1. Moving the Needle: Examining Placement and Multiple Measures Dr. Kristi Blackburn, Dean of Institutional Effectiveness, Research, & Planning Dr. Andrew Kretz, Research Analyst IERP Dr. Renee DeLong Chomiak, Dean of Counseling Ms. Connie Boardman, Dean of Science, Engineering, & Math

2. A few thoughts as we begin… “First, do no harm” Under-placement and Over-placement affects students adversely When making change, using data is the first step, middle step, and last step Evaluation  Change  Evaluation The complexity of the issue cannot be underscored– if a silver bullet were to be had, change would have been made long ago… We are all partners in this together helping students succeed!

4. Math Placement Approximately 1% of our students test into college level Math; which is consistent with surrounding community colleges Math2012-132013-142014-15 Math 170182622 Math 150, 160 14 Math 11688130106 Math 112, 114, 115 126151136 Math 80 568641642 Math 70/80A 116711641078 Math 60 387939763686 Math 40 121812731078 AED 49.01 284927682471 TOTAL9913101299233

5. English Placement English Writing2012-132013-142014-15 English 102, 103 3 English 100 128113701272 English 52, 72 372137033374 English 20, 72 418639513557 AED 48.05 538610533 TOTAL972696378736

6. Multiple Measures– Assessing for Success Multiple measures are currently employed by Counselors Counseling session: assess aptitude, motivation, ability High School transcript– last math/English course/grade/AP test scores Transfer (college) transcript Examining additional non-cognitive factors which could help place students Developing rubric for it to be uniformly applied and validated MMAP– State Pilot Multiple Measures Assessment Project Placement rules/decision tree based on high school gpa/high school courses Other colleges in state: LBCC, South Orange Community College District Counseling, Math, English faculty partnering with IERP to review data and determine multiple measures rubric/guidelines Timeline for implementation is in coordination with current assessment cycle Data intensive process

7. About the MMAP methodology… Direct Matriculants: came from high school ie. May grad, start fall Uses data up through 11 th grade Non-direct: gap term, gap year, or more Uses data up through 12 th grade Rules based/decision tree (algorithm) High school gpa Level of English/Math English/Math grade

8. IERP further research included Mann- Whitney, significance test Further validate above 2 methodologies Asterisk (*) in the data reported indicates significance difference

9. About the CCRC Columbia University methodology… Determined the “over-placement” and “under-placement” of students Over-placement: high probability of receiving F in a transfer level course Under-placement: high probability of receiving a C or better in a transfer level course Previous data provided to English and Math included probability of earning B or better Probability Threshold set to.7 (conservative measure) Previous data provided to English and Math was set to.51 (optimistic measure)

10. ENGLISH PLACEMENT

11. ENGLISH COURSE GRADE POINTS (A COMPARISON)

12. ENGLISH COURSE OVERPLACEMENT AND UNDERPLACEMENT – CURRENT PLACEMENT

13. ENGLISH COURSE OVERPLACEMENT AND UNDERPLACEMENT – MMAP PLACEMENT

14. MATH PLACEMENT

15. MATH COURSE GRADE POINTS (A COMPARISON)

16. MATH COURSE OVERPLACEMENT AND UNDERPLACEMENT – CURRENT PLACEMENT

17. MATH COURSE OVERPLACEMENT AND UNDERPLACEMENT – MMAP PLACEMENT

18. Coordinating Student Success Efforts: Collectively Moving the Needle Common Assessment Initiative (CAI) Multiple measures MMAP Validation of cut scores/multiple measures– in progress Acceleration (Engl 72; Math 75) Math Learning Center Success Center (Embedded Tutors/Supplemental Instruction) Basic Skills (AIME) STEM proposal (Math support at transfer level) K-16 Bridge/Educational Partnerships Cerritos Complete

19. “Access without support is not opportunity” --Vincent Tinto