FACTORS PROMOTING THE ADOPTION OF ACCELERATION AMONG
COMMUNITY COLLEGE MATHEMATICS FACULTY
A dissertation submitted to the faculty of
San Francisco State University
In partial fulfillment of
the requirements for
the Degree
Doctor of Education
In
Educational Leadership
by
Rebecca Kimmae Wong
San Francisco, California
May 2014
CERTIFICATION OF APPROVAL
I certify that I have read Factors Promoting the Adoption of Acceleration Among
Community College Mathematics Faculty by Rebecca Kimmae Wong, and that in my
opinion this work meets the criteria for approving a thesis submitted in partial fulfillment
of the requirement for the degree Doctor of Education in Educational Leadership at San
Francisco State University.
______________________________________
Patricia Irvine, Ph.D.
Professor
Robert Gabriner, Ed.D.
Professor
Daniel Meier, Ph.D.
Professor
FACTORS PROMOTING THE ADOPTION OF ACCELERATION AMONG
COMMUITY COLLEGE MATHEMATICS FACULTY
Rebecca Kimmae Wong
San Francisco, California
2014
This qualitative study explored the personal factors that promote the adoption of
acceleration among community college mathematics faculty as well as the departmental
and institutional relationships that support this adoption. Interviews with nine early
adopters of acceleration revealed diversity in their educational backgrounds and career
paths into community college teaching. This diversity may enhance the ability of faculty
to view the mathematics curriculum as evolving, enabling them to investigate alternatives
to the traditional developmental math curriculum such as acceleration. Study participants
also demonstrated highly developed pedagogical content knowledge and noted the
importance of participation in a community of practice in supporting their acceleration
work. Participants used implementation strategies aligned with their departmental culture
and
identified
ways
the
institution
could
support
their
adoption
efforts.
Recommendations outline strategies for faculty and institutional leaders interested in
promoting the adoption of acceleration on their campuses
I certify that the abstract is a correct representation of the content of this dissertation.
Chair, Dissertation Committee
Date
ACKNOWLEGEMENTS
"At times our own light goes out and is rekindled by a spark from another person. Each
of us has cause to think with deep gratitude of those who have lighted the flame within
us." - Albert Schweitzer. I am grateful to my committee for sharing their expertise and
encouragement: to Professor Irvine for helping me develop confidence as a writer, to
Professor Gabriner for sharing his knowledge and commitment to the community college
system, to Professor Meier for opening my eyes to the field of narrative inquiry. I am
grateful to my study participants for sharing their stories with me: your dedication to your
students inspires me. I am grateful to members of my cohort who have shared this
journey with me, especially Meredith, Megan, Kelvin, and the South Bay carpool whose
debriefing and good humor made the weekends so much more bearable. I am grateful to
Professor Larry Gerstein, UCSB, who gave me the confidence to go on to graduate
school. Special thanks to my sister, Tina, who has been my guide and support throughout
my life. I dedicate this dissertation to my father who taught me, through his example, to
pursue education with a passion and to use one's education to work for justice.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Table ...................................................................................................................... vii
List of Figures .................................................................................................................. viii
List of Appendices ............................................................................................................. ix
Chapter 1: Purpose of the Study ..........................................................................................1
Context of the Problem ............................................................................................1
Study Rationale ........................................................................................................8
Statement of the Problem .........................................................................................8
Research Questions ..................................................................................................9
Conceptual Framework ..........................................................................................10
Justification for the Study and Significance ..........................................................12
Operational Definitions ..........................................................................................13
Statement of Deliminations....................................................................................15
Summary ................................................................................................................16
Chapter 2: Literature Review .............................................................................................17
Introduction ............................................................................................................17
Scope and Structure of the Literature Review .......................................................18
Acceleration As a Promising Practice....................................................................19
Innovation Frameworks .........................................................................................20
Rogers' Diffusions of Innovation ...............................................................20
The Concerns Based Adoption Model .......................................................22
v
Personal Characteristics of Innovative Faculty......................................................23
Growth Change Mindset ........................................................................................27
Innovators As Part of a Social Network ................................................................28
Institutional Factors that Promote Faculty Innovation...........................................30
Conclusions and Implications ................................................................................31
Chapter 3: Methodology ....................................................................................................33
Introduction ............................................................................................................33
Research Design.....................................................................................................33
Research Questions ................................................................................................35
Context of the Study ..............................................................................................36
Participant Selection ..............................................................................................39
Ethics and Protection of Human Subjects ..............................................................42
Data Collection ......................................................................................................43
Data Analysis .........................................................................................................44
Summary ................................................................................................................46
Chapter 4: The Findings.....................................................................................................48
Overview ................................................................................................................48
Personal Factors that Promote the Adoption of Acceleration ................................50
Diverse Educational and Professional Backgrounds .................................51
Diversity in Educational Backgrounds ..........................................51
Diversity in Professional Backgrounds ..........................................54
Awareness of One's Purpose for Teaching ................................................58
Seeking Out Teaching As a Profession ..........................................58
vi
Self-Reflection and Growth ...........................................................61
Taking Personal Responsibility for Student Success .....................65
Approach to Mathematics As a Subject Matter .........................................68
Contextualized Curriculum ............................................................68
Mathematics As an Evolving Discipline........................................72
Personal Knowledge of Students ...............................................................77
Personal Connection to Students ...................................................77
Motivated by Issues of Student Equity ..........................................78
Importance of a Community of Practice ....................................................81
Value of Working with Emmy.......................................................82
Value of Connections with Colleagues from Other Institutions ....84
Strategies Faculty Use to Engage Departmental Colleagues in Acceleration .......87
Engaging Institutional Support for Acceleration ...................................................96
Summary of Findings ...........................................................................................103
Chapter 5: Conclusions and Implications ........................................................................106
The Findings ........................................................................................................107
Personal Factors That Promote the Adoption of Acceleration ................107
Strategies to Engage Departmental Colleagues and
Institutional Leaders....................................................................109
Implications and Recommendations ....................................................................111
Recommendations for Institutional Leaders to Promote Acceleration ....111
vii
Recommendations for Mathematic Faculty Interested in
Promoting Acceleration ...............................................................113
Current Challenges to Scaling Up Acceleration ..................................................115
Study Limitations .................................................................................................116
Recommendations for Further Study ...................................................................117
Conclusion ...........................................................................................................117
References ........................................................................................................................120
Appendices .......................................................................................................................128
viii
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Page
1. List of participants by gender, college, and cohort........................................41
2.
Participants' non-traditional educational, professional, and teaching
backgrounds ................................................................................................53
ix
LIST OF FIGURES
Figures
Page
1. Conceptual Framework.....................................................................................10
x
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix
Page
1. Interview questions…...........................................................................................128
xi
1
Chapter 1: Purpose of the Study
Introduction
The purpose of this study was to develop an understanding of the personal and
institutional factors that promote the adoption of acceleration, defined as reducing the
number of remedial courses in the traditional developmental mathematics sequence,
among California community college mathematics faculty. The study also explored the
strategies these faculty use to develop the collaborative relationships with colleagues
needed to implement acceleration projects in their local settings.
Context of the Problem
Assisting under-prepared students attain the basic skills they need to successfully
complete college-level coursework is one of the primary missions of the community
college (The Center for Student Success, 2007). Research shows, however, that
community colleges are failing in this charge (Bahr, 2010; Bailey, Jeong, & Cho, 2010).
A majority of community college students enroll in developmental courses designed to
remediate deficiencies in the foundational subjects of math and English prior to enrolling
in a college-level course; however, less than 25% of students who begin in a
2
developmental sequence go on to complete a college-level course within six years of
enrollment (Bahr, 2010). Thus community colleges are not successfully transitioning
under-prepared students from basic skills remediation to college-level coursework.
The traditional developmental math sequence consists of three levels:
arithmetic/pre-algebra, elementary algebra, and intermediate algebra. Students placing
into the developmental sequence must take between one and three of these courses before
enrolling in a transfer-level math course. Studies on student progress through the
developmental math sequence indicate that the number of courses in the sequence is itself
a barrier to student degree attainment for community college students (Bailey et al.,
2010). Research has shown that completion rates for the sequence are negatively related
to the number of levels students are required to take. For example, 45% of those needing
to take only one developmental math course will complete the sequence; however, of
those students needing to take all three levels of developmental math courses, only 17%
complete the sequence and enroll in a college-level math course (Bailey et al., 2010).
Unless these students complete the developmental math sequence, they will be unable to
earn an associates degree or transfer to a 4-year institution (www.assist.org). Research
shows that, instead of being the intended bridge to higher education, the current
developmental math sequence is in fact a barrier to student degree attainment (Bahr,
2010; Bailey et al., 2010).
The community college developmental math sequence not only impedes upward
social mobility by restricting degree attainment for some students, it also maintains racial
3
educational inequity as well. Based on data that Bahr (2010) presents, racial groups that
tend to be educationally disadvantaged in the K-12 educational system carry this
disadvantage with them into the community college system. In an analysis of data
collected by the Chancellor's Office of California Community Colleges, Bahr (2010)
found racial disparities in math preparation among students entering the community
college system. Bahr's analysis showed that, after 12th grade, only 25% of AfricanAmerican students and 20% of Latino students are prepared for college-level math,
compared with 39% of Whites. In addition, Bahr found that Latino and AfricanAmerican students also tend to place at lower levels in the sequence than White students
and are thus required to take more developmental courses. For example, only 17% of
White students start at the lowest level of the developmental math sequence, while 40%
of African-American and 31% of Latino students do so. Bahr attributes the large
differences in developmental sequence completion rates among racial groups to the
additional number of courses African-American and Latino students are required to take.
While slightly more than 25% of White students who begin in the developmental math
sequence will attain college-level math skill within six years, only 20% of Latino students
and 11% of African-American students will do so (Bahr, 2010). Thus, the community
college developmental math sequence fails to successfully transition students to collegelevel coursework and worsens rather than alleviates the racial stratification in math skill
acquisition, a result that completely contradicts one of the primary missions of the
4
community college: to assist underprepared students to develop the skills needed for
college success (Cullinane & Treisman, 2010).
While the number of courses required seems to be inversely proportional to the
likelihood of completion, content area specialists have raised questions about the
curriculum and pedagogy used in these courses as well. Mathematicians and
mathematics educators note that the core curriculum in the traditional developmental
math sequence retraces the high school curriculum that is largely directed at students who
are in the “calculus pipeline” and planning to major in math-intensive fields such as
STEM (Science/Technology/Engineering/Mathematics) fields. Students in these mathintensive fields need a strong foundation in algebra and symbol manipulation; however,
this algebra-based curriculum does not meet the needs of the vast majority of college
students whose majors do not require this type of mathematical background (Briggs,
2004). These students often perceive mathematics as an abstract, rigid field that has little
or no application in their daily lives (Sezer, 2010). This "mismatch" between the
developmental math curriculum and the educational goals of students with non-math
intensive majors may contribute to the lack of success in the developmental math
sequence.
In addition to curriculum, the predominant pedagogy used in developmental math
classes has also been identified as a contributing factor to lack of student success and
persistence (Grubb et al., 2011). In reviewing pedagogy used in these classes, Hodara
(2011) found that instruction was characterized by review, lecture, individual seat-work,
5
and math problems devoid of application to the real world. Shor (1992) asserts that
students in such classes “learn that education is something to be put up with, to tolerate as
best they can” and “many students do not like the knowledge, process, or roles set out for
them in class. In reaction they drop out or withdraw into passivity or silence in the
classroom."
When faced with a lengthy sequence of courses focused on curriculum that is not
relevant to students’ educational goals and a presentation that is not engaging, data
indicate that the majority of students who begin their community college educations in
the developmental math sequence will never go on to complete a college-level
mathematics course (Bahr, 2010; Bailey et al., 2010). The data clearly show that the
current structure of the developmental math sequence presents a serious barrier to success
for many community college students. The majority of students who are referred to the
sequence will never complete the college-level math course needed for transfer (Bailey et
al., 2010) and the outcomes are even worse for African-American and Latino students
(Bahr, 2010). A solution to this problem must be found to promote social justice and
racial equity for the 2.9 million students who enroll in California community colleges
each year.
One strategy designed to address the problem of lack of student success in the
current developmental math sequence is acceleration. For the purpose of this research,
acceleration means the policy of replacing several levels of developmental math
coursework with a single course designed to prepare students for a transfer-level
6
mathematics course. The California Acceleration Project (CAP) is part of the California
Community Colleges' Success Network that focuses on designing an accelerated
developmental education sequence based on the following principles (www.3csn.org):
1. Increasing completion of college-level English and math requires shorter
developmental pathways and broader access to college-level courses
2. Community colleges must reduce reliance on high-stakes placement tests
3. Streamlined developmental curricula should reflect three key principles:
•
Backwards design from college-level courses
•
Just-in-time remediation
•
Intentional support for students' affective needs
These principles are designed to address three problem areas of the current
developmental math sequence: the length of the sequence, misalignment of curriculum
with students' educational goals, and the use of remedial pedagogy. As of the 2013-14
academic year, there are 21 community colleges in California who are redesigning
developmental mathematics courses through participation in CAP (www.3csn.org). Each
of these colleges is designing a one-semester "pre-stats" course that will prepare students
to take a college-level statistics course after successfully completing the pre-stats course.
This one-semester course will replace the one to three semesters of developmental math
students currently are required to take.
In addition to accelerating students' progress toward a transfer-level course, the
pre-stats courses incorporate a redesigned curriculum and pedagogy. The curriculum in
7
the new pre-stats course is not the traditional algebra-based curriculum that is needed by
math-intensive majors. Instead, the curriculum in these courses is focused on those skills
that students need to successfully pass a college-level statistics course. In addition, the
pre-stats course replaces what Grubb (2011) calls the "remedial pedagogy" of the current
developmental math sequence characterized by review, lecture, and seatwork. Rather
than reviewing the K-12 math curriculum as the current developmental math sequence
does, the pre-stats courses engage students in exploring statistics problems throughout the
course, using "just-in-time remediation" to review skills from the K-12 curriculum as
they are needed to solve problems in statistics. The pre-stats courses are designed to have
students actively engaged with their peers in solving real-world problems. Specific
attention is given to overcoming students' negative attitudes toward math in general and
their negative perceptions of themselves as mathematics learners. In her study of one
pre-stats course, Mery (2011) found that students reported that learning to overcome their
negative perceptions of themselves as learners of mathematics was key to their success in
the course. Preliminary studies indicate that these redesigned pre-stats courses have been
effective in promoting students completion of college-level math course within one year
of enrollment (Hayward and Willett, 2014; Mery, 2011; Strothers, Van Campen, &
Gronow, 2013).
8
Study Rationale
Preliminary research indicates that acceleration may be an effective strategy for
improving student completion rates in the developmental math sequence. If this
promising practice is to affect students on a system-wide basis, community college
mathematics faculty will have to choose to adopt this accelerated approach. According to
Title V of the California Education Code (www.cccco.edu), all policy and
implementation efforts in the areas of curriculum, placement, and education program
development are clearly under the control of discipline faculty through the Academic
Senate. Thus, any changes to the status quo must involve participation and leadership on
the part of community college mathematics faculty to transform the current system into
one that better meets the needs of developmental math students. There are 112
community colleges in California. Currently, only about 21 of them are investigating this
use of acceleration as a strategy to address the problem of student progression through the
developmental math sequence by designing and piloting pre-stats courses. Research is
needed to learn how to increase involvement in acceleration among community colleges.
Statement of the Problem
There is growing evidence that acceleration is an effective model for improving
student outcomes in the developmental math sequence (Mery, 2011, Strothers et al.,
2013). However, putting good educational ideas into practice on a large scale is a
9
complex practice (Fullan, 2000). Ball (2012) refers to this as the "knowing-doing" gap
in education: research on effective instructional practices does not necessarily advance
their implementation in the classroom. Elmore (1996) notes that innovations that require
large changes in core educational practices, such as acceleration, rarely penetrate more
than a small number of sites and rarely become institutionalized when they do. If
acceleration is to scale to more community colleges, we must learn more about how to
bridge this gap between "knowing" and "doing." This study investigates the factors that
lead individual community college math faculty to be attracted to acceleration, the
strategies that faculty use to engage their colleagues in these acceleration efforts, and the
ways in which institutional leadership supports faculty in adopting this innovation.
Research Questions
This study addresses the following three research questions:
(a)
What are the personal factors that promote adoption of acceleration among
community college mathematics faculty?
(b)
How do individual faculty members build collaborative relationships with
departmental colleagues to develop and implement acceleration projects?
(c)
How does institutional leadership support acceleration projects?
10
Conceptual Framework
The conceptual framework I used for this study is that the adoption of
acceleration among community college mathematics faculty is influenced by three
components: 1) personal factors of the individual faculty, 2) institutional factors, and 3)
the support of a community of practice. A diagram of this conceptual framework is
shown in Figure 1. The interplay of these three key components influences the degree to
which acceleration will be successfully adopted at an institution.
Institutional
Factors
Personal
Factors
Adoption of
Acceleration
Support of a
Community of
Practice
Figure 1
11
The first component in this conceptual framework is the personal factors of
individual faculty choosing to adopt acceleration. While the diffusion of innovation has
been studied in a variety of areas, Rogers (2003) notes that very little research has been
done in the area of diffusion of innovation in education. In order to adopt acceleration,
an individual faculty member must first become interested in the innovation. Some
research in education have shown that personal factors such as teacher beliefs about
subject matter and the nature of teaching influence teachers' decisions to become
involved in instructional innovation (Major & Palmer, 2006; Major, 2002; Speer, 2008).
Institutional factors are a second component influencing the adoption of
acceleration. Acceleration is not an innovation that can be adopted solely by an
individual faculty member. Because the innovation involves major changes to
curriculum as well as pedagogy, faculty members must engage their colleagues and
institutional leadership in their innovation efforts. Walcyk, Ramsey and Zha (2007)
found that the institutions in which innovators work play an important role in either
impeding or promoting the adoption of an innovation.
A third component that influences the adoption of acceleration among community
college mathematics faculty is their involvement in community of practice. Krainer
(2003) found that a professional community plays a key role in the process of changing
instructional practice. In particular, he emphasized the need for a "network of critical
12
friends" (Krainer, 2003). The role of this community of practice in the adoption of
acceleration is explored in this research.
Justification for the Study and Significance
In a review of existing literature about community college faculty, Twombly and
Townsend (2008) point out that community college faculty are an under-researched
population among higher education faculty, despite the fact that they make up 43% of all
full-time and part-time faculty members in public, non-profit higher education
institutions. In particular, Twombly and Townsend call for research on the role of
community college faculty in the teaching and learning process, and note that this type of
research can influence policy and practice. This study can contribute to filling this gap in
knowledge of community college faculty, specifically about the personal factors that
promote community college math faculty to adopt acceleration strategies and the
collegial and institutional relationships that make acceleration a sustainable instructional
practice.
This study can also help colleges address one of the basic skills recommendations
of the Student Success Act of 2012. The Student Success Act supports the development
of more effective models of basic skills instruction, stating that we "cannot simply put
students into classes that use the same mode of instructional delivery that failed to work
13
for them in high school" (p. 47). The report calls for implementing these effective
models on a large scale. Acceleration has shown promise as an effective model for basic
skills instruction in mathematics (Mery, 2011; Strothers, Van Campen, & Gronow, 2013),
and learning more about the factors that promote community college math faculty to
adopt acceleration as an instructional strategy can help scale this effective strategy.
Finally, this study can inform instructional leaders who desire to promote more
effective basic skills instruction in community college math departments. Learning about
the backgrounds and experiences of faculty who have facilitated the adoption of
acceleration in their departments can inform hiring practices and can provide insight into
institutional practices that can promote this innovation among math faculty.
Operational Definitions
Operational definitions are given for the following terms: acceleration, pre-stats,
backward design, pedagogical content knowledge, community of practice, and
innovation.
Acceleration
For the purpose of this research, acceleration means the policy of replacing
several levels of developmental math coursework with a single course designed to
prepare students for a transfer-level mathematics course.
14
Pre-Stats
Pre-stats, or "pre-statistics," is a one-semester course designed to prepare
developmental math students to complete a college-level statistics course. The content of
the pre-stats course consists of pre-requisite knowledge students need to successfully
complete a college-level statistics course.
Backward Design
Backward design refers to the process of selecting curriculum topics for a prerequisite course by determining the knowledge needed prior to undertaking the
subsequent course. For example, in using backwards design to develop a pre-stats
course, faculty look at the content of the statistics course to determine the prerequisite
knowledge students need to successfully pass the course.
Pedagogical Content Knowledge
Shulman (1986) distinguishes between content knowledge and specific subject
matter knowledge that "embodies aspects of content most germane to its teachability"
which he calls pedagogical content knowledge. The term refers to teachers' knowledge of
the content that specifically facilitates student learning of the content. It includes
understanding common learning difficulties and preconceptions students may have about
the content as well as effective strategies for overcoming these difficulties and
preconceptions.
15
Community of Practice
Faculty piloting accelerated courses through the California Acceleration Project
(CAP) form a "community of practice" (Wenger, 1998) that meets together three times
during the year to share ideas and progress in their acceleration work. Faculty in the
community of practice also receive ongoing coaching support from CAP coordinators
and provide peer support to one another through e-mails, blogs, and the CAP website.
Innovation
Rogers (2003) defines innovation as an idea, practice, or object that is perceived
as new by an individual or other unit of adoption. In this research, acceleration is viewed
as an innovation adopted by community college math faculty to address the problem of
student progression in the developmental math sequence.
Statement of Delimitations
The purpose of this study is to explore the factors that promote the adoption of
acceleration among community college math faculty. Because this study focuses on the
specific innovation of acceleration, the factors discussed in this research may not
generalize to the adoption of other forms of innovation among community college math
faculty.
In addition, the participants in this study were primarily members of the first
cohort of the California Acceleration Project community of practice. They are the first
16
adopters of the acceleration among California community college math faculty. Rogers
(2003) has found that characteristics of the "early adopters" differ from those who adopt
an innovation at later stages; thus the experiences of the study participants may not
generalize to subsequent adopters of acceleration.
Summary
This qualitative study investigated the personal and institutional factors that
promote the adoption of acceleration among community college mathematics faculty.
Chapter Two presents a review of the literature on the effectiveness of acceleration,
Growth Change Mindset, the personal characteristics of innovative faculty, institutional
factors that support faculty innovation, and the role of a social network in the support of
faculty innovation. Chapter Three outlines the methods used in this qualitative study.
Chapter Four presents the findings of the study. Chapter Five presents a discussion of the
findings as well as the implications of the findings for faculty and institutional leaders
interested in promoting the adoption of acceleration at their local settings.
17
Chapter 2: Literature Review
Introduction
While a majority of community college students begin their education in
developmental courses designed to remediate deficiencies prior to enrolling a transferlevel mathematics course, only 25% of those who begin in the developmental sequence
go on to complete a college-level mathematics course within six years of enrollment .
According to data presented by Bahr (2010), outcomes are even worse for AfricanAmerican and Latino students. Thus the current developmental math sequence is a
barrier to student access to higher education that maintains and exacerbates racial
inequities. Research indicates that the length of the developmental math sequence, the
remedial pedagogy used in the majority of these courses, and the misalignment of the
developmental math curriculum and the educational goals of students with non-math
intensive majors may contribute to the lack of success in the developmental math
sequence (Bahr, 2010; Bailey et al., 2010).
Acceleration is a promising practice that addresses each of these issues with the
current developmental math sequence. By shortening the length of the developmental
math sequence to a single "pre-stats" course, aligning the curriculum to meet the needs of
students in non-math intensive majors, and replacing remedial pedagogy with active
student involvement in solving "real-world" problems, acceleration has shown promise in
improving outcomes for developmental math students (Mery, 2011). However, currently
18
only about 21 out of 112 community colleges are piloting acceleration projects
(www.3csn.org). If this promising practice is to affect students on a system-wide basis,
community college mathematics faculty will have to choose to adopt this innovative
approach. This research focuses on the personal, departmental, and institutional factors
that promote the adoption of acceleration among community college mathematics faculty.
Scope and Structure of the Literature Review
To find studies for inclusion in this literature review, I accessed several
educational research databases including ProQuest Education Journals, ERIC, and
Google Scholar. I also consulted with the university librarian educational database
specialist to refine my search strategy. Keyword searches included several combinations
of the following: mathematics, community college, faculty innovation and pedagogy. In
addition, I searched specifically for studies in the areas of pedagogical content knowledge
and communities of practice to find literature related to my conceptual framework
outlined in Chapter One of this study. In my search, I included studies in these areas that
focused on higher education. After completing my study data collection, I added
literature on Growth Change Mindset (Dweck, 2008) to the literature review, as this
emerged as a theme during data analysis.
This literature review begins with studies on the effectiveness of acceleration as a
strategy for improving student outcomes in the community college developmental
mathematics sequence. Next, a discussion of two adoption of innovation frameworks
19
follow: Rogers' (2003 ) Diffusions of Innovation and the Concerns Based Adoption
Model (Hall, Wallace, and Dossett, 1973). The literature review then focuses on areas
related to the three research questions of this study. The first area is the personal
characteristics of innovative faculty, including studies on Pedagogical Content
Knowledge (Shulman, 1986) and Growth Change Mindset (Dweck, 2008). Next,
research on the social systems in which innovative faculty work is presented, including
studies on Communities of Practice (Lave & Wenger, 1991). Finally, the review
concludes with research on the role of institutions in promoting faculty innovation.
Acceleration: A Promising Practice
While accelerated pre-stats courses are relatively new, early data shows promising
results. Mery (2011) studied a pre-stats course piloted at a community college that was
the model for the current CAP design. Of the 29 students in the course, 86% of them
successfully completed the pre-stats course and earned a C or higher in transfer-level
statistics in two semesters. Due to the composition of the cohort studied, nearly all of the
successful students were Latino or African-American. The students in this cohort also
performed comparably to or out-performed a group of primarily white students from
four-year institutions on questions from a nationally-normed statistics post test (Mery,
2011).
A national acceleration project, Statway, sponsored by the Carnegie Foundation
for the Advancement of Teaching and funded by foundations including the Bill and
20
Melinda Gates Foundation and the Lumina Foundation, has also shown promising results.
There are 20 community colleges from five states participating in Statway. The Statway
model differs from the CAP model in several ways. In the CAP model, students
complete a one-semester pre-stats class and then enroll in a traditional college-level
elementary statistics course. Statway offers a two-semester sequence of courses, and
students completing both semesters receive credit for a college-level statistics course.
Based on data from the 2011-12 academic year, 51% of Statway students successfully
completed the sequence and received college-level math credit. In contrast, only 5.9% of
the developmental math students at the Statway institutions completed a college-level
math class in one year (Strother, Van Campen, & Grunow, 2013)
Innovation Frameworks
Two frameworks that can be used to analyze the adoption of innovation are
Rogers' (2003 ) Diffusions of Innovation and the Concerns Based Adoption Model (Hall,
Wallace, & Dossett, 1973).
Rogers' Diffusions of Innovation
Rogers' Diffusions of Innovation model seeks to explain how, why, and at what
rates innovations spread throughout a culture. In this model, an innovation is
communicated through certain channels over time among members of a social system.
Rogers (2003) asserts that the rate of adoption of an innovation depends on five variables:
1) the relative advantage of the innovation compared to current practice, 2) cultural
compatibility: the degree to which the innovation is consistent with the existing values of
21
an organization, 3) the complexity of the innovation, 4) trialability: the degree to which
the innovation can be experimented with on a limited basis, and 5) observability: the
degree to which the results are observable to self and others. In addition to characteristics
of the innovation itself, the Diffusions of Innovation model states that the rate of adoption
characteristics of those adopting the innovation, with early adopters having attributes that
distinguish them from those adopting the innovation at later stages.
According to Rogers (2003), very little research has been done in the area of
educational diffusion. Much of the recent research in educational diffusion using Rogers'
model in higher education focuses on the adoption of various instructional technologies.
Soffer, Nachmais, and Ram (2010) studied the adoption of web-supported instruction at a
university in Israel and found that adoption followed the trajectory predicted by Rogers'
Diffusion of Innovation model. Similarly Liao (2005) found that Rogers' Diffusion of
Innovation model successfully described the adoption of a web-based course
management system at a college in New York. Rogers' model has also been used to
explain why some innovations failed to become widely adopted. In a study on the
adoption class electronic response systems, Freeman, Bell, and Comerton-Forde (2007)
found that two of Rogers' innovation attributes, relative advantage and cultural
compatibility were key in the faculty decision not to adopt the innovation.
22
The Concerns Based Adoption Model
In contrast to Rogers' Diffusion of Innovation model that focuses primarily on the
adoption of an innovation at an organizational level, the Concerns Based Adoption Model
(CBAM) focuses on the adoption of innovation at the personal level (Ellsworth, 2000).
The Concerns Based Adoption Model (CBAM) is based on the premise that individuals'
concerns regarding the adoption of an innovation change over time in an expected and
progressive manner. The model outlines seven stages of concern that individuals go
through, starting with a lack of awareness of the innovation to full use and refinement of
the innovation. CBAM focuses on the adopter's perceived needs at each stage, and in this
model change is viewed as an on-going process rather than a single event (Ellsworth,
2000). As individuals progress through the seven stages of the CBAM model, Hall
(2013) asserts that is critical that they receive necessary support if the innovation is to
take hold.
Hall (2013) notes that change in education historically follows a predictable
pattern. First, a problem is identified as well as a desired outcome. Then a specific
program or process is selected to address the problem and teachers, schools, and districts
are adopt the selected program; however, Hall notes that these innovations often fail to
take lasting hold because the complexity, time, and persistence needed for true change to
take place is overlooked (Hall, 2013). Hall states that use of the CBAM model could
promote the lasting adoption of innovations in education.
23
While a search of the educational databases returned no recent research applied
CBAM to mathematics innovation in higher education, two studies used CBAM to
analyze the adoption of new mathematics curriculum at the elementary school level.
Christou et al. (2004) studied the adoption of a new mathematics curriculum in an
elementary school and found that teachers exhibited different levels of concern about the
adoption as predicted by the CBAM model. In this study, teaching experience was the
most important factor in explaining the nature of these concerns. Teachers with more
experience showed the greatest interest in the effect the innovation would have on
students, while teachers with less experience showed greater concern for coping with the
day-to-day personal demands of the innovation, such as increased time preparing for
instruction (Christou, Eliophotou-Menon, & Philippou, 2004). Tunks and Weller (2009)
also studied in the adoption of a new mathematics curriculum by elementary school
teachers. While teachers in this study also exhibited different levels of concern about the
adoption as predicted by the CBAM model, Tunk and Weller found that local issues such
as student success rates and state mandated testing affected the development of concerns
and levels of use, in contrast to the effect of teaching experience found by Christou et al.
(2004).
Personal Characteristics of Innovative Faculty
In his research on diffusions of innovations, Rogers (2003) examined the variable
"innovativeness" which he defined as "the degree to which an individual or other unit of
24
adoption is relatively earlier in adopting new ideas than other members of a social
system" (p. 280). Based on Rogers' framework, the CAP participants in this study would
be classified as "innovators" or "early adopters" since they are the first or earliest faculty
to adopt acceleration models at their institutions. Rogers notes that these innovators and
early adopters have certain characteristics that distinguish them from "late adopters." In
particular, Rogers notes that early adopters tend to be empathetic, have a more favorable
attitude toward change, and have more social participation and, in particular, have more
contact with change agents.
Hannan, English and Silver (1999) interviewed over 200 faculty at 15 universities
in the United Kingdom regarding their experiences introducing innovations in teaching
and learning in higher education. The researchers found that very few faculty in the
study described themselves as inherently "innovative", though some described
themselves as "at home with change" or "willing to take risks." Many expressed a feeling
of being "caught in-between" as they perceived their own established teaching of
traditional lecture was in conflict with the changing learning needs of students. The
majority of faculty interviewed stated the primary reason they chose to innovate and
change their instructional practice despite their own personal teaching style preference,
was to improve student learning.
Studies of innovation in education indicate that teacher beliefs about their subject
matter and the nature of teaching influence individuals' choice of involvement in
innovative teaching practices (Major, 2002; Major & Palmer, 2006; Speer, 2008). In a
25
study of 12 high school teachers piloting a reform-based curriculum, Roehrig and Kruse
(2005) found a strong association between subject matter beliefs and the adoption of an
innovative teaching method. High school teachers with the highest level of reform-based
beliefs about science curriculum and pedagogy also exhibited the highest level of reformbased teaching.
Pedagogical content knowledge also plays a role in the faculty adoption of
innovation (Speer, 2008; Major & Palmer, 2006). Shulman (1986) proposed that
pedagogical content knowledge is a special kind of professional understanding that
combines knowledge of content and pedagogy. Pedagogical content knowledge enables
teachers to take an aspect of their subject matter and transform their understanding of it
into instruction that their students can comprehend (Fernandez-Balboa & Stiehl, 1995).
While most of the research on pedagogical content knowledge focuses on K-12 teachers,
Fernandez-Balboa and Stiehl (1995) conducted phenomenological interviews with ten
"exceptional" university professors from ten different disciplines and found that they
constructed and used pedagogical content knowledge in similar ways. They identified
five key pedagogical content knowledge components that all ten professors in the study
exemplified. These included 1) a belief that subject matter is not a static body of
knowledge but constantly evolving and being re-created, 2) a belief in the importance of
knowing students both as people and as learners, 3) an effort to create a positive learning
environment and to use a variety of delivery strategies that focused on connecting student
with the subject matter and the real world, 4) an awareness of contextual barriers to
26
student learning, and 5) a knowledge of one's own purpose as a teacher to use the subject
matter to enhance students' lives. Fernandez-Balboa and Stiehl also found that teacher
beliefs play a critical role in the interpretation and evaluation of knowledge.
In a study of the adoption of an innovative Problem-Based Learning (PBL)
curriculum at a private 4-year university, Major and Palmer (2006) also found that
pedagogical content knowledge was key in faculty adoption of instructional innovation.
Those faculty members with strong backgrounds in pedagogical content knowledge
developed through workshops, conference presentations, scholarly reading, or formal
pedagogical training were more actively involved in the implementation of the PBL
innovation and also reported that their participation in the innovation helped them
perceive their discipline in a new way.
Prior education background may also be a personal factor influencing faculty
openness to reform and innovation. Asera (2013) interviewed nine faculty leaders in the
Washington State Rethinking Pre-College Math (RPM) project. Similar to the CAP
participants, the RPM faculty worked on reshaping the curriculum and pedagogy in the
developmental math sequence in their community colleges. Of the nine RPM leaders
interviewed in the study, two-thirds of them had formal training in pedagogy prior to the
start of their community college careers. Four of the RPM leaders had extensive training
in pedagogy through completing teacher preparation and certification programs and had
taught at the high school level prior to teaching at the community college. Two of the
other RPM leaders had actively pursued opportunities to learn about pedagogy through
27
additional coursework during their graduate programs. Asera notes that community
colleges are viewed as "teaching intensive" institutions and that RPM leaders chose to
teach at the community college for this reason.
Growth Change Mindset
The conceptual framework of Growth Change Mindset (Dweck, 2008) asserts that
whether students believe that their brain or intelligence is "fixed" or rather something that
can grow or change affects their motivation, learning, and school achievement. One of
the redesign principles of the CAP project is intentional support for students' affective
needs. Many of the CAP participating colleges are using Dweck's work on Growth
Change Mindset with their students. Mery (2011) found that these concepts "appeared to
effectively suggest to students that their mathematics abilities were previously
underestimated while providing a concrete way for students to alter their sense of
capacity." Research has shown positive impact of mindset on student resilience in the
face of academic and social challenges, with students with growth mindsets completing
more challenging math courses and having improved academic performance (Yaeger and
Dweck, 2012; Good, Aronsen and Inzlicht, 2003). While much of the research focuses
on the effect of student mindset on performance, Dweck (2008) reports on several studies
on the effect of teacher mindset on student performance. Dweck reports that teachers with
a growth mindset provide students with more encouragement and concrete strategies for
28
improvement than teachers with a fixed mindset and that these teacher behaviors were
associated with improved student performance (Dweck, 2008).
Innovators as Part of a Social Network
In describing the diffusion of an innovation, Rogers (2003) states that an
innovation is communicated through certain channels over time among members in a
social system. Rogers states that the diffusion of an innovation is social process even
more than a technical one (p. 4). Thus, if an innovation is to spread, attention must be
paid to the social network in which an innovator participates. This social network and the
interactions of the innovator with the social network can facilitate or impede innovation
diffusion (Rogers, 2003).
In studying the implementation of problem-based learning at a small private
university, Major (2002) found that faculty collaboration both within and between
disciplines was a key factor contributing to successful implementation. Kezar (2011)
also highlights the importance of collaboration in innovation efforts. In an article on best
practices to "scale up" effective practices in higher education, Kezar (2011) states that
innovations scale up best when innovators in local settings are connected to a network of
like-minded individuals. Thus research indicates the social network in which innovators
work is an important in the success and diffusion of an innovation.
29
The Re-Thinking Pre-College Math (RPM) project designed regular opportunities
for faculty to discuss teaching and learning. In a report based on interviews with RPM
leaders, Asera (2013) states that "the social nature of learning and the value of collegial
relationships were consistently part of the story." The RPM participants worked closely
with colleagues and were connected with a broader network of colleagues across the
state. Reflecting on the RPM experience, one participant noted that the practice of
teaching would be "unthinkable" without collaboration.
One model of a social network to support innovation is the "community of
practice" (Lave and Wenger, 1991). Buss et al. (2013) characterizes a community of
practice as people engaging in common work and learning from each other as they solve
problems and strive to attain common goals. Wenger (2000) describes the community of
practice as a group that collectively develops understanding and build community
through mutual engagement, producing a shared repertoire of communal resources and
asserts that a community of practice is essential to learning.
Studies have shown that participation in a community of practice can lead to
professional growth (Krainer, 2003; Buss et al., 2013; Gallagher et al., 2011). Positive
outcomes from participation in a community of practice included the promotion of
thoughtful reflection on one's work and the ability to define and redefine one's
professional identity (Buss et al., 2013). Blanton (2009), however, found that
participation by higher education faculty in a community of practice can be constrained
30
by professional identities that are more deeply connected to the discipline rather than the
practice of teaching
.
Institutional Factors the Promote Faculty Innovation
The institutions in which innovators work play an important role in either
impeding or promoting the adoption of an innovation. Walcyk, Ramsey and Zha (2007)
studied factors that supported or impeded the implementation of instructional innovation.
Researchers surveyed all college mathematics and science faculty in Louisiana to explore
perceived institutional obstacles, supports, and incentives for instructional innovation.
Based on survey data, researchers identified three major institutional barriers to
innovation:
1. Faculty perception that teaching effectiveness was not weighed heavily in
personnel decisions involving promotion and tenure
2. Non-traditional assessments (assessments other than student surveys) of teacher
effectiveness were rarely used
3. Faculty lacked formal training in pedagogy
In addition, researchers found that faculty were more likely to commit to instructional
innovation if greater weight were given to teacher effectiveness in personnel decisions
such as promotion (Walczyk, Ramsey, & Zha, 2007).
31
Major (2002) found that, while institutional values, beliefs, and norms can impede
change efforts, faculty rewards were particularly helpful in promoting adoption of
instructional innovation. These rewards included release time for collaboration and
curriculum development, stipends, and support for professional development activities.
Studies have found faculty perception that the institution supports and encourages them
to try new things is also important in the initial decision to innovate as well as in the
spread of the innovation (Hannan, English, & Silver, 1999; Major & Palmer, 2006;
Major, 2002). While research demonstrates the importance of institutional support in
innovation adoption, Hannan et al. (1999) point out that faculty also needed to feel a
sense of autonomy as they worked on adopting the innovation.
Summary and Implications
While the use of acceleration to address the lack of student success in the
community college developmental math sequence is relatively new, preliminary studies
indicate that acceleration has dramatically improved student completion rates of a
college-level math course (Hayward and Willett, 2014; Mery, 2011; Stother et al., 2013).
However, because acceleration involves revised course content and sequencing in
addition to pedagogical changes, it is not something an individual faculty member can
accomplish independently. In order to acceleration to take hold on a campus, a faculty
member must be interested in the innovation and must engage departmental colleagues
and institutional leadership in the change efforts as well.
32
Rogers (2003) has identified characteristics of early adopters of innovation and
studies on innovation in higher education indicate that personal factors such as belief
about subject matter, pedagogical content knowledge, and prior educational background
may play a role in the willingness of faculty to try an innovation (Major, 2002; Speer,
2008; Asera, 2013). In addition, Rogers (2003) states that diffusion of an innovation
takes place in a social context and studies have shown that the social context of the
institution in which the innovation is being piloted can either impede or promote
diffusion efforts (Walcyk, et al., 2007; Major, 2002). However, much of the innovation
studies in higher education have focused on 4-year institutions and little is known about
innovation at the community college level. The proposed research is an opportunity fill
in this gap in the research.
33
Chapter 3: Methodology
Introduction
The purpose of this qualitative study was to develop an understanding of the
personal and institutional factors that promote the adoption of acceleration, defined as
reducing the number of remedial courses in the traditional developmental mathematics
sequence, among community college mathematics faculty. Additionally, I explored the
strategies these faculty use to develop the collaborative relationships with colleagues
needed to implement acceleration projects in their local settings. This chapter will state
the research questions and provide a description of the study design. The chapter also
addresses the role of the researcher, context of the study, ethical considerations, as well
as data collection and analysis methods.
Research Design
In this qualitative study I interviewed a volunteer sample of nine participants in
the California Acceleration Project (CAP) at six different community college campuses.
These CAP participants are mathematics faculty who are implementing acceleration
projects at their campuses. The sample included the person who pioneered acceleration
programs and who co-founded CAP, seven members of the first CAP cohort, and one
member of the second CAP cohort. Members of the first CAP cohort have been teaching
the accelerated pre-stats course for four years, and the member of the second CAP cohort
34
has been teaching the course for three years. The person who pioneered the first pre-stats
course began her accelerated course in 2009.
The purpose of these interviews was to learn about the experiences of these
faculty in adopting acceleration. Bogdan and Biklen (2007) stated that a qualitative
approach such as this is appropriate when a researcher is concerned with "understanding
behavior from the informant's own frame of reference." In this research, I sought to
explore CAP participants' experiences in adopting acceleration in their local settings from
their own perspectives; thus, a qualitative approach was most appropriate. Interviewing
was used for this study because it "provides access to the context of people's behavior and
thereby provides a way for researchers to understand the meaning of the behavior"
(Seidman, 2006). Bold (2012) suggested that qualitative techniques such as interviewing
allow the researcher to "enquire deeply into the meaning of different situations and
different people's understandings of the world" (p. 120) and noted that it may be a
particularly effective technique to use when investigating a change in practice, making it
an appropriate method for this research on community college math faculty experiences
in the adoption of acceleration.
Each interview was an in-depth exploration of the participant's experience in
adopting acceleration using open-ended questions and lasted between 1.5 hours and 2.5
hours. To assess whether the themes that emerged from the interviews were an accurate
reflection of the participants' experience, all participants were sent a summary of
emerging themes from the interviews at the completion of the data-gathering process. In
35
this member-checking process, participants were invited to comment on how these
common themes matched their own experiences and were given an opportunity to
provide any additional information regarding their experiences with acceleration.
Role of the Researcher
Like the CAP participants in my study, I am a California Community College
mathematics instructor; however, I am not affiliated with any of the institutions in the
study and do not have previous professional affiliations with any of the CAP participants.
I have been participating in the 2013-14 CAP cohort during the time I was collecting
study data and was part of a team of four mathematics instructors who were planning the
implementation of an accelerated program at our college. In addition, four of the study
participants were guest speakers at CAP meetings I attended. In this study, I conducted
and transcribed all interviews and was responsible for all data analysis.
Research Questions
This study addressed the following research questions:
(a)
What are the personal factors that promote adoption of acceleration among
community college mathematics faculty?
36
(b)
How do individual faculty members build collaborative relationships with
departmental colleagues to develop and implement acceleration projects?
(c)
How does institutional leadership support acceleration projects?
Context of the Study
While the majority of community college students enroll in developmental
courses designed to remediate deficiencies in math prior to enrolling in a college-level
course, less than 25% of students who begin in a developmental sequence go on to
complete a college-level course within six years of enrollment (Bahr, 2010). The current
developmental math sequence consists of between three to four levels of courses. Studies
on student progress through the developmental math sequence indicate that the number of
courses in the sequence is itself a barrier to student degree attainment for community
college students (Bailey, Jeong & Cho, 2010). Research has shown that the more
developmental courses a student is required to take, the less likely it is that the student
will ever complete the sequence and go on to enroll in a transfer-level course . Unless
these students complete the developmental math sequence, they will be unable to earn an
associates degree or transfer to a 4-year institution (www.assist.org). Research shows
that, instead of being the intended bridge to higher education, the current developmental
math sequence is an unintended barrier to student degree attainment (Bahr, 2010; Bailey
et al., 2010).
37
Acceleration replaces the traditional developmental math sequence with a single
course that prepares students to successfully complete a college-level statistics course.
Preliminary research indicates that acceleration may be an effective strategy for
improving student completion rates in the developmental math sequence (Hayward and
Willett, 2014; Mery, 2011; Stother, Van Campen, & Gronow, 2013). If this promising
practice is to affect students on a system-wide basis, faculty will have to choose to adopt
this accelerated approach. According to Title V of the California Education Code
(www.cccco.edu), all policy and implementation efforts in the areas of curriculum,
placement, and education program development are clearly under the control of discipline
faculty through the Academic Senate. Thus, any changes to the status quo must involve
collaboration between community college mathematics faculty and institutional
leadership to transform the current system into one that better meets the needs of
developmental math students.
There are 112 community colleges in California. Currently, only about 25 of
them are investigating acceleration as a strategy to address the problem of student
progression through the developmental math sequence by designing and piloting prestatistics courses. Research is needed to learn how to increase mathematics faculty
involvement in promoting acceleration in community colleges.
In a review of existing literature about community college faculty, Twombly and
Townsend (2008) pointed out that community college faculty are an under-researched
population among higher education faculty despite the fact that they make up 43% of all
38
full-time and part-time faculty members in public, non-profit higher education
institutions. These researchers noted that in a survey of articles published by the three
journals focused on community colleges (Community College Journal of Research and
Practice, Community College Review, and Journal of Applied Research in Community
Colleges) over the 10-year period from 1990 through 2000, only 11% of the articles were
about community college faculty. Even less research on community college faculty was
found in three journals focused on higher education in general (Journal of Higher
Education, Research in Higher Education, and Review of Higher Education). During the
same 10-year time period, only 30 articles in these journals focused on community
colleges and, of these, only 14% were about community college faculty (Twombly and
Townsend, 2008). In particular, Twombly and Townsend called for research on the role
of community college faculty in the teaching and learning process, and noted that this
type of research can influence policy and practice. This study contributes to filling this
gap in knowledge of community college faculty, specifically about the personal factors
that promote community college math faculty to adopt acceleration strategies and the
collegial and institutional relationships that make acceleration a sustainable instructional
practice.
This study can also help colleges address one of the basic skills recommendations
of the Student Success Act of 2012. The Student Success Act supports the development
of more effective models of basic skills instruction, stating that we "cannot simply put
students into classes that use the same mode of instructional delivery that failed to work
39
for them in high school" (p. 47). The report called for implementing these effective
models on a large scale. Acceleration has shown promise as an effective model for basic
skills instruction in mathematics and learning more about the factors the promote
community college math faculty to adopt acceleration as an instructional strategy can
help scale this effective strategy (Mery, 2011).
Finally, this study can inform instructional leaders who desire to promote more
effective basic skills instruction in community college math departments. Learning about
the backgrounds and experiences of faculty who have facilitated the adoption of
acceleration in their departments can inform hiring practices and can provide insight into
institutional practices that can promote this innovation among math faculty.
Participant Selection
The population of interest in this study was members of the first CAP cohort who
had already implemented acceleration projects in mathematics at their campuses and who
were teaching an accelerated pre-stats course. To recruit participants, I obtained a list of
the first CAP cohort. This cohort consisted of faculty from eight community colleges. I
eliminated two of these colleges from recruitment due to the difficulty of getting to their
locations to conduct interviews. I also eliminated one other college because I had
previously tried to get information from the CAP faculty there for another project and had
received no response to several e-mail communications.
40
The team leader and one other CAP participant who was currently teaching an
accelerated pre-stats course at the remaining colleges were invited to participate in the
study via e-mail. In this e-mail, I asked participants if they would be willing to
participate in one-on-one interviews about their experiences implementing acceleration
projects. From the initial invitation, six faculty from four colleges agreed to participate.
To expand my sample size, I made personal phone calls and sent follow-up emails to the
one college that did not respond to the initial study participation invitation. As a result of
this follow-up communication, two faculty from this college agreed to participate in the
study. Finally, one faculty member from the second CAP cohort was included in the
sample, bringing the sample size to nine. This faculty member was included for several
reasons. First, his participation increased the sample size, giving me more data to
analyze. His proximity also made a face-to-face interview easy to conduct. Finally, his
data provide some information on the similarities or differences between the experience
of the first and second CAP cohorts in implementing acceleration at their campuses.
Figure 1 shows a list of participants, their gender, their college affiliation, and their
cohort participation. All participants and colleges have been assigned pseudonyms to
protect participant privacy.
41
Table 1: List of participants by gender, college and cohort
Participant
Gender
College
Cohort
Emmy
F
A
CAP co-founder
Tom
M
A
Cohort 1
David
M
B
Cohort 1
Laura
F
C
Cohort 1
Jack
M
C
Cohort 1
Katie
F
D
Cohort 1
Mike
M
D
Cohort 1
Diane
F
E
Cohort 1
Jerry
M
F
Cohort 2
All participants in this study were teaching an accelerated pre-stats course and had
a minimum of five years teaching experience at their current campus setting. This
inclusion criterion was used to increase the likelihood that the participant would have
enough knowledge of and experience at his or her institution to be able to comment on
the role of the department and institution in the adoption of acceleration. At most, only
two participants in the study were from the same institution. This criterion was used to
42
ensure that at least six institutions were represented in the data, allowing for comparison
of departmental and institutional factors between these institutions in the data analysis.
Ethics and Protection of Human Subjects
This study involved interviews with community college mathematics faculty. The
study was low-risk because it solely involved interviewing to learn about faculty
experiences in adopting acceleration.
Although minimal, one potential risk was the risk to privacy. To minimize this
risk, participants were informed of the study procedures in advance and were given an
opportunity to ask questions and to decide whether or not to participate. Participants did
not receive any compensation for participating in the study and were free to decline to
participate, to withdraw from the study, and to refuse to answer questions without
penalty. Participants signed an informed consent form prior to participation in the study.
All interview data were kept in a locked cabinet and on a password protected
computer that only the researcher could access. Pseudonyms for participants and for
institutions were used when reporting data and discussing findings.
43
Data Collection
I interviewed nine CAP participants using a semi-structured interview protocol
(see Appendix A). I selected interviewees based on their willingness to participate in the
project and made efforts to get representation from a variety of community colleges
participating in CAP. After the initial recruitment yielded responses from faculty at four
colleges, follow-up contacts were made to increase the college representation to six. All
initial interviews were conducted in person at a private place of the participant's
choosing. Most were conducted in the participant's office, but one was conducted at a
nearby restaurant and one was conducted in a hotel meeting room at the conclusion of a
conference that the participant and I had both attended. Seidman (2006) stressed the
importance of conducting interviews in a private familiar location so that the participant
feels comfortable and secure. All interviews were audio recorded, with the participant's
permission, and I transcribed them.
The questions that formed the basis of the interview are found in Appendix A.
Using the interview protocol described by Seidman (2006) I also asked follow up
questions to ask for clarification, to seek concrete details, and to request stories to
develop a deeper understanding of the participant's experience.
44
Data Analysis
I audio-recorded all interviews and transcribed the interviews myself. After
reviewing the data many times, I developed a qualitative codebook and used the
codebook to code the interview data by hand. Throughout the process I wrote short data
memos to record my initial thoughts as I began coding the data. These data memos were
helpful as I began to see emerging themes in the data. These data memos were sent to
members of my dissertation committee for review and were discussed with my
dissertation advisor. After the interview data was coded, I grouped the codes into themes
for further analysis.
In the collection of qualitative data through interviews, this research also had a
narrative component as well. Bold (2012) stated that narrative research does not set out
to test a hypothesis; rather, narrative research seeks to explore an interesting phenomenon
with possible aim of instigating change. Narrative analysis is particularly appropriate
when the purpose of the analysis is to "enquire deeply into the meaning of different
situations and different people's understandings of the world" and "for a specific purpose
related to a change in practice or an improvement in social conditions" (Bold 2012).
Analyzing data from this study using narrative methods was appropriate since the
research questions guiding this study are designed to gain a deeper understanding of the
experiences of CAP participants as they change their practice in developmental math
instruction by adopting acceleration as an innovation. In narrative analysis, interviews
45
can be seen as the opportunity for participants to tell their personal stories about their
involvement with acceleration. These story texts were analyzed for common themes and
structures with the goal of providing a more complete portrait of the experiences of CAP
participants in the acceleration process and in the strategies they use to establish collegial
relationships that have enabled them to pilot acceleration projects at their campuses.
Qualitative validity means assessing whether the information obtained through
qualitative data collection is accurate, trustworthy and credible (Cresswell and Plano
Clark, 2011). I used several strategies to enhance the validity of findings from qualitative
data. First, I provided each participant with a summary of emerging themes from the
interviews at the completion of the data-gathering process. In this member-checking
process, I invited the participants to comment on how these common themes matched
their own experiences. At that time, I also gave participants an opportunity to provide
any additional information regarding their experiences with acceleration. All study
participants who responded to this information indicated that the common themes were,
indeed, a good description of their own personal experience. In addition, I interviewed
two CAP participants from each institution to see if any connections emerged in their
descriptions of departmental factors and institutional factors that influenced their
adoption of acceleration. If both participants identified similar factors, then it provides
stronger evidence that these factors were salient to the adoption of acceleration at that
institution. Similarly, validity was established through the triangulation of the data from
interviews of participants at different institutions. For example, participants from every
46
institution mentioned the importance of establishing collaborative relationships outside of
their own departments. This finding indicates that collaboration with colleagues outside
of the mathematics department may be a key factor in promoting the adoption of
acceleration. In analyzing the data, common themes emerged from participants at
different institutions, indicating that these themes may be representative of the experience
of CAP participants in general.
Since the sample for this study was drawn from a homogeneous group
(community college math faculty participating in CAP), the results may generalize to
math faculty participating in CAP. However, since this study was conducted primarily
with members of the first CAP cohort, it is unclear whether the results will transfer to the
experiences of the subsequent CAP participants. While the results may give us insight
into other groups, such as community college faculty implementing another form of
innovation, limitations of generalizing these results to broader populations will be noted.
Summary
Acceleration is a promising practice to address the lack of student success and
completion in the community college developmental math sequence. A qualitative
approach was used to investigate the personal, collegial, and institutional factors that
promote the adoption of acceleration among community college mathematics faculty.
This chapter described the research design, participant selection, data collection, and data
47
analysis procedures used in this study. Nine community college math faculty from six
different institutions participating in the California Acceleration Project were interviewed
for this study. Interviews were transcribed and coded, and common themes emerged. In
Chapter 4, results of this data collection and analysis are presented in detail. Narrative
methods are also used to create a portrait of the experiences of CAP participants in the
acceleration process and in the strategies they use to establish collegial relationships that
have enabled them to pilot acceleration projects at their campuses
48
Chapter 4: The Findings
Overview
Community colleges are not successfully transitioning under-prepared students
from basic skills mathematics remediation to college-level coursework. Research shows
that the majority of students who begin their community college educations in the
developmental math sequence will never go on to complete a college-level mathematics
course (Bahr, 2010; Bailey et al., 2010). Studies indicate that the length of the
developmental math sequence is itself a barrier to student degree attainment for
community college students, with completion rates negatively related to the number of
levels students are required to take (Bailey et al., 2010). To address this problem, some
community colleges are piloting acceleration projects that replace the traditional three
levels of developmental math with a single contextualized pre-statistics course designed
to prepare students to successfully complete a transfer-level statistics course.
Preliminary research indicates that acceleration is an effective strategy for
increasing the number of developmental students who complete a transfer-level
mathematics course (Hayward and Willett, 2014; Mery, 2011; Strothers, Van Campen, &
Gronow, 2013); however, if this promising practice is to affect students on a system-wide
basis, community college mathematics faculty will have to adopt this accelerated
approach. The purpose of this study was to develop an understanding of the personal and
institutional factors that promote the adoption of acceleration among community college
49
mathematics faculty. Nine community college mathematics faculty who are currently
piloting acceleration programs and who participated in the California Acceleration
Project (CAP) community of practice were interviewed. Bold (2012) notes that
interviewing may be a particularly effective technique to use when investigating a change
in practice, as it allows the researcher to "enquire deeply into the meaning of different
situations and different people's understandings of the world." The data obtained through
these interviews were analyzed using narrative analysis. In narrative analysis, interviews
are seen as the opportunity for participants to tell their personal stories about their
involvement with acceleration. These story texts were then analyzed for common themes
and structures with the goal of providing a more complete portrait of the experiences of
CAP participants in the acceleration process and in the strategies they use to establish the
collegial relationships that have enabled them to pilot acceleration projects at their
campuses.
The findings are organized into three sections that address each of the study
research questions. Section 1 addresses the question "What are the personal factors that
promote the adoption of acceleration among community college mathematics faculty?"
Section 2 addresses the question "How do these individual faculty members build
collaborative relationships with departmental colleagues to develop and implement
acceleration projects. Section 3 addresses the question "How does institutional
leadership support acceleration projects?" The chapter will conclude with a summary
50
and synthesis of the findings. In the reporting of the data, pseudonyms are used for all
participants and colleges.
Personal Factors that Promote the Adoption of Acceleration
An analysis of the data on personal factors revealed five major themes: 1) diverse
educational and professional backgrounds, 2) awareness of one's own teaching purpose,
3) approach to subject matter, 4) personal knowledge of students, and 5) the importance
of a community of practice. First, the study participants came from diverse educational
and professional backgrounds. They demonstrated awareness of their own purposes for
teaching through having actively sought out the community college teaching profession,
by engaging in self-reflection on their growth as a teacher and by taking personal
responsibility for student success. When discussing mathematics as a subject matter, they
valued a contextual approach and viewed the curriculum as evolving rather than stagnant.
In their knowledge of students, they valued a personal connection and were motivated by
issues of student equity in their acceleration work. Finally, they valued being part of a
community of practice, especially their interactions with Emmy, the mathematics
instructor who was one of the first to adopt the practice of acceleration and who cofounded and leads the California Acceleration Project mathematics community of
practice. In this section, data from interview transcripts will be used to explore each of
these themes in more detail.
51
Diverse Educational and Professional Backgrounds
With the passage of AB1725 in 1988, the issuance of California Community
College teaching credentials was discontinued in 1990 and was replaced by a set of
"minimum qualifications" used to determine a candidate's eligibility for academic
positions in the California community college system (Russell, 2012). For academic
disciplines, such as mathematics, the minimum qualifications are a master's degree in the
discipline or a bachelor's degree in the discipline and a master's degree in a reasonably
related discipline. While all study participants met these minimum qualifications, they
also had educational backgrounds that encompassed studies in fields other than
mathematics as well. In addition, participants had experience in professions other than
community college teaching and several had experience teaching at other levels,
including elementary school, high school, and 4-year institutions.
Diversity in educational backgrounds
Of the nine study participants, only two had educational backgrounds consisting
solely of a bachelor's degree in mathematics and a master's degree in mathematics. Seven
had significant academic study at the undergraduate and graduate levels in fields other
than mathematics. These included four who had bachelor's degrees in Astrophysics,
Liberal Arts, Business Administration, and Statistics. Two participants had almost
completed bachelor's degrees in English Literature before deciding to change to the
52
mathematics major. One participant had a master's degree in Education. One participant
had a master's degree in English as well as a master's degree in Marriage and Family
Counseling. Two participants had backgrounds in medicine, with one having briefly
started studies in medical school and one having significant graduate studies in the field
of nuclear medicine. Table 2 provides a summary of the diverse professional and
educational backgrounds of the study participants
53
Table 2: Participants' non-traditional educational, professional and teaching backgrounds
Participant
Emmy
Non-Traditional
Educational
Backgrounds
B.A. in Liberal Arts,
accepted to medical
school
Tom
B.A. in Astrophysics
David
M.A. in Statistics
Laura
Jack
Katie
Mike
M.A. in English,
complete studies for
M.F.C.C., graduate
studies in Education
B.A. in Business
Administration
Undergraduate studies in
English literature,
graduate studies in
nuclear medicine and
biomathematics
Diane
Jerry
Professional
Background
Professional baker
Other teaching
experience
Algebra
enrichment for
low SES
elementary
school children
Taught in high
school
Professional
statistician
Actuary,
catastrophe
modeler
Tutorial lab
coordinator
Accountant/auditor
Taught at UCLA
School of Public
Health
Department
secretary at a 4year university
M.A. in Education from
the Stanford STEP
program
Taught high
school
54
Study participants used language from their diverse educational backgrounds
when describing their experiences with acceleration. For example, Mike, a participant
with significant studies in English literature and physics, likened his experience to the
"reawakening" of the Renaissance and uses "inertia" in describing the change he
experienced:
So it kind of reawakens that curiosity from graduate school. So it overcomes the
inertial forces of comfort and allows you to become crazy again. So you feel
reawakened probably in the way the world felt with the Renaissance. The
curiosity sparked. And then you get to connect with people from other places just
focused on trying to solve a problem that's really hard, and different places will
get there differently. But it's reawakened the math department. [IN7:284-290]
Diversity in Professional Backgrounds
All nine of the study participants had experience in professions other than
community college teaching. Six of the nine had experience in non-teaching professions.
These professions included work as a statistician, actuary, baker, accountant, auditor, and
catastrophe modeler. David had a career working as a professional statistician and came
to community college teaching after physical issues limited the amount of time he could
spend working on a computer. He felt that his work in a profession other than
community college teaching gave him a different perspective from his peers:
55
I'm happy I'm here, but I see myself as different from people like you who had
been chairs and worked full-time all their life [in community college mathematics
teaching]. Most people have masters in math and I haven't yet found one other
person like myself. … So I saw myself in several ways as not part of the flock."
[IN2:43-51]
By identifying himself as "not part of the flock," David is expressing a belief that his
diverse professional background gives him an "outsider's" point of view in comparison
with his colleagues.
Four of the study participants had experience teaching mathematics at levels other
than the community college. Emmy had experience teaching for a non-profit organization
that brought algebra instruction to low socio-economic status elementary schools. Jerry
and Tom taught mathematics at the high school level, and Mike taught at the University
of California Los Angeles School of Public Health. All four of these participants made a
conscious choice to focus on teaching at the community college level. Jack, who had
also previously taught at 4-year institutions, described the transition in this way:
So I didn't really go to community colleges. They weren't really on my radar until
I moved to California, but when I moved here I was looking for work and they
came up on my radar. Oh – there's a place that does some interesting things. And
so when I went to community colleges, it was pretty obvious to me pretty soon
after going to community college campuses (because I have worked some at
56
various four-year schools) that this felt really comfortable and felt really very
much like a place I wanted to be … I just love the students. That's why I'm here.
[IN4:13-16;21-23]
After teaching at 4-year schools, Jack chose community college teaching because
community colleges of the work they did and because they were a place he "wanted to
be."
Jerry, who had previously taught mathematics at the high school level, drew on
that experience to describe the acceleration approach: "I notice that a lot of the stuff
Emmy does and the stuff they do at [another college piloting acceleration] – it all looks
exactly like the stuff we did in high school that was progressive. It's almost like we've
created an opportunity to pull all this stuff out of mothballs" [IN8:112-115]. Jerry used
his high school experience as a frame of reference for comparing the pedagogical
approach of acceleration with that of previous innovations at the high school level,
finding that the pedagogical approach of acceleration was similar to "progressive"
approaches used in high school.
The diversity of educational and professional backgrounds of the study
participants can also be seen in the language they use to describe the problem with the
current developmental math sequence. Mike, who has a background in nuclear medicine,
described the problem using vocabulary from this field such as "compartmental analysis,"
"radioactive decay," "half-life," and "LD-50":
57
And I also studied compartmental analysis in nuclear medicine where you look at
compartments – that's exactly how you lay it out. It looks exactly the same. So it
was perfect the way she [Emmy] laid it out. And the question that I hadn't fully
asked myself was 'What percentage of the students who start in arithmetic get
through? What percent who start in pre-algebra get through?' The progression
studies … In nuclear medicine you worry about radioactive decay. You worry
about something called half-life. The half-life of a student is a class. You kill
half of them. Or radiation therapy. You kill half, or another term is LD50 – the
lethal dose at which 50% of the population dies. For us it's about a class. So it all
just made sense in the language that I was most familiar with. And so the
question was, 'If you start at this stage, this stage, this stage, how many people get
through the pipeline?' And once you figure that out, you're on 'constructive
notice.' … So if 95% of the people don't get through, then you have an ethical
obligation to look and see do they really require all that you're asking of them if
you're eliminating 95% of the people and a disproportionate number of people
who are 'at risk.' It's fine to have standards. Navy Seals need to be able to do
certain things. But if you're eliminating 95% of the people you have to be able to
validate those measures. People went kicking and screaming that we should still
teach Latin. We don't teach Latin anymore. Should we? Probably not. Should it
be a requirement for graduation? Probably not. So the constructive notice that
58
we're doing damage – that much damage – was propelling … But is also spoke to
me very specifically in my language. [IN7:54-80]
Mike recognized that his diverse background gave him a different lens and language
with which to view the problem that acceleration was designed to address.
Awareness of One's Purpose for Teaching
A second key theme that emerged from the data on personal factors that promote
the adoption of acceleration among community college mathematics faculty was
awareness of one's purpose for teaching. Study participants showed knowledge of one's
purpose for teaching by intentionally seeking out community college teaching as a
profession after having professions in other areas, demonstrating self-reflection and
growth in teaching, and by taking personal responsibility for student success. In this
section, each of these three subthemes will be explored using interview transcript data.
Seeking Out Teaching as a Profession
All study participants actively sought out a community college teaching career
after experiences in other fields or in other levels of education. None of the nine study
participants went directly from graduate school into community college mathematics
teaching. Three of the nine participants had careers in fields other than education and
59
actively sought out teaching as a more personally rewarding field than their initial
profession. Laura described her dissatisfaction and transition into teaching in this way:
I worked in industry for six years. I did actuarial work. Hated it. I didn't feel like
my life was meant to build spreadsheets and analyze spreadsheets. There was no
meaning to life, to why I was doing something. So I thought maybe it's actuarial.
Maybe if I didn't work at an insurance company and could work at a little more
innovative company. So I went to a start-up in Menlo Park during the dot com
days and I worked for a catastrophe modeling company and the work was more
exciting but still there was that piece that was lacking for me. It's got to be more
than just making money and I've always remembered liking helping my friends
and tutoring them and always loved it when someone who didn't get math finally
got it. I loved that feeling of overcoming. [IN3:16-28]
Laura was motivated to seek out community college teaching by her desire to find more
personal meaning in her work and to help other people.
Four of the study participants had experience teaching at other levels before
beginning to teach at the community college level. In response to a question about what
led him to community college teaching, Mike, who had previously taught at the UCLA
School of Public Health, described his choice to teach at a community college rather than
continue teaching at UCLA in this way:
60
Because I loved teaching. It was the teaching aspect. I realized – I was teaching
part-time at Santa Monica [a community college]. I realized it was the teaching
part that really captured me. I was seeing friends do research. They were
spending their time researching. They were a couple of brilliant people – there
were about 8 or 9 graduate students in the program I was in. One of them got
three PhDs and an MD. He was a professor of medicine at age 21 and he was
pretty bright. It was that quality of people. They can handle the research side. I
think I'll enjoy the teaching side. And so it was really I love the teaching side and
I like the people and, like so many math teachers, I was a tutor in my high school
and college days so the thread is somewhere along the lines it felt good to help
people. So service to people, explaining something I was reasonably passionate
about and being good enough in it to propel me to want to continue. So that's
pretty much my story. Along the way I've made some detours into administration.
I'm back now. For the sixth time I'm returning to teaching full-time. … I love
teaching and this particular project, acceleration, was such a draw to come back
to. It's the most challenging, exhilarating, and exhausting teaching experience.
[IN7:25-43]
Participants spoke of choosing the teaching profession because it is personally rewarding
and a way to be of service to people.
61
Self-reflection and Growth
Knowledge of one's purpose for teaching was also seen in study participants'
engagement in self-reflection that led to changes in their teaching practice. All study
participants were able to reflect on their own teaching practice and to identify ways in
which they had grown and changed as teachers, especially through their participation in
acceleration. Tom recalled his first experience trying an activity that was not a traditional
lecture format in this way:
I still remember the first activity I tried that was not lecture-driven. It was a cell
phone thing where they had a very difficult graph. It was a piece-wise function
with all sorts of stuff like rates and cell phones and the idea was just a little bit of:
this is what the activity is and you do it and you help them with their thinking but
you're not telling them what the right answer is and it was so hard. I was really
scared and, of course, it went beautifully and I loved it. So that was a necessary
step: giving up control. And I note that I'm a recovering dynamic lecturer. I
want a t-shirt! [IN1:59-68]
Tom also reflected on how his positive experience teaching the accelerated pre-stats
course had affected his teaching of algebra and led him reflect on his role as a teacher:
I think the biggest change that happens in math instructors is the liberation. You
finally get what teaching can be. You finally understand how a small simple
62
activity can create so much energy and excitement around math. It's really hard to
do that in algebra. It takes a master to do that. In stats it just takes a poster
presentation. It's very easy. And so I think it's hard to go back to teaching an
algebra class. I did that and it's hard for me where I had to put a lot of energy in
to create that same interest. Or at least that same energy. It was never the same
interest. I think, 'What is teaching? What is math? What is my role in teaching
students math?' [IN1:329-339]
By reflecting on his experience with the cell phone activity, Tom was able to identify
changes in his teaching practice ("giving up control") and also to identify deeper
questions that the experience raised for him ("What is teaching? What is math?").
Laura reflected on her struggles in changing from a more "traditional" lecturebased instructor to the accelerated pedagogy that uses more group work, especially since
her own preferred style of learning more individualistic:
I would say that I'm definitely more of a traditional teacher. I was always
reminded and definitely tried group work, but I grew up learning more from the
traditional learning and so I try to reflect and say, 'Why am I teaching this way?'
And it's because when I was growing up this is how I was taught and this is what
worked for me and I'm hoping it will work for my students and that's something
that I start out with. But then I think there are so many different levels of students
here that what worked for me doesn't work for them and what worked for this
63
group doesn't work for the other group. And even group work right now – I don't
think everyone wants to do group work. And it's still my struggle. I try to do
group work but I also need to be respectful of students who don't want to do
group work and so I struggle. How much do I force them to do group work? It's
a struggle that I'm still dealing with. … So that's something I try to be mindful of.
People process information differently and I can't just force them to like share
right away. I can't force them to speak right away. It's still a lot to process for
me. To think through what works and what works best. [IN3:109-130]
Laura was able to identify her own preferred way of learning ("traditional learning") and
that her preferred method teaching matched her own dominant learning style. She was
also able to realize that this method, while effective for herself, might not be the most
effective for her students. This self-reflection has led her to use more group work with
her classes, and she continues to reflect on what is the best pedagogical approach for her
students. Laura's colleague Jack, like Laura, feels he has grown as a teacher but still
struggles to improve his pedagogy. Jack summed up his reflection and growth in this
way: "I'm learning things. I'm getting better. But I don't think I've fully figured out how
to make it work yet" [IN4:238-239].
Participants noted that growing as an instructor and changing pedagogy can be an
uncomfortable process. Jerry described this experience of pedagogical change that has
accompanied piloting acceleration in this way:
64
It's kept me from falling into that inertia. It's got me back out of my comfort
zone. I feel like some classes I teach pretty smoothly. It's enough if I roll out of
bed and wake up. And it's gotten me out of that. And I appreciate that because
it's too easy if you've done it for a while to accept where you're at. I know in
principle you can always be better, but whether you're willing to put the time into
it is another thing. [IN8:156-161]
Jerry notes that it is easy to be satisfied as an instructor with one's current level of
effectiveness and one's current pedagogical practice, and that improvement takes time
and effort. He went on to describe how his experience piloting acceleration has
contributed to his self-reflection and growth as an instructor: "I'm sure it makes me a
better teacher by forcing me to rethink how I take care of curriculum. … It really keeps
me excited about teaching because it creates a dynamic for how I think about what I'm
going to teach. It's exciting because I'm seeing much more results" [IN8:136-138]. So
while acknowledging that pedagogical growth and change can be an uncomfortable
process and that it is easier to stay in one's "comfort zone," the acceleration project has
provided Jerry the motivation to undertake this process and the positive results have
encouraged him to continue his efforts.
Many of the CAP participants use Dweck's model of Growth Change Mindset
(2008) with their students as part of their teaching tools. This model asserts that whether
students believe that their brain or intelligence is "fixed" or rather something that can
grow or change affects their motivation and learning. Several study participants used the
65
language of "growth change mindset" to discuss the own personal growth as mathematics
instructors. Mike, in describing the characteristics of faculty who are successfully
implementing acceleration pilots said this: "You have to say 'This is an experiment. I
may not get it right the first time. I have to throw out self-judgment.' That Carol Dweck
stuff – the growth mindset – you have to embrace it. Otherwise it will lead you over the
cliff. Basically people who are growth mindset [are effective]" [IN7:306-308]. Mike
identifies Growth Change Mindset as a key element of effective acceleration
implementers, since this attribute enables faculty to reflect on their current teaching
practice and to take risks to improve.
Taking Personal Responsibility for Student Success
A third way in which study participants demonstrated knowledge of one's own
teaching purpose was by taking personal responsibility for student success. Participants
expressed a strong belief that they, as instructors, share a primary responsibility for
student success. David, who became a community college mathematics instructor after a
career as a statistician, recalled his surprise at the acceptance of high failure rates in
mathematics among his colleagues. He was also surprised by the attitudes of some
colleagues, who expected that a certain percentage of their students would not be
successful each semester.
When I found out what the failure rates were, I was aghast. What I really was
aghast about was nobody talked about it. The elephant in the room. I was
assigned a mentor and as soon as the failure rates came in I would e-mail him and
66
say '50% of the people passed the second exam.' And he would basically say – he
had been teaching 20 years and had his masters from Berkeley – his response
would be 'Uh-huh.' That's it. I was like 'What am I doing wrong?' And he'd say,
'You're not doing anything wrong.' So I was shocked by this story. [IN2:33-41]
David further discussed his struggle with the perception that failure is expected and
predominantly the responsibility of students.
When I first saw the failure rates and I happened to be personal friends with the
Academic Senate President, a Ph.D. in Biology from Cal or Davis. I said, 'What
about these failure rates?' And he said, "That's the students we get.' And I said,
'Oh, you're putting it all on the students?' 'Yeah.' The president of our union – I
talked to him about my failure rates. I asked him, 'Does that ever come up in the
union? The issue of failure rates?' And I'll never forget this. He said, 'Failure?
Well, most of my failure is from withdrawal. What's your failure from?' I said,
'There are some from withdrawal. They don't make it to the end of the semester.
And from my perspective they're withdrawing not from – some of it's life factors,
but there's plenty because they see the handwriting on the wall. They see they
can't understand the material. So all that's failure in my mind.' … It was
interesting to learn that nobody ever brings up the subject – faculty contract,
union, negotiations, any of that. [IN2:291-306;314-316]
67
While his colleague did not see student withdrawal as any failure or responsibility on his
part as an instructor, David believed that student lack of understanding of the material led
to withdrawal and that finding ways to decrease student failure was his responsibility. He
expressed frustration with colleagues and people who held positions of power at the
institution, such as the Academic Senate President and union president, who seemed to
accept a certain degree of student failure as an expected outcome.
Study participants indicated that the desire to improve student success rates in the
developmental mathematics sequence motivated them to continue with their acceleration
work and contributed to their growth as teachers. In reflecting on what she has learned
about her students from her acceleration work, Diane stated:
I think the primary thing I've learned [from piloting acceleration] is my students
are a lot smarter than I ever thought, and I've grown as a person and as a teacher.
I have so much more faith in what I do now than what I had previously. It comes
from their [the students] succeeding. I'm not saying 'No' to 90 out of 100 students
– 'Go back. You don't get to take advantage of education's promise' [when they
fail the traditional developmental math sequence]. I'm saying 'yes' to 50 now of
those 100. It went from 10 to 50! That's shit high! So I feel that what I'm doing
– it matters. And it makes you willing to stay up later at night. [IN9:238-246]
68
This instructor reported seeing dramatic improvement in student success as a result of her
acceleration efforts, and this improvement gave meaning to her work and led her to
persist in expanding acceleration at her institution.
Approach to Mathematics as a Subject Matter
A third key theme that emerged from the data on personal factors that promote the
adoption of acceleration among community college mathematics faculty was approach to
subject matter. Study participants believed that mathematics should be taught in a
contextualized setting and that this contextualization was key to promoting student
success. Participants also viewed the mathematics curriculum as evolving in response to
student and societal needs. This ability to view mathematics as an evolving discipline
allowed them to question the validity of the traditional developmental mathematics
curriculum which acceleration is designed to replace. In this section, the subthemes of
contextualized and evolving mathematics curriculum will be explored using interview
transcript data.
Contextualized Curriculum
The traditional developmental mathematics sequence retraces the high school
curriculum and is largely directed at students who are planning to major in mathintensive fields. Much of this curriculum focuses on developing students' algebraic
symbol manipulation skills needed for a study of calculus. In contrast, the acceleration
pilot replaces the traditional three-level algebra based curriculum with a single "pre-stats"
69
course. This course uses a contextualized curriculum based on data analysis and is
designed to prepare students to successfully complete a transfer-level statistics course.
Study participants expressed a strong belief that the mathematics that students
study should be contextualized so that students can see a direct application between the
mathematics they are learning and their daily lives. During our interview, Mike showed
me a set of exams in which students in his acceleration pre-stats course had written a
short report on the trend of a data set. He also discussed the group presentations this
class had made. When reflecting on these assignments, he expressed his belief that what
students learn should be applicable in their daily lives:
So it's not about making it easier on them in the watered-down sense, but how to
make the learning process more mimic what they'll need when they leave college.
What are those life-skills they need? Critical thinking. Self-control. Businesses
want people who can think, show up on time, and work in teams and articulate
what's in their head. Before it was students just writing answers on a piece of
paper. Businesses don't care about that. They need people to do presentations,
people to write reports. So it's consciousness that's changed. What are those lifeskills? What are the core competencies they need for life? … That's what I've
learned: It's about the student. Not about what I think they need. It's about what
they really need. [IN7:202-213]
70
Mike believed that the projects and assessments he was using in his acceleration course
provided students the opportunity to develop critical life skills such as critical thinking,
the ability to work in groups, and the ability to articulate their thinking in writing.
David contrasted the study of data with the study of algebra in this way:
The other part of me, as a data person, having been out in the data world – to me,
data is so rich. There are so many jobs in it. It's a growing industry. For
somebody who's not a STEM major, the true breadth would be to have them
understand data because it's everywhere today. I say to my class, 'If you ever see
a polynomial in the grocery store, call me immediately because I want to be the
first to report it' because they're not. In every magazine you pick up there was a
survey and '43% said this.' Right? … I'll say this: If you have to choose between
failing two courses [algebra or pre-statistics], this [pre-statistics] is the much
better course to fail. Because what are you walking away with from elementary
algebra? What life-skills? I don't know. Maybe making them read text and try to
understand things. How are we going to determine if aspirin is effective? What
are we going to do? What data are we going to collect? I think exposure to that –
I think they get something out of it even it they don't pass it. [IN2:90-98, 345350]
71
David expressed a commonly held view among study participants that the pre-stats
curriculum was much more valuable for students than the traditional algebra-based
curriculum because it provided a context that students could use in their daily lives.
Diane felt that the contextualized curriculum was not only more applicable to
students' daily lives but also key in enabling her students to be successful in the pre-stats
course. It also helped her get a more complete view of her students' capabilities. In
reflecting on the connection between the contextualized curriculum and student success,
she said:
Teaching [the accelerated pre-statistics course] when they're learning these topics
in a contextualized setting that respects what they already know and their
intelligence – I'm seeing a whole different side to their intelligence than I ever
knew was there … Maybe one of the reasons [basic skills students] are not as
successful in the traditional pathway is when you decontextualize the concepts
and skills they need to learn they struggle with learning in that setting. But when
you put it in an interesting project that respects their intelligence and makes them
hungry for the skills they need to achieve the goal of the project, they're quite
capable of learning and quite capable of the sophisticated analysis and thinking
skills. I think the primary thing I've learned is my students are a lot smarter than I
ever thought and I've grown as a person and as a teacher [IN9:75-78; 232-340]
72
Diane felt that the contextualized pre-stats curriculum "respected her students'
intelligence" and made them eager to learn the skills they needed to complete projects in
that setting, making them more successful than in the traditional decontextualized course.
Using the contextualized curriculum also helped Diane have a more positive view of her
students' capabilities, a change that she identifies as the primary way she has grown as a
person and teacher.
Mathematics as an Evolving Discipline
Jack, in describing opposition to his acceleration efforts among other mathematics
faculty at his institution, told of encounter with one of his colleagues: "At one point
Laura and I were in a meeting of the [mathematics department] curriculum committee in
which some really crazy things were said like, 'You're trying to destroy the edifice of
mathematics'" [IN4:149-152]. Unlike this colleague, study participants did not view
mathematics as an "edifice", defined as a "large or complex structure or organization"
(http://dictionary.reference.com). Rather, they saw mathematics as an organic and
evolving discipline and were open to changing the traditional curriculum if it would
better meet the needs of their students. This acknowledgement of an evolving curriculum
was the start of Tom's acceleration efforts: "I think this was probably the first step
toward acceleration: leaving behind what I think should be learned and taught and
embracing what people's needs are" [IN1:32-34]. He, like other study participants,
believed that the curriculum could and should evolve to meet student needs.
73
Diane described her own evolution in thinking about the mathematics as a
discipline in this way:
I used to believe that mathematics should be broken down into discrete skills and
you had to have all those discrete skills in order to learn all the higher level
mathematics and that we study mathematics for its intrinsic beauty and order. But
what I've actually learned is there's a purpose to mathematics. Right? And that's
really why we study it. And factoring polynomials and solving rational equations
and equation involving radicals – they aren't necessarily the skills the general
population needs to be mathematically literate. That mathematical literacy is
more important than mathematics is what I got out of that. And mathematical
literacy does not involve factoring umpteen million polynomials. [IN9:311-322]
Diane had changed from an "edifice" view of mathematics (mastery of discrete skills that
led to a study of high level mathematics, studied for its beauty and order) to a broader
view of mathematical literacy (studying math for a purpose) that emphasized
contextualization that showed the purpose of mathematics for each person's needs. She
had come to the realization that algebra was not needed for mathematical literacy for the
general population, but that the pre-stats curriculum better met the majority of student
needs.
Like Diane, Katie also appreciated the beauty of mathematics but came to believe
that the discipline should evolve to better meet the needs of students: "It [acceleration]
74
made me question certain topics that we teach and why we spend to much time teaching
what we teach without making the connections to applications. I still love math for the
sake of the beauty of it, but I do question what we teach students and is it really as
important as we think it is, we as instructors" [IN6:254-258].
Jack noted that a rigid view of mathematics was an obstacle in the expansion of
acceleration efforts. When asked about what he believes holds people back from
adopting acceleration, Jack said:
Fear of change. Traditionalism. It's really fascinating. Emmy and I went to this
conference in Sacramento – a regional math conference put on by Sac City
[Sacramento City College]. It was in some ways one of our more hostile crowds.
They had some really fascinating arguments about why this is a problem, none of
which were compelling. There was one woman who said, 'You're basically
making an easier way to get a degree. What if everyone did that? What if we had
an easier way to get art or an easier way to get history?' or whatever it was. I said,
'I actually think that's already there.' Because there are two dozen ways to get
your art requirement. Come on. There's only one way to get your math
requirement [by completing the traditional developmental mathematics
sequence]? There's only one way to get your math requirement? It's not
equitable. It's not reasonable. So there's a lot of those kind of things out there.
Rigor. Arrogance, I would say. Fear. [IN4:319-332]
75
Jack's view that the mathematics discipline was evolving and not stagnant put him in
opposition with the woman who believed there should be only one way to complete a
mathematics requirement and that the traditional mathematics curriculum should be
completed by all students, otherwise degree attainment would be made "easier." Jack
summarized his experience with acceleration in this way: "This is the best professional
thing I've done in my life. Like it's very creative. It opens my mind to new ways of
thinking about math and the world." This openness to new ways of thinking about
mathematics reinforces Jack's view of mathematics as an evolving discipline.
Jerry believes that the ability to see mathematics as a broad and evolving
discipline is an equity issue, as it provides more students the opportunity to interact with
math in a positive way, opening educational and career opportunities for students. He
also expresses frustration with those in the field who hold a more closed and stagnant
view of mathematics:
It [acceleration] certainly consolidates my feeling about math – that it's this broad,
extremely, - talk about infinite – opportunity in a field and the more we do to
create access to it, the more opportunities we create for students to interact with
math in a positive way, the better we do for students and for the field. There are
plenty of guys salted away in the hallowed halls of Berkeley who would shudder
to think that mathematics should be open to everybody but my sense has always
been about creating access. So this [acceleration] does. … I don't know how you
look at the world around us and think that the vast majority of intermediate
76
algebra is needed to appreciate that world. There's so many ways mathematically
to access the world around you. Sure there are things in intermediate algebra that
are relevant and valuable, but it's not the only way to do it. In most cases
intermediate algebra is essentially pre-pre-calculus. That's not the way many
people interact with the world. And so it's hard to me not to feel that my
colleagues who see it that way haven't taken two seconds to investigate that. No
introspection. I can't believe that any rational person could feel – would come
away from any truthful insightful investigation and say that, 'Oh, no. The only
possible way to get there is through intermediate algebra.' I don't know how you
could possibly rationally come to that conclusion. All I can think is that they're
either too lazy or too dumb. Usually I'm willing to see the other side of it, but this
is just one of those - no, you just don't get it. I think it's necessary for a lot people
who want to become engineers or computer scientists or who really like the depth
of the physical sciences as the way to understand the world to have that
opportunity. But good Lord – there are other ways to see and feel the world of
math and why on earth someone couldn't see that… [IN8:209-216;219-238]
Jerry's views mathematics as a broad discipline that people should be able to access in
many ways. He is frustrated with colleagues who insist that all students must access
study of mathematics through completion of intermediate algebra, attributing this view to
a lack of "introspection" and "truthful investigation" on their parts and even asserts that to
77
hold this view is irrational. Jerry believes that the mathematics discipline is not stagnant
but, rather, there are many ways to "see and feel the world of math."
Personal Knowledge of Students
A fourth key theme that emerged from the data on personal factors that promote
the adoption of acceleration among community college mathematics faculty was personal
knowledge of students. In their knowledge of students, study participants valued a
personal connection and were motivated by issues of student equity in their acceleration
work. In this section, the subthemes of personal connection and issues of student equity
will be explored using interview transcript data.
Personal Connection to Students
Study participants valued a personal connection with their students and believed
that the accelerated pre-stats course helped them strengthen these personal connections
with their students. Katie described how the pre-stats course gave her more one-on-one
time with her students and the effect that this had on her and her students in this way:
Just having that one-on-one time with the students, checking in with them, really
makes a difference. If the students can see that you care they are willing to open
up more and I've found out so much more about the students than I've done in the
past. I've had them journal write and do reflections for me, but having that oneon-one time I mentioned and doing more aggressive intervention with students
78
who are struggling has been really nice. I ask a lot of my students but they
continually surprise me with that they'll do for presentations, the skills and
insights that they have, the kinds of questions they ask during our class
discussions. It's just incredible. I wish I could have a video camera on all the
time capturing them because sometimes it just makes me cry. The lively
improvement, the relationships that we're building with each other, and the
friendships. It's just amazing. [IN6:137-143; 230-237]
Katie values relationship-building with her students and having her students know that
she cares about how they are doing. She believes this personal connection motivates
students to perform better in the class.
Motivated by Issues of Equity
Study participants were keenly aware of the data showing their students' lack of
success and progression in the traditional developmental math sequence and were
motivated by issues of equity to pursue their acceleration work. Laura traced the start of
the acceleration work at her campus back to the publication of a Student Equity Report:
So it all started when there was a Student Equity Report. The Chancellor had
developed a Student Equity Report and it was from there that we saw that
African-Americans and Hispanics – if they're placed at the lowest level [of the
developmental math sequence] it takes them years to get an AA and even within
six years only a small percentage of them get through. So then it basically came
79
down to the whole department decided to brainstorm on what we could do to try
to close the achievement gap. [IN3:44-51]
Her colleague, Jack, also mentioned the importance of the Student Equity Report as a
catalyst to their efforts and spoke about his decision to work on acceleration in this way:
I remember one conversation I was having with a colleague in particular. I
realized this [acceleration] is the most important thing I could be doing right now.
It's such a barrier for so many students that providing another pathway – not that
everyone has to go down it – but just providing a different one is super, super
important. Very rewarding in that sense. To feel like you're making a difference.
[IN4:187-193]
Data from the Student Equity Report showed both Laura and Jack that the traditional
math sequence was a "barrier" for students and this motivated them to design an
accelerated pathway at their institution, and Jack describes this work as "the most
important thing I could be doing right now."
Jerry views the equity issue not just at the student level but also at a societal level
as well.
Ultimately we're trying to make a social difference. We're trying to make the
world a better place by creating a socially just community and one of the ways
you get there is through math whether we like it or not. … And that's to me is
one of the things we're talking about. Acceleration is about creating opportunities
80
for people. I don't want to spend too much time on the high horse about what
we're here for, but it sure seems if we're not just providing a way for students to
meet our expectations but also to satisfy needs they would have as members of an
educated, productive society, we're not really doing our job. … [Acceleration] is
serving students in a way they've been underserved. It creates opportunities.
[IN8:19-29]
While Jerry views his acceleration work as helping more students attain their personal
educational goals, he also sees the development of an alternative to the traditional
developmental math sequence as an issue of social justice. Jerry believes the job of
educators not just to teach a certain set content but also to help students become members
of "an educated productive society."
Issues of student equity also motivate Diane in her acceleration work, and she
sees a close relationship between student success and one's self-esteem as an educator.
When describing how she felt when first presented with the data on the lack of student
success and progression in the traditional developmental math sequence, Diane said:
I want to move those numbers. Because what we do eight hours or ten hours a
day or, in some of our cases, 12 to 13 hours a day – much of our esteem is vested
in that. And to have 100 students come in three levels below transfer [level math
course] all starry-eyed with educational goals willing to take a pre-algebra math to
attain those goals and to have anywhere from three to five percent of those
81
students pass a transfer-level math class – that's debilitating to your self-esteem.
Who cares if I'm popular or not as a teacher? I'm not helping students attain their
educational goals. [IN9:99-106]
When I mentioned that she seemed to take student success personally, whereas other
instructors might put more responsibility for success on the students themselves, Diane
responded:
Maybe that's what you need to be able to do in order to embrace change. If it's
selfish, if it's about you – … this affects my self-esteem. I'm not ok saying to 9095 out of 100 students who are taking that risk coming to college and starting
three to four levels below [transfer-level math], 'Sorry. Go back to flipping
hamburgers or dealing drugs. You don't get to benefit from education's promise.'
I'm not ok with that. It hurts. [IN9:108-114]
Diane takes personal responsibility for her student's success and sees serious implications
for students who are not successful in completing their math requirement.
Importance of the Community of Practice
A fifth and final key theme that emerged from the data on personal factors that
promote the adoption of acceleration among community college mathematics faculty was
the importance of participating in the California Acceleration Project (CAP) community
of practice. In particular, they valued working with Emmy, the mathematics instructor
who was one of the first to adopt the practice of acceleration and who co-founded and
82
leads the CAP community of practice. They also valued the connections the CAP
community of practice provided with colleagues who were piloting acceleration projects
at other institutions. In this section, the subthemes of the value of working with Emmy
and the value of connections with colleagues from other institutions will be explored
using interview data.
Value of Working with Emmy
Many of the study participants mentioned the importance of working with Emmy,
the leader of the CAP mathematics community of practice. Tom, who works at the same
institution as Emmy, identifies meeting her as a pivotal moment in his development as a
mathematics instructor. Tom began his professional career as a high school teacher, and
when recalling his start teaching at the community college he said, "That was when I met
Emmy and my world really opened" [IN1:52-53]. He works with Emmy on a regular
basis at the college but also additionally goes to the workshops she leads with the CAP
community of practice. When asked what motivated him to participate in the community
of practice even though he collaborates with Emmy at the college he said:
I go as often as I can to learn from Emmy. If you were a golfer, every day you'd
spend with Tiger Woods if you could, no matter how good you were. And that's
how I feel. This is my third time going bringing different teams. Now it's more
like re-centering. It's like being with an old master – ok, let's go through the
move again, let's re-center. I'll pick up things she's doing. [IN1:269-274]
83
Tom likens Emmy to Tiger Woods, someone at the top of her field. Despite working
with her regularly, he continues to participate in new CAP cohorts to "re-center" and
learn from watching Emmy work with new acceleration cohorts.
Several study participants commented on Emmy's personal qualities in addition to
her strong pedagogical practice. Mike said:
Emmy is a diamond. Kelly, too [co-founder of the California Acceleration project
and leader of the CAP English community of practice]. They're diamonds.
They're just wonderful people. And to see that modeling of self-sacrifice for
student success. And their willingness to put it all out there means there is no
reason I shouldn't model the same behavior. [IN7:217-220]
Mike acknowledges the challenges that Emmy has faced in piloting acceleration ("selfsacrifice for student success") and is inspired by Emmy's actions to do the same.
In a similar way, Jerry commented on Emmy's personal qualities as a
spokesperson for acceleration and the positive effect these qualities have had on the
acceleration work: "I think Emmy is such a strong representative. She mixes the right
elements of confidence and outrage. She balances it well and I think that's especially
important when you start a program. She gets the idea, so she put out a lot of cool stuff
and said, 'Ok, you get to pick some of this'" [IN8:146-150]. Jerry mentions Emmy's
"outrage" over the barrier posed to many students by the traditional developmental math
sequence and her "confidence" that acceleration is an effective alternative. He believes
84
these ability to balance these two qualities contribute to Emmy's effectiveness as a
spokesperson for acceleration and also values the curricular materials that Emmy has
developed and shared ("She put out a lot of cool stuff and said, 'Ok, you get to pick some
of this.")
Value of Connections with Colleagues from Other Institutions
In addition to valuing their work with the founder of CAP, study participants
appreciated the connections that participating in the CAP community of practice gave
them with colleagues from other institutions who were also working on acceleration
projects. Participants mentioned the perceived power that being part of a larger group
gave them when working with colleagues at their own campuses on acceleration. This
power of the larger group was especially important for David, who had no strong allies
and no one to collaborate with in his own department. As David put it:
I couldn't have done this alone. When you're in a minority position, you've got to
coalesce. It's very hard to innovate with a sense of it being me against the world
alone. You can't do it alone. So it's been – even when I approach Carl [his
department chair] – 'It's not me alone, Carl. It's this group of people. They've
tried it.' [IN2:180-190]
The feeling of being part of a group gave David greater power within his department but
also within the larger college as well.
85
Every time I talked about this I would say, 'I'm one of six community colleges
who…' When I went to the Curriculum Committee I'd say, 'Six community
colleges and we're the first cohort and, by the way, there are two others in the Bay
Area. And, by the way, the chair of the department at Danville Community
College is doing this.' Always. Always. I felt I had no stature on my own. I
could always put it in the 'we.' I wasn't alone. It wasn't just my own idea.
[IN2:389-396]
Being part of the community of practice gave Daniel more confidence to promote
acceleration within his department and within the college because he could point to
others who were undertaking similar efforts, making him part of a larger movement.
Study participants also valued the opportunity to share materials through the
community of practice. Reflecting on this sharing experience, Katie said:
We share everything among the team and so it's been great from an artistic sense
by being able to look at what everyone else is doing. Just seeing what we all do –
having that window into each others' classes has been an incredible learning
experience. I've learned so much from my colleagues. It's hard to get that
collaboration because you have to be really conscious about sharing. It has just
been such a great experience to work with everyone, to see what they're doing, to
take their activities and adjust it for my classes. Or maybe is makes me think
86
about something else that I wouldn't have thought of on my own. It has been
wonderful. It's a lot of work, a lot of time, but so worth it. [IN6:171-182]
Katie values the learning that has taken place just by seeing other people's work. She
also has appreciated being able to take work shared by colleagues for her own classes.
Seeing their work has also inspired Katie to design new materials for her classes as well.
In addition to the giving them a stronger voice for acceleration by being part of a
larger group and the opportunity to share teaching materials, study participants valued the
personal support that being part of a community of practice gave them. Laura said, "So
after we participated in CAP, it was really great to have that support … to hear the
struggles and the triumphs that other instructors go through was really great for me"
[IN3:142-145]. Laura drew personal inspiration by hearing about the challenges and
achievement of others in the community of practice. Daniel also mentioned the personal
connections that the community of practice gave him, connections that he missed within
his own department: "This is skilled training of professionals. De-isolation. The sense
of working communally. I don't know what other departments are like. But my
department – they're atoms colliding. Everyone's on their own schedules. That's another
reason I reached out for this" [IN2:420-424]. Daniel sought out the CAP community of
practice to address the feelings of isolation he felt within this own department.
87
Strategies Faculty Use to Engage Departmental Colleagues in Acceleration
Data indicate that participants used a variety of strategies to engage their
departmental colleagues in their acceleration work. This included:
•
establishing a positive reputation among colleagues
•
providing reciprocal support to colleagues for their own projects
•
sharing their experiences with colleagues both formally and informally
•
incorporating ideas of resistant colleagues in curriculum development
•
holding strategically planned meetings
•
providing data on acceleration success and ready-made materials that others
could use
•
intentionally hiring new departmental colleagues who would support innovation
in the developmental math sequence
Despite the variety of strategies used, all were based on recognition of the unique culture
of the department in which the study participants worked.
Having a positive reputation among her colleagues helped Emmy as she began
acceleration work at her campus. She established this by working on a variety of
committees and having colleagues become familiar with the quality of work she
produced: "I have held many positions on my campus – every committee – and so I think
I had a level of respect and trust that I would not develop something that was not
rigorous, that had a high level of challenge, was respectful of students, etc. That's the
88
way I navigated it in the department" [IN5:173-176]. Based on the quality of her
previous work, Emmy's colleagues were able to trust that the acceleration materials that
Emmy developed would also be of similar high quality.
Tom noted that simply providing mutual support to others for their work led to
other supporting his own acceleration work. "I found that if I can support others on what
they're doing then naturally, if they're good people – and teachers are usually good people
– they'll try to support as they can" [IN1:231-234]. Tom supported the work of his
colleagues and they, in turn, were supportive of his acceleration work.
Laura and Jack, who teach at the same campus, shared their acceleration
work with colleagues on both a formal and informal basis. Laura said, "We
definitely done department meetings where Jack and I share what we did and
what we felt with our class. Through regular passing, talking with people, we tell
them about some of the successes and some of my struggles. And then CAP had
newsletters, so I'd forward them to the department" [IN3:76-80]. Laura and Jack
shared formally at department meetings but also informally in "regular passing,"
as they talked during their day-to-day interactions working together in the same
department. They shared not only the positive experiences, but also their
"struggles." Jack described their strategy in this way: We've definitely talked
about the results of our work so far in different department meetings and
individually with colleagues. We've also shared data and anecdotes and our
experiences with the class and that kind of thing. We've gotten one new teacher
89
involved in the course that way. That's kind of all there is so far. I think that,
myself, I'm sensitive not trying to push on people and pressure people because
sometimes … well, I can do that sometimes. I have a strong personality and I
haven't been really pushing that hard. [IN4:73-81]
Jack notes that the method used to share experiences is important. In his sharing with
colleagues, Jack is particularly careful not to "push on people and pressure people" as he
feels this would be ineffective in engaging more colleagues in his acceleration work.
Another strategy that Jack and Laura used to engage their colleagues in their
acceleration work was to incorporate ideas of resistant colleagues into their curriculum.
When discussing resistant colleagues and curriculum development, Jack recounted:
But I'll tell you that as we wrote the outline, we did what we thought was right.
And as we went through the process, we asked for feedback. And unless the thing
they wanted to put in was really, really crazy, obviously we just said, 'OK.' But
there were still people who fought it the whole time. Now they're not talking
because it worked, but they still don't like it. [IN4:154-160]
Jack and Laura kept their colleagues informed throughout the curriculum development
process and incorporated all ideas from colleagues "unless the thing they wanted to put in
was really, really crazy." While they still had resistant colleagues, Jack reports they have
become less vocal in their opposition to acceleration because "it worked."
90
Mike developed a very specific plan to engage his colleagues his acceleration
work. He developed his plan during the very first meeting at which he heard Emmy
present the idea of acceleration to address the barrier the traditional developmental math
sequence was posing for student success. The plan included meeting logistics, what the
content of each meeting would be, and how to address the questions and concerns his
colleagues would have:
I knew I needed to have two long meetings on Fridays. So the first one was
scheduled for March 4th and the following one two weeks later on March 18th.
And in between there was a plan already for many of us to go to a Math Summit
down at Valley College and Uri Treisman was the speaker. And I knew I had to
split it into two because I knew the first meeting would be 'What are all your
questions?' and the last meeting would have to be 'Here are how they're answered.'
I didn't want to go into the meeting and have the expectation that I knew all the
answers. And I knew with this meeting in between [at Valley College] some of
those people would find their answers. But we needed the questions to be
explicit. And the worse thing was if someone was holding back. So I handed out
notecards and people wrote questions on them so they were anonymous. So I just
went through one by one, one at a time. But I also gave the progression data for
the college at the first meeting. So they could see 95% weren't getting through.
Or 90% weren't getting through who started in pre-algebra. So they saw the
reality. [IN7:85-100]
91
Mike strategically planned every detail of the meetings used to introduce acceleration to
his department. He planned the number of meetings based on the need to first draw out
questions and second to provide answers to the questions. He strategically planned the
timing of the meetings, since there was a conference at a neighboring college in which
the speaker would answer many of the questions that were generated in the first meeting.
Mike planned the format of the meeting to increase the likelihood that everyone would
feel comfortable asking any questions they might have by using anonymous notecards.
Finally, Mike strategically used the progression data from his college to personalize the
information for his colleagues so that they could "see the reality."
The strategy Diane used to engage her colleagues differs from Mike's. She
provides her colleagues ready-made materials that they can use for their acceleration
course that she has developed; however, unlike Mike, she does not focus on the problems
with the traditional developmental pathway and the progression data that shows students
are not being successful in the traditional sequence. Instead she focuses on the improved
outcomes that students are having in the accelerated pathway. Diane said:
The personal growth that came with teaching this program - that gave me the
ability to define what's wrong with the traditional pathway. But I don't define it
when I'm interacting with other teachers. What I realized is you're never going to
recruit other teachers if you tell them what they believe in, what they've been
diligently devoting themselves to – if you tell them it's not working. You can't
demean what they do. … But to get the teacher, and I don't mean in a derogatory
92
way, the teacher that doesn't have the energy or time to launch off that cliff – to
draw them in you have to respect what they do. You can't say the traditional
pathway is failing students. [All materials needed to teach the accelerated course
are provided to colleagues. ] Yes. Any look! Black and Hispanic students are
4.3 times more likely to complete a transfer-level course. Not 'that's not working'
– you just put the numbers out and they're math teachers! You don't have to
analyze it. You just lay the numbers in front of them and say, 'Oh, look! It's all
ready! Tests and everything. Rubrics.' [IN9:72-142]
So while Mike presented his colleagues with the data from their college showing that
students were not making it through the traditional developmental math sequence, Diane
intentionally does not share this data with colleagues. She believes that colleagues might
interpret this as "demeaning what they do" and thus resist adopting acceleration. Instead,
she focuses on the positive outcomes she is having with her accelerated pre-stats course.
She makes it easy for her colleagues to also teach an accelerated pre-stats course by
sharing all the materials she has created for the course, including tests and grading
rubrics.
Hiring new faculty who were open to reforming the traditional developmental
mathematics pathway was another strategy used by study participants to promote the
adoption of acceleration in their departments. Jerry described their intentional hiring
process in this way: "The bigger issue, and I think it's kind of intentional design, when
we've hired the hires that we've had recently, that's what we looked for – people who
93
were interested in developmental math curriculum and who would look to serving that
population of student. So we hired to fit that in, so that you're preaching to the choir"
[IN8:62-66]. In using this strategy, Jerry and his colleagues hired like-minded new
faculty members into their department so that they would increase the number of
colleagues who were supportive of changing the traditional developmental math
sequence.
While the study participants used a variety of strategies to engage their colleagues
in their acceleration work, the strategies they used were based on recognition of the
unique department culture in which each participant worked. When describing the
strategies they used, study participants also commented on departmental culture.
The departments of several study participants were similar in that they were seen
as neutral to new ideas. David said the Basic Skills Coordinator at his college who had
tried to engage the math department in change efforts described the department in this
way:
He said to me, 'David, no one's interested in any change in your department. And
I'll tell you what's good. No one is against it either. What you have in this
department is'– and I'll never forget his phrase – 'benign neglect. You have room
to move.' And so, in that sense, he knew more than I did because he had tried
interacting with these people. [IN2:156-161]
94
The Basic Skills Coordinator told David that the culture of his department gave David
the ability to try the acceleration innovation. David agreed with this assessment of his
department's culture and noted that if the culture had been different, he would not have
been able to implement acceleration: "[The department was] not strongly antiinnovation. There was none of that. If a full-timer had stood up and said even one
paragraph like that [against acceleration] – whoa! I wouldn't have been able to move
forward" [IN2:253-258]. Because there was no active opposition, David was able to
start an accelerated pre-stats course at his college.
Mike and Katie characterized their department as generally supportive of
innovation. Katie noted, "Most of the department – they were very supportive. Our
department, in general, supports innovation. There are a few faculty members who
question the rigor. And so it took some individual conversations with people" [IN6:7679]. Mike also characterized their department as hard-working, collaborative, and
interested in large-scale change: "Our faculty tend to work fairly hard here because we
tend to get rid of people who don't work hard. We're team-work oriented. We don't care
about being really good. We care about being big and really good. Scaling" [IN7:184186]. Given the culture of their department that supports innovation, is hard-working,
team-work oriented, and interested in large-scale change, Mike and Katie developed a 12hour orientation to train faculty to teach the new accelerated pre-stats course that between
20 and 25 part-time and full-time faculty attended.
95
Diane described the complete support provided to colleagues that characterizes
the culture of her department, a culture she describes as "getting on board:" She
described it in this way:
No opposition in anything, ever. … We get on board. If somebody has a project
that I'm not interested in, I still get on board. If they need something, I get on
board. Even if I disagree with something, I get on board. And we have nine
faculty - we've lost three over the past years. Even when it was nine and there
were more strong personalities in the department, we maintained that 'You get on
board.' Like if a vote is required in the department, before the vote was your
opportunity to disagree. Once it happens, we're all on board. … So I think we've
also benefitted from the lack of ego being implemented in the department. It's not
that we're not a bunch of egotists. Somehow we're able to check egos in the
department. [IN9:174-180; 193-195]
So while she may have colleagues who were not supportive of acceleration when she first
proposed it, Diane feels she has the complete support of her department for her work
based on the department value that every "get on board."
Study participants identified a variety of strategies that they used to engage their
colleagues in their acceleration efforts. Some were formal, such as departmental
meetings, orientation, and sharing college success data. Others were informal, such as
one-on-one sharing of successes and challenges. While some chose to share their
96
colleges' data on lack of student success in the traditional developmental math sequence
to motivate colleagues to change, others avoided sharing this data with colleagues out of
concern that colleagues would feel their efforts were being "demeaned." Participants
chose their strategies based on knowledge of the departmental culture at their college,
choosing those strategies that would be more effective in the setting within which they
worked.
Engaging Institutional Support for Acceleration
Participants looked for allies throughout the campus and some felt that they were
able to establish collaborative relationships with institutional leadership. They
purposefully established these collaborative relationships by serving on key committees
at the college and by being persistent. These relationships helped them navigate the
policies and procedures of the institution to support their acceleration efforts. While
some participants did not feel strongly supported in their acceleration efforts by
institutional leadership, several were able to articulate a series of strategies that
institutional leadership could use to support their efforts.
One strategy study participants used to engage institutional leadership in their
acceleration work was to serve on key campus committees. In reflecting on his
involvement on committees, Tom noted, "At one point I was on 15 different committees
at the college and outside the college. So I was learning a lot about the system and other
systems, but that just helped me maneuver and change" [IN1:97-100]. In a similar way,
97
David noted his involvement in campus committees and said, "And then eventually, I sort
of positioned myself as somebody – what happened next was the head of Basic Skills
sent out an e-mail asking is anyone interested in this thing [a CAP acceleration
workshop]" [IN2:122-124]. Both Tom and David looked at their committee work
strategically. Tom felt what he learned from his committee work helped him "maneuver
and change" and David felt that being involved in campus committees "positioned
himself" to be sponsored by the Basic Skills committee to participate in the CAP
acceleration workshop.
Several study participants said that serving on key committees such as the
Academic Senate and Curriculum committees was helpful in forwarding their
acceleration work. They felt they sometimes were able get allies in these groups because
these groups often consisted of "non-math" colleagues. As David said,
"I had to go to the Curriculum Committee. The non-math people loved it because there's
nothing like a room full of humanities professors themselves who struggled with math to
be advocates of it [acceleration] and the articulation officer said this is where things are
going. So he was positive" [IN2:271-274]. Tom had a similar experience at his campus:
Our [Academic] Senate said, 'This is great. Grow it.' Bringing stuff to
Curriculum Committee – they're always for it. Literally the only faculty who
have questions are math. Because everyone else sees it. It's plain as day. It just –
it would be like having five levels of political science. Why would you want five
levels of political science if you didn't need it? [IN1:245-250]
98
Both David and Tom felt the institutional support they received from the Academic
Senate and Curriculum Committee was due, in part, to the lack of math faculty on these
committees. David believed the non-math faculty favored acceleration because they
themselves struggled with math, and Tom felt that the non-math faculty on these
committees had a viewpoint from outside the math curriculum that enabled them to see
the effectiveness of acceleration "plain as day."
Jack emphasized the important role the Academic Senate can play in institutional
change. In reflecting on his own work serving on the Academic Senate, Jack said, "I've
been working at College C in terms of change, institutional change, for a long time and
obviously that is really why I became Academic Senate President – to help foster some
change. And we succeeded in some important ways and we failed in some other ways"
[IN4:101-106]. David worked to get the support of the Academic Senate president at his
institution. "I also personally knew the Academic Senate President. And when I told him
about this and Emmy's thing, he said, 'I'd be in favor of supporting that as an experiment'"
[IN2:166-169]. Both Jack and David saw the Academic Senate as a key vehicle for
institutional change, and both saw the Academic Senate president as a person whose
support for a proposed institutional change was key.
Laura acknowledged that some level of administrative support was key at her
institution to garner the resources she needed to teach her accelerated pre-stats course. "I
think that the dean is making calls to other deans and we use the computer labs of the
engineering department and business department. Without their support, it's not like I
99
could get those. You need a dean to make that call" [IN3:100-104]. Laura used her dean
to get the computer lab resources she needed for her accelerated course and noted that
negotiation had to occur on an administrative level. She, as a faculty member, could not
call a dean from another academic area and negotiate use of computer lab facilities. She
needed her own dean to "make that call."
Another strategy used to get institutional support for acceleration was to focus on
the potential for acceleration to reduce the number of remedial sections offered by a
college. David described the importance the administration of his college placed on this
reduction in remedial courses in this way:
What I never knew about this process, which is key, is the role of administration.
To join Emmy's thing, the administration had to say, 'We will offer two sections
[of an accelerated pre-stats course].' That's when I expected I was going to get the
big push back. And then it was - oh my God - floodgates! 'We love this idea!'
From the administration. The administration liked the idea of reducing the
number of remedial courses. [IN2:210-216]
While he anticipated opposition, David found strong support from the administration of
his college because of the potential to reduce the number of remedial courses offered.
Two participants felt that the Chancellors of their districts were strong advocates
for faculty innovation, and they used this advocacy to forward their acceleration efforts.
In describing her chancellor's support of faculty innovation, Diane said:
100
When she learned I was interested in acceleration, she sold it to the Board. She
has carved out a niche to allow me to start this acceleration process. We have a
district-level once a semester meeting on innovations that are going on in the
district. It's a three- to four-hour meeting and she invests her time. We have to
bring things that are going on with our project, discuss our project, and then she
follows up and says, 'What do you need from me? What do you need to make this
happen? [IN9:212-219]
Diane took advantage of her chancellor's support of innovation by keeping the chancellor
informed of her project and her project needs. Mike said that his chancellor supports
innovation by giving recognition to innovation projects. In the opening of the semester
meetings, while introducing the keynote speaker, Mike noted that "about a third of the
introduction was about Math 75 [the accelerated pre-stats course]. I had to stand up even
though I wasn't teaching it. I was a little embarrassed, but that's how she supports
innovation. … She gives us wide latitude and a lot of support" [IN7:159-161]. Support
for Mike's acceleration work also included some financial support for conference
attendance and stipends for curriculum development. However, Mike notes that the
monetary supports are minimal and that that the motivation for this work is primarily
intrinsic: "This sort of innovation is mostly intrinsic. There's no way you can pay Katie
for all the hours she's put in. There's simply no way. You have to go for the intrinsic
motivation. And that's sort of the rule in creative endeavors" [IN7:168-171]. Both
Diane and Mike take advantage of their chancellors' support of faculty innovation by
101
having the chancellors advocate for their acceleration with the Board and the college
community and also by garnering modest amounts of money to support the development
of the acceleration program.
While participants were able to articulate strategies for engaging administration in
their acceleration efforts such as serving on key college-wide committees, several also
expressed their frustration at the difficulty in obtaining institutional support for their
efforts. Jack believes that institutional leadership at his college often fails to collaborate
with faculty in ways that would promote innovation such as acceleration:
So you don't get anything for it. You don't get any status for it. You don't get any
money for it. And you work harder. What's the incentive? Unless you have it
intrinsically, then you don't get it. On the other hand, what do you get more for?
Teaching another class gives you more money. Or doing more work for the
department – you can get grants for that. This doesn't qualify for any of those
things, so it's essentially disincentivized. Plus the sort of political costs is a
disincentive. [IN4:174-181]
As Mike stated, motivation for innovation must be intrinsic rather than monetary. Jack,
however, notes that certain activities at his college are rewarded financially, such as
teaching another class. He believes that the lack of any kind of monetary reward for
innovation such as acceleration, the lack of status, and the "political costs" make faculty
less likely to be involved at his institution. While Mike's institution does give status, in
102
the form of public recognition from the chancellor, and modest monetary stipends for
curriculum development, Jack's institution does not. Jack believes that if leadership at his
institution were to demonstrate support of faculty innovation more faculty might have an
incentive to participate in the acceleration work.
Emmy also noted that the institutional leadership at her institution also did not
collaborate with faculty in ways that promoted innovation; however, she had several
suggestions for ways that the leadership could support faculty in adopting innovations
such as acceleration:
I had all sorts of things that I thought, 'If the institution would only do these things
that aren't hard to do, this thing [acceleration] would take off. And some of the
things were really simple. Like at opening day, if the President would just
acknowledge that we were seeing improvements in student progress because we
had started really focused work on remedial students. We couldn't get him to do
that. Another idea my partner and I had was when we were doing assessment
before accreditation required it. So we said, 'Let's have celebrations where we
have a half day where people can come and present and talk about this great
assessment they're doing in the classroom and the improvements they're making.
Even just small celebratory things that could be supported by the college that
would start to create a culture of improvement. And they were things that I
thought weren't hard to do. But it was very hard to get the administration to do
small things that would support those initiatives. And so I'm not saying it's
103
always top-down, but you have about 1/3 of your faculty who are very open to
innovating and 1/3 will do it if administration values it. And they don't even have
to give monetary rewards to anything. Just kudos. I think the middle 1/3 is very
willing to be moved by 'Oh, our administration values this' or 'This is a college
value. I'm willing to do it because I'm part of the college.' [N5:203-223]
While Jack noted the lack of financial incentives for faculty pursuing innovation such as
acceleration, Emmy believes that non-monetary incentives would be effective in
promoting innovation. These incentives would be for the administration to celebrate
innovation and to make innovation a core value of the college and to communicate that
core value to the faculty.
Summary of the Findings
The research questions in this study focused on developing an understanding of
the personal and institutional factors that promote the adoption of acceleration among
community college mathematics faculty. The institutional factors were separated into
two categories: factors at the departmental level and factors involving the institution as a
whole. Interviews of mathematics faculty piloting acceleration at six California
community colleges were analyzed to develop a deeper understanding of these personal,
departmental, and institutional factors.
104
An analysis of personal characteristics found that study participants came from
diverse educational and professional backgrounds. While they have degrees in
mathematics, they also have significant undergraduate and graduate studies in fields in
other than mathematics. They also have diversity in their professional experiences, with
a significant number having experience in professions other than community college
mathematics teaching. In addition to community college teaching, several have
experience teaching mathematics at other educational levels as well. Study participants
had similar approaches to the mathematics discipline. For example, they value a
contextual approach in the study of mathematics. They also see the mathematics
curriculum as evolving, and they question the value of having only one pathway through
the mathematics curriculum for community college students. Study participants also
value a personal connection with their students and are motivated to engage in their
acceleration work by issues of student equity. As educators, they actively sought out
teaching as a profession, often after starting their careers in other professions or teaching
at other levels. They demonstrate self-reflection and growth in their own teaching
practice and take personal responsibility for student success. A final personal factor
found in the analysis of interview data is the value of participating in the California
Acceleration Project community of practice. They value Emmy, who started the
community of practice, as a catalyst and role model, and they also give importance to the
connections with colleagues from other campuses through the community of practice.
105
Study participants also try to engage their departmental colleagues in their
acceleration work through a variety of strategies. These strategies include developing a
positive reputation for high-quality work, sharing their acceleration experiences in formal
and informal settings, providing college data on student success in the traditional
developmental math sequence and in the accelerated class, and intentional hiring of new
colleagues who would be interested in acceleration work. While the strategies were
different at various campuses, all are based on an awareness of the specific departmental
culture at each site.
The primary strategy study participants use to obtain support for acceleration
efforts at the institutional level is to work closely with key college-wide committees, such
as the Academic Senate and the Curriculum Committee. Only some participants felt that
their institutional leadership fully supports faculty innovation efforts. In these cases,
faculty worked with leadership by keeping them informed of their efforts and asking for
any monetary or other support they needed for their projects. Participants who felt that
their institutional leadership did not support faculty innovation had a variety of ideas for
supporting faculty innovation that did not involve fiscal resources, such as celebrating
innovation, making innovation a core value of the college and communicating that core
value to the faculty.
106
Chapter 5: Conclusions and Implications
Preliminary studies indicate that acceleration may be an effective practice in
helping transition under-prepared students from basic skills remediation to college-level
coursework in mathematics (Hayward and Willett, 2014; Mery, 2011; Stother, Van
Campen, and Gronow, 2013). In particular, research indicates that acceleration may be
effective in addressing the achievement gap (Hayward and Willett, 2014). However,
putting good education ideas such as acceleration into practice on a large scale is a
complex practice (Fullan, 2000). Ball (2012) refers to this as the "knowing-doing" gap in
education: Research on effective instructional practices does not necessarily advance
their implementation in the classroom.
One purpose of this study was to learn more about how to bridge this "knowingdoing" gap. Specifically, this study aimed to develop an understanding of the personal
and institutional factors that promote the adoption of acceleration among community
college mathematics faculty. Interview data from nine community college mathematics
faculty members who were among the first adopters of acceleration in the state were
analyzed for this study.
This study addressed three research questions:
(1)
What are the personal factors that promote adoption of acceleration among
community college mathematics faculty?
107
(2)
How do individual faculty members build collaborative relationships with
departmental colleagues to develop and implement acceleration projects?
(3)
How does institutional leadership support acceleration projects?
The conceptual framework I used for this study is that the adoption of acceleration among
community college mathematics faculty is influenced by three components: personal
factors of the individual faculty, institutional factors, and the support of a community of
practice. The interplay of these three key components influences the degree to which
acceleration will be successfully adopted at an institution. Analysis of the data confirmed
that each of these components was critical in the adoption of acceleration among study
participants.
This chapter presents a discussion of the study findings. Recommendations for
institutional leaders and faculty interested in promoting the adoption of acceleration in
their local settings based on these findings are discussed. Study limitations and
suggestions for further research are also included.
The Findings
Personal Factors Promoting the Adoption of Acceleration
Two frameworks that can be used to study the adoption of innovations are Rogers'
Diffusions of Innovations (2003) and the Concerns Based Adoption Model (CBAM)
(Hall, Wallace and Dossett, 1979). Rogers' (2003) description of early adopters matched
108
well with the personal characteristics of the study participants. In particular, Rogers
noted that early adopters tend to be empathetic, have a more favorable attitude toward
change, have more social participation and, in particular, have more contact with change
agents. Study participants did not seem to follow the stages of concern predicted by the
Concerns Based Adoption Model (Hall, Wallace and Dossett, 1973). One unanticipated
finding was the diversity of backgrounds of the study participants. In her study of
innovative community college faculty in Washington, Asera (2013) found that two-thirds
of the nine faculty studied had taught at pre-collegiate levels and had formal training in
pedagogy. Similar diversity in teaching experience was found in this study; however,
participants in this study also had diversity in academic backgrounds and in career paths.
Eight out of the nine participants had extensive academic study in fields other than
mathematics, and six out of the nine participants had previous careers in fields other than
teaching. Research has shown that belief about subject matter is key to individuals'
choice of involvement in innovative teaching practices (Major, 2002; Major & Palmer,
2006; Speer, 2008). It may be that this diversity in educational and career backgrounds
enhanced the ability of the study participants to view the mathematics curriculum as
evolving, enabling them to investigate alternatives to the traditional algebra-based
developmental math sequence such as acceleration.
Study participants also demonstrated highly developed pedagogical content
knowledge that aligned with research on four-year university professors by FernandezBalboa and Stiehls (1999). Specifically, participants demonstrated 1) a belief that subject
109
matter is not a static body of knowledge but constantly evolving and being re-created, 2)
a belief in the importance of knowing students both as people and as learners, 3) an effort
to create a positive learning environment and to use a variety of delivery strategies that
focused on connecting student with the subject matter and the real world, 4) an awareness
of contextual barriers to student learning, and 5) a knowledge of one's own purpose as a
teacher to use the subject matter to enhance students' lives.
Study participants noted that participating in the California Acceleration Project
(CAP) community of practice was key to the success of their acceleration work. The
community of practice enabled them to develop and share materials and to make
connections with like-minded colleagues throughout the community college system. The
interview data support the description of a community of practice as a place where
participants can hold each other accountable to a joint enterprise, develop a shared
repertoire of communal resources, and develop a sense of mutuality and trust where
participants can give and receive help (Wenger, 2000). Kezar (2011) notes that
innovations scale up best when innovators at local settings are connected with a network,
such as the CAP community of practice.
Strategies to Engage Departmental Colleagues and Institutional Leaders
The strategies that study participants used to engage their department colleagues
in their acceleration efforts varied by institution. Strategies included establishing a
positive reputation among colleagues, sharing acceleration experiences in formal and
110
informal settings, and providing reciprocal support for colleagues' projects. While the
specific strategies varied, all participants based their strategies on the unique
departmental culture of their institution.
To engage institutional leaders in their acceleration work, study participants
established collaborative relationships by serving on key campus committees such as the
Academic Senate and Curriculum Committee. Some participants felt that their
acceleration work was supported and valued by institutional leadership; others did not.
Those who felt supported noted that institutional leaders helped them gain access to
resources and publicly acknowledged their acceleration work. Those who did not feel
supported by institutional leadership were able to articulate ways in which institutional
leadership could show support for their efforts, such as by promoting instructional
improvement as a core institutional value. Research shows that adoption of innovation
by faculty is influenced by institutional values, beliefs and norms and that faculty
perception that administrative leadership supports and encourages them to try new things
is important in the initial decision to innovate and in the spread of the innovation
(Hannan, English & Silver, 1999; Major, 2002; Major & Palmer, 2006). Thus,
identifying ways in which institutional leaders can support these innovative efforts is key
to promoting the spread of acceleration throughout the community college system.
111
Implications and Recommendations
As shown in Chapter One, the current traditional community college
developmental math sequence fails to successfully transition students to college-level
coursework. It also increases the racial stratification in math skill acquisition for AfricanAmerican and Latino students (Cullinane & Treisman, 2010). Preliminary research
indicates that acceleration may be an effective strategy for improving student completion
rates and for promoting education equity (Hayward and Willett, 2014). However, if this
promising practice is to affect students on a system-wide basis, more community college
mathematics faculty will have to choose to adopt this accelerated approach.
Based on an analysis of interview data from mathematics faculty currently
implementing acceleration, this study provides recommendations for institutional leaders
and mathematics faculty interested in promoting acceleration on their campuses.
Recommendations for Institutional Leaders to Promote Acceleration
1. Provide on-going professional development opportunities for faculty to develop
their pedagogical content knowledge, especially new faculty members. Study
participants all exhibited highly developed pedagogical content knowledge.
Research indicates that pedagogical content knowledge plays a key role in faculty
adoption of innovation (Shulman, 1998; Fernandez-Balboa and Stiehl, 1995).
2. Incentivize innovation by providing both tangible and intangible support. In
particular, provide incentives for faculty to develop accelerated math curriculum
using the California Acceleration Project design principles. Studies indicate that
112
institutional support is a key factor in the initial decision of faculty to adopt an
innovation (Walczyk, Ramsey and Zha, 2007; Major and Palmer, 2006).
Tangible support includes stipends for curriculum development and professional
development training. Other tangible incentives might include adding
participation in innovation as part of the tenure process. Intangible support
includes promoting innovation and student success as core institutional values in
college vision and mission statements as well as college goals, and publicly
acknowledging faculty who are working on projects to improve student success,
such as acceleration.
3. Provide data on local student progression through the mathematics curriculum to
mathematics faculty on a regular basis. In this study, participants were
motivated to pursue acceleration by Basic Skills Cohort Tracker data on the lack
of student progression through the developmental mathematics sequence. In
particular, this data highlighted the need to shorten the length of the
developmental sequence in order to improve student outcomes. By providing data
on local student progression through the mathematics curriculum to faculty using
the Basic Skills Cohort Tracker, institutional leaders can highlight the magnitude
of the progression problem at their campuses and encourage the development of
innovations to address this problem.
4. Increase the number of sections of pre-stats courses at campuses that have
adopted this accelerated curriculum. By increasing the number of sections
113
allocated to pre-stats courses, more students will have access to the accelerated
curriculum and more faculty will have the opportunity to become involved with
this innovative approach.
5. Make development of an accelerated mathematics pathway a key activity for
faculty in institutional planning documents, such as the Student Equity Plan and
the Educational Master Plan. Research indicates that acceleration is effective in
improving student completion of transfer-level mathematics courses and, in
particular, may be effective in addressing the achievement gap (Hayward and
Willett, 2014; Strothers, Van Campen and Grunnow, 2013). Acceleration and
other forms of innovation could be a key activity in institutional plans designed to
promote improved outcomes and equity for students.
6. Consider applicants with diverse educational and professional backgrounds in
the hiring process. In addition to meeting the minimum educational qualifications
for community college math instructors, the study participants had extensive
study in other academic fields and many had had careers in fields other than
teaching. This diversity in backgrounds may help faculty to be open to new
approaches to the mathematics discipline.
Recommendations for Mathematics Faculty Interested in Promoting Acceleration
1. Look for allies within the department and in the college-wide community. All of
the study participants saw the value of having at least one colleague to collaborate
114
with within their departments. Seeking out allies provided study participants with
support for broad support for their acceleration efforts and assisted in the
curriculum development and approval processes.
2. Enlist the help of the Academic Senate and Curriculum Committee members in
promoting innovations like acceleration. Some study participants found that their
strongest support was from the "non-math" faculty who serve on these
committees that approve new curriculum to be offered, such as the accelerated
pre-stats curriculum.
3. Start or join a community of practice focused on developing pedagogical content
knowledge. Study participants felt that their participation in the CAP community
of practice was invaluable in their acceleration work. The community of practice
provided support for developing their pedagogical expertise and curricular
materials needed to implement the accelerated course.
4. Develop an understanding of departmental and institutional culture and use this
knowledge to inform strategies for engaging colleagues in acceleration efforts.
The department and institutional cultures of the study participants' colleges
varied, yet all were able to describe the cultures in which they worked and
tailored their implementation strategies to their settings.
5. Take an active part in the hiring process and hire colleagues with interest in
developmental student success. While this strategy is a long-term process,
intentionally hiring colleagues who are open to innovations like acceleration to
115
promote student success can transform the culture of a department, making
innovation more likely to occur.
Current Challenges to Scaling Up Acceleration
While the findings of this study provide recommendations for promoting
acceleration at community colleges, leadership at a system-wide level is needed if
acceleration is going to scale up to provide this alternative to the traditional
developmental math sequence for students at all 112 community colleges in California.
Currently the University of California (UC) system requires that all college-level math
courses must include intermediate algebra or its equivalent as a pre-requisite. Recently, a
UC faculty committee, the Board of Admissions and Relations with Schools, affirmed
this position, stating that incoming transfer students must complete the same math
sequence as recent high school graduates enrolling as freshmen, i.e., the completion of
intermediate algebra (Burdman, 2013). The effect of this policy on mathematics faculty
interest in acceleration has been, according to one of the co-founders of the California
Acceleration Project, "chilling" (Fain, 2013). This "chilling effect" can be seen in
recruitment efforts for the 2014-15 CAP mathematics cohort. Because the number of
new colleges who expressed interest in participating in CAP was fewer than anticipated,
colleges who have previously participated and who already have accelerated programs
are being encouraged to send a second set of faculty for acceleration training. Thus,
acceleration is not spreading as quickly as it could. Faculty are reluctant to pilot or
expand these promising acceleration programs because of fear that their statistics courses
116
will lose their transfer articulation with the UC system since these students are no longer
taking a traditional intermediate algebra course prior to taking statistics. Advocating for
changes to this policy effectively is not something that individual faculty or institutional
leaders can do on their own. Changing this policy will require leadership on a systemwide basis from institutional leaders from both the community college and UC systems.
Study Limitations
This study focused on the adoption of a specific innovation, acceleration, among a
particular population, community college mathematics faculty. Thus, the personal factors
of the study participants and the strategies they used to engage colleagues and
institutional leaders in their acceleration efforts may not apply to other innovations or
among other populations.
This study also focused on the first CAP cohort, or those among the first
community college math faculty to adopt acceleration in their local settings. The
experiences of subsequent CAP cohorts may differ from those in this initial group.
Additionally, participants for this study represent five of the eight community colleges
that participated in the first CAP cohort. It may be that the experiences of faculty from
the three colleges not included in this study diverge from the data presented here.
117
Recommendations for Further Study
This study focused primarily on faculty who participated in the first California
Acceleration Program (CAP) community of practice. These participants were the first in
the state to respond to an invitation to participate in this acceleration work. In the 201314 academic year, a third cohort is participating in the CAP community of practice.
Further research is needed to investigate the degree to which the personal factors of
successive CAP cohorts are similar to the subjects of this study. It may be that while the
stages of concern outlined in the Concerns Based Adoption Model (Hall, Wallace and
Dossett, 1973) did not model the experience of the study participants, this model may be
more effective in describing the experience of later CAP cohorts who may have more
concerns about adopting acceleration than those in the first cohort. In addition, further
study is needed to examine the extent to which the study participants have been able to
continue to engage their departmental colleagues to scale acceleration within their own
institutions.
Conclusion
Preliminary research indicates that acceleration may be an effective strategy in
promoting success and educational equity for California community college students.
However, putting good educational ideas into practice on a large scale is a complex
118
practice (Fullan, 2000). This study tells the story of those early innovators who were
among the first in the state to develop acceleration projects at their institutions. By
learning about their personal backgrounds and the strategies they used to engage their
colleagues and institutional leaders in their efforts, this study can provide insight into
how faculty and institutional leaders can promote the adoption of acceleration at their
institutions.
Research indicates that California community colleges are failing to assist
students in attaining the basic skills they need to complete college-level course work
(Bahr, 2010). While the majority of community college students will begin in the
developmental math sequence, less than 25% of them will go on to complete a collegelevel mathematics course within six years of enrollment (Bahr, 2010). The outcomes for
Latino and African-American students are even worse, with only 20% of Latino students
and 11% of African-American students completing a college-level mathematics course
within six years of enrollment (Bahr, 2010). A recent study of student outcomes for the
first CAP acceleration adopters found that students' odds of completing a college-level
mathematics course were 4.5 times greater for students in the accelerated pre-stats course
than for students in the traditional developmental math sequence (Hayward and Willett,
2014). This positive effect held for students of all ethnicities, and research also indicated
that the CAP acceleration design principles may also be effective in addressing the
achievement gap (Hayward and Willett, 2014). Given the numbers of students negatively
impacted by the current developmental math sequence and the potential of acceleration to
119
address this problem, it is vital that more community colleges investigate this promising
approach. This research indicates that both faculty and institutional leadership play an
important role in promoting the adoption of acceleration. In doing so, educators can
promote success for majority of California community college students who begin their
studies in the developmental mathematics sequence.
120
References
Asera, R. (2013). Unpacking professional development: Mathematics faculty reflections
on re-thinking pre-college math. Washington State Board for Community and
Technical Colleges. Retrieved from www.transitionmathproject.org
Bahr, P. R. (2010). Preparing the underprepared: An analysis of racial disparities in
postsecondary mathematics remediation. Journal of Higher Education, 81(2),
209–237.
Bailey, T., Jeong, D. W., & Cho, S.-W. (2010). Referral, enrollment, and completion in
developmental education sequences in community colleges. Economics of
Education Review, 29(2), 255–270.
Ball, A. F. (2012). To know is not enough: Knowledge, power, and the zone of
generativity. Educational Researcher, 41.
Blanton, M. L., & Stylianou, D. A. (2009). Interpreting a community of practice
perspective in discipline-specific professional development in higher education.
Innovative Higher Education, 34(2), 79–92.
Bold, C. (2012). Using narrative in research. London, UK: Sage.
121
Briggs, W. (2004). What mathematics should all college students know? In Current
practices in quantitative literacy. Mathematical Association of America.
Burdman, P. (2013). Changing the equations: How community colleges are re-thinking
college readiness in math (p. 24). Oakland, CA: LearningWorks.
Buss, R. R., Zambo, D., Painter, S. R., & Moore, D. W. (2013). Examining faculty
member changes in an innovative educational doctorate program. Innovative
Higher Education, 38(1), 59–74.
Christou, C., Eliophotou-Menon, M., & Philippou, G. (2004). Teachers’ concerns
regarding the adoption of a new matheamtics curriculum: An application of
CBAM. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 57(2), 157–176.
Cresswell, J. W. & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and Conducting Mixed
Methods Research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Cullinane, J., & Treisman, P. U. (2010). Improving developmental mathematics
education in community colleges: A prospectus and early progress report on the
Statway initiative. In What Policies and Practices Work for Students? Teachers
College, Columbia University: National Center for Postsecondary Research.
Dweck, C. S. (2008). Mindsets: How Praise Is Harming Youth and What Can Be Done
about It. School Library Media Activites Monthly, 24(5), 55–58.
122
Ellsworth, J. B., & ERIC Clearinghouse on Information and Technology, S., NY. (2000).
Surviving Change: A Survey of Educational Change Models. Retrieved from
http://0search.ebscohost.com.opac.sfsu.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,cookie
,url,uid&db=eric&AN=ED443417&site=ehost-live
Elmore, R. F. (1996). Getting to scale with good educational practice. Harvard
Educational Review, 66(1).
Fain, P. (2013, October 21). Faster math path. Inside Higher Ed.
Fernandez-Balboa, J. M., & Stiehl, J. (1995). The generic nature of pedagogical content
knowledge among college professors. Teaching and Teacher Education, 11(3),
293–306.
Freeman, M., Bell, A., Comerton-Forde, C., Pickering, J., & Blayney, P. (2007). Factors
affecting educational innovation with in class electronic response systems.
Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 23(2), 149–170.
Fullan, M. (2000). The return of large-scale reform. Journal of Educational Change, 1,
5–28.
Gallagher, T., Griffin, S., Parker, D., Kitchen, J., & Figg, C. (2011). Establishing and
sustaining teacher educator professional development in a self-study community
123
of practice: Pre-tenure teacher educators developing professionally. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 27(5), 880–890.
Good, C., Aronson, J., & Inzlicht, M. (2003). Improving adolescents’ standardized test
performance: An intervention to reduce the effects of stereotype threat. Journal of
Applied Developmental Psychology, 24, 645–662.
Grubb, W. N., Boner, E., Frankel, K., Parker, L., Patterson, D., Gabriner, R., … Policy
Analysis for California Education (PACE). (2011). Understanding the “crisis” in
basic skills: Framing the issues in community colleges. basic skills instruction in
california community colleges. working paper, number 1. Policy Analysis for
California Education, PACE. Retrieved from http://0search.ebscohost.com.opac.sfsu.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,cookie
,url,uid&db=eric&AN=ED523553&site=ehost-live
Hall, G. E. (2013). Evaluating change processes: Assessing extent of implementation
(constructs, methods and implications). Journal of Educational Administration,
51(3), 264–289.
Hall G. E., Wallace, R. D., Jr., & Dossett, W. A. (1973). A developmental
conceptualization of the adoption process within educational institutions.
Research and Development Center for Teacher Education, the University of
Texas
124
Hannan, A., English, S., & Silver, H. (1999). Why innovate? Some preliminary findings
from a research project on “innovations in teaching and learning in higher
education.” Studies in Higher Education, 24(3), 279–289.
Hayward, C., & Willett, T. (2014). Acceleration effects of curricular redesign in the
California Acceleration Project. Berkeley, CA: The Research and Planning
Group for California Community Colleges.
Hodara, Michelle. (2011). Reforming mathematics classroom pedagogy: Evidence-based
findings and recommendations for the developmental math classroom (No. 27)
(pp. 1–66). CCRC Community College Research Center: Teachers College,
Columbia University.
Kezar, A. (2011). What is the best way to achieve broader reach of improved practices in
higher education? Innovative Higher Education, 36(4), 235–247.
Krainer, K. (2003). Teams, communities and networks. Journal of Mathematics Teacher
Education, 6(2), 93–105.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation.
New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Liao, H.-A. (2005). Communication technology, student learning, and diffusion of
innovation. College Quarterly, 8(2). Retrieved from http://0-
125
search.ebscohost.com.opac.sfsu.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,cookie
,url,uid&db=eric&AN=EJ846491&site=ehost-live
Major, C. (2002). Problem-based learning in general education at Samford University: A
case study of changing faculty culture through targeted improvement efforts. The
Journal of General Education, 51(4), 235–256.
Major, C. H., & Palmer, B. (2006). Reshaping teaching and learning: The transformation
of faculty pedagogical content knowledge. Higher Education, 51(4), 619–647.
Mery, P. (2011). A mixed methods study of a statistics pathway for community college
students placed into developmental mathematics. Doctoral Dissertation, San
Francisco State University.
Roehrig, G. H., & Kruse, R. A. (2005). The role of teachers’ beliefs and knowledge in the
adoption of a reform-based curriculum. School Science and Mathematics, 105(8),
412–422.
Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of Innovations (5th ed.). New York: Free Press.
Russell, B. (2010). Minimum qualifications for faculty and administrators in California
community colleges. Sacramento, CA: Academic Senate for California
Community Colleges.
Seidman, I. (2006). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in
education and the social sciences. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
126
Sezer, R. (2010). Pulling out all the stops. Education, 130(3), 416–423.
Shor, I. (1992). Empowering education: Critical teaching for social change. Chicago, IL:
University Of Chicago Press.
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching.
Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
Shulman, L. S. (1998). Theory, practice, and the education of professionals. The
Elementary School Journal, 98(5), 511–526.
Soffer, T., Nachmais, R., & Ram, J. (2010). Diffusion of web supported instruction in
higher education - the case of Tel-Aviv University. Educational Technology &
Society, 13(3), 212–223.
Speer, N. M. (2008). Connecting beliefs and practices: A fine-grained analysis of a
college mathematics teacher’s collections of beliefs and their relationship to his
instructional practices. Cognition and Instruction, 26(2), 218–267.
Strothers, J., Van Campen, J., & Grunow, A. (2013). Community college pathways:
2011-2012 descriptive report. Stanford, CA: The Carnegie Foundation for the
Advancement of Teaching.
The Center for Student Success. (2007). Basic skills as a foundation for student success
in California community colleges. Sacramento, CA: Chancellor’s Office.
127
Tunks, J., & Weller, K. (2009). Changing practice, changing minds, from arithmetical to
algebraic thinking: An application of the Concerns-Based Adoption Model
(CBAM). Educational Studies in Mathematics, 72(2), 161–183.
Twombly, S., & Townsend, B. K. (2008). Community college faculty: What we know
and need to know. Community College Review, 36(1), 5–24.
Walczyk, J. J., Ramsey, L. L., & Zha, P. (2007). Obstacles to instructional innovation
according to college science and mathematics faculty. Journal of Research in
Science Teaching, 44(1), 85–106.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning as a social system. The Systems
Thinker, 9(5). Retrieved from http://www.ewenger.com/pub/index.htm
Wenger, E. (2000). Communities of practice and social learning systems. Organization,
7(2), 226–246. doi:10.1177/135050840072002
Yaeger, S., & Dweck, C. (2012). Mindsets that promote resilience: When students
believe that personal characteristics can be developed, 47(4), 302–314.
128
APPENDIX A: INTERVIEW QUESTIONS
0. (Background data) Tell me about your educational background and how you became
interested in community college teaching.
1. Tell me about how you became interested in the California Acceleration Project.
(Describe how you personally became interested in the California Acceleration Project.)
2. Tell me about the process you used to get other colleagues in the department
interested in CAP. How have you engaged your colleagues in your acceleration efforts?
3. Do you feel your college supports or encourages innovation? If so, in what ways?
4. What have you learned about teaching and learning through your participation in
CAP?
5. What effect has being part of the CAP "community of practice" had on you
personally and on your acceleration work?
6. How have you changed as a teacher through your participation in CAP? Do you find
that your teaching or pedagogy has changed in any of your other (non pre-stats) courses
as a result of your CAP experience?
7. Has your participation in CAP changed your view of your students? If so, in what
ways?
8. Has your participation in CAP changed your view of mathematics in any way?
Explain.
9. Do you belong to any professional associations, such as AMATYC or CMC? If so,
which ones?
10. How often do you attend professional development activities outside of your college?
11. Is there anything else you'd like to tell me about your CAP experience?
129
Text begins here.
130
Text begins here.
131
Text begins here.