Broadening the Pipeline Comprehensive Math Reform that Increased Completion without Limiting Options Erik Scott Developmental Mathematics Committee Chair

Thinking About Your Institution What improvements are you seeking in your precollege math students’ achievement and understanding? What strengths does your math department have that can facilitate changing the curriculum and pedagogy? In what ways does your math department’s culture or personnel hinder or prevent change? What strengths does your institution have that can facilitate this type of change? In what ways does your institution hinder or prevent this type of change?

Overview – Changes to Sequence Prior Sequence Current Sequence Arithmetic Basic Algebra (3x+5=12, Geom, Stats) Int. Algebra Essentials (Graphs, f(x), Quad) College Level (Gen Ed) Int. Alg. for STEM (Factor, Rat’l Expr) College Level (Precalculus) Arithmetic Basic Algebra (3x+5=12) Middle Algebra (Factoring, Graphs) Intermediate Algebra (f(x), Quad) College Level (Gen Ed) College Level (Precalculus)

Key Features of Courses – Math 81 Learning goals include Describe and use available resources to be successful in math classes. Describe your reasoning on a task, including sources of confusion or errors. Mastery tests – signed numbers, equation solving Relevant applications – car rentals, home remodeling, personal finance, following stock prices Active classroom – group work or guided activities Online homework system (MyMathLab) Custom textbook (Rockswold + Martin-Gay)

Key Features of Courses – Math 91 Learning goals include Describe your level of understanding before a formal assessment as well as steps you will take to improve. Describe and consistently apply an effective strategy for solving problems. Mastery tests – function concepts, linear functions Relevant applications – Analyzing real data/graphs using ideas of functions and lines, comparing models Same text, HW system, and approach to class time

Key Features of Courses – Math 98 Course emphasizes Function families and the algebra of functions, which gives a reason for adding rational expressions Solving nonlinear inequalities and features of graphs, which gives a reason for factoring Transformations, which gives a reason for completing the square Additional emphasis of the CRS Student Attributes Students should take responsibility for their own learning Students should pay attention to detail Homework – Option of paper or MyMathLab Text – Int. Algebra-Graphs & Models (Bittinger, et. al.)

Evidence of Effectiveness I 2004 – – 2012Change (% pts) Math 81 (Basic Algebra) 57.3 %65.0 %+7.7 % Math 91 (Middle Algebra or Int. Alg. Essentials) 52.3 %64.5 %+12.2 % Overall Pass Rates – % of Students Earning 2.0 or Higher Data Notes:Percentages are averages of annual pass rates for the included years. Prepared by Dr. Helen Burn, Highline faculty member.

Evidence of Effectiveness II First course was Old SequenceNew SequenceChange (% pts) Math 81 (Basic Algebra) 2 %18 %+16 % Math 91 (Middle Algebra or Int. Alg. Essentials) 30 %46 %+16 % Persistence to College Level in One Year – Data Notes:Percentages are the fraction of students who started in the listed course and enrolled in a college-level math course within one year. New sequence data is students taking Math 81/91 in Fall 2010 or Winter 2011 – the first full year of our new curriculum. Prepared by Tonya Benton, Director of Institutional Research at Highline.

Evidence of Effectiveness III First course was Math 107 (Math in Society) Math 111 (Precalc for Busn.) Math 146 (Statistics) Math 141 (Precalc for STEM) Math 81 (Basic Algebra) 86 %57 %38 % (Not in 2 qtrs) Math 91 (Middle Algebra or Int. Alg. Essentials) 79 %74 %68 %92 % Pass Rates in College-Level Course – Data Notes:Percentages are the pass rates only for those students who enrolled in a college-level math course within two quarters of their first course. Prepared by Tonya Benton, Director of Institutional Research at Highline.

Factors Leading to Change Achieving the Dream – Data focus Autonomy of curriculum groups in department Prior efforts to create alternative algebra pathways College and departmental-level focus on learning outcomes Annual scheduling of faculty and courses Administrative support with regard to DTA

Factors Leading to Successful Implementation Ongoing communication with full department Gathering & acting on feedback Seeking vote of support Having different groups of faculty develop the gen-ed and STEM-focused algebra courses Allowing faculty to opt out of teaching these courses Proactive and ongoing training of faculty Inclusion of adjunct faculty as partners Faculty Inquiry Groups – supported by SBCTC’s Rethinking Precollege Math grant Positive initial data on student achievement/attitudes

Comparison to Other Approaches Statway & Quantway (Carnegie Foundation) Similarities – Enable completing precollege to college-level course in one year; all use authentic contexts and data Differences – Direct students toward specific college-level courses; complicates advising for students who do not complete the full program

Comparison to Other Approaches The Emporium Model (NCAT, Virginia Tech) Similarities – Use online homework systems and typically include mastery requirements Differences – Tech-dependent, emphasis on skills over concept

Applying These Ideas to Your Institution What improvements are you seeking in your precollege math students’ achievement and understanding? What strengths does your math department have that can facilitate changing the curriculum and pedagogy? In what ways does your math department’s culture or personnel hinder or prevent change? What strengths does your institution have that can facilitate this type of change? In what ways does your institution hinder or prevent this type of change?

Questions? Contact me (Erik Scott) at