developmental education: best practices and exemplary … · 2011-01-05 · developmental...

Developmental Education: Best Practices and Exemplary Programs 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Agenda ........................................................................................................................... 3

Email/Fax/Call-In Instruction ............................................................................................. 4

Fax-In Question Sheet ..................................................................................................... 5

Presenters and Moderator .............................................................................................. 6

“Exploring Alternatives to Remediation” by Hunter Boylan ................................................ 7

Learning Communities and “Generations” ..................................................................... 14

Uses of Technology in Developmental Education ............................................................ 22

NCDE Information Sheet ................................................................................................ 23

SWT-TIDE Conference Information ................................................................................ 26

NADE Fact Sheet 2000 ................................................................................................. 28

Selected Bibiography ..................................................................................................... 30

STARLINK Information Sheet ......................................................................................... 34

Upcoming STARLINK Programs .................................................................................... 35

Evaluation ...................................................................................................................... 36


AGENDA

Overview and Introduction......................................................................... Linda ThompsonModerator

Diverse Instructional Strategies .................................................................... Hunter BoylanAppalachian State University

Learning Communities and “Generations” ................................................ Susanne AdamsSandhill Community College

Cognitive, Non-cognitive, and Meta-cognitive Strategies .............................. Hunter BoylanAppalachian State University

Uses of Technology in Developmental Education .......................................... David CaverlySouthwest Texas State University

Question and Answer ................................................................................................ Panel

Close ....................................................................................................... Linda Thompson


EMAIL/FAX/CALL-IN INSTRUCTIONS

There are three way in which you can interact with the panelists:

E-MAIL: You may e-mail your questions in advance toLisaThompson at [email protected] and panelists will addressthem during the teleconference.

FAX: Before September 21, fax to 972.669.6699

On September 21, fax to 972.669.6633

CALL: You are encouraged at any time during the program to call inyour questions and comments.

The toll-free telephone number for call-in questions is:

1.800.745.0371

HOW IT WORKS: Your call will be answered by a member of our staff, who will ask for yourname and site location. You will then be put on hold. While you are on hold, you will be ableto hear the videoconference through the telephone. Stay on the line so we can communi-cate with you if necessary.

If your call should be accidentally disconnected, call again and tell the operator you weredisconnected while waiting to ask a question.

When prompted or introduced by the program host, give your name and site location, andstate your questions as clearly and succinctly as you can. Please be aware that while youare asking your question and while it is being answered you will be “on the air.” Pleaseremain on the line until your question has been answered and your call has beendisconnected.

BETTER AUDIO : To minimize the possibility of any technical or program difficulties that maybe caused by audio feedback, we suggest you locate the telephone away from the audiospeaker at your site.

M acin tosh I I


FAX-IN QUESTION SHEET

FAX: 972.669.6633

:emaN

:etatS,ytiC,etiSgniweiV

:tnemmoCronoitseuQ

Enter your question or comment below in 25 words or less and print clearly so that themoderator can read the question.


PRESENTERS AND MODERATOR

Hunter Boylan is the Director of the NCDE, a Professor of Higher Education, and the former Director of theKellogg Institute. He is a past President of the National Association for Developmental Education, the currentChair of the American Council of Developmental Education Associations, the founder and Editor of Research inDevelopmental Education, and the Principle Investigator for the National Study of Developmental Education. Healso directed the nation’s first doctoral program in developmental education at Grambling State University. He hasmore than a decade of experience working with learning centers, developmental programs, and TRIO Programs.

Hunter BoylanDirector, National Center for Developmental EducationAppalachian State UniversityP.O. Box 2776Boone, NC 28607Email: [email protected] Phone: 828.262.3057

Susanne Adams is the Director of Academic Support Services and Developmental Education at SandhillsCommunity College. She is also the president of the North Carolina Association for Developmental Education andYear 2000 program recipient of the John Champaigne Award for Outstanding Developmental Education Programgiven by the National Association for Developmental Education. In 1999, Ms. Adams was named OutstandingFirst-year Student Advocate by the National Resource Center for the First-Year Experience from the University ofSouth Carolina. A Kellogg Institute Fellow, Susanne is co-author of two publications on Developmental Education.

Susanne AdamsDirector, Academic Support ServicesSandhills Community College3395 Airport RoadPinehurst, NC 28374Email: [email protected] Phone: 910.695.3914

David Caverly has been involved in developmental education for over 25 years teaching reading and directinglearning centers in community colleges, four-year colleges, and universities. He has written extensively in the fieldwith 56 articles, 12 books, 11 grants, and over 150 presentations. Perhaps he is best known for his columnTechTalk in the Journal of Developmental Education and the recent revision with Rona Flippo of his book calledthe Handbook of College Reading and Study Strategy Research. Since 1989, he has been Professor of Educationat Southwest Texas State University where he directs the developmental reading program and teaches readingand research classes in the Graduate Program in Developmental Education and the Teacher Education Program.

Dr. David CaverlyDepartment of Curriculum and InstructionSouthwest Texas State University, DC02San Marcos, TX 78666-4616Email: [email protected] Phone: 512.245.3100

Linda Thompson is the Director of Student Support Services and an Associate Professor of Psychology atHarding University. She is the current President of the National Association for Developmental Educational andthe Journal Editor for the Arkansas Association for Developmental Education. Linda first conceived and imple-mented the Developmental Education program for Harding, which now has a full learning center.

Dr. Linda R. Thompson, ModeratorPresident, NADEDirector, Student Support ServicesHarding University, Box 12235Searcy, AR 72149-0001Email: [email protected] Phone: 501.279.4416


EXPLORING ALTERNATIVES TO REMEDIATIONBY HUNTER BOYLAN

ABSTRACT: The article addresses issues related to the cost and time investment of providing remedial courses tocollege students and offers an overview of possible alternatives. Some criticisms of developmental education areexamined and countered with evidence from research. Frequently employed current practices are outlined. Morerecent alternative approaches to course delivery and student support services are then reviewed, and their applica-tion to at-risk student needs is discussed. Recommendations for the actual implementation of alternatives areincluded.

Many developmental educators perceive that they and their work are the subject of increasingly strident attacks bylegislators and policy makers. Actually, this perception is not entirely accurate. Of the many services provided bydevelopmental educators, only remedial courses are the target of most criticism. Developmental educators mightbenefit, therefore, by continuing to challenge criticisms of remedial courses while also continuing their study andexploration of alternatives to them.

In doing this it is important to note that developmental education as a whole is not under attack. Most legislatorsand policy makers accept and support the need for tutoring, instructional laboratories, individualized learningprograms, and learning centers in colleges and universities. Although developmental education may be conceived ofas a continuum of such interventions, ranging from individual basic remedial courses at one end to comprehensivelearning centers at the other end, most of the criticisms are directed at the lowest end of the continuum: to remedialcourses. Students, parents, administrators, faculty, and legislators regularly complain that remedial courses taketoo long, cost too much, and keep students from making progress toward degrees by holding them in severaldifferent levels of noncredit, remedial courses.

In response to these criticisms it should be noted that both logical and research-based arguments can be broughtto bear to counter each of them. The criticisms are often based on misconceptions rather than fact. For one thing,“too long” is a relative term. According to the National Center for Education Statistics (1996) the vast majority ofstudents complete their remedial requirements within 1 year. For the many students who are unable to succeed incollege without reme-diation, the only alternative to an entire year’s worth of effort is never completing college at all.Given this alternative, a year spent taking a few remedial courses might represent a very sound investment ofstudent time and money. For many students, participation in remedial courses does extend their time in college byas much as a semester to a full year. For most of these students, however, it is a case of “better late than never.” Itis better to delay graduation than to risk never receiving a degree at all and losing access to the employment andeconomic opportunities resulting from a college degree (Lavin & Hyllegard, 1996).

The criticism that remedial courses represent an unreasonable proportion of public higher education expenses issimply invalid. There is little evidence that eliminating remedial courses would result in any significant savings instate allocations for higher education. A recent report from the Brookings Institute (Breneman, 1998), for instance,points out that the total national expenditure for remedial courses in a given year is less than 1% of expenditures forpublic higher education in the United States. The report also suggests that the benefits of remedial courses greatlyoutweigh this minimal cost. A follow up to this report concludes that “remedial education draws political fire far inexcess of any reasonable view of its budgetary costs” (Breneman & Haarlow, 1998, p. 20).

Another criticism of remedial courses is that many students drop out before completing them. This is a criticismwith some basis in fact. A recent review of developmental education in Texas colleges and universities found somerelationship between student attrition and the length of time spent in remedial courses (Boylan, et al., 1996).However, such a study has not been undertaken for any other state. Nor has any national study been done on dropout rates of students who repeat remedial courses.

It does appear to be true that the greater the amount of remediation required, the more likely a student is to dropout (Adelman, 1998). In other words, students who are assessed as needing multiple levels of remedial courses intwo or more subject areas are less likely to complete college than those who need remediation in only one area.


Those who place in remedial courses in only one subject area, however, are as likely as anyone else to graduate.

Adelman (1998), notes that students who place in the lowest levels of two or more remedial courses have very weakpotential for college success to begin with. This, however, is not an argument for eliminating all remedial courses,particularly since most of those who take them are eventually successful in college (McCabe & Day, 1998).

The previous discussion notwithstanding, there is at least a germ of truth to the claim that remedial courses may taketoo long or cost too much for some students. If a student can develop the skills essential to college success withoutsemester-long remedial courses, then any unnecessary time spent in remedial courses is too long. Furthermore, if thestudent or the public has paid for any unnecessary remedial courses, then that cost is too much.

The key term here is unnecessary. For a great many students with weak academic backgrounds and low placementscores, the investment of time and money in remedial courses is necessary if they are to have any hope of succeedingin college. For them, immersion in a battery of remedial courses may represent the only intervention that offers areasonable chance of success. However, for some portion of the students with low placement scores, there are otherinterventions available that might accomplish the objectives of remediation without requiring participation in a series ofremedial courses. For such students, remediation through formal courses may really be unnecessary.

As noted at the outset, remedial courses are only one form of intervention along the continuum of interventions thatcomprise developmental education. Other forms of developmental education may accomplish the same purpose at alower cost to the student and with a lesser investment of student time. This article explores alternatives to remedialcourses and methods of organizing these alternatives in a manner that may reduce the amount of time required for theremediation of academic skills deficiencies. It should be noted that these alternatives are not necessarily cheaper thanremedial courses and, because many of them are individualized, they may be even more labor intensive. They do,however, offer the advantage of being less time consuming for some students.

It should also be noted that these alternatives may only be applicable to a minority of the students who place intoremedial courses. It is likely that the very weakest students with multiple skill deficiencies will still require the disciplineof a structured course and the immersion in subject matter provided by a semester or more of remedial course work.

Nevertheless, developmental educators have a professional responsibility to insure that participation in extensive reme-dial courses is required of students only when necessary. To the extent that other, less time consuming and moreefficient alternatives are available, students who might profit from these should have access to them.

Alternatives to Remedial Courses

Traditional Approaches

Traditionally, developmental education has included such activities as remedial/ developmental courses, tutoring, learn-ing laboratories, and various forms of individualized instruction. Although they have been widely criticized, remedial/developmental courses do work. Success in these courses has consistently been found to contribute to improvedstudent academic performance as well as increased student persistence (Boylan, Bonham, Bliss, & Claxton, 1992;Cross, 1976; Donovan, 1975; Roueche & Roueche, 1993; Roueche & Snow, 1977).

Tutoring is one of the primary components of today’s developmental education, and almost all colleges and universitiesprovide some form of it (Maxwell, 1985). Furthermore, tutoring in the basic skill areas consistently has been found tocontribute to student success in courses and improved retention at the institution (Boylan, Bliss, & Bonham, 1997;Donovan, 1975; Maxwell, 1985). This is particularly true when it is accompanied by strong tutor training (Boylan, Bliss,& Bonham, 1997; Casazza & Silverman, 1996).

Individualized learning laboratories and learning centers also represent traditional approaches to developmental educa-tion. When properly implemented, these approaches, too, have been demonstrated to make a positive contribution tostudent success (Boylan, Bliss, & Bonham, 1997; Casazza & Silverman, 1996; Cross, 1976; Maxwell, 1985).

Approaches such as those described have formed the basis of developmental education practice since the 1960s(Cross, 1976). They represent validated interventions with a history of success. They are used by developmental


education practitioners because, when properly implemented, they contribute to the success of students who mightnot otherwise be able to succeed in college. Consequently, there is no reason to abandon them. However, the experi-ence of the past 2 decades suggests that there are other alternatives available which, when combined with traditionaldevelopmental education, can improve the quality of practice even more, reduce the number of students taking reme-dial courses, and, perhaps, lead to even greater student success. At the same time, creative use of these alternativesmight also reduce the amount of time students need to spend in remedial courses.

Alternative Approaches

In addition to traditional approaches, developmental educators and developmental programs currently provide a varietyof more innovative alternatives. Examples of these alternatives include freshmen seminar/orientation courses (Upcraft,Gardner, & Associates, 1989), Supplemental Instruction (Martin & Arendale, 1994), paired or adjunct courses (Com-mander, Stratton, Callahan, & Smith, 1996), collaborative learning communities (Tinto, 1997), and critical thinkingcourses and programs (Chaffee, 1992).

It should, perhaps, be noted that use the term “innovative” as applied to these alternatives is not completely accurate.Many of these interventions have been available since the 1970s and many of them are already used by developmentaleducators. Their use, however, has been limited in developmental programs, particularly as an alternative to remedialcourses.

Freshman seminars. As Dwyer (1989) points out, colleges and universities have provided orientation to incomingstudents through most of this century. At universities, this orientation has occupied a day or two prior to the start ofclasses and involved students learning about their institution, its rules, regulations, procedures, and traditions. Atcommunity colleges, such orientation is generally even more limited.

As college rules and regulations became more complex, as “in loco parentis” was abandoned by institutions, and asmore nontraditional students entered American colleges and universities, this “one shot” approach to orientation be-came increasingly ineffective (Dwyer, 1989). The freshman seminar concept, pioneered by John Gardner at the Univer-sity of South Carolina in the 1970s, provided a much more comprehensive approach to the orientation of first-yearcollege students.

Instead of lasting only a few days, the freshman seminar spans an entire academic term. Instead of concentrating onrules and traditions, the freshman seminar actually explores issues in college life, the purposes of higher education,and the requirements and expectations of college attendance through the vehicle of a regular, credit-bearing, collegecourse conceived as an integral part of the first-year experience (Upcraft, Gardner, & Associates, 1989).

The freshman seminar has proven to be a highly effective way of integrating students into the campus culture andcontributing to increased retention (Fidler & Hunter, 1989; Gardner, 1998). Because developmental students are oftenfirst-generation college students and, therefore, among the least knowledgeable of college lore, rewards, and expecta-tions, the freshman seminar would appear to be a particularly valuable and important experience for them (Gardner).

Participation in the freshman seminar would also enable developmental students to learn more about college life andthe institution and obtain college credit while taking remedial courses. Although participation in the freshman seminardoes not reduce the amount of time required for remediation, it does facilitate the adjustment of nontraditional studentsto college and contribute to their retention (Fidler & Godwin, 1994).

Supplemental Instruction. Supplemental Instruction, also known by its abbreviation as SI, was originally developedin the early 1970s at the University of Missouri-Kansas City by Deanna Martin (1980). It was designed to help medicalschool students succeed in their more difficult courses but has since been successfully applied to a variety of othergroups, including developmental students (Martin & Arendale, 1998).

In Supplemental Instruction, courses in which students typically have difficulty are designated as “high-risk” courses,generally one in which 30% or more of the students enrolled obtain grades of D or F (Commander, Stratton, Callahan,& Smith, 1996). Such courses are targeted for Supplemental Instruction support. A key philosophical component of SI,therefore, is that terms such as “difficult” or “high risk” are assigned to the course rather than the students.


The support provided in SI courses consists of small-group sessions in which students who have taken the coursepreviously serve as small-group leaders. A leader is a fellow student who attends the course, takes notes, and thenmeets with groups of students to discuss techniques necessary for success in the course. The student leader acts asa coach for those taking the course, offering advice and encouragement on note taking, test taking, and other studyskills and strategies. This is all accomplished in small-group sessions where students may also be given oral or writtenquizzes or take practice tests. Another version of SI, Video-Based Supplemental Instruction or VSI, combines tradi-tional SI activities with video tapes of lectures as a further aid in small-group sessions (Martin & Arendale, 1998).

Supplemental Instruction has been found to be particularly effective with developmental students (Blanc, DeBuhr, &Martin, 1983; Commander, Stratton, Callahan, & Smith, 1996; Ramirez, 1997). For example, developmental studentswho participate in Supplemental Instruction during their early years in college are retained at far higher rates than thosewho do not participate (Ramirez, 1997). From this evidence, it appears likely that some of the students placed inremedial courses might be successful in regular curriculum courses supported by Supplemental Instruction.

Learning communities and collaborative learning. Following extensive research using data from the CooperativeInstitutional Research Program, Astin (1993) found that membership in one or more college communities is a criticalfactor in student development as well as retention. A consequence of this is that more aggressive efforts may beneeded to help students develop membership in communities. The concept of learning communities at the college levelis an effort to respond to this need.

At the college level, learning communities are based on the assumption that the classroom is not only a community butthe only academic community that many students, particularly commuters and community college students, are likelyto encounter in their lives. Consequently, it is important to make greater use of the classroom as a place to involvestudents in the academic culture. In a learning community, the classroom not only becomes a place where teachingoccurs but also becomes a community in which students learn to learn.

Learning communities link courses and groups of students so that “students encounter learning as a shared rather thanisolated experience” (Tinto, 1997, p. 602). Typically, a learning community is arranged by having students enroll to-gether as a cohort in several courses linked together by a common theme. The instructors of these courses thenfunction as a team to insure that content in one course is related to content in the other courses and to help studentsmake connections to that content. Students in the learning community also work collaboratively in small groups orteams to solve problems, study, or develop class projects.

Uri Treisman suggests that collaborative learning techniques are particularly important for those students who may befrom nontraditional backgrounds. Results from his workshops indicate that collaborative learning contributes to greatermastery of the subject matter and higher course grades for such students (Garland, 1993). Tinto (1997) reports that theuse of learning communities emphasizing collaborative learning have a positive impact on student attitudes towardlearning. His research also suggests that learning communities and collaborative learning activities have a positiveeffect on the academic performance and persistence of developmental students (Tinto, 1998). The use of learningcommunities in regular curriculum courses, therefore, represents another possible alternative to remedial courses.

Paired courses. Paired courses are, to some degree, related to collaborative learning in that a cohort of studentsregisters for the same two courses. In the paired course model, however, one course is designed to supplement theother course. Rather than engaging students in a series of courses with a common theme, paired courses use thecontent of one course as a focus for the application of skills taught in another course (Commander, Stratton, Callahan,& Smith, 1996). A reading and study strategies course, for instance, might be paired with a sociology course. Theinstructors of the two courses would then work together to insure that the content and rate of coverage of material areconsistent between the two courses. The reading and study strategies course would use the content of the sociologycourse as a focus for the reading and study strategies being taught. In this way, the content of both courses becomesmutually supportive.

The use of paired courses might work well for students who read at somewhere near the level of the sociology text butwho still need to develop their reading and study strategies or other academic skills. It might work well for students whorequire the discipline of a structured classroom setting in order to learn. Paired courses might also provide some of the


benefits of a learning community by emphasizing collaboration and involvement in the learning experience.

Paired courses have been demonstrated to be a successful technique for enhancing the performance of developmentalstudents. Developmental students participating in paired courses tend to show higher levels of performance and dem-onstrate greater satisfaction with their instructional experiences than similar students participating in traditional courses(Commander, Stratton, Callahan, & Smith, 1996; Wilcox, delMas, Stewart, Johnson, & Ghere, 1997).

This research suggests that, for some students, the pairing of a remedial course with a curriculum course may enhancelearning. As such, thoughtful use of paired courses might reduce the amount of time spent in remediation while enablingunderprepared students to earn credit in regular college courses.

Critical thinking instruction. The ability to think critically–to use logic, to analyze information, and to solve problems–is an essential component of success in college. Unfortunately, as Chaffee (1998) points out, students in general anddevelopmental students in particular are rarely taught these skills. As a consequence, the inability to engage in criticalthinking is a major cause for the failure of developmental students.

This problem has been addressed by developmental educators in two ways. One is the provision of a stand-alonecourse or workshop designed to teach critical thinking skills. The other is the integration of critical thinking skilldevelopment activities throughout an entire curriculum. Research suggests that the latter approach is the more effectiveof the two, particularly for the weakest students (Chaffee, 1992; Chaffee, 1998; Elder & Paul, 1994). The model used byJohn Chaffee at LaGuardia Community College is, perhaps, one of the best known methods of integrating criticalthinking into the curriculum. It involves teaching students to:

* solve challenging problems;

* analyze complex issues and arrive at rea- soned conclusions;

* establish appropriate goals and design plans for action;

* analyze complex bodies of information and make informed decisions;

* communicate effectively through, speaking, discussing, and writing; and

* critically evaluate the logic, relevance, and validity of information (Chaffee, 1997).

This is accomplished through a series of courses emphasizing these skills and linked to reading, writing, and commu-nication content.

There is a substantial body of research indicating that the development of critical thinking skills contributes to theacademic success of developmental students. Participation in programs designed to teach critical thinking skills hasproven to enhance student reading and writing skills (Chaffee, 1992), improve student attitudes toward learning (Harris& Eleser, 1997), and improve student ability to do research for class assignments (St. Clair, 1994/95). An emphasis oncritical thinking at the early stages of developmental students’ academic careers may enable them to gain more fromearly remedial courses and, therefore, reduce the amount of time spent in remediation.

Strategic learning. Another approach to improving student learning is found in the individual learning skills coursesdeveloped by Claire Weinstein at the University of Texas at Austin (Weinstein, Dierking, Husman, Roska, & Powdrill,1998). These courses provide students with an awareness of the systems nature of strategic learning, the range offactors which influence learning, and the impact and interaction among these factors.

Unlike many other learning skills courses or programs with focus on specific learning strategies, the strategic learningapproach provides students with a basis from which to manage a variety of strategy choices and evaluate the applica-tion and effectiveness of their choices. In the Weinstein model (Weinstien, personal correspondence, December 29,1998), students receive instruction in both the theoretical underpinnings of strategic learning and the practical applica-tion of specific learning strategies.


Weinstein’s course emphasizes four main components: (a) skill, or cognitive strategies and study skills; (b) will, ormotivation and self-efficacy for learning; (c) self-regulation, or time management and comprehension monitoring; and(d) academic environment, or social support and the nature of the task. Based on these main points, students learnto strategically match their selection of learning strategies to task demands and their own learning goals; identifyproblems and potential problems in the application of these strategies; and generate alternative learning plans basedon solution-relevant factors in the context of particular problems (Weinstien, Dierking, Husman, Roska, & Powdrill,1998).

A major benefit of strategic learning instruction is that students are able to transfer the knowledge gained to othersubjects and other courses. Furthermore, these benefits appear to last throughout students’ college careers. Asevidence of this, Weinstein points out that those who participate in the course are retained and graduate at rates higherthan those of the general student population and even those who enter the course with low placement scores areretained and graduate at a rate of 71% (Weinstein, personal correspondence, December 29, 1998). Participation in thecourse also has contributed to the improvement of subsequent GPA for high-risk students (Weinstein, Dierking, Husman,Roska, & Powdrill, 1998).

Certainly developmental students could benefit from this sort of training. It may not only improve their capacity tosucceed more rapidly in early remedial courses but also improve their likelihood of success in the regular curriculum.

Implementing Alternative Approaches

All of the interventions discussed here, both traditional and alternative, have been and can be provided through admin-istrative agencies organized as developmental education programs or learning assistance centers. Typically, develop-mental education programs are organized around a collection of courses whereas learning assistance centers areorganized around a battery of support services. Frequently, these services are provided outside of either developmentalprograms or learning assistance centers. They are sometimes provided by counseling centers, academic departments,or student affairs programs. Often, they are not even targeted for underprepared students; instead, they are offered tostudents in a particular course or program, to honors students, or to any students choosing to participate. In essence,services that are frequently available to all students at an institution may be of particular benefit to developmentalstudents.

Although many of these alternative approaches were not necessarily designed for developmental students, they havebeen shown to be effective for them and they have been widely adopted by developmental educators. A review of themost recent College Reading and Learning Association Conference program, for instance, indicates that 15 of 88 or17% of concurrent sessions considered at least one of these innovative approaches. A review of the most recentprogram of the National Association for Developmental Education Conference indicates that 24 of 177 or 12.4% ofconcurrent sessions considered at least one of these approaches.

It is apparent that those who work with developmental students are well aware of alternatives to remedial courses. Theproblem is that they provide these alternatives randomly. Developmental educators do not offer these options nor dotheir students have access to them on a systematic basis. There are few, if any, institutions or programs in which:

(a) a variety of alternatives to remedial courses are regularly provided,

(b) developmental students have systematic access to them,

(c) assessment and advising are used to insure that appropriate options are made available to meet the particularneeds of individual students, and

(d) all these features are organized in a systematic manner.

It is this failure to bring to bear the resources available to assist developmental students in a manner consistent withtheir individual characteristics and to do this in a systematic fashion for which most developmental programs may justlybe criticized. We have the means to provide alternatives to remedial courses and to do so in a manner consistent withindividual student needs. We simply have not organized and delivered the alternatives systematically.


Conclusion

Obviously, the key to the success of efforts to reduce the need for remedial courses is a systematic relationshipbetween assessment, advising, and placement activities. Such a systematic approach requires a strong advisingprogram based on information obtained from a combination of cognitive and affective assessment. It would probablyrequire some retraining of academic advisors and counselors and would certainly require retraining of some faculty.This systematic approach would also require greater collaboration between developmental educators and those whoprovide Supplemental Instruction, freshmen seminars, critical thinking courses, and other interventions representingan alternative to remedial courses. If more developmental students are to take advantage of these alternative inter-ventions, it might also require that more personnel and financial resources be assigned to these interventions,regardless of whether they were provided by the developmental program, the learning center, or through othercampus agencies.

Using the alternative intervention techniques described here, it should be possible to reduce the amount of timestudents spend in remedial courses. These alternatives would not only reduce the amount of time students spend inremediation, they might also reduce the number of students enrolled in remedial courses. They would, however,require more training of advisors and faculty, more collaboration among developmental educators and curriculumfaculty, and, most likely, more resources than are currently assigned to developmental education.

This article has outlined a response to criticisms of remedial courses. It has described a variety of research-basedalternatives to remedial courses. It has suggested that these alternatives be provided through a systematic integra-tion of assessment, placement, and instruction designed to reduce the need for remedial courses on the campusesof American colleges and universities.

The interventions and approaches required to provide alternatives are not altogether innovative; most of them havebeen available for at least a decade or two. It is the systematic integration of these techniques with the assessmentand advising process that represents a highly plausible alternative to traditional remedial courses. This alternativealso represents, in the words of Pat Cross, a paradigm shift “Beyond education for all—Toward education for each”(Cross, 1976, p.3).

Reprinted from the Journal of Developmental Education, Volume 22, Issue 3, Spring, 1999.


PersistenceStudents Who Enroll in Subsequent Semesters

86 8589

8591 91

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Spring 1997 Fall 1997 Spring 1998 Fall 1998 Spring 1999 Fall 1999

Per

cent

age

of S

tude

nts

Spring 1997 N=14Fall 1997 N=91Spring 1998 N=58Fall 1998 N=66Spring 1999 N=71Fall 1999 N=69

Retention RatesThe Number of Students Who Completed the Semester100

8792 94

87 8986

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Spring 1997 Fall 1997 Spring 1998 Fall 1998 Spring 1999 Fall 1999 Spring 2000

Per

cent

age

of S

tude

nts

Spring 1997 N=14Fall 1997 N=91Spring 1998 N=58Fall 1998 N=66Spring 1999 N=71Fall 1999 N=69Spring 2000 N=46

SUSANNE ADAMSLEARNING COMMUNITIES EVALUATIONS


Retention Rates

77

91

82

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Developmental Students (Non-LearningCommunity)

Learning Community Students General College Population

Per

cent

age

of S

tude

nts

'98 - '99 '98 - '99 '98 - '99

Persistence

60

85

48

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Developmental Students (Non-Learning Community)

Learning Community Students General College Population

Per

cent

age

of S

tude

nts

'98 - '99 '98 - '99 '98 - '99

COMPARISON OF DEVELOPMENTAL STUDENTS,DEVELOPMENTAL LEARNING COMMUNITY STUDENTS ANDTHE GENERAL COLLEGE POPULATION


Satisfaction Rates

93 9194 93 92 91

96

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100


Per

cent

age

of S

tude

nts


Pass Rates

92

71

8582

92 93

83

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100


Per

cent

age

of S

tude

nts


LEARNING COMMUNITY PASS RATESSTUDENTS MUST PASS COURSES WITH A “C” OR BETTER


QUESTIONS INSTITUTIONS SHOULD EXPLORE PRIOR TOIMPLEMENTING LEARNING COMMUNITIES

• Develop a Vision Based on the Needs and Resources of Your Institution.What do you expect Learning Communities to accomplish on your campus?

• Identify Your Program Needs.What are the retention rates, persistence rates, pass rates, satisfaction rates, and grades infirst curriculum courses for your developmental students?

• Identify Your Resources.What are your resources in terms of funding, faculty, administrative support, and physicalspace for the project?

• Plan for Implementation.What are the factors that relate to internal control of the project such as leadership, courses,extracurricular activities, and marketing to the institution? What are the factors that relate toexternal control of the project such as advising and registration of students in learning com-munities?

• Sustaining Communities on Your CampusWhat will you evaluate and how will you evaluate your learning communities? How you willshare the results of the project? How will you expand and refine your learning communities?

Learning Communities at Sandhills Community College

• Include approximately 24 students moving through a block of three or four classes

• Have faculty who meet weekly to integrate the curriculum, provide comprehensive academicsupport, and plan extracurricular activities related to the trigger course

• Offer three different levels of courses to accommodate a variety of student abilities

• Include a curriculum credit course

The Impact of Learning Communities at Sandhills

• Increased retention, persistence, pass rates in developmental courses, pass rates in subse-quent developmental and curriculum courses, and satisfaction rates

• Encouraged student interdependence and a place in the academic community

• Provided a new option for learning and teaching

• Encouraged collaboration among faculty

• Increased communication and cooperation among various departments

• Provided opportunities for innovative curriculum development

• Created an atmosphere in which educators and students are learning partners


LEARNING COMMUNITY BLOCK SCHEDULES AT SANDHILLSSPRING 1997 TO SPRING 2000

Spring 1997 Pilot n=14ENG 080RED 080MAT 060ACA 115

This pilot community was created during the last quarter offered at Sandhills. Only one section ofeach course was offered, so a natural community was created. Courses were linked thematically,and the ACA course was taught by a counselor in student services.

Fall 1997 n = 91Circle 1 Circle 2 Circle 3 Circle 4ACA 115 ACA 115 ACA 115 ACA 115ENG 060 ENG 060 ENG 060 ENG 090/090AENG 080 ENG 080 ENG 080 RED 090RED 080 RED 080 RED 090 PSY 150

Encouraged by spring evaluation data, we offered four communities in Fall 1997. For the firsttime, we offered PSY 150 as the first curriculum course integrated into a community. In hindsight,we did not have enough resources or structure in place to offer this many circles. During thissemester and the spring 1998 semester, we began to identify resources and build structure.

Spring 1998 n = 58Circle 1 Circle 2 Circle 3ACA 115 ACA 115 ACA 115ENG 060 ENG 060 ENG 090/090AENG 080 ENG 080 PSY 150MAT 060 RED 090 RED 090RED 080

Learning an important lesson from fall 1997, we offered fewer circles and worked harder to inte-grate PSY 150. Also, we added MAT 060 to Circle 1 at the request of students and instructors.

Fall 1998 n = 66Circle 1 Circle 2 Circle 3ACA 115 ACA 115 ACA 115ENG 060 ENG 060 ENG 090/090AENG 080 ENG 080 RED 090RED 080 RED 090 PSY 150MAT 060

Again, we decided to keep fall semester small and added supplemental instruction to PSY 150.


LEARNING COMMUNITY BLOCK SCHEDULES AT SANDHILLS

Spring 1999 n = 71

Circle 1 Circle 2 Circle 3 Circle 4ACA 115 ACA 115 ACA 115 ACA 115ENG 060 ENG 060 ENG 090/090A ENG 090/090AENG 080 ENG 080 RED 090 SOC 210RED 080 RED 090 ART 111MAT 060

As more faculty learned about our communities, they began offering to integrate curriculumcourses into our communities. Offering a curriculum credit course is a great incentive for devel-opmental students. In Spring 1999, ART 111 and SOC 210 were included in our highest levelcircles. Also, we designed Circle 4 as a community for students who participated in the twolowest level circles in fall 1998 (those two circles were identical to circles 1 and 2 in spring1999). These students were excited about moving into another community.

Fall 1999 n = 60

Circle 1 Circle 2 Circle 3 Circle 4 Circle 5ENG 080 CIS 110 ENG 090 ENG 090 ENG 090ENG 060 ENG 060 ENG 090A ENG 090A ENG 090AMAT 060 ENG 080 RED 090 RED 090 RED 090RED 080 RED 090 ART 111 MAT 070 SOC 210

PHY 110PHY 110A

As we sustain and expand learning communities, we are now offering a curriculum credit coursein every circle except circle 1.

Spring 2000 n = 44

Circle 1 Circle 2 Circle 3 Circle 4ENG 080 ENG 080 ENG 090/090A ENG 090/090AENG 060 ENG 060 RED 090 RED 090RED 080 RED 090 ART 111 SOC 210MAT 060 CIS 110


DEVELOPMENTAL LEARNING COMMUNITIESFALL 2000--SANDHILLS COMMUNITY COLLEGE

Circle OneCourse Title Instructor Days TimeENG 080 Writing Foundations Danley M-F 10:00ENG 060 Speaking English Well Fitzgerald M,W 11:00RED 080 Intro to College Reading Huneycutt M-F 12:00MAT 060 Essential Mathematics Dennison M-F 9:00

Circle Two, Keyboarding ElectiveCourse Title Instructor Days TimeENG 080 Writing Foundations Danley M-F 9:00ENG 060 Speaking English Well Fitzgerald T, Th 11:00RED 090 Improved College Reading Huneycutt M-F 10:00OST 131 Keyboarding Lucas M, W, F 12:00

Circle Three, Humanities ElectiveCourse Title Instructor Days TimeENG 090 Composition Strategies Danley M, W, F 11:00ENG 090A Comp. Strategies Lab Danley T, Th 11:00RED 090 Improved College Reading Fitzgerald M-F 12:00ART 111 Art Appreciation Stuckey M, W, F 10:00ACA 115 Success and Study Skills Fitzgerald T, Th 1:00

Circle Four, Social Science ElectiveCourse Title Instructor Days TimeENG 090 Composition Strategies Fitzgerald M, W, F 10:00ENG 090A Comp. Strategies Lab Fitzgerald T, Th 10:00RED 090 Improved College Reading Huneycutt M-F 9:00SOC 210 Intro. to Sociology Allen M, W, F 8:00

Students must sign up for each course in the block so that instructors will be ableto integrate the curriculum.

*Please encourage students to also enroll in ACA 115, if not previously taken.

**Students in Circles three and four should also enroll in math or other courses for whichthey are asset qualified.


GENERATIONS – A DEVELOPMENTAL EDUCATION INITIATIVE

One generation - the dedicated retirees of the community, recruited and trained bySandhills Community College – work to help students of today’s generation de-velop the education and skills to become the leaders of tomorrow’s generations.

The Scope of the Problem:

Nearly two-thirds of the students who enter Sandhills Community College are unpreparedto do college work.

The Goal:

To raise the overall success rate of developmental students from 50% to 70% within fiveyears.

The Mission:

• To create a technology-based learning environment with classroom instruction andvolunteer assistance.

• To create options for student learning by offering self-paced class instruction.• To allow access to technology in developmental reading, English, and math.• To provide tutoring by trained volunteers.• To promote independent study through volunteer-staffed open labs.

The Generations Volunteers:

• Are recruited from computer courses offered in the Department of ContinuingEducation at Sandhills Community College or from local organizations.

• Will complete four hours of training in Plato and teaching the adult learner.• Observe at least two developmental class sessions.• Commit at least two hours per week to the program.• May choose to be a classroom assistant, tutor/mentor, and or open lab assistant.

The Results:

• Over 70 retired volunteers are currently part of the project.• 100% of developmental students have access to technology and volunteer assis-

tance.• The pass rate in developmental classes is 79%.• The pass rate of developmental tutees is 76%.• The pass rate in first-curriculum classes is 69%.• Evaluation of self-paced classes reveals:

Pass rate = 92.5%Retention rate = 81%Persistence rate = 94%Satisfaction rate = 97%


USES OF TECHNOLOGY IN DEVELOPMENTAL EDUCATIONDAVID CAVERLY


NATIONAL CENTER FOR DEVELOPMENTAL EDUCATIONRESOURCE DISSEMINATION

People to People Network

The constantly expanding computerized network links experienced resource persons withthose who are seeking information. Access to this unique data base of resource consult-ants in over 32 different content areas is obtained by calling the National Center or access-ing the NCDE web page. A minimum fee is charged to access the computerized informa-tion base in the area(s) of interest.

Materials Collection

The National Center maintains the nation’s most extensive resource library of over 800volumes in the field of developmental education. This collection includes reference books,journals, periodicals, newsletters, magnetic media, and other resources such as researchand technical reports, program descriptions, sample instructional materials, etc.

Consultation and Technical Assistance

Through its residential and adjunct staff, the National Center provides a small group ofhighly skilled consultants who are available to work with higher education agencies andinstitutions in all areas of developmental education. For specific information please call orwrite.

Workshops, Conferences, and Symposia

The National Center, through periodic workshops, conferences, and symposia, contributesto the professional growth options available to personnel working with underpreparedadults. The focus of these activities is on research, materials, techniques, and practicesthat have proven effective in the field. Information about these activities may be obtainedby requesting placement on the mailing list.

INSTRUCTION AND TRAINING

Kellogg Institute

The nationally recognized Kellogg Institute provides an intensive summer training programfollowed by a semester-long practicum carried out on participants’ home campuses. TheInstitute’s summer session features four, week-long seminars on the topics of studentassessment and placement, program evaluation, teaching and learning, and academicsupport services for students. The seminars are led by carefully selected practitioners andtheoreticians from across the country, who live in residence with Institute participants.During the summer session, participants design a program development project in consul-tation with Institute staff and advisors. The project is then implemented during the subse-quent academic year under the supervision of selected faculty. Those who successfullycomplete the summer training session and the practicum are certified as “DevelopmentalEducation Specialists.” Optional graduate credit is available through the Institute. TheKellogg Institute derives its name from its founding agency, the W. K. Kellogg Foundation.


Graduate Programs in Developmental Education

Appalachian State University was the first institution in the United States to offer graduate-level training in developmental education. Both the Master’s and the Educational Special-ist degrees are available through the Department of Leadership and Educational Studies.Qualified members of the national Center staff hold graduate faculty appointments in vari-ous departments where they teach and advise students pursuing a degree in developmen-tal education. The National Center enhances graduate course offerings by providingopportunities for students to participate in workshops, conferences, research, and publica-tion activities.

Advanced Studies in Developmental Education/Visiting Scholar Program

Because the National Center is engaged in a wide variety of activities at the local, regional,and national levels, it is well suited as a place of renewal and reflection for those on schol-arly or sabbatical leave. Personalized studies from one week to a full academic year canbe arranged. Visiting scholars are usually mentored by senior members of the Center staff,faculty in the Department of Leadership and Educational Studies, or faculty in thediscipline(s) of interest. Inquiries are invited.

RESEARCH

The National Center conducts or coordinates a variety of sponsored and individual re-search activities. The Center’s major research project is the ongoing National Study ofDevelopmental Education, originally funded by the Exxon Education Foundation. Ex-amples of other sponsored Center research projects include the Study of Minority StudentRetention, funded by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation; the Annotated Research Bibliogra-phies in Development Education (ARBIDE); the study of state policies on developmentaleducation, supported by the League for Innovation in the Community College; and the studyof developmental education in Texas, funded by the Texas Higher Education CoordinationBoard. The National Center has sponsored two national conferences on research in devel-opmental education in 1992 and 1996 in Charlotte, North Carolina, and plans a third for thefall of 2001. Over 700 participants attended these two conferences where future researchagendas were discussed and developed. The Center has conducted or cooperated in thestatewide evaluations of developmental education for Minnesota, Texas, South Carolina,and Mississippi on a contract basis. In addition, the Center supports its own continuingstudy of the efficacy of various techniques for the delivery of developmental education. TheCenter’s staff and resources are available on a grant or contract basis for assistance inresearch and demonstration projects. Its extensive collection of research materials, bibli-ographies, and data bases are also available to individuals and agencies studying devel-opmental education.

PUBLICATIONS

Journal of Developmental Education (JDE)

JDE is recognized as the definitive periodical serving educators concerned with the field.Guided by a national Board of Editors, the Journal publishes articles which focus on devel


opmental education activities such as remediation, tutoring, advising, counseling, andother adjacent fields addressing college students at risk. Practice, theory, applied re-search, and news of interest to the postsecondary developmental and remedial educationcommunity are included in the Journal. It is characterized by innovative and challengingideas as well as current information to keep the developmental educator abreast ofchanges in the field. To read the Journal, request a subscription; to submit manuscripts forpublication consideration, request a copy of the “Authors’ Guidelines;” and to evaluate it,send for a complimentary copy. The Journal is published each fall, winter, and springduring the academic year.

Research in Developmental Education (RIDE)

RIDE is a highly informative newsletter designed to review current research in areasrelating to the practice of developmental education. Many issues include a review ofrelevant research, a summary of research findings, or a list of suggested resources forlearning about the topic under consideration. RIDE is published five times per academicyear.

Annotated Research Bibliographies in Developmental Education (ARBIDE)

The ARBIDE Project is a complete collection of research annotations in the areas ofAssessment and Placement; Critical Thinking, Developmental Mathematics, Developmen-tal Reading, Developmental Writing, Minority Student Retention, and Tutoring. Each bibli-ography includes nearly 100 citations representing the best developmental education-related research of the past decade. An invaluable resource for staff or program develop-ment as well as research, individual topics or the complete ARBIDE collection is availableon disk or in hard copy. Information is available upon inquiry or from the NCDE website.

Annotated Bibliography of Major Journals in Developmental Education, Volume 2

A bibliography of all the articles in the three major journals in the field from 1991-1998; thispublication is a definitive resource for practice and inquiry into all aspects of developmen-tal education. It is an outstanding tool for the scholar / practitioner.

For further information contact:

National Center for Developmental EducationP.O. Box 32098Appalachian State UniversityBoone, NC 28608-2098Phone (828) 262-3057Fax (828) 262-2128www.ncde.appstate.edu


SOUTHWEST TEXAS STATE UNIVERSITY

TECHNOLOGY INSTITUTE FOR DEVELOPMENTAL EDUCATORS

July 22 - July 27, 2001

Co-sponsored by

College Reading & Learning Assoc. (CRLA) and

National Assoc.for Developmental Education (NADE)

Come join us at the 3rd Annual Southwest Texas State University Technology Institute for

Developmental Education (SWT-TIDE).

Designed by and for college developmental educators, SWT-TIDE is 5 days ofmentoring and hands-on practice for honing your technology skills. Learn what you needand choose from workshops on topics such as:

• Basic Computer Applications• Multimedia Slide Shows• Online Course Development• Online Discussion Groups• Web pages and Hypermedia• Desktop Publishing• Teaching with Technology

Technology Expertise takes practice, time and mentorship

There’s rarely enough time in the work day–or even at a conference–for the time andresources you need. You need a technology vacation with us!

Aquarena Springs is on the campus of Southwest Texas State University in San Marcos,Texas.

Although Ralph the Swimming Pig has retired, the “Natural Aquarium of Texas” offersunique attractions–a glass bottom boat ride along the San Marcos River, endangeredspecies exhibits, a 9 hole golf course, and outdoor pools. Nearby, enjoy the picturesquecollege campus that was LBJ’s alma mater, go river tubing, and explore quaint hill-countrycommunities.

Only 30 minutes from Austin and 45 minutes from San Antonio, San Marcos also is hometo one of the country’s premier Outlet Malls.


Learn from experienced technology mentors

• Work on a team of developmental educators who share your interests• Pursue your own project• Enjoy Great Food, Great Company, and New Ideas, in an historic setting• Leave with your Technology Stripes (on your TIDE T-shirt)

SWT-TIDE Coordinators

Dr. David CaverlyTechTalk columnist for Journal of Developmental EducationProfessor/Director Developmental Reading Program

Dr. Russ HodgesPast President of TxCRLACoordinator, Undergraduate Programs, Educational Administration & PsychologicalServices

Dr. Cynthia PetersonDevelopmental educator specializing in technology integration Associate Professor of Curriculum & Instruction

Fees

$675Includes TIDE Conference Registration, transportation to and from airport, materials, allmeals including a San Antonio Riverwalk dinner cruise, happy hours, evening hospitalitysuites, and post-conference support.

$250Lodging for 5 nights at the Historic Aquarena Inn

We can arrange for 3 credit hours of graduate or C.E.U credit hours for an additional fee.Ask us about it!

Contact

Dr. David C. CaverlyDept. of Curriculum and InstructionSouthwest Texas State University601 University DriveSan Marcos, TX 78666-4616Email: [email protected]: 512.245.3100

We will send a registration packet. Or register online at: www.ci.swt.edu/TIDE/TIDEhome.htm


Purpose

Mission

DevelopmentalEducationDefined

History

Membership

ExecutiveBoard

Responses to Frequently Asked Questions AboutThe National Association for Developmental EducationNADE seeks to improve the theory and practice of developmental education in postsecondaryeducation, the professional capabilities of developmental educators, and the design of programs toprepare developmental educators.

NADE focuses on the academic success of college students by 1) providing professional develop-ment, 2) supporting student learning, 3) providing public leadership, 4) expanding learning, 5) dis-seminating exemplary models of practice, 6) coordinating efforts with other organizations, 7) facilitat-ing communication among developmental education professionals, and 8) anticipating future trends.

Developmental education is defined as a comprehensive process which focuses on the intellectual,social, and emotional growth and development of all post-secondary students. Developmentaleducation includes but is not limited to tutoring, personal and career counseling, academic advise-ment, and course work.

NADE was founded in 1976 in Chicago as the National Association for Remedial/ Develop-mentalStudies in Postsecondary Education. NADE established its first local chapter in New York City in1979, the same year NADE membership increased to more than 1,200. The Journal of Developmen-tal Education became the official journal of the association, and awards were established for out-standing service. The organization officially became NADE in 1984. The association’s conferencesadded pre- and post-conference institutes and more exhibitors. Increased revenues enabled morecommittee activities, more revenues shared with chapters, better communications and services tomembers, and a wider range of conference activities. Recent initiatives include international involve-ment, political liaison efforts, self-assessment guidelines, and certification processes.

Membership during 1999 included 2551 professional educators, with 31 chapters representing all 50states, the District of Columbia, and the Caribbean. The annual national conference attracts 1300-1400 members each year with 200 concurrent sessions. Over 4000 chapter members attend stateand regional conferences yearly. NADE supports 11 awards and 2 scholarships, while NADE’scommittee structure involves over 100 volunteers to carry on the business of the association. FifteenSpecial Professional Interest Networks (SPINs) provide opportunities for growth in specializationswithin developmental education.

President Vice President President ElectLinda R. Thompson, Ed.D. Karen Patty-Graham, Ed.D. Carol S. O’Shea, Ph.D.Student Support Services Peck 1404, Box 1630 P. O. Box 10,000Harding Univ., Box 12235 Southern Ill. Univ. Edwardsville Owens Comm. CollegeSearcy, AR 72149-0001 Edwardsville, IL 62026 Toledo, OH 43699-1947501-279-4416 618-650-3717 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

Secretary TreasurerCarol Atnip, M.S. Ed. Bobbie Yellott, Ph.D.Div. of Transitional Studies P. O. Box 92340University of Louisville McNeese State UniversityLouisville, KY 40292 Lake Charles, LA 70609-2340502-852-8109 [email protected] [email protected]

NADE FACT SHEET 2000


NADE FACT SHEET 2000

♦ Journals, monographs, newsletters, directories and other materials♦ Conferences and workshops at both the national and regional level♦ Special Interest Groups that provide opportunities to become more skilled in specialties♦ Jobs clearinghouse for information concerning developmental education job opportunities♦ Political liaison network sharing information with legislators and Policy makers♦ Mentoring from past presidents of NADE♦ Networking through membership directories and opportunities at conferences♦ Leadership opportunities at the chapter and national level♦ Awards programs to recognize individual, departmental, and chapter achievements♦ Publication/presentation opportunities in newsletters, monographs, journals, conferences♦ Financial grants to support graduate education and to conduct research

♦ To preserve and make possible educational opportunity for each postsecondary learner♦ To develop skills and attitudes necessary for the attainment of academic career and life goals♦ To ensure proper placement by assessing levels of preparedness for college course work♦ To maintain academic standards by enabling learners to acquire competencies needed for success in mainstream college courses♦ To enhance the retention of students♦ To promote the development and application of cognitive and affective learning theory

NADE will celebrate its Silver Anniversary in Louisville, Kentucky, March 14–18, 2001. The celebrationwill begin with the opening reception at the newly renovated Kentucky Derby Museum in the shadowsof the twin spires of the famous and historic Churchill Downs, home of the Kentucky Derby. The themeof the conference is Setting the Pace: 25 Years of Excellence . The featured speaker of the confer-ence is Vincent Tinto, Ph.D., author of Leaving College: Rethinking the Causes and Cures of StudentAttrition. The keynote address will be given by Marilyn Sternglass, Ph.D., author of Time to KnowThem: A Longitudinal Study of Writing and Learning at the College Level.

Purpose History ConferenceMr. David Arendale Dr. Hunter Boylan Dr. Carol Atnip211 SASS Building 360 Duncan Hall Div. Of Transitional StudiesUniv. Mo. Kansas City Appalachian State Univ. University of LouisvilleKansas City, MO 64110 Boone, NC 28608 Louisville, KY 40292816-235-1197 828-262-3057 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

Research Assessment Certification BoardDr. Bonnie Henrie Dr. Barbara Bonham Dr. Martha CasazzaLearning Resources 331 Duncan Hall Developmental Ed. StudiesUtah Valley St. College Appalachian State University National Louis UniversityOrem, UT 84058 Boone, NC 28608 Chicago, IL 60603801-222-8311 828-262-6036 312-621-9650 [email protected] bonhambs@conrad. [email protected]

appstate.edu

You can get more information about our association by visiting the NADEWeb site: http://nade.net

Services toMembers

Goals ofDevelopmentalEducation

2001 NationalConference

Contacts

Web Page


SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY PREPARED BY HUNTER BOYLAN

Angelo, T. (1998, Fall). Classroom assessment and research: An update on uses, approaches andresearch findings. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, # 75. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Angelo, T. and Cross, K. (1993). Classroom assessment techniques: A handbook for college teachers.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Belenky, M.F., and others 91986). Women’s ways of knowing: The development of self, voice, and mind.New York, NY: Basic Books.

Boylan, H., Bliss, L., & Bonham, C. (1997). Program components and their relationship to student performance. Journal of Development Education, 20(3), 2-8.

Boylan, H., & Saxon, D. (1998). An evaluation of developmental education in Texas Colleges and Universities. Austin, TX: Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board.

Boylan, H. (1999). Exploring alternatives to remediation. Journal of Developmental Education, 22(3), 2-11.

Breneman, D., & Haarlow, W. (1998). Remedial Education: What it is, what it costs. Washington, DC: TheFordham Foundation.

Brookfield, S. (1995). Becoming a critically reflective teacher. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Brookfield, S. and Preskill, S. (1999). Discussion as a way of teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Casazza, M., & Silverman, S. (1996). Learning assistance and developmental education. San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.

Chickering, A., & Reisser, L. (1993). Education and identity. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Commander, N., Stratton, C., Callahan, C., & Smith, B. (1996). A learning assistance model for expandingacademic support. Journal of Developmental Education, 20(2), 8-16.

Cross, K. (1971). Beyond the open door. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Cross, K. (1976). Accent on Learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Daloz, L.A. (1999). Mentor: Guiding the journey of adult learners. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Gaither, G. (1999, Winter). Promising practices in recruitment, remediation, and retention. New Directionsin Higher Education, Number 108. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Grimes, S., & David, K. (1999). Underprepared community college students: Implications of attitudinal andexperiential differences. Community College Review, 27(2), 73-92.

Grubb, W.N., and Associates (1999). Honored but invisible: An inside look at teaching in communitycolleges. New York, NY: Routledge.

Higbee, J., & Dwinnell, P. (1998). Developmental education: Preparing successful college students.Columbia, SC: National Resource Center for the First Year Experience and Students in Transition.

Hoyt, J. (1999). Remedial education and student attrition. Community College Review,27(2), 51-72.

Jarvis, P. (1998). The practitioner-researcher: Developing theory from practice. SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass.


Lavin, D., & Hyllegard, L. (1996). Changing the odds: Open admissions and the life changes of the disadvantaged. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press

Lowman, J. (1996). Mastering the techniques of teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Maxwell, M. (1997). Improving student learning skills. Clearwater, FL: H & H Publishing Company.

McCabe, R., & Day, P. (1998, June). Developmental education: A 21st century social and economic imperative. Mission Viejo, CA: League for Innovation in the Community College.

McKeachie, W. J. Teaching tips: Strategies, research, and theory for college and university teachers.Lexington, MA: D.C. Health

Perry, W.G. (1998). Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years. San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.

Roueche, J., & Snow, G. (1977). Overcoming learning problems. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Roueche, J., & Roueche, S. (1993). Between a rock and a hard place: The at-risk student in the open doorcollege. Washington, DC: Community College Press.

Roueche, J., & Roueche, S. (1999). Remedial education: High stakes, high performance. Washington,DC: Community College Press.

Shapiro, N., & Levine, J. (1999). Creating learning communities: A practical guide to winning support,organizing for chance, and implementing programs. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Silverman, S., & Casazza, M. (1999). Learning and development: Making connections to enhance teaching.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Stahl, N., Simpson, M., Hayes, C. (1992). Ten recommendations from Research for teaching high riskcollege students. Journal of Developmental Education, 16(1), 2-10.

Tinto, V. (1986). Leaving college: The causes and cures of student attrition. Chicago: University ofChicago Press.

Tinto, V. (1997). Classrooms as communities: Exploring the educational character of student persistence.Journal of Higher Education, 68(6), 599-623.

Weinstein, C, Dierkling, D., Hussman, J., Roska, K., & Powdrill, L. (1998). The impact of a course onstrategic learning on the long-term retention of college students. In J. Higbee & P Dwinnel (Eds.),Developmental Education: Preparing successful college students, (pp. 85-96). Columbia, SC:National Resource Center for the First Year Experience and Students in Transition.


SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY PREPARED BY SUSANNE ADAMS

Adams, S. & Huneycutt, K. 1998. Building a community of learners. NADE Selected Conference Papers,4:1-3.

Adams, S. & Huneycutt, K. 1998. Developmental education at Sandhills Community College: A communityof support. Developmental Education : A Twenty First Century Social and Economic Imperative. TheLeague for Innovations in the Community College.

Astin, A. 1993. What matters in college? San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Gabelnick, F., MacGregor, J., Matthews, R., & Smith, B.L. 1990. Learning communities: Creating connections among students, faculty, and disciplines. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, No. 41.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Levine, J., ed. 1999. Learning Communities: New Structures, New Partnerships for Learning, No. 26. SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Matthews, R. 1986. Learning communities in the community college. AACJC Journal. Oct/ Nov.: 44-47.

Smith, B.L. 1991. Taking structure seriously: The learning community model. Liberal Education. 77 (2): 42-48.

Smith, B.L. 1993. Creating learning communities. Liberal Education. 79 (4): 32-39.

Tinto, V., Goodsell Love, A. & Russo, P. 1993. Building community. Liberal Education, 79 (4).

Tinto, V., Russo, P. & Kadel, S. 1994. Constructing educational communities in challenging circumstances.Community College Journal. 64 (4): 26-30.

Tinto, V. 1997. Classrooms as communities: Exploring the educational character of student persistence.Journal of Higher Education. 68 (6): 600-623.

Tinto, V. 1998. Learning communities and the reconstruction of remedial education in higher education.Prepared for presentation at the “Conference on Replacing Remediation in Higher Education” atStanford University, January 26-27.

Learning Community Website at Sandhills Community College: www.sandhills.cc.nc.us. Refer to Advising/Tutoring


SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY PREPARED BY DAVID CAVERLY

Caverly, D. C. (2000). Bridging the GAP between information and knowledge: Integrating technology intodevelopmental education. Retrieved August 15, 2000 from the World Wide Web: http://www.ci.swt.edu/Faculty/Caverly/Publications/BridgingtheGap.html

Caverly, D. C., & MacDonald, L. (1999). Designing online developmental education courses. Journal ofDevelopmental Education, 23(1), 34-35.

Caverly, D. C., Mandeville, T. P., & Nicholson, S. A. (1995). PLAN: A study-reading strategy for informational text. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 39(3), 190-199.

Caverly, D. C., & Peterson, C. L. (2000). In R. F. Flippo & D. C. Caverly (Eds.) Technology and collegereading, Handbook of college reading and study strategy research (pp. 291-320). Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum & Associates.

Chickering, A. W., & Ehrmann, S. C. (1999). Implementing the seven principles: Technology as lever.Retrieved August 14, 1999 from the World Wide Web: http://www.aahe.org/technology/ehrmann.htm Henry, T. (1998, September 30). Computers No Guarantee of Higher Test Scores.USA Today, pp. 7D.

Koski, W. S., & Levin, H. M. (1998). Replacing remediation with acceleration in higher education: Preliminary report on literature review and initial interviews. Retrieved August 14, 2000 from the WorldWide Web: http://www.stanford.edu/group/ncpi/publications/4-01_Remediation.pdf

Lewis, L., Farris, E., & Greene, B. (1996). Remedial education at higher education institutions in Fall 1995.Statistical analysis report. Retrieved August 14, 2000 from the World Wide Web: http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=97584

McBride, J. (1996). The color of water: A black man’s tribute to his white mother. New York: RiverheadBooks.

Navarro, P., & Shoemaker, J. (1999). The power of cyberlearning: An empirical test. Journal of Computing inHigher Education.

Phillips, R. (1998). College remediation: What it is; what it costs; what’s at stake? Retrieved August 11,1999 from the World Wide Web: http://www.ihep.com/Remediation.pdf

Rdg1300 0NLINE (2000). Retrieved August 17, 2000 from the World Wide Web: http://www.ci.swt.edu/courses/RDG1300Nicholson/OnlineRDG1300.htm

Sinagra, M., Battle, J., & Nicholson, S. (1998). E-mail “Booktalking”: Engaging developmental readers withauthors and others in the academic community. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 29(1), 30-40.

Spiro, R. J., Coulson, R. L., Feltovich, P. J., & Anderson, D. K. (1994). In R. B. Ruddell, M. R. Ruddell., &H. Singer (Eds.) Cognitive flexibility theory: Complex knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domains, Theoretical models and processes of reading,4th ed. (pp. 602-615). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Stahl, N. A., Simpson, M. L., & Hayes, C. G. (1992). Ten recommendations from research for teachinghigh-risk college students. Journal of Developmental Education, 16(1), 2-10.

Wilson, R.J., Gilbert, J., Nissenbaum, S., Kupperman, K.O., & Scott, D. (1990). Chapter 9: A new north.In The Pursuit of Liberty: A History of the American People; Volume 1,2nd ed. (pp. 371-414).Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishers.


STARLINK is a statewide training network that produces and distributes programming to benefitdiverse educational and governmental audiences. As a cooperative enterprise among Texascommunity and technical colleges, STARLINK maximizes the use of existing telecommunica-tions systems to serve higher education, state agencies, and other public entities.

STARLINK was established in 1989 with funding from a federal Carl Perkins Grant, which contin-ued until 1992. In 1991, the network began receiving partial funding from the state. Currently,STARLINK annual funding comes from multiple sources: the state, member fees, contractservices, and national sales of selected teleconferences.

The STARLINK network is composed of 53 Texas community and technical college districts, oneuniversity, and one community college in Florida. STARLINK is a “soft” network which meansthat it owns no equipment or facilities of its own. Members use their own downlink equipment toreceive programming, and production facilities are either provided by member institutions or theyare commercially rented. STARLINK resources are dedicated to the development and delivery oftraining and information services.

The network is an agency of the Texas association of Community Colleges and thus governedby a committee of fifteen college presidents that make up the Telecommunications Committee.Each college appoints both an Institutional and Technical representative that handle allSTARLINK programming on campus. A strong “grassroots” effort drives training topics eachyear via a statewide survey sent to all college faculty and administration.

Since becoming operational in the fall of 1989, STARLINK has—

1. been rated as one of the top 3 training networks in the U.S. by the U.S. Distance LearningAssociation

2. coordinated colleges’ owned/operated equipment and facilities to form a statewide networkthat extends in every region of Texas and has gained a substantial national audience

3. just completed installation of a second receive system that provides digital satellite capabilityto all member schools

4. produced and/or distributed 144 professional development and informational video teleconfer-ences targeted primarily to community and technical colleges, reaching a documented80,000 audience members

5. produced and/or distributed information and training teleconferences (some multiple-dayevents) for state agencies and other public entities such as:

• Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board• Texas Department of Human Services• Texas Department of Transportation• Texas Department of Mental Health/Mental Retardation• Internal Revenue Service

6. and regularly provides programming to PBS Adult Learning Satellite Service

STARLINK is now offering its faculty development and training programs to colleges outside ofTexas through Associate Network memberships. To obtain information about costs and theadvantages of associate membership contact: Henry Hartman, Network Director at972.669.6505 or email [email protected]. For further information, visit our web site at:www.starlink.dcccd.edu


STARLINK 2000/2001 PROGRAMMING

September 21, 2000 DEVELOPMENTAL EDUCATION: BEST PRACTICES

1:30-3 p.m. CT AND EXEMPLARY PROGRAMS

October 12, 2000 ARE YOU HISTORY? FACULTY JOB SECURITY IN AN

1:30-3 p.m. CT ONLINE WORLD

October 17, 2000 ASSESSMENT OF THE CORE CURRICULUM

1:30-3 p.m. CT

November 1, 2000 ALTERNATIVE TEACHER CERTIFICATION

1:30-3 p.m. CT PROGRAMS IN COMMUNITY COLLEGES:

A NATIONAL CONVERSATION

November 8, 2000 ANNUAL THECB UPDATE

1:30-3 p.m. CT

December 7, 2000 WITH A LITTLE HELP FROM MY FRIENDS...

1:30-3:00p.m CT IMPLEMENTING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY INTO

THE CURRICULUM

February 15, 2001 SELF-LEADERSHIP

11:30 a.m.-12:30 p.m. CT

March 22, 2001 THE PORTFOLIO AS A STUDENT LEARNING AND

1:30-3 p.m. CT ASSESSMENT TOOL

April 10, 2001 A WORKSHOP ON STREAMING VIDEO

1:30-3 p.m. CT

April 19, 2001 STAYING THE COURSE: RETAINING ONLINE

1:30-3 p.m. CT STUDENTS

May 17, 2001 MINORITY ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE:

9 a.m.-5 p.m. CT A CONTINUING EDUCATION CREDIT CLASS

August (TBA), 2001 BIANNUAL LEGISLATIVE UPDATE


EVALUATE THIS VIDEOCONFERENCE . .

On a scale of 1-5, with 5 being the highest, rate the videoconference in terms of its value to you

Excellent Poor

Timeliness of topic 5 4 3 2 1

Objectives clearly stated and supported with effective program elements (discussions, videos, interviews, demos, etc.) 5 4 3 2 1

Moderator 5 4 3 2 1

Panelists or Instructor 5 4 3 2 1

Handouts 5 4 3 2 1

Technical quality 5 4 3 2 1

Overall evaluation of program 5 4 3 2 1

Local site activities were held? _____YES _____NO

Circle the most convenient day and time for you to attend a videoconference:

Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday

7-9 am 9-12 am 12-3pm 3-6pm

1. Institution name:________________________________________________

2. My current position is: (circle one)

a. Board Member d. Classified Staff

b. Faculty e. Other___________________

c. Administrator/Professional Staff

3. What did you like most about the videoconference?

4. What could have been done to make it more valuable to you?

5. What topics would you like to see addressed in future videoconferences?

developmental education: best practices and exemplary … · 2011-01-05 · developmental...

Documents