The Student Success Task Force SB 1143

Зарегистрируйтесь, чтобы просмотреть полный документ!

The Student Success Task Force (SB 1143)

Overview • • • Introductions and 1143 Basics Status of 1143 Metrics Performance Based Funding (PBF) Potential Impact of PBF Questions and Discussion

Faculty Members of the Student Success Task Force • Manuel Baca, Member, Board of Governors • Richard Hansen, De. Anza College • David Morse, Long Beach City College • Jane Patton, President, ASCCC • Cynthia Rico-Bravo, San Diego Mesa College

Senate Bill 1143, Liu • Requires the Board of Governors (Bo. G) to: • Adopt a plan for promoting and improving student success… • Establish a Student Success Task Force…

Task Force on Student Success: Outcomes • (1) Multiple measures and effective programs for assessing student success and completion… • (2) Statutory and regulatory barriers to student success and completion. • (3) Best practices for promoting student success and completion, including, but not limited to, the acquisition of basic skills. • (4) Alternative funding options for providing necessary services to students and promoting best practices for student success and completion.

Task Force on Student Success: Outcomes • (5) Alternative funding options instituted in other states for improving student success and completion. • (6) The effective use of technology by community colleges and districts to promote, evaluate, and improve student success and completion.

“Every student identifies meaningful educational and/or career goals and obtains the knowledge and skills necessary to meet those goals. ”

Status of the Task Force on Student Success

“Alternative Funding” • • Change census date Change basis of funding Now – access-based If the goal is to change to a “success” or “completion” based funding model, what metric or metrics should be used?

Metrics • • • Course completion Certificates Degrees Transfer “Progression” – Level 1 > Level 2 – Basic Skills > Transfer

Performance Based Funding

History of Performance-Based Funding • Although states such as South Carolina, Tennessee and others in the late 1980 s and early 1990 s began allocating some of their funds for colleges through new metrics based on performance rather than traditional enrollment-based formulas, the idea did not catch on widely, and was seen as having relatively limited impact in most states that experimented with it.

Why? • Use of “crude measures” • Funding issues

The Washington Model • “momentum points” • “. . extra money for students who earn their first 15 and first 30 college credits, earn their first 5 credits of college-level math, pass a pre-college writing or math course, make significant gains in certain basic skills tests, earn a degree or complete a certificate. Colleges also will be rewarded for students who earn a GED through their programs.

The Washington Model • “All of these benchmarks are important accomplishments that help propel students forward on the road of higher education. ” • What does this statement – and the funding model – presume? • A causal connection. • Does the Washington model “work”?

Unintended Consequences • Do the potential unintended consequences outweigh the intended ones? • Will the intended ones happen? • What ‘controls’ need to be implemented?

Discussion, Questions, Conclusions

Скачать презентацию The Student Success Task Force SB 1143

9d4fdf5b48ad6a4527262eb5eda755af.ppt

Количество слайдов: 18