Bridges 2 Success: WSU
and Sinclair Co-Requisite
Remediation Project
Columbus, OH 10/7/2016
Where we are: pathways
WSU has had well defined pathways for students in different
majors for at least a decade:
• Mathematical and quantitative literacy, general audience.
• College Algebra, feeder for three different Calculus tracks.
• Introductory statistics, feeder for research methods courses
in psychology, nursing, and some education and social
science majors.
• Early and middle childhood mathematics education.
Where are we going?
The B2S grant is helping us redesign our courses using a corequisite remediation model to improve both the gateway
completion rate, and shorten the time to completion in all
three pathways.
We are starting with the Quantitative Literacy pathway,
and our first pilot is this spring.
Changes in Curriculum
We are aligning the course content with the new
Quantitative Reasoning OTM.
We have chosen the Dana Center curriculum.
The course will be an Active Learning course aligning not
only with the OTM, best practices, but also campus
initiatives.
Where we are: DEV math
In 2013 WSU redesigned its developmental mathematics
courses (DEV) in the Mathematics Emporium model,
using computer aided instruction (ALEKS).
The redesign increased the DEV completion rates by
13%.
Coreq DEV course
In the spring pilot the gateway course and the coreq DEV
will be taught by different instructors. This is the only
sustainable model apparent to us now. We will use the
pilot to gauge how difficult it is to maintain the “just in
time” pacing with different instructors.
Our goal is to design the corequisite courses to merge as
much as possible with the existing remediation
infrastructure.
Placement requirement: none, for coreq remediation in
QR and STT 1600, TBD for college algebra.
The Co-Requisite Model
We will offer three sections of the pilot QR :
QR – Section 01:
20 Students
(Direct Placement)
QR – Section 02:
20 Students
(Direct Placement)
QR – Section 11:
20 Students (Co-Req)
QR – Section 12:
20 Students (Co-Req)
DEV 0950
40 Students
(Co-Req Only)
QR – Section 03:
40 Students
(All Direct Placement)
The planned schedule allows one section of DEV to serve
both sections of QR with “just in time” remediation.
10:10
MWF
DEV 0950
11:15
MWF
QR-01 w/ Coreq DEV
1:25
MWF
QR-02 w/Coreq DEV
8
Registration model
We are fortunate that WSU has experience with this from
implementing the corequisite English writing program.
QR – Section 11:
20 Students (Co-Req)
DEV 0950 –
Section 01:
20 Students
(Co-Req Only)
QR – Section 12:
20 Students (Co-Req)
DEV 0950 –
Section 02:
20 Students
(Co-Req Only)
Students must register for both
the DEV and a QR.
Success of the Pilot
To determine a “success rate” for the pilot we used
baseline data from students who started DEV math
in Fall 2013, 2014, or 2015.
Where we are: DEV+gateway
one year completion
Analysis of three year’s direct admit freshman data
shows that approximately 14.5% of students who start
DEV math complete their DEV and their mathematics
gateway course in one year.
Started DEV in Fall
2013,2014, or 2015
N=2,082 (Total)
Passed DEV in Fall
>1 year to complete DEV
N=1,438 (Eligible)
69.1% of Total
Attempted math gateway in
Spring (Attempted)
N=447
>1 year to complete DEV and
attempt gateway
31% of Eligible
21% of Total
Passed math gateway in Spring
(Successful)
N=302
67.6% of Attempted
21% of Eligible
14.5% of Total
>1 year to complete both
DEV and gateway
Started DEV in Fall
2013,2014, or 2015
N=2,082 (Total)
Passed DEV in Fall
>1 year to complete DEV
N=1,438 (Eligible)
69.1% of Total
The major “leakage” in
the pipeline:
Attempted math gateway in
Spring (Attempted)
N=447
>1 year to complete DEV and
attempt gateway
31% of Eligible
21% of Total
Passed math gateway in Spring
(Successful)
N=302
67.6% of Attempted
21% of Eligible
14.5% of Total
>1 year to complete both
DEV and gateway
The same population
in the Coreq DEV
Model
Started DEV in Fall
2013,2014, or 2015
N=2,082 (Total)
Passed DEV in Fall
>1 year to complete DEV
N=1,438 (Eligible)
69.1% of Total
Attempted math gateway in
Spring (Attempted)
N=447
>1 year to complete DEV and
attempt gateway
31% of Eligible
21% of Total
Passed math gateway in Spring
(Successful)
N=302
67.6% of Attempted
21% of Eligible
14.5% of Total
>1 year to complete both
DEV and gateway
The same population
in the Coreq DEV
Model
Started DEV in Fall
2013,2014, or 2015
N=2,082 (Total)
Passed DEV in Fall
>1 year to complete DEV
N=1,438 (Eligible)
69.1% of Total
Attempted math gateway in
Spring (Attempted)
N=447
31% of Eligible
>1 year to complete DEV and
attempt gateway
The Coreq DEV model eliminates this “leak”
21% of Total
Passed math gateway in Spring
(Successful)
N=302
67.6% of Attempted
21% of Eligible
14.5% of Total
>1 year to complete both
DEV and gateway
Defining Success: Part 1
We want the corequisite model to “do no harm”.
Therefore our measure of success for the corequisite
model has to be at least as good as the current
prerequisite DEV success rate.
Since we have eliminated the “Attempted” leakage, we
also want to replicate the success rate of all who passed
DEV and attempted the gateway.
Start DEV
At least
Pass Both
70%
Attempt Gateway
Defining Success: Part 2
Does the Coreq DEV model preserve the integrity of the gateway
course?
The operational definition of “integrity” varies from pathway to
pathway.
Examples:
For College Algebra pathway, we will use success and persistence
in subsequent math courses.
For QR, we will use grade distributions and performance on
nationally-normed QR assessment instruments.
Data from the Spring 2017 Pilot
QR – Section 01:
20 Students
(Direct Placement)
QR – Section 02:
20 Students
(Direct Placement)
QR – Section 11:
20 Students (Co-Req)
QR – Section 12:
20 Students (Co-Req)
DEV 0950
40 Students
(Co-Req Only)
QR – Section 03:
40 Students
(All Direct Placement)
Data from the Spring 2017 Pilot
Part 1: Compare completion
rates to where we are now
QR – Section 01:
20 Students
(Direct Placement)
QR – Section 02:
20 Students
(Direct Placement)
QR – Section 11:
20 Students (Co-Req)
QR – Section 12:
20 Students (Co-Req)
DEV 0950
40 Students
(Co-Req Only)
QR – Section 03:
40 Students
(All Direct Placement)
Data from the Spring 2017 Pilot
Part 1: Compare completion rates
to where we are now
QR – Section 01:
20 Students
(Direct Placement)
QR – Section 02:
20 Students
(Direct Placement)
QR – Section 11:
20 Students (Co-Req)
QR – Section 12:
20 Students (Co-Req)
QR – Section 03:
40 Students
(All Direct Placement)
Part 2: Compare pacing and grade
distribution to coreq model
DEV 0950
40 Students
(Co-Req Only)
Challenges
• “Do no harm”: If a student passes the coreq DEV but not
the gateway math, will they have earned a math
placement level that would place them directly into the
gateway course?
• What should happen to a student who passes the
gateway math but not the coreq DEV?
• Will our coreq DEV model accommodate all students
regardless of math placement level?
• How do we populate the coreq model so our data are
generalizable?
• Is the model sustainable?