% 2.5A – What are the persistence rates of 2003F Basic Skills English students by ethnicity ? English in 04W or 04S • Asian: 69% • Black: 69% • Hispanic: 67% • White: 67% • Other/Unk: 63% Note: For reference, campus-wide persistence from 2003F – 2004W in all segments was 65%, and in Segments 4 & 5 was 76%.

  18. Any course in 04W Asian: 87% Hispanic: 64% White: 73% Other/Unk: 84% 2.5B – What are the persistence rates of 2003F Basic Skills ESL students by ethnicity ? English/ESL in 04W or 04S • Asian: 84% • Hispanic: 66% • White: 64% • Other/Unk: 72% Note: For reference, campus-wide persistence from 2003F – 2004W in all segments was 65%, and in Segments 4 & 5 was 76%.

  19. Any course in 04W Asian: 77% Black: 81% Hispanic: 71% White: 79% Other/Unk: 78% 2.5C – What are the persistence rates of 2003F Basic Skills Math students by ethnicity ? Math in 04W or 04S • Asian: 57% • Black: 64% • Hispanic: 56% • White: 60% • Other/Unk: 57% Note: For reference, campus-wide persistence from 2003F – 2004W in all segments was 65%, and in Segments 4 & 5 was 76%.

  20. 2.6 – Does our existing curriculum adequately prepare students for the sequence of classes they need to take?

  21. Starting in Math 200 Pass 200: 72% Pass 101: 37% Pass 105: 20% Pass CL: 11% Starting in Math 101 Pass 101: 79% Pass 105: 41% Pass CL: 24% Starting in Math 105 Pass 105: 72% Pass CL: 32% 2.6A – Math Sequence Progression, 2000-2001 Entering Cohort Enrollments tracked through Spring 2004

  22. Starting in Eng 100 Pass 100: 79% Pass 110*: 47% Pass 1A: 36% Pass 1B: 21% Starting in Eng 110 Pass 110: 86% Pass 1A: 62% Pass 1B: 39% Starting in Eng 1A Pass 1A: 90% Pass 1B: 58% 2.6B – English Sequence Progression, 2000-2001 Entering Cohort Enrollments tracked through Spring 2004

  23. Starting in ESL 150s Pass 150s: 87% Pass 160s: 55% Pass 25: 32% Pass 26: 26% Starting in ESL 160s Pass 160s: 94% Pass 25: 66% Pass 26: 55% Starting in ESL 26 Pass 25: 94% Pass 26: 61% 2.6C – ESL Sequence Progression, 2000-2001 Entering Cohort Enrollments tracked through Spring 2004

  24. 2.7 – Is a student who took a Basic Skills sequence course last quarter more likely to pass the next course in the sequence than a student who waits 3+ quarters?

  25. 2.7 -Time Lag/Non-Success in BS Sequence Courses Data Covers 2003-2004 School Year

  26. 2.8 – How does course load affect the success of Basic Skills students?

  27. 2.8A – Non-Success in Basic Skills Courses and Overall Course Load : English Data Covers 2003-2004 School Year

  28. 2.8B – Non-Success in Basic Skills Courses and Overall Course Load : ESL Data Covers 2003-2004 School Year

  29. 2.8C – Non-Success in Basic Skills Courses and Overall Course Load: Math Data Covers 2003-2004 School Year

  30. 2.9 – Does prior course grade relate to future course success in Basic Skills sequence courses?

  31. 2.9A - Prior Course Grade and Non-Success: Math Enrollments tracked from 1998M to 2003S

  32. 2.9B - Prior Course Grade and Non-Success: Eng 110 Enrollments tracked from 1998M to 2003S

  33. 2.9C - Prior Course Grade and Non-Success: Eng 1A Enrollments tracked from 1998M to 2003S

  34. 2.10 – Do students who complete their Basic Skills courses have a higher rate of success than those who don’t?

  35. 2.10A – English Course Completion and BSS Non-Success Enrollments tracked from 1996M to 2002S

  36. 2.10B – English/ESL Placement and BSS Non-Success Enrollments tracked from 1996M to 2002S

  37. 2.10C – Math Level and Econ 1/Actg 1/Astr 10 Non-Success Enrollments tracked from 1996M to 2002S

  38. Section 3 Research Highlights from Basic Skills Special Programs At Foothill and Other California Schools

  39. 3.1 – Foothill Pass the Torch • Widely successful model pairing at-risk current students with academically successful former students from same class. • Success rate improvements of 8 to 15 points in English, 7 to 22 points in Math • Improvements noted are independent of prior levels of knowledge; PTT members had lower levels of academic success upon entry to program. • After one year, 63% of non-PTT members of similar risk status had left campus by the following Fall quarter – only 11% of PTT members had left campus.

  40. 3.2 – Foothill Puente & Mfumo • Both programs combine counseling, English, and mentoring for the English 100 through English 1A sequence. • Puente focuses on Hispanic/Latino students, and Mfumo on African-American students (although not exclusively) • 2002 Cohort Results: • Puente: 44% of students succeeded through Eng 1A • Mfumo: 38% • Control Group: 22% • 2003 Cohort Results: • Puente: 45% of students succeeded through Eng 1A • Mfumo: 34% • Control Group: 22%

  41. 3.3 – De Anza Math Performance Success (MPS) Program • Program for pre-collegiate Math courses • Takes traditional 5 days a week, 1 hr/day and transforms it into 5 days a week, 2 hrs/day • More collaborative group work • Counselor in every session • Group peer tutoring and study sessions • Amazing increase in success rates – 40 points higher in Math 101, 30 points in Math 105, 20 points in Math 10 • Actively recruits students who have previously been unsuccessful in coursework

  42. 3.4A – Mt. San Antonio College Math Academy • Beginning and Intermediate Algebra have 41-54% success rates at Mt. Sac; only 19-24% get through both in two semesters. • Math Academy combines the two semesters into one semester • Adds in a student peer advisor, a supplemental instructor giving individualized instruction, and regular visits with counselor • Also two-hour study skills course every week

  43. 3.4B – Mt. San Antonio College Math Academy • Another key component – the two-hour study skills course also focuses on math in real-world environments, and on math throughout the rest of the college curriculum • Increased success rates of completing both courses in a single semester to 62-77%, 2.5 times higher than the two-semester rate of 19-24%. • Student quote:“My hope at the beginning of the class was to get my math over with so I could go on to the stuff I am good at and enjoy, but now I am beginning to see math as empowering. I am now beginning to wonder if perhaps I want to take more than the minimum math requirements. I am beginning to wonder if I want to teach math also.”

  44. 3.5A – City College of San Francisco (CCSF) Special Program Services • Tracked service usage for pre-collegiate basic skills programs at individual level • Nine programs studied were African-American Scholastic Programs, DSPS, EOPS, Homeless/At Risk Students Program, Latino Service Network, Learning Assistance Center (LAC), Math Bridge, Puente, & Writing Service Program. • Number of students served ranged from 50 (Math Bridge) to over 13,000 (LAC)

  45. 3.5B – City College of San Francisco (CCSF) Special Program Services • Found that 84% of students utilized only one service. • Success rates of students utilizing services were 3 to 24 points higher in Math, and 6 to 33 points in English • For specific minority groups, success rate improvements were even higher. • Noted that demand far outweighed supply – 13,000 students take pre-collegiate courses every semester, only 3,000 served by non-LAC services in entire academic year.

  46. 3.6 – Common Threads for Success • Shift traditional delivery model to more learner-centered model (Barr Learning College vs. Teaching College) • Utilize cohorts/peer group investment • Focus on developing study skills early in pre-collegiate course sequences • Additional student time on task is required; this is an issue for recruiting • Student confidence in their own abilities is increased

  47. 3.7 – Cost Considerations • Foothill’s system for tracking students at point-of-service is coming in the near future. • CCSF has calculated cost per student of special programs – found an average of $1,350 per student. • Yes, expensive, but aside from the fact we should be doing this because it works, we need to consider downstream benefits of WSCH gained from persisting students. • IRP will attempt to calculate return-on-investment (ROI) model similar to those calculated in industry for investments.

More Related