Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
DOCUMENT RESUME
ED 480 191 JC 030 425
TITLE Mathematics Developmental Education in Texas PublicInstitutions of Higher Education Performance Assessment.
INSTITUTION Texas State Higher Education Coordinating Board, Austin. Div.of Community and Technical Colleges.
PUB DATE 2002-10-00
NOTE 77p.; Funded in part by Carl D. Perkins Vocational andTechnical Education Act, State Administration.
PUB TYPE Reports Research (143)
EDRS PRICE EDRS Price MF01/PC04 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS Basic Skills; *Community Colleges; Costs; Labor Force
Development; Labor Needs; *Mathematics; *Mathematics Skills;Remedial Instruction; *Remedial Programs; Skill Development;Technology; Tutoring; Two Year College Students; Two YearColleges
IDENTIFIERS *Texas
ABSTRACT
This report aims to address concerns regarding the need fordevelopmental education in mathematics in the higher education institutionsin Texas. Fifty-three million dollars of the $93 million appropriated fordevelopmental education in Texas in 2002 went to mathematics. About 40% ofnew students in two-year colleges and 20% of new students in universitiesrequire developmental education in mathematics. While developmental educationis often considered a program mainly benefiting minority students, therequirement for developmental education in mathematics cuts across racial andethnic lines. Forty-six percent of students requiring developmental educationin mathematics in Texas are white. This report finds gender differences to bea minor issue. The report also suggests that older students are not drivingthe need for developmental education, contrary to popular opinion. In fact,after age 24, the percentages of students requiring developmental educationdecrease with age. Eighty-three percent of students requiring developmentaleducation in mathematics are 21 or younger. This report offers briefsummaries of four external studies of developmental education and makesrecommendations for future studies. Appended are the following two tables forFall/Prior Summer 1999 First-Time-in-College Students Tracked Through Fall2001: (1) Institutional Profiles of Students Requiring DevelopmentalMathematics Education; and (2) Math Developmental Education byCharacteristics of Institution, Program, and Student. Also included are: (1)
Addendum 1: A Comparison of the Performance of Full-Time and Part-TimeMathematics Developmental Education Students (Agenda Item IX-D(1), January2003); and (2) Addendum 2: The Relationship between Initial TASP Test Scoresand Performance of Mathematics Developmental Education Students (Agenda ItemIX-D(1), January 2003). (NB)
Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be madefrom the original document.
C71r00
1
Mathematics Developmental Education
in Texas Public Institutions of Higher Education
PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE ANDDISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS
BEEN GRANTED BY
Ct K-iroTO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES
INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)
Performance Assessment
October 2002
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOffice of Educational Pusearch and Improvement
EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER (ERIC)
Jil,This document has been reproduced asreceived from the person or organizationoriginating it.
0 Minor changes have been made toimprove reproduction quality.
Points of view or opinions stated in thisdocument do not necessarily representofficial OERI position or policy.
Texas Higher Education Coordinating BoardDivision of Community and Technical Colleges
Funded in part by0 Carl D. Perkins
Vocational and Technical Education ActState Administration
.)
as of October 3, 2002
BEST COPY AVAILABLE
Executive Summary
This report is envisioned as the first in a series of initiatives designed to increase thenumber of students who successfully complete certificate or degree programs afterbeing identified as having academic deficiencies.
For this report, a cohort of first-time-in-college students who enrolled in Texas publiccolleges and universities during the 1999 summer and fall terms was studied. Thecohort consisted of 158,903 students, and the focus was on mathematics developmentaleducation. Data was extracted from reports previously made by institutions to theCoordinating Board. The following are some of the major observations:
Statewide, about one-third of new students require mathematics developmentaleducation.
About 80 percent of new students requiring mathematics developmental educationare in two-year colleges.
About one-half of the students requiring mathematics developmental education areWhite, about one-third are Hispanic, and about one-sixth are African-American.
Older students aren't more likely than their younger contemporaries to requiremathematics developmental education. Gender differences are minor.
Nearly one-half of the students required to participate in mathematics developmentaleducation are required to do so based on an alternative to the Texas Academic SkillsProgram (TASP) Test.
After two years, only about one-fourth of students required to complete mathematicsdevelopmental education will have done so.
The report includes the following recommendations intended to increase the academicsuccess of students needing mathematics developmental education:
The Board should promote and monitor the adoption in Texas public institutions ofhigher education of the "best practices" described in What Works: Research-BasedBest Practices in Developmental Education, a 2002 publication of the NationalCenter for Developmental Education.
The Board should conduct a study of institutional revenues and expenditures fordevelopmental education.
The Board should conduct other studies as appropriate. Two suggested studiesinclude a telephone survey of 300 to 400 students who have dropped out ofmathematics developmental education and a study relating high school preparationto college performance.
i 3
Table of Contents
Page
Executive Summary i
Background of this report 1
Why improving mathematics developmental educationis important 3
What the data tells us about mathematics developmental educationin Texas 4
Brief summaries of four external studies of developmentaleducation 11
Recommendations for additional studies 13
Appendices
A Institutional Profiles of Students Who Require MathematicsDevelopmental Education
B Math Developmental Education by Characteristics ofInstitution, Program, and Student
Background of this report
Texas public institutions of higher education, like those of most states, offer some coursesand services designed to address academic deficiencies of entering students. In Texas,these courses and services are called developmental education. These courses aretypically similar to other college and university courses, except college credit is not given forcompleting them. In addition to courses, developmental education services might includetutoring services, writing or math labs, special instructional resources, and similar efforts.These services often supplement developmental education courses but sometimes serve asthe primary instruction delivery mode.
Texas Education Code, Section 51.306, requires that all students be tested in basic reading,writing, and mathematics skills prior to enrollment using the TASP Test or an approvedalternative test. Students who score below the minimum established for each area mustbegin a developmental education program. Board rules also limit the number ofdevelopmental education courses that institutions may offer and the hours that students mayaccumulate.
This report is motivated by several related factors:
A long-term concern with the effectiveness of developmental education in general andspecifically with the effectiveness of mathematics developmental education. While thereis evidence to indicate that students who complete developmental educationsubsequently demonstrate success rates similar to their peers who did not requiredevelopmental education, too few students complete developmental education.
A long-term concern on the part of the Board and the Texas Legislature with the cost ofdevelopmental education. As the higher education finance system is subjected toadditional stress, it is incumbent on the Board and institutions to demonstrate that thestate's investment in developmental education is as important, or more important, thancompeting priorities in graduate education, health-care education, and other disciplines.
Concerns regarding the ability of the state to meet its technology workforce needs.Mathematics is a key discipline for engineers, scientists, and technology workers in abroad range of fields. While Texas high schools may be increasing the number ofgraduates with adequate skills in mathematics, it is clear that mathematicsdevelopmental education will be required for years in the future. Not all high schoolstudents will make judicious choices, students who graduated years ago will requireretraining, and other situations will require a continuing commitment to mathematicsdevelopmental education.
Concerns regarding the academic preparation of future students. While the TexasLegislature has taken steps to encourage more students to take the recommended highschool curriculum, the Closing the Gaps by 2015 plan for higher education envisions asignificant increase in the rate of participation in higher education. This increaseincludes large numbers of students from groups who have traditionally been less well-prepared for college-level work, especially in mathematics, science, and technology.
1 5
An increased emphasis on accountability at all levels of government. In 2000, theNational Center for Public Policy in Higher Education published Measuring Up 2000, astate-by-state evaluation of higher education systems. Texas received a grade of D+ onthe completion factor because of low graduation rates resulting in part from an inability toremedy deficiencies of students with poor academic preparation. The federalgovernment has recently proposed requiring a graduation rate accountability measurefor all states.
This report is envisioned as the first in a series of initiatives designed to improve the qualityof developmental education in Texas public institutions of higher education. The datapresented in this report is based exclusively on data currently being reported to the Board.No additional data collection was done in an effort to speed production of the report and inan effort to minimize the reporting burden on institutions.
The decision not to do additional data collection significantly limits the conclusions that canbe made in some areas. For example, while institutions report the numbers of hours inwhich individual students enroll, the Board does not maintain data on the specific courses inwhich students enroll, whether or not they complete them, what grades they obtain, onsimilar items. While institutions report courses taught, the Board does not collect data oncourse syllabi, instructional methodologies, and technologies employed, or instructorqualifications.
Most of the data included in this report are based on an analysis of students who enrolledfor the first time in the summer and/or fall of 1999. This group of approximately 160,000students was chosen because their experiences are representative of current programswhile at the same time providing at least some performance data. The report will beupdated with FY 2002 data when those data are certified later this year.
The Coordinating Board's data system does allow measurement of the overall performanceof the state's developmental education system and its impact on students, and that is theemphasis of this report. The report provides data on how many students are required toundertake mathematics developmental education, who they are, what level of success theyare experiencing, and how much it is costing the state.
Finally, the report includes a number of recommendations for further action or study. Whilethere are numerous opportunities to do research on what is currently working well in Texasinstitutions and to attempt to disseminate the results of that research at other institutions, theemphasis of this report is on using the significant body of research that has already beendone on developmental education in Texas and elsewhere.
62
Why improving mathematics developmental education is important
Mathematics developmental education is a large, expensive operation that currently provides alow return on the state's investment, and it is not going away. Further, it is a key to increasingboth participation and success in Texas public institutions and it is required if we are to meet thestate's technology workforce needs.
With the exception of a very few upper-division-only universities, every community college,technical college and university in the state offers some developmental education courses.
More developmental education is required for mathematics than for reading and writingcombined.
The appropriation for developmental education for Fiscal Year 2002 was over $93 million. Theappropriation for mathematics was $53 million, while the appropriations for writing and readingwere $13 million and $15 million, respectively, with the balance undesignated. While there aresome indications that the growth in expenditures for developmental education has slowed,appropriations for mathematics developmental education have increased each year for at leastthe last 15 years.
The yield of all of this effort is disappointing. Less than 30 percent of the students required toparticipate in developmental education in any given year successfully complete it within the nexttwo years. An even smaller percentage of students eventually complete certificates or degrees.
The 77th Texas Legislature's action to make the Recommended High School Program thedefault curriculum should reduce the need for developmental education. While that action isclearly desirable and will make a difference, any expectation that this action will eliminate theneed for developmental education is misplaced. The full effect of the new requirement won't beseen until the class of 2008 graduates. Not all students will choose the Recommendedcurriculum even then. Some who do take it will still need developmental education. Bothuniversities and two-year colleges will still be accepting older students who graduated prior to2008 and who have not taken the recommended curriculum.
There is some conjecture that elimination or scaling back the TASP would eliminate the need fordevelopmental education. Again, this is not realistic. A number of institutions currently requireTASP mathematics scores higher than the standard adopted by the state prior to enrolling inCollege Algebra. They do so because their own research indicates a higher score betterpredicts success in college-level mathematics. No institution should admit students without amathematics placement exam, and as long as the academic deficiencies exist, institutions willbe required to provide developmental education.
Most importantly, the state's goals include enrolling an increasing percentage of the populationin higher education and increasing the number of certificates and degrees awarded. The twobasic means of accomplishing these goals are to retain more of the students who enroll and toenroll more of the students who are not currently enrolling in higher education, many of whomcould be expected to require more developmental education than current students rather thanless. A successful mathematics developmental education is necessary part of both strategies.
3 7
What the data tells us about mathematics developmental education in Texas
To better understand how many students are involved in mathematics developmentaleducation, who they are, and what success they are having, Board staff studied a cohort ofall first-time-in-college students in the 1999 summer and fall terms. A total of 158,903 newstudents enrolled those terms. It was not possible, from Coordinating Board data, todetermine the status of 16,609 of these students, and they were eliminated from theanalysis.
Appendices A and B present the detailed statistics, and interested readers will wish toexamine these tables in more detail. The following are believed to be the most importantconclusions that can be drawn from these data.
1. Statewide, about one-third of new college and university students requiremathematics developmental education.
The graph below shows the number and percentage from each sector.
SectorTotalNewStdts
NumberRequiring
MathDev Ed
PercentRequiring
MathDev Ed
CommColleges 105,913 42,299 40%
(Acad) 65,290 26,556 (41%)(Tech) 40,623 15,743 (39%)
TSTC/LIT 3,886 1,427 37%
University 49,104 9,400 19%
All 158,903 53,126 33%
TSTC/LIT = Texas State Technical College andLamar Institute of Technology
About 40 percent of new students in two-year colleges require mathematics developmentaleducation and about 20 percent of new students in universities require mathematicsdevelopmental education. These data indicate little difference between the percentages oftwo-year college students seeking academic and technical degrees who requiremathematics developmental education. However, technical certificate programs of one yearor less are TASP exempt by law. If that were not the case, we would expect the percentageof technical students requiring mathematics developmental education to be higher.
84
2. Over 80 percent of the new students requiring mathematics developmentaleducation are enrolled in two-year colleges.
The chart below shows the percentage of the total cohort of students requiring mathematicsdevelopmental education enrolled in each sector of higher education.
Percent of Math Dev Ed Students inEach Education Sector
Univ
CC-Acad50%
Univ = UniversitiesTSTC/LIT = Texas State Technical College and
Lamar Institute of TechnologyCC-Tech = Community Colleges, Technical StudentsCC-Acad = Community Colleges, Academic Students
Nearly one-half of the cohort of students requiring mathematics developmental education iscomposed of community college students enrolled in academic programs.
3. The percentages of new students requiring mathematics developmental educationvary widely from institution to institution.
The five two-year college districts with the highest and lowest percentages of new studentsrequiring mathematics developmental education are listed below:
Highest percentageSWTJC 77%Trinity Valley CC 67%El Paso CC 65%College of Mainland 65%Collin CC 58%
Lowest PercentageHill College 23%Frank Phillips College 23%Texarkana College 22%Grayson County College 20%Brazosport College 20%
95 BEST COPY AVAILABLE
The five universities with the highest and lowest percentages of new students requiringmathematics developmental education are listed below:
Highest percentageU of Houston 66%Prairie View A & M U 64%Texas Southern U 61%U of Texas-El Paso 45%Texas A & M U-Kingsville 45%
Lowest PercentageTexas A&M U-Galveston 4%U of Texas- Dallas 3%U of Texas-Tyler 3%U of Texas-Austin 2%Texas A&M U 2%
These data suggest that institutions, even within a given academic sector, serve studentswho vary significantly in academic preparation. All of the community colleges and someuniversities are open admission institutions, and they will have much higher percentages ofstudents requiring developmental education.
Program offerings also affect the academic qualifications of students who enroll. Theimportant point is that institutions with radically different students must operate with differentpriorities and programs if they are to be successful.
4. About one-half of the students requiring mathematics developmental educationare White, about one-third are Hispanic, and about one-sixth are African-American.
While developmental education is often considered a program mainly benefiting minoritystudents, the requirement for mathematics developmental education cuts acrossracial/ethnic lines. The chart below shows the percentage of the cohort requiringdevelopmental education from each ethnic group.
Percent of Math Dev Ed Students in EachRacial/Ethnic Group
African-American
17%
Hispanic33%
Other4%
White46%
Notice that almost one-half of the students required to participate in mathematicsdevelopmental education are White students.
610
5. Different racial/ethnic groups exhibit differences in academic preparation.The table below shows the number of students in each racial/ethnic group, the numberrequiring mathematics developmental education, and the percentage requiring mathematicsdevelopmental education.
Race orEthnicGroup
Total inCohort
NumberRequiring
MathDev Ed
PercentRequiring
MathDev Ed
White 91,952 24,424 27%Hispanic 39,751 17,746 45%
African-Am 17,298 9,023 52%Am Indian 748 267 36%
Asian 6,727 1,082 16%Internat'l 1,789 420 23%
Unknown 638 164 26%
Projections of future college populations include increasing numbers of minority students.One implication of this chart is that Texas must do a better job of preparing those studentsfor college or face an increasing demand for mathematics developmental education.
6. Gender differences are a minor issue.
Much has been written about females and science and mathematics education. Femalesmake up 54 percent of the cohort and 57 percent of the students who were required toparticipate in mathematics developmental education.
The data suggest that slightly lower performance by female students contributes to thehigher number of female students required to participate in mathematics developmentaleducation.
Gender
PercentRequiring
MathDev Ed
NumberRequiring
MathDev Ed
Male 31% 22,599Female 36% 30,527
7. Older students aren't more likely than their younger counterparts to requiremathematics developmental education.
There has been a great deal of speculation that much of the requirement for developmentaleducation is driven by older students who enroll in college for the first time for job retrainingand other purposes.
These data do not support that thesis. Seventy-four percent of students requiringmathematics developmental education are 19 or younger; 83 percent are 21 or younger.These high percentages are partially due to the fact that the traditional age-24-and-understudents continue to dominate enrollments, but the percentages of these students requiringmathematics developmental education are startlingly high. After age 24, the percentagesrequiring mathematics developmental education decrease with age, and people over 50 are
7 11
less likely to require mathematics developmental education than any other age group.(NOTE: Students over 55 are exempt from TASP requirements by law unless they areseeking a degree or certificate.)
AgeGroup
Numberin
Cohort
NumberRequiring
MathDev Ed
PercentRequiring
MathDev Ed
Under 18 22,154 3,844 17%18-19 100,419 35,350 35%20-21 10,258 4,969 48%22-24 7,215 3,203 44%25-29 6,761 2,652 39%30-34 4,022 1,282 32%35-40 3,549 985 28%41-50 3,324 694 21%
Over 50 1,151 130 11%Unknown 50 17 34%
8. Encouraging more students to enroll in the Recommended High School Programshould help reduce the demand for mathematics developmental education, but noteliminate it.
Coordinating Board data in this area is somewhat problematical, because it is not possibleto identify the high school curriculum for nearly 40 percent of the students in the cohort.
However, the existing data are encouraging, indicating that significantly fewer students whohave taken an advanced or recommended high school curriculum are required to completemathematics developmental education.
High SchoolCurriculum
Totalin
Cohort
NumberRequiring
MathDev Ed
PercentRequiring
MathDev Ed
Regular 47,402 23,033 49%Recom'd or
Advanced 50,019 11,657 23%
Unknown 61,482 18,436 30%
Making the Recommended High School Program the default curriculum will not eliminate theneed for developmental education because not all students will opt for it and because 23percent of students who complete it still require mathematics developmental education whenthey reach higher education. Not all students who choose the Recommended curriculumachieve college-level mastery of the material now, and as it becomes the default curriculum,that percentage can be expected to increase.
9. Nearly one-half of the students who are required to undergo mathematicsdevelopmental education are required to do so based on a test other than the TASPTest.
Coordinating Board rules allow use of a number of alternative tests to determine initialplacement. In 45 percent of the cases, students are placed in mathematics developmentaleducation based on scores on one of those alternative tests rather than the TASP Test.
Determining the equivalence of these scores has proved to be a difficult technical task, butthese data indicate the importance of additional effort.
10. Nearly 20 percent of students required to participate in mathematicsdevelopmental education never did so.
The data for this cohort of students indicates that no developmental education was providedfor 10,270 of the 53,126 students in the cohort required to participate in mathematicsdevelopmental education.
About one-half of those students, or 4,945 of them, passed the TASP Test or achieved agrade of "B" or better in approved college-level mathematics course.
Other students dropped out of college before enrolling in mathematics developmentaleducation, switched to TASP-exempt curricula, or otherwise delayed mathematicsdevelopmental education.
11. About 28 percent of new students required to complete mathematicsdevelopmental education did so within two years.
The number of students who successfully complete developmental education in a specifictime period is one measure of the performance of the developmental education system.
In the cohort included in this study, only 14,762 of the 53,126 students required toparticipate in mathematics developmental education passed the TASP Test or achieved agrade of "B" or better in an approved college-level mathematics course within two years.This is a discouraging statistic, given the importance of addressing academic deficienciesearly.
It indicates that the academic deficiencies of relatively few students are being addressedsuccessfully and that students are spreading their mathematics developmental educationover an extended period of time, increasing costs to themselves and the state anddecreasing the probability of eventual success in college.
12. After two years, about one-half of the new students required to completemathematics developmental education will have either earned a certificate or a degreeor are still enrolled.
The number of students who are retained and subsequently receive degrees or certificatesis another important performance measure for the developmental education system.
The term of this study was not long enough to measure graduates, especially at thebaccalaureate level. As an alternative, a number of alternative statistics were computed.
9 13
Of 158,903 first-time-in-college students who enrolled summer/fall 1999, 53,126 wererequired to participate in mathematics developmental education. Of those students, by fall2001:
452 or 1 percent had been awarded two-year degrees or certificates and were no longerenrolled;251 or less than 1 percent had completed mathematics developmental education, hadbeen awarded degrees or certificates, and were still enrolled;9,967 or 19 percent had completed mathematics developmental education, were stillenrolled but had not been awarded a degree or certificate;4,287 or 8 percent had completed mathematics developmental education but had notreceived a degree or certificate and were no longer enrolled;13,678 or 26 percent had not yet completed mathematics developmental education butwere still enrolled;24,491 or 46 percent had not completed mathematics developmental education andwere not enrolled.
Sixty-seven percent of students not required to participate in mathematics developmentaleducation were either still enrolled or had been awarded a degree or certificate by fall 2001.For those required to participate in mathematics developmental education, thecorresponding percentage was 46 percent, or 24,348 students.
While these persistence rates are understandable, if not especially desirable, anotherproblem exists. Of the 24,348 mathematics developmental education students who hadbeen retained or had been awarded a certificate, only 10,475 had finished their mathematicsdevelopmental education requirement after two years.
Updated/corrected 12/05/2002
1410
Brief summaries of four external studies of developmental education
There is a massive amount of literature on developmental education, and no attempt will bemade to summarize it in this report. However, four documents are thought to be especiallyrelevant and of special interest to readers of this report.
From Policy to Learning: The Effectiveness of Developmental Education in TexasCommunity Colleges, Hansel Burley, Texas Tech University, 1997. In preparing this report,Prof. Burley, with the help of an advisory committee and Coordinating Board staff, trackedfor two years a cohort of 63,770 community college students who first matriculated in 1992.The goal of the study was to determine the progress of students mandated into remediationby the TASP and to compare those receiving remediation to those not receivingremediation.
While the study is now based on data that is nearly 10 years old and TASP regulations havechanged in the interim, it remains an important piece of work. It provides the mostcomprehensive portrait available of students requiring developmental education in Texas,their enrollment patterns, and performance after receiving developmental education.
The report recognizes the special importance of remedying mathematics deficiencies. Itprovides compelling evidence that students whose deficiencies are remedied can effectivelyperform college-level work, and notes that even in 1995 a relatively small number ofstudents were being successfully remediated.
An Evaluation of Developmental Education in Texas Public Colleges and Universities, Part 1and 2, National Center for Developmental Education, 1998.This study was done undercontract from the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board. The purpose of the studywas to provide a general evaluation of developmental education programs and outcomes inTexas, with special emphasis on the TASP.
The principal methodology employed in the study was a survey of all the public colleges anduniversities in Texas. The survey was followed by site visits to a representative sample ofinstitutions.
The report provides a good description of the Texas developmental education system,including student characteristics, faculty characteristics, testing instruments, andinstructional methods.
This document also provides an extensive analysis of program outcomes. Finally, itrecommends implementation of an extensive list of "best practices."
Best Practices in Developmental Mathematics, Thomas Arminoton (ed.), MathematicsSpecial Professional Interest Network, National Association for Developmental Education,2002. This recent document is an attempt to identify best practices specific to mathematicsdevelopmental education. It essentially consists of 24 short essays by experts inmathematics developmental education in several different categories such as "working withdevelopmental students," "placement," "teaching techniques and methodologies," and"academic support."
12 15
This document is especially useful because it is specifically oriented to mathematicsinstruction and because it provides links to a number of valuable relevant resources such assources for professional development, publications, web sites, and data sources.
What Works: Research-Based Best Practices in Developmental Education, Hunter R.Boylan, National Center for Developmental Education, 2002. This book is a joint effort ofthe Continuous Quality Improvement Network and the National Center for DevelopmentalEducation with support from the American Productivity and Quality Center (APQC).
APQC is a nonprofit organization providing information, training, research, decision support,and networking for organizational performance improvement. The Center, which specializesin completing benchmarking research and has won numerous awards for its work, isregarded as one of the outstanding benchmarking research organizations in the U.S.
The study was based on research done by dozens of different researchers at manyinstitutions over decades. It proposes a set of best practices that have been demonstratedby that research to be practical and effective. Virtually all are common-sense techniquesthat applicable in any context but are especially important for developmental education.
An important contribution of the book includes a methodology for measuring the extent towhich individual institutions have adopted these best practices.
131 6
Recommendations for additional studies
Previous sections of this report indicate that relatively few students who are required toparticipate in mathematics developmental education are subsequently successful, wheresuccess is defined as completion of developmental education, by certificate or degreecompletion, or retention.
The Closing the Gaps by 2015 plan calls for enrolling as many as 300,000 studentsbeyond the 200,000 students already expected to enroll in higher education in the next12 years. A large number of those students will require developmental education. If thestate is to meet the plan's participation and success goals, it must increase the "yield" ofits developmental education programs and may be required to increase financial supportfor developmental education as well.
To improve the quality and effectiveness of developmental education, it is recommendedthat the Board endorse the following initiatives at this time:
(1) Promote and monitor the adoption in Texas public institutions of higher education ofthe "best practices" described in What Works: Research-Based Best Practices inDevelopmental Education. (See previous section.) The Board should disseminateinformation about these best practices, identify other best practices; encourage theirwidespread adoption, measure the extent of their adoption, and publish reports on thesemeasurements on a regular basis. This should include distributing copies of the book toinstitutions, sponsoring workshops on the material included in the book, including anemphasis on developmental education in institutional effectiveness reviews, surveyinginstitutions regarding the adoption of these best practices on their campuses on anannual basis, and publishing the findings.
(2) Study institutional revenues and expenditures for developmental education.Legislators are regularly presented with differing opinions as to whether developmentaleducation revenues subsidize other programs or developmental education is subsidizedby revenues intended for other programs. Developing a clear, compelling case for oneof these positions is important for the future of developmental education in Texas. In theprocess, a per-graduate cost for developmental education statistic should be developedand tracked over time.
If developmental education is being subsidized by other programs, the Board shouldaggressively seek additional funding for developmental education. If other programs arebeing subsidized by developmental education, the Board should ensure that fundsappropriated for developmental education are used for that purpose. This initiativecannot be accomplished using financial data currently being reported to the Board, so itwould require additional financial data from institutions.
(3) Conduct other studies as appropriate. The Board has limited capability to analyzethe effectiveness of proposed developmental education policies because it collectslimited data on individual students and classes and because some of the informationneeded for studying developmental education does not have wide enough application tojustify regular data collection and is thus not available. For example, the Board does notcollect information on the courses taken by individual students, so it cannot bedetermined from existing data if students who successfully completed developmentaleducation were subsequently successful in completing a college-level course in the
14 1 7
same subject. The Board and the institutions should jointly continue to studydevelopmental education practices and results with the goal of developing a facility foranalyzing a wide range of different policies.
Two follow-up studies to this report are recommended at this time:
A telephone survey in which a random sample of students who have dropped out ofmathematics developmental education are queried about their experiences, with theaim of identifying major impediments to success faced by students who are currentlynot being successful. This effort would require the assistance of institutions inlocating the total of 300 to 500 former students who would make up a statisticallysignificant sample.
A study relating success rates to pre-college academic preparation. CurrentCoordinating Board data does not provide data on student preparation for everystudent, so it is not possible to determine how many developmental educationstudents have no high school diploma, a GED certificate, a basic diploma, or anadvanced diploma and how the experiences of these groups differ when they enrollin higher education. Understanding these relationships is important for planningpurposes. Again, this effort would require institutions to provide data from their filesfor an estimated 1,500 students who would make up a sample.
1 815
Uni
vers
ity
CT
C C/S
C-A
cad
C/S
C-T
ech
TS
TC
/LIT
1-4
r.ay
pe M
ajor
Aca
dem
ic
Tec
hnic
al
Tec
h P
rep
Sta
tew
ide A
-1
1
FT
IC
1
Mat
h D
ev.
Ed.
1R
equi
red
49,1
049,
400
19%
109,
799
43,7
2640
%
65,2
9026
,556
41%
40,6
2315
,743
39%
3,88
61,
427
37%
114,
394
35,9
5631
%
34,6
9213
,069
38%
9,81
74,
101
42%
158,
903
53,1
2633
%
App
endi
x A
Inst
itutio
nal P
rofil
es o
f Stu
dent
s R
equi
ring
Mat
hem
atic
s D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
cato
nF
all/P
rior
Sum
mer
199
9 F
irst-
Tim
e-in
-Col
lege
Stu
dent
s T
rack
ed T
hrou
gh F
all 2
001
Inst
itutio
n Le
vel a
nd T
ype
Maj
or
Gen
der
Fem
ale
Mal
eW
hite
Bla
ckE
thni
city
Asi
anIn
dian
Inte
rnat
iona
lU
nkno
wn
IH
ispa
nic
5,70
961
%3,
691
39%
3,33
335
%2,
686
29%
3,11
133
%16
32%
390%
541%
140%
24,8
1857
%18
,908
43%
21,0
9148
%6,
337
14%
14,6
3533
%91
92%
228
1%36
61%
150
0%
15,1
9257
%11
,364
43%
13,6
4151
%3,
336
13%
8,71
133
%48
52%
147
1%15
61%
800%
9,10
758
%6,
636
42%
6,77
943
%2,
788
18%
5,39
334
%42
33%
801%
210
1%70
0%
519
36%
908
64%
671
47%
213
15%
531
37%
111%
10%
00%
00%
20,9
0158
%15
,055
42%
16,9
7447
%6,
022
17%
11,8
2233
%64
82%
186
1%21
01%
940%
7,33
456
%5,
735
44%
5,82
645
%2,
423
19%
4,15
432
%35
63%
650%
185
1%60
0%
2,29
256
%1,
809
44%
1,62
440
%57
814
%1,
770
43%
782%
160%
251%
100%
30,5
2757
%22
,599
43%
24,4
2446
%9,
023
17%
17,7
4633
%1,
082
2%26
71%
420
1%16
40%
Kt)
App
endi
x A
Inst
itutio
nal P
rofil
es o
f Stu
dent
s R
equi
ring
Mat
hem
atic
s D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
cato
nF
all/P
rior
Sum
mer
199
9 F
irst-
Tim
e-in
-Col
lege
Stu
dent
s T
rack
ed T
hrou
gh F
all 2
001
Inst
itutio
n Le
vel a
nd T
ype
Maj
or
FT
ICM
ath
Dev
.
Ed.
1R
equi
red
18-1
920
-21
22-2
425
-29
30-3
4A
ge35
-40
41-5
0O
ver
50U
nder
18
Unk
now
n
Uni
vers
ity49
,104
9,40
019
%8,
004
85%
378
4%18
12%
156
2%62
1%52
1%30
0%17
0%51
96%
10%
CT
C10
9,79
943
,726
40%
27,3
4663
%4,
591
10%
3,02
27%
2,49
66%
1,22
03%
933
2%66
42%
113
0%3,
325
8%16
0%
C/S
C-A
cad
65,2
9026
,556
41%
17,2
9265
%2,
575
10%
1,59
56%
1,23
25%
600
2%47
02%
322
1%54
0%2,
408
9%8
0%
C/S
C-T
ech
40,6
2315
,743
39%
9,25
859
%1,
827
12%
1,29
28%
1,13
57%
564
4%42
03%
308
2%50
0%88
16%
80%
TS
TC
/L IT
3,88
61,
427
37%
796
56%
189
13%
135
9%12
99%
564%
433%
342%
91%
363%
00%
Typ
e M
ajor
Aca
dem
ic11
4,39
435
,956
31%
25,2
9670
%2,
953
8%1,
776
5%1,
388
4%66
22%
522
1%35
21%
710%
2,92
78%
90%
Tec
hnic
al34
,692
13,0
6938
%7,
609
58%
1,54
912
%1,
128
9%96
77%
461
4%34
43%
250
2%44
0%71
15%
60%
Tec
h P
rep
9,81
74,
101
42%
2,44
560
%46
711
%29
97%
297
7%15
94%
119
3%92
2%15
0%20
65%
20%
Sta
tew
ide
158,
903
53,1
2633
%35
,350
67%
4,96
99%
3,20
36%
2,65
25%
1,28
22%
985
2%69
41%
130
0%3,
844
7%17
0%
App
endi
x A
Inst
itutio
nal P
rofil
es o
f Stu
dent
s R
equi
ring
Mat
hem
atic
s D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
cato
nF
all/P
rior
Sum
mer
199
9 F
irst-
Tim
e-in
-Col
lege
Stu
dent
s T
rack
ed T
hrou
gh F
all 2
001
Inst
itutio
n Le
vel a
nd T
ype
Maj
or
FT
ICM
ath
Dev
.
Req
uire
d
Hig
h S
choo
l Dip
lom
a
Reg
ular
Rec
om./A
dv.
Unk
now
n
Initi
alT
est C
ateg
ory
TA
SP
Per
sist
ence
or
Aw
ard
No
Yes
---
1-M
ath
Dev
. Ed.
Pro
vide
d
Not
Pro
vide
dP
rovi
ded
Mat
h T
AS
P O
blig
atio
n M
et
TA
SP
Met
TA
SP
Not
Met
-
Alte
rnat
ive
Unk
now
n
Uni
vers
ity49
,104
9,40
019
%3,
725
40%
3,61
038
%2,
065
22%
1,61
517
%7,
768
83%
170%
3,43
937
%5,
961
63%
1,77
919
%7,
621
81%
4,42
847
%4,
972
53%
CT
C10
9,79
943
,726
40%
19,3
0844
%8,
047
18%
16,3
7137
%22
,321
51%
21,2
9249
%11
30%
25,3
3958
%18
,387
42%
8,49
119
%35
,235
81%
10,3
3424
%33
,392
76%
C/S
C-A
cad
65,2
9026
,556
41%
11,7
4344
%5,
303
20%
9,51
036
%12
,782
48%
13,7
0152
%73
0%14
,963
56%
11,5
9344
%5,
353
20%
21,2
0380
%6,
625
25%
19,9
3175
%
C/S
C-T
ech
40,6
2315
,743
39%
6,88
544
%2,
529
16%
6,32
940
%8,
999
57%
6,70
543
%39
0%9,
517
60%
6,22
640
%2,
909
18%
12,8
3482
%3,
321
21%
12,4
2279
%
TS
TC
/LIT
3,88
61,
427
37%
680
48%
215
15%
532
37%
540
38%
886
62%
10%
859
60%
568
40%
229
16%
1,19
884
%38
827
%1,
039
73%
Typ
e M
ajor
Aca
dem
ic11
4,39
435
,956
31%
15,4
6843
%8,
913
25%
11,5
7532
%14
,397
40%
21,4
6960
%90
0%18
,402
51%
17,5
5449
%7,
132
20%
28,8
2480
%11
,053
31%
24,9
0369
%
Tec
hnic
al34
,692
13,0
6938
%5,
673
43%
2,04
116
%5,
355
41%
7,48
157
%5,
566
43%
220%
7,81
160
%5,
258
40%
2,37
318
%10
,696
82%
2,96
123
%10
,108
77%
Tec
h P
rep
9,81
74,
101
42%
1,89
246
%70
317
%1,
506
37%
2,05
850
%2,
025
49%
180%
2,56
563
%1,
536
37%
765
19%
3,33
681
%74
818
%3,
353
82%
Sta
tew
ide
158,
903
53,1
2633
%23
,033
43%
11,6
5722
%18
,436
35%
23,9
3645
%29
,060
55%
130
0%28
,778
54%
24,3
4846
%10
,270
19%
42,8
5681
%14
,762
28%
38,3
6472
%
A-3
App
endi
x A
Inst
itutio
nal P
rofil
es o
f Stu
dent
s R
equi
ring
Mat
hem
atic
s D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
nF
all/P
rior
Sum
mer
199
9 F
irst-
lime-
in-C
olle
ge S
tude
nts
Tra
cked
Thr
ough
Fal
l 200
1
Inst
itutio
n
FT
ICIM
ath
Dev
. Ed.
Req
uire
d
Gen
der
Mal
eE
thni
city
Fem
ale
Whi
teB
lack
His
pani
cA
sian
Am
eric
an In
dian
Inte
rnat
iona
lU
nkno
wn
AN
GE
LO S
TA
TE
UN
IVE
RS
ITY
1,24
029
824
%17
559
%12
341
%19
164
%25
8%81
27%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
10%
N/A
0%LA
MA
R U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y1,
179
374
32%
228
61%
146
39%
236
63%
109
29%
154%
72%
41%
31%
N/A
0%M
IDW
ES
TE
RN
ST
AT
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y59
316
127
%10
364
%58
36%
121
75%
2113
%16
10%
11%
11%
11%
N/A
0%P
RA
IRIE
VIE
W A
&M
UN
IVE
RS
ITY
978
622
64%
341
55%
281
45%
20%
611
98%
81%
10%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%S
AM
HO
US
TO
N S
TA
TE
UN
IVE
RS
ITY
1,63
650
031
%34
168
%15
932
%26
252
%18
737
%48
10%
31%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%S
OU
TH
WE
ST
TE
XA
S S
TA
TE
UN
IV2,
563
333
13%
239
72%
9428
%17
853
%42
13%
105
32%
31%
21%
31%
N/A
0%S
TE
PH
EN
F. A
US
TIN
ST
AT
E U
NIV
2,30
760
726
%38
764
%22
036
%38
263
%17
128
%40
7%8
1%6
1%N
/A0%
N/A
0%S
UL
RO
SS
ST
AT
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y27
010
740
%41
38%
6662
%37
35%
98%
5955
%N
/A0%
22%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
TA
RLE
TO
N S
TA
TE
UN
IVE
RS
ITY
962
241
25%
139
58%
102
42%
219
91%
52%
156%
N/A
0%1
0%1
0%N
/A0%
TE
XA
S A
&M
INT
ER
NA
TIO
NA
L U
NIV
302
7324
%41
56%
3244
%7
10%
N/A
0%66
90%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
TE
XA
S A
&M
UN
IV A
T G
ALV
ES
TO
N39
717
4%12
71%
529
%10
59%
212
%3
18%
16%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
16%
TE
XA
S A
&M
UN
IV-C
OR
PU
S C
HR
IST
I76
121
128
%13
062
%81
38%
102
48%
84%
9746
%4
2%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
TE
XA
S A
&M
UN
IV-K
ING
SV
ILLE
767
345
45%
155
45%
190
55%
5215
%46
13%
245
71%
N/A
0%2
1%N
/A0%
N/A
0%T
EX
AS
A&
M U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y6,
648
121
2%63
52%
5848
%63
52%
2420
%27
22%
22%
11%
11%
32%
TE
XA
S A
&M
UN
IVE
RS
ITY
-CO
MM
ER
CE
629
154
24%
9461
%60
39%
9461
%42
27%
117%
11%
64%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
TE
XA
S S
OU
TH
ER
N U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y80
749
561
%28
658
%20
942
%N
/A0%
480
97%
71%
41%
N/A
0%4
1%N
/A0%
TE
XA
S T
EC
H U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y3,
525
360
10%
219
61%
141
39%
282
78%
247%
4813
%1
0%1
0%1
0%3
1%T
EX
AS
WO
MA
N'S
UN
IVE
RS
ITY
383
131
34%
129
98%
22%
4131
%68
52%
1612
%1
1%N
/A0%
54%
N/A
0%U
. OF
HO
US
TO
N-D
OW
NT
OW
N97
564
466
%39
061
%25
439
%43
7%26
241
%29
045
%38
6%3
0%3
0%5
1%U
. OF
TE
XA
S A
T A
RLI
NG
TO
N1,
442
192
13%
130
68%
6232
%75
39%
6835
%36
19%
137%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%U
. OF
TE
XA
S A
T A
US
TIN
7,00
112
72%
8567
%42
33%
3931
%40
31%
3931
%8
6%1
1%N
/A0%
N/A
0%U
. OF
TE
XA
S A
T B
RO
WN
SV
ILLE
308
27%
563
%3
38%
113
%N
/A0%
788
%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%U
. OF
TE
XA
S A
T D
ALL
AS
625
183%
1372
%5
28%
1056
%3
17%
211
%2
11%
N/A
0%1
6%N
/A0%
IN)
U. O
F T
EX
AS
AT
EL
PA
SO
1,86
684
845
%46
955
%37
945
%83
10%
283%
706
83%
101%
20%
192%
N/A
0%4\
3 U
. OF
TE
XA
S A
T S
AN
AN
TO
NIO
1,78
137
321
%21
959
%15
441
%12
333
%40
11%
198
53%
92%
31%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
U. O
F T
EX
AS
AT
TY
LER
222
63%
583
%1
17%
467
%1
17%
117
%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%U
. OF
TE
XA
S-P
AN
AM
ER
ICA
N1,
982
848
43%
519
61%
329
39%
116
14%
20%
725
85%
N/A
0%1
0%4
0%N
/A0%
U. O
F T
EX
AS
-PE
RM
IAN
BA
SIN
107
87%
563
%3
38%
225
%1
13%
563
%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y O
F H
OU
ST
ON
3,26
043
213
%28
065
%15
235
%86
20%
198
46%
105
24%
379%
20%
20%
20%
UN
IVE
RS
ITY
OF
NO
RT
H T
EX
AS
2,85
446
916
%32
269
%14
731
%26
156
%14
932
%48
10%
92%
N/A
0%2
0%N
/A0%
WE
ST
TE
XA
S A
&M
UN
IVE
RS
ITY
1,01
227
727
%14
452
%13
348
%21
176
%20
7%42
15%
N/A
0%1
0%3
1%N
/A0%
Uni
vers
ity S
tate
wid
e49
,104
9,40
019
%5,
709
61%
3,69
139
%3,
333
35%
2,68
629
%3,
111
33%
163
2%39
0%54
1%14
0%
A-4
App
endi
x A
Inst
itutio
nal P
rofil
es o
f Stu
dent
s R
equi
ring
Mat
hem
atic
s D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
nF
all/P
rior
Sum
mer
199
9 F
irst-
Tim
e-In
-Col
lege
Stu
dent
s T
rack
ed T
hrou
gh F
all 2
001
Inst
itutio
n
FT
IC1M
ath
Day
. Ed.
Req
uire
d18
-19
Age
20-2
122
-24
25-2
930
-34
35-4
041
-50
Ove
r 50
Und
er 1
8U
nkno
wn
AN
GE
LO S
TA
TE
UN
IVE
RS
ITY
1,24
029
824
%26
388
%14
5%5
2%3
1%1
0%2
1%3
1%N
/A0%
72%
N/A
0%
LAM
AR
UN
IVE
RS
ITY
1,17
937
432
%30
682
%21
6%16
4%9
2%3
1%2
1%2
1%1
0%14
4%N
/A0%
MID
WE
ST
ER
N S
TA
TE
UN
IVE
RS
ITY
593
161
27%
135
84%
106%
53%
42%
21%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
11%
42%
N/A
0%
PR
AIR
IE V
IEW
A&
M U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y97
862
264
%52
584
%27
4%4
1%4
1%2
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
6010
%N
/A0%
SA
M H
OU
ST
ON
ST
AT
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y1,
636
500
31%
457
91%
61%
31%
41%
10%
10%
N/A
0%1
0%27
5%N
/A0%
SO
UT
HW
ES
T T
EX
AS
ST
AT
E U
NIV
2,56
333
313
%29
288
%7
2%9
3%3
1%2
1%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
206%
N/A
0%
ST
EP
HE
N F
. AU
ST
IN S
TA
TE
UN
IV2,
307
607
26%
554
91%
163%
112%
81%
20%
N/A
0%1
0%N
/A0%
152%
N/A
0%
SU
L R
OS
S S
TA
TE
UN
IVE
RS
ITY
270
107
40%
8983
%5
5%4
4%2
2%2
2%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
55%
N/A
0%
TA
RLE
TO
N S
TA
TE
UN
IVE
RS
ITY
962
241
25%
221
92%
52%
21%
10%
42%
31%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
52%
N/A
0%
TE
XA
S A
&M
INT
ER
NA
TIO
NA
L U
NIV
302
7324
%64
88%
45%
23%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
11%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
23%
N/A
0%
TE
XA
S A
&M
UN
IV A
T G
ALV
ES
TO
N39
717
4%16
94%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%1
6%N
/A0%
TE
XA
S A
&M
UN
IV-C
OR
PU
S C
HR
IST
I76
121
128
%19
894
%1
0%2
1%2
1%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%8
4%N
/A0%
TE
XA
S A
&M
UN
IV-K
ING
SV
ILLE
767
345
45%
284
82%
206%
93%
154%
41%
51%
21%
N/A
0%6
2%N
/A0%
TE
XA
S A
&M
UN
IVE
RS
ITY
6,64
812
12%
113
93%
11%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
76%
N/A
0%
TE
XA
S A
&M
UN
IVE
RS
ITY
-CO
MM
ER
CE
629
154
24%
120
78%
43%
32%
64%
21%
75%
32%
N/A
0%9
6%N
/A0%
TE
XA
S S
OU
TH
ER
N U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y80
749
561
%40
682
%30
6%8
2%7
1%4
1%1
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%39
8%N
/A0%
TE
XA
S T
EC
H U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y3,
525
360
10%
328
91%
62%
62%
41%
41%
41%
31%
N/A
0%5
1%N
/A0%
TE
XA
S W
OM
AN
'S U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y38
313
134
%10
076
%10
8%2
2%5
4%3
2%1
1%1
1%1
1%8
6%N
/A0%
U. O
F H
OU
ST
ON
-DO
WN
TO
WN
975
644
66%
481
75%
6410
%31
5%16
2%2
0%8
1%6
1%N
/A0%
366%
N/A
0%
U. O
F T
EX
AS
AT
AR
LIN
GT
ON
1,44
219
213
%16
988
%8
4%3
2%1
1%1
1%N
/A0%
N/A
0%1
1%9
5%N
/A0%
U. O
F T
EX
AS
AT
AU
ST
IN7,
001
127
2%12
296
%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
54%
N/A
0%
U. O
F T
EX
AS
AT
BR
OW
NS
VIL
LE30
827
%8
100%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%
U. O
F T
EX
AS
AT
DA
LLA
S62
518
3%15
83%
211
%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%1
6%N
/A0%
U. O
F T
EX
AS
AT
EL
PA
SO
1,86
684
845
%67
980
%39
5%15
2%15
2%4
0%5
1%3
0%10
1%77
9%1
0%
Ng)
U. O
F T
EX
AS
AT
SA
N A
NT
ON
IO1,
781
373
21%
306
82%
92%
62%
144%
21%
21%
21%
N/A
0%32
9%N
/A0%
tA3
U. O
F T
EX
AS
AT
TY
LER
222
63%
N/A
0%2
33%
233
%N
/A0%
'117
%1
17%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
U. O
F T
EX
AS
-PA
N A
ME
RIC
AN
1,98
284
843
%71
985
%39
5%22
3%20
2%10
1%4
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%34
4%N
/A0%
U. O
F T
EX
AS
-PE
RM
IAN
BA
SIN
107
87%
788
%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%1
13%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
UN
IVE
RS
ITY
OF
HO
US
TO
N3,
260
432
13%
371
86%
82%
10%
10%
10%
10%
N/A
0%1
0%48
11%
N/A
0%
UN
IVE
RS
ITY
OF
NO
RT
H T
EX
AS
2,85
446
916
%41
989
%11
2%3
1%3
1%3
1%2
0%1
0%1
0%26
6%N
/A0%
WE
ST
TE
XA
S A
&M
UN
IVE
RS
ITY
1,01
227
727
%23
786
%9
3%7
3%9
3%2
1%1
0%3
1%N
/A0%
93%
N/A
0%
Uni
vers
ity S
tate
wid
e49
,104
9,40
019
%8,
004
85%
378
4%18
12%
156
2%62
1%52
1%30
0%17
0%51
96%
10%
App
endi
x A
Inst
itutio
nal P
rofil
es o
f Stu
dent
s R
equi
ring
Mat
hem
atic
s D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
nF
ail/P
rior
Sum
mer
199
9 F
irst-
Tim
e-In
-Col
lege
Stu
dent
s T
rack
ed T
hrou
gh F
all 2
001
Inst
itutio
n
1
Mat
h D
ey. E
d.
I1
Hig
h S
choo
l Dip
lom
a
I
Initi
al T
est C
ateg
ory
1
Per
sist
ence
or
Aw
ard
1
Mat
h D
ev. E
d. P
rovi
ded
1
Mat
h T
AS
P O
blig
atio
n M
etF
TIC
Req
uire
dR
egul
arR
ecom
/Adv
.U
nkno
wn
Alte
mat
ive
TA
SP
Unk
now
nN
oY
esI
Not
Pro
vide
dP
rovi
ded
TA
SP
Met
TA
SP
Not
Met
AN
GE
LO S
TA
TE
UN
IVE
RS
ITY
1,24
029
824
%17
057
%97
33%
3110
%2
1%29
699
%N
/A0%
131
44%
167
56%
4013
%25
887
%29
599
%3
1%LA
MA
R U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y1,
179
374
32%
145
39%
123
33%
106
28%
N/A
0%37
410
0%N
/A0%
165
44%
209
56%
7019
%30
481
%18
249
%19
251
%M
IDW
ES
TE
RN
ST
AT
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y59
316
127
%81
50%
4125
%39
24%
N/A
0%16
110
0%N
/A0%
7647
%85
53%
3723
%12
477
%99
61%
6239
%P
RA
IRIE
VIE
W A
&M
UN
IVE
RS
ITY
978
622
64%
357
57%
113
18%
152
24%
N/A
0%62
010
0%2
0%24
640
%37
660
%66
11%
556
89%
164
26%
458
74%
SA
M H
OU
ST
ON
ST
AT
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y1,
636
500
31%
220
44%
217
43%
6313
%7
1%49
399
%N
/A0%
159
32%
341
68%
119
24%
381
76%
109
22%
391
78%
SO
UT
HW
ES
T T
EX
AS
ST
AT
E U
NIV
2,56
333
313
%82
25%
199
60%
5216
%5
2%32
898
%N
/A0%
6720
%26
680
%10
130
%23
270
%21
364
%12
036
%S
TE
PH
EN
F. A
US
TIN
ST
AT
E U
NIV
2,30
760
726
%25
943
%24
240
%10
617
%25
742
%35
058
%N
/A0%
198
33%
409
67%
204
34%
403
66%
369
61%
238
39%
SU
L R
OS
S S
TA
TE
UN
IVE
RS
ITY
270
107
40%
7065
%19
18%
1817
%3
3%10
497
%N
/A0%
5350
%54
50%
6460
%43
40%
1211
%95
89%
TA
RLE
TO
N S
TA
TE
UN
IVE
RS
ITY
962
241
25%
8837
%12
753
%26
11%
31%
238
99%
NIA
0%78
32%
163
68%
5222
%18
978
%13
255
%10
945
%T
EX
AS
A&
M IN
TE
RN
AT
ION
AL
UN
IV30
273
24%
2838
%34
47%
1115
%17
23%
5677
%N
/A0%
2940
%44
60%
912
%64
88%
2940
%44
60%
TE
XA
S A
&M
UN
IV A
T G
ALV
ES
TO
N39
717
4%6
35%
424
%7
41%
N/A
0%17
100%
N/A
0%4
24%
1376
%6
35%
1165
%14
82%
318
%T
EX
AS
AB
M U
NIV
-CO
RP
US
CH
RIS
TI
761
211
28%
3918
%13
966
%33
16%
N/A
0%21
110
0%N
/A0%
5124
%16
076
%10
952
%10
248
%18
186
%30
14%
TE
XA
S A
BM
UN
IV-K
ING
SV
ILLE
767
345
45%
144
42%
132
38%
6920
%2
1%33
998
%4
1%18
152
%16
448
%82
24%
263
76%
5817
%28
783
%T
EX
AS
A&
M U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y6,
648
121
2%24
20%
7965
%18
15%
N/A
0%11
898
%3
2%12
10%
109
90%
7058
%51
42%
112
93%
97%
TE
XA
S A
&M
UN
IVE
RS
ITY
-CO
MM
ER
CE
629
154
24%
6039
%56
36%
3825
%3
2%15
198
%N
/A0%
6341
%91
59%
2416
%13
084
%57
37%
9763
%T
EX
AS
SO
UT
HE
RN
UN
IVE
RS
ITY
807
495
61%
253
51%
5611
%18
638
%3
1%49
299
%N
/A0%
220
44%
275
56%
428%
453
92%
192
39%
303
61%
TE
XA
S T
EC
H U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y3,
525
360
10%
9727
%17
749
%86
24%
41%
355
99%
10%
7621
%28
479
%80
22%
280
78%
242
67%
118
33%
TE
XA
S W
OM
AN
'S U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y38
313
134
%50
38%
5139
%30
23%
22%
129
98%
N/A
0%35
27%
9673
%36
27%
9573
%76
58%
5542
%U
. OF
HO
US
TO
N-D
OW
NT
OW
N97
564
466
%35
054
%10
016
%19
430
%34
554
%29
946
%N
/A0%
325
50%
319
50%
355%
609
95%
190
30%
454
70%
U. O
F T
EX
AS
AT
AR
LIN
GT
ON
1,44
219
213
%48
25%
100
52%
4423
%5
3%18
797
%N
/A0%
6534
%12
766
%47
24%
145
76%
9851
%94
49%
U. O
F T
EX
AS
AT
AU
ST
IN7,
001
127
2%34
27%
7257
%21
17%
3225
%95
75%
N/A
0%21
17%
106
83%
5946
%68
54%
105
83%
2217
%U
. OF
TE
XA
S A
T B
RO
WN
SV
ILLE
308
27%
113
%7
88%
N/A
0%1
13%
788
%N
/A0%
113
%7
88%
N/A
0%8
100%
225
%6
7161
4U
. OF
TE
XA
S A
T D
ALL
AS
625
183%
422
%12
67%
211
%N
/A0%
1810
0%W
A0%
633
%12
67%
633
%12
67%
1689
%2
1 %
U. O
F T
EX
AS
AT
EL
PA
SO
1,86
684
845
%26
932
%29
735
%28
233
%71
985
%12
915
%N
/A0%
324
38%
524
62%
102
12%
746
88%
149
18%
699
82%
U. O
F T
EX
AS
AT
SA
N A
NT
ON
IO1,
781
373
21%
145
39%
154
41%
7420
%17
747
%19
653
%N
/A0%
127
34%
246
66%
216%
352
94%
118
32%
255
68%
U. O
F T
EX
AS
AT
TY
LER
222
63%
117
%3
50%
233
%N
/A0%
467
%2
33%
117
%5
83%
610
0%N
/A0%
610
0%N
/A0%
U. O
F T
EX
AS
-PA
N A
ME
RIC
AN
1,98
284
843
%25
029
%48
657
%11
213
%N
/A0%
847
100%
10%
355
42%
493
58%
143
17%
705
83%
827
98%
212%
U. O
F T
EX
AS
-PE
RM
IAN
BA
SIN
107
87%
450
%2
25%
225
%N
/A0%
810
0%N
IA0%
563
%3
38%
N/A
0%8
100%
225
%6
75%
UN
IVE
RS
ITY
OF
HO
US
TO
N3,
260
432
13%
155
36%
180
42%
9722
%17
4%41
596
%N
/A0%
108
25%
324
75%
286%
404
94%
9823
%33
477
%U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y O
F N
OR
TH
TE
XA
S2,
854
469
16%
166
35%
205
44%
9821
%6
1%46
399
%N
IA0%
127
27%
342
73%
8919
%38
081
%20
443
%26
557
%W
ES
T T
EX
AS
A&
M U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y1,
012
277
27%
125
45%
8631
%66
24%
52%
268
97%
41%
130
47%
147
53%
3212
%24
588
%77
28%
200
72%
Uni
vers
ity S
tate
wid
e49
,104
9,40
019
%3,
725
40%
3,61
038
%2,
065
22%
1,61
517
%7,
768
83%
170%
3,43
937
%5,
961
63%
1,77
919
%7,
621
81%
4,42
847
%4,
972
53%
1%)
t=fa
i.
A-6
FT
IC1M
ath
Day
. Ed.
IR
equi
red
Gen
der
App
endi
x A
Inst
itutio
nal P
rofil
es o
f Stu
dent
s R
equi
ring
Mat
hem
atic
s D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
nF
all/P
rior
Sum
mer
199
9 F
irst-
Tim
e-in
-Col
lege
Stu
dent
s T
rack
ed T
hrou
gh F
all 2
001
Inst
itutio
n
Fem
ale
Mal
eW
hite
Bla
ckH
ispa
nic
Eth
nici
tyA
sian
Am
eric
an In
dian
Inte
rnat
iona
lU
nkno
wn
ALA
MO
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
DIS
T8,
666
4,03
147
%2,
447
61%
1,58
439
%1,
200
30%
271
7%2,
485
62%
551%
130%
70%
N/A
0%A
LVIN
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
906
336
37%
171
51%
165
49%
245
73%
165%
6820
%4
1%N
/A0%
N/A
0%3
1%A
MA
RIL
LO C
OLL
EG
E1,
581
520
33%
302
58%
218
42%
372
72%
173%
111
21%
112%
20%
10%
61%
AN
GE
LIN
A C
OLL
EG
E1,
251
529
42%
352
67%
177
33%
364
69%
112
21%
509%
N/A
0%3
1%N
/A0%
N/A
0%A
US
TIN
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
7,75
82,
259
29%
1,24
555
%1,
014
45%
1,40
462
%19
59%
568
25%
603%
171%
131%
20%
BLI
NN
CO
LLE
GE
5,29
31,
638
31%
839
51%
799
49%
1,11
968
%31
519
%18
111
%12
1%5
0%6
0%N
/A0%
BR
AZ
OS
PO
RT
CO
LLE
GE
696
136
20%
7857
%58
43%
8462
%17
13%
3224
%1
1%2
1%N
/A0%
N/A
0%C
EN
TR
AL
TE
XA
S C
OLL
EG
E1,
414
386
27%
273
71%
113
29%
188
49%
9926
%71
18%
205%
51%
N/A
0%3
1%C
ISC
O J
UN
IOR
CO
LLE
GE
854
406
48%
212
52%
194
48%
253
62%
7719
%68
17%
31%
N/A
0%5
1%N
/A0%
CLA
RE
ND
ON
CO
LLE
GE
119
5143
%29
57%
2243
%36
71%
918
%6
12%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
CO
AS
TA
L B
EN
D C
OLL
EG
E95
236
638
%18
851
%17
849
%11
431
%21
6%22
662
%1
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%4
1%C
OLL
EG
E O
F T
HE
MA
INLA
ND
532
343
64%
202
59%
141
41%
197
57%
6619
%75
22%
10%
31%
10%
N/A
0%C
OLL
IN C
O C
OM
M C
OLL
DIS
TR
ICT
2,13
21,
229
58%
675
55%
554
45%
957
78%
101
8%11
59%
403%
121%
30%
10%
DA
LLA
S C
O C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OLL
DIS
T13
,030
5,58
143
%3,
251
58%
2,33
042
%2,
318
42%
1,51
727
%1,
219
22%
243
4%36
1%17
23%
761%
DE
L M
AR
CO
LLE
GE
2,12
893
844
%58
763
%35
137
%36
439
%9
1%56
060
%3
0%N
/A0%
20%
N/A
0%E
L P
AS
O C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OLL
EG
E D
IST
3,39
72,
219
65%
1,21
855
%1,
001
45%
211
10%
643%
1,89
285
%5
0%13
1%34
2%N
/A0%
FR
AN
K P
HIL
LIP
S C
OLL
EG
E48
111
023
%51
46%
5954
%83
75%
1514
%10
9%N
/A0%
22%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
GA
LVE
ST
ON
CO
LLE
GE
437
206
47%
123
60%
8340
%78
38%
6632
%57
28%
31%
21%
N/A
0%N
IA0%
GR
AY
SO
N C
OU
NT
Y C
OLL
EG
E1,
188
241
20%
132
55%
109
45%
197
82%
2711
%12
5%N
/A0%
52%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
HIL
L C
OLL
EG
E1,
030
237
23%
137
58%
100
42%
179
76%
2812
%27
11%
N/A
0%1
0%2
1%W
A0%
HO
US
TO
N C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OLL
EG
E5,
624
2,04
336
%1,
165
57%
878
43%
620
30%
462
23%
752
37%
167
8%3
0%30
1%9
0%H
OW
AR
D C
O J
UN
IOR
CO
LLE
GE
DIS
T68
622
333
%11
250
%11
150
%13
761
%19
9%64
29%
21%
10%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
KIL
GO
RE
CO
LLE
GE
1,13
748
242
%27
357
%20
943
%31
465
%14
430
%13
3%3
1%1
0%7
1%N
/A0%
LAM
AR
INS
TIT
UT
E O
F T
EC
HN
OLO
GY
499
234
47%
100
43%
134
57%
115
49%
103
44%
94%
63%
10%
WA
0%N
/A0%
\DLA
MA
R S
T C
OLL
OR
AN
GE
/PT
AR
TH
UR
1,17
154
446
%33
061
%21
439
%35
165
%15
228
%22
4%16
3%3
1%N
/A0%
N/A
0%LA
RE
DO
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
LEE
CO
LLE
GE
900
785
465
263
52%
34%
252
173
54%
66%
213 90
46%
34%
14
156
3% 59%
1
39
0%
15%
444 62
95%
24%
2
N/ A
0% 0%
N/A 3
0% 1%
4 3
1% 1%
N/A
N/A
0% 0%M
CLE
NN
AN
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
1,58
356
836
%33
659
%23
241
%35
763
%12
622
%79
14%
20%
10%
31%
N/A
0%M
IDLA
ND
CO
LLE
GE
795
206
26%
133
65%
7335
%13
767
%10
5%56
27%
21%
N/A
0%1
0%N
/A0%
N. H
AR
RIS
MO
NT
GO
ME
RY
CO
LL D
IST
6,14
72,
110
34%
1,22
858
%88
242
%1,
307
62%
301
14%
375
18%
653%
181%
201%
241%
NA
VA
RR
O C
OLL
EG
E1,
353
619
46%
306
49%
313
51%
336
54%
219
35%
396%
61%
20%
173%
N/A
0%N
OR
TH
CE
NT
RA
L T
EX
AS
CO
LLE
GE
1,16
541
636
%23
356
%18
344
%34
984
%27
6%33
8%5
1%2
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
OR
TH
EA
ST
TE
XA
S C
OM
M C
OLL
EG
E60
427
245
%17
464
%98
36%
223
82%
2911
%16
6%3
1%1
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%O
DE
SS
A C
OLL
EG
E1,
390
417
30%
234
56%
183
44%
209
50%
379%
164
39%
31%
41%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
PA
NO
LA C
OLL
EG
E55
620
437
%12
260
%82
40%
144
71%
5125
%9
4%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%P
AR
IS J
UN
IOR
CO
LLE
GE
934
402
43%
254
63%
148
37%
300
75%
7418
%14
3%2
0%12
3%N
/A0%
N/A
0%R
AN
GE
R C
OLL
EG
E41
917
241
%74
43%
9857
%81
47%
6135
%29
17%
N/A
0%1
1%N
/A0%
N/A
0%S
AN
JA
CIN
TO
CO
MM
CO
LL D
IST
4,34
01,
038
24%
596
57%
442
43%
455
44%
139
13%
368
35%
424%
81%
162%
101%
SO
UT
H P
LAIN
S C
OLL
EG
E2,
205
813
37%
423
52%
390
48%
457
56%
729%
280
34%
20%
20%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
SO
UT
H T
EX
AS
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
2,50
51,
397
56%
848
61%
549
39%
473%
N/A
0%1,
348
96%
20%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%S
OU
TH
WE
ST
TE
XA
S J
UN
IOR
CO
LLE
GE
922
707
77%
375
53%
332
47%
165
23%
132%
514
73%
30%
51%
N/A
0%7
1%T
AR
RA
NT
CO
UN
TY
CO
LLE
GE
DIS
T5,
272
2,61
750
%1,
556
59%
1,06
141
%1,
697
65%
394
15%
419
16%
883%
161%
20%
10%
TE
MP
LE C
OLL
EG
E98
227
228
%16
360
%10
940
%18
367
%37
14%
4818
%3
1%1
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%T
EX
AR
KA
NA
CO
LLE
GE
1,01
122
222
%13
460
%88
40%
163
73%
5525
%3
1%1
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
TE
XA
S S
OU
TH
MO
ST
CO
LLE
GE
1,60
272
545
%42
258
%30
342
%21
3%N
/A0%
697
96%
N/A
0%1
0%6
1%N
/A0%
TE
XA
S S
T T
EC
HN
ICA
L C
OLL
SY
ST
EM
3,38
71,
193
35%
419
35%
774
65%
556
47%
110
9%52
244
%5
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
TR
INIT
Y V
ALL
EY
CO
MM
CO
LLE
GE
1,06
470
867
%36
652
%34
248
%52
975
%13
319
%30
4%8
1%5
1%3
0%N
/A0%
TY
LER
JU
NIO
R C
OLL
EG
E2,
291
1,15
851
%64
055
%51
845
%70
261
%37
232
%76
7%5
0%2
0%1
0%N
/A0%
VE
RN
ON
CO
LLE
GE
704
232
33%
140
60%
9240
%17
776
%14
6%35
15%
N/A
0%6
3%N
/A0%
N/A
0%V
ICT
OR
IA C
OLL
EG
E, T
HE
994
357
36%
237
66%
120
34%
200
56%
206%
131
37%
21%
31%
10%
N/A
0%W
EA
TH
ER
FO
RD
CO
LLE
GE
810
357
44%
196
55%
161
45%
298
83%
164%
247%
62%
41%
51%
41%
WE
ST
ER
N T
EX
AS
CO
LLE
GE
494
136
28%
5238
%84
62%
102
75%
118%
2216
%N
/A0%
11%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
WH
AR
TO
N C
OU
NT
Y J
UN
IOR
CO
LLE
GE
1,62
339
224
%24
061
%15
239
%22
658
%54
14%
105
27%
62%
N/A
0%1
0%N
/A0%
CT
C S
tate
wid
e10
9,79
943
,726
40%
24,8
1857
%18
,908
43%
21,0
9148
%6,
337
14%
14,6
3533
%91
92%
228
1%36
61%
150
0%
A-7
App
endi
x A
Inst
itutio
nal P
rofil
es o
f Stu
dent
s R
equi
ring
Mat
hem
atic
s D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
nF
al1/
Prio
r S
umm
er 1
999
FIr
st-T
ime.
in-C
olle
ge S
tude
nts
Tra
cked
Thr
ough
Fal
l 200
1
Inst
itutio
nR
idM
ath
Dev
. Ed.
IR
equi
red
18-1
9A
ge20
-21
22-2
425
-29
30-3
435
-40
41-5
0O
ver
50U
nder
18
Unk
now
nA
LAM
O C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OLL
EG
E D
IST
8,66
64,
031
47%
2,48
562
%43
811
%29
77%
256
6%10
33%
842%
581%
120%
298
7%N
/A0%
ALV
IN C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OLL
EG
E90
633
637
%18
354
%26
8%23
7%19
6%14
4%13
4%12
4%5
1%41
12%
NIA
0%A
MA
RIL
LO C
OLL
EG
E1,
581
520
33%
307
59%
5611
%64
12%
285%
143%
173%
143%
N/A
0%20
4%N
/A0%
AN
GE
LIN
A C
OLL
EG
E1,
251
529
42%
330
62%
357%
265%
306%
173%
132%
71%
N/A
0%71
13%
N/A
0%A
US
TIN
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
7,75
82,
259
29%
1,15
051
%40
718
%26
112
%19
69%
593%
422%
291%
70%
108
5%N
/A0%
BLI
NN
CO
LLE
GE
5,29
31,
638
31%
1,20
774
%14
69%
875%
584%
272%
252%
252%
40%
584%
10%
BR
AZ
OS
PO
RT
CO
LLE
GE
696
136
20%
9973
%14
10%
107%
75%
21%
N/A
0%1
1%N
/A0%
32%
N/A
0%C
EN
TR
AL
TE
XA
S C
OLL
EG
E1,
414
386
27%
200
52%
4512
%34
9%45
12%
195%
113%
72%
21%
236%
N/A
0%C
ISC
O J
UN
IOR
CO
LLE
GE
854
406
48%
290
71%
389%
225%
174%
92%
61%
72%
N/A
0%17
4%N
/A0%
CLA
RE
ND
ON
CO
LLE
GE
119
5143
%13
25%
1529
%3
6%7
14%
612
%3
6%4
8%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
CO
AS
TA
L B
EN
D C
OLL
EG
E95
236
638
%20
155
%33
9%23
6%25
7%21
6%12
3%7
2%4
1%40
11%
N/A
0%C
OLL
EG
E O
F T
HE
MA
INLA
ND
532
343
64%
220
64%
3911
%20
6%23
7%12
3%9
3%7
2%N
/A0%
134%
N/A
0%C
OLL
IN C
O C
OM
M C
OLL
DIS
TR
ICT
2,13
21,
229
58%
917
75%
968%
423%
484%
202%
171%
71%
10%
817%
N/A
0%D
ALL
AS
CO
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LL D
IST
13,0
305,
581
43%
3,09
055
%73
813
%56
410
%45
68%
186
3%13
52%
801%
140%
312
6%6
0%D
EL
MA
R C
OLL
EG
E2,
128
938
44%
623
66%
9210
%60
6%46
5%31
3%19
2%8
1%3
0%56
6%N
/A0%
EL
PA
SO
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
DIS
T3,
397
2,21
965
%1,
394
63%
253
11%
133
6%13
96%
693%
502%
512%
70%
123
6%N
/A0%
FR
AN
K P
HIL
LIP
S C
OLL
EG
E48
111
023
%75
68%
55%
98%
11%
33%
11%
11%
11%
1413
%N
/A0%
GA
LVE
ST
ON
CO
LLE
GE
437
206
47%
116
56%
2613
%17
8%8
4%7
3%7
3%5
2%5
2%15
7%N
/A0%
GR
AY
SO
N C
OU
NT
Y C
OLL
EG
E1,
188
241
20%
156
65%
229%
146%
104%
73%
42%
21%
N/A
0%26
11%
N/A
0%H
ILL
CO
LLE
GE
1,03
023
723
%13
356
%20
8%3
1%6
3%4
2%2
1%3
1%N
/A0%
6628
%N
/A0%
HO
US
TO
N C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OLL
EG
E5,
624
2,04
336
%1,
123
55%
295
14%
203
10%
132
6%66
3%51
2%36
2%3
0%13
06%
40%
HO
WA
RD
CO
JU
NIO
R C
OLL
EG
E D
IST
686
223
33%
128
57%
3013
%12
5%7
3%6
3%2
1%6
3%N
/A0%
3114
%1
0%K
ILG
OR
E C
OLL
EG
E1,
137
482
42%
363
75%
357%
245%
133%
163%
71%
61%
N/A
0%18
4%N
/A0%
LAM
AR
INS
TIT
UT
E O
F T
EC
HN
OLO
GY
499
234
47%
143
61%
2912
%16
7%24
10%
83%
63%
42%
N/A
0%4
2%N
/A0%
LAM
AR
ST
CO
LL O
RA
NG
E/P
T A
RT
HU
R1,
171
544
46%
289
53%
5410
%49
9%36
7%28
5%15
3%16
3%N
/A0%
5710
%N
/A0%
LAR
ED
O C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OLL
EG
E90
046
552
%35
677
%32
7%6
1%8
2%6
1%2
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%54
12%
10%
LEE
CO
LLE
GE
785
263
34%
182
69%
20B
%17
6%16
6%4
2%6
2%5
2%N
/A0%
135%
N/A
0%M
CLE
NN
AN
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
1,58
356
836
%38
367
%47
8%31
5%33
6%12
2%11
2%6
1%1
0%44
8%N
/A0%
MID
LAN
D C
OLL
EG
E79
520
626
%75
36%
94%
105%
73%
21%
31%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
100
49%
N/A
0%N
. HA
RR
IS M
ON
TG
OM
ER
Y C
OLL
DIS
T6,
147
2,11
034
%1,
413
67%
190
9%11
05%
110
5%45
2%44
2%32
2%7
0%15
98%
N/A
0%N
AV
AR
RO
CO
LLE
GE
1,35
361
946
%41
467
%59
10%
417%
193%
102%
51%
61%
30%
6210
%N
/A0%
Crj
NO
RT
H C
EN
TR
AL
TE
XA
S C
OLL
EG
E1,
165
416
36%
237
57%
399%
205%
215%
92%
133%
61%
N/A
0%71
17%
NIA
0%N
OR
TH
EA
ST
TE
XA
S C
OM
M C
OLL
EG
E60
427
245
%17
765
%26
10%
104%
135%
93%
52%
21%
21%
2810
%N
/A0%
OD
ES
SA
CO
LLE
GE
1,39
041
730
%26
163
%23
6%15
4%19
5%10
2%14
3%5
1%1
0%69
17%
N/A
0%P
AN
OLA
CO
LLE
GE
556
204
37%
151
74%
105%
52%
52%
10%
52%
52%
N/A
0%22
11%
N/A
0%P
AR
IS J
UN
IOR
CO
LLE
GE
934
402
43%
251
62%
297%
195%
164%
164%
143%
133%
20%
4210
%N
/A0%
RA
NG
ER
CO
LLE
GE
419
172
41%
125
73%
116%
42%
32%
21%
11%
N/A
0%N
IA0%
2615
%N
/A0%
SA
N J
AC
INT
O C
OM
M C
OLL
DIS
T4,
340
1,03
824
%72
670
%90
9%68
7%30
3%18
2%11
1%11
1%1
0%83
8%N
/A0%
SO
UT
H P
LAIN
S C
OLL
EG
E2,
205
813
37%
581
71%
587%
324%
223%
121%
40%
71%
N/A
0%97
12%
N/A
0%S
OU
TH
TE
XA
S C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OLL
EG
E2,
505
1,39
756
%86
362
%15
911
%85
6%94
7%43
3%21
2%25
2%2
0%10
58%
N/A
0%S
OU
TH
WE
ST
TE
XA
S J
UN
IOR
CO
LLE
GE
922
707
77%
462
65%
416%
365%
335%
243%
71%
51%
WA
0%98
14%
10%
TA
RR
AN
T C
OU
NT
Y C
OLL
EG
E D
IST
5,27
22,
617
50%
1,69
365
%26
710
%15
96%
123
5%87
3%68
3%49
2%11
0%15
96%
10%
TE
MP
LE C
OLL
EG
E98
227
228
%17
665
%16
6%17
6%9
3%4
1%3
1%4
1%2
1%41
15%
N/A
0%T
EX
AR
KA
NA
CO
LLE
GE
1,01
122
222
%15
972
%12
5%16
7%11
5%7
3%6
3%1
0%N
/A0%
94%
10%
TE
XA
S S
OU
TH
MO
ST
CO
LLE
GE
1,60
272
545
%48
166
%73
10%
365%
345%
182%
132%
91%
N/A
0%61
8%N
/A0%
TE
XA
S S
T T
EC
HN
ICA
L C
OLL
SY
ST
EM
3,38
71,
193
35%
653
55%
160
13%
119
10%
105
9%48
4%37
3%30
3%9
1%32
3%N
/A0%
TR
INIT
Y V
ALL
EY
CO
MM
CO
LLE
GE
1,06
470
867
%48
068
%35
5%23
3%27
4%11
2%20
3%8
1%W
A0%
104
15%
N/A
0%T
YLE
R J
UN
IOR
CO
LLE
GE
2,29
11,
158
51%
828
72%
807%
494%
383%
212%
252%
81%
N/A
0%10
99%
N/A
0%V
ER
NO
N C
OLL
EG
E70
423
233
%14
362
%13
6%20
9%12
5%13
6%10
4%4
2%1
0%16
7%N
/A0%
VIC
TO
RIA
CO
LLE
GE
, TH
E99
435
736
%23
766
%29
8%13
4%14
4%14
4%16
4%11
3%1
0%22
6%N
/A0%
WE
AT
HE
RF
OR
D C
OLL
EG
E81
035
744
%27
076
%21
6%19
5%16
4%5
1%6
2%2
1%1
0%17
5%N
/A0%
WE
ST
ER
N T
EX
AS
CO
LLE
GE
494
136
28%
7152
%16
12%
97%
86%
21%
54%
11%
N/A
0%24
18%
N/A
0%W
HA
RT
ON
CO
UN
TY
JU
NIO
R C
OLL
EG
E1,
623
392
24%
263
67%
3910
%17
4%13
3%13
3%7
2%6
2%1
0%33
8%N
/A0%
CT
C S
tate
wid
e10
9,79
943
,726
40%
27,3
4663
%4,
591
10%
3,02
27%
2,49
66%
1,22
03%
933
2%66
42%
113
0%3,
325
8%16
0%
App
endi
x A
Inst
itutio
nal P
rofil
es o
f Stu
dent
s R
equi
ring
Mat
hem
atic
s D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
nF
all/P
rior
Sum
mer
199
9 F
irst-
Tim
e-in
-Col
lege
Stu
dent
s T
rack
ed T
hrou
gh F
all 2
001
Inst
itutio
n
Mat
h D
ee. E
d.
Req
uire
d
Hig
h S
choo
l Dip
lom
aR
ecoi
l./ A
dv.
Initi
al T
est
TA
SP
- P
ersi
sten
ce o
r A
war
d -
No
Yes
- M
ath
Dev
. Ed.
Pro
vide
d -
Not
Pro
vide
dP
rovi
ded
- M
ath
TA
SP
Obl
igat
ion
Met
-
TA
SP
Met
TA
SP
Not
Met
Reg
ular
Unk
now
nI
Alte
rnat
ive
Cat
egor
yU
nkno
wn
ALA
MO
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
DIS
T8,
666
4,03
147
%2,
008
50%
600
15%
1,42
335
%3,
295
82%
736
18%
N/A
0%2,
468
61%
1,56
339
%31
88%
3,71
392
%76
719
%3,
264
81%
ALV
IN C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OLL
EG
E90
633
637
%11
735
%38
11%
181
54%
228
68%
108
32%
N/A
0%17
652
%16
048
%64
19%
272
81%
6620
%27
080
%A
MA
RIL
LO C
OLL
EG
E1,
581
520
33%
213
41%
111
21%
196
38%
344
66%
176
34%
N/A
0%30
659
%21
441
%35
7%48
593
%10
921
%41
179
%A
NG
ELI
NA
CO
LLE
GE
1,25
152
942
%25
548
%87
16%
187
35%
51%
524
99%
N/A
0%32
762
%20
238
%19
236
%33
764
%11
422
%41
578
%A
US
TIN
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
7,75
82,
259
29%
913
40%
460
20%
886
39%
1,29
958
%95
642
%4
0%1,
349
60%
910
40%
743
33%
1,51
667
%70
331
%1,
556
69%
BLI
NN
CO
LLE
GE
5,29
31,
638
31%
838
51%
378
23%
422
26%
201%
1,61
599
%3
0%72
844
%91
056
%46
729
%1,
171
71%
550
34%
1,08
866
%B
RA
ZO
SP
OR
T C
OLL
EG
E69
613
620
%71
52%
2821
%37
27%
N/A
0%13
610
0%N
/A0%
8160
%55
40%
2720
%10
980
%22
16%
114
84%
CE
NT
RA
L T
EX
AS
CO
LLE
GE
1,41
438
627
%14
237
%76
20%
168
44%
286
74%
100
26%
N/A
0%26
268
%12
432
%40
10%
346
90%
7018
%31
682
%C
ISC
O J
UN
IOR
CO
LLE
GE
854
406
48%
208
51%
8320
%11
528
%4
1%40
299
%N
/A0%
270
67%
136
33%
116
29%
290
71%
8320
%32
380
%C
LAR
EN
DO
N C
OLL
EG
E11
951
43%
2039
%11
22%
2039
%1
2%50
98%
N/A
0%30
59%
2141
%19
37%
3263
%23
45%
2855
%C
OA
ST
AL
BE
ND
CO
LLE
GE
952
366
38%
8824
%13
737
%14
139
%13
838
%22
862
%N
/A0%
201
55%
165
45%
8824
%27
876
%17
5%34
995
%C
OLL
EG
E O
F T
HE
MA
INLA
ND
532
343
64%
163
48%
5315
%12
737
%23
769
%96
28%
103%
192
56%
151
44%
5917
%28
483
%46
13%
297
87%
CO
LLIN
CO
CO
MM
CO
LL D
IST
RIC
T2,
132
1,22
958
%58
848
%23
419
%40
733
%57
747
%65
253
%N
IA0%
680
55%
549
45%
492
40%
737
60%
530
43%
699
57%
DA
LLA
S C
O C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OLL
DIS
T13
,030
5,58
143
%2,
158
39%
809
14%
2,61
447
%4,
241
76%
1,34
024
%N
/A0%
3,41
061
%2,
171
39%
778
14%
4,80
386
%85
615
%4,
725
85%
DE
L M
AR
CO
LLE
GE
2,12
893
844
%36
439
%24
927
%32
535
%33
836
%60
064
%N
/A0%
525
56%
413
44%
829%
856
91%
282
30%
656
70%
EL
PA
SO
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
DIS
T3,
397
2,21
965
%95
143
%44
520
%82
337
%2,
010
91%
193
9%16
1%1,
357
61%
862
39%
233
11%
1,98
689
%57
3%2,
162
97%
FR
AN
K P
HIL
LIP
S C
OLL
EG
E48
111
023
%51
46%
1615
%43
39%
11%
109
99%
N/A
0%64
58%
4642
%24
22%
8678
%40
36%
7064
%G
ALV
ES
TO
N C
OLL
EG
E43
720
647
%92
45%
73%
107
52%
10%
175
85%
3015
%14
369
%63
31%
4321
%16
379
%17
8%18
992
%G
RA
YS
ON
CO
UN
TY
CO
LLE
GE
1,18
824
120
%11
447
%35
15%
9238
%7
3%23
497
%N
/A0%
152
63%
8937
%78
32%
163
68%
6527
%17
673
%H
ILL
CO
LLE
GE
1,03
023
723
%10
544
%23
10%
109
46%
108
46%
129
54%
N/A
0%13
155
%10
645
%92
39%
145
61%
6427
%17
373
%H
OU
ST
ON
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
5,62
42,
043
36%
884
43%
186
9%97
348
%1,
509
74%
534
26%
N/A
0%1,
220
60%
823
40%
189
9%1,
854
91%
560
27%
1,48
373
%H
OW
AR
D C
O J
UN
IOR
CO
LLE
GE
DIS
T68
622
333
%11
552
%19
9%89
40%
N/A
0%22
310
0%N
/A0%
138
62%
8538
%50
22%
173
78%
4118
%18
282
%K
ILG
OR
E C
OLL
EG
E1,
137
482
42%
262
54%
8918
%13
127
%19
941
%28
359
%N
/A0%
311
65%
171
35%
135
28%
347
72%
7816
%40
484
%LA
MA
R IN
ST
ITU
TE
OF
TE
CH
NO
LOG
Y49
923
447
%12
654
%17
7%91
39%
N/A
0%23
410
0%N
/A0%
140
60%
9440
%33
14%
201
86%
6829
%16
671
%LA
MA
R S
T C
OLL
OR
AN
GE
/PT
AR
TH
UR
1,17
154
446
%19
536
%64
12%
285
52%
280
51%
264
49%
N/A
0%31
057
%23
443
%11
120
%43
380
%12
623
%41
877
%LA
RE
DO
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
900
465
52%
120
26%
225
48%
120
26%
176
38%
289
62%
N/A
0%16
435
%30
165
%10
623
%35
977
%13
028
%33
572
%LE
E C
OLL
EG
E78
526
334
%11
945
%62
24%
8231
%17
767
%83
32%
31%
146
56%
117
44%
166%
247
94%
187%
245
93%
MC
LEN
NA
N C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OLL
EG
E1,
583
568
36%
269
47%
130
23%
169
30%
272
48%
294
52%
20%
314
55%
254
45%
9316
%47
584
%12
121
%44
779
%M
IDLA
ND
CO
LLE
GE
795
206
26%
3015
%14
7%16
279
%15
977
%47
23%
N/A
0%11
154
%95
46%
143
69%
6331
%30
15%
176
85%
N.)
N. H
AR
RIS
MO
NT
GO
ME
RY
CO
LL D
IST
6,14
72,
110
34%
1,09
552
%24
812
%76
736
%1,
562
74%
547
26%
10%
1,17
055
%94
045
%21
210
%1,
898
90%
453
21%
1,65
779
%N
AV
AR
RO
CO
LLE
GE
1,35
361
946
%27
845
%11
118
%23
037
%39
764
%22
236
%N
/A0%
308
50%
311
50%
101
16%
518
84%
8614
%53
386
%'N
,14
NO
RT
H C
EN
TR
AL
TE
XA
S C
OLL
EG
E1,
165
416
36%
180
43%
4611
%19
046
%4
1%41
299
%N
/A0%
237
57%
179
43%
173
42%
243
58%
9623
%32
077
%N
OR
TH
EA
ST
TE
XA
S C
OM
M C
OLL
EG
E60
427
245
%15
256
%30
11%
9033
%15
156
%12
144
%N
/A0%
158
58%
114
42%
7628
%19
672
%75
28%
197
72%
OD
ES
SA
CO
LLE
GE
1,39
041
730
%15
537
%78
19%
184
44%
234
56%
183
44%
N/A
0%23
757
%18
043
%84
20%
333
80%
9022
%32
778
%P
AN
OLA
CO
LLE
GE
556
204
37%
109
53%
3718
%58
28%
6733
%13
767
%N
/A0%
120
59%
8441
%67
33%
137
67%
6029
%14
471
%P
AR
IS J
UN
IOR
CO
LLE
GE
934
402
43%
154
38%
8220
%16
641
%17
243
%23
057
%N
/A0%
237
59%
165
41%
8621
%31
679
%80
20%
322
80%
RA
NG
ER
CO
LLE
GE
419
172
41%
9052
%25
15%
5733
%59
34%
113
66%
N/A
0%97
56%
7544
%64
37%
108
63%
5230
%12
070
%S
AN
JA
CIN
TO
CO
MM
CO
LL D
IST
4,34
01,
038
24%
512
49%
155
15%
371
36%
614
59%
422
41%
20%
519
50%
519
50%
979%
941
91%
328
32%
710
68%
SO
UT
H P
LAIN
S C
OLL
EG
E2,
205
813
37%
455
56%
150
18%
208
26%
167
21%
643
79%
30%
504
62%
309
38%
296
36%
517
64%
221
27%
592
73%
SO
UT
H T
EX
AS
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
2,50
51,
397
56%
582
42%
428
31%
387
28%
30%
1,39
410
0%N
/A0%
808
58%
589
42%
329
24%
1,06
876
%37
127
%1,
026
73%
SO
UT
HW
ES
T T
EX
AS
JU
NIO
R C
OLL
EG
E92
270
777
%31
845
%16
724
%22
231
%1
0%70
610
0%N
/A0%
358
51%
349
49%
299
42%
408
58%
182
26%
525
74%
TA
RR
AN
T C
OU
NT
Y C
OLL
EG
E D
IST
5,27
22,
617
50%
1,02
739
%63
024
%96
037
%1,
248
48%
1,36
952
%N
/A0%
1,64
363
%97
437
%22
99%
2,38
891
%40
115
%2,
216
85%
TE
MP
LE C
OLL
EG
E98
227
228
%13
851
%48
18%
8632
%N
/A0%
272
100%
NIA
0%15
256
%12
044
%82
30%
190
70%
9936
%17
364
%T
EX
AR
KA
NA
CO
LLE
GE
1,01
122
222
%83
37%
3415
%10
547
%N
/A0%
222
100%
N/A
0%13
561
%87
39%
3014
%19
286
%64
29%
158
71%
TE
XA
S S
OU
TH
MO
ST
CO
LLE
GE
1,60
272
545
%27
438
%23
432
%21
730
%21
930
%50
670
%N
/A0%
377
52%
348
48%
618%
664
92%
156
22%
569
78%
TE
XA
S S
T T
EC
HN
ICA
L C
OLL
SY
ST
EM
3,38
71,
193
35%
554
46%
198
17%
441
37%
540
45%
652
55%
10%
719
60%
474
40%
196
16%
997
84%
320
27%
873
73%
TR
INIT
Y V
ALL
EY
CO
MM
CO
LLE
GE
1,06
470
867
%29
241
%17
324
%24
334
%8
1%70
099
%N
/A0%
356
50%
352
50%
415
59%
293
41%
706
100%
20%
TY
LER
JU
NIO
R C
OLL
EG
E2,
291
1,15
851
%55
748
%21
418
%38
733
%67
458
%48
442
%N
/A0%
649
56%
509
44%
361
31%
797
69%
159
14%
999
86%
VE
RN
ON
CO
LLE
GE
704
232
33%
120
52%
2410
%88
38%
N/A
0%23
210
0%N
/A0%
136
59%
9641
%11
449
%11
851
%48
21%
184
79%
VIC
TO
RIA
CO
LLE
GE
, TH
E99
435
736
%14
641
%93
26%
118
33%
8624
%23
666
%35
10%
195
55%
162
45%
5816
%29
984
%11
031
%24
769
%W
EA
TH
ER
FO
RD
CO
LLE
GE
810
357
44%
189
53%
8524
%83
23%
72%
347
97%
31%
224
63%
133
37%
123
34%
234
66%
9627
%26
173
%W
ES
TE
RN
TE
XA
S C
OLL
EG
E49
413
628
%59
43%
1813
%59
43%
6850
%68
50%
N/A
0%85
63%
5138
%32
24%
104
76%
3626
%10
074
%W
HA
RT
ON
CO
UN
TY
JU
NIO
R C
OLL
EG
E1,
623
392
24%
210
54%
5314
%12
933
%12
833
%26
467
%N
/A0%
209
53%
183
47%
4010
%35
290
%39
210
0%N
/A0%
CT
C S
tate
wid
e10
9,79
943
,726
40%
19,3
0844
%8,
047
18%
16,3
7137
%22
,321
51%
21,2
9249
%11
30%
25,3
3958
%18
,387
42%
8,49
119
%35
,235
81%
10,3
3424
%33
,392
76%
A-9
App
endi
x A
Inst
itutio
nal P
rofil
es o
f Stu
dent
s R
equi
ring
Mat
hem
atic
s D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
nF
all/P
rior
Sum
mer
199
9 F
irst-
Tim
e-in
-Col
lege
Stu
dent
s T
rack
ed T
hrou
gh F
all 2
001
Com
mun
ity a
nd S
tate
Col
lege
- A
cade
mic
FT
IC
Mat
h D
ev.
Ed.
1R
equi
red
Gen
der
- Mal
eW
hite
Bla
ckH
ispa
nic
Eth
nici
tyA
sian
Indi
anIn
tern
atio
nal
Unk
now
nF
emal
e
ALA
MO
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
DIS
T6,
833
3,14
746
%1,
964
62%
1,18
338
%98
531
%19
96%
1,90
861
%40
1%11
0%4
0%N
/A0%
ALV
IN C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OLL
EG
E68
224
836
%13
153
%11
747
%18
374
%14
6%49
20%
10%
N/A
0%N
/A00
.72
10%
AM
AR
ILLO
CO
LLE
GE
801
285
36%
159
56%
126
44%
208
73%
83%
5620
%8
3%1
0%3
1%A
NG
ELI
NA
CO
LLE
GE
707
306
43%
192
63%
114
37%
233
76%
5016
%21
7%N
/A0%
21%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
AU
ST
IN C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OLL
EG
E5,
621
1,68
330
%90
654
%77
746
%1,
064
63%
132
8%41
325
%47
3%14
1%11
1%2
0%B
LIN
N C
OLL
EG
E4,
321
1,31
730
%64
649
%67
151
%92
470
%22
717
%14
611
%12
1%3
0%5
0%N
/A0%
BR
AZ
OS
PO
RT
CO
LLE
GE
330
104
32%
6663
%38
37%
6865
%10
10%
2322
%1
1%2
2%N
/A0%
N/A
0%C
EN
TR
AL
TE
XA
S C
OLL
EG
E70
518
927
%14
074
%49
26%
9148
%49
26%
3016
%14
7%2
1%N
/A0%
32%
CIS
CO
JU
NIO
R C
OLL
EG
E69
934
549
%18
253
%16
347
%22
666
%57
17%
5516
%3
1%N
/A0%
41%
N/A
0%C
LAR
EN
DO
N C
OLL
EG
E94
3840
%24
63%
1437
%23
61%
924
%6
16%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
CO
AS
TA
L B
EN
D C
OLL
EG
E64
026
942
%13
952
%13
048
%90
33%
187%
159
59%
10%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
10%
CO
LLE
GE
OF
TH
E M
AIN
LAN
D37
126
371
%16
663
%97
37%
145
55%
5822
%55
21%
10%
31%
10%
N/A
0%C
OLL
IN C
O C
OM
M C
OLL
DIS
TR
ICT
1,11
167
160
%37
556
%29
644
%50
976
%64
10%
629%
254%
81%
20%
10%
DA
LLA
S C
O C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OLL
DIS
T3,
322
1,44
343
%81
657
%62
743
%66
846
%40
128
%24
317
%72
5%6
0%23
2%30
2%D
EL
MA
R C
OLL
EG
E1,
265
561
44%
332
59%
229
41%
235
42%
92%
314
56%
20%
N/A
0%1
0%N
/A0%
EL
PA
SO
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
DIS
T1,
964
1,33
868
%74
556
%59
344
%15
111
%42
3%1,
103
82%
50%
111%
262%
N/A
0%F
RA
NK
PH
ILLI
PS
CO
LLE
GE
405
106
26%
5047
%56
53%
8075
%14
13%
109%
N/A
0%2
2%N
/A0%
N/A
0%G
ALV
ES
TO
N C
OLL
EG
E32
515
447
%86
56%
6844
%63
41%
4429
%42
27%
32%
21%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
GR
AY
SO
N C
OU
NT
Y C
OLL
EG
E73
918
625
%10
255
%84
45%
156
84%
179%
95%
N/A
0%4
2%N
/A0%
N/A
0%H
ILL
CO
LLE
GE
315
124
39%
7560
%49
40%
8770
%19
15%
1512
%N
/A0%
11%
22%
N/A
0%H
OU
ST
ON
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
1,70
553
231
%34
465
%18
835
%13
425
%14
527
%19
436
%44
8%1
0%11
2%3
1%H
OW
AR
D C
O J
UN
IOR
CO
LLE
GE
DIS
T30
093
31%
5458
%39
42%
6671
%8
9%18
19%
N/A
0%1
1%N
/A0%
N/A
0%K
ILG
OR
E C
OLL
EG
E77
034
044
%17
752
%16
348
%22
867
%91
27%
113%
21%
10%
72%
N/A
0%LA
MA
R S
T C
OLL
OR
AN
GE
/PT
AR
TH
UR
708
312
44%
186
60%
126
40%
202
65%
8327
%14
4%13
4%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
LAR
ED
O C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OLL
EG
E51
624
948
%14
157
%10
843
%9
4%1
0%23
494
%1
0%N
/A0%
42%
N/A
0%LE
E C
OLL
EG
E18
210
155
%65
64%
3636
%61
60%
1414
%23
23%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
33%
N/A
0%M
CLE
NN
AN
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
1,04
538
537
%21
456
%17
144
%24
864
%80
21%
5414
%1
0%1
0%1
0%N
/A0%
ND
MID
LAN
D C
OLL
EG
E58
815
126
%10
268
%49
32%
106
70%
75%
3523
%2
1%N
/A0%
11%
N/A
0%
00N
. HA
RR
IS M
ON
TG
OM
ER
Y C
OLL
DIS
T5,
310
1,89
736
%1,
081
57%
816
43%
1,21
364
%23
913
%33
117
%54
3%18
1%19
1%23
1%N
AV
AR
RO
CO
LLE
GE
915
410
45%
203
50%
207
50%
241
59%
140
34%
205%
20%
20%
51%
N/A
0%N
OR
TH
CE
NT
RA
L T
EX
AS
CO
LLE
GE
877
319
36%
183
57%
136
43%
269
84%
206%
268%
31%
10%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
NO
RT
HE
AS
T T
EX
AS
CO
MM
CO
LLE
GE
423
202
48%
123
61%
7939
%17
185
%16
8%11
5%3
1%1
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%O
DE
SS
A C
OLL
EG
E91
533
336
%18
355
%15
045
%17
051
%30
9%12
738
%3
1%3
1%N
/A0%
N/A
0%P
AN
OLA
CO
LLE
GE
433
179
41%
107
60%
7240
%12
771
%43
24%
95%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
PA
RIS
JU
NIO
R C
OLL
EG
E71
731
844
%18
859
%13
041
%24
075
%58
18%
103%
21%
83%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
RA
NG
ER
CO
LLE
GE
360
168
47%
7142
%97
58%
7947
%60
36%
2817
%N
/A0%
11%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
SA
N J
AC
INT
O C
OM
M C
OLL
DIS
T2,
380
644
27%
368
57%
276
43%
302
47%
7612
%21
433
%31
5%6
1%10
2%5
1%S
OU
TH
PLA
INS
CO
LLE
GE
1,42
851
536
%28
555
%23
045
%31
962
%42
8%15
230
%1
0%1
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%S
OU
TH
TE
XA
S C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OLL
EG
E1,
519
870
57%
514
59%
356
41%
334%
N/A
0%83
696
%1
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
SO
UT
HW
ES
T T
EX
AS
JU
NIO
R C
OLL
EG
E68
954
479
%31
157
%23
343
%13
124
%10
2%39
172
%3
1%3
1%N
/A0%
61%
TA
RR
AN
T C
OU
NT
Y C
OLL
EG
E D
IST
3,89
41,
927
49%
1,15
260
%77
540
%1,
288
67%
264
14%
299
16%
613%
131%
10%
10%
TE
MP
LE C
OLL
EG
E64
018
128
%10
256
%79
44%
127
70%
2413
%27
15%
21%
11%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
TE
XA
RK
AN
A C
OLL
EG
E87
418
521
%11
361
%72
39%
146
79%
3720
%2
1%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%T
EX
AS
SO
UT
HM
OS
T C
OLL
EG
E1,
488
683
46%
400
59%
283
41%
213%
N/A
0%65
596
%N
/A0%
10%
61%
N/A
0%T
RIN
ITY
VA
LLE
Y C
OM
M C
OLL
EG
E62
743
770
%21
649
%22
151
%32
975
%77
18%
235%
41%
31%
10%
N/A
0%T
YLE
R J
UN
IOR
CO
LLE
GE
1,66
784
951
%43
852
%41
148
%53
463
%25
630
%53
6%5
1%N
/A0%
10%
N/A
0%V
ER
NO
N C
OLL
EG
E23
869
29%
4159
%28
41%
5783
%3
4%6
9%N
/A0%
34%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
VIC
TO
RIA
CO
LLE
GE
, TH
E72
425
435
%17
569
%79
31%
148
58%
146%
8634
%2
1%3
1%1
0%N
/A0%
WE
AT
HE
RF
OR
D C
OLL
EG
E47
923
549
%13
055
%10
545
%20
085
%9
4%15
6%4
2%2
1%4
2%1
0%W
ES
TE
RN
TE
XA
S C
OLL
EG
E41
811
327
%50
44%
6356
%84
74%
1110
%17
15%
N/A
0%1
1%N
/A0%
N/A
0%W
HA
RT
ON
CO
UN
TY
JU
NIO
R C
OLL
EG
E1,
211
284
23%
179
63%
105
37%
169
60%
3713
%71
25%
62%
N/A
0%1
0%N
/A0%
C/S
C-A
cade
mic
Sta
tew
ide
65,2
9026
,556
41%
15,1
9257
%11
,364
43%
13,6
4151
%3,
336
13%
8,71
133
%48
52%
147
1%15
61%
800%
A-1
0
App
endi
x A
Inst
itutio
nal P
rofil
es o
f Stu
dent
s R
equi
ring
Mat
hem
atic
s D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
nF
all/P
rior
Sum
mer
199
9 F
irst-
Tim
e-in
-Col
lege
Stu
dent
s T
rack
ed T
hrou
gh F
all 2
001
Com
mun
ity a
nd S
tate
Col
lege
- A
cade
mic
1
Mat
h D
ev.
Ed.
1F
TIC
Req
uire
d18
-19
20-2
122
-24
25-2
930
-34
Age
-
35-4
041
-50
Ove
r 50
Und
er 1
8U
nkno
wn
ALA
MO
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
DIS
T6,
833
3,14
746
%1,
993
63%
319
10%
204
6%18
46%
732%
582%
421%
80%
266
8%N
/A0%
ALV
IN C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OLL
EG
E68
224
836
%15
060
%20
8%9
4%10
4%12
5%12
5%9
4%2
1%24
10%
N/A
0%A
MA
RIL
LO C
OLL
EG
E80
128
536
%18
866
%31
11%
3011
%6
2%3
1%6
2%6
2%N
/A0%
155%
N/A
0%A
NG
ELI
NA
CO
LLE
GE
707
306
43%
187
61%
186%
134%
114%
93%
52%
41%
N/A
0%59
19%
N/A
0%A
US
TIN
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
5,62
11,
683
30%
887
53%
300
18%
199
12%
130
8%34
2%26
2%17
1%5
0%85
5%N
/A0%
BLI
NN
CO
LLE
GE
4,32
11,
317
30%
964
73%
116
9%73
6%41
3%22
2%18
1%22
2%4
0%56
4%1
0%B
RA
ZO
SP
OR
T C
OLL
EG
E33
010
432
%78
75%
1212
%4
4%4
4%2
2%N
/A0%
11%
N/A
0%3
3%N
/A0%
CE
NT
RA
L T
EX
AS
CO
LLE
GE
705
189
27%
108
57%
2011
%17
9%19
10%
53%
32%
32%
N/A
0%14
7%N
/A0%
CIS
CO
JU
NIO
R C
OLL
EG
E69
934
549
%25
273
%27
8%19
6%15
4%7
2%5
1%5
1%N
/A0%
154%
N/A
0%C
LAR
EN
DO
N C
OLL
EG
E94
3840
%13
34%
1334
%1
3%4
11%
411
%2
5%1
3%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
CO
AS
TA
L B
EN
D C
OLL
EG
E64
026
942
%15
156
%16
6%13
5%19
7%18
7%10
4%4
1%1
0%37
14%
N/A
0%C
OLL
EG
E O
F T
HE
MA
INLA
ND
371
263
71%
174
66%
3011
%10
4%17
6%8
3%7
3%5
2%N
/A0%
125%
N/A
0%C
OLL
IN C
O C
OM
M C
OLL
DIS
TR
ICT
1,11
167
160
%50
475
%50
7%26
4%20
3%9
1%12
2%4
1%N
/A0%
467%
N/A
0%D
ALL
AS
CO
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LL D
IST
3,32
21,
443
43%
805
56%
221
15%
149
10%
113
8%38
3%27
2%14
1%2
0%72
5%2
0%D
EL
MA
R C
OLL
EG
E1,
265
561
44%
389
69%
529%
295%
204%
132%
92%
41%
20%
438%
N/A
0%E
L P
AS
O C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OLL
EG
E D
IST
1,96
41,
338
68%
882
66%
153
11%
816%
685%
343%
252%
212%
20%
725%
N/A
0%F
RA
NK
PH
ILLI
PS
CO
LLE
GE
405
106
26%
7369
%5
5%7
7%1
1%3
3%1
1%1
1%1
1%14
13%
N/A
0%G
ALV
ES
TO
N C
OLL
EG
E32
515
447
%96
62%
1812
%6
4%7
5%6
4%4
3%2
1%4
3%11
7%N
/A0%
GR
AY
SO
N C
OU
NT
Y C
OLL
EG
E73
918
625
%12
165
%16
9%9
5%6
3%5
3%3
2%1
1%N
/A0%
2513
%N
/A0%
HIL
L C
OLL
EG
E31
512
439
%75
60%
1613
%2
2%4
3%2
2%2
2%2
2%N
/A0%
2117
%N
/A0%
HO
US
TO
N C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OLL
EG
E1,
705
532
31%
259
49%
8316
%68
13%
458%
234%
112%
122%
10%
295%
10%
HO
WA
RD
CO
JU
NIO
R C
OLL
EG
E D
IST
300
9331
%56
60%
55%
33%
11%
N/A
0%2
2%N
/A0%
N/A
0%25
27%
11%
KIL
GO
RE
CO
LLE
GE
770
340
44%
271
80%
206%
134%
82%
72%
21%
21%
N/A
0%17
5%N
/A0%
LAM
AR
ST
CO
LL O
RA
NG
E/P
T A
RT
HU
R70
831
244
%16
954
%29
9%26
8%13
4%18
6%7
2%6
2%N
/A0%
4414
%N
/A0%
LAR
ED
O C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OLL
EG
E51
624
948
%18
373
%18
7%6
2%3
1%3
1%1
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%35
14%
N/A
0%LE
E C
OLL
EG
E18
210
155
%75
74%
55%
66%
55%
11%
44%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
55%
N/A
0%t\.
.M
CLE
NN
AN
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
1,04
538
537
%26
769
%24
6%18
5%23
6%9
2%8
2%3
1%N
/A0%
339%
N/A
0%
tC:I
MID
LAN
D C
OLL
EG
E58
815
126
%42
28%
64%
53%
43%
11%
11%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
9261
%N
/A0%
N. H
AR
RIS
MO
NT
GO
ME
RY
CO
LL D
IST
5,31
01,
897
36%
1,29
668
%16
18%
925%
925%
362%
372%
292%
70%
147
8%N
/A0%
NA
VA
RR
O C
OLL
EG
E91
541
045
%27
567
%33
8%26
6%8
2%6
1%2
0%2
0%1
0%57
14%
N/A
0%N
OR
TH
CE
NT
RA
L T
EX
AS
CO
LLE
GE
877
319
36%
181
57%
278%
175%
134%
41%
83%
62%
N/A
0%63
20%
N/A
0%N
OR
TH
EA
ST
TE
XA
S C
OM
M C
OLL
EG
E42
320
248
%13
667
%17
8%7
3%6
3%5
2%2
1%1
0%1
0%27
13%
N/A
0%O
DE
SS
A C
OLL
EG
E91
533
336
%21
063
%16
5%12
4%12
4%5
2%10
3%1
0%1
0%66
20%
N/A
0%P
AN
OLA
CO
LLE
GE
433
179
41%
138
77%
74%
42%
32%
N/A
0%4
2%3
2%N
/A0%
2011
%N
/A0%
PA
RIS
JU
NIO
R C
OLL
EG
E71
731
844
%21
267
%20
6%15
5%9
3%7
2%9
3%7
2%2
1%37
12%
N/A
0%R
AN
GE
R C
OLL
EG
E36
016
847
%12
273
%10
6%4
2%3
2%2
1%1
1%N
/A0%
N/A
0%26
15%
N/A
0%S
AN
JA
CIN
TO
CO
MM
CO
LL D
IST
2,38
064
427
%44
970
%56
9%42
7%16
2%9
1%5
1%7
10%
599%
N/A
0%S
OU
TH
PLA
INS
CO
LLE
GE
1,42
851
536
%38
875
%26
5%9
2%11
2%4
1%N
/A0%
107
:N
/A0%
7615
%N
/A0%
SO
UT
H T
EX
AS
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
1,51
987
057
%55
364
%98
11%
496%
415%
243%
91%
71%
10%
8810
%N
/A0%
SO
UT
HW
ES
T T
EX
AS
JU
NIO
R C
OLL
EG
E68
954
479
%34
764
%29
5%29
5%27
5%19
3%4
1%4
1%N
/A0%
8415
%1
0%T
AR
RA
NT
CO
UN
TY
CO
LLE
GE
DIS
T3,
894
1,92
749
%1,
277
66%
193
10%
112
6%80
4%59
3%43
2%32
2%6
0%12
46%
10%
TE
MP
LE C
OLL
EG
E64
018
128
%13
273
%11
6%6
3%3
2%3
2%3
2%1
1%1
1%21
12%
N/A
0%T
EX
AR
KA
NA
CO
LLE
GE
874
185
21%
139
75%
116%
95%
84%
42%
63%
11%
N/A
0%6
3%1
1%T
EX
AS
SO
UT
HM
OS
T C
OLL
EG
E1,
488
683
46%
462
68%
6610
%32
5%29
4%16
2%10
1%7
1%N
/A0%
619%
N/A
0%T
RIN
ITY
VA
LLE
Y C
OM
M C
OLL
EG
E62
743
770
%29
868
%18
4%12
3%12
3%2
0%6
1%4
1%N
/A0%
8519
%N
/A0%
TY
LER
JU
NIO
R C
OLL
EG
E1,
667
849
51%
611
72%
607%
354%
223%
51%
142%
40%
N/A
0%98
12%
N/A
0%V
ER
NO
N C
OLL
EG
E23
869
29%
5174
%N
/A0%
46%
11%
23%
23%
11%
N/A
0%8
12%
N/A
0%V
ICT
OR
IA C
OLL
EG
E, T
HE
724
254
35%
176
69%
197%
42%
83%
62%
135%
94%
N/A
0%19
7%N
/A0%
WE
AT
HE
RF
OR
D C
OLL
EG
E47
923
549
%19
081
%7
3%9
4%10
4%3
1%2
1%1
0%1
0%12
5%N
/A0%
WE
ST
ER
N T
EX
AS
CO
LLE
GE
418
113
27%
5347
%12
11%
98%
76%
22%
54%
11%
N/A
0%24
21%
N/A
0%W
HA
RT
ON
CO
UN
TY
JU
NIO
R C
OLL
EG
E1,
211
284
23%
184
65%
3512
%11
4%10
4%8
3%4
1%2
1%N
/A0%
3011
%N
/A0%
C/S
C-A
cade
mic
Sta
tew
ide
65,2
9026
,556
41%
17,2
9265
%2,
575
10%
1,59
56%
1,23
25%
600
2%47
02%
322
1%54
0%2,
408
9%8
0%
A-1
1
App
endi
x A
Inst
itutio
nal P
rofil
es o
f Stu
dent
s R
equi
ring
Mat
hem
atic
s D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
nF
all/P
rior
Sum
mer
199
9 F
irst-
Tim
e-in
-Col
lege
Stu
dent
s T
rack
ed T
hrou
gh F
all 2
001
Com
mun
ity a
nd S
tate
Col
lege
- A
cade
mic
1
Mat
h D
ev. E
d.
FT
ICR
equi
red
----
----
- H
igh
Sch
ool D
iplo
ma
----
----
-R
egul
arR
ecom
./Adv
.U
nkno
wn
----
----
Initi
al T
est C
ateg
ory
Alte
rnat
ive
TA
SP
----
----
-U
nkno
wn
-- P
ersi
sten
ce o
r A
war
d
No
Yes
---
---
Mat
h D
ev. E
d. P
rovi
ded
--
Not
Pro
vide
dP
rovi
ded
-- M
ath
TA
SP
Obl
igat
ion
Met
-
TA
SP
Met
TA
SP
Not
Met
ALA
MO
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
DIS
T6,
833
3,14
746
%1,
557
49%
484
15%
1,10
635
%2,
568
82%
579
18%
N/A
0%1,
902
60%
1,24
540
%25
58%
2,89
292
%62
320
%2,
524
80%
ALV
IN C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OLL
EG
E68
224
836
%89
36%
3414
%12
550
%15
663
%92
37%
N/A
0%12
751
%12
149
%33
13%
215
87%
5723
%19
177
%A
MA
RIL
LO C
OLL
EG
E80
128
536
%12
142
%73
26%
9132
%17
361
%11
239
%N
/A0%
160
56%
125
44%
186%
267
94%
5319
%23
281
%A
NG
ELI
NA
CO
LLE
GE
707
306
43%
145
47%
4916
%11
237
%2
1%30
499
%N
/A0%
186
61%
120
39%
116
38%
190
62%
6822
%23
878
%A
US
TIN
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
5,62
11,
683
30%
677
40%
339
20%
667
40%
955
57%
725
43%
30%
990
59%
693
41%
563
33%
1,12
067
%54
232
%1,
141
68%
BLI
NN
CO
LLE
GE
4,32
11,
317
30%
652
50%
319
24%
346
26%
171%
1,29
798
%3
0%58
144
%73
656
%37
929
%93
871
%45
935
%85
865
%B
RA
ZO
SP
OR
T C
OLL
EG
E33
010
432
%55
53%
2322
%26
25%
N/A
0%10
410
0%N
/A0%
6159
%43
41%
1817
%86
83%
1716
%87
84%
CE
NT
RA
L T
EX
AS
CO
LLE
GE
705
189
27%
6735
%45
24%
7741
%13
571
%54
29%
N/A
0%12
667
%63
33%
2011
%16
989
%32
17%
157
83%
CIS
CO
JU
NIO
R C
OLL
EG
E69
934
549
%17
852
%70
20%
9728
%2
1%34
399
%N
/A0%
229
66%
116
34%
9528
%25
072
%72
21%
273
79%
CLA
RE
ND
ON
CO
LLE
GE
9438
40%
1437
%11
29%
1334
%N
/A0%
3810
0%N
/A0%
2258
%16
42%
1437
%24
63%
2155
%17
45%
CO
AS
TA
L B
EN
D C
OLL
EG
E64
026
942
%50
19%
109
41%
110
41%
102
38%
167
62%
N/A
0%14
353
%12
647
%65
24%
204
76%
145%
255
95%
CO
LLE
GE
OF
TH
E M
AIN
LAN
D37
126
371
%12
748
%46
17%
9034
%17
667
%80
30%
73%
140
53%
123
47%
4617
%21
783
%39
15%
224
85%
CO
LLIN
CO
CO
MM
CO
LL D
IST
RIC
T1,
111
671
60%
324
48%
140
21%
207
31%
312
46%
359
54%
N/A
0%36
354
%30
846
%26
840
%40
360
%28
542
%38
658
%D
ALL
AS
CO
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LL D
IST
3,32
21,
443
43%
578
40%
239
17%
626
43%
1,10
076
%34
324
%N
/A0%
861
60%
582
40%
201
14%
1,24
286
%25
718
%1,
186
82%
DE
L M
AR
CO
LLE
GE
1,26
556
144
%21
338
%15
327
%19
535
%19
935
%36
265
%N
/A0%
305
54%
256
46%
5610
%50
590
%18
934
%37
266
%E
L P
AS
O C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OLL
EG
E D
IST
1,96
41,
338
68%
563
42%
294
22%
481
36%
1,21
191
%12
19%
60%
804
60%
534
40%
140
10%
1,19
890
%40
3%1,
298
97%
FR
AN
K P
HIL
LIP
S C
OLL
EG
E40
510
626
%48
45%
1615
%42
40%
11%
105
99%
N/A
0%62
58%
4442
%24
23%
8277
%38
36%
6864
%G
ALV
ES
TO
N C
OLL
EG
E32
515
447
%71
46%
75%
7649
%1
1%13
286
%21
14%
106
69%
4831
%31
20%
123
80%
128%
142
92%
GR
AY
SO
N C
OU
NT
Y C
OLL
EG
E73
918
625
%94
51%
2513
%67
36%
63%
180
97%
N/A
0%11
160
%75
40%
6133
%12
567
%49
26%
137
74%
HIL
L C
OLL
EG
E31
512
439
%62
50%
1310
%49
40%
6048
%64
52%
N/A
0%78
63%
4637
%42
34%
8266
%29
23%
9577
%H
OU
ST
ON
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
1,70
553
231
%20
639
%54
10%
272
51%
384
72%
148
28%
N/A
0%32
461
%20
839
%50
9%48
291
%14
327
%38
973
%H
OW
AR
D C
O J
UN
IOR
CO
LLE
GE
DIS
T30
093
31%
3538
%11
12%
4751
%N
/A0%
9310
0%N
/A0%
5256
%41
44%
3032
%63
68%
2224
%71
76%
KIL
GO
RE
CO
LLE
GE
770
340
44%
181
53%
6619
%93
27%
134
39%
206
61%
N/A
0%20
861
%13
239
%96
28%
244
72%
6519
%27
581
%LA
MA
R S
T C
OLL
OR
AN
GE
/PT
AR
TH
UR
708
312
44%
104
33%
3411
%17
456
%14
747
%16
553
%N
/A0%
177
57%
135
43%
6721
%24
579
%80
26%
232
74%
LAR
ED
O C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OLL
EG
E51
624
948
%61
24%
113
45%
7530
%10
141
%14
859
%N
/A0%
8233
%16
767
%62
25%
187
75%
7932
%17
068
%LE
E C
OLL
EG
E18
210
155
%45
45%
2727
%29
29%
5857
%42
42%
11%
5352
%48
48%
77%
9493
%10
10%
9190
%M
CLE
NN
AN
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
1,04
538
537
%17
846
%92
24%
115
30%
184
48%
200
52%
10%
210
55%
175
45%
6717
%31
883
%84
22%
301
78%
MID
LAN
D C
OLL
EG
E58
815
126
%15
10%
N/A
0%72
48%
7952
%11
375
%38
25%
2013
%13
187
%N
. HA
RR
IS M
ON
TG
OM
ER
Y C
OLL
DIS
T5,
310
1,89
736
%99
953
%21
9912
6Z61
7297
3846
%%
1.41
0137
7747
%%
4934
322
63%
%1
0%1,
035
55%
862
45%
191
10%
1,70
690
%41
722
%1,
480
78%
NA
VA
RR
O C
OLL
EG
E91
541
045
%18
244
%79
19%
149
36%
264
64%
146
36%
N/A
0%20
450
%20
650
%66
16%
344
84%
5814
%35
286
%N
OR
TH
CE
NT
RA
L T
EX
AS
CO
LLE
GE
877
319
36%
135
42%
3411
%15
047
%4
1%31
599
%N
/A0%
172
54%
147
46%
138
43%
181
57%
8025
%23
975
%N
OR
TH
EA
ST
TE
XA
S C
OM
M C
OLL
EG
E42
320
248
%11
155
%26
13%
6532
%11
155
%91
45%
N/A
0%12
160
%81
40%
5728
%14
572
%60
30%
142
70%
OD
ES
SA
CO
LLE
GE
915
333
36%
120
36%
6419
%14
945
%18
455
%14
945
%N
/A0%
180
54%
153
46%
7723
%25
677
%76
23%
257
77%
PA
NO
LA C
OLL
EG
E43
317
941
%95
53%
3721
%47
26%
5330
%12
670
%N
/A0%
103
58%
7642
%59
33%
120
67%
5732
%12
268
%P
AR
IS J
UN
IOR
CO
LLE
GE
717
318
44%
132
42%
6821
%11
837
%13
442
%18
458
%N
/A0%
187
59%
131
41%
6821
%25
079
%63
20%
255
80%
RA
NG
ER
CO
LLE
GE
360
168
47%
8752
%24
14%
5734
%57
34%
111
66%
N/A
0%96
57%
7243
%63
38%
105
63%
5130
%11
770
%S
AN
JA
CIN
TO
CO
MM
CO
LL D
IST
2,38
064
427
%30
648
%97
15%
241
37%
381
59%
263
41%
N/A
0%31
549
%32
951
%60
9%58
491
%20
532
%43
968
%S
OU
TH
PLA
INS
CO
LLE
GE
1,42
851
536
%28
756
%10
921
%11
923
%95
18%
417
81%
31%
297
58%
218
42%
194
38%
321
62%
164
32%
351
68%
SO
UT
H T
EX
AS
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
1,51
987
057
%34
540
%28
433
%24
128
%3
0%86
710
0%N
/A0%
484
56%
386
44%
208
24%
662
76%
255
29%
615
71%
SO
UT
HW
ES
T T
EX
AS
JU
NIO
R C
OLL
EG
E68
954
479
%24
144
%12
423
%17
933
%1
0%54
310
0%N
/A0%
270
50%
274
50%
234
43%
310
57%
146
27%
398
73%
TA
RR
AN
T C
OU
NT
Y C
OLL
EG
E D
IST
3,89
41,
927
49%
747
39%
491
25%
689
36%
885
46%
1,04
254
%N
/A0%
1,18
061
%74
739
%14
78%
1,78
092
%29
015
%1,
637
85%
TE
MP
LE C
OLL
EG
E64
018
128
%98
54%
3821
%45
25%
N/A
0%18
110
0%N
/A0%
9754
%84
46%
5832
%12
368
%70
39%
111
61%
TE
XA
RK
AN
A C
OLL
EG
E87
418
521
%73
39%
3217
%80
43%
N/A
0%18
510
0%N
/A0%
114
62%
7138
%29
16%
156
84%
5630
%12
970
%T
EX
AS
SO
UT
HM
OS
T C
OLL
EG
E1,
488
683
46%
256
37%
226
33%
201
29%
201
29%
482
71%
N/A
0%35
552
%32
848
%45
7%63
893
%15
222
%53
178
%T
RIN
ITY
VA
LLE
Y C
OM
M C
OLL
EG
E62
743
770
%18
242
%10
223
%15
335
%6
1%43
199
%N
/A0%
227
52%
210
48%
252
58%
185
42%
436
100%
10%
TY
LER
JU
NIO
R C
OLL
EG
E1,
667
849
51%
398
47%
160
19%
291
34%
485
57%
364
43%
N/A
0%45
253
%39
747
%26
431
%58
569
%12
114
%72
886
%V
ER
NO
N C
OLL
EG
E23
869
29%
3449
%8
12%
2739
%N
/A0%
6910
0%N
/A0%
3855
%31
45%
4362
%26
38%
1522
%54
78%
VIC
TO
RIA
CO
LLE
GE
, TH
E72
425
435
%96
38%
7228
%86
34%
5722
%17
268
%25
10%
146
57%
108
43%
2811
%22
689
%74
29%
180
71%
WE
AT
HE
RF
OR
D C
OLL
EG
E47
923
549
%12
453
%59
25%
5222
%4
2%22
997
%2
1%14
763
%88
37%
7733
%15
867
%65
28%
170
72%
WE
ST
ER
N T
EX
AS
CO
LLE
GE
418
113
27%
4237
%16
14%
5549
%53
47%
6053
%N
/A0%
7062
%43
38%
2825
%85
75%
3127
%82
73%
WH
AR
TO
N C
OU
NT
Y J
UN
IOR
CO
LLE
GE
1,21
128
423
%14
350
%39
14%
102
36%
100
35%
184
65%
N/A
0%13
849
%14
651
%30
11%
254
89%
284
100%
N/A
0%
C/S
C-A
cade
mic
Sta
tew
ide
65,2
9026
,556
41%
11,7
4344
%5,
303
20%
9,51
036
%12
,782
48%
13,7
0152
%73
0%14
,963
56%
11,5
9344
%5,
353
20%
21,2
0380
%6,
625
25%
19,9
3175
%
A-1
2
CA
)
App
endi
x A
Inst
itutio
nal P
rofil
es o
f Stu
dent
s R
equi
ring
Mat
hem
atic
s D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
nF
a ii/
Prlo
r S
umm
er 1
999
Firs
t-T
ime-
in-C
olle
ge S
tude
nts
Tra
cked
Thr
ough
Fal
l 200
1
Com
mun
ity, T
echn
ical
, and
Sta
te C
olle
ge -
Tec
hnic
al
Mat
h D
ev. E
d.--
----
----
Gen
der
----
----
---
FT
ICI
Req
uire
dF
emal
eM
ale
1
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
Whi
teB
lack
His
pani
cA
sian
----
----
----
----
----
---
InL-
----
--In
tern
atio
nal
Unk
now
n
ALA
MO
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
DIS
T1,
833
884
48%
483
55%
401
45%
215
24%
728%
577
65%
152%
20%
30%
N/A
0%A
LVIN
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
224
8839
%40
45%
4855
%62
70%
22%
1922
%3
3%N
/A0%
N/A
0%2
2%A
MA
RIL
LO C
OLL
EG
E78
023
530
%14
361
%92
39%
164
70%
94%
5523
%3
1%1
0%N
/A0%
31%
AN
GE
LIN
A C
OLL
EG
E54
422
341
%16
072
%63
28%
131
59%
6228
%29
13%
N/A
0%1
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%A
US
TIN
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
2,13
757
627
%33
959
%23
741
%34
059
%63
11%
155
27%
132%
31%
20%
N/A
0%B
LIN
N C
OLL
EG
E97
232
133
%19
360
%12
840
%19
561
%88
27%
3511
%N
/A0%
21%
10%
N/A
0%B
RA
ZO
SP
OR
T C
OLL
EG
E36
632
9%12
38%
2063
%16
50%
722
%9
28%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
CE
NT
RA
L T
EX
AS
CO
LLE
GE
709
197
28%
133
68%
6432
%97
49%
5025
%41
21%
63%
32%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
CIS
CO
JU
NIO
R C
OLL
EG
E15
561
39%
3049
%31
51%
2744
%20
33%
1321
%N
/A0%
N/A
0%1
2%N
/A0%
CLA
RE
ND
ON
CO
LLE
GE
2513
52%
538
%8
62%
1310
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%C
OA
ST
AL
BE
ND
CO
LLE
GE
312
9731
%49
51%
4849
%24
25%
33%
6769
%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
33%
CO
LLE
GE
OF
TH
E M
AIN
LAN
D16
180
50%
3645
%44
55%
5265
%8
10%
2025
%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%C
OLL
IN C
O C
OM
M C
OLL
DIS
TR
ICT
1,02
155
855
%30
054
%25
846
%44
880
%37
7%53
9%15
3%4
1%1
0%N
/A0%
DA
LLA
S C
O C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OLL
DIS
T9,
708
4,13
843
%2,
435
59%
1,70
341
%1,
650
40%
1,11
627
%97
624
%17
14%
301%
149
4%46
1%D
EL
MA
R C
OLL
EG
E86
337
744
%25
568
%12
232
%12
934
%N
/A0%
246
65%
10%
N/A
0%1
0%N
/A0%
EL
PA
SO
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
DIS
T1,
433
881
61%
473
54%
408
46%
607%
222%
789
90%
N/A
0%2
0%8
1%N
/A0%
FR
AN
K P
HIL
LIP
S C
OLL
EG
E76
45%
125
%3
75%
375
%1
25%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%G
ALV
ES
TO
N C
OLL
EG
E11
252
46%
3771
%15
29%
1529
%22
42%
1529
%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%G
RA
YS
ON
CO
UN
TY
CO
LLE
GE
449
5512
%30
55%
2545
%41
75%
1018
%3
5%N
/A0%
12%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
HIL
L C
OLL
EG
E71
511
316
%62
55%
5145
%92
81%
98%
1211
%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%H
OU
ST
ON
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
3,91
91,
511
39%
821
54%
690
46%
486
32%
317
21%
558
37%
123
8%2
0%19
1%6
0%H
OW
AR
D C
O J
UN
IOR
CO
LLE
GE
DIS
T38
613
034
%58
45%
7255
%71
55%
118%
4635
%2
2%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
KIL
GO
RE
CO
LLE
GE
367
142
39%
9668
%46
32%
8661
%53
37%
21%
11%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%LA
MA
R S
T C
OLL
OR
AN
GE
/PT
AR
TH
UR
463
232
50%
144
62%
8838
%14
964
%69
30%
83%
31%
31%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
LAR
ED
O C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OLL
EG
E38
421
656
%11
151
%10
549
%5
2%N
/A0%
210
97%
10%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%LE
E C
OLL
EG
E60
316
227
%10
867
%54
33%
9559
%25
15%
3924
%N
/A0%
32%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
MC
LEN
NA
N C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OLL
EG
E53
818
334
%12
267
%61
33%
109
60%
4625
%25
14%
11%
N/A
0%2
1%N
/A0%
MID
LAN
D C
OLL
EG
E20
755
27%
3156
%24
44%
3156
%3
5%21
38%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N. H
AR
RIS
MO
NT
GO
ME
RY
CO
LL D
IST
837
213
25%
147
69%
6631
%94
44%
6229
%44
21%
115%
N/A
0%1
0%1
0%N
AV
AR
RO
CO
LLE
GE
438
209
48%
103
49%
106
51%
9545
%79
38%
199%
42%
N/A
0%12
6%N
/A0%
NO
RT
H C
EN
TR
AL
TE
XA
S C
OLL
EG
E28
897
34%
5052
%47
48%
8082
%7
7%7
7%2
2%1
1%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
OR
TH
EA
ST
TE
XA
S C
OM
M C
OLL
EG
E18
170
39%
5173
%19
27%
5274
%13
19%
57%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
OD
ES
SA
CO
LLE
GE
475
8418
%51
61%
3339
%39
46%
78%
3744
%N
/A0%
11%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
PA
NO
LA C
OLL
EG
E12
325
20%
1560
%10
40%
1768
%8
32%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%P
AR
IS J
UN
IOR
CO
LLE
GE
217
8439
%66
79%
1821
%60
71%
1619
%4
5%N
/A0%
45%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
RA
NG
ER
CO
LLE
GE
594
7%3
75%
125
%2
50%
125
%1
25%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
SA
N J
AC
INT
O C
OM
M C
OLL
DIS
T1,
960
394
20%
228
58%
166
42%
153
39%
6316
%15
439
%11
3%2
1%6
2%5
1%S
OU
TH
PLA
INS
CO
LLE
GE
777
298
38%
138
46%
160
54%
138
46%
3010
%12
843
%1
0%1
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%S
OU
TH
TE
XA
S C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OLL
EG
E98
652
753
%33
463
%19
337
%14
3%N
/A0%
512
97%
10%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%S
OU
TH
WE
ST
TE
XA
S J
UN
IOR
CO
LLE
GE
233
163
70%
6439
%99
61%
3421
%3
2%12
375
%N
/A0%
21%
N/A
0%1
1%T
AR
RA
NT
CO
UN
TY
CO
LLE
GE
DIS
T1,
378
690
50%
404
59%
286
41%
409
59%
130
19%
120
17%
274%
30%
10%
N/A
0%T
EM
PLE
CO
LLE
GE
342
9127
%61
67%
3033
%56
62%
1314
%21
23%
11%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%T
EX
AR
KA
NA
CO
LLE
GE
137
3727
%21
57%
1643
%17
46%
1849
%1
3%1
3%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
TE
XA
S S
OU
TH
MO
ST
CO
LLE
GE
114
4237
%22
52%
2048
%N
/A0%
N/A
0%42
100%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
TR
INIT
Y V
ALL
EY
CO
MM
CO
LLE
GE
437
271
62%
150
55%
121
45%
200
74%
5621
%7
3%4
1%2
1%2
1%N
/A0%
TY
LER
JU
NIO
R C
OLL
EG
E62
430
950
%20
265
%10
735
%16
854
%11
638
%23
7%N
/A0%
21%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
VE
RN
ON
CO
LLE
GE
466
163
35%
9961
%64
39%
120
74%
117%
2918
%N
/A0%
32%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
VIC
TO
RIA
CO
LLE
GE
, TH
E27
010
338
%62
60%
4140
%52
50%
66%
4544
%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%W
EA
TH
ER
FO
RD
CO
LLE
GE
331
122
37%
6654
%56
46%
9880
%7
6%9
7%2
2%2
2%1
1%3
2%W
ES
TE
RN
TE
XA
S C
OLL
EG
E76
2330
%2
9%21
91%
1878
%N
/A0%
522
%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%W
HA
RT
ON
CO
UN
TY
JU
NIO
R C
OLL
EG
E41
210
826
%61
56%
4744
%57
53%
1716
%34
31%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
C/S
C-T
echn
ical
Sta
tew
ide
40,6
2315
,743
39%
9,10
758
%6,
636
42%
6,77
943
%2,
788
18%
5,39
334
%42
33%
801%
210
1%70
0%
LAM
AR
INS
TIT
UT
E O
F T
EC
HN
OLO
GY
499
234
47%
100
43%
134
57%
115
49%
103
44%
94%
63%
10%
00%
00%
TE
XA
S S
T T
EC
HN
ICA
L C
OLL
SY
ST
EM
3,38
71,
193
35%
419
35%
774
65%
556
47%
110
9%52
244
%5
0%N
/A0%
00%
00%
TS
TC
/LIT
Sta
tew
ide
3,88
61,
427
37%
519
36%
908
64%
671
47%
213
15%
531
37%
111%
10%
00%
00%
A-1
3
App
endi
x A
Inst
itutio
nal P
rofil
es o
f Stu
dent
s R
equi
ring
Mat
hem
atic
s D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
nF
all/P
rior
Sum
mer
199
9 F
irst-
Tim
e-In
-Col
lege
Stu
dent
s T
rack
ed T
hrou
gh F
all 2
001
Com
mun
ity, T
echn
ical
, and
Sta
te C
olle
ge -
Tec
hnic
al
FT
IC1M
ath
Dev
.
Ed.
1R
equi
red
18-1
9--
20-2
1---
22-2
425
-29-
---
----
----
-- A
ge
30-3
4O
ver
50U
nder
18
Unk
now
n35
-40
41-5
0
ALA
MO
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
DIS
T1,
833
884
48%
492
56%
119
13%
9311
%72
8%30
3%26
3%16
2%4
0%32
4%N
/A0%
ALV
IN C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OLL
EG
E22
488
39%
3338
%6
7%14
16%
910
%2
2%1
1%3
3%3
3%17
19%
N/A
0%A
MA
RIL
LO C
OLL
EG
E78
023
530
%11
951
%25
11%
3414
%22
9%11
5%11
5%8
3%N
/A0%
52%
N/A
0%A
NG
ELI
NA
CO
LLE
GE
544
223
41%
143
64%
178%
136%
199%
84%
84%
31%
N/A
0%12
5%N
/A0%
AU
ST
IN C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OLL
EG
E2,
137
576
27%
263
46%
107
19%
6211
%66
11%
254%
163%
122%
20%
234%
N/A
0%B
LIN
N C
OLL
EG
E97
232
133
%24
376
%30
9%14
4%17
5%5
2%7
2%3
1%N
/A0%
21%
N/A
0%B
RA
ZO
SP
OR
T C
OLL
EG
E36
632
9%21
66%
26%
619
%3
9%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%C
EN
TR
AL
TE
XA
S C
OLL
EG
E70
919
728
%92
47%
2513
%17
9%26
13%
147%
84%
42%
21%
95%
N/A
0%C
ISC
O J
UN
IOR
CO
LLE
GE
155
6139
%38
62%
1118
%3
5%2
3%2
3%1
2%2
3%N
/A0%
23%
N/A
0%C
LAR
EN
DO
N C
OLL
EG
E25
1352
%N
/A0%
215
%2
15%
323
%2
15%
18%
323
%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
CO
AS
TA
L B
EN
D C
OLL
EG
E31
297
31%
5052
%17
18%
1010
%6
6%3
3%2
2%3
3%3
3%3
3%N
/A0%
CO
LLE
GE
OF
TH
E M
AIN
LAN
D16
180
50%
4658
%9
11%
1013
%6
8%4
5%2
3%2
3%N
/A0%
11%
N/A
0%C
OLL
IN C
O C
OM
M C
OLL
DIS
TR
ICT
1,02
155
855
%41
374
%46
8%16
3%28
5%11
2%5
1%3
1%1
0%35
6%N
/A0%
DA
LLA
S C
O C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OLL
DIS
T9,
708
4,13
843
%2,
285
55%
517
12%
415
10%
343
8%14
84%
108
3%66
2%12
0%24
06%
40%
DE
L M
AR
CO
LLE
GE
863
377
44%
234
62%
4011
%31
8%26
7%18
5%10
3%4
1%1
0%13
3%N
/A0%
EL
PA
SO
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
DIS
T1,
433
881
61%
512
58%
100
11%
526%
718%
354%
253%
303%
51%
516%
N/A
0%F
RA
NK
PH
ILLI
PS
CO
LLE
GE
764
5%2
50%
N/A
0%2
50%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%G
ALV
ES
TO
N C
OLL
EG
E11
252
46%
2038
%8
15%
1121
%1
2%1
2%3
6%3
6%1
2%4
8%N
/A0%
GR
AY
SO
N C
OU
NT
Y C
OLL
EG
E44
955
12%
3564
%6
11%
59%
47%
24%
12%
12%
N/A
0%1
2%N
/A0%
HIL
L C
OLL
EG
E71
511
316
%58
51%
44%
11%
22%
22%
N/A
0%1
1%N
/A0%
4540
%N
/A0%
HO
US
TO
N C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OLL
EG
E3,
919
1,51
139
%86
457
%21
214
%13
59%
876%
433%
403%
242%
20%
101
7%3
0%H
OW
AR
D C
O J
UN
IOR
CO
LLE
GE
DIS
T38
613
034
%72
55%
2519
%9
7%6
5%6
5%N
/A0%
65%
N/A
0%6
5%N
/A0%
KIL
GO
RE
CO
LLE
GE
367
142
39%
9265
%15
11%
118%
54%
96%
54%
43%
N/A
0%1
1%N
/A0%
LAM
AR
ST
CO
LL O
RA
NG
E/P
T A
RT
HU
R46
323
250
%12
052
%25
11%
2310
%23
10%
104%
83%
104%
N/A
0%13
6%N
/A0%
LAR
ED
O C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OLL
EG
E38
421
656
%17
380
%14
6%N
/A0%
52%
31%
10%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
199%
10%
LEE
CO
LLE
GE
603
162
27%
107
66%
159%
117%
117%
32%
21%
53%
N/A
0%8
5%N
/A0%
MC
LEN
NA
N C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OLL
EG
E53
818
334
%11
663
%23
13%
137%
105%
32%
32%
32%
11%
116%
N/A
0%M
IDLA
ND
CO
LLE
GE
207
5527
%33
60%
35%
59%
35%
12%
24%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
815
%N
/A0%
N. H
AR
RIS
MO
NT
GO
ME
RY
CO
LL D
IST
837
213
25%
117
55%
2914
%18
8%18
8%9
4%7
3%3
1%N
/A0%
126%
N/A
0%N
AV
AR
RO
CO
LLE
GE
438
209
48%
139
67%
2612
%15
7%11
5%4
2%3
1%4
2%2
1%5
2%N
/A0%
+13
NO
RT
H C
EN
TR
AL
TE
XA
S C
OLL
EG
E28
897
34%
5658
%12
12%
33%
88%
55%
55%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
88%
N/A
0%
\)N
OR
TH
EA
ST
TE
XA
S C
OM
M C
OLL
EG
E18
170
39%
4159
%9
13%
34%
710
%4
6%3
4%1
1%1
1%1
1%N
/A0%
OD
ES
SA
CO
LLE
GE
475
8418
%51
61%
78%
34%
78%
56%
45%
45%
N/A
0%3
4%N
IA0%
PA
NO
LA C
OLL
EG
E12
325
20%
1352
%3
12%
14%
28%
14%
14%
28%
N/A
0%2
8%N
/A0%
PA
RIS
JU
NIO
R C
OLL
EG
E21
784
39%
3946
%9
11%
45%
78%
911
%5
6%6
7%N
/A0%
56%
N/A
0%R
AN
GE
R C
OLL
EG
E59
47%
375
%1
25%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
SA
N J
AC
INT
O C
OM
M C
OLL
DIS
T1,
960
394
20%
277
70%
349%
267%
144%
92%
62%
41%
N/A
0%24
6%N
/A0%
SO
UT
H P
LAIN
S C
OLL
EG
E77
729
838
%19
365
%32
11%
238%
114%
83%
41%
62%
N/A
0%21
7%N
/A0%
SO
UT
H T
EX
AS
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
986
527
53%
310
59%
6112
%36
7%53
10%
194%
122%
183%
10%
173%
N/A
0%S
OU
TH
WE
ST
TE
XA
S J
UN
IOR
CO
LLE
GE
233
163
70%
115
71%
127%
74%
64%
53%
32%
11%
N/A
0%14
9%N
/A0%
TA
RR
AN
T C
OU
NT
Y C
OLL
EG
E D
IST
1,37
869
050
%41
660
%74
11%
477%
436%
284%
254%
172%
51%
355%
N/A
0%T
EM
PLE
CO
LLE
GE
342
9127
%44
48%
55%
1112
%6
7%1
1%N
/A0%
33%
11%
2022
%N
/A0%
TE
XA
RK
AN
A C
OLL
EG
E13
737
27%
2054
%1
3%7
19%
38%
38%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%3
8%N
/A0%
TE
XA
S S
OU
TH
MO
ST
CO
LLE
GE
114
4237
%19
45%
717
%4
10%
512
%2
5%3
7%2
5%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
TR
INIT
Y V
ALL
EY
CO
MM
CO
LLE
GE
437
271
62%
182
67%
176%
114%
156%
93%
145%
41%
N/A
0%19
7%N
/A0%
TY
LER
JU
NIO
R C
OLL
EG
E62
430
950
%21
770
%20
6%14
5%16
5%16
5%11
4%4
1%N
/A0%
114%
N/A
0%V
ER
NO
N C
OLL
EG
E46
616
335
%92
56%
138%
1610
%11
7%11
7%8
5%3
2%1
1%8
5%N
/A0%
VIC
TO
RIA
CO
LLE
GE
, TH
E27
010
338
%61
59%
1010
%9
9%6
6%8
8%3
3%2
2%1
1%3
3%N
/A0%
WE
AT
HE
RF
OR
D C
OLL
EG
E33
112
237
%80
66%
1411
%10
8%6
5%2
2%4
3%1
1%N
/A0%
54%
N/A
0%W
ES
TE
RN
TE
XA
S C
OLL
EG
E76
2330
%18
78%
417
%N
/A0%
14%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
N/A
0%N
/A0%
WH
AR
TO
N C
OU
NT
Y J
UN
IOR
CO
LLE
GE
412
108
26%
7973
%4
4%6
6%3
3%5
5%3
3%4
4%1
1%3
3%N
/A0%
C/S
C-T
echn
ical
Sta
tew
ide
40,6
2315
,743
39%
9,25
859
%1,
827
12%
1,29
28%
1,13
57%
564
4%42
03%
308
2%50
0%88
16%
80%
LAM
AR
INS
TIT
UT
E O
F T
EC
HN
OLO
GY
499
234
47%
143
61%
2912
%16
7%24
10%
83%
63%
42%
N/A
0%4
2%0
0%T
EX
AS
ST
TE
CH
NIC
AL
CO
LL S
YS
TE
M3,
387
1,19
335
%65
355
%16
013
%11
910
%10
59%
484%
373%
303%
91%
323%
00%
TS
TC
/LIT
Sta
tew
ide
3,88
61,
427
37%
796
56%
189
13%
135
9%12
99%
564%
433%
342%
91%
363%
00%
A-1
4
App
endi
x A
Inst
itutio
nal P
rofil
es o
f Stu
dent
s R
equi
ring
Mat
hem
atic
s D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
nF
all/P
rior
Sum
mer
199
9 F
irst-
Tim
e-In
-Col
lege
Stu
dent
s T
rack
ed T
hrou
gh F
all 2
001
Com
mun
ity, T
echn
ical
, and
Sta
te C
olle
ge -
Tec
hnic
al
Mat
h D
ev. E
d.--
----
----
-- H
igh
Sch
ool D
iplo
ma
----
----
---
FT
ICR
equi
red
Reg
ular
Rec
orn.
/Adv
.U
nkno
wn
I1
----
----
----
Initi
al T
est C
ateg
ory
----
----
----
Al
-te
rnat
ive
TA
SP
Unk
now
n
---
Per
sist
ence
or
Aw
ard
No
Yes
---
---
Mat
h D
ev. E
d. P
rovi
ded
---
Not
Pro
vide
dP
rovi
ded
- M
ath
TA
SP
Obl
igat
ion
Met
-
TA
SP
Met
TA
SP
Not
Met
ALA
MO
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
DIS
T1,
833
884
48%
451
51%
116
13%
317
36%
727
82%
157
18%
N/A
0%56
664
%31
836
%63
7%82
193
%14
416
%74
084
%A
LVIN
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
224
8839
%28
32%
45%
5664
%72
82%
1618
%N
/A0%
4956
%39
44%
3135
%57
65%
910
%79
90%
AM
AR
ILLO
CO
LLE
GE
780
235
30%
9239
%38
16%
105
45%
171
73%
6427
%N
/A0%
146
62%
8938
%17
7%21
893
%56
24%
179
76%
AN
GE
LIN
A C
OLL
EG
E54
422
341
%11
049
%38
17%
7534
%3
1%22
099
%N
/A0%
141
63%
8237
%76
34%
147
66%
4621
%17
779
%A
US
TIN
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
2,13
757
627
%23
641
%12
121
%21
938
%34
460
%23
140
%1
0%35
962
%21
738
%18
031
%39
669
%16
128
%41
572
%B
LIN
N C
OLL
EG
E97
232
133
%18
658
%59
18%
7624
%3
1%31
899
%N
/A0%
147
46%
174
54%
8827
%23
373
%91
28%
230
72%
BR
AZ
OS
PO
RT
CO
LLE
GE
366
329%
1650
%5
16%
1134
%N
/A0%
3210
0%N
/A0%
2063
%12
38%
928
%23
72%
516
%27
84%
CE
NT
RA
L T
EX
AS
CO
LLE
GE
709
197
28%
7538
%31
16%
9146
%15
177
%46
23%
N/A
0%13
669
%61
31%
2010
%17
790
%38
19%
159
81%
CIS
CO
JU
NIO
R C
OLL
EG
E15
561
39%
3049
%13
21%
1830
%2
3%59
97%
N/A
0%41
67%
2033
%21
34%
4066
%11
5082
%C
LAR
EN
DO
N C
OLL
EG
E25
1352
%6
46%
N/A
0%7
54%
18%
1292
%N
/A0%
862
%5
38%
538
%8
62%
1183
.%11
85%
CO
AS
TA
L B
EN
D C
OLL
EG
E31
297
31%
3839
%28
29%
3132
%36
37%
6163
%N
/A0%
5860
%39
40%
2324
%74
76%
33%
9497
%C
OLL
EG
E O
F T
HE
MA
INLA
ND
161
8050
%36
45%
79%
3746
%61
76%
1620
%3
4%52
65%
2835
%'
1316
%67
84%
79%
7391
%C
OLL
IN C
O C
OM
M C
OLL
DIS
TR
ICT
1,02
155
855
%26
447
%94
17%
200
36%
265
47%
293
53%
N/A
0%31
757
%24
143
%22
440
%33
460
%24
544
%31
356
%D
ALL
AS
CO
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LL D
IST
9,70
84,
138
43%
1,58
038
%57
014
%1,
988
48%
3,14
176
%99
724
%N
/A0%
2,54
962
%1,
589
38%
577
14%
3,56
186
%59
914
%3,
539
86%
DE
L M
AR
CO
LLE
GE
863
377
44%
151
40%
9625
%13
034
%13
937
%23
863
%N
/A0%
220
58%
157
42%
267%
351
93%
9325
%28
475
%E
L P
AS
O C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OLL
EG
E D
IST
1,43
388
161
%38
844
%15
117
%34
239
%79
991
%72
8%10
1%55
363
%32
837
%93
11%
788
89%
172%
864
98%
FR
AN
K P
HIL
LIP
S C
OLL
EG
E76
45%
375
%N
/A0%
125
%N
/A0%
410
0%N
/A0%
250
%2
50%
N/A
0%4
100%
250
%2
50%
GA
LVE
ST
ON
CO
LLE
GE
112
5246
%21
40%
N/A
0%31
60%
N/A
0%43
83%
917
%37
71%
1529
%12
23%
4077
%5
10%
4790
%G
RA
YS
ON
CO
UN
TY
CO
LLE
GE
449
5512
%20
36%
1018
%25
45%
12%
5498
%N
/A0%
4175
%14
25%
1731
%38
69%
1629
%39
71%
HIL
L C
OLL
EG
E71
511
316
%43
38%
109%
6053
%48
42%
6558
%N
IA0%
5347
%60
53%
5044
%63
56%
3531
%78
69%
HO
US
TO
N C
OM
MU
NIT
Y C
OLL
EG
E3,
919
1,51
139
%67
845
%13
29%
701
46%
1,12
574
%38
626
%N
/A0%
896
59%
615
41%
139
9%1,
372
91%
417
28%
1,09
472
%H
OW
AR
D C
O J
UN
IOR
CO
LLE
GE
DIS
T38
613
034
%80
62%
86%
4232
%N
/A0%
130
100%
N/A
0%86
66%
4434
%20
15%
110
85%
1915
%11
185
%K
ILG
OR
E C
OLL
EG
E36
714
239
%81
57%
2316
%38
27%
6546
%77
54%
N/A
0%10
373
%39
27%
3927
%10
373
%13
9%12
991
%LA
MA
R S
T C
OLL
OR
AN
GE
/PT
AR
TH
UR
463
232
50%
9139
%30
13%
111
48%
133
57%
9943
%N
/A0%
133
57%
9943
%44
19%
188
81%
4620
%18
680
%LA
RE
DO
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
384
216
56%
5927
%11
252
%45
21%
7535
%14
165
%N
/A0%
8238
%13
462
%44
20%
172
80%
5124
%16
576
%LE
E C
OLL
EG
E60
316
227
%74
46%
3522
%53
33%
119
73%
4125
%2
1%93
57%
6943
%9
6%15
394
%8
5%15
495
%M
CLE
NN
AN
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
538
183
34%
9150
%38
21%
5430
%88
48%
9451
%1
1%10
457
%79
43%
2614
%15
786
%37
20%
146
80%
MID
LAN
D C
OLL
EG
E20
755
27%
1527
%5
9%35
64%
4276
%13
24%
N/A
0%39
71%
1629
%30
55%
2545
%10
18%
4582
%N
. HA
RR
IS M
ON
TG
OM
ER
Y C
OLL
DIS
T83
721
325
%96
45%
2914
%88
41%
159
75%
5425
%N
IA0%
135
63%
7837
%21
10%
192
90%
3617
%17
783
%LI
'N
AV
AR
RO
CO
LLE
GE
438
209
48%
9646
%32
15%
8139
%13
364
%76
36%
N/A
0%10
450
%10
550
%35
17%
174
83%
2813
%18
187
%N
OR
TH
CE
NT
RA
L T
EX
AS
CO
LLE
GE
288
9734
%45
46%
1212
%40
41%
N/A
0%97
100%
N/A
0%65
67%
3233
%35
36%
6264
%16
16%
8184
%U
.)N
OR
TH
EA
ST
TE
XA
S C
OM
M C
OLL
EG
E18
170
39%
4159
%4
6%25
36%
4057
%30
43%
NIA
0%37
53%
3347
%19
27%
5173
%15
21%
5579
%O
DE
SS
A C
OLL
EG
E47
584
18%
3542
%14
17%
3542
%50
60%
3440
%N
/A0%
5768
%27
32%
78%
7792
%14
17%
7083
%P
AN
OLA
CO
LLE
GE
123
2520
%14
56%
N/A
0%11
44%
1456
%11
44%
N/A
0%17
68%
832
%8
32%
1768
%3
12%
2288
%P
AR
IS J
UN
IOR
CO
LLE
GE
217
8439
%22
26%
1417
%48
57%
3845
%46
55%
N/A
0%50
60%
3440
%18
21%
6677
93°/
0
1720
%67
80%
RA
NG
ER
CO
LLE
GE
594
7%3
75%
125
%N
/A0%
250
%2
50%
N/A
0%1
25%
375
%1
25%
125
%3
75%
SA
N J
AC
INT
O C
OM
M C
OLL
DIS
T1,
960
394
20%
206
52%
5815
%13
033
%23
359
%15
940
%2
1%20
452
%19
048
%37
9%35
791
%12
331
%27
169
%S
OU
TH
PLA
INS
CO
LLE
GE
777
298
38%
168
56%
4114
%89
30%
7224
%22
676
%N
/A0%
207
69%
9131
%10
234
%19
666
%57
19%
241
81%
SO
UT
H T
EX
AS
CO
MM
UN
ITY
CO
LLE
GE
986
527
53%
237
45%
144
27%
146
28%
N/A
0%52
710
0%N
/A0%
324
61%
203
39%
121
23%
406
77%
116
22%
411
78%
SO
UT
HW
ES
T T
EX
AS
JU
NIO
R C
OLL
EG
E23
316
370
%77
47%
4326
%43
26%
N/A
0%16
310
0%N
/A0%
8854
%75
46%
6540
%98
60%
3622
%12
778
%T
AR
RA
NT
CO
UN
TY
CO
LLE
GE
DIS
T1,
378
690
50%
280
41%
139
20%
271
39%
363
53%
327
47%
N/A
0%46
367
%22
733
%82
12%
608
88%
111
16%
579
84%
TE
MP
LE C
OLL
EG
E34
291
27%
4044
%10
11%
4145
%N
/A0%
9110
0%N
/A0%
5560
%36
40%
2426
%67
74%
2932
%62
68%
TE
XA
RK
AN
A C
OLL
EG
E13
737
27%
1027
%2
5%25
68%
N/A
0%37
100%
N/A
0%21
57%
1643
%1
3%36
97%
822
%29
78%
TE
XA
S S
OU
TH
MO
ST
CO
LLE
GE
114
4237
%18
43%
819
%16
38%
1843
%24
57%
N/A
0%22
52%
2048
%16
38%
2662
%4
10%
3890
%T
RIN
ITY
VA
LLE
Y C
OM
M C
OLL
EG
E43
727
162
%11
041
%71
26%
9033
%2
1%26
999
%N
/A0%
129
48%
142
52%
163
60%
108
40%
270
100%
10%
TY
LER
JU
NIO
R C
OLL
EG
E62
430
950
%15
951
%54
17%
9631
%18
961
%12
039
%N
/A0%
197
64%
112
36%
9731
%21
269
%38
12%
271
88%
VE
RN
ON
CO
LLE
GE
466
163
35%
8653
%16
10%
6137
%N
/A0%
163
100%
N/A
0%98
60%
6540
%71
44%
9256
%33
20%
130
80%
VIC
TO
RIA
CO
LLE
GE
, TH
E27
010
338
%50
49%
2120
%32
31%
2928
%64
62%
1010
%49
48%
5452
%30
29%
7371
%36
35%
6765
%W
EA
TH
ER
FO
RD
CO
LLE
GE
331
122
37%
6553
%26
21%
3125
%3
2%11
897
%1
1%77
63%
4537
%46
38%
7662
%31
25%
9175
%W
ES
TE
RN
TE
XA
S C
OLL
EG
E76
2330
%17
74%
29%
417
%15
65%
835
%N
/A0%
1565
%8
35%
417
%19
83%
522
%18
78%
WH
AR
TO
N C
OU
NT
Y J
UN
IOR
CO
LLE
GE
412
108
26%
6762
%14
13%
2725
%28
26%
8074
%N
/A0%
7166
%37
34%
109%
9891
%10
810
0%N
/A0%
C/S
C-T
echn
ical
Sta
tew
ide
40,6
2315
,743
39%
6,88
544
%2,
529
16%
6,32
940
%8,
999
57%
6,70
543
%39
0%9,
517
60%
6,22
640
%2,
909
18%
12,8
3482
%3,
321
21%
12,4
2279
%LA
MA
R IN
ST
ITU
TE
OF
TE
CH
NO
LOG
Y49
923
447
%12
654
%17
7%91
39%
N/A
0%23
410
0%N
/A0%
140
60%
9440
%33
14%
201
86%
6829
%16
671
%T
EX
AS
ST
TE
CH
NIC
AL
CO
LL S
YS
TE
M3,
387
1,19
335
%55
446
%19
817
%44
137
%54
045
%65
255
%1
0%71
960
%47
440
%19
616
%99
784
%32
027
%87
373
%T
ST
C/L
IT S
tate
wid
e3,
886
1,42
737
%68
048
%21
515
%53
237
%54
038
%88
662
%1
0%85
960
%56
840
%22
916
%1,
198
84%
388
27%
1,03
973
%A
-15
App
endi
x B
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n by
Cha
ract
eris
tics
of In
stitu
tion,
Pro
gram
, and
Stu
dent
Fal
l/Prio
r S
umm
er 1
999
Firs
t-T
ime-
in-C
olle
ge S
tude
nts
Tra
cked
Thr
ough
Fal
l 200
1
Pub
lic H
ighe
r E
duca
tion
Sta
tew
ide
----
----
----
----
---
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n S
tatu
sT
otal
NC
ol%
Not
Req
uire
dN
Col
% R
ow%
Req
uire
dN
Col
% R
ow%
Unk
now
nN
Col
% R
ow%
Tot
al15
8,90
310
0%89
,168
100%
56%
53,1
2610
0%33
%16
,609
100%
10%
Inst
itutio
n Le
vel
Uni
vers
ity49
,104
31%
36,8
3141
%75
%9,
400
18%
19%
2,87
317
%6%
CT
C10
9,79
969
%52
,337
59%
48%
43,7
2682
%40
%13
,736
83%
13%
Typ
e M
ajor
Aca
dem
ic11
4,39
472
%67
,910
76%
59%
35,9
5668
%31
%10
,528
63%
9%T
echn
ical
34,6
9222
%16
,724
19%
48%
13,0
6925
%38
%4,
899
29%
14%
Tec
h P
rep
9,81
76%
4,53
45%
46%
4,10
18%
42%
1,18
27%
12%
Inst
itutio
n T
ype/
Typ
e M
ajor
C/S
C-A
cade
mic
65,2
9041
%31
,079
35%
48%
26,5
5650
%41
%7,
655
46%
12%
C/S
C-T
echn
ical
40,6
2326
%19
,251
22%
47%
15,7
4330
%39
%5,
629
34%
14%
TS
TC
/LU
IT3,
886
2%2,
007
2%52
%1,
427
3%37
%45
23%
12%
Uni
vers
ity-A
cade
mic
49,1
0431
%36
,831
41%
75%
9,40
018
%19
%2,
873
17%
6%R
emot
e C
ampu
sC
orre
ctio
nal I
nstit
utio
n36
90%
114
0%31
%15
70%
43%
981%
27%
Gen
der
Fem
ale
85,7
8554
%46
,397
52%
54%
30,5
2757
%36
%8,
861
53%
10%
Mal
e73
,118
46%
42,7
7148
%58
%22
,599
43%
31%
7,74
847
%11
%E
thni
city
Whi
te91
,952
58%
58,5
0766
%64
%24
,424
46%
27%
9,02
154
%10
%B
lack
17,2
9811
%6,
367
7%37
%9,
023
17%
52%
1,90
811
%11
%H
ispa
nic
39,7
5125
%18
,038
20%
45%
17,7
4633
%45
%3,
967
24%
10%
Asi
an6,
727
4%4,
616
5%69
%1,
082
2%16
%1,
029
6%15
%A
mer
ican
Indi
an74
80%
400
0%53
%26
71%
36%
810%
11%
Inte
rnat
iona
l1,
789
1%89
01%
50%
420
1%23
%47
93%
27%
Unk
now
n63
80%
350
0%55
%16
40%
26%
124
1%19
%
Age
18-1
910
0,41
963
%57
,963
65%
58%
35,3
5067
%35
%7,
106
43%
7%20
-21
10,2
586%
4,12
65%
40%
4,96
99%
48%
1,16
37%
11%
22-2
47,
215
5%2,
943
3%41
%3,
203
6%44
%1,
069
6%15
%25
-29
6,76
14%
2,66
93%
39%
2,65
25%
39%
1,44
09%
21%
30-3
44,
022
3%1,
401
2%35
%1,
282
2%32
%1,
339
8%33
%35
-40
3,54
92%
1,32
91%
37%
985
2%28
%1,
235
7%35
%41
-50
3,32
42%
1,33
82%
40%
694
1%21
%1,
292
8%39
%O
ver
501,
151
1%55
31%
48%
130
0%11
%46
83%
41%
Und
er 1
822
,154
14%
16,8
2219
%76
%3,
844
7%17
%1,
488
9%7%
Unk
now
n50
0%24
0%48
%17
0%34
%9
0%18
%
Edu
catio
nal O
bjec
tive
Unk
now
n2,
922
2%0
0%0%
00%
0%2,
922
18%
100%
Non
-Deg
ree
See
king
21,3
901a%
10,0
7511
%47
%8,
805
17%
41%
2,51
015
%12
%C
ertif
icat
e -
TA
SP
Lia
ble
1,65
81%
903
1%54
%49
51%
30%
260
2%16
%A
ssoc
iate
Deg
ree
50,7
3832
%20
,207
23%
40%
24,1
1045
%48
%6,
421
39%
13%
Bac
cala
urea
te D
egre
e57
,133
36%
41,0
5946
%72
%13
,397
25%
23%
2,67
716
%5%
Und
eter
min
ed16
,641
10%
9,07
910
%55
%5,
847
11%
35%
1,71
510
%10
%C
ertif
icat
e -
TA
SP
Wai
ved
8,42
15%
7,84
59%
93%
472
1%6%
104
1%1%
B-2
App
endi
x B
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n by
Cha
ract
eris
tics
of In
stitu
tion,
Pro
gram
, and
Stu
dent
Fal
l/Prio
r S
umm
er 1
999
Firs
t-T
ime-
in-C
olle
ge S
tude
nts
Tra
cked
Thr
ough
Fal
l 200
1
Pub
lic H
ighe
r E
duca
tion
Sta
tew
ide
Tot
alN
Col
%
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n S
tatu
sN
ot R
equi
red
Req
uire
dN
Col
% R
ow%
N C
ol%
Row
%U
nkno
wn
N C
ol%
Row
%
Tot
al15
8,90
310
0%89
,168
100%
56%
53,1
2610
0%33
%16
,609
100%
10%
Firs
t Sem
este
r C
ours
e-Lo
adF
ull-T
ime
98,6
7462
%58
,614
66%
59%
32,5
4661
%33
%7,
514
45%
8%P
art-
Tim
e60
,229
38%
30,5
5434
%51
%20
,580
39%
34%
9,09
555
%15
%
Hig
h S
choo
l Dip
lom
aR
egul
ar47
,402
30%
20,9
2523
%44
%23
,033
43%
49%
3,44
421
%7%
Rec
omm
ende
d or
Adv
ance
d50
,019
31%
34,5
7239
%69
%11
,657
22%
23%
3,79
023
%8%
Unk
now
n61
,482
39%
33,6
7138
%55
%18
,436
35%
30%
9,37
556
%15
%
Hig
h S
choo
l Eco
nom
ical
ly D
isad
vant
aged
Unk
now
n64
,469
41%
35,0
7039
%54
%19
,761
37%
31%
9,63
858
%15
%N
one
Iden
tifie
d76
,058
48%
46,5
8752
%61
%23
,938
45%
31%
5,53
333
%7%
Fre
e Lu
nch
13,6
329%
5,40
16%
40%
7,20
114
%53
%1,
030
6%8%
Red
uced
Pric
e Lu
nch
3,64
32%
1,75
72%
48%
1,61
93%
44%
267
2%7%
Oth
er1,
101
1%35
30%
32%
607
1%55
%14
11%
13%
Initi
al T
est C
ateg
ory
Alte
rnat
ive
Tes
ts36
,530
23%
10,8
0012
%30
%23
,936
45%
66%
1,79
411
%5%
TA
SP
(or
Sta
nfor
d A
chie
vem
ent T
est)
62,5
0939
%27
,909
31%
45%
29,0
6055
%46
%5,
540
33%
9%U
nkno
wn
59,8
6438
%50
,459
57%
84%
130
0%0%
9,27
556
%15
%
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n S
CH
306,
854
35,6
3212
%26
5,87
387
%5,
349
2%T
otal
SC
H F
all 1
999
- F
all 2
001
7,16
1,65
24,
529,
453
63%
2,08
9,19
429
%54
3,00
58%
Ret
entio
n M
ore
Tha
n O
ne S
emes
ter
137,
524
87%
81,5
9692
%59
%43
,797
82%
32%
12,1
3173
%9%
Spr
ing/
Sum
mer
200
012
7,29
080
%76
,129
85%
60%
40,1
6776
%32
%10
,994
66%
9%A
Y 2
000-
2001
112,
781
71%
70,2
7479
%62
%33
,792
64%
30%
8,71
552
%8%
Fal
l 200
187
,732
55%
57,2
7564
%65
%23
,896
45%
27%
6,56
140
%7%
Tra
nsfe
r fr
om 2
-Yea
r to
4-Y
ear
18,8
6812
%13
,553
15%
72%
3,83
87%
20%
1,47
79%
8%A
war
d D
urin
g F
all 1
999
- S
umm
er 2
001
5,45
43%
4%71
%80
22%
15%
781
5%14
%
Per
sist
ence
or
Aw
ard
91,2
5857
%59
,811
67%
66%
24,3
4846
%27
%7,
099
43%
8%
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n P
rovi
ded
Not
Pro
vide
d10
5,63
966
%82
,860
93%
78%
10,2
7019
%10
%12
,509
75%
12%
Pro
vide
d50
,342
32%
7%13
%42
,856
81%
85%
1,17
87%
2%U
nkno
wn
2,92
22%
00%
0%0
0%0%
2,92
218
%10
0%
Mat
h T
AS
P O
blig
atio
n M
etT
AS
P M
et10
5,02
466
%89
,168
100%
85%
14,7
6228
%14
%1,
094
7%1%
TA
SP
Not
Met
50,9
5732
%0
0%0%
38,3
6472
%75
%12
,593
76%
25%
Unk
now
n2,
922
2%0
0%0%
00%
0%2,
922
18%
100%
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n P
rovi
ded
Not
Pro
vide
dT
AS
P M
et88
,786
56%
82,8
6093
%93
%4,
945
9%6%
981
6%1%
TA
SP
Not
Met
16,8
5311
%0
0%0%
5,32
510
%32
%11
,528
69%
68%
Pro
vide
d
TA
SP
Met
16,2
3810
%6,
308
7%39
%9,
817
18%
60%
113
1%1%
TA
SP
Not
Met
34,1
0421
%0
0%0%
33,0
3962
%97
%1,
065
6%3%
Dev
. Ed.
and
TA
SP
Sta
tus
Unk
now
n2,
922
2%0
0%0%
00%
0%2,
922
18%
100%
B-3
App
endi
x B
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n by
Cha
ract
eris
tics
of In
stitu
tion,
Pro
gram
, and
Stu
dent
Fal
l/Prio
r S
umm
er 1
999
Firs
t-T
ime-
in-C
olle
ge S
tude
nts
Tra
cked
Thr
ough
Fal
l 200
1
Pub
lic H
ighe
r E
duca
tion
Sta
tew
ide
Tot
alN
Col
%
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n S
tatu
sN
ot R
equi
red
Req
uire
dN
Col
% R
ow%
N C
ol%
Row
%U
nkno
wn
N C
ol%
Row
%T
otal
158,
903
100%
89,1
6810
0%56
%53
,126
100%
33%
16,6
0910
0%10
%D
ev. E
d. N
ot P
rovi
ded
TA
SP
Met
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n S
CH
10,4
578,
000
77%
2,14
821
%30
93%
Tot
al S
CH
Fal
l 199
9 -
Fal
l 200
14,
546,
706
4,22
7,84
493
%26
3,61
26%
55,2
501%
Ret
entio
n M
ore
Tha
n O
ne S
emes
ter
81,1
6751
%75
,590
85%
93%
4,64
49%
6%93
36%
1%E
nrol
led
Spr
ing/
Sum
mer
200
075
,949
48%
70,6
8779
%93
%4,
385
8%6%
877
5%1%
Enr
olle
d A
Y 2
000-
2001
69,9
3344
%64
,935
73%
93%
4,14
78%
6%85
15%
1%E
nrol
led
Fal
l 200
157
,645
36%
53,6
3660
%93
%3,
274
6%6%
735
4%1%
Tra
nsfe
r fr
om 2
-Yea
r to
4-Y
ear
14,4
309%
13,0
6215
%91
%1,
075
2%7%
293
2%2%
Aw
ard
Dur
ing
Fal
l 199
9 -
Sum
mer
200
13,
784
2%3,
493
4%92
%24
00%
6%51
0%1%
Per
sist
ence
or
Aw
ard
60,0
9638
%55
,956
63%
93%
3,38
76%
6%75
35%
1%T
AS
P N
ot M
etM
ath
Dev
elop
men
tal E
duca
tion
SC
H43
60
0%40
994
%27
6%T
otal
SC
H F
all 1
999
- F
all 2
001
503,
450
00%
114,
495
23%
388,
955
77%
Ret
entio
n M
ore
Tha
n O
ne S
emes
ter
11,5
487%
00%
0%2,
912
5%25
%8,
636
52%
75%
Enr
olle
d S
prin
g/S
umm
er 2
000
10,2
716%
00%
0%2,
464
5%24
%7,
807
47%
76%
Enr
olle
d A
Y 2
000-
2001
7,79
95%
00%
0%1,
538
3%20
%6,
261
38%
80%
Enr
olle
d F
all 2
001
5,95
44%
00%
0%1,
256
2%21
%4,
698
28%
79%
Tra
nsfe
r fr
om 2
-Yea
r to
4-Y
ear
1,22
11%
00%
0%26
00%
21%
961
6%79
%A
war
d D
urin
g F
all 1
999
- S
umm
er 2
001
619
0%0
0%0%
112
0%18
%50
73%
82%
Per
sist
ence
or
Aw
ard
6,38
84%
00%
0%1,
343
3%21
%5,
045
30%
79%
Dev
. Ed.
Pro
vide
dT
AS
P M
etM
ath
Dev
elop
men
tal E
duca
tion
SC
H82
,575
27,6
3233
%54
,399
66%
544
1%T
otal
SC
H F
all 1
999
- F
all 2
001
862,
141
301,
609
35%
554,
208
64%
6,32
41%
Ret
entio
n M
ore
Tha
n O
ne S
emes
ter
15,6
7710
%6,
006
7%38
%9,
559
18%
61%
112
1%1%
Enr
olle
d S
prin
g/S
umm
er 2
000
14,6
699%
5,44
26%
37%
9,12
117
%62
%10
61%
1%E
nrol
led
AY
200
0-20
0114
,326
9%5,
339
6%37
%8,
881
17%
62%
106
1%1%
Enr
olle
d F
all 2
001
10,6
687%
3,63
94%
34%
6,94
413
%65
%85
1%1%
Tra
nsfe
r fr
om 2
-Yea
r to
4-Y
ear
1,76
01%
491
1%28
%1,
254
2%71
%15
0%1%
Aw
ard
Dur
ing
Fal
l 199
9 -
Sum
mer
200
165
20%
378
0%58
%26
81%
41%
60%
1%P
ersi
sten
ce o
r A
war
d11
,034
7%3,
855
4%35
%7,
088
13%
64%
911%
1%T
AS
P N
ot M
etM
ath
Dev
elop
men
tal E
duca
tion
SC
H21
3,38
60
0%20
8,91
798
%4,
469
2%T
otal
SC
H F
all 1
999
- F
all 2
001
1,18
1,97
90
0%1,
156,
879
98%
25,1
002%
Ret
entio
n M
ore
Tha
n O
ne S
emes
ter
27,3
8217
%0
0%0%
26,6
8250
%97
%70
04%
3%E
nrol
led
Spr
ing/
Sum
mer
200
024
,805
16%
00%
0%24
,197
46%
98%
608
4%2%
Enr
olle
d A
Y 2
000-
2001
19,6
4912
%0
0%0%
19,2
2636
%98
%42
33%
2%E
nrol
led
Fal
l 200
112
,706
8%0
0%0%
12,4
2223
%98
%28
42%
2%T
rans
fer
from
2-Y
ear
to 4
-Yea
r1,
268
1%0
0%0%
1,24
92%
99%
190%
1%A
war
d D
urin
g F
all 1
999
- S
umm
er 2
001
185
0%0
0%0%
182
0%98
%3
0%2%
Per
sist
ence
or
Aw
ard
12,8
168%
00%
0%12
,530
24%
98%
286
2%2%
Dev
. Ed.
and
TA
SP
Sta
tus
Unk
now
n
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n S
CH
00
N/A
0N
/A0
N/A
Tot
al S
CH
Fal
l 199
9 -
Fal
l 200
167
,376
00%
00%
67,3
7610
0%R
eten
tion
Mor
e T
han
One
Sem
este
r1,
750
1%0
0%0%
00%
0%1,
750
11%
100%
Enr
olle
d S
prin
g/S
umm
er 2
000
1,59
61%
00%
0%0
0%0%
1,59
610
%10
0%E
nrol
led
AY
200
0-20
011,
074
1%0
0%0%
00%
0%1,
074
6%10
0%E
nrol
led
Fal
l 200
175
90%
00%
0%0
0%0%
759
5%10
0%T
rans
fer
from
2-Y
ear
to 4
-Yea
r18
90%
00%
0%0
0%0%
189
1%10
0%A
war
d D
urin
g F
all 1
999
- S
umm
er 2
001
214
0%0
0%0%
00%
0%21
41%
100%
Per
sist
ence
or
Aw
ard
924
1%0
0%0%
00%
0%92
46%
100%
App
endi
x B
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n by
Cha
ract
eris
tics
of In
stitu
tion,
Pro
gram
, and
Stu
dent
Fal
l/Prio
r S
umm
er 1
999
Firs
t-T
ime-
in-C
olle
ge S
tude
nts
Tra
cked
Thr
ough
Fal
l 200
1
Pub
lic H
ighe
r E
duca
tion
Sta
tew
ide
----
----
----
----
- M
ath
Dev
elop
men
tal E
duca
tion
Sta
tus
----
---
----
----
----
--T
otal
NC
ol%
Not
Req
uire
dN
Col
% R
ow%
Req
uire
dN
Col
% R
ow%
Unk
now
nN
Col
% R
ow%
Tot
al15
8,90
310
0%89
,168
100%
56%
53,1
2610
0%33
%16
,609
100%
10%
Per
sist
or
Rec
eive
Aw
ard
91,2
5857
%59
,811
67%
66%
24,3
4846
%27
%7,
099
43%
8%T
AS
P M
et71
,130
45%
59,8
1167
%84
%10
,475
20%
15%
844
5%1%
Dev
. Ed.
Not
Pro
vide
d60
,096
38%
55,9
5663
%93
%3,
387
6%6%
753
5%1%
Dev
. Ed.
Pro
vide
d11
,034
7%3,
855
4%35
%7,
088
13%
64%
911%
1%T
AS
P N
ot M
et19
,204
12%
00%
0%13
,873
26%
72%
5,33
132
%28
%D
ev. E
d. N
ot P
rovi
ded
6,38
84%
00%
0%1,
343
3%21
%5,
045
30%
79%
Dev
. Ed.
Pro
vide
d12
,816
8%0
0%0%
12,5
3024
%98
%28
62%
2%T
AS
P S
tatu
s an
d D
ev. E
d. U
nkno
wn
924
1%0
0%0%
00%
0%92
46%
100%
Did
Not
Per
sist
or
Rec
eive
Aw
ard
67,6
4543
%29
,357
33%
43%
28,7
7854
%43
%9,
510
57%
14%
TA
SP
Met
33,8
9421
%29
,357
33%
87%
4,28
78%
13%
250
2%1%
Dev
. Ed.
Not
Pro
vide
d28
,690
18%
26,9
0430
%94
%1,
558
3%5%
228
1%1%
Dev
. Ed.
Pro
vide
d5,
204
3%2,
453
3%47
%2,
729
5%52
%22
0%0%
TA
SP
Not
Met
31,7
5320
%0
0%0%
24,4
9146
%77
%7,
262
44%
23%
Dev
. Ed.
Not
Pro
vide
d10
,465
7%0
0%0%
3,98
27%
38%
6,48
339
%62
%D
ev. E
d. P
rovi
ded
21,2
8813
%0
0%0%
20,5
0939
%96
%77
95%
4%T
AS
P S
tatu
s an
d D
ev. E
d. U
nkno
wn
1,99
81%
00%
0%0
0%0%
1,99
812
%10
0%
B-4
Tot
al
Inst
itutio
n Le
vel
Uni
vers
ityC
TC
Typ
e M
ajor
Aca
dem
icT
echn
ical
Tec
h P
rep
Inst
itutio
n T
ype/
Typ
e M
ajor
C/S
C-A
cade
mic
C/S
C-T
echn
ical
TS
TC
/LU
ITU
nive
rsity
-Aca
dem
icR
emot
e C
ampu
sC
orre
ctio
nal I
nstit
utio
n
Gen
der
Fem
ale
Mal
e
Eth
nici
tyW
hite
Bla
ckH
ispa
nic
Asi
anA
mer
ican
Indi
anIn
tern
atio
nal
Unk
now
n
Age
18-1
920
-21
22-2
425
-29
30-3
435
-40
41-5
0O
ver
50U
nder
18
Unk
now
n
Edu
catio
nal O
bjec
tive
Unk
now
n
Non
-Deg
ree
See
king
Cer
tific
ate
- T
AS
P L
iabl
eA
ssoc
iate
Deg
ree
Bac
cala
urea
te D
egre
eU
ndet
erm
ined
Cer
tific
ate
- T
AS
P W
aive
d
App
endi
x B
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n by
Cha
ract
eris
tics
ofIn
stitu
tion,
Pro
gram
, and
Stu
dent
Fal
l/Prio
r S
umm
er 1
999
Firs
t-T
ime-
in-C
olle
ge S
tude
nts
Tra
cked
Thr
ough
Fal
l 200
1
Tot
alN
Col
%
49,1
04 1
00%
49,1
04 1
00%
O0%
49,1
04 1
00%
00%
00%
0 00%
O0%
49,1
04 1
00%
00%
26,5
0022
,604
29,4
905,
685
10,0
963,
081
225
350
177
54%
46%
60%
12%
21% 6% 0% 1% 0%
43,8
3189
%88
22%
413
1%28
71%
123
0%10
70%
730%
370%
3,34
011
0%7%
443
1%98
22%
80%
166
0%45
,844
93%
1,65
1 100%3%
Uni
vers
ity S
tate
wid
e
----
----
----
-- M
ath
Dev
elop
men
tal E
duca
tion
Sta
tus
----
--
Not
Req
uire
dR
equi
red
Unk
now
nN
Col
% R
ow%
N C
ol%
Row
%N
Col
% R
ow%
36,8
3110
0% 7
5%9,
400
100%
19%
2,87
3 10
0%6%
36,8
3110
0% 7
5%0
0% N
/A
36,8
3110
0% 7
5%0
0% N
/A0
0% N
/A
0 00%
N/A
00%
N/A
36,8
3110
0%75
%
0% N
/A
19,2
4552
% 7
3%17
,586
48%
78%
24,9
412,
505
6,13
02,
682
173
264
136
33,4
0342
319
1 85 33 41 32 15
2,59
810 0
691 4
105
34,9
161,
108 7
68%
85%
7% 4
4%17
% 6
1%7%
87%
0% 7
7%1%
75%
0% 7
7%
91% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 7% 0% 0% 2% 0% 0% 95
% 3% 0%
76%
48%
46%
30%
27%
38%
44%
41%
78%
91% 0%
70%
50%
63%
76%
67%
70%
9,40
0 10
0%19
%0
0% N
/A
9,40
0 10
0%19
%0
0% N
/AO
0% N
/A
0 O0%
N/A
O0%
N/A
9,40
0 10
0%19
%
0% N
/A
5,70
961
% 2
2%3,
691
39%
16%
3,33
32,
686
3,11
116
3 39 54
14
8,00
437
818
115
6 62 52 30 1751
9 1 025
6 1
348,
904
204 1
35%
29%
33% 2% 0% 1% 0%
85% 4% 2% 2% 1% 1% 0% 0% 6% 0% 0% 3% 0% 0%
95%
.2%
0%
11%
47%
31% 5%
17%
15%
8%
18%
43%
44%
54%
50%
49%
41%
46%
16%
9% 0% 26%
13%
20%
19%
12%
10%
2,87
3 10
0%6%
00%
N/A
2,87
3 10
0%6%
00%
N/A
00%
N/A
0 00%
N/A
00%
N/A
2,87
3 10
0%6%
0% N
/A
1,54
654
%6%
1,32
746
%6%
1,21
649
485
523
613 32 27
2,42
481 41 46 28 14 11 5
223 0
443 353
27
2,02
433
9 2
42%
17%
30% 8% 0% 1% 1%
4% 9% 8% 8% 6% 9% 15%
84%
6%3%
9%1%
10%
2%16
%1%
23%
0% 1
3%0% 0%
14%
8% 0%0%15
%
7%
15%
100
%1%
4%0%
38%
1%16
%70
%4%
12%
21%
0% 2
0%
8-6
App
endi
x B
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n by
Cha
ract
eris
tics
of In
stitu
tion,
Pro
gram
, and
Stu
dent
Fal
l/Prio
r S
umm
er 1
999
Firs
t-T
ime-
in-C
olle
ge S
tude
nts
Tra
cked
Thr
ough
Fal
l 200
1
Uni
vers
ity S
tate
wid
e
Tot
alN
Col
%
----
----
----
----
- M
ath
Dev
elop
men
tal E
duca
tion
Sta
tus
----
----
----
----
----
--N
ot R
equi
red
Req
uire
dN
Col
% R
ow%
N C
ol%
Row
%U
nkno
wn
N C
ol%
Row
%
Tot
al49
,104
100%
36,8
3110
0%75
%9,
400
100%
19%
2,87
310
0%6%
Firs
t Sem
este
r C
ours
e-Lo
ad
46,1
3494
%35
,207
96%
76%
8,39
389
%18
%2,
534
88%
5%P
art-
Tim
e2,
970
6%1,
624
4%55
%1,
007
11%
34%
339
12%
11%
Hig
h S
choo
l Dip
lom
aR
egul
ar12
,615
26%
8,08
222
%64
%3,
725
40%
30%
808
28%
6%R
ecom
men
ded
or A
dvan
ced
27,1
9755
%22
,117
60%
81%
3,61
038
%13
%1,
470
51%
5%U
nkno
wn
9,29
219
%6,
632
18%
71%
2,06
522
%22
%59
521
%6%
Hig
h S
choo
l Eco
nom
ical
ly D
isad
vant
age
Unk
now
n10
,153
21%
7,20
520
%71
%2,
287
24%
23%
661
23%
7%N
one
Iden
tifie
d33
,337
68%
26,5
1472
%80
%5,
105
54%
15%
1,71
860
%5%
Fre
e Lu
nch
4,01
98%
2,13
36%
53%
1,53
316
%38
%35
312
%9%
Red
uced
Pric
e Lu
nch
1,31
83%
844
2%64
%36
44%
28%
110
4%8%
Oth
er27
71%
135
0%49
%11
11%
40%
311%
11%
Initi
al T
est C
ateg
ory
Alte
rnat
ive
Tes
ts2,
974
6%1,
268
3%43
%1,
615
17%
54%
913%
3%T
AS
P (
or S
tanf
ord
Ach
ieve
men
t Te
21,3
9444
%11
,689
32%
55%
7,76
883
%36
%1,
937
67%
9%U
nkno
wn
24,7
3650
%23
,874
65%
97%
170%
0%84
529
%3%
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n S
CH
44,0
026,
072
14%
37,1
3184
%79
92%
Tot
al S
CH
Fal
l 199
9 -
Fal
l 200
13,
139,
955
2,46
6,66
479
%51
0,77
516
%16
2,51
65%
Ret
entio
n M
ore
Tha
n O
ne S
emes
ter
47,2
5796
%35
,994
98%
76%
8,65
992
%18
%2,
604
91%
6%S
prin
g/S
umm
er 2
000
46,0
0894
%35
,206
96%
77%
8,28
788
%18
%2,
515
88%
5%A
Y 2
000-
2001
43,5
3789
%33
,763
92%
78%
7,48
180
%17
%2,
293
80%
5%F
all 2
001
38,2
7678
%30
,343
82%
79%
5,94
963
%16
%1,
984
69%
5%T
rans
fer
from
2-Y
ear
to 4
-Yea
r0
0%0%
N/A
0% N
/A0%
N/A
Aw
ard
Dur
ing
Fal
l 199
9 -
Sum
mer
200
119
80%
153
0%77
%17
0%9%
281%
14%
Per
sist
ence
or
Aw
ard
38,4
0178
%30
,438
83%
79%
5,96
163
%16
%2,
002
70%
5%
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n P
rovi
dec
Not
Pro
vide
d39
,661
81%
35,6
5197
%90
%1,
779
19%
4%2,
231
78%
6%P
rovi
ded
9,00
018
%1,
180
3%13
%7,
621
81%
85%
199
7%2%
Unk
now
n44
31%
00%
0%0
0%0%
443
15%
100%
Mat
h T
AS
P O
blig
atio
n M
etT
AS
P M
et41
,747
85%
36,8
3110
0%88
%4,
428
47%
11%
488
17%
1%T
AS
P N
ot M
et6,
914
14%
00%
0%4,
972
53%
72%
1,94
268
%28
%U
nkno
wn
443
1%0
0%0%
00%
0%44
315
%10
0%
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n P
rovi
dec
Not
Pro
vide
dT
AS
P M
et37
,389
76%
35,6
5197
%95
%1,
302
14%
3%43
615
%1%
TA
SP
Not
Met
2,27
25%
00%
0%47
75%
21%
1,79
562
%79
%P
rovi
ded
TA
SP
Met
4,35
89%
1,18
03%
27%
3,12
633
%72
%52
2%1%
TA
SP
Not
Met
4,64
29%
00%
0%4,
495
48%
97%
147
5%3%
Dev
. Ed.
and
TA
SP
Sta
tus
Unk
now
443
1%0
0%0%
00%
0%44
315
%10
0%
B-7
App
endi
x B
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n by
Cha
ract
eris
tics
of In
stitu
tion,
Pro
gram
, and
Stu
dent
Fal
l/Prio
r S
umm
er 1
999
Firs
t-T
ime-
in-C
olle
ge S
tude
nts
Tra
cked
Thr
ough
Fal
l 200
1
Uni
vers
ity S
tate
wid
e
Tot
alN
Col
%
----
---
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n S
tatu
sN
ot R
equi
red
Req
uire
dN
Col
% R
ow%
N C
ol%
Row
%C
ol%
Row
%U
nkno
wn
N
Tot
al49
,104
100%
36,8
3110
0% 7
5%9,
400
100%
19%
2,87
310
0%6%
Dev
. Ed.
Not
Pro
vide
dT
AS
P M
etM
ath
Dev
elop
men
tal E
duca
tioi
1,98
21,
469
74%
246
12%
267
13%
Tot
al S
CH
Fal
l 199
9 -
Fal
l 200
2,50
9,96
12,
396,
477
95%
85,9
173%
27,5
671%
Ret
entio
n M
ore
Tha
n O
ne S
en36
,539
74%
34,8
4895
% 9
5%1,
272
14%
3%41
915
%1%
Enr
olle
d S
prin
g/S
umm
er 2
000
35,7
7673
%34
,118
93%
95%
1,24
413
%3%
414
14%
1%E
nrol
led
AY
200
0-20
0134
,277
70%
32,7
1189
% 9
5%1,
184
13%
3%38
213
%1%
Enr
olle
d F
all 2
001
30,8
6263
%29
,480
80%
96%
1,03
211
%3%
350
12%
1%T
rans
fer
from
2-Y
ear
to 4
-Yea
l0
0%0%
N/A
0% N
/A0%
N/A
Aw
ard
Dur
ing
Fal
l 199
9 -
Sum
i16
20%
145
0% 9
0%9
0%6%
80%
5%P
ersi
sten
ce o
r A
war
d30
,964
63%
29,5
7280
% 9
6%1,
038
11%
3%35
412
%1%
TA
SP
Not
Met
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
i3
00%
00%
310
0%T
otal
SC
H F
all 1
999
- F
all 2
0012
1,92
10
0%17
,948
15%
103,
973
85%
Ret
entio
n M
ore
Tha
n O
ne S
en1,
987
4%0
0%0%
318
3% 1
6%1,
669
58%
84%
Enr
olle
d S
prin
g/S
umm
er 2
000
1,91
64%
00%
0%29
93%
16%
1,61
756
% 8
4%E
nrol
led
AY
200
0-20
011,
731
4%0
0%0%
222
2% 1
3%1,
509
53%
87%
Enr
olle
d F
all 2
001
1,47
13%
00%
0%18
92%
13%
1,28
245
% 8
7%T
rans
fer
from
2-Y
ear
to 4
-Yea
l0
0%0%
N/A
0% N
/A0%
N/A
Aw
ard
Dur
ing
Fal
l 199
9 -
Sum
i9
0%0
0%0%
00%
0%9
0% 1
00%
Per
sist
ence
or
Aw
ard
1,47
83%
00%
0%18
92%
13%
1,28
945
% 8
7%D
ev. E
d. P
rovi
ded
TA
SP
Met
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
i17
,593
4,60
326
%12
,741
72%
249
1%T
otal
SC
H F
all 1
999
- F
all 2
0026
4,56
070
,187
27%
191,
188
72%
3,18
51%
Ret
entio
n M
ore
Tha
n O
ne S
en4,
220
9%1,
146
3% 2
7%3,
022
32%
72%
522%
1%E
nrol
led
Spr
ing/
Sum
mer
200
04,
050
8%1,
088
3% 2
7%2,
911
31%
72%
512%
1%E
nrol
led
AY
200
0-20
013,
890
8%1,
052
3% 2
7%2,
789
30%
72%
492%
1%E
nrol
led
Fal
l 200
13,
237
7%86
32%
27%
2,33
325
% 7
2%41
1%1%
Tra
nsfe
r fr
om 2
-Yea
r to
4-Y
eal
00%
0% N
/A0%
N/A
0% N
/AA
war
d D
urin
g F
all 1
999
- S
umi
150%
80%
53%
50%
33%
20%
13%
Per
sist
ence
or
Aw
ard
3,24
57%
866
2% 2
7%2,
336
25%
72%
431%
1%T
AS
P N
ot M
etM
ath
Dev
elop
men
tal E
duca
tioi
24,4
240
0%24
,144
99%
280
1%T
otal
SC
H F
all 1
999
- F
all 2
0022
0,02
90
0%21
5,72
298
%4,
307
2%R
eten
tion
Mor
e T
han
One
Sen
4,14
18%
00%
0%4,
047
43%
98%
943%
2%E
nrol
led
Spr
ing/
Sum
mer
200
03,
913
8%0
0%0%
3,83
341
% 9
8%80
3%2%
Enr
olle
d A
Y 2
000-
2001
3,33
77%
00%
0%3,
286
35%
98%
512%
2%E
nrol
led
Fal
l 200
12,
432
5%0
0%0%
2,39
525
% 9
8%37
1%2%
Tra
nsfe
r fr
om 2
-Yea
r to
4-Y
eal
00%
0% N
/A0%
N/A
0% N
/AA
war
d D
urin
g F
all 1
999
- S
umi
30%
00%
0%3
0% 1
00%
00%
0%P
ersi
sten
ce o
r A
war
d2,
435
5%0
0%0%
2,39
826
% 9
8%37
1%2%
Dev
. Ed.
and
TA
SP
Sta
tus
Unk
now
nM
ath
Dev
elop
men
tal E
duca
tioi
00
N/A
0N
/A0
N/A
Tot
al S
CH
Fal
l 199
9 -
Fal
l 200
23,4
840
0%0
0%23
,484
100%
Ret
entio
n M
ore
Tha
n O
ne S
en37
01%
00%
0%0
0%0%
370
13%
100
%E
nrol
led
Spr
ing/
Sum
mer
200
035
31%
00%
0%0
0%0%
353
12%
100
%E
nrol
led
AY
200
0-20
0130
21%
00%
0%0
0%0%
302
11%
100
%E
nrol
led
Fal
l 200
127
41%
00%
0%0
0%0%
274
10%
100
%T
rans
fer
from
2-Y
ear
to 4
-Yea
l0
0%0%
N/A
0% N
/A0%
N/A
Aw
ard
Dur
ing
Fal
l 199
9 -
Sum
i9
0%0
0%0%
00%
0%9
0% 1
00%
Per
sist
ence
or
Aw
ard
279
1%0
0%0%
00%
0%27
910
% 1
00%
App
endi
x B
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n by
Cha
ract
eris
tics
of In
stitu
tion,
Pro
gram
, and
Stu
dent
Fal
l/Prio
r S
umm
er 1
999
Firs
t-T
ime-
in-C
olle
ge S
tude
nts
Tra
cked
Thr
ough
Fal
l 200
1
Uni
vers
ity S
tate
wid
e
----
----
----
----
----
----
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n S
tatu
s --
---
----
----
----
----
--T
otal
NC
ol%
Not
Req
uire
dN
Col
% R
ow%
Req
uire
dN
Col
% R
ow%
Unk
now
nN
Col
% R
ow%
Tot
al49
,104
100%
36,8
3110
0%75
%9,
400
100%
19%
2,87
310
0%6%
Per
sist
or
Rec
eive
Aw
ard
38,4
0178
%30
,438
83%
79%
5,96
163
%16
%2,
002
70%
5%T
AS
P M
et34
,209
70%
30,4
3883
%89
%3,
374
36%
10%
397
14%
1%D
ev. E
d. N
ot P
rovi
ded
30,9
6463
%29
,572
80%
96%
1,03
811
%3%
354
12%
1%D
ev. E
d. P
rovi
ded
3,24
57%
866
2%27
%2,
336
25%
72%
431%
1%T
AS
P N
ot M
et3,
913
8%0
0%0%
2,58
728
%66
%1,
326
46%
34%
Dev
. Ed.
Not
Pro
vide
d1,
478
3%0
0%0%
189
2%13
%1,
289
45%
87%
Dev
. Ed.
Pro
vide
d2,
435
5%0
0%0%
2,39
826
%98
%37
1%2%
TA
SP
Sta
tus
and
Dev
. Ed.
Unk
now
279
1%0
0%0%
00%
0%27
910
%10
0%
Did
Not
Per
sist
or
Rec
eive
Aw
ard
10,7
0322
%6,
393
17%
60%
3,43
937
%32
%87
130
%8%
TA
SP
Met
7,53
815
%6,
393
17%
85%
1,05
411
%14
%91
3%1%
Dev
. Ed.
Not
Pro
vide
d6,
425
13%
6,07
917
%95
%26
43%
4%82
3%1%
Dev
. Ed.
Pro
vide
d1,
113
2%31
41%
28%
790
8%71
%9
0%1%
TA
SP
Not
Met
3,00
16%
00%
0%2,
385
25%
79%
616
21%
21%
Dev
. Ed.
Not
Pro
vide
d79
42%
00%
0%28
83%
36%
506
18%
64%
Dev
. Ed.
Pro
vide
d2,
207
4%0
0%0%
2,09
722
%95
%11
04%
5%T
AS
P S
tatu
s an
d D
ev. E
d. U
nkno
w16
40%
00%
0%0
0%0%
164
6%10
0%
App
endi
x B
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n by
Cha
ract
eris
tics
of In
stitu
tion,
Pro
gram
, and
Stu
dent
Fal
l/Prio
r S
umm
er 1
999
Firs
t-T
ime-
in-C
olle
ge S
tude
nts
Tra
cked
Thr
ough
Fal
l 200
1
Com
mun
ity, T
echn
ical
, and
Sta
te C
olle
ge S
tate
wid
e
Tot
alN
Col
%
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n S
tatu
s --
----
----
----
--R
equi
red
N C
ol%
Row
%U
nkno
wn
N C
ol%
Row
%N
ot R
equi
red
N C
ol%
Row
%
Tot
al10
9,79
910
0%52
,337
100%
48%
43,7
2610
0% 4
0%13
,736
100%
13%
Inst
itutio
n Le
vel
Uni
vers
ity0
0%0
0% N
/A0
0% N
/A0
0% N
/AC
TC
109,
799
100%
52,3
3710
0%48
%43
,726
100%
40%
13,7
3610
0%13
%T
ype
Maj
orA
cade
mic
65,2
9059
%31
,079
59%
48%
26,5
5661
%41
%7,
655
56%
12%
Tec
hnic
al34
,692
32%
16,7
2432
%48
%13
,069
30%
38%
4,89
936
%14
%T
ech
Pre
p9,
817
9%4,
534
9%46
%4,
101
9%42
%1,
182
9%12
%In
stitu
tion
Typ
e/T
ype
Maj
orC
/SC
-Aca
dem
ic65
,290
59%
31,0
7959
%48
%26
,556
61%
41%
7,65
556
%12
%C
/SC
-Tec
hnic
al40
,623
37%
19,2
5137
%47
%15
,743
36%
39%
5,62
941
%14
%T
ST
C/L
UIT
3,88
64%
2,00
74%
52%
1,42
73%
37%
452
3%12
%U
nive
rsity
-Aca
dem
ic0
0%0
0% N
/A0
0% N
/A0
0% N
/AR
emot
e C
ampu
sC
orre
ctio
nal I
nstit
utio
n36
90%
114
0%31
%15
70%
43%
981%
27%
Gen
der
Fem
ale
59,2
8554
%27
,152
52%
46%
24,8
1857
%42
%7,
315
53%
12%
Mal
e50
,514
46%
25,1
8548
%50
%18
,908
43%
37%
6,42
147
%13
%E
thni
city
Whi
te62
,462
57%
33,5
6664
%54
%21
,091
48%
34%
7,80
557
%12
%B
lack
11,6
1311
%3,
862
7%33
%6,
337
14%
55%
1,41
410
%12
%H
ispa
nic
29,6
5527
%11
,908
23%
40%
14,6
3533
%49
%3,
112
23%
10%
Asi
an3,
646
3%1,
934
4%53
%91
92%
25%
793
6%22
%A
mer
ican
Indi
an52
30%
227
0%43
%22
81%
44%
680%
13%
4651
lIn
tern
atio
nal
1,43
91%
626
1%44
%36
61%
25%
447
3%31
%N
I)U
nkno
wn
461
0%21
40%
46%
150
0%33
%97
1%21
%
Age
18-1
956
,588
52%
24,5
6047
%43
%27
,346
63%
48%
4,68
234
%8%
20-2
19,
376
9%3,
703
7%39
%4,
591
10%
49%
1,08
28%
12%
22-2
46,
802
6%2,
752
5%40
%3,
022
7%44
%1,
028
7%15
%25
-29
6,47
46%
2,58
45%
40%
2,49
66%
39%
1,39
410
%22
%30
-34
3,89
94%
1,36
83%
35%
1,22
03%
31%
1,31
110
%34
%35
-40
3,44
23%
1,28
82%
37%
933
2%27
%1,
221
9%35
%41
-50
3,25
13%
1,30
62%
40%
664
2%20
%1,
281
9%39
%O
ver
501,
114
1%53
81%
48%
113
0%10
%46
33%
42%
Und
er 1
818
,814
17%
14,2
2427
%76
%3,
325
8%18
%1,
265
9%7%
Unk
now
n39
0%14
0%36
%16
0%41
%9
0%23
%
Edu
catio
nal O
bjec
tive
Unk
now
n2,
479
2%0
0%0%
00%
0%2,
479
18%
100%
Non
-Deg
ree
See
king
20,4
0819
%9,
384
18%
46%
8,54
920
%42
%2,
475
18%
12%
Cer
tific
ate
- T
AS
P L
iabl
e1,
650
2%89
92%
54%
494
1%30
%25
72%
16%
Ass
ocia
te D
egre
e50
,572
46%
20,1
0238
%40
%24
,076
55%
48%
6,39
447
%13
%B
acca
laur
eate
Deg
ree
11,2
8910
%6,
143
12%
54%
4,49
310
%40
%65
35%
6%U
ndet
erm
ined
14,9
9014
%7,
971
15%
53%
5,64
313
%38
%1,
376
10%
9%C
ertif
icat
e -
TA
SP
Wai
ved
8,41
18%
7,83
815
%93
%47
11%
6%10
21%
1%
B-9
App
endi
x B
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n by
Cha
ract
eris
tics
of In
stitu
tion,
Pro
gram
, and
Stu
dent
Fal
l/Prio
r S
umm
er 1
999
Firs
t-T
ime-
in-C
olle
ge S
tude
nts
Tra
cked
Thr
ough
Fal
l 200
1
Com
mun
ity, T
echn
ical
, and
Sta
te C
olle
ge S
tate
wid
e
Tot
alN
Col
%
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n S
tatu
sR
equi
red
Row
%N
Col
% R
ow%
Row
%N
ot R
equi
red
N C
ol%
Unk
now
nN
Col
%
Tot
al10
9,79
910
0%52
,337
100%
48%
43,7
2610
0%40
%13
,736
100%
13%
Firs
t Sem
este
r C
ours
e-Lo
adF
ull-T
ime
52,5
4048
%23
,407
45%
45%
24,1
5355
%46
%4,
980
36%
9%P
art-
Tim
e57
,259
52%
28,9
3055
%51
%19
,573
45%
34%
8,75
664
%15
%
Hig
h S
choo
l Dip
lom
aR
egul
ar34
,787
32%
12,8
4325
%37
%19
,308
44%
56%
2,63
619
%8%
Rec
omm
ende
d or
Adv
ance
d22
,822
21%
12,4
5524
%55
%8,
047
18%
35%
2,32
017
%10
%U
nkno
wn
52,1
9048
%27
,039
52%
52%
16,3
7137
%31
%8,
780
64%
17%
Hig
h S
choo
l Eco
nom
ical
ly D
isad
vant
age
Unk
now
n54
,316
49%
27,8
6553
%51
%17
,474
40%
32%
8,97
765
%17
%N
one
Iden
tifie
d42
,721
39%
20,0
7338
%47
%18
,833
43%
44%
3,81
528
%9%
Fre
e Lu
nch
9,61
39%
3,26
86%
34%
5,66
813
%59
%67
75%
7%R
educ
ed P
rice
Lunc
h2,
325
2%91
32%
39%
1,25
53%
54%
157
1%7%
Oth
er82
41%
218
0%26
%49
61%
60%
110
1%13
%
Initi
al T
est C
ateg
ory
Alte
rnat
ive
Tes
ts33
,556
31%
9,53
218
%28
%22
,321
51%
67%
1,70
312
%5%
TA
SP
(or
Sta
nfor
d A
chie
vem
ent T
e41
,115
37%
16,2
2031
%39
%21
,292
49%
52%
3,60
326
%9%
Unk
now
n35
,128
32%
26,5
8551
%76
%11
30%
0%8,
430
61%
24%
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n S
CH
262,
852
29,5
6011
%22
8,74
287
%4,
550
2%
c4, C.A
.)
Tot
al S
CH
Fal
l 199
9 -
Fal
l 200
1
Ret
entio
n M
ore
Tha
n O
ne S
emes
ter
4,02
1,69
7
90,2
6782
%
2,06
2,78
9
45,6
0287
%
51%
51%
1,57
8,41
9
35,1
3880
%
39%
39%
380,
489
9,52
769
%
9% 11%
Spr
ing/
Sum
mer
200
081
,282
74%
40,9
2378
%50
%31
,880
73%
39%
8,47
962
%10
%A
Y 2
000-
2001
69,2
4463
%36
,511
70%
53%
26,3
1160
%38
%6,
422
47%
9%F
all 2
001
49,4
5645
%26
,932
51%
54%
17,9
4741
%36
%4,
577
33%
9%T
rans
fer
from
2-Y
ear
to 4
-Yea
r18
,868
17%
13,5
5326
%72
%3,
838
9%20
%1,
477
11%
8%A
war
d D
urin
g F
all 1
999
- S
umm
er 2
001
5,25
65%
3,71
87%
71%
785
2%15
%75
35%
14%
Per
sist
ence
or
Aw
ard
52,8
5748
%29
,373
56%
56%
18,3
8742
%35
%5,
097
37%
10%
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n P
rovi
dec
Not
Pro
vide
d65
,978
60%
47,2
0990
%72
%8,
491
19%
13%
10,2
7875
%16
%P
rovi
ded
41,3
4238
%5,
128
10%
12%
35,2
3581
%85
%97
97%
2%U
nkno
wn
2,47
92%
00%
0%0
0%0%
2,47
918
%10
0%
Mat
h T
AS
P O
blig
atio
n M
etT
AS
P M
et63
,277
58%
52,3
3710
0%83
%10
,334
24%
16%
606
4%1%
TA
SP
Not
Met
44,0
4340
%0
0%0%
33,3
9276
%76
%10
,651
78%
24%
Unk
now
n2,
479
2%0
0%0%
00%
0%2,
479
18%
100%
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n P
rovi
dec
Not
Pro
vide
dT
AS
P M
et51
,397
47%
47,2
0990
%92
%3,
643
8%7%
545
4%1%
TA
SP
Not
Met
14,5
8113
%0
0%0%
4,84
811
%33
%9,
733
71%
67%
Pro
vide
dT
AS
P M
et11
,880
11%
5,12
810
%43
%6,
691
15%
56%
610%
1%B
-10
TA
SP
Not
Met
29,4
6227
%0
0%0%
28,5
4465
%97
%91
87%
3%D
ev. E
d. a
nd T
AS
P S
tatu
s U
nkno
w2,
479
2%0
0%0%
00%
0%2,
479
18%
100%
App
endi
x B
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n by
Cha
ract
eris
tics
of In
stitu
tion,
Pro
gram
, and
Stu
dent
Fal
l/Prio
r S
umm
er 1
999
Firs
t-T
ime-
in-C
olle
ge S
tude
nts
Tra
cked
Thr
ough
Fal
l 200
1
Com
mun
ity, T
echn
ical
, and
Sta
te C
olle
ge S
tate
wid
e
Tot
alN
Col
%
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n S
tatu
s -
Req
uire
dN
Col
% R
ow%
----
--U
nkno
wn
N C
ol%
Row
%N
ot R
equi
red
N C
ol%
Row
%
Tot
al10
9,79
910
0%52
,337
100%
48%
43,7
2610
0%40
%13
,736
100%
13%
Dev
. Ed.
Not
Pro
vide
dT
AS
P M
etM
ath
Dev
elop
men
tal E
duca
tioi
8,47
56,
531
77%
1,90
222
%42
0%T
otal
SC
H F
all 1
999
- F
all 2
002,
036,
745
1,83
1,36
790
%17
7,69
59%
27,6
831%
Ret
entio
n M
ore
Tha
n O
ne S
en44
,628
41%
40,7
4278
%91
%3,
372
8%8%
514
4%1%
Enr
olle
d S
prin
g/S
umm
er 2
000
40,1
7337
%36
,569
70%
91%
3,14
17%
8%46
33%
1%E
nrol
led
AY
200
0-20
0135
,656
32%
32,2
2462
%90
%2,
963
7%8%
469
3%1%
Enr
olle
d F
all 2
001
26,7
8324
%24
,156
46%
90%
2,24
25%
8%38
53%
1%T
rans
fer
from
2-Y
ear
to 4
-Yea
l14
,430
13%
13,0
6225
%91
%1,
075
2%7%
293
2%2%
Aw
ard
Dur
ing
Fal
l 199
9 -
Sum
i3,
622
3%3,
348
6%92
%23
11%
6%43
0%1%
Per
sist
ence
or
Aw
ard
29,1
3227
%26
,384
50%
91%
2,34
95%
8%39
93%
1%T
AS
P N
ot M
etM
ath
Dev
elop
men
tal E
duca
tioi
433
00%
409
94%
246%
Tot
al S
CH
Fal
l 199
9 -
Fal
l 200
381,
529
00%
96,5
4725
%28
4,98
275
%R
eten
tion
Mor
e T
han
One
Sen
9,56
19%
00%
0%2,
594
6%27
%6,
967
51%
73%
Enr
olle
d S
prin
g/S
umm
er 2
000
8,35
58%
00%
0%2,
165
5%26
%6,
190
45%
74%
Enr
olle
d A
Y 2
000-
2001
6,06
86%
00%
0%1,
316
3%22
%4,
752
35%
78%
Enr
olle
d F
all 2
001
4,48
34%
00%
0%1,
067
2%24
%3,
416
25%
76%
Tra
nsfe
r fr
om 2
-Yea
r to
4-Y
eai
1,22
11%
00%
0%26
01%
21%
961
7%79
%A
war
d D
urin
g F
all 1
999
- S
umi
610
1%0
0%0%
112
0%18
%49
84%
82%
Per
sist
ence
or
Aw
ard
4,91
04%
00%
0%1,
154
3%24
%3,
756
27%
76%
Dev
. Ed.
Pro
vide
dT
AS
P M
etM
ath
Dev
elop
men
tal E
duca
tioi
64,9
8223
,029
35%
41,6
5864
%29
50%
4.1.
Tot
al S
CH
Fal
l 199
9 -
Fal
l 200
597,
581
231,
422
39%
363,
020
61%
3,13
91%
Ali
Ret
entio
n M
ore
Tha
n O
ne S
en11
,457
10%
4,86
09%
42%
6,53
715
%57
%60
0%1%
Enr
olle
d S
prin
g/S
umm
er 2
000
10,6
1910
%4,
354
8%41
%6,
210
14%
58%
550%
1%E
nrol
led
AY
200
0-20
0110
,436
10%
4,28
78%
41%
6,09
214
%58
%57
0%1%
Enr
olle
d F
all 2
001
7,43
17%
2,77
65%
37%
4,61
111
%62
%44
0%1%
Tra
nsfe
r fr
om 2
-Yea
r to
4-Y
eal
1,76
02%
491
1%28
%1,
254
3%71
%15
0%1%
Aw
ard
Dur
ing
Fal
l 199
9 -
Sum
i63
71%
370
1%58
%26
31%
41%
40%
1%P
ersi
sten
ce o
r A
war
d7,
789
7%2,
989
6%38
%4,
752
11%
61%
480%
1%T
AS
P N
ot M
etM
ath
Dev
elop
men
tal E
duca
tioi
188,
962
00%
184,
773
98%
4,18
92%
Tot
al S
CH
Fal
l 199
9 -
Fal
l 200
961,
950
00%
941,
157
98%
20,7
932%
Ret
entio
n M
ore
Tha
n O
ne S
en23
,241
21%
00%
0%22
,635
52%
97%
606
4%3%
Enr
olle
d S
prin
g/S
umm
er 2
000
20,8
9219
%0
0%0%
20,3
6447
%97
%52
84%
3%E
nrol
led
AY
200
0-20
0116
,312
15%
00%
0%15
,940
36%
98%
372
3%2%
Enr
olle
d F
all 2
001
10,2
749%
00%
0%10
,027
23%
98%
247
2%2%
Tra
nsfe
r fr
om 2
-Yea
r to
4-Y
eal
1,26
81%
00%
0%1,
249
3%99
%19
0%1%
Aw
ard
Dur
ing
Fal
l 199
9 -
Sum
i18
20%
00%
0%17
90%
98%
30%
2%P
ersi
sten
ce o
r A
war
d10
,381
9%0
0%0%
10,1
3223
%98
%24
92%
2%D
ev. E
d. a
nd T
AS
P S
tatu
s U
nkno
wn
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
i0
0N
/A0
N/A
0N
/AT
otal
SC
H F
all 1
999
- F
all 2
0043
,892
00%
00%
43,8
9210
0%R
eten
tion
Mor
e T
han
One
Sen
1,38
01%
00%
0%0
0%0%
1,38
010
%10
0%E
nrol
led
Spr
ing/
Sum
mer
200
01,
243
1%0
0%0%
00%
0%1,
243
9%10
0%E
nrol
led
AY
200
0-20
0177
21%
00%
0%0
0%0%
772
6%10
0%E
nrol
led
Fal
l 200
148
50%
00%
0%0
0%0%
485
4%10
0%T
rans
fer
from
2-Y
ear
to 4
-Yea
l18
90%
00%
0%0
0%0%
189
1%10
0%B
-11
Aw
ard
Dur
ing
Fal
l 199
9 -
Sum
i20
50%
00%
0%0
0%0%
205
1%10
0%P
ersi
sten
ce o
r A
war
d64
51%
00%
0%0
0%0%
645
5%10
0%
App
endi
x B
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n by
Cha
ract
eris
tics
of In
stitu
tion,
Pro
gram
, and
Stu
dent
Fal
l/Prio
r S
umm
er 1
999
Firs
t-T
ime-
in-C
olle
ge S
tude
nts
Tra
cked
Thr
ough
Fal
l 200
1
Com
mun
ity, T
echn
ical
, and
Sta
te C
olle
ge S
tate
wid
e
----
----
----
----
- M
ath
Dev
elop
men
tal E
duca
tion
Sta
tus
----
----
----
----
-T
otal
NC
ol%
Not
Req
uire
dN
Col
% R
ow%
Req
uire
dN
Col
% R
ow%
Unk
now
nN
Col
% R
ow%
Tot
al10
9,79
910
0%52
,337
100%
48%
43,7
2610
0%40
%13
,736
100%
13%
Per
sist
or
Rec
eive
Aw
ard
52,8
5748
%29
,373
56%
56%
18,3
8742
%35
%5,
097
37%
10%
TA
SP
Met
36,9
2134
%29
,373
56%
80%
7,10
116
%19
%44
73%
1%D
ev. E
d. N
ot P
rovi
ded
29,1
3227
%26
,384
50%
91%
2,34
95%
8%39
93%
1%D
ev. E
d. P
rovi
ded
7,78
97%
2,98
96%
38%
4,75
211
%61
%48
0%1%
TA
SP
Not
Met
15,2
9114
%0
0%0%
11,2
8626
%74
%4,
005
29%
26%
Dev
. Ed.
Not
Pro
vide
d4,
910
4%0
0%0%
1,15
43%
24%
3,75
627
%76
%D
ev. E
d. P
rovi
ded
10,3
819%
00%
0%10
,132
23%
98%
249
2%2%
TA
SP
Sta
tus
and
Dev
. Ed.
Unk
now
645
1%0
0%0%
00%
0%64
55%
100%
Did
Not
Per
sist
or
Rec
eive
Aw
ard
56,9
4252
%22
,964
44%
40%
25,3
3958
%44
%8,
639
63%
15%
TA
SP
Met
26,3
5624
%22
,964
44%
87%
3,23
37%
12%
159
1%1%
Dev
. Ed.
Not
Pro
vide
d22
,265
20%
20,8
2540
%94
%1,
294
3%6%
146
1%1%
Dev
. Ed.
Pro
vide
d4,
091
4%2,
139
4%52
%1,
939
4%47
%13
0%0%
TA
SP
Not
Met
28,7
5226
%0
0%0%
22,1
0651
%77
%6,
646
48%
23%
Dev
. Ed.
Not
Pro
vide
d9,
671
9%0
0%0%
3,69
48%
38%
5,97
744
%62
%D
ev. E
d. P
rovi
ded
19,0
8117
%0
0%0%
18,4
1242
%96
%66
95%
4%T
AS
P S
tatu
s an
d D
ev. E
d. U
nkno
w1,
834
2%0
0%0%
00%
0%1,
834
13%
100%
B-1
2
App
endi
x B
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n by
Cha
ract
eris
tics
of In
stitu
tion,
Pro
gram
, and
Stu
dent
Fal
l/Prio
r S
umm
er 1
999
Firs
t-T
ime-
in-C
olle
ge S
tude
nts
Tra
cked
Thr
ough
Fal
l 200
1
Com
mun
ity a
nd S
tate
Col
lege
Sta
tew
ide
- A
cade
mic
Tot
alN
Col
%N
ot R
equi
red
N C
ol%
Row
%
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n S
tatu
sR
equi
red
N C
ol%
Row
%U
nkno
wn
N C
ol%
Row
%
Tot
al65
,290
100%
31,0
7910
0% 4
8%26
,556
100%
41%
7,65
510
0%12
%
Inst
itutio
n Le
vel
Uni
vers
ity0
0%0
0% N
/A0
0% N
/A0
0% N
/AC
TC
65,2
9010
0%31
,079
100%
48%
26,5
5610
0% 4
1%7,
655
100%
12%
Typ
e M
ajor
Aca
dem
ic65
,290
100%
31,0
7910
0% 4
8%26
,556
100%
41%
7,65
510
0%12
%T
echn
ical
00%
00%
N/A
00%
N/A
00%
N/A
Tec
h P
rep
00%
00%
N/A
00%
N/A
00%
N/A
Inst
itutio
n T
ype/
Typ
e M
ajor
C/S
C-A
cade
mic
65,2
9010
0%31
,079
100%
48%
26,5
5610
0% 4
1%7,
655
100%
12%
C/S
C-T
echn
ical
00%
00%
N/A
00%
N/A
00%
N/A
TS
TC
/LU
IT0
0%0
0% N
/A0
0% N
/A0
0% N
/AU
nive
rsity
-Aca
dem
ic0
0%0
0% N
/A0
0% N
/A0
0% N
/AR
emot
e C
ampu
sC
orre
ctio
nal I
nstit
utio
n30
00%
520%
17%
152
1% 5
1%96
1% 3
2%
Gen
der
Fem
ale
35,7
1255
%16
,463
53%
46%
15,1
9257
% 4
3%4,
057
53%
11%
Mal
e29
,578
45%
14,6
1647
% 4
9%11
,364
43%
38%
3,59
847
% 1
2%E
thni
city
Whi
te40
,055
61%
21,6
1670
% 5
4%13
,641
51%
34%
4,79
863
% 1
2%B
lack
5,53
58%
1,62
35%
29%
3,33
613
% 6
0%57
68%
10%
His
pani
c16
,525
25%
6,14
620
% 3
7%8,
711
33%
53%
1,66
822
%10
%A
sian
2,01
73%
1,15
34%
57%
485
2% 2
4%37
95%
19%
Am
eric
an In
dian
318
0%13
30%
42%
147
1% 4
6%38
0% 1
2%In
tern
atio
nal
608
1%30
21%
50%
156
1% 2
6%15
02%
25%
Unk
now
n23
20%
106
0% 4
6%80
0% 3
4%46
1% 2
0%
Age
18-1
935
,777
55%
15,1
2649
% 4
2%17
,292
65%
48%
3,35
944
%9%
20-2
14,
901
8%1,
725
6% 3
5%2,
575
10%
53%
601
8%12
%22
-24
3,09
55%
1,03
53%
33%
1,59
56%
52%
465
6%15
%25
-29
2,56
54%
779
3% 3
0%1,
232
5% 4
8%55
47%
22%
30-3
41,
457
2%35
11%
24%
600
2% 4
1%50
67%
35%
35-4
01,
270
2%33
31%
26%
470
2% 3
7%46
76%
37%
41-5
01,
109
2%31
81%
29%
322
1% 2
9%46
96%
42%
Ove
r 50
376
1%11
50%
31%
540%
14%
207
3% 5
5%U
nder
18
14,7
2123
%11
,291
36%
77%
2,40
89%
16%
1,02
213
%7%
Unk
now
n19
0%6
0% 3
2%8
0% 4
2%5
0% 2
6%
Edu
catio
nal O
bjec
tive
Unk
now
n91
51%
00%
0%0
0%0%
915
12%
100
%N
on-D
egre
e S
eeki
ng8,
582
13%
4,51
715
% 5
3%3,
089
12%
36%
976
13%
11%
Cer
tific
ate
- T
AS
P L
iabl
e23
20%
100
0% 4
3%10
10%
44%
310%
13%
Ass
ocia
te D
egre
e34
,270
52%
14,4
9947
% 4
2%15
,338
58%
45%
4,43
358
% 1
3%B
acca
laur
eate
Deg
ree
9,34
014
%5,
086
16%
54%
3,70
114
% 4
0%55
37%
6%U
ndet
erm
ined
10,8
6217
%5,
919
19%
54%
4,20
316
% 3
9%74
010
%7%
Cer
tific
ate
- T
AS
P W
aive
d1,
089
2%95
83%
88%
124
0% 1
1%7
0%1%
t4=
&
App
endi
x B
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n by
Cha
ract
eris
tics
of In
stitu
tion,
Pro
gram
, and
Stu
dent
Fal
l/Prio
r S
umm
er 1
999
Firs
t-T
ime-
in-C
olle
ge S
tude
nts
Tra
cked
Thr
ough
Fal
l 200
1
Com
mun
ity a
nd S
tate
Col
lege
Sta
tew
ide
- A
cade
mic
B-1
4
Tot
al
Firs
t Sem
este
r C
ours
e-Lo
adF
ull-T
ime
Par
t-T
ime
Hig
h S
choo
l Dip
lom
aR
egul
arR
ecom
men
ded
or A
dvan
ced
Unk
now
n
Hig
h S
choo
l Eco
nom
ical
ly D
isad
vant
age
Unk
now
nN
one
Iden
tifie
dF
ree
Lunc
hR
educ
ed P
rice
Lunc
hO
ther
Initi
al T
est C
ateg
ory
Alte
rnat
ive
Tes
tsT
AS
P (
or S
tanf
ord
Ach
ieve
men
t Te
Unk
now
n
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n S
CH
Tot
al S
CH
Fal
l 199
9 -
Fal
l 200
1
Ret
entio
n M
ore
Tha
n O
ne S
emes
ter
Spr
ing/
Sum
mer
200
0A
Y 2
000-
2001
Fal
l 200
1T
rans
fer
from
2-Y
ear
to 4
-Yea
rA
war
d D
urin
g F
all 1
999
- S
umm
er 2
001
Per
sist
ence
or
Aw
ard
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n P
rovi
de(
Not
Pro
vide
dP
rovi
ded
Unk
now
n
Mat
h T
AS
P O
blig
atio
n M
etT
AS
P M
etT
AS
P N
ot M
etU
nkno
wn
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n P
rovi
de(
Not
Pro
vide
dT
AS
P M
etT
AS
P N
ot M
etP
rovi
ded
TA
SP
Met
TA
SP
Not
Met
Dev
. Ed.
and
TA
SP
Sta
tus
Unk
now
Tot
alN
65,2
90
32,6
6032
,630
20,0
6315
,335
29,8
92
31,0
8227
,275
5,08
71,
304
542
19,5
1526
,745
19,0
30
158,
881
2,54
5,04
9
55,7
4149
,960
44,5
7133
,240
14,8
331,
818
34,0
35
39,8
4024
,535 91
5
38,1
2626
,249 91
5
31,1
788,
662
6,94
817
,587
915
Col
%
100% 50
%50
%
31%
23%
46%
48%
42%
8% 2% 1%
30%
41%
29%
85%
77%
68%
51%
23%
3% 52%
61%
38%
1%
58%
40% 1%
48%
13%
11%
27% 1%
----
----
----
----
---
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n S
tatu
s -
Not
Req
uire
dR
equi
red
N C
ol%
Row
%N
Col
% R
ow%
31,0
79 1
00%
48%
26,5
56 1
00%
41%
14,1
5746
% 4
3%15
,299
58%
47%
16,9
2254
% 5
2%11
,257
42%
34%
6,59
321
% 3
3%11
,743
44%
59%
8,36
027
% 5
5%5,
303
20%
35%
16,1
2652
% 5
4%9,
510
36%
32%
16,5
5753
% 5
3%10
,147
38%
33%
12,5
4140
% 4
6%12
,048
45%
44%
1,41
75%
28%
3,26
312
% 6
4%45
31%
35%
753
3% 5
8%11
10%
20%
345
1% 6
4%
5,48
518
% 2
8%12
,782
48%
65%
10,4
2934
% 3
9%13
,701
52%
51%
15,1
6549
% 8
0%73
0%0%
16,9
1511
%13
9,08
988
%1,
325,
278
52%
983,
820
39%
28,3
3691
% 5
1%21
,712
82%
39%
25,3
2781
% 5
1%19
,673
74%
39%
23,9
5877
% 5
4%16
,530
62%
37%
18,6
9260
% 5
6%11
,446
43%
34%
10,9
0335
% 7
4%2,
855
11%
19%
1,17
74%
65%
353
1% 1
9%
19,1
8962
% 5
6%11
,593
44%
34%
28,3
5391
% 7
1%5,
353
20%
13%
2,72
69%
11%
21,2
0380
% 8
6%0
0%0%
00%
0%
31,0
79 1
00%
82%
6,62
525
% 1
7%0
0%0%
19,9
3175
% 7
6%0
0%0%
00%
0%
28,3
5391
% 9
1%2,
440
9%8%
00%
0%2,
913
11%
34%
2,72
69%
39%
4,18
516
% 6
0%0
0%0%
17,0
1864
% 9
7%0
0%0%
00%
0%
Col
% R
ow%
100%
12%
42%
10%
58%
14%
23%
9%22
% 1
1%56
% 1
4%
57%
14%
35%
10%
5%8%
1%8%
1% 1
6%
16%
6%34
% 1
0%50
% 2
0% 2% 9%
74%
10%
65%
10%
53%
9%41
%9%
14%
7%4%
16%
42%
10%
80%
15%
8%2%
12%
100
%
6%1%
83%
24%
12%
100
%
5%1%
75%
66%
0%1%
7%3%
12%
100
%
Unk
now
nN
7,65
5
3,20
44,
451
1,72
71,
672
4,25
6
4,37
82,
686
407 98 86
1,24
82,
615
3,79
2
2,87
723
5,95
1
5,69
34,
960
4,08
33,
102
1,07
528
8
3,25
3
6,13
460
691
5
422
6,31
891
5
385
5,74
9
37 569
915
App
endi
x B
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n by
Cha
ract
eris
tics
of In
stitu
tion.
Pro
gram
, and
Stu
dent
Fal
l/Prio
r S
umm
er 1
999
Firs
t-T
ime-
in-C
olle
ge S
tude
nts
Tra
cked
Thr
ough
Fal
l 200
1
Com
mun
ity a
nd S
tate
Col
lege
Sta
tew
ide
- A
cade
mic
Tot
alN
Col
%N
ot R
equi
red
N C
ol%
Row
%
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n S
tatu
s --
--R
equi
red
N C
ol%
Row
%
-- Unk
now
nN
Col
% R
ow%
Tot
al65
,290
100%
31,0
7910
0%48
%26
,556
100%
41%
7,65
510
0%12
%D
ev. E
d. N
ot P
rovi
ded
TA
SP
Met
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
i6,
275
4,84
577
%1,
394
22%
361%
Tot
al S
CH
Fal
l 199
9 -
Fal
l 200
1,33
9,64
41,
199,
329
90%
120,
884
9%19
,431
1%R
eten
tion
Mor
e T
han
One
Sen
28,4
0744
%25
,763
83%
91%
2,28
29%
8%36
25%
1%E
nrol
led
Spr
ing/
Sum
mer
200
025
,469
39%
23,0
2274
%90
%2,
129
8%8%
318
4%1%
Enr
olle
d A
Y 2
000-
2001
24,0
2237
%21
,667
70%
90%
2,02
78%
8%32
84%
1%E
nrol
led
Fal
l 200
118
,913
29%
17,0
9055
%90
%1,
547
6%8%
276
4%1%
Tra
nsfe
r fr
om 2
-Yea
r to
4-Y
eal
11,5
9218
%10
,534
34%
91%
838
3%7%
220
3%2%
Aw
ard
Dur
ing
Fal
l 199
9 -
Sum
i1,
239
2%1,
080
3%87
%13
20%
11%
270%
2%P
ersi
sten
ce o
r A
war
d19
,421
30%
17,5
4356
%90
%1,
597
6%8%
281
4%1%
TA
SP
Not
Met
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
i26
40
0%25
597
%9
3%T
otal
SC
H F
all 1
999
- F
all 2
0024
4,12
30
0%58
,783
24%
185,
340
76%
Ret
entio
n M
ore
Tha
n O
ne S
en6,
027
9%0
0%0%
1,63
06%
27%
4,39
757
%73
%E
nrol
led
Spr
ing/
Sum
mer
200
05,
172
8%0
0%0%
1,34
25%
26%
3,83
050
%74
%E
nrol
led
AY
200
0-20
014,
039
6%0
0%0%
854
3%21
%3,
185
42%
79%
Enr
olle
d F
all 2
001
3,17
25%
00%
0%73
53%
23%
2,43
732
%77
%T
rans
fer
from
2-Y
ear
to 4
-Yea
l94
61%
00%
0%20
31%
21%
743
10%
79%
Aw
ard
Dur
ing
Fal
l 199
9 -
Sum
i21
40%
00%
0%32
0%15
%18
22%
85%
Per
sist
ence
or
Aw
ard
3,28
15%
00%
0%75
33%
23%
2,52
833
%77
%D
ev. E
d. P
rovi
ded
14:1
2hT
AS
P M
et
CO
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
i38
,245
12,0
7032
%26
,025
68%
150
0%T
otal
SC
H F
all 1
999
- F
all 2
0035
8,64
512
5,94
935
%23
0,79
764
%1,
899
1%R
eten
tion
Mor
e T
han
One
Sen
6,70
710
%2,
573
8%38
%4,
098
15%
61%
360%
1%E
nrol
led
Spr
ing/
Sum
mer
200
06,
257
10%
2,30
57%
37%
3,91
815
%63
%34
0%1%
Enr
olle
d A
Y 2
000-
2001
6,15
69%
2,29
17%
37%
3,83
014
%62
%35
0%1%
Enr
olle
d F
all 2
001
4,64
57%
1,60
25%
34%
3,01
511
%65
%28
0%1%
Tra
nsfe
r fr
om 2
-Yea
r to
4-Y
ew1,
303
2%36
91%
28%
922
3%71
%12
0%1%
Aw
ard
Dur
ing
Fal
l 199
9 -
Sum
i21
10%
970%
46%
112
0%53
%2
0%1%
Per
sist
ence
or
Aw
ard
4,72
87%
1,64
65%
35%
3,05
211
%65
%30
0%1%
TA
SP
Not
Met
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
i11
4,09
70
0%11
1,41
598
%2,
682
2%T
otal
SC
H F
all 1
999
- F
all 2
0058
6,99
10
0%57
3,35
698
%13
,635
2%R
eten
tion
Mor
e T
han
One
Sen
14,0
9222
%0
0%0%
13,7
0252
%97
%39
05%
3%E
nrol
led
Spr
ing/
Sum
mer
200
012
,615
19%
00%
0%12
,284
46%
97%
331
4%3%
Enr
olle
d A
Y 2
000-
2001
10,0
7215
%0
0%0%
9,81
937
%97
%25
33%
3%E
nrol
led
Fal
l 200
16,
309
10%
00%
0%6,
149
23%
97%
160
2%3%
Tra
nsfe
r fr
om 2
-Yea
r to
4-Y
eal
904
1%0
0%0%
892
3%99
%12
0%1%
Aw
ard
Dur
ing
Fal
l 199
9 -
Sum
i80
0%0
0%0%
770%
96%
30%
4%P
ersi
sten
ce o
r A
war
d6,
353
10%
00%
0%6,
191
23%
97%
162
2%3%
Dev
. Ed.
and
TA
SP
Sta
tus
Unk
now
nM
ath
Dev
elop
men
tal E
duca
tioi
00
N/A
0N
/A0
N/A
Tot
al S
CH
Fal
l 199
9 -
Fal
l 200
15,6
460
0%0
0%15
,646
100%
Ret
entio
n M
ore
Tha
n O
ne S
en50
81%
00%
0%0
0%0%
508
7%10
0%E
nrol
led
Spr
ing/
Sum
mer
200
044
71%
00%
0%0
0%0%
447
6%10
0%E
nrol
led
AY
200
0-20
0128
20%
00%
0%0
0%0%
282
4%10
0%E
nrol
led
Fal
l 200
120
10%
00%
0%0
0%0%
201
3%10
0%T
rans
fer
from
2-Y
ear
to 4
-Yea
l88
0%0
0%0%
00%
0%88
1%10
0%B
-15
Aw
ard
Dur
ing
Fal
l 199
9 -
Sum
i74
0%0
0%0%
00%
0%74
1%10
0%P
ersi
sten
ce o
r A
war
d25
20%
00%
0%0
0%0%
252
3%10
0%
App
endi
x B
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n by
Cha
ract
eris
tics
of In
stitu
tion,
Pro
gram
, and
Stu
dent
Fal
l/Prio
r S
umm
er 1
999
Firs
t-T
ime-
in-C
olle
ge S
tude
nts
Tra
cked
Thr
ough
Fal
l 200
1
Com
mun
ity a
nd S
tate
Col
lege
Sta
tew
ide
- A
cade
mic
Tot
alN
Col
%
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n S
tatu
sR
equi
red
N C
ol%
Row
%R
ow%
Not
Req
uire
dN
Col
% R
ow%
Unk
now
nN
Col
%T
otal
65,2
9010
0%31
,079
100%
48%
26,5
5610
0%41
%7,
655
100%
12%
Per
sist
or
Rec
eive
Aw
ard
34,0
3552
%19
,189
62%
56%
11,5
9344
%34
%3,
253
42%
10%
TA
SP
Met
24,1
4937
%19
,189
62%
79%
4,64
918
%19
%31
14%
1%D
ev. E
d. N
ot P
rovi
ded
19,4
2130
%17
,543
56%
90%
1,59
76%
8%28
14%
1%D
ev. E
d. P
rovi
ded
4,72
87%
1,64
65%
35%
3,05
211
%65
%30
0%1%
TA
SP
Not
Met
9,63
415
%0
0%0%
6,94
426
%72
%2,
690
35%
28%
Dev
. Ed.
Not
Pro
vide
d3,
281
5%0
0%0%
753
3%23
%2,
528
33%
77%
Dev
. Ed.
Pro
vide
d6,
353
10%
00%
0%6,
191
23%
97%
162
2%3%
TA
SP
Sta
tus
and
Dev
. Ed.
Unk
now
252
0%0
0%0%
00%
0%25
23%
100%
Did
Not
Per
sist
or
Rec
eive
Aw
ard
31,2
5548
%11
,890
38%
38%
14,9
6356
%48
%4,
402
58%
14%
TA
SP
Met
13,9
7721
%11
,890
38%
85%
1,97
67%
14%
111
1%1%
Dev
. Ed.
Not
Pro
vide
d11
,757
18%
10,8
1035
%92
%84
33%
7%10
41%
1%D
ev. E
d. P
rovi
ded
2,22
03%
1,08
03%
49%
1,13
34%
51%
70%
0%T
AS
P N
ot M
et16
,615
25%
00%
0%12
,987
49%
78%
3,62
847
%22
%D
ev. E
d. N
ot P
rovi
ded
5,38
18%
00%
0%2,
160
8%40
%3,
221
42%
60%
Dev
. Ed.
Pro
vide
d11
,234
17%
00%
0%10
,827
41%
96%
407
5%4%
TA
SP
Sta
tus
and
Dev
. Ed.
Unk
now
663
1%0
0%0%
00%
0%66
39%
100%
App
endi
x B
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n by
Cha
ract
eris
tics
of In
stitu
tion,
Pro
gram
, and
Stu
dent
Fal
l/Prio
r S
umm
er 1
999
Firs
t-T
ime-
in-C
olle
ge S
tude
nts
Tra
cked
Thr
ough
Fal
l 200
1
Com
mun
ity a
nd S
tate
Col
lege
Sta
tew
ide
Tec
hnic
al
Tot
alN
Col
%
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n S
tatu
sR
equi
red
N C
ol%
Row
%U
nkno
wn
N
Not
Req
uire
dN
Col
% R
ow%
Col
% R
ow%
Tot
al40
,623
100%
19,2
5110
0% 4
7%15
,743
100%
39%
5,62
910
0%14
%
Inst
itutio
n Le
vel
Uni
vers
ity0
0%0
0% N
/A0
0% N
/A0
0% N
/AC
TC
40,6
2310
0%19
,251
100%
47%
15,7
4310
0% 3
9%5,
629
100%
14%
Typ
e M
ajor
Aca
dem
ic0
0%0
0% N
/A0
0% N
/A0
0% N
/AT
echn
ical
30,9
8476
%14
,809
77%
48%
11,7
1474
% 3
8%4,
461
79%
14%
Tec
h P
rep
9,63
924
%4,
442
23%
46%
4,02
926
% 4
2%1,
168
21%
12%
Inst
itutio
n T
ype/
Typ
e M
ajor
C/S
C-A
cade
mic
00%
00%
N/A
00%
N/A
00%
N/A
C/S
C-T
echn
ical
40,6
2310
0%19
,251
100%
47%
15,7
4310
0% 3
9%5,
629
100%
14%
TS
TC
/LU
IT0
0%0
0% N
/A0
0% N
/A0
0% N
/AU
nive
rsity
-Aca
dem
ic0
0%0
0% N
/A0
0% N
/A0
0% N
/AR
emot
e C
ampu
sC
orre
ctio
nal I
nstit
utio
n69
0%62
0% 9
0%5
0%7%
20%
3%
Gen
der
Fem
ale
22,1
9655
%9,
998
52%
45%
9,10
758
% 4
1%3,
091
55%
14%
Mal
e18
,427
45%
9,25
348
% 5
0%6,
636
42%
36%
2,53
845
% 1
4%E
thni
dty
Whi
te20
,592
51%
11,0
2257
% 5
4%6,
779
43%
33%
2,79
150
% 1
4%B
lack
5,66
914
%2,
075
11%
37%
2,78
818
% 4
9%80
614
%14
%H
ispa
nic
11,5
1128
%4,
870
25%
42%
5,39
334
% 4
7%1,
248
22%
11%
Asi
an1,
599
4%76
74%
48%
423
3% 2
6%40
97%
26%
Am
eric
an In
dian
193
0%86
0% 4
5%80
1% 4
1%27
0%14
%In
tern
atio
nal
830
2%32
32%
39%
210
1% 2
5%29
75%
36%
C.It
Unk
now
n22
91%
108
1% 4
7%70
0% 3
1%51
1% 2
2%C
DA
ge18
-19
18,8
0446
%8,
369
43%
45%
9,25
859
% 4
9%1,
177
21%
6%20
-21
4,01
810
%1,
764
9% 4
4%1,
827
12%
45%
427
8% 1
1%22
-24
3,34
88%
1,53
38%
46%
1,29
28%
39%
523
9%16
%25
-29
3,62
79%
1,67
99%
46%
1,13
57%
31%
813
14%
22%
30-3
42,
264
6%94
65%
42%
564
4% 2
5%75
413
% 3
3%35
-40
2,03
55%
904
5% 4
4%42
03%
21%
711
13%
35%
41-5
02,
000
5%92
45%
46%
308
2% 1
5%76
814
% 3
8%O
ver
5069
42%
403
2% 5
8%50
0%7%
241
4% 3
5%U
nder
18
3,81
39%
2,72
114
% 7
1%88
16%
23%
211
4%6%
Unk
now
n20
0%8
0% 4
0%8
0% 4
0%4
0% 2
0%
Edu
catio
nal O
bjec
tive
Unk
now
n1,
402
3%0
0%0%
00%
0%1,
402
25%
100
%N
on-D
egre
e S
eeki
ng11
,662
29%
4,79
625
% 4
1%5,
395
34%
46%
1,47
126
%13
%C
ertif
icat
e -
TA
SP
Lia
ble
1,30
03%
763
4% 5
9%35
02%
27%
187
3% 1
4%A
ssoc
iate
Deg
ree
14,0
1434
%4,
838
25%
35%
7,43
047
% 5
3%1,
746
31%
12%
Bac
cala
urea
te D
egre
e1,
920
5%1,
035
5% 5
4%78
85%
41%
972%
5%U
ndet
erm
ined
4,12
410
%2,
051
11%
50%
1,43
79%
35%
636
11%
15%
Cer
tific
ate
- T
AS
P W
aive
d6,
201
15%
5,76
830
% 9
3%34
32%
6%90
2%1%
B-1
7
B-1
8
App
endi
x B
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n by
Cha
ract
eris
tics
of In
stitu
tion,
Pro
gram
, and
Stu
dent
Fal
l/Prio
r S
umm
er 1
999
Firs
t-T
ime-
in-C
olle
ge S
tude
nts
Tra
cked
Thr
ough
Fal
l 200
1
Com
mun
ity a
nd S
tate
Col
lege
Sta
tew
ide
Tec
hnic
al
----
----
----
----
----
---
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n S
tatu
s --
----
----
----
---
Tot
alN
Col
%N
ot R
equi
red
N C
ol%
Row
%R
equi
red
N C
ol%
Row
%U
nkno
wn
N C
ol%
Row
%
Tot
al40
,623
100%
19,2
5110
0%47
%15
,743
100%
39%
5,62
910
0%14
%
Firs
t Sem
este
r C
ours
e-Lo
adF
ull-T
ime
18,5
3346
%8,
647
45%
47%
8,22
552
%44
%1,
661
30%
9%P
art-
Tim
e22
,090
54%
10,6
0455
%48
%7,
518
48%
34%
3,96
870
%18
%
Hig
h S
choo
l Dip
lom
aR
egul
ar13
,171
32%
5,47
428
%42
%6,
885
44%
52%
812
14%
6%R
ecom
men
ded
or A
dvan
ced
6,78
517
%3,
693
19%
54%
2,52
916
%37
%56
310
%8%
Unk
now
n20
,667
51%
10,0
8452
%49
%6,
329
40%
31%
4,25
476
%21
%
Hig
h S
choo
l Eco
nom
ical
ly D
isad
vant
age
Unk
now
n21
,515
53%
10,4
4454
%49
%6,
751
43%
31%
4,32
077
%20
%N
one
Iden
tifie
d14
,087
35%
6,80
635
%48
%6,
262
40%
44%
1,01
918
%7%
Fre
e Lu
nch
3,87
910
%1,
516
8%39
%2,
138
14%
55%
225
4%6%
Red
uced
Pric
e Lu
nch
897
2%40
02%
45%
447
3%50
%50
1%6%
Oth
er24
51%
850%
35%
145
1%59
%15
0%6%
Initi
al T
est C
ateg
ory
Alte
rnat
ive
Tes
ts13
,193
32%
3,78
120
%29
%8,
999
57%
68%
413
7%3%
TA
SP
(or
Sta
nfor
d A
chie
vem
ent T
e12
,426
31%
4,86
225
%39
%6,
705
43%
54%
859
15%
7%
Unk
now
n15
,004
37%
10,6
0855
%71
%39
0%0%
4,35
777
%29
%
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n S
CH
95,2
8310
,792
11%
82,9
4787
%1,
544
2%T
otal
SC
H F
all 1
999
Fal
l 200
11,
311,
737
653,
566
50%
530,
234
40%
127,
937
10%
Ret
entio
n M
ore
Tha
n O
ne S
emes
ter
31,2
4677
%15
,516
81%
50%
12,2
3878
%39
%3,
492
62%
11%
Spr
ing/
Sum
mer
200
028
,178
69%
13,9
1572
%49
%11
,076
70%
39%
3,18
757
%11
%A
Y 2
000-
2001
22,5
4255
%11
,449
59%
51%
8,97
057
%40
%2,
123
38%
9%F
all 2
001
15,0
8937
%7,
690
40%
51%
6,02
138
%40
%1,
378
24%
9%T
rans
fer
from
2-Y
ear
to 4
-Yea
r3,
801
9%2,
509
13%
66%
916
6%24
%37
67%
10%
Aw
ard
Dur
ing
Fal
l 199
9 S
umm
er 2
001
2,68
47%
1,99
510
%74
%32
62%
12%
363
6%14
%
Per
sist
ence
or
Aw
ard
17,0
3042
%9,
150
48%
54%
6,22
640
%37
%1,
654
29%
10%
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n P
rovi
de(
Not
Pro
vide
d24
,044
59%
17,2
5290
%72
%2,
909
18%
12%
3,88
369
%16
%P
rovi
ded
15,1
7737
%1,
999
10%
13%
12,8
3482
%85
%34
46%
2%U
nkno
wn
1,40
23%
00%
0%0
0%0%
1,40
225
%10
0%
Mat
h T
AS
P O
blig
atio
n M
etT
AS
P M
et22
,738
56%
19,2
5110
0%85
%3,
321
21%
15%
166
3%1%
TA
SP
Not
Met
16,4
8341
%0
0%0%
12,4
2279
%75
%4,
061
72%
25%
Unk
now
n1,
402
3%0
0%0%
00%
0%1,
402
25%
100%
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n P
rovi
dec
Not
Pro
vide
dT
AS
P M
et18
,534
46%
17,2
5290
%93
%1,
137
7%6%
145
3%1%
TA
SP
Not
Met
5,51
014
%0
0%0%
1,77
211
%32
%3,
738
66%
68%
Pro
vide
dT
AS
P M
et4,
204
10%
1,99
910
%48
%2,
184
14%
52%
210%
0%T
AS
P N
ot M
et10
,973
27%
00%
0%10
,650
68%
97%
323
6%3%
Dev
. Ed.
and
TA
SP
Sta
tus
Unk
now
1,40
23%
00%
0%0
0%0%
1,40
225
%10
0%
App
endi
x B
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n by
Cha
ract
eris
tics
of In
stitu
tion,
Pro
gram
, and
Stu
dent
Fal
l/Prio
r S
umm
er 1
999
Firs
t-T
ime-
in-C
olle
ge S
tude
nts
Tra
cked
Thr
ough
Fal
l 200
1
Com
mun
ity a
nd S
tate
Col
lege
Sta
tew
ide
- T
echn
ical
Tot
alN
Col
%
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
nR
equi
red
N C
ol%
Sta
tus
Row
%N
ot R
equi
red
N C
ol%
Row
%R
ow%
Unk
now
nN
Col
%
Tot
al40
,623
100%
19,2
5110
0%47
%15
,743
100%
39%
5,62
910
0%14
%D
ev. E
d. N
ot P
rovi
ded
TA
SP
Met
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
r2,
200
1,68
677
%50
823
%6
0%T
otal
SC
H F
all 1
999
- F
all 2
0062
7,53
556
7,30
390
%52
,722
8%7,
510
1%R
eten
tion
Mor
e T
han
One
Sen
14,7
6536
%13
,604
71%
92%
1,02
47%
7%13
72%
1%E
nrol
led
Spr
ing/
Sum
mer
200
013
,304
33%
12,2
2463
%92
%94
86%
7%13
22%
1%E
nrol
led
AY
200
0-20
0110
,732
26%
9,72
751
%91
%87
76%
8%12
82%
1%E
nrol
led
Fal
l 200
17,
403
18%
6,64
835
%90
%65
64%
9%99
2%1%
Tra
nsfe
r fr
om 2
-Yea
r to
4-Y
eal
2,68
67%
2,39
812
%89
%22
11%
8%67
1%2%
Aw
ard
Dur
ing
Fal
l 199
9 -
Sum
i1,
909
5%1,
804
9%94
%90
1%5%
150%
1%P
ersi
sten
ce o
r A
war
d8,
816
22%
8,00
342
%91
%70
54%
8%10
82%
1%T
AS
P N
ot M
etM
ath
Dev
elop
men
tal E
duca
tioi
169
00%
154
91%
159%
Tot
al S
CH
Fal
l 199
9 -
Fal
l 200
123,
575
00%
33,6
1327
%89
,962
73%
Ret
entio
n M
ore
Tha
n O
ne S
en3,
247
8%0
0%0%
874
6%27
%2,
373
42%
73%
Enr
olle
d S
prin
g/S
umm
er 2
000
2,91
37%
00%
0%74
55%
26%
2,16
839
%74
%E
nrol
led
AY
200
0-20
011,
863
5%0
0%0%
418
3%22
%1,
445
26%
78%
Enr
olle
d F
all 2
001
1,24
33%
00%
0%30
82%
25%
935
17%
75%
Tra
nsfe
r fr
om 2
-Yea
r to
4-Y
eal
257
1%0
0%0%
510%
20%
206
4%80
%A
war
d D
urin
g F
all 1
999
- S
umi
309
1%0
0%0%
630%
20%
246
4%80
%P
ersi
sten
ce o
r A
war
d1,
480
4%0
0%0%
360
2%24
%1,
120
20%
76%
Dev
. Ed.
Pro
vide
dT
AS
P M
et
CA
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
i23
,287
9,10
639
%14
,051
60%
130
1%
IN3
Tot
al S
CH
Fal
l 199
9 -
Fal
l 200
197,
657
86,2
6344
%11
0,37
756
%1,
017
1%R
eten
tion
Mor
e T
han
One
Sen
4,05
510
%1,
912
10%
47%
2,12
213
%52
%21
0%1%
Enr
olle
d S
prin
g/S
umm
er 2
000
3,68
69%
1,69
19%
46%
1,97
713
%54
%18
0%0%
Enr
olle
d A
Y 2
000-
2001
3,71
59%
1,72
29%
46%
1,97
313
%53
%20
0%1%
Enr
olle
d F
all 2
001
2,48
46%
1,04
25%
42%
1,42
89%
57%
140%
1%T
rans
fer
from
2-Y
ear
to 4
-Yea
l42
01%
111
1%26
%30
62%
73%
30%
1%A
war
d D
urin
g F
all 1
999
- S
umi
276
1%19
11%
69%
831%
30%
20%
1%P
ersi
sten
ce o
r A
war
d2,
641
7%1,
147
6%43
%1,
478
9%56
%16
0%1%
TA
SP
Not
Met
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
i69
,627
00%
68,2
3498
%1,
393
2%T
otal
SC
H F
all 1
999
- F
all 2
0034
0,13
50
0%33
3,52
298
%6,
613
2%R
eten
tion
Mor
e T
han
One
Sen
8,42
021
%0
0%0%
8,21
852
%98
%20
24%
2%E
nrol
led
Spr
ing/
Sum
mer
200
07,
589
19%
00%
0%7,
406
47%
98%
183
3%2%
Enr
olle
d A
Y 2
000-
2001
5,81
714
%0
0%0%
5,70
236
%98
%11
52%
2%E
nrol
led
Fal
l 200
13,
715
9%0
0%0%
3,62
923
%98
%86
2%2%
Tra
nsfe
r fr
om 2
-Yea
r to
4-Y
eal
345
1%0
0%0%
338
2%98
%7
0%2%
Aw
ard
Dur
ing
Fal
l 199
9 -
Sum
i90
0%0
0%0%
901%
100%
00%
0%P
ersi
sten
ce o
r A
war
d3,
769
9%0
0%0%
3,68
323
%98
%86
2%2%
Dev
. Ed.
and
TA
SP
Sta
tus
Unk
now
nM
ath
Dev
elop
men
tal E
duca
tior
00
N/A
0N
/A0
N/A
Tot
al S
CH
Fal
l 199
9 -
Fal
l 200
22,8
350
0%0
0%22
,835
100%
Ret
entio
n M
ore
Tha
n O
ne S
en75
92%
00%
0%0
0%0%
759
13%
100%
Enr
olle
d S
prin
g/S
umm
er 2
000
686
2%0
0%0%
00%
0%68
612
%10
0%E
nrol
led
AY
200
0-20
0141
51%
00%
0%0
0%0%
415
7%10
0%E
nrol
led
Fal
l 200
124
41%
00%
0%0
0%0%
244
4%10
0%T
rans
fer
from
2-Y
ear
to 4
-Yea
l93
0%0
0%0%
00%
0%93
2%10
0%B
-19
Aw
ard
Dur
ing
Fal
l 199
9 -
Sum
i10
00%
00%
0%0
0%0%
100
2%10
0%P
ersi
sten
ce o
r A
war
d32
41%
00%
0%0
0%0%
324
6%10
0%
App
endi
x B
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n by
Cha
ract
eris
tics
of In
stitu
tion,
Pro
gram
, and
Stu
dent
Fal
l/Prio
r S
umm
er 1
999
Firs
t-T
ime-
in-C
olle
ge S
tude
nts
Tra
cked
Thr
ough
Fal
l 200
1
Com
mun
ity a
nd S
tate
Col
lege
Sta
tew
ide
- T
echn
ical
----
----
----
---
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n S
tatu
s --
----
----
----
--T
otal
NC
ol%
Not
Req
uire
dN
Col
% R
ow%
Req
uire
dN
Col
% R
ow%
Unk
now
nN
Col
% R
ow%
Tot
al40
,623
100%
19,2
5110
0%47
%15
,743
100%
39%
5,62
910
0%14
%
Per
sist
or
Rec
eive
Aw
ard
17,0
3042
%9,
150
48%
54%
6,22
640
%37
%1,
654
29%
10%
TA
SP
Met
11,4
5728
%9,
150
48%
80%
2,18
314
%19
%12
42%
1%D
ev. E
d. N
ot P
rovi
ded
8,81
622
%8,
003
42%
91%
705
4%8%
108
2%1%
Dev
. Ed.
Pro
vide
d2,
641
7%1,
147
6%43
%1,
478
9%56
%16
0%1%
TA
SP
Not
Met
5,24
913
%0
0%0%
4,04
326
%77
%1,
206
21%
23%
Dev
. Ed.
Not
Pro
vide
d1,
480
4%0
0%0%
360
2%24
%1,
120
20%
76%
Dev
. Ed.
Pro
vide
d3,
769
9%0
0%0%
3,68
323
%98
%86
2%2%
TA
SP
Sta
tus
and
Dev
. Ed.
Unk
now
324
1%0
0%0%
00%
0%32
46%
100%
Did
Not
Per
sist
or
Rec
eive
Aw
ard
23,5
9358
%10
,101
52%
43%
9,51
760
%40
%3,
975
71%
17%
TA
SP
Met
11,2
8128
%10
,101
52%
90%
1,13
87%
10%
421%
0%D
ev. E
d. N
ot P
rovi
ded
9,71
824
%9,
249
48%
95%
432
3%4%
371%
0%D
ev. E
d. P
rovi
ded
1,56
34%
852
4%55
%70
64%
45%
50%
0%T
AS
P N
ot M
et11
,234
28%
00%
0%8,
379
53%
75%
2,85
551
%25
%D
ev. E
d. N
ot P
rovi
ded
4,03
010
%0
0%0%
1,41
29%
35%
2,61
847
%65
%D
ev. E
d. P
rovi
ded
7,20
418
%0
0%0%
6,96
744
%97
%23
74%
3%T
AS
P S
tatu
s an
d D
ev. E
d. U
nkno
w1,
078
3%0
0%0%
00%
0%1,
078
19%
100%
App
endi
x B
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n by
Cha
ract
eris
tics
of In
stitu
tion,
Pro
gram
, and
Stu
dent
Fal
l/Prio
r S
umm
er 1
999
Firs
t-T
ime-
in-C
olle
ge S
tude
nts
Tra
cked
Thr
ough
Fal
l 200
1
TS
TC
and
Lam
ar In
stitu
te o
f Tec
hnol
ogy
Sta
tew
ide
Tot
alN
Col
%N
ot R
equi
red
N C
ol%
Row
%
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n S
tatu
sR
equi
red
N C
ol%
Row
%U
nkno
wn
N C
ol%
Row
%
Tot
al3,
886
100%
2,00
7 10
0% 5
2%1,
427
100%
37%
452
100%
12%
Inst
itutio
n Le
vel
Uni
vers
ity0
0%0
0% N
/A0
0% N
/A0
0% N
/AC
TC
3,88
610
0%2,
007
100%
52%
1,42
7 10
0%37
%45
2 10
0%12
%T
ype
Maj
orA
cade
mic
00%
00%
N/A
00%
N/A
00%
N/A
Tec
hnic
al3,
708
95%
1,91
595
% 5
2%1,
355
95%
37%
438
97%
12%
Tec
h P
rep
178
5%92
5% 5
2%72
5% 4
0%14
3%8%
Inst
itutio
n T
ype/
Typ
e M
ajor
C/S
C-A
cade
mic
00%
00%
N/A
00%
N/A
00%
N/A
C/S
C-T
echn
ical
00%
00%
N/A
00%
N/A
00%
N/A
TS
TC
/LU
IT3,
886
100%
2,00
7 10
0% 5
2%1,
427
100%
37%
452
100%
12%
Uni
vers
ity-A
cade
mic
00%
00%
N/A
00%
N/A
00%
N/A
Rem
ote
Cam
pus
Cor
rect
iona
l Ins
titut
ion
00%
0% N
/A0%
N/A
0% N
/A
Gen
der
Fem
ale
1,37
735
%69
134
% 5
0%51
936
% 3
8%16
737
%12
%M
ale
2,50
965
%1,
316
66%
52%
908
64%
36%
285
63%
11%
Eth
nici
tyW
hite
1,81
547
%92
846
% 5
1%67
147
% 3
7%21
648
% 1
2%B
lack
409
11%
164
8% 4
0%21
315
% 5
2%32
7%8%
His
pani
c1,
619
42%
892
44%
55%
531
37%
33%
196
43%
12%
Asi
an30
1%14
1% 4
7%11
1% 3
7%5
1%17
%C
ilA
mer
ican
Indi
an12
0%8
0% 6
7%1
0%8%
31%
25%
isC
tt.In
tern
atio
nal
10%
10%
100
%0
0%0%
00%
0%U
nkno
wn
00%
00%
N/A
00%
N/A
00%
N/A
Age
18-1
92,
007
52%
1,06
553
% 5
3%79
656
% 4
0%14
632
%7%
20-2
145
712
%21
411
% 4
7%18
913
% 4
1%54
12%
12%
22-2
435
99%
184
9% 5
1%13
59%
38%
409%
11%
25-2
928
27%
126
6% 4
5%12
99%
46%
276%
10%
30-3
417
85%
714%
40%
564%
31%
5111
% 2
9%35
-40
137
4%51
3% 3
7%43
3% 3
1%43
10%
31%
41-5
014
24%
643%
45%
342%
24%
4410
% 3
1%O
ver
5044
1%20
1% 4
5%9
1% 2
0%15
3% 3
4%U
nder
18
280
7%21
211
% 7
6%36
3% 1
3%32
7% 1
1%U
nkno
wn
00%
00%
N/A
00%
N/A
00%
N/A
Edu
catio
nal O
bjec
tive
Unk
now
n16
24%
00%
0%0
0%0%
162
36%
100
%N
on-D
egre
e S
eeki
ng16
44%
714%
43%
655%
40%
286%
17%
Cer
tific
ate
- T
AS
P L
iabl
e11
83%
362%
31%
433%
36%
399%
33%
Ass
ocia
te D
egre
e2,
288
59%
765
38%
33%
1,30
892
% 5
7%21
548
%9%
Bac
cala
urea
te D
egre
e29
1%22
1% 7
6%4
0% 1
4%3
1% 1
0%U
ndet
erm
ined
40%
10%
25%
30%
75%
00%
0%C
ertif
icat
e -
TA
SP
Wai
ved
1,12
129
%1,
112
55%
99%
40%
0%5
1%0%
B-2
1
B-2
2
App
endi
x B
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n by
Cha
ract
eris
tics
of In
stitu
tion,
Pro
gram
, and
Stu
dent
Fal
l/Prio
r S
umm
er 1
999
Firs
t-T
ime-
in-C
olle
ge S
tude
nts
Tra
cked
Thr
ough
Fal
l 200
1
TS
TC
and
Lam
ar In
stitu
te o
f Tec
hnol
ogy
Sta
tew
ide
----
----
----
- M
ath
Dev
elop
men
tal E
duca
tion
Sta
tus
Tot
alN
Col
%N
ot R
equi
red
N C
ol%
Row
%R
equi
red
N C
ol%
Row
%U
nkno
wn
N C
ol%
Row
%
Tot
al3,
886
100%
2,00
710
0%52
%1,
427
100%
37%
452
100%
12%
Firs
t Sem
este
r C
ours
e-Lo
adF
ull-T
ime
1,34
735
%60
330
%45
%62
944
%47
%11
525
%9%
Par
t-T
ime
2,53
965
%1,
404
70%
55%
798
56%
31%
337
75%
13%
Hig
h S
choo
l Dip
lom
aR
egul
ar1,
553
40%
776
39%
50%
680
48%
44%
9721
%6%
Rec
omm
ende
d or
Adv
ance
d70
218
%40
220
%57
%21
515
%31
%85
19%
12%
Unk
now
n1,
631
42%
829
41%
51%
532
37%
33%
270
60%
17%
Hig
h S
choo
l Eco
nom
ical
ly D
isad
vant
age
Unk
now
n1,
719
44%
864
43%
50%
576
40%
34%
279
62%
16%
Non
e Id
entif
ied
1,35
935
%72
636
%53
%52
337
%38
%11
024
%8%
Fre
e Lu
nch
647
17%
335
17%
52%
267
19%
41%
4510
%7%
Red
uced
Pric
e Lu
nch
124
3%60
3%48
%55
4%44
%9
2%7%
Oth
er37
1%22
1%59
%6
0%16
%9
2%24
%
Initi
al T
est C
ateg
ory
Alte
rnat
ive
Tes
ts84
822
%26
613
%31
%54
038
%64
%42
9%5%
TA
SP
(or
Sta
nfor
d A
chie
vem
ent T
e1,
944
50%
929
46%
48%
886
62%
46%
129
29%
7%U
nkno
wn
1,09
428
%81
240
%74
%1
0%0%
281
62%
26%
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n S
CH
8,68
81,
853
21%
6,70
677
%12
91%
Tot
al S
CH
Fal
l 199
9 -
Fal
l 200
116
4,91
183
,945
51%
64,3
6539
%16
,601
10%
Ret
entio
n M
ore
Tha
n O
ne S
emes
ter
3,28
084
%1,
750
87%
53%
1,18
883
%36
%34
276
%10
%S
prin
g/S
umm
er 2
000
3,14
481
%1,
681
84%
53%
1,13
179
%36
%33
273
%11
%A
Y 2
000-
2001
2,13
155
%1,
104
55%
52%
811
57%
38%
216
48%
10%
Fal
l 200
11,
127
29%
550
27%
49%
480
34%
43%
9721
%9%
Tra
nsfe
r fr
om 2
-Yea
r to
4-Y
ear
234
6%14
17%
60%
675%
29%
266%
11%
Aw
ard
Dur
ing
Fal
l 199
9 -
Sum
mer
200
175
419
%54
627
%72
%10
67%
14%
102
23%
14%
Per
sist
ence
or
Aw
ard
1,79
246
%1,
034
52%
58%
568
40%
32%
190
42%
11%
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n P
rovi
de(
Not
Pro
vide
d2,
094
54%
1,60
480
%77
%22
916
%11
%26
158
%12
%P
rovi
ded
1,63
042
%40
320
%25
%1,
198
84%
73%
296%
2%U
nkno
wn
162
4%0
0%0%
00%
0%16
236
%10
0%
Mat
h T
AS
P O
blig
atio
n M
etT
AS
P M
et2,
413
62%
2007
,10
0%83
%38
827
%16
%18
4%1%
TA
SP
Not
Met
1,31
134
%0
0%0%
1,03
973
%79
%27
260
%21
%U
nkno
wn
162
4%0
0%0%
00%
0%16
236
%10
0%
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n P
rovi
de(
Not
Pro
vide
dT
AS
P M
et1,
685
43%
1,60
480
%95
%66
5%4%
153%
1%T
AS
P N
ot M
et40
911
%0
0%0%
163
11%
40%
246
54%
60%
Pro
vide
dT
AS
P M
et72
819
%40
320
%55
%32
223
%44
%3
1%0%
TA
SP
Not
Met
902
23%
00%
0%87
661
%97
%26
6%3%
Dev
. Ed.
and
TA
SP
Sta
tus
Unk
now
162
4%0
0%0%
00%
0%16
236
%10
0%
B-2
3
App
endi
x B
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n by
Cha
ract
eris
tics
of In
stitu
tion,
Pro
gram
, and
Stu
dent
Fal
l/Prio
r S
umm
er 1
999
Firs
t-T
ime-
in-C
olle
ge S
tude
nts
Tra
cked
Thr
ough
Fal
l 200
1
TS
TC
and
Lam
ar In
stitu
te o
f Tec
hnol
ogy
Sta
tew
ide
Tot
alN
Col
%
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n S
tatu
s
Req
uire
dN
Col
% R
ow%
Unk
now
nN
Col
% R
ow%
Not
Req
uire
dN
Col
% R
ow%
Tot
al3,
886
100%
100%
52%
1,42
710
0%37
%45
210
0%12
%D
ev. E
d. N
ot P
rovi
ded
TA
SP
Met
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
i0
0N
/A0
N/A
0N
/AT
otal
SC
H F
all 1
999
- F
all 2
0069
,566
64,7
3593
%4,
089
6%74
21%
Ret
entio
n M
ore
Tha
n O
ne S
en1,
456
37%
1,37
569
%94
%66
5%5%
153%
1%E
nrol
led
Spr
ing/
Sum
mer
200
01,
400
36%
1,32
366
%95
%64
4%5%
133%
1%E
nrol
led
AY
200
0-20
0190
223
%83
041
%92
%59
4%7%
133%
1%E
nrol
led
Fal
l 200
146
712
%41
821
%90
%39
3%8%
102%
2%T
rans
fer
from
2-Y
ear
to 4
-Yea
l15
24%
130
6%86
%16
1%11
%6
1%4%
Aw
ard
Dur
ing
Fal
l 199
9 -
Sum
i47
412
%46
423
%98
%9
1%2%
10%
0%P
ersi
sten
ce o
r A
war
d89
523
%83
842
%94
%47
3%5%
102%
1%T
AS
P N
ot M
etM
ath
Dev
elop
men
tal E
duca
tioi
00
N/A
0N
/A0
N/A
Tot
al S
CH
Fal
l 199
9 -
Fal
l 200
13,8
310
0%4,
151
30%
9,68
070
%R
eten
tion
Mor
e T
han
One
Sen
287
7%0
0%0%
906%
31%
197
44%
69%
Enr
olle
d S
prin
g/S
umm
er 2
000
270
7%0
0%0%
785%
29%
192
42%
71%
Enr
olle
d A
Y 2
000-
2001
166
4%0
0%0%
443%
27%
122
27%
73%
Enr
olle
d F
all 2
001
682%
00%
0%24
2%35
%44
10%
65%
Tra
nsfe
r fr
om 2
-Yea
r to
4-Y
eal
180%
00%
0%6
0%33
%12
3%67
%A
war
d D
urin
g F
all 1
999
- S
umi
872%
00%
0%17
1%20
%70
15%
80%
Per
sist
ence
or
Aw
ard
149
4%0
0%0%
413%
28%
108
24%
72%
Dev
. Ed.
Pro
vide
dT
AS
P M
etM
ath
Dev
elop
men
tal E
duca
tiou
3,45
01,
853
54%
1,58
246
%15
0%T
otal
SC
H F
all 1
999
- F
all 2
0041
,279
19,2
1047
%21
,846
53%
223
1%R
eten
tion
Mor
e T
han
One
Sen
695
18%
375
19%
54%
317
22%
46%
31%
0%E
nrol
led
Spr
ing/
Sum
mer
200
067
617
%35
818
%53
%31
522
%47
%3
1%0%
Enr
olle
d A
Y 2
000-
2001
565
15%
274
14%
48%
289
20%
51%
20%
0%E
nrol
led
Fal
l 200
130
28%
132
7%44
%16
812
%56
%2
0%1%
Tra
nsfe
r fr
om 2
-Yea
r to
4-Y
eal
371%
111%
30%
262%
70%
00%
0%A
war
d D
urin
g F
all 1
999
- S
umi
150
4%82
4%55
%68
5%45
%0
0%0%
Per
sist
ence
or
Aw
ard
420
11%
196
10%
47%
222
16%
53%
20%
0%T
AS
P N
ot M
etM
ath
Dev
elop
men
tal E
duca
tioi
5,23
80
0%5,
124
98%
114
2%T
otal
SC
H F
all 1
999
- F
all 2
0034
,824
00%
34,2
7998
%54
52%
Ret
entio
n M
ore
Tha
n O
ne S
en72
919
%0
0%0%
715
50%
98%
143%
2%E
nrol
led
Spr
ing/
Sum
mer
200
068
818
%0
0%0%
674
47%
98%
143%
2%E
nrol
led
AY
200
0-20
0142
311
%0
0%0%
419
29%
99%
41%
1%E
nrol
led
Fal
l 200
125
06%
00%
0%24
917
%10
0%1
0%0%
Tra
nsfe
r fr
om 2
-Yea
r to
4-Y
eai
190%
00%
0%19
1%10
0%0
0%0%
Aw
ard
Dur
ing
Fal
l 199
9 -
Sum
i12
0%0
0%0%
121%
100%
00%
0%P
ersi
sten
ce o
r A
war
d25
97%
00%
0%25
818
%10
0%1
0%0%
Dev
. Ed.
and
TA
SP
Sta
tus
Unk
now
nM
ath
Dev
elop
men
tal E
duca
tiou
00
N/A
0N
/A0
N/A
Tot
al S
CH
Fal
l 199
9 -
Fal
l 200
5,41
10
0%0
0%5,
411
100%
Ret
entio
n M
ore
Tha
n O
ne S
en11
33%
00%
0%0
0%0%
113
25%
100%
Enr
olle
d S
prin
g/S
umm
er 2
000
110
3%0
0%0%
00%
0%11
024
%10
0%E
nrol
led
AY
200
0-20
0175
2%0
0%0%
00%
0%75
17%
100%
Enr
olle
d F
all 2
001
401%
00%
0%0
0%0%
409%
100%
Tra
nsfe
r fr
om 2
-Yea
r to
4-Y
eal
80%
00%
0%0
0%0%
82%
100%
Aw
ard
Dur
ing
Fal
l 199
9 -
Sum
i31
1%0
0%0%
00%
0%31
7%10
0%P
ersi
sten
ce o
r A
war
d69
2%0
0%0%
00%
0%69
15%
100%
App
endi
x B
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n by
Cha
ract
eris
tics
of In
stitu
tion,
Pro
gram
, and
Stu
dent
Fal
l/Prio
r S
umm
er 1
999
Firs
t-T
ime-
in-C
olle
ge S
tude
nts
Tra
cked
Thr
ough
Fal
l 200
1
TS
TC
and
Lam
ar In
stitu
te o
fS
tate
wid
e
Tot
alN
Col
%N
ot R
equi
red
N C
ol%
Row
%
Mat
h D
evel
opm
enta
l Edu
catio
n S
tatu
sR
equi
red
N C
ol%
Row
%R
ow%
Unk
now
nN
Col
%
Tot
al3,
886
100%
2,00
710
0%52
%1,
427
100%
37%
452
100%
12%
Per
sist
or
Rec
eive
Aw
ard
1,79
246
%1,
034
52%
58%
568
40%
32%
190
42%
11%
TA
SP
Met
1,31
534
%1,
034
52%
79%
269
19%
20%
123%
1%D
ev. E
d. N
ot P
rovi
ded
895
23%
838
42%
94%
473%
5%10
2%1%
Dev
. Ed.
Pro
vide
d42
011
%19
610
%47
%22
216
%53
%2
0%0%
TA
SP
Not
Met
408
10%
00%
0%29
921
%73
%10
924
%27
%D
ev. E
d. N
ot P
rovi
ded
149
4%0
0%0%
413%
28%
108
24%
72%
Dev
. Ed.
Pro
vide
d25
97%
00%
0%25
818
%10
0%1
0%0%
TA
SP
Sta
tus
and
Dev
. Ed.
Unk
now
692%
00%
0%0
0%0%
6915
%10
0%
Did
Not
Per
sist
or
Rec
eive
Aw
ard
2,09
454
%97
348
%46
%85
960
%41
%26
258
%13
%T
AS
P M
et1,
098
28%
973
48%
89%
119
8%11
%6
1%1%
Dev
. Ed.
Not
Pro
vide
d79
020
%76
638
%97
%19
1%2%
51%
1%D
ev. E
d. P
rovi
ded
308
8%20
710
%67
%10
07%
32%
10%
0%T
AS
P N
ot M
et90
323
%0
0%0%
740
52%
82%
163
36%
18%
Dev
. Ed.
Not
Pro
vide
d26
07%
00%
0%12
29%
47%
138
31%
53%
Dev
. Ed.
Pro
vide
d64
317
%0
0%0%
618
43%
96%
256%
4%T
AS
P S
tatu
s an
d D
ev. E
d. U
nkno
w93
2%0
0%0%
00%
0%93
21%
100%
AGENDA ITEM IX-D(1) JANUARY 2003Page 1
ADDENDUM 1
A Comparison of the Performance of Full-Time and Part-TimeMathematics Developmental Education Students
Background
At its October 2002 meeting, the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board adopted a reportentitled, Mathematics Developmental Education in Texas Public Higher Education:Performance Assessment. At the time, Board members raised questions regarding the relativeperformance of full-time and part-time students who are required to participate in mathematicsdevelopmental education. This document addresses those questions.
The original report was developed from data on 158,903 first-time-in-college students in the1999 summer and fall terms. It was not possible to determine the status of 16,609 of thesestudents, and they were eliminated from the analysis. The same cohort of students was usedfor this study.
What the data tells us about the performance of full-time and part-timemathematics developmental education students:
The following are the most important conclusions that can be drawn from these data.
1. Statewide, about one-third of new college and university students requiremathematics developmental education. This is true for both full-time and part-timestudents.
However, that fact masks some sector differences. The percentage of full-time students in two-year colleges required to participate in mathematics developmental education is significantlyhigher than the percentage of part-time students. The opposite is true at universities. Thepercentages of part-time students required to participate in mathematics developmentaleducation are virtually the same across all sectors.
All Students
Total Number Requiring Math Percent RequiringSector New Stdts Dev Ed Math Dev Ed
Comm Colleges 105,913 42,299 40%(Acad) (65,290) (26,556) (41%)(Tech) (40,623) (15,743) (39%)
TSTC/LIT 3,886 1,427 37%
University 49,104 9,400 19%All 158,903 53,126 33%
TSTC/LIT = Texas State Technical College andLamar Institute of Technology
AGENDA ITEM IX-D(1)Page 2
Full-Time Students
JANUARY 2003
Total Number Requiring Math Percent RequiringSector New Stdts Dev Ed Math Dev Ed
Comm Colleges 51,193 23,524 46%(Acad) (32,660) (15,299) (47%)(Tech) (18,533) (8,225) (44%)
TSTC/LIT 1,347 629 47%University 46,134 8,393 18%All 98,674 32,546 33%
TSTC/LIT = Texas State Technical College andLamar Institute of Technology
Part-Time Students
SectorTotal
New StdtsNumber Requiring
Math Dev EdPercent Requiring
Math Dev EdComm Colleges
(Acad)(Tech)
54,720(32,630)(22,090)
18,775(11,257)
(7,518)
34%(34%)(34%)
TSTC/LIT 2,539 798 31%University 2,970 1,007 34%All 60,229 20,580 34%
TSTC/LIT = Texas State Technical College andLamar Institute of Technology
2. Over 80 percent of the new students requiring mathematics developmental educationare enrolled in two-year colleges. University students comprise 26 percent of full-timestudents requiring developmental education but only five percent of part-time studentsrequiring developmental education.
The following charts show the percentage of the total cohort of students requiring mathematicsdevelopmental education enrolled in each sector of higher education.
AGENDA ITEM IX-D(1) JANUARY 2003Page 3
All Students
Percent of Math Dev Ed Students inEach Education Sector
Univ18%
TSTC/LIT3%
CC-Tech29%
CC-Acad50%
Univ = UniversitiesTSTC/LIT = Texas State Technical College and
Lamar Institute of TechnologyCC-Tech = Community Colleges, Technical StudentsCC-Acad = Community Colleges, Academic Students
Full-Time Students
Percent of Math Dev Ed Students inEach Education Sector
Univ26%
CC-AcadTSTC/LIT 47%
2%
CC-Tech25%
Univ = UniversitiesTSTC/LIT = Texas State Technical College and
Lamar Institute of TechnologyCC-Tech = Community Colleges, Technical StudentsCC-Acad = Community Colleges, Academic Students
60BEST COPY AVAILARLF_
AGENDA ITEM IX-D(1) JANUARY 2003Page 4
Part-Time Students
Percent of Math Dev Ed Students inEach Education Sector
Univ5%
TSTC/LIT4%
CC-Tech37%
CC-Acad55%
Univ = UniversitiesTSTC/LIT = Texas State Technical College and
Lamar Institute of TechnologyCC-Tech = Community Colleges, Technical StudentsCC-Acad = Community Colleges, Academic Students
The sector differences between full-time and part-time students can be largely explained by therelative differences in the number of students enrolled in each sector.
3. About one-half of the students requiring mathematics developmental education areWhite, about one-third are Hispanic, and about one-sixth are African-American.
While there is some variation between full-time and part-time students, the differences are notsignificant.
All Students
Percent of Math Dev Ed Students inEach Racial/Ethnic Group
Hispanic33%
African-American
17%
OtherA< White
Full-Time Students
AGENDA ITEM IX-D(1) JANUARY 2003Page 5
Percent of Math Dev Ed Students inEach Racial/Ethnic Group
African-Hispanic American
32% 19%
Other3%
White45%
Part-Time Students
Percent of Math Dev Ed Students inEach Racial/Ethnic Group
Hispanic35%
African-American
14%
WhiteOther 47%
4%
Notice that almost one-half of the students required to participate in mathematics developmentaleducation are White students.
4. Different racial/ethnic groups exhibit differences in academic preparation butdifferences between full-time and part-time students in each group are minor.
The following tables show the number of students in each racial/ethnic group, the numbersrequiring mathematics developmental education, and the percentages requiring mathematicsdevelopmental education.
All Students
AGENDA ITEM IX-D(1)Page 6
JANUARY 2003
Race or EthnicGroup Total in Cohort
Number RequiringMath Dev Ed
Percent RequiringMath Dev Ed
White 91,952 24,424 27%Hispanic 39,751 17,746 45%
African-Am 17,298 9,023 52%Am Indian 748 267 36%
Asian 6,727 1,082 16%Internat'l 1,789 420 23%
Unknown 638 164 26%
Full-Time Students
Race or EthnicGroup Total in Cohort
Number RequiringMath Dev Ed
Percent RequiringMath Dev Ed
White 57,728 14,783 26%Hispanic 23,495 10,521 45%
African-Am 11,130 6,196 56%Am Indian 452 144 32%
Asian 4,398 559 13%Internat'I 1,131 262 23%
Unknown 340 81 24%
Part-Time Students
Race or EthnicGroup Total in Cohort
Number RequiringMath Dev Ed
Percent RequiringMath Dev Ed
White 34,224 9,641 28%Hispanic 16,256 7,225 44%
African-Am 6,168 2,827 46%Am Indian 296 123 42%
Asian 2,329 523 22%Internat'l 658 158 24%
Unknown 298 83 28%
AGENDA ITEM IX-D(1) JANUARY 2003Page 7
5. Gender differences are minor for both full-time and part-time students.
Much has been written about females and science and mathematics education. Females makeup 54 percent of the cohort and 57 percent of the students who were required to participate inmathematics developmental education.
Females make up 54 percent of the full-time students in the cohort and 57 percent of thoserequired to participate in mathematics developmental education. Females make up 55 percentof the part-time students in the cohort and 58 percent of those required to participate indevelopmental education. The gender differences between full-time and part-time students areminor.
All Students
GenderPercent Requiring
Math Dev EdNumber Requiring
Math Dev EdMale 31% 22,599
Female 36% 30,527
Full-Time Students
GenderPercent Requiring
Math Dev EdNumber Requiring
Math Dev EdMale 30% 13,961
Female 35% 18,585
Part-Time Students
GenderPercent Requiring
Math Dev EdNumber Requiring
Math Dev EdMale 32% 8,638
Female 36% 11,942
6. Older students, either full-time or part-time, aren't more likely than their youngercounterparts to require mathematics developmental education.
There has been a great deal of speculation that much of the requirement for developmentaleducation is driven by older students who enroll in college for the first time for job retraining andother purposes.
These data do not support that thesis. Seventy-four percent of students requiring mathematicsdevelopmental education are 19 or younger; 83 percent are 21 or younger. The patterns forboth full-time and part-time students are similar. These high percentages are partially due to the
AGENDA ITEM IX-D(1)Page 8
JANUARY 2003
fact that the traditional age-24-and-under students continue to dominate enrollments, but thepercentages of these students requiring mathematics developmental education are startlinglyhigh. After age 24, the percentages requiring mathematics developmental education decreasewith age, and people over 50 are less likely to require mathematics developmental educationthan any other age group. [NOTE: Students over 55 are exempt from Texas Academic SkillsProgram (TASP) requirements by law unless they are seeking a degree or certificate.]
All Students
Age Group Number inCohort
Number RequiringMath Dev Ed
Percent RequiringMath Dev Ed
Under 18 22,154 3,844 17%18-19 100,419 35,350 35%20-21 10,258 4,969 48%22-24 7,215 3,203 44%25-29 6,761 2,652 39%30-34 4,022 1,282 32%35-40 3,549 985 28%41-50 3,324 694 21%
Over 50 1,151 130 11%Unknown 50 17 34%
Full-Time Students
Age GroupNumber in
CohortNumber Requiring
Math Dev EdPercent Requiring
Math Dev EdUnder 18 5,412 1,560 29%
18-19 80,976 25,664 32%20-21 4,740 2,284 48%22-24 2,664 1,237 46%25-29 2,035 890 44%30-34 1,024 389 38%35-40 836 281 34%41-50 755 192 25%
Over 50 207 41 20%Unknown 25 8 32%
AGENDA ITEM lX-D(1)Page 9
Part-Time Students
JANUARY 2003
Age Group Number in CohortNumber Requiring
Math Dev EdPercent Requiring
Math Dev EdUnder 18 16,742 2,284 14%
18-19 19,443 9,686 50%20-21 5,518 2,685 49%22-24 4,551 1,966 43%25-29 4,726 1,762 37%30-34 2,998 893 30%35-40 2,713 704 26%41-50 2,569 502 20%
Over 50 944 89 9%Unknown 25 9 36%
7. Encouraging more students to enroll in the Recommended High School Programshould help reduce the demand for mathematics developmental education, but noteliminate it.
Coordinating Board data in this area is somewhat problematical, because it is not possible toidentify the high school curriculum for nearly 40 percent of the students in the cohort (64 percentof the part-time cohort).
However, the existing data are encouraging, indicating that fewer students who have taken anadvanced or recommended high school curriculum are required to complete mathematicsdevelopmental education.
All Students
High SchoolCurriculum Total in Cohort
NumberRequiring
Math Dev EdPercent Requiring
Math Dev EdRegular 47,402 23,033 49%
Recom'd orAdvanced
50,019 11,657 23%
Unknown 61,482 18,436 30%
Full-Time Students
High SchoolCurriculum Total in Cohort
Number RequiringMath Dev Ed
Percent RequiringMath Dev Ed
Regular 33,035 15,155 46%Recom'd or
Advanced42,762 9,109 21%
Unknown 22,877 8,282 36%
AGENDA ITEM IX-D(1)Page 10
Part-Time Students
JANUARY 2003
High SchoolCurriculum Total in Cohort
Number RequiringMath Dev Ed
Percent RequiringMath Dev Ed
Regular 14,367 7,878 55%
Recom'd orAdvanced
7,257 2,548 35%
Unknown 38,605 10,154 26%
Making the Recommended High School Program the default curriculum will not eliminate theneed for developmental education because not all students will opt for it and because asignificant percentage of students (e.g., 35 percent of part-time students) who complete it stillrequire mathematics developmental education when they reach higher education. Not allstudents who choose the Recommended curriculum achieve college-level mastery of thematerial now, and as it becomes the default curriculum, that percentage may increase as morestudents enroll in that curriculum.
8. Thirty-seven percent of the full-time students who are required to undergomathematics developmental education are required to do so based on a test other thanthe TASP Test. Fifty-eight percent of the part-time students required to participate indevelopmental education are required to do so based on an alternative test.
Coordinating Board rules allow use of a number of alternative tests to determine initialplacement.
Determining the equivalence of scores on TASP alternatives has proved to be a difficulttechnical task, but these data indicate the importance of additional effort, especially for part-timestudents.
9. Seventeen percent of full-time students required to participate in mathematicsdevelopmental education never did so; 23 percent of part-time students did not.
The data for this cohort of students indicates that no developmental education was provided for10,270 of the 53,126 students in the cohort required to participate in mathematicsdevelopmental education. No developmental education was provided to 5,523 of 32,546 full-time students and 4,747 of 20,580 part-time students.
Sixty-one percent of these full-time students subsequently passed the TASP Test or achieved agrade of "B" or better in approved college-level mathematics course within two years. Only 33percent of part-time students did so.
Other students dropped out of college before enrolling in mathematics developmentaleducation, switched to TASP-exempt curricula, or otherwise delayed mathematicsdevelopmental education.
While previous sections of this report indicate that pre-college performance differences arerelatively minor, the data above indicate that in-college performance of part-time studentsseriously lags that of full-time students.
6 7
AGENDA ITEM IX-D(1) JANUARY 2003Page 11
10. About 32 percent of new students required to complete mathematics developmentaleducation did so within two years; only about 20 percent of part-time students did so.
The number of students who successfully complete developmental education in a specific timeperiod is one measure of the performance of the developmental education system.
In the cohort included in this study, only 14,762 of the 53,126 students required to participate inmathematics developmental education passed the TASP Test or achieved a grade of "B" orbetter in an approved college-level mathematics course within two years. Of 32,546 full-timestudents, 10,574 did so; of 20,580 part-time students, 4,188 did so. This is a discouragingstatistic, given the importance of addressing academic deficiencies early. The implications forpart-time students are especially discouraging.
It indicates that the academic deficiencies of relatively few students are being addressedsuccessfully and that students are spreading their mathematics developmental education overan extended period of time, increasing costs to themselves and the state and decreasing theprobability of eventual success in college.
11. After two years, about one-half of the new students required to completemathematics developmental education either earned a certificate or a degree or are atleast still enrolled. A higher percentage of full-time students than part-time studentsmeet these criteria.
The number of students who are retained and subsequently receive degrees or certificates isanother important performance measure for the developmental education system.
The term of this study was not long enough to measure graduates, especially at thebaccalaureate level. As an alternative, a number of alternative statistics were computed.Of 158,903 first-time-in-college students who enrolled summer/fall 1999, 53,126 were requiredto participate in mathematics developmental education. Of those, 32,546 were full-timestudents and 20,580 were part-time students. The following table summarizes what happenedto those 53,126 students by fall 2001.
All StudentsFull-TimeStudents
Part-TimeStudents
Received degree or certificate, and nolonger enrolled 452 (1%) 307 (1%) 145 (1%)Completed mathematics developmentaleducation, received degree or certificate,still enrolled
251 (1/2-%) 218 (1%) 33 (2/10-%)
Completed mathematics developmentaleducation, still enrolled but not beenawarded a degree or certificate
9,967 (19%) 7,329 (23%) 2,638 (13%)
Completed mathematics developmentaleducation but had not received a degreeor certificate and were no longer enrolled
4,287 (8%) 2,847 (9%) 1,440 (7%)
All StudentsFull-TimeStudents
Part-TimeStudents
68
AGENDA ITEM IX-D(1)Page 12
JANUARY 2003
Not yet completed mathematicsdevelopmental education but still enrolled 13,678 (26%) 9,002 (28%) 4,676 (23%)Not completed mathematicsdevelopmental education and not enrolled 24,491 (46%) 12,843 (39%) 11,648 (57%)
Sixty-seven percent of students not required to participate in mathematics developmentaleducation were either still enrolled or had been awarded a degree or certificate by fall 2001.Seventy-five percent of full-time students and 53 percent of part-time students were either stillenrolled or had been awarded a degree or certificate by fall 2001.
For those required to participate in mathematics developmental education, 46 percent, or24,348 students, were either still enrolled or had been awarded a degree or certificate by fall2001. Fifty-two percent of full-time and 36 percent of part-time students were either still enrolledor had been awarded a degree or certificate by fall 2001.
Clearly, retention rates for students who are not required to participate in mathematicsdevelopmental education are better than retention rates for students who are required toparticipate. And, retention rates for full-time students are clearly superior to retention rates forpart-time students.
Conclusion
Although there is considerable variability, these data do not indicate that there are majordifferences between the students who choose to enroll part-time and those who choose to enrollfull-time for students requiring mathematics developmental education. The percentages of full-time and part-time students required to participate in mathematics developmental education aresimilar. The percentages of part-time and full-time students in different ethnic groups requiredto participate in mathematics developmental education are similar. Similar statements can bemade for gender, age, and even academic preparation, although the data for academicpreparation is somewhat problematic.
However, there appears to be a major difference in the performance of part-time and full-timestudents after enrollment. Part-time students have uniformly lower retention rates and are lesslikely to successfully complete mathematics developmental education requirements.
Given these differences, educators with responsibility for developmental education shouldreview the implementation of these programs to compensate for these differences. Somestrategies might include:
Ensuring that developmental education classes are offered at times when part-timestudents can avail themselves of them;Ensuring that developmental education support services are available at times whenpart-time students can avail themselves of them;Enhancing support services for these students, including tutoring, the availability ofcomputer assisted instruction modules, organizing learning communities, etc.Coordinating developmental education with other instructional programs; andProviding mechanisms for convenient, frequent evaluation of mastery of the material.Monitor the distribution of initial test scores of developmental education students andconsider that distribution in the design of curricular materials.
69
AGENDA ITEM IX-D(1) JANUARY 2003Page 13
Tailor developmental education programs to specific student needs. Students withminor deficiencies as measured by TASP should not be routed to the samedevelopmental education class as students who initially tested below 150.Identify students with a high probability of successfully completing developmentaleducation early and encourage them to satisfy their developmental educationrequirements as soon as possible.Monitor students with a low probability of completing developmental educationrequirements carefully. Provide counseling regarding other alternatives when itbecomes obvious that they will not be successful and before an unmanageable studentdebt or other issues make other alternatives untenable.
70
AGENDA ITEM IX-D(1) JANUARY 2003Page 1
ADDENDUM 2
The Relationship between Initial TASP Test Scores and Performanceof Mathematics Developmental Education Students
Background
At its October 2002 meeting, the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board adopted a reportentitled, Mathematics Developmental Education in Texas Public Higher Education:Performance Assessment. At the time, Board members raised questions regarding therelationships that exist between initial Texas Academic Skills Program (TASP) test scores andperformance of those who are required to participate in mathematics developmental education.This document addresses those questions.
The original report was developed from data on 158,903 first-time-in-college students in the1999 summer and fall terms. One-third of those students were required to participate inmathematics developmental education. Nearly one-half of those students took an alternative tothe TASP Test. The equivalence of scores on TASP, and the alternative tests, has been asource of continuing controversy. In an effort to eliminate questions that might arise from testequivalency issues, it was decided to use data derived only from students who took the TASP.An additional 2,965 students were eliminated because TASP test scores were not included ordid not pass edit checks. The final sample includes 26,082 students who were required toparticipate in mathematics developmental education because they scored less than theCoordinating Board required minimum of 230 on the mathematics portion of the TASP. This isstill a large sample.
What the data tells us about the relationship between initial TASP test scores andperformance in mathematics developmental education:
Appendices A and B present detailed statistics, and interested readers will wish to examinethese tables in more detail. The following are believed to be the most important conclusionsthat can be drawn from these data.
1. Slightly less than one-half of the students required to participate in mathematicsdevelopmental education score within 20 points (85 percent) of passing.
The tables below show the number and percentage of students required to participate indevelopmental education, by test score. Relatively large percentages of students are clusterednear the 230 pass score, and that fact should be encouraging for eventual success ofdevelopmental education programs. A slightly higher percentage of university students thantwo-year college students are close to passing, but the differences are small.
AGENDA ITEM IX-D(1)Page 2
Two-Year College Students
JANUARY 2003
Initial TASPMathematics Score
Number of NewStudents
Percentage ofNew Students
210-229 8,243 43%190-209 5,413 29%170-189 3,033 16%120-169 2,185 12%100-119 97 0.5%Total 18,971 100%
University Students
Initial TASPMathematics Score
Number of NewStudents
Percentage of NewStudents
210-229 3,702 52%190-209 1,925 27%170-189 920 13%120-169 537 8%100-119 27 0.4%Total 7,111 100%
2. Percentages of developmental education students initially testing within 20 points ofthe passing score vary significantly from institution to institution.
The tables below show the top five and bottom five institutions, ranked by percentage ofstudents initially testing within 20 points of the passing TASP mathematics score. Students whoinitially test within 20 points of passing are prime candidates for successful remediation.Differences in the percentages of students in this group at least partially explain the differencesin effectiveness of different developmental education programs.
Two-Year Colleges
Institution
Percentage of Developmental EducationStudents Testing Within 20 Points of
Passing Mathematics ScoreTop Five Institutions
Midland College 57%Hill College 56%Lee College 53%Amarillo College 52%Austin Community College 52%
Bottom Five InstitutionsGalveston College 35%Southwest Texas Jr. College 35%Lamar Institute of Tech. 34%South Texas Community C. 32%Clarendon College 30%
AGENDA ITEM IX-D(1)Page 3
Universities
JANUARY 2003
Institution
Percentage of Developmental EducationStudents Testing Within 20 Points of
Passing Mathematics ScoreTop Five Institutions
TAMU-Galveston 81%TAMU-College Station 70%UT-San Antonio 69%Texas Tech University 69%TAMU-Corpus Christi 69%
Bottom Five InstitutionsUH-Downtown 43%UT of the Permian Basin 38%Prairie View A&M University 35%Sul Ross State University 34%Texas Southern University 30%
3. Developmental education participation rates are largely unaffected by initial TASP testscores.
Some students who score close to passing grades opt for self-study or simply repeating theTASP Test and do not participate in developmental education and for that reason the group withinitial scores between 210-229 has a slightly lower participation rate than other groups. Othergroups have remarkably similar participation rates centered around 85 percent.
Mathematics Developmental EducationParticipation Rates After Two Years
Initial TASPMathematics
ScoreNumber of New
StudentsNumber Participated
in Math Dev. Ed.
PercentageParticipated
in Math Dev. Ed.210-229 11,945 8,934 75%190-209 7,338 6,093 83%170-189 3,953 3,376 85%120-169 2,722 2,294 84%100-119 124 97 78%
Total 26,082 20,794 80%
4. Statewide, after two years, over one-half of students required to participate inmathematics developmental education will have either earned a degree or certificate andleft the institution or will still be enrolled.
One measure of the effectiveness of developmental education programs is the percentage ofstudents who have either obtained a degree or certificate and left the institution and/or are stillenrolled after two years. As expected, percentages are higher for those students who initiallytested closer to the passing score. However, differences are smaller than are widely believed.
AGENDA ITEM IX-D(1)Page 4
JANUARY 2003
The high percentage completion/retention rate for students in the 100-119 range requires someexplanation. In a mass testing program such as this, a small number of students will fall ill whiletaking the exam, will arrive late for the exam, etc. Many of those students are capable ofpassing the exam and will do so on a retake and subsequently make good progress in theiracademic programs. They will, however, show up with low initial test scores.
Statewide Completion/Retention Rates After Two Years
Initial TASPMathematics Score
Number ofNew Students
NumberCompleted
and/or Retained
PercentageCompleted and/or
Retained210-229 11,945 6,958 58%190-209 7,338 3,698 50%170-189 3,953 1,780 45%120-169 2,722 1,137 42%100-119 124 70 56%
Total 26,082 13,643 52%
Data from the original study indicated that 67 percent of those not required to participate inmathematics developmental education completed a degree or certificate program and/or wereretained for two years. While this is higher than the 58 percent completion/retention of thosewho scored between 210 and 229 and the 50 percent completion/retention of those who scoredbetween 190 and 209, these data do indicate that developmental education programs aresuccessful with many students.
5. The percentage of students required to participate in developmental education whosatisfactorily complete TASP requirements within two years is strongly related to initialTASP score.
Another measure of the effectiveness of developmental education programs is the percentageof students who satisfactorily complete TASP requirements, either by re-taking the TASP andscoring a passing grade or by earning a grade of B or better in a qualifying mathematics course.The table below shows the percentage of students in each testing category who satisfactorilycompleted TASP requirements within two years.
Statewide TASP Requirement Passing Rates After Two Years
Initial TASPMathematics Score
Number ofNew Students
NumberPassing TASPRequirements
PercentagePassing TASPRequirements
210-229 11,945 5,608 47%190-209 7,338 2,319 32%170-189 3,953 928 23%120-169 2,722 500 18%100-119 124 40 32%
Total 26,082 9,395 36%
AGENDA ITEM IX-D(1) JANUARY 2003Page 5
Note that TASP passing rates decline rapidly with declining initial test scores. This can bepartially explained simply by the fact that it takes longer to remedy major deficiencies than minordeficiencies. However, low passing rates after two years also indicate that many students withlow initial test scores will probably never satisfy TASP requirements.
These rates are generally lower than completion/retention rates described in section 4 becausesome students choose to transfer to workforce development programs which do not have TASPrequirements rather than participate in developmental education. In addition, some studentschoose to continue to enroll, even though they have not completed developmental educationrequirements after two years.
6. The percentages of developmental education students initially testing within 20 pointsof the passing score, who satisfactorily complete TASP requirements within two years,vary significantly from institution to institution.
The tables below show the top five and bottom five institutions, ranked by percentage ofstudents initially testing within 20 points of the passing TASP mathematics score, whosatisfactorily complete TASP requirements within two years. Students who initially test within 20points of passing are prime candidates for successful remediation. Differences in thepercentages of students who satisfactorily complete TASP requirements within two years areindicative of the differences in effectiveness of different developmental education programs.
Two-Year Colleges
Institution
Percentage Passing TASPRequirements (Students Testing
Within 20 Points of PassingMathematics Score)
Top Five InstitutionsTrinity Valley C.C. 100%Wharton County J.C. 100%Austin Community College 59%Ranger College 58%Victoria College 54%
Bottom Five InstitutionsLee College 15%Cisco Junior College 14%El Paso C.C.D. 13%Galveston College 11%Coastal Bend College 9%
5
AGENDA ITEM IX-D(1)Page 6
Universities
JANUARY 2003
Institution
Percentage Passing TASP Requirements(Students Testing Within 20 Points of
Passing Mathematics Score)Top Five Institutions
UT-Dallas 100%Angelo State University 98%UT-Pan American 96%TAMU-College Station 94%UT-Austin 89%
Bottom Five InstitutionsUT-El Paso 34%West Texas A&M University 31%TAMUKingsville 28%Sam Houston State Univ. 25%Sul Ross State University 20%
Conclusions
This study examined the records of over 26,000 students who were first-time-in-college studentsduring the summer and fall of 1999 and who were required to participate in mathematicsdevelopmental education because of low test scores on the TASP Test. It did not includestudents who were required to participate in mathematics developmental education because oflow scores on alternative tests, and that is a weakness of this effort.
Significant percentages of students enrolled in universities and two-year institutions have testscores clustered within 20 points of the pass score. These students are prime candidates forsuccessful developmental education.
More students who are not required to participate in mathematics developmental educationcomplete a degree or certificate within two years or are retained after two years than those whoare required to participate in developmental education. But, the differences are not large,especially for students who initially tested within 40 points of passing.
Many mathematics developmental education students (26 percent) do not satisfactorilycomplete their mathematics developmental education requirements in two years, yet continue toenroll.
In view of these data, educators with responsibility for mathematics developmental educationmay wish to review the implementation of these programs to ensure that they meet the needs oftheir students. Some specific recommendations include the following:
Monitor the distribution of initial test scores of developmental education students andconsider that distribution in the design of curricular materials.Tailor developmental education programs to specific student needs. Students withminor deficiencies as measured by TASP should not be routed to the samedevelopmental education class as students who initially tested below 150.
AGENDA ITEM IX-D(1) JANUARY 2003Page 7
Identify students with a high probability of successfully completing developmentaleducation early and encourage them to satisfy their developmental educationrequirements as soon as possible.Monitor students with a low probability of completing developmental educationrequirements carefully. Provide counseling regarding other alternatives when itbecomes obvious that they will not be successful and before an unmanageable studentdebt or other issues make other alternatives untenable.
7 7 7
U.S. Department of EducationOffice of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI)
National Library of Education (NLE)
Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC)
NOTICE
Reproduction Basis
ERICMeatball Immo klumalka COO
This document is covered by a signed "Reproduction Release (Blanket)"form (on file within the ERIC system), encompassing all or classes ofdocuments from its source organization and, therefore, does not require a"Specific Document" Release form.
This document is Federally-funded, or carries its own permission toreproduce, or is otherwise in the public domain and, therefore, may bereproduced by ERIC without a signed Reproduction Release form (either"Specific Document" or "Blanket").
EFF-089 (1/2003)
![ERIC - Education Resources Information CenterDOCUMENT. RESUME ED 127 099 BC 009 397 AUTHOR Streiff, Paul; And Others TITLE Wyoming Indian High School [WIHS], Ethete, Wyoming. Evaluation](https://img.pdfslide.net/doc/110x75/5f9d1b2edb2d123477402afb/eric-education-resources-information-center-document-resume-ed-127-099-bc-009.jpg)
![Repub]jc of the Philippines Department of Education …jc of the Philippines Department of Education Region IV-A CALABARZON SCHOOLS DIVISION OF IMUS CITY Toclong 1-C, City of Imus](https://img.pdfslide.net/doc/110x75/5b3de5377f8b9a5e1f8e5f3e/repubjc-of-the-philippines-department-of-education-jc-of-the-philippines-department.jpg)
