Group items tagged

Policy brief from Institute for Higher Education Leadership & Policy outlining higher education policies in Florida that should be considered by California. Issues include standardized assessments and placement policies. Also comments on common course numbering/transfer policies and Florida's data system

This brief makes a case for using cohort and momentum point data, disaggregated by gender, ethnicity, and institution, to improve program practices and community college system policies in California. Findings indicate that too few students reach transfer, retention, and completion milestones, and that a large percentage of students do not always follow enrollment patterns or degree checkpoints, as intended by policy. The brief outlines three recommendations: improving campus data collection practices, creating accountability structures through new funding models and assessment policies, and using data to align institutional and system-level efforts (Institute for Higher Education Leadership & Policy at California State University Sacramento, October 2010).

This literature review identifies reoccurring themes found throughout the history of developmental education in American higher education; examines the ways developmental education programs have been conceived and understood as a policy issue; and looks to how individuals, systems and states have responded to the remedial education policy debate. The literature review was conducted as part of the Getting Past Go project. (Tara L. Parker, Leticia Tomas Bustillos, and Laurie B. Behringer, PrePARE, August 2010)

Resource shared at the GPG Workshop on Remedial Education in Nashville, TN on October 5-7, 2010

The study follows a cohort model and tracks the course-taking patterns of first-time community college students over a seven-year period. The data suggest that aspirations, age, ethnicity, and institutional factors affect students' completion of a developmental course sequence. After presenting the descriptive data, the authors outline five policy implications for their research. Three are particularly relevant to policy discussions we have had at Getting Past Go: using common assessments and early interventions to reduce the need for developmental education; identifying delays in course-taking to develop better-aligned support; and, addressing the issue of students not completing remediation from the lowest course levels.

The author describes the experiences of three states that reviewed their placement assessment policies. The report encourages states to consider college placement policies as part of a broader vision of college readiness. (Michael Lawrence Collins, Jobs for the Future, 2008)

It's Not About the Cut Score: Redesigning Placement Assessment Policy to Improve Student Success is an Achieving the Dream Community Colleges Count and Jobs for the Future Policy Brief written by Michael Lawrence Collins, program director for Jobs for the Future's Youth Transitions Cluster, July 2008.

Resource shared at the GPG Workshop on Remedial Education in Nashville, TN on October 5-7, 2010.

Joyce Foundation approach to systems change for state policy for ensuring that state postecondary, adult basic education, skills, and credentials needed to advance and succeed in our changing economy. Their approach: uses data to foster improvements;pursues policy changes to leverage improvements; engages the field to generate ideas for buy-in; and builds strategic communications to cultivate skakeholder support for systemic change.

Describes Getting Past Go's policy framework for how states can more effectively integrate reforms to remedial education policy into efforts to increase college attainment rates. The framework centers on four key policy levers: assessment and placement; data and reporting; delivery of instruction; accountability and continuous improvement; and funding. The report also summarizes the goals and activities of the GPG project. (Bruce Vandal, Education Commission of the States, May 2010)

Resource shared at the GPG Workshop on Remedial Education in Nashville, TN on October 5-7, 2010

Policy framework for the Getting Past Go initiative of the Education Commission of the States.

Setting Up Success in Developmental Education: How State Policy Can Help Community Colleges Improve Student Outcomes is an Achieving the Dream Community Colleges Count and Jobs for the Future Policy Brief written by Michael Lawrence Collins, program director at Jobs for the Future. June 2009

Document outlining state policy priorities for states participating in the developmental education initiative. Addresses, K-12 curricular alignment, funding, assessment and placement, data and performance measurement, academic support services

Provides an overview of the remedial education landscape, Getting Past Go project activities and workshop objectives and principles. The PowerPoint also discusses the four policy levers and related questions that are central to the GPG policy framework. (Bruce Vandal, Education Commission of the States, October 2010)

Resource shared at the GPG Workshop on Remedial Education in Nashville, TN on October 5-7, 2010

The Office of Research and Policy Analysis (RPA) is the research arm of the Board of Regents, analyzing higher education and related state and national policy issues and their impact on the University System of Georgia. Reports in this section analyze success of students in developmental education courses as a means for evaluating their "Learning Support" Programs

Examines developmental education best practices and policies within Massachusetts' 15 community colleges. It presents findings, recommendations and resources to assist the community colleges in improving the success of academically vulnerable students within and beyond developmental education. (Massachusetts Community Colleges Executive Office, June 2009)

Examines the current policy challenges that impede access to postsecondary education for adult students who require English language training, GED or Adult Basic Education training. The report offers several recommendations to improve adult basic education and track student results.(Julie Strawn, Center for Law and Social Policy, National Commission on Adult Literacy, 2007)

Examines the tradeoffs states encounter as they make state-level developmental education placement policies. The brief encourages policies to be combined with appropriate support services and interventions that enable students to succeed. It promotes a P-16 approach with multiple assessments of students and sound data collection and analysis. (Heath Prince, Jobs for the Future, 2005)

This issue brief describes how the 15 states participating in the Achieving the Dream project have concentrated their policy efforts on four key areas: preventative strategies, assessment and placement, implementation and evaluation of program innovation,

This policy brief looks at efforts in three community colleges, two of which are Achieving the Dream institutions, to revamp remedial math programming. It focuses on the ways in which state and system policies interact with institutional reform efforts -

Developmental Education Initiative Policy Framework for their states. Includes comprehensive framework emphasizing innovation, funding models, early assessment and interventions, benchmarks, performance funding, etc.

Chapter in Advances in Education in Diverse Communities: Research, Policy, and Praxis, Vol. 3, 1215-148. 2004 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

This analysis of data from the DEI Self-Assessment Tool covers policy changes between 2009 and 2010, the first year of the initiative. Includes summaries from Connecticut, Florida, North Carolina, Ohio, Virginia, and Texas. (Jobs for the Future, October 2011)

Impact evaluations are important because they provide evidence about what works and does not work. It looks at what caused the improvement, or lack there of. This article from the Center for Effective Philanthropy talks about evaluation from the policy, practice, as well as philanthropy perspective.