CAROLE BOGUE-FEINOUR, RETIRED VICE CHANCELLOR OF ACADEMIC AFFAIRS, CCCCO MYRNA HUFFMAN, DIRECTOR MIS, CCCCO JANET FULKS, ASCCC CURRICULUM CHAIR JULY 2009 CURRICULUM INSTITUTE 1 Basic Skills Success; You Need a Valid Instrument - CB 21 Coding
Dec 24, 2015
CAROLE BOGUE-FEINOUR, RETIRED VICE CHANCELLOR OF ACADEMIC AFFAIRS, CCCCO
MYRNA HUFFMAN, DIRECTOR MIS, CCCCO
JANET FULKS, ASCCC CURRICULUM CHAIR
JULY 2009CURRICULUM INSTITUTE
1
Measuring and Reporting Basic Skills Success; You
Need a Valid Instrument - CB 21 Coding
Background2
BSI directed attention to the ARCC dataSome measures did not make senseInvestigating the coding revealed inaccuraciesParticularly the
Basic Skills Progress Outcome ESL Progress Outcome
Progress for courses prior to transferNeeded to define the Supplemental Basic
Skills Report for accountability on the BSI funding and noncredit enhanced funding
“CB 21-Course Prior to Transfer Course Level”3
CB21 is code for the course “level”, in terms of number of levels below the transferrable levelHow many levels below transfer level is this course?
It is used primarily for basic skills but can be used for non-basic skills, degree-
applicable coursesIt is used only for English, writing, ESL,
reading, or mathematics (TOP codes)We are reporting credit courses; noncredit in
progress
MIS Data Element CB214
Is used for a lot of accountability reporting Which in turn is used to justify investments and
expenditures in basic skills ARCC Technical Advisory Group: defines metrics for
mandated reports
Is necessary to show student progress through basic skills curriculum 4…3…2…1…transferrable
Tracking Progress5
CB21 Course Progress to Transfer
Transfer Level Courses
Courses One Level Prior to Transfer
Courses Two Levels Prior to Transfer
Courses Three Levels Prior to Transfer
Courses Four Levels Prior to Transfer for Mathematics, English
and Reading. ESL has Five & Six levels prior to transfer.
Old Coding Instructions for Math6
Currently, CB21: A= 1 prereq. for transfer math
(Intermediate Algebra) B= 2 prereq./prep. for “A” (Algebra
I/Elem. Algebra) C= 3 prereq./prep. For “A/B”
(Arithmetic) Y= 4+ >3 levels below transfer level
(N/A)
Old Coding Instructions for English7
Currently, CB21: A= 1 prereq. for transfer Eng. Comp.
(Subject A) B= 2 prereq./prep. for “A” (Not available) C= 3 prereq./prep. For “A/B” (Not
available) Y= 4+ >3 levels below transfer level
(Not available)
Old Coding Instructions for Reading and ESL
8
Not addressed at all
Coding problems
No colleges had a common beginning; college level was different for every college – even colleges within a district
Some college coding had no progress – all courses one level
Some courses were in the wrong order of progression
Some courses were incorrectly identified as transfer
9
Sample Coding – All are Credit Courses
10
ElementaryGeometry DegApplicable Not Basic Skills 1 IntermediateAlgebra DegApplicable Not Basic Skills 1 ElementaryAlgebra DegApplicable Not Basic Skills 2 Pre Algebra ‐ NOT DegApplicable Basic Skills 3
ElementaryAlgebra DegApplicable Not Basic Skills 1 Arithmetic NOT DegApplicable Basic Skills 2
ElementaryAlgebra DegApplicable Not Basic Skills 1 ElementaryAlgebra 1st Half ‐ DegApplicable Not Basic Skills 1 ElementaryAlgebra 2nd Half ‐ DegApplicable Not Basic Skills 1 Intermediate Algebra DegApplicable Not Basic Skills 1
Sample Data – All are Credit Courses11
IntermediateAlgebra DegApplicable Not Basic Skills 1
Basic Mathematics NOT DegApplicable Basic Skills 3
Beginning Algebra NOT DegApplicable Basic Skills 4+
Sample Data – All are Credit Courses12
Course Id Title
Basic Skills Status
Transfer Status Level
ESLV33 Intermed Reading Comprehension B C BESLV01 Low-Beginning ESL B C CESLV40 Vocab&Communication: Nonnative B C CESLV34A Low-Begin Read Comprehension B C CESLV15 Inter ESL Listening & Speaking B C CESLV06 High-Advanced ESL B C CESLV05 Low-Advanced ESL B C CESLV03 Low-Intermediate ESL B C CESLV14 Begin ESL Listening & Speaking B C CESLV12 English Proficiency: Citizen B C CESLV02 High-Beginning ESL B C CESLV34B High-Begin Read Comprehension B C CESLV07 Reading Skills LEP B C CESLV04 High-Intermediate ESL B C CESLV08 Writing Skills LEP B C CESLV16 Adv ESL Listening & Speaking B C C
Sample Data13
TitleCredit Status
Basic Skills Status
Transfer Status Level
ELEMENTARY ALGEBRA D N C YELEMENTARY ALGEBRA II D N C YELEMENTARY ALGEBRA I D N C YINTERMEDIATE ALGEBRA D N C YMATH: OPERATIONS WITH WHOLE NUMBERS C B C YMATH: OPERATIONS WITH DECIMALS C B C YMATH: OPERATIONS WITH RATIONAL NUMBERS C B C YOPERATIONS WITH FRACTIONS, DECIMALS AND % C B C YPRE-ALGEBRA C B C YBASIC MATHEMATICS SKILLS C B C Y
Enrollments(SX)
StudentDemographics
(SB)Sections
CoursesFin.Aid
Assess.
PBS
VTEA
Matric.
Pgm.Awds.
Emp.Demo.
Sessions
Calendar Assignments
EOPSDSPS
Emp.Assign.
Cal-WORKs
CCC MIS Database
15
Why do we code courses?
What are the data uses?
16
Research Questions
• Legislative Analyst Office • Department of Finance • California Postsecondary
Education Commission • California Student Aid
Commission• Public Policy Institute• UC/CSU• Legislature – Committees and
individual members• Community College
Organizations• Newspapers• Labor Unions
Data Matches
• Transfer to UC/CSU/NSC match
• Dept. of Social Services • EDD/UI Match/Wage Study
Accountability Reporting
Justification & Funding • Matriculation• EOPS• DSPS
Career Technical EducationPerkins Core Indicator ReportsPerkins Allocations
BOGW Administrative Funding
Federal Integrated Postsecondary
Education Data System (IPEDS) Reporting
CCC Data Mart
Annual Staffing Report
MIS Data Element CB2117
Chancellor’s Office MIS system collects all course information each term
Courses are coded for identification purposesTOP code, credit status, transfer status,
units, basic skills status, SAM/voc code, etc.
CB21=Course Prior to College Level (Current)
MIS Data Element CB2118
Last changed in 1994
Defined number of “codeable” levels at 5 (xfer + 4 below)
Is used across math/English/reading/writing/ESL
Has little curricular definition of levels
ARCC Reporting19
2009 Statewide ARCC Data
What CB21 is used for20
Basic Skills Improvement Rate (ARCC)◦ Credit courses only◦ Completed (A,B,C,CR, P) any math/Eng basic
skills course at 2 or more levels below◦ Within 3 years, successfully completed a higher
level basic skills course of same discipline Anywhere in the system where SSN’s are
reported
◦ Current data range: 24%-62%, ◦ avg 49%.
What CB21 is used for21
ESL Improvement Rate (ARCC) Credit ESL courses only Completed (A,B,C,CR, P) any ESL course
at 2 or more levels below Within 3 years, successfully completed a
higher level ESL course Anywhere in the system where SSN’s are
reported Current data range: 0% to 81%, avg. 42%
The Strategy - Establishing a Rubric22
Is not standardizationDoes not drive curricular changesIs not common course numbering or
articulation
IS a mapping exercise designed to maximize our ability to show student progress AND your good work
Newly Designed CB 21 – Attached to Rubrics
23
Each college retains their own curriculumDoes not affect degree applicabilityAllows for uniformity throughout stateWill enhance collection of accurate and
comparable dataCan be used to collect assessment and
placement data
The Process24
140 FacultyResearch for standards, outcomes and exit
skillsDivided by DisciplineDeveloped rubrics based on need and
curriculumUniversally acceptable, not comprehensive
The results25
Rubrics created using 4 levels below transfer◦ Reading◦ Writing◦ Math,
ESL created 3 rubrics and needed 6 levels below transfer◦ ESL Writing◦ ESL Reading◦ ESL Listening and Speaking◦ **ESL Integrated
Vetting the Rubrics26
Demographics of Discipline Faculty Taking Part in the Vetting Process Faculty experience teaching basic skills Courses taught transfer and below
(select all that apply)
Full load 76 32.6% transfer 153 65.7%
> 50% of load 71 30.5% 1 level below 204 87.6%
25-50% load 67 28.8% 2 levels below 207 88.8%
<25% 9 3.8% 3 levels below 151 64.8%
no basic skills *10 4.3% 4 levels below 82 35.2%
totals 233 100% 5 levels below 30 12.9%
coding issues -teach geometry but not classified as basic skills etc 6 levels below 21 9.0%
assignment issues: adjuncts have varying loads, senate pres 7 levels below 10 4.3%
*some are chairs this semester 8 levels below 3 1.3%
Vetting the Rubrics27CB 21 Rubric-Vetting Data Results as of February 18, 2009
Discipline Number of respondents
Approval Contingent
Approval
Doesn’t work
other 4 levels adequate
6 levels adequate
comments on levels
other comments
Math 79 59 (74.7%)
18 (22.8%)
1 (1.3%)
1 (1.3%)
86.1% none 6.3% wanted 3 levels, 5.1% five levels
need to deal with geometry 1 or 2 levels below
Reading 29 12 (42.9%)
14 (50%)
1 (3.6%)
2 (7.1%)
50% few 25% want only 3 levels & 10.7% more than 4
78.6% (22) want grade levels included
ESL 35
ESL writing 21 9 (42.9%)
10 (47.6%)
1 (4.8%)
1 (4.8%)
3 (14.3%)
16 (76.2%)
some decisions based on local course offerings
including word count 61.9% yes 38.1% no
ESL listening & speaking
10 5 (50%)
5 (50%)
0 0
100%
ESL reading 4 3(75%) 1(25%) 0 0 0 75% 25% (1) 5 levels
English 69 38 (55.1%)
27 (39.1%)
3 (4.3%)
1 (1.4%)
30 (43.5%)
3 (4.5%)
much relates to ESL & student population 40.6% (28) 3 levels
word counts 52.2% helpful; 47.8% not helpful
other 21 These people answered some but not all of the questions within specific disciplines
total 233
Moving on to noncredit28
ABE/ASEMathEnglishESL integrated
Next Steps29
What will this mean?How will it change ARCC reporting?
Will the data suddenly show a big difference due to recoding?
How will you proceed?
Next Steps & Timeline30
Coding instructions CIOs and Researchers meetings and
listservsPossible web trainingContact people for questionsAll recoding must be done by
November 30
Questions31