Evaluating Innovative Curriculum under AB 705 - Shared screen with speaker view
If you have questions as we go through the webinar, please type them into the chat box and we will respond to them.
Here’s the webinar that Craig was referring to: http://rpgroup.org/Portals/0/Documents/archive/HowToUseRForDecisionTrees20150423.pdf
And the CCCCO's memo including the default placement rules: https://assessmentplacement.squarespace.com/s/0718-AB-705-Implementation-Memorandumpdf.pdf
Has the research validating / recommending the 2.6 GPAs et al been updated to include more recent figures, say for 2017-18? Just curious, specifically if there were any changes to the throughput with more recent figures...
We’ll be conducting another round of research this year - it’s unlikely to change substantially but we’ll definitely be looking into it.
Do we have the data on students who would have been placed 2 or more levels below? If they are now placed 1 level below, is their throughput better than it was when 2 semesters below? Would they still be compared to the same numbers?
Thanks---agree there wouldn't be any sub changes...it may make convincing reluctant folks to take the leap by including / showing off recent figures...
Do we have one year success rates/throughput rates since ab705 requires to maximize within the year?
Also - for the BSTEM, the chart said based on having completed Intermediate Algebra. That needs to be stated every time this chart is shared!
That's right, Karen.
@Karen - Note - however, that the requirement to have completed Intermediate Algebra is up to local determination and various colleges are exploring alternative models of provision of intermediate algebra within support models rather than as a prequisite.
Why do you think the Bill did not simply say place all students into transfer level Math and English? Not being facetiuos at all. Gebuine question.
@jchaidez - Because there has been a fair amount of research that’s been done since the law was implemented which has clarified that it’s been exceptionally hard to identify students that are highly unlikely to succeed in transfer-level courses or who might have been more likely to complete if they started below transfer-level.
@jchaidez - The presumption of the law was that such groups of students might possibly exist and wasn’t precluding the possibility that some students might be better served via placement below transfer-level but wanted us to do the work to demonstrate who those students might be. As it has turned out, no one has been able to provide such evidence to date. Many are still are looking and that’s part of the reason that we’ve provided this and the previous webinar so that people can think through how they might go through such a process/develop such evidence locally.
Will guided self placement models be covered in this webinar? If not, will there be? Thanks!
@antoniramirez, we will not be toucing on guided self-placement in this webinar. What are you looking for? Examples of what other colleges are doing around GSP? Or something else?
@Mallory Newell, I would also like to know about GSP. What type of questionnaires and/or surveys will be accepted by CCCCO? Who is piloting GSPs that we can look at?
Hi Mallory one of my questions was already addressed but examples from other colleges would be great
Here’s a link to Fullerton College’s presentation to the AB705 Implementation Committee on March 29: https://assessment.cccco.edu/s/Revised-Merged-Guided-Self-placement-for-AB-705-Workgroup_withFormatting.pdf
San Diego Mesa also presented to the committee and provided their logic for Math. It’s available here: https://assessment.cccco.edu/s/AB705WorkgroupHandout.pdf
The AB705 Implementation committee also discussed some of the evidence from the CSU’s on their use on GSP. See the July 18 meeting… https://assessment.cccco.edu/implementation-committee-1/
And MiraCosa has shared their GSP model at a recent Strengthening Student Success Conference presentation. http://rpgroup.org/Portals/0/Documents/Conferences/StudentSuccess/2018SSSCMaterials/SSSC18_Presentation_Materials/SSSC18_Post-Conference_Workshops/Guided_Self-Placement-SSSC2018.pdf
Vinh Nguyen (IVC)
This might have been covered earlier (I was a few minutes late), but can we re-state which scenarios would require TP innovation? If we let all students into WR 1, with student choice of co-req, are we exempt? If we let all students into transfer-level math, but require some students to take co-req support (low GPA students), are we required to demonstrate better than baseline TP?
Vinh Nguyen (IVC)
co-req is optional
Vinh Nguyen (IVC)
I would expect it to be higher. I was curious as to how high it was.
It makes the bar that much higher for those that want to create two semester innovations.