20
Peter Riley Bahr, Ph.D. Assistant Professor of Education Center for the Study of Higher and Postsecondary Education University of Michigan [email protected]
Peter Riley Bahr, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor of Education
Center for the Study of Higher and Postsecondary Education
University of Michigan
1. …about a larger research agenda for understanding and facilitating student success in Michigan community colleges.
2. …about how we approach analytical problems that have relevance for policy and practice.
3. …about the value of collaboration and data sharing across the postsecondary sectors for maximizing the overall potential of public higher education in Michigan.
Across the U.S., the majority of community college students require some degree of remedial assistance with basic academic skills.
More students require assistance with remedial math than with any other subject.
Writing (often referred to generically as “English”) is second, followed by reading.
Successfully navigating remedial coursework is a critically important determinant of credential completion.
A minority of students who need remedial assistance with math or writing ultimately complete a college-level course in the subject.
There are enormous differences in college-level skill attainment between students who enter the remedial sequence at differing levels of competency.
Students who begin near the top of the remedial ladder fair much better than students who begin near the bottom…
…though even students at the top don’t fair all that well.
Differences in duration of enrollment (persistence) can explain only part of the differences in skill attainment between students who begin at differing points of entry.
When and why do we lose so many students who begin near the bottom of the remedial sequences?
Data from Michigan’s “Achieving the Dream” colleges:
o 14 community colleges that were participating in ATD between 2004 and 2008.
o 72,315 first-time, credential-seeking students who began in the Fall of 2004 through 2008
o Students were monitored from the semester of entry through the later of the semester of exit or Summer 2011
Remedial Math Students
o Students whose first math course was 1, 2, or 3 levels below college math (typically college algebra)
Remedial English Students
o Students whose first English course was 1, 2, or 3 levels below college English (typically college composition)
29%
14%
6%
23%
43%
23%
10%
35%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
1 level below college 2 levels below college 3 levels below college all levels combined
Co
mp
lete
d a
Co
lleg
e-L
evel
Ma
th C
ou
rse
Su
cce
ssfu
lly
Point of Entry into Remedial Math
College-Level Math Attainment
duration of enrollment ≥ 1 semester
duration of enrollment ≥ 4 semesters
40%
29%
24%
37%
65%
52%
44%
61%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
1 level below college 2 levels below college 3 levels below college all levels combined
Co
mp
lete
d a
Co
lleg
e-L
evel
En
gli
sh C
ou
rse
Su
cces
sfu
lly
Point of Entry into Remedial English
College-Level English Attainment
duration of enrollment ≥ 1 semester
duration of enrollment ≥ 4 semesters
As seen throughout the U.S., remedial math and remedial English students in Michigan’s community college tend to achieve college-level competency at fairly low rates.
Students who begin at lower levels competency fair worse than students who begin at higher levels of competency.
Part, but not all, of this difference can be explained by differences in duration of enrollment (persistence).
However, a large gap in college-level attainment remains even at reasonably high durations of enrollment.
When and why do we lose so many students from the remedial sequence?
When and why do we lose so many more students who begin near the bottom of the remedial sequences?
One approach to exploring this question is to “deconstruct” students’ course-taking from their point of entry into the remedial sequence to their eventual exit.
Features of course-taking at which we might look include:
o Delays between remedial courses
o Course success rates at each step of the remedial sequence
o The attempt of the next course in the remedial sequence or, conversely, attrition from the sequence
Delaying a course
o A break between courses in a remedial sequence that was not a result of a break in college enrollment
Passing a course
o The achievement of a passing grade (A, B, C, Credit, or Pass) on the first attempt of a remedial course
Attempting the next course
o Enrollment in a course in the remedial sequence that is of a higher skill-level than the previous course
Among those students who remained in the community
college for at least 4 semesters and whose first math course
was remedial in nature:
What percentage of students at each point of entry delayed
this first math course relative to when they began college?
What percentage passed this first remedial math course on
the first attempt?
What percentage attempted a second math course of higher
skill than their first math course?
Of those students who attempted a second math course,
what percentage delayed this course relative to the
semester of their first math course enrollment?
More than a third of students experience delays between
remedial math courses.
Delays are costly because they put students at risk of
“running out of time” and leaving college without
achieving college-level competency.
Pass rates at each step of the remedial math sequence never
exceed 70% and are considerably lower at later points in
the sequence.
Attrition from the sequence (demonstrated by low
“attempt” rates) increases with each successive step of the
remedial math sequence.
Though students who delay early remedial courses tend to
accelerate later remedial course-taking if they continue in the
sequence…
…the students who delay early remedial courses tend
to be much more likely to drop out of the sequence
altogether.
A non-passing grade at any point in the sequence is
devastating for students’ chances of continuing in the
sequence…
…even if they were successful in all prior courses.
Leaving aside low-duration (non-persisting) students…
…much of the overall low rate of college-level skill
attainment is a result of the incrementally escalating
rate of attrition at each step of the remedial sequence
(i.e., pipeline “leakage” as opposed to “breakage”).
The fact that students who begin the sequence at lower
points of entry must take more remedial steps…
means that they suffer greater total attrition, resulting
in terribly low rates of college-level skill attainment
among these students.
1. What are the causes of remedial sequence attrition,
independent of the causes of complete departure from
college?
2. Why does the rate of remedial sequence attrition escalate as
one moves through the sequence, even among those
students remain in college after exiting the remedial
sequence?
3. What are students who leave the remedial sequence, but
remain enrolled in college, doing with respect to course-
taking after they leave the remedial sequence?
Irrespective of this particular study…
1. What are the really pressing questions for Michigan’s
community colleges?
What is the research agenda for Michigan’s community
colleges?
2. To what extent are the data available now to address these
questions?
3. What is needed to assemble these data and begin to pursue
this research agenda?
