Does the Method of Acceleration Matter? Exploring the Likelihood of College Coursetaking Success Across Four Developmental Education Instructional Strategies

Abstract

Background/Context: Accelerated instructional strategies for developmental education have been promoted as a way to help underprepared students to progress more quickly through college-level coursework. Yet, what remains unknown is whether certain accelerated strategies are more effective than others and whether this initial acceleration may lead to longer term success. Purpose/Objective/Research Question/Focus of Study: We examine whether the likelihood of success varies for completion of mathematics and English requirements over 3 years among the Florida students enrolled in courses using one of four developmental instructional strategies: compressed, corequisite, modularized, or contextualized. Population/Participants/Subjects: Our sample includes all first-time-in-college students during the 2015–2016 year who enrolled in all 28 public state colleges and took any developmental education course during the first year. Research Design: We use inverse probability-weighted regression adjustment (IPWRA) to compare success rates in completion of mathematics and English requirements over 3 years for Florida college students in each of these strategies. Findings/Results: Overall, the results demonstrate variation in the likelihood of success for completion of mathematics and English courses over 3 years among students in different developmental instructional strategies, which suggests that the method of acceleration does matter. Corequisite courses tended to lead to greater long-term gains in math and, to an extent, in reading, while contextualized tended to be most effective in writing. Conclusions/Recommendations: Leaders can play an important role in strengthening institutional capacity to effectively implement developmental education reform by developing faculty buy-in, ensuring adequate resources to scale and sustain reform efforts, and using data to inform future decision-making.

Prevailing Themes Across Corequisite Mathematics Courses: A Systematic Review

“…Understanding the limitations of using a single placement criterion for student placement, some institutions redesigned their placement protocols to use a multiple measures approach (Beamer, 2021b). Some student placement reforms designed to improve access and ultimately success in introductory college-level mathematics courses, such as one in Florida, removed traditional testing-based placement altogether, instead focusing on previous credentialing, e.g., an exemption based on a diploma from an in-state high school or military service (Mokher et al, 2021). Students involved in the reform were allowed to take developmental mathematics coursework to remediate known or perceived mathematics deficiencies; however, it was not mandated.…”

“…Students involved in the reform were allowed to take developmental mathematics coursework to remediate known or perceived mathematics deficiencies; however, it was not mandated. Though sometimes incorporated into other placement mechanisms, self-selection or directed self-placement, as a student placement criterion, has gained traction in the spirit of student empowerment and participation in the educational process (Mokher et al, 2021;Clinkenbeard, 2021;Minsu Kim et al, 2018). A model used uniquely in the University System of Georgia (USG) is not included in the following table.…”