Module 2Module 2 AVATAR Common Foundations: Understanding College and Career Readiness and Success 1

1

Module 2AVATAR Common Foundations:

Understanding College and Career Readiness and Success

http://www.ntp16.notlb.com/avatar

2

This Module Will Introduce…

SECTION A: College and Career Readiness: Features, Standards, Assessments

i. Defining College and Career Readinessii. Standards and Assessments for Readiness and Success

SECTION B:

Indicators of Student Readiness and Successiii. Local Student Performance Dataiv. State Student Performance Data

SECTION C: Action Planning

3http://www.ntp16.notlb.com/avatar

Section A1:Defining College

And Career Readiness

Are we really responsible

for getting all students

college and career ready?

4


Students

Counselors

Parents

Administrators

Community

Campus Staff

Teachers

Partners for Student Success


Read Redefining College Readiness by David T. ConleyDiscuss• Current Means to Determine College Readiness• Components in a Comprehensive Definition of College Readiness• A Definition of College Readiness • Possible Ways to Measure the Dimensions of College Readiness• Implications of the Definition• What Schools and Students Can Do to Foster College Readiness• What Students Can Do to Develop Their College Readiness

Creating a College Ready Student

Document Available on the AVATAR site: http://www.ntp16.notlb.com/avatar/files/resources


Small Group Discussion• Introduction (pp. 5-6)

– Group 1 - Current Means to Determine College Readiness (pp.8-11)– Group 2 - Components in a Comprehensive Definition of College Readiness

(pp. 12-17)– Group 3 - A Definition of College Readiness (pp. 18-19)– Group 4 - Possible Ways to Measure the Dimensions of College Readiness

(pp. 20-22)– Group 5 - Implications of the Definition (p. 23)– Group 6 - What Schools and Students Can Do to Foster College Readiness

(pp. 25-27)

• What Students Can Do to Develop Their College Readiness (p. 28)



Redefining College Readiness by David T. Conley

Following reading, reflection, and small group discussion, participants

will:Report key report findings.

Discuss strengths of the secondary and postsecondary systems in developing college and career readiness.

Identify secondary and postsecondary opportunities for improvement.


Group Discussion: Your Past Education Experiences

How focused on preparing for

college were you in high school?

How knowledgeable were you about

career expectations when you finished

high school?

Why did you want to go to college?


College and Career Ready: Helping all StudentsSucceed Beyond High School

by David T. Conley, 2010

Participants will: 1. Read the abstract2. Discuss the seven principles, utilizing the

STEPS project discussion document


Discussion Document Available on AVATAR site: http://www.ntp16.notlb.com/avatar/files/resources and the seven principles are discussed in more detail in PowerPoint of Conley’s at https://epiconline.org/files/pdf/20110228_ASU.pdf

http://www.ntp16.notlb.com/avatar/files/resources

http://www.ntp16.notlb.com/avatar/files/resources

https://epiconline.org/files/pdf/20110228_ASU.pdf


• Principle 1: Create and maintain a college-going culture in the school.

• Principle 2: Create a core academic program that is aligned with and leads to college readiness by the end of 12th grade.

• Principle 3: Teach key self-management skills, require students to use them, and provide students with feedback on how well they are developing these skills.

• Principle 4: Make college real by preparing students for the complexity of applying to college.

Conley’s Key Principles of College Readiness


• Principle 5: Create assignments and grading policies that more closely approximate college expectations each successive year of high school.

• Principle 6: Make the senior year meaningful and challenging.

• Principle 7: Build partnerships with and connections to postsecondary programs and institutions.

Conley’s Key Principles of College Readiness


Creating a College Ready Student Debrief

I used to think…

And now I think…

Please complete the following thoughts in groups of 2 to 3


Participation & Preparedness• Regular academic

attendance• Engagement in learning

environment– Volunteer information– Take initiative participating in

class discussion– Self advocacy

• Come to class with materials

• Assigned reading completed• Homework completed and

turned in on time• Test and quiz ready• Research complete for in-

class project participation


Work Completion & Study Skills• Homework completed on

time• Original work done and

turned in• Follow through with all

project requirements

• Organization • Time management• Note-taking• Memory building• Test taking skills• Stress management• Goal Setting


Writing Abilities

• Planning– Brainstorming– Mapping– Outlining– Graphic organizers– Note taking

• Drafting the paper– Following assignment requirements

• Evaluation– Making necessary adjustments/corrections

• Revision


Reading Abilities• Listen to and read a variety

of texts while applying:– Comprehension strategies– An extension of understanding on a

personal level– An analysis of the text– Contextual analysis

• Increase word knowledge through vocabulary development and application


Speaking Abilities

• Communicate supportedideas through various mediums

• Listen critically and respond appropriately to various information both in and out of an academic context


Career Readiness Skills

http://www.act.org/workkeys/assess/

WorkKeys®

Sample QuestionsThe National Career Readiness Certificate AssessmentsThe National Career Readiness Certificate program is composed of these three WorkKeys assessments Applied Mathematics Reading for Information Locating Information Other Foundational Skills AssessmentsApplied Technology Business Writing Listening for Understanding Teamwork

http://www.act.org/workkeys/index.html

http://www.act.org/workkeys/index.html

http://www.act.org/certificate/

http://www.act.org/workkeys/assess/math/sample3.html

http://www.act.org/workkeys/assess/reading/sample3.html

http://www.act.org/workkeys/assess/locate/sample3.html

http://www.act.org/workkeys/assess/tech/sample3.html

http://www.act.org/workkeys/assess/bus_writ/sample1.html

http://www.act.org/workkeys/assess/understand/demo/wk_listening_demo.html

http://www.act.org/workkeys/assess/teamwork/sample3.html


• Create a list of the top five, necessary career

skills that you believe employers cite.

Elbow Partner Conversations


Communication = exceptional ability to listen, write, and speak effectively Analytical/Research = assesses situations seeking multiple perspectives Computer/Technology Literacy = extensive software abilities Flexibility/Adaptability/Managing Multiple Priorities = thrives on juggling

multiple tasks and projects Interpersonal Abilities = proven relationship builder Leadership/Management Skills = goal driven, motivational leader Multicultural Sensitivity/Awareness = personable rapport builder Planning/Organizing = results driven, detail oriented achiever Problem-Solving/Reasoning/Creativity= innovative problem solver Teamwork = resourceful team player

Top 10 Career Skills


Critical Questions in Building a Culture of College and Career Readiness

What do we want our students to know?

What do we want our students to be able to do?

How will we know when each student has learned it?


Section A2:Standards and

Assessments for Readiness and Success


STANDARDS INSTRUCTION ASSESSMENT

CONNECTIONS

Standards require a change in both teaching and assessment. Standards and assessment are

intertwined and need to be integral parts of the curriculum and the program of instruction.

Steiner, J. (1998). Why have a standards-based curriculum and what are the implications for the teaching-learning-assessment process? Retrieved from: http://www.etni.org.il/red/etninews/issue4/whystandard.html


Curriculum Standards• In the field of education, standards is a term which

defines a cumulative body of knowledge and set of competencies that is the basis for quality education.

• They express what all pupils should know and be able to do, but do not dictate pedagogy (Ravitch, 1996).

• Standards in and of themselves are meaningless. What counts are the steps that educators and others take to help pupils reach them (Fiske, 1998).

Ravitch, D., (1996). 50 states, 50 standards - The continuing need for national voluntary standards in education. The Brookings Review, 14, 1-9. Fiske, E.B. (1998). Quest for standards splits US Educators. International. Herald Tribune. Feb. 9. Foreign Language Standards. Retrieved from: http://www.etni.org.il/red/etninews/issue4/whystandard.html


Texas Essential Knowledge and SkillsSec. 28.001. PURPOSE. It is the intent of the legislature that the essential knowledge and skills developed by the State Board of Education under this subchapter shall require all students to demonstrate the knowledge and skills necessary to read, write, compute, problem solve, think critically, apply technology, and communicate across all subject areas. The essential knowledge and skills shall also prepare and enable all students to continue to learn in postsecondary educational, training, or employment settings. 74th Legislative Session (1995)


1. What are the TEKS?They are state-mandated learning standards for students from elementary through high school in the state; what students should and be able to do in each subject area. 2. Why were the TEKS created?Prior to the creation of the TEKS, Essential Elements were used. It was discovered more specific and clear guidelines were needed so teachers are knowledgeable about what to teach and test. 3. Who developed the TEKS?Groups of teachers, administrators, parents, businesspeople, and members of the general public make up the subject-specific TEKS writing teams.

Source: Mathematics & Science TEKS Toolkit, Charles A. Dana Center at University of Texas http://www.utdanacenter.org/


• The College and Career Readiness Standards (CCRS) program is identifying, defining and implementing college and career readiness educational standards in partnership with Texas secondary schools.

• The program is a collaboration between the Texas Education Agency and the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board.

• The initiative was formed by the 79th Texas Legislature (3rd Called Session) through House Bill 1, now Section 28.008 of the Texas Education Code.

SourcesHouse Bill 1: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlodocs/793/billtext/html/HB00001F.htmSection 28.008: http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/ED/htm/ED.28.htm


AssessmentIn a standards-based curriculum, assessment is

viewed not only as a final product (summative), but also as a continual process (formative) that provides

pupil performance data to teachers and students regarding their progress towards achieving the

standards.Therefore, it is necessary to move beyond testing

methods which concentrate on memory, and develop those which measure understanding and application

(Genesee, et.al., 1998; Winters, 1995).

Genesee, F. Gottlieb, M. Katz, A. Malone, M. Managing the assessment process. (1998). Virginia: TESOLWinters, R.E. (1995). National Standards in Education: How we should arrive at them, why we should arrive at them and why we have not arrived at them yet. The Claremont Graduate School. Retrieved from: http://www.etni.org.il/red/etninews/issue4/whystandard.html


What are the Assessments?

I. Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS)

II. State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness (STAAR)

a. Grades 3-8b. End of Course (EOC)

III. Texas Success Initiative (TSI)


Phasing in of STAAR EOC Assessments

2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016

Grade 9 STAAR STAAR STAAR STAAR STAAR

Grade 10 TAKS STAAR STAAR STAAR STAAR

Grade 11 TAKS TAKS STAAR STAAR STAAR

Grade 12+ TAKS TAKS TAKS TAKS or STAAR TAKS or STAAR

Source: http://www.tea.state.tx.us/WorkArea/linkit.aspx?LinkIdentifier=id&ItemID=2147497744&libID=2147497741

32

What’s the Difference?TAKS STAAR

Assessed Curriculum

Grade-level assessments assess content from multiple courses.

Assessments assess only curriculum for that grade and course.

Rigor of Assessment

Rigor based upon standards set in 2003; students have outgrown the assessments.

Assessments are longer and include more rigorous items; Skills are assessed at a greater depth and cognitive complexity.

Performance Standards

Standards are set separately for each grade and subject.

Standards are set as an aligned system and based on data from studies from other states, national, and international assessments.

Testing Days(Grades 9-11)

13 (25 with exit level retesting) 15 (45 with retesting)

Measures of Student Progress

Growth measures were developed after TAKS program was established and provide information on whether student is on track to meet standards.

Growth measures are developed as STAAR is implemented and will provide early-warning indicators for students who are not on track.

Source: House Bill 3 Transition Plan, Chapter Onehttp://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/hb3plan/


State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness

STAAR How will this change affect students?– Students’ score on each EOC assessment

will be worth 15% of the students’ final grade for the course tested. – The test will be administered (3) times,

allowing for retesting opportunities and choice when to take the STAAR.–Graduation Requirements



Graduation Requirements


State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness

STAAR

Level 2:SatisfactoryAcademic

Performance

Level 3:AdvancedAcademic

Performance

Level 1:Unsatisfactory

Academic Performance

Minimum Score

Minimum High School Program:

Must meet the minimum cumulative score requirement

in each of the four core content areas.

Recommended High School Program:

In addition to the previous, must achieve level 2 for Algebra II and English III.

Distinguished AchievementHigh School Program:

In addition to the minimum, must achieve level 3 for

Algebra II and English III.


What Can Happen To Students Who Are Not College Readied?

• Endanger the GPA needed to stay at college,

• Double tuition costs by retaking the same course,

• Risk penalties incurred by “Three-peat,” “Six-Drops,” and “Excess hours” legislation,

• Delay progress toward graduation,

• Contribute to drop-out probability, and/or

• Move back home


Why Does Placement Testing Matter?• Placement tests provide an indication of whether

the student is prepared to succeed in college courses.

• Failure rates in first-year college courses can be very high.

• Retaking courses can be expensive.

• The more semesters of developmental courses taken, the less likely passing college-credit courses and earning a degree.

Source: The Tipping Point in Developmental Education (McCoy & Mejia) retrieved from: http://www.mheducation.com/uar/Developmental_Ed_White_Paper.pdf


What is the TSI?

• Texas Success Initiative (TSI) requires all students enrolling in public colleges and universities to take an approved test to demonstrate readiness for college-level work, unless otherwise exempt.

• Currently approved tests include: ACCUPLACER, ASSET, COMPASS, AND THEA–Minimum state standards are set for each test, yet

institutions may set higher standards and/or require additional departmental placement tests

Source: The Tipping Point in Developmental Education (McCoy & Mejia) retrieved from: http://www.mheducation.com/uar/Developmental_Ed_White_Paper.pdf


Upcoming TSI ChangesTexas Education CodeChapter 4, Subchapter C, Section 453.3Assessment--the use of a Board-approved instrument to determine the academic skills of each entering undergraduate student and the student's readiness to enroll in freshman-level academic coursework.

What does this mean?• The Commissioner will recommend a uniform performance

standard for college readiness, placement in Developmental Education or Adult Basic Education.

• With the one test, there will be one cutoff score that determines college readiness to be in place by Fall 2013.

• Institutions may not set a higher standard.


Timeline of New TSIFall 2012 Field Testing with current ACCUPLACER UsersJanuary/February 2013Standard SettingMarch/April 2013 THECB ApprovalMay – July 2013 College and University Training First day of AY 2013 IMPLEMENTATION

Note: Majority of 2013 students will have current standards applied


What Are the Potential Outcomes?

• One test and one score (in each area) will provide targets for students and educators

• Higher standards –Current THEA cut score is 230–New score expected to approach 270

equivalence• Expect more students to require

developmental education – but only in the short run


The Connection:STAAR and TSI Implementation


Other Considerations in College and Career Readiness…

• Advanced Placement (AP) & International Baccalaureate (IB) programs – Many more participating in courses– Performance still trailing number of attempts

• Dual Credit– High rates of participation– Quality and rigor difficult to monitor

• Early College High Schools– Proficiency and graduation rates higher than local high schools – Stronger student performance linked to ECHSs located on college

campuses– Not all college credits earned transfer to college by institution upon

graduation from a ECHSSource: Six Years and Counting: The ECHSI Mature, 2009http://www.earlycolleges.org/publications.html#earlycollege:researchandevaluations


What is the recipe for successful achievement? To my mind there are just

four essential ingredients: Choose a career you love.... Give it the best there is in you....

Seize your opportunities.... And be a member of the team.

Benjamin F. Fairless


Group Debrief

• Three things I learned today,

• Two topics I want to know more about, and

• One action I can start next week to incorporate what I’ve learned


Section B1:Local Student

Performance Data


What is the Purpose of Studying and Collecting Student Data?

• Uses data as the basis for key AVATAR decision-making.

• Provides opportunity for comparison of regional data to state data by Vertical Alignment Teams.

• Provides commonly accepted rational for key AVATAR actions


As You Examine the Data, Please Consider:

• To what extent do local students progress from high school to college?

• Are there differences by discipline in college readiness?

• How does student readiness for college vary by ethnicity? What factors contribute to the gaps?

• What colleges do local students attend?


• To what extent do local students take advantage of college readiness programs (AP/IB, dual credit, core completion)?

• How does developmental education influence college readiness and success locally?

• How do local students fare when they transfer to other institutions?

• How do local data compare the that of the state? (A separate PowerPoint is available to address this question.)

As You Examine the Data, Please Consider:

49

Region16

Amarillo High School

West Texas A&M University

Panhandle P-16 Council

Frank Phillips College

Region 16 ESC

Please note: Amarillo is in Potter County. Frank Phillips College is in Hutchinson County. West Texas A&M University is in Randall County.

Region 16: Working to Scaffold Student Success


AEIS Data from TEAAmarillo High School, 2010-11

• Student Body:Student Group Number

TOTAL 2089

Grade 9 585

Grade 10 490

Grade 11 520

Grade 12 494

Graduating class 240

% Minimum curriculum 16.3*

% Recommended curriculum

83.7*

*State Comparison:Minimum 17.2%Recommended 82.8%



• Ethnicity of Student Body in Percentages:Ethnic Group Percentage

African American 5

Hispanic 15.9

White 73.7

American Indian 0.6

Asian 2.4

Pacific Islander 0.1

2 or more races 2.2



• Other Descriptors of Student Body in Percentages:Demographic groups Percentage

Economically disadvantaged 16.1

Limited English Proficient (LEP) 1.1

With disciplinary placements 2.5

At risk* 20.5

Mobility (2009-10) 11.4

*At risk of dropping out of school based on performance and status indicators listed in the AEIS Glossary.



• Percent Enrolled in Advanced Course/Dual Enrollment:

Year All African-American

Hispanic White Amer.Indian

Asian PacificIsland

Two/More

2009-10 26.8 15.5 21.5 27.9 16.7 56.8 * 17.8

2008-09 26.5 12.1 14.4 28.7 14.3 n/a n/a n/a



• AP/IB Percentage Tested– IP PercenAP/IP Percentage Tested– tage TestedAP/IP Percentage Tested– AP/IP Percentage Tested• AP/IB Percent Examinees Met or Exceeded Criteria



Asian PacificIsland

Two/More

2009-10 17.1 14.8 14.4 17.0 0.0 55.0 * 9.52008-09 20.2 9.7 10.9 20.7 * n/a n/a n/a



Asian PacificIsland

Two/More

2009-10 79.6 * 76.2 81.5 - 63.6 - *

2008-09 66.2 * 45.5 67.3 - n/a n/a n/a



• Texas Success Initiative, English Lang Arts, Percent Passing

– IP PercenAP/IP Percentage Tested– tage TestedAP/IP Percentage Tested– AP/IP Percentage Tested• Texas Success Initiative, Math, Percent Passing



Asian PacificIsland

Two/More

2009-10 86 69 74 89 * 99 * 922008-09 81 61 77 83 60 90 * 99



Asian PacificIsland

Two/More

2009-10 85 54 69 89 * 91 * 99

2008-09 76 35 66 79 60 99 * 73



• Percentage College Ready Graduates, Class of 2010

Subject All African-American


Asian PacificIsland

Two/More

English 89 79 78 81 * 88 * 57

Math 76 71 71 78 * 56 * 29

Both 69 57 63 72 * 63 * 29


P-16 Data from THECBAmarillo High School, 2011

Institution of Enrollment, Class of 2011 Students

Amarillo College 154

West Texas A&M University 46

Texas Tech University 44

Univ. of Texas at Austin 13

Texas A&M University 9

Baylor University 6

Texas State University-San Marcos 6

Other Public/Ind 4-year (15) 27

Other Public/Ind 2-year (9) 17

Not trackable 3

Not found 180


P-16 Data from THECBAmarillo High School, 2011

• Public Higher Education First Year Grades of High School Graduates in FY 2010

IHE type

N <2.0 2.0-2.49 2.5-2.99 3.0-3.49 >3.5 Unk

4-year 141 21 15 31 35 39 0

2-year 193 56 31 30 38 28 10


Student Migration Data from THECBFrank Phillips College, 2011

Fall 2009 to Fall 2010

Non-graduates N % at Same

% at Other 2-yr

% at 4-yr % not found

Academic 820 38.3 7.2 16.0 38.5

Technical 217 37.8 9.7 2.3 50.2

Tech-prep 9 64.3 7.1 0 28.6

Graduates by program

N % at Same

% at Other 2-yr

% at 4-yr % notfound

Academic 49 8.2 2.0 34.7 55.1

Technical 70 12.9 2.9 4.3 80

Tech-Prep 1 0 0 0 100


Academic Performance of Transfer Students fromFrank Phillips College, 2011

Developmental Education vs. No Developmental Education, Fall 2009

No Developmental Education

N <2.0 2.0-2.49

2.5-2.99

3.0-3.49

>3.5 Unk EnrollFall‘10

Texas Tech 11 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1

West Texas A&M 35 5 1 1 1 0 2 0 4

Other public 4-yr 13 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 2

Developmental Education prior to Transfer

Total N <2.0 2.0-2.49

2.5-2.99

3.0-3.49

>3.5 Unk Enroll Fall ‘10

Texas Tech 11 10 3 1 2 2 2 0 7

West Texas A&M 35 30 12 2 6 6 3 1 14

Other public 4-yr 13 11 4 4 2 1 0 0 4


Academic Performance of Transfer Students fromWest Texas A&M University, 2011



N <2.0 2.0-2.49

2.5-2.99

3.0-3.49


Texas Tech 11 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1

West Texas A&M 35 5 1 1 1 0 2 0 4

Other public 4-yr 13 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 2


Total N <2.0 2.0-2.49

2.5-2.99

3.0-3.49


Amarillo College 301 155 23 26 38 36 36 4 120

Clarendon College 40 11 5 3 1 2 0 0 7

South Plains College

36 17 6 1 6 3 1 0 12


37 30 12 2 6 6 3 1 14

North Central Texas College

7 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 1

Vernon College 7 3 1 0 1 0 2 0 2

Houston CC 6 3 0 1 0 1 1 0 2

All Other Public 87 24 9 7 3 1 3 1 14





N <2.0 2.0-2.49

2.5-2.99

3.0-3.49


Texas Tech 11 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1

West Texas A&M 35 5 1 1 1 0 2 0 4

Other public 4-yr 13 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 2


Total N <2.0 2.0-2.49

2.5-2.99

3.0-3.49





36 19 3 2 5 5 4 0 12


37 5 1 1 1 0 2 0 4


7 5 0 0 1 3 1 0 3


Houston CC 6 3 0 2 0 1 0 0 3

All Other Public 87 63 15 9 11 10 14 4 44



Core Curriculum Completed Prior to Transfer, Fall 2009


N <2.0 2.0-2.49

2.5-2.99

3.0-3.49


Texas Tech 11 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1

West Texas A&M 35 5 1 1 1 0 2 0 4

Other public 4-yr 13 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 2

Core Complete Total N <2.0 2.0-2.49

2.5-2.99

3.0-3.49





36 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


37 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


7 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 1


Houston CC 6 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0

All Other Public 87 8 1 1 1 1 4 0 7



Earned Associate of Arts Degree Prior to Transfer, Fall 2009


N <2.0 2.0-2.49

2.5-2.99

3.0-3.49


Texas Tech 11 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1

West Texas A&M 35 5 1 1 1 0 2 0 4

Other public 4-yr 13 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 2

Core Complete Total N <2.0 2.0-2.49

2.5-2.99

3.0-3.49





36 8 0 0 3 3 2 0 4


37 13 5 0 2 4 1 1 7


7 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0


Houston CC 6 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0

All Other Public 87 14 2 4 3 2 3 0 13


Academic Performance of Transfer Students fromFrank Phillips College, 2011

Academic or Technical Associate Degrees, Fall 2009

Technical Associate Degree

Total N <2.0 2.0-2.49

2.5-2.99

3.0-3.49

>3.5

Unk EnrollFall‘10

Texas Tech 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

West Texas A&M 35 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

Other public 4-yr 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Associate of Arts Degree

Total N <2.0

2.0-2.49

2.5-2.99

3.0-3.49

>3.5

Unk Enroll Fall ‘10

Texas Tech 11 7 1 1 0 3 2 0 5

West Texas A&M 35 13 5 0 2 4 1 1 7

Other public 4-yr 13 2 1 2 4 0 0 0 4


Success Data from THECBWest Texas A&M University, 2011

Developmental Education, Fall 2008 Cohort Tracked for 2 years

FTIC Students Requiring Dev. Ed.

N % AttemptingCollege Courses

% Attempting and Completing

Math 194 61.3 91.6

Reading 101 80.2 95.1

Writing 39 79.5 93.5

*FTIC Students Not Needing Dev. Ed.

N % AttemptingCollege Courses

% Attempting and Completing

West Texas A&M Univ. 841

Math 78 95.1

Reading 84.9 92.6

Writing 91 93.1

First time in college


Success Data from THECBFrank Phillips College, 2011

Percent of Students Transferred or Employed with Peer Comparison

Transferred with < 30 SCH

Transferred with > 30 SCH

Employed StillEnrolled

Enrolled & Employed

Frank Phillips

FY 2010 6.4 12.7 53.4 13.5 9.0

FY 2011 5.0 20 n/a n/a n/a

Peers (2010) 20.9 12.9 64.7 9.7 9.9

• Student Transfer and Completer Percentages


Success Data from THECBTexas A&M University, 2011

Graduation Rate of First-time, Full-Time Degree-seeking Students

4-year rate 5-year rate 6-year rateWest Texas A&M

Same institution 23.5 35.4 39.7

Other institution 1.8 3.6 5.9

Total 25.3 39.4 45.9

• Student Baccalaureate Success Rate


Data Sources• High school data are from the Texas Education

Agency, Testing and Accountability, AEIS. • K-12 and higher education data are from the

Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, Data Resources and Tools.

• If your partner IHE is a private institution, you may need to ask for local data.


Group Discussion: Analyzing the Data

• What patterns do you see among students who advance to the next education level and those who fall behind in your pipeline?

• What factors may be influencing the data?

• What supports to college and career readiness are available in your region? (ECHS, Dual Credit, Non-Profits)


• What are our region’s top vertical alignment concerns?

• How can we use these to influence our work over the next year?

• How can we directly affect this data with our action plan?



Section B2:State Student

Performance Data


What is the Purpose of Studying and Collecting Student Data?

• Uses data as the basis for key AVATAR decision-making.

• Provides opportunity for comparison of regional data to state data by Vertical Alignment Teams.

• Provides commonly accepted rational for key AVATAR actions


AEIS Data from TEAAll Texas Public High Schools, 2010-11

• Student Body:Student Group Number

TOTAL 1,329,203

Grade 9 390,370

Grade 10 343,450

Grade 11 314,263

Grade 12 291,799

Graduating class 280,520

% Minimum curriculum 17.2*

% Recommended curriculum

82.8*

*State Comparison:Minimum 17.2%Recommended 82.8%


AEIS Data from TEAAll Texas Public Schools, 2010-11

• Ethnicity of Student Body in Percentages:Ethnic Group Percentage

African American 12.9

Hispanic 50.3

White 31.2

American Indian 0.5

Asian 3.4

Pacific Islander 0.1

2 or more races 1.6


AEIS Data from TEAAll Texas Public Schools, 2010-11

• Other Descriptors of Student Body in Percentages:Demographic groups Percentage

Economically disadvantaged 59.2

Limited English Proficient (LEP) 16.9

With disciplinary placements 1.9

At risk* 46.3

Mobility (2009-10) n/a

*At risk of dropping out of school based on performance and status indicators listed in the AEIS Glossary.



• Percent Enrolled in Advanced Course/Dual Enrollment:



Asian PacificIsland

Two/More

2009-10 26.3 19.5 23.0 30.9 23.5 49.9 26.1 30.6

2008-09 24.6 18.1 20.8 29.4 22.7 n/a n/a n/a



• AP/IB Percentage Tested– IP PercenAP/IP Percentage Tested– tage TestedAP/IP Percentage Tested– AP/IP Percentage Tested• AP/IB Percent Examinees Met or Exceeded Criteria



Asian PacificIsland

Two/More

2009-10 22.7 14.5 19.6 25.9 19.4 53.6 25.6 27.02008-09 21.2 12.9 17.3 25.1 21.5 n/a n/a n/a



Asian PacificIsland

Two/More

2009-10 50.8 25.7 37.3 63.1 49.4 69.0 51.6 61.6

2008-09 51.2 25.5 37.5 61.5 52.7 n/a n/a n/a


AEIS Data from TEAAll Texas Public High Schools, 2010-11• Texas Success Initiative, English Lang Arts, Percent Passing

– IP PercenAP/IP Percentage Tested– tage TestedAP/IP Percentage Tested– AP/IP Percentage Tested• Texas Success Initiative, Math, Percent Passing



Asian PacificIsland

Two/More

2009-10 66 57 59 77 69 79 68 762008-09 60 51 52 70 61 76 68 70



Asian PacificIsland

Two/More

2009-10 69 54 63 79 69 88 68 76

2008-09 66 49 58 78 69 87 73 72



• Percentage College Ready Graduates, Class of 2010

Subject All African-American


Asian PacificIsland

Two/More

English 66 53 58 77 69 79 75 75

Math 64 46 57 75 65 86 70 70

Both 52 34 42 66 55 74 60 61


P-16 Data from THECBAll Texas Public High Schools, 2011

Type of Institution of Enrollment, Class of 2011

Students %age

Public 2-year institution 79,966 27.5

Public 4-year institution 60,508 20.8

Independent college or university 11,128 3.8

Not trackable 14,210 4.9

Not found 124,796 42.9Total 290,581* 100

*Includes GED recipients as well as high school graduates.


P-16 Data from THECBAll Texas Public High Schools, 2011

• Public Higher Education First Year Grades of High School Graduates in FY 2010• These data are available by school district

and high school for schools with more than 25 students. State level data are not available.


Participation Data from THECBFirst Time Undergraduates, 2011

• Enrollment Total & by Ethnicity, Summer/Fall, ‘11

Type of Institution

Total White Hispanic African American

MultiRacial

Asian/Pacific

Inter’l

Other/Unk

Texas 128,095 47,072 47,352 18,464 1,065 8,456 688 4,996

Other state 12,627 6,668 1,450 2,466 140 1,083 150 650

Other country

5,904 58 248 41 0 148 5,249 160

Total 146,626 53,818 49,050 20,971 1,205 9,689 6,087 5,806

Female 79,080 28,473 21,946 12,478 720 4,857 2,374 3,074

Male 67,546 25,345 27,104 8,493 485 4,832 3,713 2,732


Participation Data from THECBStatewide Enrollment, 2011

• Enrollment Totals by Institutional Type, Fall, 2011

Type of Institution Total Enrolled Total Enrolled Percentage

University 568,938 39.5%

Community College 730,633 50.5%

Technical College 12,353 0.9%

Independent 4-year 122,624 8.5%

Independent 2-year 1,066 0.1%

Total 1,445,614 100%


P-16 Data from THECBDual Credit Enrollment by Type of Texas Public IHE, 2011

• IHE Students by Prior Dual Credit Enrollment Type of enrollment after high school

Students enrolled

Students with core

Same Public 2-year institution 12,083 13

Other Public 2-year institution 5,665 11

Same public 4-year institution 435 1

Other public 4-year institution 24,626 130

Independent college or university

5,431 18

All on record 48,240 171


Participation Data from THECBAll Texas Institutions, 2011

Developmental Education, First time Cohort Tracked for 3 years; 2008 cohort for 2-year IHEs and 2005 cohort for 4-year

FTIC Students Requiring Dev. Ed.

% who persisted after 3 years

% who graduated

2-year institutions 29.1 8.5


FTIC* Students Not Needing Dev. Ed.

% who persisted after 3 years

% who graduated

2-year institutions 39.9

17.3


*First time in college


Student Migration Data from THECBStatewide Summary, 2011

Fall 2009 to Fall 2010

Non-graduates N % at Same

% at Other 2-yr

% at Other 4-yr

% not found

Academic 191,574 42.7 6.2 13.6 37.5

Technical 53,247 44.8 6.3 4.6 44.3

Tech-prep 30,478 47.5 6.5 4.6 41.4

Graduates by program

N % at Same

% at Other 2-yr

% at Other 4-yr

% notfound

Academic 23,026 17.7 2.3 42.9 37.1

Technical 18,680 20.5 2.5 6.1 70.9

Tech-Prep 9,093 21.0 2.7 8.2 68.1


Academic Performance of Transfer Students fromTexas Colleges, 2011


Total30,945

N <2.0 2.0-2.49

2.5-2.99

3.0-3.49



16,332 2530 2767 3341 3628 2778 288 12,161

No Develop-mental Education

14,613 2450 2078 2691 3499 3664 241 11,000

Fall 2010 Transfers



Academic and Technical Associate Degree Transfers, 2010

Total30,945

N <2.0 2.0-2.49

2.5-2.99

3.0-3.49


Earned AA degree prior to transfer

8, 210 1045 1066 1561 2158 2239 141 6,435

Earned Technical Associate prior to transfer

1,319 216 162 218 319 424 52 864

Fall 2010 Transfers



Core Curriculum and Field of Study Complete, 2010

Total30,945

N <2.0 2.0-2.49

2.5-2.99

3.0-3.49


Core curriculum complete prior to transfer

9,284 1232 1227 1737 2310 2529 149 7,331

Field of study complete prior to transfer

508 63 56 123 139 121 6 404

Fall 2010 Transfers


Success Data from THECB6-year graduation rate and persistence for Fall 2004 Cohort

NumberFulltime

PercentageFulltime

NumberPart-time

PercentagePart-time

Earned Baccalaureate 7,628 13.4 6,974 13.0

Earned AA 6,412 11.2 3,743 7.0

Earned certificate 2,682 4.7 1,854 3.5

Total graduating 16,722 29.3 12,571 23.5

Non-graduates persisting

7,316 12.8 7,773 14.5

• Degree-seeking fulltime and part-time undergraduates


Success Data from THECB6-Year Baccalaureate Graduation Rate of First-time, Full-Time

Degree-seeking Students, 2005 entry

All White African American

Hispanic Asian Other

Same institution

50.9 58.0

31.8 43.8 64.2 45.2

Other institution

7.4 9.1 4.8 5.7 7.7 2.7

Still enrolled, same inst.

5.1 3.8 6.5 7.3 4.9 4.6

Still enrolled, other inst.

7.2 5.7 9.6 9.1 7.0 5.0

Not enrolled 29.4 23.4 47.3 34.1 16.2 45.2


Data Sources

• High school data are from the Texas Education Agency, Testing and Accountability, AEIS.

• K-12 and higher education data are from the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, Data Resources and Tools.


• After comparing our region to the state, do our top vertical alignment concerns remain the same?

• How have your opinions about the pipeline in our region changed?



Section C:Action Planning


• How do the local and state data influence our work?

• How might the data influence the steps in our action plan?

• Do we need to edit our action plan?



Purposes of Action Planning

• Guide action planning process and action.

• Provide basis for working with local institutional research (IR) officers to collect additional data.

• Identify benchmarks for evaluation of progress in implementation of goals over time.

• Offer rationale to motivate action for the region.


Where can I go for help with local data?

Consult your local expert!• Each Independent School District (ISD) and

Institution of Higher Education (IHE) has an employee who is responsible for providing data to TEA or THECB or the governing board and accreditors of the IHE. We refer to this individual or department as the Institutional Research officer.


Where can I go for help with local data?

The following Institutional Research Officers consulted in preparation of the slides that follow:• Anne Rusher, Director, Accountability and Data

Quality, Fort Worth ISD• Terri Day, Executive Director, Institutional

Research and Planning, Tarrant College District• Mary Barton, Director, Institutional Research,

University of North Texas


Suggestions from the experts

An example of local data collection and sharing.A chemistry vertical alignment team asks what grades were earned in the introductory college chemistry course by students from one school district. • UNT and TCD would provide group data if > 5 students; no

names would be provided unless students had given prior informed consent (due to FERPA).

• Would want several weeks notice. • Other data might also be of interest, i.e., retention,

developmental education, ethnicity (Achieving the Dream).


Suggestions from the experts

An example of local data collection and sharing.A chemistry vertical alignment team asks what grades were earned in the introductory college chemistry course by students from one school district who had completed high school chemistry with and without Algebra II . • ISD could provide high school transcript data and would share group

data with IHE through an MOU.• Would want several weeks notice.• Other data might also be of interest, i.e., grades earned in chemistry

and algebra, data on number of course attempts, EOC results, attendance, disciplinary data.

• FWISD administers an annual student survey with potentially relevant questions.


Suggestions for Collecting Data through Institutional Research

• Know what data you want in detail. Refine your request, and provide a spreadsheet.

• Institutional Research has busy times of year.

• Seeking data across institutions may require MOU and involvement of Sponsored Research.

• Be clear about how the data will help you.


Considerations for Local Data Collection

• Collection of data from students requires consideration of FERPA. Institutional Research officers recommend that you secure IRB approval and informed consent.

• Data warehouses are constantly improving. Be sure to ask whether the data you want are available.

Documents

Module 2Module 2 AVATAR Common Foundations: Understanding College and Career Readiness and Success 1