1. TSI and Student Success
Suzanne Morales-Vale, PhD
Keylan Morgan, MEd
Division of College Readiness and Success
March 29, 2019
NTCCC Forum, Gainesville, TX

2. Agenda Overview of Texas Higher Education Strategic Plan (60x30TX)
Overview of College Readiness
Definitions
Trends
TSI Policy Updates
TSIA Writing Benchmark
HB 2223 Implementation Rules and Policies
HB 2223 Reporting
TSIA, Version 2.0
Resources/Support
Q&A

4. College Readiness Definitions and Trends
Some of the slides include data from Fall 2016, but most don’t. Fall 2016 data isn’t completely certified yet, so I removed the schools that still had error records. Thank Charlie Busbey for running some of these analyses.
Definitions and Trends

5. Demonstration of College-readiness and TSI Exemptions
TSIA scores
ACT scores
SAT scores
STAAR EOC – English III and Algebra II (4000)
HS College Preparatory Course
Successful completion of a college-level course as accepted by the receiving institution
Use example of dual credit – depends on the course AND whether the school accepts it as a FCLC

6. THECB Definition of College Readiness Differs From:
Dual credit eligibility
TEA definition of “college readiness,” “postsecondary,” “college, career, and military readiness” (CCMR)

7. Dual Credit Eligibility vs. College Readiness
Dual Credit Eligibility- not a college readiness benchmark but allows qualifying students to ENROLL in a college-level course (by subject area(s)):
PSAT-MNSQT/Aspire
English II EOC (4000)
Algebra I EOC (4000) + Algebra II course (grade of A, B, or C)
TAC, Section 4.85
Students meeting above eligibility requirements are not considered college ready until successful completion of the college-level course (grade of A, B, or C)

8. TEA: College, Career, and Military Readiness (CCMR)
4/20/18
College Ready
Meet criteria of 3 on AP or 4 on IB examinations
Meet TSI criteria (SAT/ACT/TSIA/College Prep course) in reading and mathematics
Complete a course for dual credit (9 hours or more in any subject or 3 hours or more in ELAR/mathematics)
Earn an associate’s degree
Complete an OnRamps course*
Meet standards on a composite of indicators indicating college readiness*
*Implementation in 2019 & beyond
NOTE: TSI benchmark is only in reading and math /

9. TEA: College, Career, and Military Readiness (CCMR)
4/20/18
Career Ready
•Earn industry-based certification
•CTE coherent sequence coursework completion and credit aligned with approved industry-based certifications (one-half point credit)
•Graduate with completed IEP and workforce readiness (graduation type code of 04, 05, 54, or 55)
•Be admitted to postsecondary industry certification program*
Military Ready
Enlist in the United States Armed Forces
*Implementation in 2019 & beyond
NOTE: TSI benchmark is only in reading and math

10. College readiness of incoming cohorts increased in 2017 after two years of declines
Source: CBM002

11. 60 percent of first-time entering students in Fall 2017 were college ready.
The majority of students who are not college-ready and who enroll in developmental education are in community colleges.
Comparison to fall 2016:
Statewide: 53.6 CR ( CR)/ 46.4 NOT CR ( ) –almost 7 point gain!
CTCs: 32.9 CR ( CR)/67.1 NOT CR ( NOT CR) --almost 10 % point gain!
Universities: 81.9 CR ( CR)/18.1 NOT CR ( NOT CR) almost 3 % point gain!
Possible Reasons: 1) lowering the TSIA college readiness benchmark for writing
2) Increase in DC enrollments and thus completions

12. Almost half of non-college-ready students from Fall 2016 remained not-ready after 1 year
We actually measure two major checkpoints for students who enter non-college ready in each subject. Becoming college –ready (through TSI-retake, successful completion of Developmental education, or completing a FCLC).

13. Math continues to be the subject with the most students who are not college-ready and also have the lowest FCLC completions after a year

14. Successful completion of FCLC has increased over past 5 years
We expect these percentages to increase significantly as a result of HB Preliminary data show 60-70% FCLC completion after one semester, compared in 17-39%

15. Graduate rates at two-year colleges are 10 percentage points higher for college ready students compared to students who enter not college-ready.
Because more students who entered not college ready are becoming college-ready quicker (HB 2223), we expect graduation rates for those entering not college-ready to increase.

16. At universities, graduate rates are more than 30 percentage points higher for college ready students

17. % Total Underprepared Population
Table 1: ABE Levels, by Subject, as Percent of Total Population Classified as “Underprepared”
Diagnostic
Score
Reporting Year ‘16
% Total Underprepared Population
Reporting Year ‘17
ABE Math
Score = 1
207
0.05%
331
0.08%
Score = 2
569
0.14%
796
0.18%
Score = 3
2,529
0.62%
3,067
0.71%
Score = 4
15,065
3.69%
16,807
3.89%
ABE Reading 68
0.03% 81
453
568
0.22%
467
0.19%
525
0.21%
3,986
1.62%
4,260
1.66%
ABE Writing
239
0.09%
405
0.15%
238
212
1,134
0.44%
1,146
0.43%
5,256
2.05%
5,823
2.18%
Adult Education – defined as below high school knowledge and skills levels (ABE diagnostic levels 1-4)
AE participants in HE: ranging from 2-4% of the total underprepared population in HE
Slight uptick between 2016 and 2017
Source: Reporting Year(s) 2016, 2017 CBM002, TX Higher Education Coordinating Board

18. Table 2: BASE NCBO Enrollments by Reporting Year
Students
Enrollments
2016
3,096
3,528
2017
4,617
5,322
BASE NCBO Enrollments grew by 1,794 between 2016 and With 1,521 more students making up those enrollments.
BASE NCBO is a co-enrollment with DE or CTE course (i.e., IET/ICP/ATX models) designed for levels 3-4 (near HS levels)
Pell grants/federal financial aid can be used for courses/interventions at minimal high school skill levels only
Source: Reporting Year(s) 2016, 2017 CBM00S, TX Higher Education Coordinating Board

19. Table 3: CERT 1 Completions by Reporting Year
Students
Cert 1 Completions
Change in Number of Completions
2015
28,232
32,007
2016
28,015
32,382
+375
2017
28,857
33,237
+855
CERT 1 Completions have grown over the past two years. In 2017, CERT 1 completions outpaced the population of students that pursued the program.
Degrees&Certs awarded - CTCs
,280 45% (tot com) ,295__45% (tot com)___
CERT 1 32,382 28% 33,237 27%
CERT % %
AA 80,217 68% 84,568 69%
University & CTC completions: 262,191 (55% BA, 45% other)
Source: Reporting Year(s) 2015, 2016, 2017 CBM009, TX Higher Education Coordinating Board

20. Policy Updates TSIA Writing Benchmark
HB 2223 Implementation Rules and Policies
HB 2223 Reporting
TSIA, Version 2.0

21. TSI Assessment Rule Change
Effective the institution’s first class of fall 2017, the following minimum passing standards for reading , math, and writing on the TSIA shall be used to determine a student’s readiness to enroll in entry-level freshman coursework:
Math (no change) Reading- 351 (no change)
Writing -
Placement score of at least 340 and an essay score of at least 4
Placement score of less than 340, and ABE Diagnostic Level of at least 4, and an essay score of at least 5

22. Understanding HB 2223
Requires each IHE to develop and implement for developmental education a corequisite model(s)
Each institution shall ensure that at least 75 percent* of the institution's students enrolled in developmental coursework, other than adult basic education or basic academic skills education, are enrolled in developmental coursework described by this subsection.
*phased-in over 3 year period: 25% fall 2018; 50% fall 2019; 75% fall 2020

23. Definition of Corequisite (aka Mainstreaming, Co-Enrollment, Course Pairing)
Rule 4.53(7):
Co-requisite (also known as corequisite or mainstreaming)--An instructional strategy whereby undergraduate students as defined in paragraph (24) of this section are co-enrolled or concurrently enrolled in a developmental education course or NCBO, as defined in paragraph (18) of this section, and the entry-level freshman course of the same subject matter within the same semester.

24. Definition of Corequisite (aka Mainstreaming, Co-Enrollment, Course Pairing)
Rule 4.53(7): (continued)
The developmental component provides support aligned directly with the learning outcomes, instruction, and assessment of the entry-level freshman course, and makes necessary adjustments as needed in order to advance students' success in the entry- level freshman course. Participation in the entry-level freshman course is not contingent upon performance in the developmental education component of the corequisite.*
*sequential models

25. Definition of Undergraduate
Rule 4.53(24):
(24) Undergraduate student—a student, other than a high school student enrolled in college-level coursework for dual credit, who enrolls at a Texas public institution of higher education in a field or program of study.
Corequisite models are for high school complete students only

26. When do HB 2223 requirements take effect?
: At least 25% of the IHE's students enrolled in DE coursework must be enrolled in corequisite models
: At least 50% of the IHE's students enrolled in DE coursework must be enrolled in corequisite models
: At least 75% of the IHE's students enrolled in DE coursework must be enrolled in corequisite models
How measured?
By subject area
By institution or campus (per CBM reporting)
By semester, including summer
Insert table
Minimum percentage required

27. Which students are exempt? (unduplicated)
STUDENT IS ENROLLED IN A DE COURSE/ INTERVENTION AND
(i) assessed at ABE Diagnostic levels 1-4 on the TSI Assessment* or enrolled in BASE NCBOs;
(ii) is reported as college ready;
(iii) enrolled in adult education/AEL or reported with ESOL waiver;
(iv) enrolled in a degree plan not requiring a freshman–level academic mathematics course; OR
meets one or more of the exemptions as outlined in §4.54 (relating to Exemptions, Exceptions, and Waivers)
*initial semester only

28. HB 2223 Applies To The Following Students:
STUDENT IS ENROLLED IN A DE COURSE/ INTERVENTION AND
Students with TSIA Developmental Education Diagnostic results (e.g., TSIA math );
Students with TSIA ABE Diagnostic results of Levels 5 and 6; OR
Underprepared students enrolled in developmental education courses/interventions not otherwise exempt

29. Additional Changes from HB 2223
Texas Success Initiative (TSI) statute relocated
Section changes to Article I, Section 1.01, F-1
DE Hours Eligible for Funding are Reduced
Section
Universities: Reduced from 18 hours to 9 hours
Community Colleges: Reduced from 27 hours to 18 hours
ESOL: Remains at 18 hours/Universities and 27/CC
89.4% of DE students currently meet these new mandates

30. Clarification- starting Spring 2019
Only IRW DE courses will count as a corequisite model for HB 2223
CIP Approval Codes (e.g., CTCs)
The following courses/interventions will no longer count as part of a corequisite model (e.g., CTCs)
DE Reading /61 12
DE Writing /62 12
Because IRW course/intervention is required at the exit-level, DE Reading and DE Writing courses/interventions will not count as part of the corequisite model. If the student is enrolled in a corequisite model with DE Reading or DE Writing, the student will not count in the institution’s HB 2223 percentage calculation.

31. Reporting for HB 2223
Percentage of DE students in corequisite models will be determined through CBM reports
State reporting officials provide THECB data on:
College-readiness status of each student
TSIA and ABE Diagnostic level scores
TSIA waiver and exemption status
Developmental coursework taken by each student (i.e., subject and type of DE instruction)
Communication with your institution’s reporting official is important –
ensure corequisite models are being reported correctly
ensure exemptions are being reported correctly
For questions about reporting, please contact Melissa Humphries (THECB): (512)

32. Reporting for HB 2223
Your institution’s reporting administrator has received several s with your institution’s fall and spring 2018 HB 2223 calculations
Serves as a checkpoint to determine if your institution is reporting correctly
Annual DEPS
DE Report, approved by the Board and sent to Governor and Legislators, reports in aggregate and by-institution progress on HB 2223
Report follow-up will be based on verified CBM data, expected spring 2019
Participation as required by HB 2223
Fall 2019 corequisite outcomes
Future reports will include longitudinal data

33. DE Report – January 2019
DE Report, approved by the Board and sent to Governor and Legislators, reports in aggregate and by-institution progress on HB 2223
Report follow-up will be based on verified CBM data, expected spring 2019
Participation as required by HB 2223
Fall 2019 corequisite outcomes
Future reports will include longitudinal data

34. DE Report – January 2019
Includes 4 Recommendations for Serving Underprepared Students
Developmental education is delivered via corequisite models by 2023;
All community colleges have access to Adult Education and Literacy programs, either directly or through partnerships;
All students completing the high school College Preparatory Course (Section ) be administered the TSI Assessment;
Funding for serving underprepared students addresses all students, including those identified as not college- ready and those college-ready but are still struggling.

35. Developmental Education Program Survey (DEPS)
New items included:
2 questions about HB2223 implementation costs
2 questions about placement; one for Math Pathways, and another for IRW
THECB Reporting on the DEPS
The DEPS will be used to report corequisite percentages for fall 2018
CBM used as addendum once available
Preliminary Findings
The Developmental Education Program Survey (DEPS) is administered through the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (THECB) and contains items related to DE student placement, DE course and intervention options, and college preparatory courses. The registered DEPS contact for your institution is responsible for the completion of this survey as part of the evaluation requirement in accordance with TAC §4.60.

36. DEPS: Preliminary Findings - Overview32
Public Universities
8,361
Corequisite Enrollments
84%
Meeting the 25% Math Corequisite Enrollment Goal
94%
Meeting the 25% IRW Corequisite Enrollment Goal 65
Public Community and Technical Colleges
40,401
72%
92%
Meeting the 25% IRW Corequisite Enrollment Goal

37. DEPS: Preliminary Findings – Statewide Overview
37%
of eligible DE students are enrolled in a corequisite model for Math
76%
of institutions met the 25% corequisite enrollment goal for Math
52%
of eligible DE students are enrolled in a corequisite model for IRW
93%
of institutions met the 25% corequisite enrollment goal for IRW

38. DEPS: Preliminary Findings - Challenges & Investments
Top 3 Implementation Challenges
Scheduling corequisite course sections/support
Providing sufficient number of qualified faculty to teach in a corequisite model
Communicating between faculty and advisors about corequisite options
Top 3 Investments for Implementation
Costs associated with enhancing academic support services (e.g. supplemental instruction, tutoring, math / writing lab etc.)
Professional development for instructors of new developmental education courses
Compensation to faculty for curriculum development or course redesign work

39. TSIA, Version 2.0 Upcoming Changes: Integrate Reading and Writing
Aligns with SAT/ACT, Secondary Education
Expands current delivery of IRW at exit level to all levels
Improve transportability of test results
Reduce diagnostics to one test
Anticipated effective date: Fall 2020

40. OTHER POLICY CLARIFICATIONS
Holistic advising is used to place underprepared undergraduate students
Cannot be used to make a student “college-ready”
Cannot be used for high school students wishing to enroll in college-level coursework through dual credit
Should be used to determine best course/intervention placement for student (e.g., course, NCBO, ALP, SI)
TSI Statute requires institutions to
assess entering, non-exempt undergraduate students on the TSIA for college readiness
develop an individualized Plan for Academic Success for those not meeting the college readiness benchmark
GIPWE reference to “meeting TSI requirements” (p. 19)
Holistic advising models are for high school complete students only

41. OTHER POLICY CLARIFICATIONS (cont’d)
TSI does not require students to be “TSI- met/complete” in order to graduate
Most students will be TSI-met/complete through TSIA, DE, and/or successful college- level coursework completion
Individualized Plan for Academic Success
The institution determines the support necessary that aligns with faculty expectations for students’ programs/degree plans
Example: AAS students who complete a college-level science course in lieu of college-level math may not be required to be “TSI-met” in math in order to graduate

42. 86th Legislative Session)
Some highlights:
incorporating TSIA in K-12 Accountability and ESSA Testing
allowing score set by the Board on HS equivalency tests (GED, HiSET, TASC) to be eligible for TSI exemption
Study needed to determine appropriate score(s)
reducing mandatory testing for K-12 students
improving transferability and applicability of courses

43. Resources/Support www.thecb.state.tx.us
Enter “TSI” in the Learn More search bar
Sign up for the TSI/DE listserv for latest updates
Austin Community College, Corequisite PD Program
Advising and Placement
DE and College-level Faculty Collaborations
Corequisites for non-English/Math courses
Model Evaluation and Continuous Improvement
Administration and Adjunct Support
Collaborating with Texas Community College Education Initiative and Catch the Next

44. Resources/Support –Upcoming Events
Call with the Co-Board (spring 2019)
TexAAN – Texas Academic Advising Network
P-16 PD Conference (Austin, June 24)
Texas Corequisite Project
Needs Analysis Survey (feedback ongoing)
Transformational Teaching Workshop (Austin, March 7-8)
Continuous Improvement Conference (Austin, June 8-9)

45. Discussion/ Q&A THECB Contacts: Suzanne Morales-Vale, PhD 512.427.6262
Division of College Readiness and Success
Keylan Morgan, MEd
Bobby Jenkins, MEd
DE/TSI Reporting
Division of Strategic Planning and Funding