This Dana Center resource provides an overview of efforts to implement multiple math pathways at scale in American higher education. It focuses special attention on the structural and policy dimensions of ensuring that new gateway mathematics course sequences become standard institutional course offerings. These include: • Transfer and applicability across institutions; • Alignment of mathematics pathways within institutions; • Appropriate placement into gateway course and support structures.
Many institutions implementing and scaling mathematics pathways are faced with the challenge of enrolling students in relevant gateway math courses that are aligned to their programs of study. When faculty and policy agencies in Arkansas understood the impact of transfer and applicability of mathematics courses on students, they committed to state-level action and coordination to address the problem. In an effort to increase student success in mathematics and increase overall degree completion at a large scale, various Arkansas stakeholders set into motion strategic policy action to provide statewide guidance and alignment of non-STEM mathematics courses to programs of study.
This 2018 report provides an update of the current state efforts and progress towards increased student persistence and success as a result of implementing multiple mathematics pathways. This report specifically explores examples of innovative approaches to drafting and implementing task force recommendations from thirteen states working in collaboration with the Dana Center. Furthermore, this report provides a synopsis of key focus areas of state-level task force recommendations and concrete examples of customized state-level supports for the sustainability and scale math pathways.
Texas 2-year and 4-year transfer inventory guide for 2018-19.
Most state– and system–level policies and practices support the transferability of credits, but do not account for the applicability of those credits to a student’s program of study. Even when students are able to transfer credits, those credits might not count toward their desired majors, which can lead to wasted time, increased costs for both students and the state, and students dropping out of college altogether. Efforts to remedy these problems are most effective when enabled by a well-considered policy environment which, in turn, is informed by data. In Washington, substantive steps have been taken to address this issue with a data-driven process.
When the focus for entry-level mathematics shifted, over a decade ago, from access to success, it catalyzed demand for accelerated multiple mathematics pathways alongside the algebraic-intensive pathway. Subsequent successes have been exciting, showing more than three times the success rates for students in one third of the time for some programs. With these startling increases came a widespread concern about maintaining rigor within the discipline. In response to this concern, the Charles A. Dana Center engaged in a study of the meaning and intention of rigor in mathematics education. This paper first explores the meaning of rigor in mathematics education through a synthesis of interviews with leading mathematicians and educators, and presents a review of the literature in higher education and K–12. It concludes by offering recommendations for a shared definition of rigor and its implications for curriculum and instruction.
Six states gathered together in Fall 2018 to discuss progress and continuous improvement for mathematics pathways as a part of the Mathematics Pathways to Completion (MPC) project. This 13–minute video walks through the 3 essential elements of telling your story related to mathematics pathways in an effective and memorable way.
Implementation teams from six states gathered together in Fall 2018 to discuss progress and continuous improvement for mathematics pathways as a part of the Mathematics Pathways to Completion (MPC) project. This 26–minute video discusses normative practice at the MPC event, focusing on a state–level understanding of normative practice.
While mathematics pathways are not new, there is still a long way to go towards wide-scale adoption and normative practice. The premise of this monograph is that there is expertise to be shared and issues still to be addressed. The monograph comprises chapters organized along topics that are aligned with the DCMP theory of change. The DCMP believes that systemic and sustainable change is best achieved through a process that is faculty-driven, administrator-supported, policy-enabled, and culturally reinforced. We hope that each chapter will provide the guidance and inspiration for improving student success in mathematics education through the widespread adoption, implementation, and continuous improvement of mathematics pathways.
The Dana Center recommends that implementation of mathematics pathways is most effective when efforts are coordinated across institutions while still allowing for local decision making on how the pathways are operationalized. Monitoring depth of implementation of reforms under these conditions is a daunting task, especially when there is not a statewide policy mandate or significant funding for institutions. Collecting information about implementation practices is a further complexity. The Texas Success Center (TSC) has addressed these challenges related to implementation by highlighting exemplary practices among colleges and motivating continuous improvement. TSC supports Texas community colleges in a variety of ways including evaluating, supporting, and scaling ongoing efforts to improve student success rates.