Common Course Numbering Art Goss Faculty Curriculum Committee Chair at Bellevue Community College [email protected] http://scidiv.bcc.ctc.edu/ag/ccn
Dec 22, 2015
Common Course Numbering
Art Goss
Faculty Curriculum Committee Chair at Bellevue Community College
http://scidiv.bcc.ctc.edu/ag/ccn
• Common Course Numbering will be a bump in the road for a while…
• …but the long-term benefits for students are worth it.
• Besides, the CCN train has left the station. We can’t stop it now.
“Bump in the Road”
• In a one week span, over 90% of our academic courses will have number changes and/or name changes.
• Some 200s become 100s, and some 100s become 200s• 100 level courses could have 200 level prerequisites• Dozens of courses will be changed to numbers of
existing courses – “collision courses”– Confusion if one is a prerequisite– Confusion when “old” course is humanities and “new” course is
social science– Confusion when taking a similar class to one you enjoyed only to
find out it is the same class with a new name and number– Confusion when your transcript seems to show you repeated a
class when it was two classes with the same number.
Student Chaos
• Hardest hit will be those who are not engaged on campus, and self-advise.
– Low income
– Students of color
Bump in the road - staff
• Hundreds of courses phased out• Hundreds of new courses created• Advising sheets• Course catalogs• Degrees and certificates• Web of prerequisites changed• Other databases of course info• 4-year University articulation sites overhauled• Advising
Bump in the road - faculty
• No state-wide systematic faculty input
• Tends to freeze curriculum
• Subtle pressure to conform
Why Faculty if Staff are doing this now?
•Staff do not determine “equivalency” except…
•English and math and those crosswalks created with faculty input
•State-wide equivalency is a bigger issue than individual student transcripts
What other states did to minimize the “bump” (and which the current plan is
not doing)• Rename and renumber only courses most
common with 4-years• It is done slowly rather than all at once• Go to 4 digits to avoid “collisions”• Participation is optional – colleges can
change some or all or none• Unique courses are left alone• Substantial increase in funding for
advising
The “bump in the road”, is a source of confusion that will undoubtedly frustrate some at-risk students,
causing them to give up their hopes of getting a college degree. It is a
costly and time consuming project, done without faculty input, with
disturbing implications for curriculum flexibility.
• Common Course Numbering will be a rocky road for a while…
• …but the long-term benefits for students are worth it.
• Besides, the CCN train has left the station. We can’t stop it now.
HB 2382
“state-wide system of course equivalency”
2-year to 4-year transfers or relationship
(The HEC Board must…) “Identify equivalent courses between community and technical colleges and public four-year institutions”
Clearly the legislature had 2-to-4-year transfers in mind.
“Common course numbers will make it easier for students and advisors to identify those courses that are equivalent for transfer among community and technical colleges.
Common Course Numbering Newsletter, July 2006.
After changing names and numbers
There will be no difference in the practical experience of a transfer student between CTCs before and after CCN.
“Not for 10 years. We will need crosswalks with our own courses. It’s ridiculous. There will be 10 years of chaos.”
Catherine Kwong, Credentials Evaluator, BCC.
Won’t it make the evaluator’s jobs easier?
“Common course numbering will reduce the number of repeated courses students take when transferring between community or technical colleges.”
Common Course Numbering Newsletter, July 2006.
“This does happen, but seldom with students transferring within the state -- it is mostly with students from out of state, and complaints about this are very rare... maybe once a year.” C. Kwong
At BCC this represents 1 / 34,860 X 100 = 0.003% of our students
College AECON 101Macro econ
College BECON 100 Macro econ
(CCN) “…will address a small problem for a handful of students, but it will also complicate things for 10s of thousands of students who will have to explain this for their entire careers. It’s throwing the baby out with the bathwater.”
Matt Grochong, Associate Dean of Student Success, BCC.
Goals of the legislature
Help articulation to 4-year universities
Real and Practical impact on transfer among CTCs
Problem of transfer students repeating classes
The current plan’s long-term benefit to students is virtually zero – there is no upside.
• Common Course Numbering will be a rocky road for a while…
• …but the long-term benefits for students are worth it.
• Besides, the CCN train has left the station. We can’t stop it now.
Recommendations
1. Continue defining equivalent courses, but…
– With equivalency decision-making being done by faculty from across the state.
Common Course Numbering Project
A) Determine equivalent courses
B) Rename & renumber courses
Student confusion
Choosing
distrib
ution
requirements
PrerequisitesDifferent class
with the same
numbers
Harms student success
Thousands of
hours of staff time
Petrify the curriculum
Done with no
state-wide faculty
input
Makes no sense without the four-years on board
May have to be
re-done if the 4-
years do come on
board later
Recommendations
2. Do not change course names and numbers.
– Changing names and numbers should only be done if mandated by the legislature, and the four-year institutions are participating.
Common Course Numbering Project
A) Determine equivalent courses
B) Rename & renumber courses
How will students know which courses are equivalent?
Very Good alternatives to CCN
1. Easy-to-use online database
2. Secondary tier of numbers that are common throughout the state (like the California Articulation Number – “CAN #”)
Recommendations
3. Pursue alternate methods to inform students of equivalency
1. Easy-to-use online database
2. Washington Articulation Numbers
No other state has done this without:
• The four-year universities participating
• Heavy faculty involvement.
No matter how small or big the “bump” is, without the 4-year institutions, there is no real benefit.
It simply makes no sense.
Summary of Recommendations
1. Continue defining equivalent courses, with greatly increased faculty participation.
2. Do not change course names and numbers.
3. Pursue alternate methods to inform students of equivalency – online database or California system.