The Acce lera ted Lear ning Pro gram The Com mun ity C olle ge o f Balt imor e C ount y
why we developed ALP
what ALP is
results
costs
scaling up and replicating
A L P
The Accelerated Learning Project
RDG
051
RDG
052
MATH
081
MATH
082
MATH
083
ENGL
051
ENGL
052
ENG
101
ENG
102
CCBC’s Developmental Education Courses:
59%
A L P
The Accelerated Learning Project
took ENG 052 1988/1989 863 Passed ENG 052 490 57% never passed ENG 052 373 43% took ENG 101 355 41% took no more writing courses 135 16%
Students who took ENG 052 for the first time in 1988/1989
A, B, or C in 101 287 33% D, F, or W in 101 68 8%
why we developed ALP
what ALP is
results
costs
scaling up and replicating
A L P
The Accelerated Learning Project
A L P
The Accelerated Learning Project
ENG 052
semester 1
Traditional ENG 052
ENG 101
A L P
The Accelerated Learning Project
ENG 101
semester 1
ENG 052
semester 1
ALP
What do we do in the ALP 052 class?
The instructor for the ALP 052 section has one goal: to do everything possible to maximize the ALP students’ likelihood of success in the 101 class.
answering questions left over from the 101 class
lots of writing, mostly of short papers that reinforce what has been iiiidiscussed in the 101 class or prepare for what will be discussed in iiiithe 101 class
discussing ideas for the next essay in 101
reviewing drafts of essays the students are working on for 101 working on grammar and punctuation
discussing how to succeed as a college student
A L P
The Accelerated Learning Project
Outline of Today’s Presentation
why we developed ALP
what ALP is
results
costs
Community College of Baltimore County
Accelerated Learning Program (ALP)
Preliminary Analysis of Effectiveness
•
Nikki Edgecombe and Davis Jenkins
•
Community College Research Center
results for students who took ALP in fall 07, spring 08, and fall 08 as of June 2010 results for students who took traditional developmental writing in fall 07, spring 08, and fall 08 as of June 2010 passed ENG 052 85 82% didn’t pass ENG 052 19 18% took ENG 052 Fa07-Fa08 104 100% took ENG 101 104 100% took no more writing courses 0 0%
results for students who took ALP in fall 07, spring 08, and fall 08 as of June 2010 results for students who took traditional developmental writing in fall 07, spring 08, and fall 08 as of June 2010 passed ENG 052 85 82% didn’t pass ENG 052 19 18% took ENG 052 Fa07-Fa08 104 100% took ENG 101 104 100% took no more writing courses 0 0% passed ENG 101 78 75% didn’t pass ENG 101 26 25% 46% 18%
A L P
The Accelerated Learning Project
ALP Success Rates, 2007-09
traditional 052 fall 06 ALP fall 07 ALP spring 08 ALP fall 08 ALP spring 09 48% pass ENGL 101 69% pass ENGL 101 58% pass ENGL 101 74% pass ENGL 101 70% pass ENGL 101 75% 50% 25% ALP fall 09 71% pass ENGL 101 68% pass ENGL 101 ALP spring 10
results for students who took ALP in fall 07, spring 08, and fall 08 as of June 2010 results for students who took traditional developmental writing in fall 07, spring 08, and fall 08 as of June 2010 passed ENG 052 85 82% didn’t pass ENG 052 19 18% took ENG 052 Fa07-Fa08 104 100% took ENG 101 104 100% took no more writing courses 0 0% passed ENG 101 78 75% didn’t pass ENG 101 26 25%
passed ENG 052 85 82% didn’t pass ENG 052 19 18% took ENG 052 Fa07-Fa08 104 100% took ENG 101 104 100% took no more writing courses 0 0% passed ENG 101 78 75% didn’t pass ENG 101 26 25% took ENG 102 154 15% haven’t taken ENG 102 125 12% took 102 187 36% haven’t taken ENG 102 178 34% passed ENG 102 107 10% F, I, or W in ENG102 47 5% passed ENG 102 127 24% have not passed 102 60 11%
10%
A L P
The Accelerated Learning Project
Longitudinal Studies: degree completion
15% 5%
15%
7%
traditional
ENGL 052
fall 06
ALP
2007-8
A L P
The Accelerated Learning Project
Outline of Today’s Presentation
why we developed ALP
what ALP is
results
costs
A L P
The Accelerated Learning Project
1000 students
A L P
The Accelerated Learning Project
Costs Under Traditional Model
A L P
The Accelerated Learning Project
50 sections of Dev Eng
X 3 faculty credit hours/section = 150 faculty credit hours
A L P
The Accelerated Learning Project
54% of traditional developmental students take 101
540 students ÷ 20 students/section = 27 sections
Costs for ENG 101 Under Traditional Model
.54 X 1000 = 540 students
27 sections X 3 faculty credit hours/section = 81 faculty credit hours
A L P
The Accelerated Learning Project
Costs Under Traditional Model
total for developmental course =
total for 101= 81 faculty credit hours 150 faculty credit hours
A L P
The Accelerated Learning Project
1000 students
A L P
The Accelerated Learning Project
Costs Under ALP
A L P
The Accelerated Learning Project
125 sections of ALP Dev Eng
Costs Under ALP Model
X 2 faculty credit hours/section = 250 faculty credit hours
A L P
The Accelerated Learning Project
100% of ALP developmental students take ENG 101
1000 students ÷ 20 students/section = 50 sections
Costs for FYC Under ALP Model
1.00 X 1000 = 1000 students
50 sections X 3 faculty credit hours/section = 150 faculty credit hours
A L P
The Accelerated Learning Project
Comparison of Costs for 1000 Students
Traditional ALP
DEV: 50 sect X 3 cr/sect = 150 fch 101: 18.5 sect X 3 cr/sect = 81 fch
TOTAL: 231 fch
DEV: 125 sect X 2 cr/sect = 250 fch 101: 50 sect X 3 cr/sect = 150 fch
A L P
The Accelerated Learning Project
traditional factory widgets per year cost per widget cost/year to operate $231,000 $400,000 40,000 75,000 $5.78 $5.33 ALP factory
An Analogy
A L P
The Accelerated Learning Project
traditional factory
231 fch
400 fch
students per year cost per student cost per year
students per
year cost per student cost per year
400 (40%) of 1000 students pass FYC 750 (75%) of 1000 students pass FYC .578 fch per passing student .533 fch per passing student ALP factory
An Analogy
A L P
The Accelerated Learning Project
traditional factory
231 fch
400 fch
students per year cost per student cost per year
students per
semester cost per student cost per year
400 (40%) of 1000 students pass FYC 750 (75%) of 1000 students pass FYC .578 fch per passing student .533 fch per passing student ALP factory
An Analogy
Costs to the Institution
1.5M .5 Mtraditional
cost = $231,000 1.5M .5 MALP
dev: 125 sections X $2000 = $250,000 101: 50 sections X $3000 = $150,000 total = $400,000 dev: 50 sections X $3000 = $150,000 101: 27 sections X $3000 = $81,000 total = $231,000 cost = $400,000total = $1,014,000 dev tuition: 1000 X $300 = $300,000 101 FTE: 540 X $300 = $162,000 102 tuition: 150 X $300 = $45,000 dev FTE: 1000 X $300 = $300,000 101 tuition: 540 X $300 = $162,000 102 FTE: 150 X $300 = $45,000 dev FTE: 1000 X $300 = $300,000 101 FTE: 1000 X $300 = $300,000 102 tuition: 360 X $300 = $108,000 total = $1,416,000 dev tuition: 1000 X $300 = $300,000 101 tuition: 1000 X $300 = $300,000 102 FTE: 360 X $300 = $108,000
Revenue Generated for the Institution
traditional
ALP
1.0 M .5 M 1.5M 1.0 M .5 M 1.5M revenue = $1,014,000 cost = $231,000 total = $1,416,000 $783,000 $1,016,000 cost = $400,000Net Revenue Generated for the Institution
$1,016,000
$783,000
$233,000
net revenue from ALP
net revenue from traditional
ALP Summary
ALP increases the success rate by 75 per cent. cuts the attrition rate in half
does it in half the time
at slightly less cost per successful student
Based on four semesters of data and 227 students, compared to traditional developmental writing:
A L P
The Accelerated Learning Project
Outline of Today’s Presentation
why we developed ALP
what ALP is
results
costs
2009-10 2007-08 2008-09 160 students 20 sections 640 students 80 sections 2010-11 320 students 40 sections 80 students 2011-12 1280 students 160 sections
The New
Developmental Education
Traditional Model
•
Bottom up curriculum
•
Minimal expectations
•
Long pipeline to credit
courses
•
Addresses discipline skills
•
No discrete cohorts
•
Teacher‐centered
•
Remediation as a hurdle
before credit courses
•
Remedial course
completion is goal
Acceleration Model
•
Top down curriculum
•
High expectations
•
Shortened pipeline to credit
courses
•
Addresses whole learner
•
Cohort ‐
based
•
Student‐centered
•
Remediation as concurrent
support for credit courses
•
Credit and degree attainment
goal
Other pilots in Acceleration
•
Developmental Math‐
Blended Courses
–
Combinations of Introductory and Intermediate
Algebra
–
Combinations of Intermediate and College Algebra
– 29 sections, fall 2011
•
Developmental Reading
–
Learning Communities
– WRAP
–
Other pilots
1. Blue Ridge Technical and Community College (WV) 2. Community College of District of Columbia (DC) 3. Community College of Vermont (VT)
4. Cuyahoga Community College (OH) 5. El Paso Community College (TX)
6. Gateway Technical and Community College (KY) 7. The Graduate School (DC)
8. Lone Star College Tomball (TX)
9. Middlesex Community College (MA)
10. Missouri State University-West Plains (MO) 11. North Central State College (OH)
12. Northampton Community College (PA) 13. Northeast Lakeview College (TX)
14. Patrick Henry Community College (VA)
15. Springfield Technical and Community College (MA) 16. SUNY Adirondack (NY)
17. Valley Forge Military College (PA)
18. West Kentucky Technical and Community College (KY) 19. West Virginia Northern Community College (WV)
20. York Technical College (SC)
Institutions currently offering sections of ALP:
A project in which CCBC will assist two other colleges, LaGuardia
Community College and Patrick Henry Community College, to pilot and then to scale up ALP.
In the second year, two additional colleges will join the project. A major focus of this project is faculty development.
The CCRC/Hewlett Grant
Nine faculty members on one credit re-assigned time to develop a document and other materials to provide guidance to ALP faculty, especially those new to the program.
These materials will be available to other schools using a software platform.
The ALP Inquiry Network
3rd National Conference on
Acceleration in Developmental Education
June 16th to 17th 2011: two days of presentations on acceleration in
reading, math, and writing.
June 15th 2011: Pre-Conference Workshops on acceleration options in math and on starting up ALP at your school.
Plenary speakers:
Uri Treisman (University of Texas at Austin). Director of the
Charles A. Dana Center and Senior Partner at the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Professor
Treisman will discuss the innovative approach to developmental math known as StatWay.
W. Norton Grubb (University of California, Berkeley). David
Gardner Chair in Higher Education at the School of Education and author of Honored But Invisible: An Inside Look at Teaching in Community Colleges.
The Acce lera ted Lear ning Pro gram The Com mun ity Co llege of B altim ore Coun ty
