Jon Phillips

Using Engagement Theory to Improve H341

Outcomes for Community College Students 4/18/2017

in Low-Level Math Remediation

What is Remediation?
 The purpose of remediation (also known as developmental education) is to provide academically
underprepared students with the skills they need to succeed in college and the labor market.
 Students typically place into remediation by taking a test to determine whether they require high school
level math, English, or writing
 Around 60-70% of community college students have been enrolled in at least one remedial course
(Scrivener & Weiss, 2014)

Community Colleges’ Remediation Crisis

 Only 62% of students who take a remedial course complete all of their required remedial courses
(Complete College America, 2012)
 18% transfer to a 4-year institution in 4 years (Complete College America, 2012)
 9.5% graduate within 3 years (Complete College America, 2012)
 28% attain a degree or certificate within 8.5 years of entry, compared with 43% of students who take no
remedial courses (Scrivener & Weiss, 2014)

Existing Interventions
 There are essentially 4 types of interventions (Rutschow & Schneider, 2011):
 Strategies targeted to students before they enter college
 Interventions that shorten the timing or content of remedial courses
 Programs that combine basic skill attainment with college-level coursework
 Supplemental programs such as tutoring, advising, or participation in targeted sections outside of
class

Many existing interventions have been very effective at improving course completion and persistence
rates among students who test into remediation. However, the improvements have been more elusive for those
students who test in the lowest levels of remediation (Long & Boatman, 2013). But these are the students who
need the most support! Only 10% of those who enroll in the lowest-level math ever complete a college-level
math course (Scrivener & Weiss, 2014). These students are the most likely to be disengaged and interventions
need to address their developmental needs to improve outcomes.

Engagement Theory

Educaonal Context: Psychological Variables: Academic Engagement:

Organizaon Competency Beliefs Movaon
Pedagogy Values / Goals Flow
School Climate Social Connectedness Self-Movated Learning
  Remedial students’ poor outcomes can be tied to the three psychological variables in Engagement
Theory: competency beliefs, values/goals, and social connectedness.
 The increased academic difficulties and time-to-degree students face negatively impact their
competency beliefs, essentially telling students they can’t succeed (Raab & Adam, 2005)
 Students do not want to be in these classes, in part because the content of remedial classes is
often irrelevant to students’ programs of study and little effort is made to connect the course
material to students’ lives (Bailey, 2009)
 Finally, there is a stigma associated with remedial courses and they prevent students from taking
courses in their program, which can make them feel like they don’t belong. (Bettinger & Long,
2009; Jacob & Lefgren, 2004)

Improving Engagement by Redesigning 3 Key Contextual Factors: Counseling, Courses and Community

Educaonal Context: Psychological Variables: Academic Engagement:

Counseling I can Improved self-e&cacy
Courses I want to Higher movaon
Community I belong Greater sense of belonging

Getting to “I Can”  Connect students to a counselor immediately after placement testing

through counseling:  Place students in a meta-major and communicate steps to program completion

Restructuring courses  Restructure course material to be tailored to program needs

to reach “I Want to”:  Integrate career development in coursework

Creating Communities  Incorporate program-related courses into students’ schedule

to establish a sense  Establish learning communities that persist through all remedial math courses
that “I Belong”:

REFERENCES
Bailey, T. (2009). Challenge and opportunity: Rethinking the role and function of developmental education in community college.
New Directions for Community Colleges, 145, 11–30.

Bettinger, E., & Long, B. T. (2009a). Remedial and developmental courses. In S. Dickert-Conlin & R. Rubenstein (Eds.), Economic
inequality and higher education: Access, persistence, and success (pp. 69–100). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.

Complete College America (2012). Remediation: Higher Education’s Bridge to Nowhere. Washington D.C. Retrieved from:
http://www.completecollege.org/docs/CCA-Remediation-final.pdf

Jacob, B. A., & Lefgren, L. (2004). Remedial education and student achievement: A regressiondiscontinuity analysis. Review of
Economics and Statistics, 86(1), 226–244.

Long, B. T., & Boatman, A. (2013). The role of remedial and developmental courses in access and persistence. The state of college
access and completion: Improving college success for students from underrepresented groups, 1, 1-24.

Raab, L. & Adam, A.J. (2005). “The university College Model: A Learning-Centered Approach to Retention and Remediation”. New
Directions for Institutional Research 125, no. 2: 86-106.

Scrivener, S., & Weiss, M. J. (2013). More graduates: Two-year results from an evaluation of Accelerated Study in Associate Programs
(ASAP) for developmental education students.