On February 28th, the Community
College Research Center (CCRC) at Columbia University released two studies
focused on the use of standardized tests to determine placement in
developmental education at community colleges which were widely publicized in
the New York Times and other media outlets.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/29/education/colleges-misassign-many-to-remedial-classes-studies-find.html?_r=1&emc=eta1
Using data from a large urban
community college system, the first study found misplacement rates of 24 to 33
percent using COMPASS. The second study,
using data from a statewide community college system, found that three out of
every ten students may be incorrectly assigned to either developmental or
college-level courses using COMPASS and ACCUPLACER. Both studies found that in general placement
tests are more accurate for math than for English. Both studies also indicated that placing
students based on high school GPA would yield a lower percentage of severe
placement errors than the tests. The
researchers stopped short of recommending that colleges discontinue using the tests
but did suggest alternatives that could yield better results.
In fall 2009, the most recent year
for which data is available, an average of 62% of incoming students placed into
one or more developmental education courses at Michigan’s community colleges (http://www.michigan.gov/midashboard/0,4624,7-256-58084---,00.html).
This rate includes both recent high school graduates and adults entering
college for the first time. Despite the
stated intent of developmental education to prepare students with weak academic
skills to succeed in college, recent research has demonstrated that students
assigned to these courses frequently fail to persist and have lower levels of
overall educational attainment than students who begin at college level. These two new CCRC studies now strongly
suggest that the most commonly used placement tests may not be accurate for
significant numbers of students. Based
on this research, some policy and practice recommendations for consideration by
Michigan community colleges include:
1)
Collaborate
with K-12 partners to share information about college readiness standards and
how both high schools and colleges work with students to help them meet those
expectations. Implementation of the
Common Core Standards and more rigorous proficiency scores on the MEAP and MME
demonstrate commitment on the part of the Michigan Department of Education to
graduate more students who are college and career ready. The MCCA and the principals’’ association
(MASSP) have recently agreed on common college readiness benchmarks based on a
range of ACT scores in Mathematics, Reading and Writing that will allow
students to bypass placement into developmental education. Additionally,
partnerships to increase dual enrollment, cross-sector faculty and
administrator dialogues and more effective use of information from assessment
tools including EXPLORE, PLAN and ACT can help reduce the numbers of recent graduates
who are placed in developmental education.
2)
Examine
the conditions under which placement tests are administered on campus. Colleges advise students to complete
placement tests prior to meeting with an advisor for their initial
registration. Since community college
students typically have limited time and access to transportation, many
students try to complete testing, advising and registration within one campus
visit, often immediately before the semester begins. Providing advising and access to test
preparation resources well in advance of having students take the tests as some
colleges in Michigan and other states are doing through their orientation
programs may decrease the number of students referred to developmental
education who could have succeeded in college-level coursework.
3)
Consider
additional measures beyond standardized tests. Scarce resources of money, time and personnel
have prompted colleges to rely on these tests, which are designed to be quick
and inexpensive to administer (each individual test costs less than $2.00 and
takes about ½ hour to complete).
However, including or substituting measures such as high school GPA, high
school attended, years since high school graduation and assessment of other
non-cognitive factors such as the GRIT assessment being piloted by Grand Rapids
Community College may yield better placement results resulting in higher levels
of credit and credential attainment over time.
4)
Develop
alternatives to a “one size fits all” approach to placement in and delivery of
developmental education. Colleges
typically rely on a single score (perhaps two in math) to determine who is
“college ready.” This generic
distinction ignores the fact that different types and levels of mathematics may
be needed in Culinary Arts versus STEM disciplines or that more sophisticated rhetorical
skills may be required to complete a Social Science versus a Welding
degree. By examining learning outcomes
from each program and the skills needed to meet them, states such as Virginia
and North Carolina are implementing
modularized, discipline-specific pathways leading from developmental
through college-level mathematics as
well as diagnostic assessments that assign students only to the modules they
will need to complete their programs. Contextualizing
developmental reading, writing or mathematics content within program-specific
instruction is another approach that has shown promise in Washington and other
states.
Implementing any or all of these
recommendations will require investments of money, time and personnel and most
will increase the complexity of admissions and enrollment for students. In addition to concern over the resources
required, colleges who have worked diligently to simplify processes at their
front doors in order to improve access may justifiably question whether their
students will perceive requirements to attend a mandatory orientation, present
their high school transcript or participate in a longer, more intensive
advising procedure as insurmountable obstacles to enrolling in college. However, research conducted by the Center for
Community College Student Engagement at UT Austin strongly suggests that
students would prefer that colleges not only offer but require more guidance
for entering students as they select a program of study and register for
courses. In addition, reallocating
resources to increase assistance to entering students has the potential to
generate a return on that investment through increased persistence into higher
level courses and increased credential completion.
