FSCR 99022
Emporia State University, Faculty Senate
Academic Affairs Committee
Developmental Courses Action Plan
for the 2000-1 Academic Affairs Committee
i. Contents
I. Report Purpose
II. Action Plan Major Points
III. Issues
A. Objectives
B. Resources
C. Assessment
D. Policies
E. Limitations
F. Future Concerns
IV. Reading, English and Math Program Reports
I. Report Purpose
1. Share the experience of the 1999-2000 committee on an action plan for developmental courses.
2. Discuss the objectives, resources, measurement, policies, limitations and future concerns of Developmental Courses.
II. Action Plan Major Points
1. Identify Developmental Courses objective(s).
2. Determine if the current programs and policies meeting the objective(s).
3. Establish the necessary assessment information and the steps to get that data.
4. Make everyone aware what developmental courses do and why they are necessary.
III. Issues
A. Objectives
Students, who identified by test scores, are given the opportunity to gain competencies to satisfy general education classes. ESU is committed to this objective, but opinions have been expressed that the implementation of specifics is less than enthusiastic. A main issue in the current situation is whether MA 098 students learn enough to get at least a C in MA110. Both English and Math have defined standards for passing their Development Courses. Reading does not have a defined passing standard, but works to raise reading levels (usually about 2 years in 3 months).
Currently, no general objective of success or failure (e.g., graduation or retention rates) has been defined for developmental courses. Any future effort with respect to Developmental Courses will have to define the objectives to be achieved so that everyone can measure performance. There is great potential to waste time and cause other negative consequences if objectives are not determined.
The question has been raised as to whether a legal problem might exist if it can be shown that minority students are ones most affected by the new policy. This point with respect to objectives needs to be reviewed.
SPECIFIC COMMITTEE ACTION STEPS:
1. Determine what are the developmental course objectives and establish a process for them to be known in writing to all concerned.
2. Currently, English, math and reading set the standards for their area. In 2001, the Regents will set outcomes. The 2000-2001 committee needs to review the standards with the areas and explicitly or implicitly sign off that these new minimum Regent standards are appropriate for the objectives. The standards need to be stated in written form (i.e., No mystery standards that advisors and students do not know).
3. Run a faculty survey specifically on Math (followed by an analysis of English during next year) concerning the usage of math in sophomore and above classes. While Math has previously attempted this analysis and failed to get responses, this step is probably the only direction that will get attention placed on the right issues. Because of the previous failure, syllabi should be gathered first, categorized second and faculty surveyed third in order to compare what is actually done according to syllabi with general intentions. Specifically, ask if the outcomes of college algebra and calculus are the required prerequisites to upper division classes.
B. Resources
An emphasis on individualizing and attitude is likely to result in greater success, but the approach is costly. Reading employs a one-on-one approach which is successful in raising reading levels as much as two years, but this approach is very resource intensive. Neither math or English currently has the resources to provide this type of delivery. English appears to successfully meet the objective with their current classroom delivery approach. However, students complain (justification unknown, but math indicates prior classroom lecture approaches were worse) about math's delivery of a student self-paced instruction approach. An experiment (possibly the 2000 summer math class) is needed to see if varying the math student-teacher ratio significantly affects the pass rate.
The issue of cost is important with respect to limiting what the institution can do in meeting the existing problem of the need for the developmental courses. Compelling students to complete the required courses seems to be the most cost efficient. For example, the use of the instituted policy fall semester 1999 increased considerably the number of persons taking and passing the math courses.
SPECIFIC COMMITTEE ACTION STEPS:
1. Get a faculty workshop (possibly as a part of the new faculty seminar) or online seminar which will help faculty identify students with learning disabilities.
2. Investigate the results of the Math 2000 summer program. If successful, co-ordinate with Math to allocate for better performance including issues of class size.
3. Coordinate with freshman seminar administrators. Report the identifiable attitude issues and give guidance so as to improve the student's retention and graduation rates.
C. Assessment
This area is probably the most controversial aspect of Developmental Courses. The courses and faculty oversight need good information but it can not come at the cost of overbearing micro-management. All three areas (Reading, English and Math) employ some form of diagnostic tests in addition to the ACT test mechanism which puts students in Developmental Courses. The current ACT cutoff score is at the 5th-grade level. The local vocational-technical school uses a cutoff at the 10th-grade level. Also, the use of the ACT scores results in the fact that transfer students do not get evaluated. Evidence indicates that some upper-level students on campus have only a 3rd-grade or 4th-grade reading-skill level. Furthermore, the ACT score for writing has not proven to be a sound measure of a student's skill level. Consequently, the developmental writing course diagnostic writing is used to determine that level. One area of future review should be to get more detailed explanations and data concerning these entry level diagnostics so that policies can be improved or at least understood by all constituents.
The success of students who take Developmental Courses does not appear to be equivalent of the remainder of the student population. However, this information is sketchy at best. Definitely, better monitoring information is necessary to determine if the allocation of resources to developmental courses is cost efficient. The general assessment of incoming students appears insufficient. There should be an ex ante assessment of the specific developmental courses (which appear in place, but is not accumulated in a policy decision-making form). There should also be an ex post assessment presented in summary form of raw data and adjusted for prior indications of student ability.
SPECIFIC COMMITTEE ACTION STEPS:
1. Get an assessment of students that enables students to placed properly in developmental courses. ACT scores are reported to be inadequate for the task. Find what will work.
2. Get an assessment of students' knowledge developmental course exit test scores and compare them with initial test scores. Determine if measurement tools are adequate.
3. Get an assessment of students's success in general education courses: taken concurrently with development courses and taken subsequently after developmental courses.
4. Compare student's development test score outcomes with their grades in classes which have prequisites.
D. Policies
See the policies specified in the 1999 school year Faculty Senate bill. All constituents have expressed favorable opinions about requiring that the Developmental Courses be completed early in the academic program. Several constituents have stated that the current policy is too restrictive (e.g., the 13 hour cap and the no-drop requirement). An opinion was expressed that students who go on probation should be evaluated (re-evaluated) for developmental course work.
SPECIFIC COMMITTEE ACTION STEPS:
1. Evaluate no-drop and/or attendance policies in developmental courses according to comparative statistics.
E. Limitations
There is no magic for helping students who lost out early on in their schooling in developing basic math skills. It is highly unlikely that a student can progress from the 5th to 12th grade reading in one semester, but some presume that the current system will do just that. Anecdotal attributions of negative student attitude toward Developmental Courses are frequently given, however discussion on this line of reasoning is probably not profitable because of the lack specific action plan steps that can be taken. In particular, it has been reported that some students show a lack of the maturity and self-discipline necessary for overcoming their deficiency in math.
F. Future concerns
A major concern is the Regents exemption policy which will go into effect next year. This policy will limit ESU to less that ten percent of each class that does not meet the Regents standards. Hypothetically, 10 percent of a class of 800 is 80 which when multiplied times 4 years (freshmen through senior) gives 320 students who may be admitted below the standard. The current enrollment in development courses is over 900. However, informed estimates indicate the head count is about 500 which will mean a potential drop in enrollment of 180. If this risk is serious financially and becomes realized, then ESU must find a way to (A) get a more qualified group to begin with; (B) get the existing population qualified before formal enrollment (through Web and summer courses, etc.); or (C) some combination of (A) and (B).
SPECIFIC COMMITTEE ACTION STEPS:
1. The 2000-2001 Academic Affairs Committee should report to the Senate next year of the steps taken and steps that need to be taken. This area has problems that will not go away without direct action.
IV. Reading, English and Math Program Reports
Math Department Issues - Larry Scott
Larry Scott reviewed the summer actions, which involved Robert Goltra (SAC) and Russ Meyer (English). He said that he personally thought the matter should have gone to the Senate. He emphasized the existing problem that some students finish all of their course work for their degree except their general education math course and then show by diagnostic testing that they are two or more semesters' work away from passing that course. He thinks some form of pressure needs to be imposed so that students get the general education math requirement fulfilled early in their progress toward their degree. He indicated there is poor attendance by some students which results in poor outcomes. He said that math generally uses the lecture method, but open to other models of teaching.
English Department Issues- Rachelle Smith
She stated that writing is a skill. She expressed the opinion that students should be able to drop a developmental course and even choose not to take the developmental courses. The current policy sends the wrong message to students. She strongly supports students self-responsibility. She suggested that developmental courses may be discriminatory.
Reading Issues - Lori Mann
She expressed the position that the current ACT cutoff is too low and doesn't catch many substandard readers. Therefore, we are not catching all the students who need reading help. Some students take high school college credit and get into ESU without ACT scores which bypasses any entry into the reading developmental course. There is no cutoff (or proficiency score) for reading, students only need to make satisfactory progress for a semester. There is definitely a need to assist students early in their program to be effective. Reading has a lack of control over reading assessment.
Student Issues - Templeton & Others
They objected that students were not involved in setting the current policy. They felt that the 13 credit hour semester limit is unfair and uneven in its treatment to individuals. They made complaints about the teaching quality of the Math098 course and thought there was something wrong with the relatively low percentage of students who pass the Math 098 compared with the other developmental courses.
Administration - John Schwenn
The instituted no-drop policy is cost effective for hiring instructors. He is concerned that transfer students are not being adequately analyzed for developmental course work.
Last updated on 1 May 2000.
Provide comments to Dwight Moore at mooredwi@emporia.edu.
Return to the Faculty Senate at Emporia State University.