Bakersfield College Making It Happen(MIH fulfilling our SEP, SSSP, ATD and BSI mandates)

Key Data Issues for BC

Completion Data

Basic Skills Progress

Data

CCSSE – Perception

Data

Equity Data

SSSP-Student

Service Data40.5%

33.5% 31.7%

57.2%

44.1%

34.7%

43.6%

34.8%30.8%

33.3%

51.5%

42.9%

30.3%

40.7%

Completion Unprepared Students Statewide and Bakersfield College

Statewide Rate BC Rate

Lowest CCSSE benchmarksStudent Faculty InteractionStudent Effort

Bakersfield College 2014 CCSSE Benchmarks

4

All ATD Cohort Students 4,202 71.9% 55.9% 4,013 72.4% 54.7% 3,313 74.8% 56.4% 11,528 72.9% 55.6%

Results by Demographic Component (red and green bars illustrate achievement gaps relative to the overall (average) rate)

Matriculation - Ed PlanNo Ed Plan 3,117 65.7% 49.7% 3,091 67.0% 49.0% 2,205 66.9% 47.2% 8,413 66.5% 48.8%Ed Plan 1,085 89.9% 73.6% 922 90.5% 73.5% 1,108 90.3% 74.6% 3,115 90.2% 74.0%

English Attempted in First Term No 2,818 65.0% 47.6% 2,801 66.4% 48.8% 2,463 70.1% 50.8% 8,082 67.1% 49.0%Yes 1,384 86.1% 72.8% 1,212 86.2% 68.2% 850 88.2% 72.6% 3,446 86.7% 71.1%

Math Attempted in First Term No 2,792 65.2% 49.1% 2,728 66.5% 48.7% 2,461 70.5% 52.2% 7,981 67.2% 49.9%Yes 1,410 85.4% 69.4% 1,285 85.1% 67.3% 852 87.1% 68.4% 3,547 85.7% 68.4%

Fall to Spring Fall to Fall Fall to Spring Fall to Fall Fall to Spring Fall to Fall Fall to Spring Fall to Fall

BC Element 4 - Persistence Rate from Term to Term

Persistence Rate CohortPersistence Cohort

2009-10 Cohort 2010-11 Cohort 2011-12 Cohort 3 Cohorts Combined

Persistence Rate Cohort Persistence Rate Cohort Persistence Rate

Cohort Completion Rate Cohort Completion Rate Cohort Completion Rate Cohort Completion Rate

All ATD Cohort Students 4,071 13.7% 4,565 14.6% 4,202 15.8% 12,838 14.7%

Results by Demographic Component (red and green bars illustrate achievement gaps relative to the overall (average) rate)

Matriculation - Ed PlanNo Ed Plan 2,930 10.9% 3,647 12.4% 3,117 12.7% 9,694 12.0%Ed Plan 1,141 21.0% 918 23.5% 1,085 24.7% 3,144 23.0%

English Attempted in First Term No 3,267 11.7% 3,180 10.9% 2,818 12.5% 9,265 11.7%Yes 804 21.9% 1,385 23.1% 1,384 22.5% 3,573 22.6%

Math Attempted in First Term No 2,602 11.7% 2,924 12.1% 2,792 13.7% 8,318 12.5%Yes 1,469 17.3% 1,641 19.1% 1,410 20.1% 4,520 18.8%

BC Element 5 - Percentage of Students who Attain an Award and/or Transfer within 3 Years

Completion2007-08 Cohort 2008-09 Cohort 2009-10 Cohort 3 Cohorts Combined

Overview of Intervention

• Identify cohort traditionally known to require support (CalSOAP)

• Examine & institute Multiple Measures • Examine Testing Practices• Recruit and train mentor personnel (faculty,

staff & administrators)• Require frequent and proactive contact with

mentees (relationship development)• Evaluate data

What is CalSOAP?• California Student Opportunity & Access Program

• CCC, CSU, and UC partnership• Est. in 1978 by State legislature• Raise achievement for:

• Low-income (some HS have 80-90% free lunch)• Regions w/ low college eligibility and/or low

participation rates• First generation students

Recommendations of MM work• Assessment procedures and placement decisions clearly communicated to students. Students

should be informed about the entire set of multiple measures that are being used to assess their level of knowledge and skill and how those multiple measures will be analyzed.

• Ensure that multiple measures are applied consistently for all students.• Collect multiple measures before students complete assessment tests, not just those who appeal

their assessments.• Use measures that have a high degree of predictive validity. • Involve discussions by the local senate and discipline experts at each college.• Create a local selection of validated measures policy and data.• Include periodic review of multiple measures assessment policies.• Provide discipline experts and counseling faculty with information on why certain multiple

measures have been selected for use at the college and the role that multiple measures can play in accurate placement.

• Strive to produce an objective process and carefully examine the use of local measures that may be overly subjective, such as interviews.

• Make weighting of multiple measures transparent and research based. 8

Title 5 on Multiple Measures

Title 5 §55502(i) clearly mandates that California community colleges use multiple measures in their assessment processes: “‘Multiple measures’ are a required component of a district’s assessment system and refer to the use of more than one assessment measure in order to assess the student”

The requirement to use multiple measures is reiterated in Title 5 §55522(a): “When using an English, mathematics, or ESL assessment test for placement, it must be used with one or more other measures to comprise multiple measures.”

9

BC Philosophy behind MMs and Assessment

• Tests aren’t always the best measures• Tests alone are TERRIBLE measures• The goal is to predict success• More information provides better

placement

10

High School Testing• Some shocking information – Students test better at the

high schools than in a foreign location – a lot better• Challenge for BC, we have 41 feeder high schools• Previous testing was not web-based, therefore changed to

Accuplacer – a web-based (more easily delivered) test which promised BC automatically applied multiple measures and branched (smart) testing.

• Accuplacer also provided writing exam versus multiple choice for English

11

12

Not by a Single Test Alone: Multiple Measures

ENGLISH Multiple Measures

Measures used:

ESL placement into English 1A, ERWC (with C or better) EAP (college ready) or Placement test into English 1A

To BUMP

1. HS GPA (3.0 or above without PE) – called Cal Grant GPA

2. Highest English class with grade of B

3. 4 years of English with C or Better

4. AP English jr/sr year with grade of B

5. Reading compass score of 06 level (82-99)

6. 9 of any potential A-G courses (college prep)

MATH Multiple Measures

Measures used:

1. Placement test score

2. Highest level math class with grade of B or higher and

3. HS GPA of 3.0 or higher

Importance of First Semester Course -taking pattern

• Previous data predicted better success if students took:a. Math first semester

b. English first semester

c. Had a full load of 12 or more units

• IT DID NOT PREDICT a + b + c = better success

• Changed strategy - Math and Reading or English and Reading

• Communicate better with students about making choices but be directive ASEP 14

15

What we have learned from the data

2014 MIH Cohort (n=467)

Previous 3 Cohorts (n=326)

Enrolled 70% (326) 58% (264) Percent with Multiple Measures Placement

100% 0

Enrolled in English first semester 76% (248) 38% (100) Enrolled in ENSL first semester 10% (32) 28% (75) Enrolled in Math first semester 75% (246) 41% (108)

GPA and Unit ceiling???????

What we have learned from the data• 4 treatments

• Bumped up a level• Accelerated• Compressed• Left with score placement validated by GPA and

grades

• The worst performance was from those left where they placed and

• From those bumped more than once – need to record MM when it occurs (returning vs hs) 16

17

What we have learned from the dataMIH Group Math

(college-wide)

English (college-wide)

Reading (college-wide)

Total students enrolled from each cohort

2011 64% (50.5%)

57% (57.4%)

62% (59.3%)

73

2012 59% (52.7%)

64% (61%)

75% (60.8%)

92

2013 64% (53.1%)

61% (61.8%)

59% (61.6%)

99

2014 47% 60% 62% 326

How does the transition process affect Equity ?

Click icon to add picture

Institutional Data Collection and Analysis

 Operational Data: Number (and percentage) of Student Educational Plans completed

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

Percent Assessment Completed 82% 84% 84% 84% 82%

Percent Orientation Completed 71% 76% 81% 83% 84%

Percent Counseling Completed 63% 63% 71% 73% 72%

Percent Ed Plan Completed 16% 16% 24% 29% 34%

5%

15%

25%

35%

45%

55%

65%

75%

85% 82%84% 84% 84%

82%

71%

76%

81%83%

84%

63% 63%

71%73% 72%

16% 16%

24%

29%

34%

Student Services - 5 Year Trend on Matriculation Steps

Office of Equity and Inclusion

The BC Office of Equity and Inclusion

• supports the mission to increase the educational pathways for students from diverse economic, cultural, and educational backgrounds to attain degrees and certificates, workplace skills, and preparation for transfer. 

• works collaboratively with existing Bakersfield College campus programs, departments, and services to create opportunities

• Enhances campus climate in terms of diversity and support cultural awareness, understanding, respect and educational opportunities conveys a message of equity and inclusion by promoting opportunities that demonstrate fairness, equality, respect, and civility.

Strategies include:• Equity TV focus on closing the achievement gaps through

community engagement (you tube and Facebook 1-minute clips)

• Parent Orientation• Spanish Translation Services• Community Leaders Engagement (Project Best, BSU,

AASU)• Latino Network• Mentorship

Office of Equity and Inclusion

MIH Strategies• Multiple Measures – Start accurately

• Bridge Programs - Prepare academically

• Progress faster – Compressed, accelerated, self-paced coursework

• MIH Mentors – Engage personally

• Classroom Interventions – Challenge intellectually, math and writing centers

• Student Affairs Interventions – SSSP, tutoring, Supplemental Instruction

• SARS Alert – Diagnose problems early

• Tracking – Track effect interventions

• Predictive Analysis – Forecast Success

• Improve – Processes, procedures, curriculum, linkages

• Scale up - Title V Grant

MIH Making it Happen

MentorsFT Faculty (22)

Adjunct (3) Classified (4)

Administrators (12)

Personal Contact Progress Report Management

MIH Activities & Summary

Student Ed Plans (SEP) DegreeWORKS & SARS

Classroom Interventions FT Faculty(25);Adjunct(3)

Habits of the Mind Tools & Evaluation

ILO Assessment & Report

SARS Alert

Everyone

SARS ALert Progress Cards

English 1A Transfer,

Degree and Certificate29% placed

English (7323 placed)

English 50 4 units

18% placed

English 60 4 units

7% placed

ACDV 65 2 units

37% placed

Academic Development

ACDV 201 9% placed

ENGLISH PLACEMENT 7323 STUDENTS PLACED 2012-13

18%

Academic Development

ACDV 201 (9%)

English 60 & English 50 Compressed Learning Community

25% placed into this series 8 units in one semester

ACDV 65 2 units

37% placed

29%

Academic Development

ACDV 201 (9%)

English 53 Accelerated 25% placed into this series

4 units in one semester

ACDV 65 2 units

37% placed

New Placement based on HS GPA and HS

English Grades

English 53 Accelerated 65% placed into this series

4 units in one semester

Potential UNITS Cost to

get all to English 1A $1,677,552

3 semesters 10 units

Potential UNITS Cost to

get all to English 1A $1,084,6822 semesters

6 units

Potential UNITS Cost to

get all to English 1A $208,851

1 semester 4 units

Negative

Positive1. Correction of institutional barriers

2. A learning institution (president & classified)

3. Analysis of this group compared to overall

4. Equity insights

5. Improvements to bridge and summer

6. Improvements to other support services and instruction

7. Partners – high schools, community groups, CalPASS, CalSOAP

1. Inability to use many college services

2. Problems with communicating through email

• Email address• Not using email – texting• No computers

3. Messaging and culture (financial aid & early alert)

4. Overall Math + English + Reading + 12 + units were too much all together

5. Learned about unit ceiling for this cohort

Lessons Learned and Unintended Consequences

THE ENDOdella Johnson

Janet Fulks