Faculty/Staff Present
Andrea
Barnett, Amanda Blanton, K.C. Bryson, Scott Harvey, Jennifer Hulehan, Pam
McWhorter, and Elizabeth Cox
Absent
Galen
Dehay, Allison Earley, Tom Lawrence, Amy Roberts, and Carol Watts
Guest
Keri
Catalfomo
Discussion
Andrea
Barnett opened the meeting with information from York Tech and how they use
Multiple Measures. They do not
administer Multiple Measures in actuality, but use the HS GPA for placement
purposes. See attached handout.
A new
generation of Accuplacer will roll out in January 2019.
A new
Banner roll out is coming December 2018.
As
discussed before, Banner is capturing Weighted and Unweighted GPA, but not the
highest level of math taken in high school.
Scott Harvey stated that his department would need assistance with
interpretation of GPA scores.
The
meeting was then turned over to K. C. Bryson.
She shared some research findings—traditional students versus
developmental students in the areas of persistence, retention, and graduation
rates. However, at this time, she did
not want this information shared or distributed since she wanted to do more
research, so the handout was taken up at the end of the meeting.
K.C.
Bryson then brought up some questions for the committee to think about and
answer as we move forward—
What is our role as the MM Task Force -
deciding simply which measures
(e.g., placement scores, high school GPA, etc.) to use for placement
and how to use them or something broader that includes revisiting our approach
to placement as we figure out how to implement a multiple measures process for
placement?
Galen had posed the question as to how our
developmental students are doing compared to our non-developmental
students. K. C. decided to look at the persistence,
retention, and graduation rates of developmental students compared to
traditional students.
What is our definition of developmental
students? The State says any student
taking any 031 or 032 course. TCTC needs
a definition of developmental students.
For this
study, developmental students for AA or AS degrees were students who did not
place into ENG 101 and MAT 103/120.
Bridge students were excluded from this study
because of the nature of Bridge students – they have different success outcomes
(i.e., transfer) and not as many place into developmental courses.
Can we better capture and track who our Fast
Track students are? For this study any
student who took a comprehensive studies course during sessions B or C were
considered FastTrack, but sessions B and C are sometimes used as scheduling
options only.
We need more FastTrack options for students in
technical programs needing MAT 155, ENG 155, MAT 170 and ENG 165.
The graduation rates in this study were lower
for FastTrack students as compared to non-developmental students. While FastTrack students were often
persisting and being retained at the same rates as non-developmental students,
they were still not graduating at the same rate.
Who should take Fast Track?
Are we offering Fast Track classes and advising
consistently in this area? The answer
was “no” for many reasons, but one being the person advising the student.
Should we suggest something like an IEP for
developmental students so that they are advised properly and consistently? Could only Success Coaches advise these
students?
Note by Jennifer Hulehan: Tasheka Johnson is teaching Success Coaches
and the designated Ambassadors in all other divisions in the college how to
advise students with developmental needs.
Spring 2018, ENG 101 will have a co-requisite
(linked courses).
Should our placement scores be based on Program
Ready or Course Ready?
Should we use different MM criteria for AA/AS
and technical programs?
Phase in MM and make adjustments?
As
Andrea closed the meeting, she stated that she will try to schedule the next
meeting after the July 4th holiday week. Jennifer suggested that we make sure Galen is
available since he can answer some of the questions posed by K.C.
Andrea
requested that we keep our calendars up to date to make scheduling meetings
easier.
There
being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
Recorded
by Elizabeth Cox
Task Force
6-27-17 York Tech:
Meeting
6/27/17
Multiple
Measures Task Force,
I
talked with Taunya Paul about the measures York Tech has been using for the
last year. The ‘multiple measures’ being used to place students are listed
below:
Students
with an unweighted GPA 3.0 is considered college level and are able to register
for ENG 101, RDG 101 and MAT 101 (not college level)
At
registration they answer a questionnaire about their math history. The student
may then qualify for MAT 110 (college algebra) or MAT 120 (college Statistics).
Per
our phone conversation and the email below from Taunya Paul about their
‘multiple measure’. I called her back and asked if there were any other
requirements students could have to enroll in these classes and any higher math
class and about RDG 101.
Here are the new rules for math
placement:
If a student has a recent HS GPA
>= 3.0, they may:
-
Exempt MAT 031 and 032;
-
Place directly into MAT 101, 155, 133, 201, or 165
If a student has a recent HS GPA
>=3.0 and has earned a ‘C’ or better in HS Algebra II (or its equivalent),
they may:
-
Place directly into MAT 110 or 120
Please let me know if you need
additional information.
Taunya
Taunya Paul
Department Chair
York Technical College
452 S. Anderson Rd., Rock Hill, SC 29730
Tel:
803.981.7316 | Fax: 803.981.7332
RDG 101 is an upper level (16-17 grade level) reading for
their Health Science majors.
Math placement: To qualify for MAT 140 (Calculus I) a
student must score:
MATH 650 on SAT 2005 version
MATH 670
on SAT 2016 version
MATH 29
on ACT
If any student wants to take TRIG classes they must set up a
meeting with the math department head.
All of the above options are available through GPA 3.0
within 5 years or SAT and ACT scores.
Any student can take the
placement test, they are just not required if they meet the above
recommendations for the classes needed for their major.
A 3.0 GPA is based on research by York Techs Institutional
Research: Mary Beth Schwartz
