for insightful feedback offered over the course of reviewing multiple drafts of the report. In addition, conducts research on the major issues affecting community colleges in the United States and contributes to the development of practice and policy that expands access to higher education and promotes success for all students.
{"title":"Redefining Full-Time in College: Evidence on 15-Credit Strategies","authors":"S. Klempin","doi":"10.7916/D83F4N7Z","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7916/D83F4N7Z","url":null,"abstract":"for insightful feedback offered over the course of reviewing multiple drafts of the report. In addition, conducts research on the major issues affecting community colleges in the United States and contributes to the development of practice and policy that expands access to higher education and promotes success for all students.","PeriodicalId":218750,"journal":{"name":"Community College Research Center, Columbia University","volume":"30 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114560490","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"A Growing Culture of Evidence? Findings From a Survey on Data Use at Achieving the Dream Colleges in Washington State","authors":"M. Kerrigan, Davis Jenkins","doi":"10.7916/D8ST7MT9","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7916/D8ST7MT9","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":218750,"journal":{"name":"Community College Research Center, Columbia University","volume":"125 17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133094049","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Thomas R. Bailey, S. Jaggars, Judith E. Scott-Clayton
Over the past several years, the Community College Research Center (CCRC) has conducted several research studies on developmental education and has produced reviews synthesizing the results of our own work together with that of colleagues from other research organizations. In a recent issue of the Journal of Developmental Education, Alexandros Goudas and Hunter Boylan (2012) aimed several criticisms at this body of work, with the key claims being that: (1) we unfairly portray developmental education as ineffective because it does not lead to outcomes better than those of collegeready students; (2) we ignore several studies showing positive results; and (3) we overgeneralize from results that are only valid for students near the developmental cutoff scores. These three claims are woven into a broader critique that we have “cherry-picked” negative results, neglected methodological problems with the studies yielding such results, and ignored positive results in order to advance our own reform agenda and, in particular, to support the notion of co-requisite developmental education.
在过去的几年里，社区学院研究中心(CCRC)进行了几项关于发展教育的研究，并综合了我们自己和其他研究机构的同事的研究结果，发表了一些评论。在最近一期的《发展教育杂志》(Journal of Developmental Education)上，Alexandros Goudas和Hunter Boylan(2012)针对这一工作提出了几项批评，其中关键的观点是:(1)我们不公平地将发展教育描述为无效的，因为它不会带来比大学毕业生更好的结果;(2)我们忽略了一些显示积极结果的研究;(3)我们过度概括了只对接近发展分数线的学生有效的结果。这三种说法被编织成一种更广泛的批评，即我们有“精心挑选的”负面结果，忽视了产生这些结果的研究的方法问题，并忽视了积极的结果，以推进我们自己的改革议程，特别是支持共同必要的发展教育的概念。
{"title":"Characterizing the Effectiveness of Developmental Education: A Response to Recent Criticism","authors":"Thomas R. Bailey, S. Jaggars, Judith E. Scott-Clayton","doi":"10.7916/D857191J","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7916/D857191J","url":null,"abstract":"Over the past several years, the Community College Research Center (CCRC) has conducted several research studies on developmental education and has produced reviews synthesizing the results of our own work together with that of colleagues from other research organizations. In a recent issue of the Journal of Developmental Education, Alexandros Goudas and Hunter Boylan (2012) aimed several criticisms at this body of work, with the key claims being that: (1) we unfairly portray developmental education as ineffective because it does not lead to outcomes better than those of collegeready students; (2) we ignore several studies showing positive results; and (3) we overgeneralize from results that are only valid for students near the developmental cutoff scores. These three claims are woven into a broader critique that we have “cherry-picked” negative results, neglected methodological problems with the studies yielding such results, and ignored positive results in order to advance our own reform agenda and, in particular, to support the notion of co-requisite developmental education.","PeriodicalId":218750,"journal":{"name":"Community College Research Center, Columbia University","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115622615","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Nikki Edgecombe, S. Jaggars, Elaine Delott Baker, Thomas R. Bailey
{"title":"Acceleration Through a Holistic Support Model: An Implementation and Outcomes Analysis of FastStart@CCD","authors":"Nikki Edgecombe, S. Jaggars, Elaine Delott Baker, Thomas R. Bailey","doi":"10.7916/D8JQ0Z18","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7916/D8JQ0Z18","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":218750,"journal":{"name":"Community College Research Center, Columbia University","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133331695","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Using a dataset containing nearly 500,000 courses taken by over 40,000 community and technical college students in Washington State, this study examines how well students adapt to the online environment in terms of their ability to persist and earn strong grades in online courses relative to their ability to do so in face-to-face courses. While all types of students in the study suffered decrements in performance in online courses, some struggled more than others to adapt: males, younger students, Black students, and students with lower grade point averages. In particular, students struggled in subject areas such as English and social science, which was due in part to negative peer effects in these online courses.
{"title":"Adaptability to Online Learning: Differences across Types of Students and Academic Subject Areas. CCRC Working Paper No. 54.","authors":"Di Xu, S. Jaggars","doi":"10.7916/D82F7M24","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7916/D82F7M24","url":null,"abstract":"Using a dataset containing nearly 500,000 courses taken by over 40,000 community and technical college students in Washington State, this study examines how well students adapt to the online environment in terms of their ability to persist and earn strong grades in online courses relative to their ability to do so in face-to-face courses. While all types of students in the study suffered decrements in performance in online courses, some struggled more than others to adapt: males, younger students, Black students, and students with lower grade point averages. In particular, students struggled in subject areas such as English and social science, which was due in part to negative peer effects in these online courses.","PeriodicalId":218750,"journal":{"name":"Community College Research Center, Columbia University","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114260241","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Davis Jenkins, John Wachen, M. Kerrigan, Alexander K. Mayer
iii Overview In 2004, Lumina Foundation for Education launched an innovative national reform initiative, Achieving the Dream (ATD), with the purpose of increasing the persistence and completion rates of community college students, especially low-income students and students of color, through evidence-based institutional change. Originally consisting of 26 partner colleges in five states, today more than 150 colleges in 30 states and the District of Columbia participate in ATD, which in 2010 became a national nonprofit organization. This report examines six community and technical colleges in Washington State that joined the initiative in 2006 (" Round 3 ") and were provided with grant funding from College Spark Washington and the services of a leadership coach and data coach to facilitate their ATD efforts. The report (1) describes the progress each college made in implementing ATD's " culture of evidence " principles for institutional improvement; (2) examines strategies implemented by the colleges to improve student outcomes, comparing them to interventions developed by the 26 " Round 1 " colleges that joined ATD in 2004; and (3) charts trends in student outcomes in the period before and after the Washington colleges joined the initiative. Key findings for the six Washington ATD colleges are: • Progress toward building a culture of evidence. All but one of the colleges made at least some progress. Two colleges made substantial progress, moving from a low level of implementation to a high level over the five years of their ATD involvement. Specifically, they strengthened student success goals and strategies, increased their institutional research capacities, created institutional effectiveness committees, and strengthened their program review processes. • Development of student success strategies. Several of the colleges — those further along in implementing the ATD culture of evidence principles — made significant systemic changes to programs and services. Compared with the Round 1 ATD colleges, the Washington colleges were more likely to have implemented changes in instruction as opposed to student support services and were more successful in operating improvement strategies at scale. • Student outcome trends after ATD implementation. The average student outcomes across the six colleges appear largely unchanged, as do the racial and economic achievement gaps. The colleges that succeeded in implementing improvement strategies at scale did so only later in the iv period under study. It may be too early to see their impact. On the other hand, most of the reforms implemented by the Washington colleges …
{"title":"Progress in the First Five Years: An Evaluation of Achieving the Dream Colleges in Washington State","authors":"Davis Jenkins, John Wachen, M. Kerrigan, Alexander K. Mayer","doi":"10.7916/D8S75DDT","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7916/D8S75DDT","url":null,"abstract":"iii Overview In 2004, Lumina Foundation for Education launched an innovative national reform initiative, Achieving the Dream (ATD), with the purpose of increasing the persistence and completion rates of community college students, especially low-income students and students of color, through evidence-based institutional change. Originally consisting of 26 partner colleges in five states, today more than 150 colleges in 30 states and the District of Columbia participate in ATD, which in 2010 became a national nonprofit organization. This report examines six community and technical colleges in Washington State that joined the initiative in 2006 (\" Round 3 \") and were provided with grant funding from College Spark Washington and the services of a leadership coach and data coach to facilitate their ATD efforts. The report (1) describes the progress each college made in implementing ATD's \" culture of evidence \" principles for institutional improvement; (2) examines strategies implemented by the colleges to improve student outcomes, comparing them to interventions developed by the 26 \" Round 1 \" colleges that joined ATD in 2004; and (3) charts trends in student outcomes in the period before and after the Washington colleges joined the initiative. Key findings for the six Washington ATD colleges are: • Progress toward building a culture of evidence. All but one of the colleges made at least some progress. Two colleges made substantial progress, moving from a low level of implementation to a high level over the five years of their ATD involvement. Specifically, they strengthened student success goals and strategies, increased their institutional research capacities, created institutional effectiveness committees, and strengthened their program review processes. • Development of student success strategies. Several of the colleges — those further along in implementing the ATD culture of evidence principles — made significant systemic changes to programs and services. Compared with the Round 1 ATD colleges, the Washington colleges were more likely to have implemented changes in instruction as opposed to student support services and were more successful in operating improvement strategies at scale. • Student outcome trends after ATD implementation. The average student outcomes across the six colleges appear largely unchanged, as do the racial and economic achievement gaps. The colleges that succeeded in implementing improvement strategies at scale did so only later in the iv period under study. It may be too early to see their impact. On the other hand, most of the reforms implemented by the Washington colleges …","PeriodicalId":218750,"journal":{"name":"Community College Research Center, Columbia University","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129729009","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Davis Jenkins, John Wachen, Colleen Moore, Nancy B. Shulock
In 2007, the Washington State Board for Community and Technical Colleges (SBCTC) launched a performance reporting and funding policy called the Student Achievement Initiative (SAI) both to improve public accountability by more accurately describing what students achieve from enrolling in community colleges and to provide incentives to colleges through financial rewards for increasing student success. This report presents findings from a three-year evaluation of the initiative that was designed to assess how and to what extent the SAI model of performance funding encourages colleges to track trends in student achievement and improve student outcomes. The quantitative component of the evaluation was an analysis of “achievement point” accumulation by colleges over the period 2007 to 2011. The qualitative component was based on a synthesis of approximately 250 interviews with faculty, staff, and administrators at 20 of Washington State’s 34 community and technical colleges that took place in spring 2012. Key broad findings include: • The SAI is viewed as one force among others pushing the colleges to improve student success. The funding is not a significant factor motivating the colleges, largely because the amount (less than one percent of the system’s total operating budget) is too small to have much impact. • On average, the colleges increased their point total by 31 percent between 2007 and 2011, with the relative positions of the colleges remaining stable. Although there was evidence of some gains in momentum (i.e., forward progress) for students who were already accumulating credits and making progress, overall student momentum does not seem to have changed much during the period in which the SAI has been in effect, even as aggregate achievement points have increased. • While larger colleges earn more awards than smaller colleges, there is little evidence that colleges serving more at-risk, low-income students are penalized by the SAI awards method. Consistent with the SAI’s goals, the basic skills metric appears to have encouraged enrollment from traditionally underserved groups. • The intermediate milestone framework is viewed as a helpful way to focus collective efforts on student progression and publicly account for college performance. In order to understand the impact of strategies for improving student outcomes, however, colleges have found they need to use longitudinal cohort data in conjunction with the cross-sectional SAI metrics. The funding mechanism has proved problematic and unpopular, as SAI funding has come from reallocated base funds rather than as additional funds as originally intended.
{"title":"Washington State Student Achievement Initiative Policy Study: Final Report.","authors":"Davis Jenkins, John Wachen, Colleen Moore, Nancy B. Shulock","doi":"10.7916/D83J3B16","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7916/D83J3B16","url":null,"abstract":"In 2007, the Washington State Board for Community and Technical Colleges (SBCTC) launched a performance reporting and funding policy called the Student Achievement Initiative (SAI) both to improve public accountability by more accurately describing what students achieve from enrolling in community colleges and to provide incentives to colleges through financial rewards for increasing student success. This report presents findings from a three-year evaluation of the initiative that was designed to assess how and to what extent the SAI model of performance funding encourages colleges to track trends in student achievement and improve student outcomes. The quantitative component of the evaluation was an analysis of “achievement point” accumulation by colleges over the period 2007 to 2011. The qualitative component was based on a synthesis of approximately 250 interviews with faculty, staff, and administrators at 20 of Washington State’s 34 community and technical colleges that took place in spring 2012. Key broad findings include: • The SAI is viewed as one force among others pushing the colleges to improve student success. The funding is not a significant factor motivating the colleges, largely because the amount (less than one percent of the system’s total operating budget) is too small to have much impact. • On average, the colleges increased their point total by 31 percent between 2007 and 2011, with the relative positions of the colleges remaining stable. Although there was evidence of some gains in momentum (i.e., forward progress) for students who were already accumulating credits and making progress, overall student momentum does not seem to have changed much during the period in which the SAI has been in effect, even as aggregate achievement points have increased. • While larger colleges earn more awards than smaller colleges, there is little evidence that colleges serving more at-risk, low-income students are penalized by the SAI awards method. Consistent with the SAI’s goals, the basic skills metric appears to have encouraged enrollment from traditionally underserved groups. • The intermediate milestone framework is viewed as a helpful way to focus collective efforts on student progression and publicly account for college performance. In order to understand the impact of strategies for improving student outcomes, however, colleges have found they need to use longitudinal cohort data in conjunction with the cross-sectional SAI metrics. The funding mechanism has proved problematic and unpopular, as SAI funding has come from reallocated base funds rather than as additional funds as originally intended.","PeriodicalId":218750,"journal":{"name":"Community College Research Center, Columbia University","volume":"57 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125411381","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
John Wachen, Davis Jenkins, C. Belfield, Michelle Van Noy, Kristen Kulongoski
{"title":"Contextualized College Transition Strategies for Adult Basic Skills Students: Learning from Washington State's I-BEST Program Model.","authors":"John Wachen, Davis Jenkins, C. Belfield, Michelle Van Noy, Kristen Kulongoski","doi":"10.7916/D8BZ6432","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7916/D8BZ6432","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":218750,"journal":{"name":"Community College Research Center, Columbia University","volume":"58 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132734072","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper presents the findings from a follow-up quantitative analysis of the Community College of Baltimore County’s Accelerated Learning Program (ALP). Our results suggest that among students who enroll in the highest level developmental writing course, participation in ALP is associated with substantially better outcomes in terms of English 101 completion and English 102 completion (college-level English courses), which corroborates the results of a similar analysis completed in 2010. These results were consistent, and in some cases, even stronger, when we used propensity score matching. Moreover, using a larger number of cohorts and tracking students over a longer period of time, we also found that ALP students were more likely to persist to the next year than non-ALP students. Specific subgroup analyses for earlier versus later cohorts, as well as for Black and low-income students, revealed relationships between ALP participation and student outcomes that were similar to those found in the larger sample, although ALP appeared to be more effective for White and high-income students on some outcomes. Finally, we compared college-ready students enrolled in ALP sections of English 101 with their counterparts in wholly college-ready sections, and found that those in ALP sections had equivalent performance within English 101 itself, but slightly lower subsequent college-level course enrollment and completion.
{"title":"New Evidence of Success for Community College Remedial English Students: Tracking the Outcomes of Students in the Accelerated Learning Program (ALP). CCRC Working Paper No. 53.","authors":"Sung-woo Cho, E. Kopko, Davis Jenkins, S. Jaggars","doi":"10.7916/D8JS9ZTP","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7916/D8JS9ZTP","url":null,"abstract":"This paper presents the findings from a follow-up quantitative analysis of the Community College of Baltimore County’s Accelerated Learning Program (ALP). Our results suggest that among students who enroll in the highest level developmental writing course, participation in ALP is associated with substantially better outcomes in terms of English 101 completion and English 102 completion (college-level English courses), which corroborates the results of a similar analysis completed in 2010. These results were consistent, and in some cases, even stronger, when we used propensity score matching. Moreover, using a larger number of cohorts and tracking students over a longer period of time, we also found that ALP students were more likely to persist to the next year than non-ALP students. Specific subgroup analyses for earlier versus later cohorts, as well as for Black and low-income students, revealed relationships between ALP participation and student outcomes that were similar to those found in the larger sample, although ALP appeared to be more effective for White and high-income students on some outcomes. Finally, we compared college-ready students enrolled in ALP sections of English 101 with their counterparts in wholly college-ready sections, and found that those in ALP sections had equivalent performance within English 101 itself, but slightly lower subsequent college-level course enrollment and completion.","PeriodicalId":218750,"journal":{"name":"Community College Research Center, Columbia University","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125577331","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
At open-access two-year public colleges, the goal of the traditional assessment and placement process is to match incoming students to the developmental or collegelevel courses for which they have adequate preparation; the process presumably increases underprepared students’ chances of shortand long-term success in college while maintaining the academic quality and rigor of college-level courses. However, the traditional process may be limited in its ability to achieve these aims due to poor course placement accuracy and inconsistent standards of college readiness. To understand current approaches that seek to improve the process, we conducted a scan of assessment and placement policies and practices at open-access two-year colleges in Georgia, New Jersey, North Carolina, Oregon, Texas, Virginia, and Wisconsin. We describe the variety of approaches that systems and colleges employed to ameliorate poor course placement accuracy and inconsistent standards associated with the traditional process. Taking a broad view of the extent of these approaches, we find that most colleges we studied adopted a measured approach that addressed a single limitation without attending to other limitations that contribute to the same overall problem of poor course placement accuracy or inconsistent standards. Much less common were comprehensive approaches that attended to multiple limitations of the process; these approaches were likely to result from changes to developmental education as a whole. Drawing from the study’s findings, we also discuss how colleges can overcome barriers to reform in order to implement approaches that hold promise for improved course placement accuracy, more consistent standards of college readiness, and, potentially, greater long-term academic success of community college students.
{"title":"Improving Developmental Education Assessment and Placement: Lessons from Community Colleges across the Country. CCRC Working Paper No. 51.","authors":"Michelle Hodara, S. Jaggars, M. Karp","doi":"10.7916/D8SB4F49","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7916/D8SB4F49","url":null,"abstract":"At open-access two-year public colleges, the goal of the traditional assessment and placement process is to match incoming students to the developmental or collegelevel courses for which they have adequate preparation; the process presumably increases underprepared students’ chances of shortand long-term success in college while maintaining the academic quality and rigor of college-level courses. However, the traditional process may be limited in its ability to achieve these aims due to poor course placement accuracy and inconsistent standards of college readiness. To understand current approaches that seek to improve the process, we conducted a scan of assessment and placement policies and practices at open-access two-year colleges in Georgia, New Jersey, North Carolina, Oregon, Texas, Virginia, and Wisconsin. We describe the variety of approaches that systems and colleges employed to ameliorate poor course placement accuracy and inconsistent standards associated with the traditional process. Taking a broad view of the extent of these approaches, we find that most colleges we studied adopted a measured approach that addressed a single limitation without attending to other limitations that contribute to the same overall problem of poor course placement accuracy or inconsistent standards. Much less common were comprehensive approaches that attended to multiple limitations of the process; these approaches were likely to result from changes to developmental education as a whole. Drawing from the study’s findings, we also discuss how colleges can overcome barriers to reform in order to implement approaches that hold promise for improved course placement accuracy, more consistent standards of college readiness, and, potentially, greater long-term academic success of community college students.","PeriodicalId":218750,"journal":{"name":"Community College Research Center, Columbia University","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132664131","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：