AB 705: A Game-Changer for Completion & Equity October 13, 2018 Hal Huntsman, City College of San Francisco

AB 705: A Game-Changer for Completion & Equity What does the law say? What does it mean? Models that maximize equitable outcomes

Student Success Scorecard Statewide, more than three-quarters of incoming students are classified “unprepared” Here’s the problem we know. AND most of our students have been deemed ”unprepared” for callege.

Placement Is Destiny Students’ Starting Placement % Completing Transfer-Level Math in 3 Years One Level Below 35% Two Levels Below 15% Three or more Levels Below 6% Across CA, more than half of Black and Hispanic students in remedial math begin here We've seen these data before -- but the kicker is that students of color have been disproportionately placed in the lowest levels of remediation. Statewide data, Basic Skills Cohort Tracker Fall 2009 cohort tracked through Spring 2012.

A Structural Issue: Attrition is inevitable in the developmental math pipeline Where students start the sequence % of students who successfully complete transfer-level math in 3 years At CCSF In California In AtD study of 5 states Intermediate Algebra 46% 35% 27% Elementary Algebra 23% 15% 20% Pre-algebra or Arithmetic 12% 6% 10% Across CA, more than half of Black and Hispanic students in pre-transfer math begin here

Goal: Improve completion of English and transfer math (or program specific math)

Eliminate equity gaps Transfer-level achievement in one -year

AB 705 (Irwin) – Assessment and Placement Colleges must use high school grades to assess and place students. If unavailable or “logistically problematic,” colleges may use self-report or guided placement. Students may not be placed into remedial courses that lengthen time to degree unless placement research suggests they are “highly unlikely” to succeed in transfer-level course. Placement must maximize the probability that a student enters and completes transfer-level English and math within a year. Colleges can require students to enroll in “additional concurrent support…during the same semester that they take a transfer-level English or mathematics course, but only if it is determined that the support will increase their likelihood of passing the transfer-level … course” Effective January 1, 2018. Deadline for full implementation: Fall 2019. Talking points – carves out a couple of exceptions – If students are enrolled in a degree or certificate program with math requirements that can’t be met with transferable course

Say what? What does “highly unlikely to succeed” mean? What does it mean to maximize the probability that students complete transfer math?

What does “highly unlikely to succeed” mean? • Categorization and Regression Tree (CART) analysis: uses most predictive characteristics (GPA and/or math course taking) to categorize students into groups with similar success rates • Success rates adjusted downward based on factors that might distinguish students placed directly into transfer-level courses from those placed below this level, such as placement test performance and HS GPA variance across placement levels.

Default Placement Rules for Statistics/Liberal Arts Math From CCCCO memo July 11, 2018 High School Performance AB 705-Compliant Placement HSGPA ≥ 3.0 Adjusted success rate 74% HSGPA 2.3–3.0 Adjusted success rate 48% HSGPA < 2.3 Adjusted success rate 29% If you’re like me, you’re now thinking, you’re thinking 50% is not that good. And 29% is pretty bad. But is it highly unlikely to succeed? Let’s talk about maximizing the probability of success.

What does it mean to maximize the probability of completing transfer math? Compare the throughput for students starting one-level below (in intermediate algebra) to the predicted success rate of similar students placed directly into transfer-level. Adjust throughputs to produce more accurate estimates Remove students with terminal AA as an educational goal Adjust for pathway, e.g. removing students taking Statistics and/or Liberal Arts Math from BSTEM throughput estimate

Default Placement Rules for Statistics/Liberal Arts Math From CCCCO memo July 11, 2018 High School Performance AB 705-Compliant Placement HSGPA ≥ 3.0 Adjusted success rate 74% Throughput from one-level below is 31% HSGPA 2.3–3.0 Adjusted success rate 48% Throughput from one-level below is 17% HSGPA < 2.3 Adjusted success rate 29% Throughput from one-level below is 8%

Default Placement Rules for Statistics/Liberal Arts Math From CCCCO memo July 11, 2018 High School Performance AB 705-Compliant Placement HSGPA ≥ 3.0 Adjusted success rate 74% Throughput from one-level below is 31% Transfer-Level Statistics/Liberal Arts Math HSGPA 2.3–3.0 Adjusted success rate 48% Throughput from one-level below is 17% HSGPA < 2.3 Adjusted success rate 29% Throughput from one-level below is 8%

Default Placement Rules for Statistics/Liberal Arts Math From CCCCO memo July 11, 2018 High School Performance AB 705-Compliant Placement HSGPA ≥ 3.0 Adjusted success rate 74% Transfer-Level Statistics/Liberal Arts Math No additional academic or corequisite support required HSGPA 2.3–3.0 Adjusted success rate 48% CCCCO recommends that colleges provide additional academic and concurrent support HSGPA < 2.3 Adjusted success rate 29% CCCCO strongly recommends that colleges provide additional academic and concurrent support

Default Placement Rules for Introductory BSTEM Math From CCCCO memo July 11, 2018 High School Performance Metric BSTEM Math for Algebra 2/IM3 completers Recommended AB 705 Placement for BSTEM Math HSGPA ≥ 3.4 OR HSGPA ≥ 2.6 AND enrolled in a HS Calculus course Adjusted success rate 75% Throughput from one-level below is 54% HSGPA ≥2.6 or Enrolled in HS PreCalculus Adjusted success rate 54% Throughput from one-level below is 34% HSGPA ≤ 2.6 and no PreCalculus Adjusted success rate 28% Throughput from one-level below is 13%

Default Placement Rules for Introductory BSTEM Math From CCCCO memo July 11, 2018 High School Performance Metric BSTEM Math for Algebra 2/IM3 completers Recommended AB 705 Placement for BSTEM Math HSGPA ≥ 3.4 OR HSGPA ≥ 2.6 AND enrolled in a HS Calculus course Adjusted success rate 75% Throughput from one-level below is 54% Transfer-Level BSTEM Math HSGPA ≥2.6 or Enrolled in HS PreCalculus Adjusted success rate 54% Throughput from one-level below is 34% HSGPA ≤ 2.6 and no PreCalculus Adjusted success rate 28% Throughput from one-level below is 13%

Default Placement Rules for Introductory BSTEM Math From CCCCO memo July 11, 2018 High School Performance Metric BSTEM Math for Algebra 2/IM3 completers Recommended AB 705 Placement for BSTEM Math HSGPA ≥ 3.4 OR HSGPA ≥ 2.6 AND enrolled in a HS Calculus course Adjusted success rate 75% Transfer-Level BSTEM Math No additional academic or concurrent support required HSGPA ≥2.6 or Enrolled in HS PreCalculus Adjusted success rate 53% CCCCO recommends that colleges provide additional concurrent support HSGPA ≤ 2.6 and no PreCalculus Adjusted success rate 28% CCCCO strongly recommends that colleges provide additional concurrent support Ok, that’s what the data shows but what can we really do? Can we really succeed with students putting them directly into transfer level? Let’s look at colleges that are already doing this.

Access to transfer math + concurrent support = biggest and most equitable gains in outcomes PPIC study released August 16, 2018 First study to provide a comprehensive look at multiple measures and corequisite remediation in California community colleges prior to AB 705.

Highlights PPIC study Larger share of students starting in transfer-level math correlates to higher transfer-level math completion in one year R-squared = .76; R = .87 We can control what percentage of students have access to transfer level.

Highlights PPIC study “Early implementers” of AB 705 types of reforms had the highest one-year completion of transfer-level math statewide in 2016. Statewide: 28% College of the Siskiyous 58% All students are eligible for Statistics; support via embedded lab Cuyamaca College 57%, Los Medanos College 51% All students are eligible for Statistics with 2-unit corequisite support; Algebra 2 completers are eligible for Precalculus and Applied Calculus, some with a required 2-unit corequisite at Cuyamaca.

Highlights PPIC study At “early implementer” colleges transfer math completion for low income students and students of color is substantially higher than the statewide average. Average one-year math throughput for early implementers vs. statewide average: Low-income: 49% vs. 23% Latinx: 48% vs. 19% African American: 46% vs. 13%

Highlights PPIC study Concurrent support for Statistics produced much better outcomes than one-year statistics pathway models About 70% of corequisite students completed Statistics in a year – over two to three times higher than students enrolled in accelerated one year Statistics pathways.

Transfer-level Completion with Co-req Support at Cuyamaca College

Cuyamaca Intro Transfer-level B-STEM Math Completion (First-Time Math Enrollment in Transfer-level with Support) One Level … Traditional (215) … Transfer Math with support (42) Two Levels … Traditional (296) … Transfer Math with support (10) Three Levels … Traditional (84) … Transfer Math with support (4)

Preliminary findings on corequisite success rate by GPA Band – BSTEM Corequisites (Cuyamaca College) Statewide adjusted success rate if placed directly without support – 28% N=63, 19 low, 34 middle, 10 high (2 each in lower 2 bands without Algebra 2) Statewide throughput if begin one-level below: 13% Students with high school transcript data available in CalPASS Plus with verified enrollments in either Business Calculus or Pre-Calculus AND a simultaneous corequisite course – n = 63

Preliminary findings on corequisite success rate by GPA Band – Statistics Corequisite (Cuyamaca & Los Medanos) Statewide adjusted success rate if placed directly without support – 29% N=498 between the two schools, 202 lowest, 214 middle, 82 top band Statewide throughput if begin one-level below: 8% Students with high school transcript data available in CalPASS Plus with verified enrollments in either Statistics AND a simultaneous corequisite course – n = 498

Statway Five Statway colleges revamped Statway into a single course completed in one semester. Maintained Statway design principles: group work, intentional strategies to support productive persistence and growth mindset RESULTS: Higher completion rates than two-semester Statway! 67% in one-term vs. 50% in one-year. Some colleges implemented both forms of Statway and consistently across these colleges success rates in accelerated Statway were higher than the sequence completion rate for standard Statway.

Community College of Denver Students with transfer intent are placed into transfer-level with an additional 2-lab hours a week For STEM students default placement is College Algebra with an additional 2-lab hours a week Students can bypass the lab requirement by going through the placement process (multiple measures) Lab hour is before class with same instructor; practice skills needed for that day’s transfer-level math lesson Lab students comingled with “college ready” students in College transfer-level class RESULTS: Slight overall increase in transfer-level math success rates (59% FA11 to 63% SP17)

Other Promising Corequisite Models Supplemental Instruction – City University of New York Rethinking the STEM Path – LaGuardia Community College Rethinking Mathematical Foundations– Guttman Community College

Percent of Remedial Students who Complete Transfer-level Math Adapted from Educational Results Partnership & The RP Group presentation

Tennessee Community Colleges Gateway Math Success in One Year Tennessee Board of Regents Brief #3: Co-Requisite Remediation Full Implementation 2015-16

Tennessee Community Colleges 52% of students passed both courses Earned hours as a percentage of attempted hours 3% of students passed only the credit course 36% of students failed both courses There’s something more going on here that needs to be addressed separately – how to support students with multiple issues. Update: 10/3/17: How are they addressing the students who are not served by this model? Tennessee Board of Regents recommended $7.6 million ($7.1 million recurring, $500k non-recurring) to fund success (or relational) coaches. Would work directly with students to help them navigate financial aid, career exploration, and problems that arise, complimenting the work of faculty and academic advisors. Enable serving more students who need more specialized advising. Adapted from TBR Brief #3: Co-Requisite Remediation Full Implementation 2015-16

Caleb Rendon-Guerrero, Cuyamaca College Background: High school dropout who’d been in and out of criminal justice system Goal: To “be the solution not the problem” in his family, create a non-profit to help kids like him Placement via Standardized Test: Elementary Algebra Probability of completing transfer-level math: 36% Corequisite Remediation: Enrolled directly in College Statistics with 2 units of concurrent support Grade in Statistics: B Follow Up: Second-year student, GPA of 3.6

Karly Franz, Cuyamaca College Background: Returning adult student, away from math for 5 years; studied fashion design, worked as a historical costumer Goal: Teach high school biology Placement via Accuplacer: Intermediate Algebra Probability of completing transfer-level math: 36% Given access to transfer-level: Enrolled directly in Pre-Calculus with 2 units of concurrent support Grade in Pre-Calculus: 89

Questions and Discussion

Thank you! Hal Huntsman City College of San Francisco shuntsma@ccsf.edu