{"id":2336,"date":"2018-09-19T22:00:58","date_gmt":"2018-09-20T02:00:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/postsecondaryreadiness.org\/dev\/?p=2336"},"modified":"2018-09-19T16:06:26","modified_gmt":"2018-09-19T20:06:26","slug":"multiple-measures-better-for-students","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/postsecondaryreadiness.org\/dev\/multiple-measures-better-for-students\/","title":{"rendered":"Assessing College Readiness Using Multiple Measures: Is It Better for Students?"},"content":{"rendered":"

Assessing College Readiness Using Multiple Measures: Is It Better for Students?<\/h1>\n

By Elisabeth Barnett<\/a><\/p>\n

\"Multiple<\/p>\n

Should a student who can pass a college-level course be made to take a remedial course to review K-12 math or English content?<\/p>\n

The answer to that question seems obvious. But when colleges use placement tests to determine which courses incoming students must take, many students who could do well in college-level courses are assigned to remedial courses, making it much less likely that they will ever graduate. The problem with the inaccuracy of college placement testing has been clear for several years, but researchers are still working to determine the best replacement for the tests.<\/p>\n

CAPR is studying one alternative placement method<\/a>, a system that combines multiple measures of college readiness\u2014including high school GPA, years since high school graduation, and placement test scores\u2014in an algorithm that weights them by their predictive power. Our new report<\/a> on seven community colleges in the State University of New York system that are using the algorithm shows that it is making a difference for students\u2014though it\u2019s too soon to tell its effects in the longer term. In the first semester of the study, many more students were placed into college-level math and English courses, and more students passed these courses, especially in English.<\/p>\n

Students participating in the CAPR study were randomly assigned to be placed using either multiple measures or the traditional placement system. Among students who took an English placement test in fall 2016, nearly 83 percent placed using the algorithm were deemed ready for college-level courses, compared with 52 percent of the control group. Of students who took a math placement test, nearly 49 percent placed using multiple measures were put in college-level math, compared with 44 percent in the control group.<\/p>\n

Because of the change in placement method, in the CAPR study alone, hundreds of students got to start directly on their college programs instead of looking ahead to one or more semesters of pre-college-level courses. What is more, early results indicate that they can keep up and even excel.<\/p>\n

In the multiple measures group, 40 percent enrolled in and passed college-level English, compared with 27 percent of the control group, and 17 percent enrolled in and passed a college-level math, compared with 14 percent of the control group. The reformed placement system also appeared to narrow the gap between men and women in math.<\/p>\n