Increasing Success Rates in Developmental Math: The Complementary Role of Individual and Institutional Characteristics

Abstract

This study tracks students' progression through developmental math sequences and defines progression as both attempting and passing each level of the sequence. A model of successful progression in developmental education was built utilizing individual-, institutional-, and developmental math-level factors. Employing step-wise logistic regression models, we found that while each additional step improves model fit, the largest proportion of variance is explained by individual-level characteristics, and more variance is explained in attempting each level than passing that level. We identify specific individual and institutional factors associated with higher attempt (e.g., Latino) and passing rates (e.g., small class size) in the different courses of the developmental math trajectory. These findings suggest that colleges should implement programs and policies to increase attempt rates in developmental courses in order to increase passing rates of the math pre-requisite courses for specific certificates, associate degrees or transfer.

What Happens to Underprepared First-Time-in-College Students When Developmental Education is Optional? The Case of Developmental Math and Intermediate Algebra in the First Semester

“…Indeed, estimates have indicated that roughly 60% of community college students are referred to developmental math upon entry—a decision that could require a student to take a year or more of developmental courses before being able to enroll in credit-bearing, college-level classes (Bailey, Jeong, & Cho, 2010). Although developmental courses may provide necessary support to some underprepared students, a growing body of evidence suggests that students placed in developmental education, particularly those placed in developmental math, are highly unlikely to obtain an associate degree or transfer (Bailey et al, 2010; Calcagno, Crosta, Bailey, & Jenkins, 2007; Fong, Melguizo, & Prather, 2015; Melguizo, Hagedorn, & Cypers, 2008). In response, many states have begun to adopt policies that accelerate students into credit-bearing courses.…”

Predicting Successful Mathematics Remediation Among Latina/o Students

“…In addition to assessing the overall effectiveness of developmental math, researchers have been increasingly engaging in work to identify student and institutional characteristics associated with students' success in developmental math courses. These findings have consistently shown several student characteristics and experiences to be related to or predictive of students' success in developmental math including gender, age, high school experiences, socioeconomic status, and enrollment intensity and patterns during college (Bahr, 2010;Fong et al, 2015;Roksa et al, 2009). In particular, research by Roksa et al (2009) found that female community college students in Virginia who were 25 years or older were more likely to successfully complete developmental and college-level gatekeeper math courses.…”

“…Similarly, Bettinger and Long (2005) found that, among a sample of community college students in Ohio, those who enrolled in remedial math courses were more likely to transfer to a 4-year institution than those with comparable test scores and precollege academic preparation who did not enroll in remedial math. Fong, Melguizo, and Prather (2015) found that students who persisted in developmental math were “catching up” and were even more successful than students who were more academically prepared for college-level math. At the same time, other studies have found developmental math to have similar or even negative outcomes when compared with students who do not enroll in developmental mathematics courses (e.g., Bahr, 2008b, 2010).…”

(Mis)Measuring Developmental Math Success: Classroom Participants’ Perspectives on Learning

“…Examining the outcomes for students across a large, urban district who actually attempted their developmental math coursework (i.e. enrolled and remained in the course beyond the no-penalty withdrawal date), Fong, Melguizo, and Prather (2015) calculated pass rates of 64% to 79%. They concluded that for students placed lower in the sequence, the "students who MISMEASURING DEVELOPMENTAL MATH SUCCESS 9 are actually progressing through their sequence are passing courses at comparable rates to their initially higher placed peers."…”