|
Spring 1997
Curriculum Committee, 1996-97
Bill Scroggins, chair, Chabot College
Luz Argyriou, Napa Valley College
Donna Ferracone, Crafton Hills College
Jannett Jackson, Fresno City College
Linda Lee, San Diego Miramar College
Jean Smith, San Diego Continuing Education
Bob Stafford, San Bernardino Valley College
Ron Vess, Southwestern College
Nancy Glock-Grueneich, Chancellor's Office liaison
Joyce Black, CIO liaison, Pasadena City College
Introduction
Prerequisites are an essential tool in the construction of curriculum
for courses in which student success is highly dependent on previously
acquired knowledge or skills. However, effective use of prerequisites
requires a balance of several countervailing factors. (Used in this
general sense the term prerequisites applies also to corequisites
and other limitations on enrollment.)
Applied overzealously, prerequisites which go beyond
needed skills will unnecessarily limit students' access to courses
and inhibit their ability to make normal progress toward fulfilling
their educational potential and may drive qualified students away
causing financial loss to the college. Used laxly or not at all,
weak or nonexistent prerequisites do not inform students of skills
needed to succeed in their courses. Instructors will find course
goals hard to achieve when precious class time is needed to teach
such unprepared students. In fact, these situations often create
pressures to reduce academic standards. The tendency of unprepared
students to drop out will create unfilled seats for which the college
will generate no income and make it seem that the instructional
program is weak and ineffective.
Properly set prerequisites benefit all: students,
faculty, and the college. Students know what is expected of them
without being denied access, faculty teach prepared students and
have a positive classroom environment, and the college has efficient
educational programs.
Appropriate prerequisites also require a balance between
externally imposed mandates and local control. State standards help
to assure that prerequisites do not deny access but yet uphold academic
standardsthe balance stated above. But local control must
be maintained over the mechanisms employed to institute prerequisites
and to empower faculty in assessing academic standards. Striking
this balance was one of the goals of the framers of the Title 5
prerequisite regulations passed in September of 1993. As good practices
for putting these regulations into place are discussed in this paper,
keep in mind the balance between access and success and between
state and local control. Advisories for Recommended Preparation
An instructor may wish to give advice to students on skills which
will enable them to get more out of a class. Advisories for recommended
preparation are intended to identify skills which will broaden or
deepen a student's learning experience but without which the student
will still succeed in the course. The college does not block student
enrollment for lack of advisory skills. Students are free to ignore
the advice. As is suitable for a recommendation, not a great deal
is required to establish advisories. The process is known as a basic
content review. Each local college is expected to develop its own
content review process. Typically, the content review process is
accepted by vote of the curriculum committee and the academic senate
and a form and/or explanation for content review is included in
the college curriculum handbook. A good model for content review
is that outlined in Method #23 in Matriculation Evaluation: Phase
III Local Research Options (California Community Colleges Chancellor's
Office, June 1992). In short, three steps are involved.
First, the discipline faculty who teach the course
examine their class materials: course outline, syllabus, text, exams,
and so forth. The point is to list skills that it would be a good
idea for students to have but which are not necessary to pass the
class. If, in the opinion of the discipline faculty, the students
would be highly unlikely to succeed without one or more previously-acquired
skills, then the faculty should consider proposing a prerequisite.
Next, the faculty should agree, either by consensus or vote, on
the skills to recommend. Finally, the best means by which students
can acquire these skills should be identified. This is usually a
coursebut not always. Examples of non-course advisories might
include typing speed for a computer course, a high school biology
class for a college biology class, or eligibility for English 1A
for a history class. Note that many of these would be difficult
to establish as prerequisites. To obtain curriculum committee approval
for an advisory, the originating faculty typically 1) present a
rationale which summarizes the process used and 2) include the advisory
skills in the course outline [Title 5 §55202(a)]. If the process
is clear and the course outline coherent, committee approval is
routine. Levels of Scrutiny for Prerequisites
The method to establish a prerequisite, called the level of scrutiny,
varies with the type of course: 1) prerequisites for transferable
courses can be established by a basic content review plus identification
of similar prerequisites used at three UC or CSU campuses; 2) courses
within or across sequences, especially vocational courses which
have no UC or CSU equivalents, can have prerequisites by going through
a documented content review; and 3) out-of-sequence communication
and computation skills (and non-course prerequisites) require data
collection and analysis in addition to content review.
Many transferable courses have standard prerequisites
that are well recognized in the discipline. The analysis begins
with basic content review as described under advisories but with
a higher level of rigor: identifying skills without which the student
is highly unlikely to succeed. Agreement of the discipline faculty
on these skills, either by consensus or vote, is important. In some
cases it may help to have each faculty member rank the skills, for
example on a scale such as 1-to-5, for the degree of impact on student
success. A mean score above certain level, e.g. 4, might be recommended
before advancing the skill for the prerequisite. The appropriate
course which teaches these skills is then proposed. If a similar
course is used as a prerequisite at three or more UC or CSU campuses,
the prerequisite is justified [Model District Policy II.A.1.a.].
Documentation presented to the curriculum committee
might consist of 1) a summary of the process and rationale, and
2) copies of the catalog descriptions of the target and prerequisite
courses at three UC or CSU campusesperhaps with a narrative
if the comparability of the courses is not obvious, and 3) a list
of the prerequisite skills in the course outline. The curriculum
committee approves the course and the prerequisite by separate action,
applying the criteria that 1) the content review process has been
followed, 2) the UC/CSU and proposed college courses are comparable,
and 3) the course outline is complete, well integrated, coherent
and meets Title 5 standards.
The second level of scrutiny is documented content
review [Model District Policy II.A.1.b.]. This analysis is sufficient
to establish prerequisites within a sequence or across a sequence,
such as prerequisites for a vocational courses which have no UC/CSU
equivalents. Excluded are communication or computational skillswhich
require data collection and analysis. The term "in a sequence"
does not imply that the courses are numbered or lettered sequentiallyor
even that the courses are in the same discipline. If the course
content of A is structured to lead into course B and students normally
take B after A, clearly the courses are sequential. Examples include
so-called "service courses" such as "Chemistry 70,
Pharmaceutical Chemistry" (in the chemistry discipline) as
a prerequisite for "Pharmacy 101: The Chemical Basis of Pharmacology"
(in the pharmacy technology discipline). The fundamental difference
between a basic content review and a documented content review is
the need to present evidence that the identified prerequisite skills
are covered in the proposed prerequisite course.
Again, the curriculum committee approves the course
outline and the prerequisite by separate action. In evaluating the
proposed prerequisite, the committee is generally checking that
1) the content review process was followed, 2) the proposed prerequisite
course does indeed teach the needed skills (and that both the target
and prerequisite course outlines demonstrate thisperhaps using
a grid analysis such as that shown below), and 3) the course outline
is complete, well integrated, coherent and meets Title 5 standards.
| Target
Course Prerequisite Skills |
|
Prerequisite Course Student Outcomes
|
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
| 1 |
|
X |
|
| 2 |
X |
|
|
| 3 |
|
|
X |
The analysis
of the exit skills in the prerequisite course and the entry skills
needed for the target course often leads to curriculum change.
-
Discussions
among instructors of the two courses may lead to the discovery
of topics or teaching methods which make the prerequisite skills
more effective for the target course. For example, science faculty
need students to graph scattered experimental data but graphing
may be taught in the prerequisite math class using points that
fall neatly on a line.
-
It may
be that not all of the prerequisite skills are taught in the
proposed prerequisite course. Options to deal with this include
1) teaching the prerequisite skill within the target course
itself, 2) adding the topic to the content of the proposed prerequisite
course, and 3) shifting the needed topic from another course
into the proposed course. For example, 9 of the 10 skills needed
for C may be taught in B but 1 may be taught in A. By moving
that topic to B, the prerequisite to C could be B alone rather
than both A and B.
The curriculum committee should
be sure that any gaps in prerequisites are covered. If not all the
needed skills are taught in the prerequisite course, how are students
to learn them?
The highest level of scrutiny
is data collection and analysis. This analysis is applied to out-of-sequence
communication and computation skills and non-course prerequisites.
Examples are "English 1A: Freshman Composition" as a prerequisite
to "History 17A: Early United States History," "Math
1A: Calculus" as a prerequisite to "Physics 4A: General
Physics" and "Computer Science 20: Basic Programming within
the last three years" as a prerequisite to "Computer Science
25: Intermediate Programming." (The latter is called a recency
prerequisite, establishing how recently the prerequisite course
has been taken.)
The basic premise is that the
college must demonstrate, using sound research practices, that students
are highly unlikely to succeed without these skills. The Model District
Policy, II.A.1.g.(3), states, "The research design, operational
definition, and numerical standards, if appropriate, shall be developed
by research personnel, discipline faculty, and representatives of
the Academic Senate." The college should establish a procedure
for developing such research designs. This procedure should be approved
by the curriculum committee and the academic senate and should appear
in the college's curriculum handbook. The Model District Policy
II.A.1.g. lists three options for student success: 1) grades, either
mid-term or final; 2) the instructor's evaluation of the student's
readiness for the course, and 3) the student's own self-evaluation
of his or her readiness. (A fourth option, assessment, can be used
as a measure and will be covered in the next section.) When using
grades, success is a "satisfactory grade" of A, B, C,
or CR [Title 5 §55200(d)]. Final grades are certainly a well-recognized
measure of student success, but mid-term grades may be a better
yardstick for readinessgiven that students who drop a course
late in the term rarely do so because of a lack of prerequisite
skills. When doing a grade analysis, classifying 'W' withdrawals
(drops after the add/drop date) and 'NG' no grades (drops before
the add/drop date) is quite advantageous. Some W's and NG's result
from lack of student readiness, but others are attributable to job
changes, family responsibilities, and so on. Should a W or NG be
counted as non-success or left out of the study entirely? One approach
is to ask instructors to make the determination. Did the drop occur
for non-academic reasons, job changes, family situations and so
on? If so, leave the W or NG out of the sample. If not, include
the student in the sample. As you will see, sample size, particularly
that of the "nonsuccess" population, is critical in producing
a meaningful statistical result. Besides grades, success may be
ascertained by an evaluation of readiness by the instructor or student.
Typically, instructors and/or students are surveyed for this information.
A good practice is to use a scale such as 1-to-5 or 1-to-10 from
"very prepared" to "not prepared at all." The
five or ten point spread produces a more meaningful correlation
with whether or not the student had the prerequisite. The survey
may be more effective when administered about one-third of the way
into the course. This gives enough time for students to attempt
course material but is not so late in the term that the survey just
duplicates the final grade results. Standard research methods to
evaluate the relationship between having the prerequisite and success
in the course include:
1) a correlation coefficient
such as the Pearson r (useful for continuous data such as grade-to-grade
correlations, often corrected for factors such as restriction of
range),
2) a matrix or four-cell table
and accompanying chi-square (for discrete categories of data such
as the "yes/no" answer to "does the student meet
the prerequisite?," and
3) a matrix or four-cell analysis
showing net increase in accuracy, a comparison of the percentage
of the students who succeed in the course before and after imposing
the prerequisite. (Applying the prerequisite should show a significant
gain in the percentage of students succeeding.)
The details of these methods
can be gleaned from standard statistics texts, and, in particular,
Method #23 in Matriculation Evaluation: Phase III Local Research
Options (CCCCCO, June 1992) and Appendix A in Assessment Validation
Project Local Research Options (CCCCCO, February 1991). The diagram
below may be useful in visualizing these methods.
| prerequisite?
The Four Cell Process |
|
success?
|
|
YES |
NO |
Goals: 1) minimize students who pass without
the prerequisite and thus would be denied access (here only
1), 2) significant chi-square, typically > 3.84 (here 2
= 60, significant at the 0.05 level, 3) maximize right/wrong
ratio, typically 2:1 (here 90:10 = 9:1), 4) maximize incremental
gain in success, typically by 10% (here before applying the
prerequisite 67/100 = 67%, after applying the prerequisite
66/75 = 88%; 21% gain).
|
| YES |
66
right
|
1 wrong |
| NO |
9
wrong
|
24
right
|
The numerical standard to justify
the prerequisite is entirely a local decision. Typical standards
are above approximately 0.35 for Pearson r, 3.84 for chi-square,
2:1 for right/wrong ratio, and 10% incremental gain in accuracy.
The above methods give meaningful
results only with reasonably sized samples. This is the origin of
the suggestion for 100 in the total sample and 20 in the nonsuccess
group. Problems arise with small sample sizes such as courses of
20 students taught only once a year. Waiting five years for data
is not practical. Although this is a thorny problem, some suggestions
may help.
1) It may be that the prerequisite
is not essential and could be replaced by and advisory on recommended
preparation. Advisories are taken seriously by students and may
be sufficient to assure good student success. In addition, many
instructional techniques can help less well prepared students: out-of-class
review sessions, tutoring, review reading and/or problem assignments,
and so forth.
2) Use all research methods
at your disposal to increase sample size and produce a meaningful
statistical correlation. If student demand for the course is high,
open an additional section. Count W's and NG's as nonsuccess unless
determined by the instructor to be nonacademic related drops. Collect
success data for all three measures and use the most statistically
significant result. Use several statistical measures and use the
results that seem most appropriate. If dependence on prerequisite
skills is strong, correlations will be high enough that even small
samples (i.e., 40) may be meaningful.
New courses do not have a tract
record on which to base research analysis of the need for a communication
or computation skills prerequisite. When a math or English prerequisite
for a new course appears to be needed, as an outcome of the established
curriculum approval process, the Model District Policy [II.A.1.g(4)]
provides for the establishment of the prerequisite for a two-year
provisional period while the data is collected and analyzed.
Every effort should be made
to inform students of the faculty's best advice for preparation.
On a practical level, it may even be more effective to set the skills
as advisory. In this way, students are advised of the recommended
skills, and, typically, sufficient numbers of students will enroll
both with and without those skills to make an analysis meaningful.
It may be, however, that the prerequisite is needed to be formally
part of the course outline to meet other requirements such as those
imposed by intersegmental articulation standards (e.g., freshman
composition as a prerequisite for the IGETC critical thinking-English
composition course).
Assessment Processes as Prerequisites
The steps required to use an assessment process for placement advice
are sufficient to meet the research requirements to establish that
assessment process as a prerequisite [Title 5 §55202(c)]. To
fully implement an assessment process requires 1) that any instrument
used be on the Chancellor's Office approved list, 2) local validation
of cut-off scores, 3) the use of multiple measures, and 4) checking
for disproportionate impact on historically underrepresented groups
and, if found, implementing a plan to ameliorate the disproportionate
impact [Title 5 §55524]. These regulations have been in place
since 1990 and are generally well understood.
It is good practice to use
the assessment result in concert with the equivalent course when
listing the prerequisite in the course description. For example,
an electronics class might have a math prerequisite listed in the
catalog as "Prerequisite: Math 101 or equivalent skills demonstrated
through the math placement process." This allows students the
alternative of placing into the course through assessment, or, if
starting the math course sequence at a lower entry point, to take
electronics after passing the appropriate math course.
Typically, the curriculum committee
establishes the assessment as an alternative to the course. Justification
of the prerequisite is then based on the level of scrutiny applied
to the course. Evidence that the assessment result is appropriate
to include along with the course listing consists of the research
needed to validate the assessment process (on Chancellor's list,
appropriate cutoff scores, justified multiple measures, lack of
disproportionate impact) for the prerequisite course in the discipline
sequence. For example, the college may have a math sequence such
as 100 (intermediate algebra), 101 (trigonometry), 102 (precalculus),
1 (calculus), etc. The curriculum committee first establishes Math
101 as the prerequisite to the Electronics course using data collection
and analysis (computational skill prerequisite). Then the curriculum
committee adds "or equivalent skills demonstrated through the
math placement process" when evidence is available that the
assessment process is valid. The "appropriate skill level"
would be that which would place the student in Math 102, thus demonstrating
that the student had mastered the math skills up through Math 101.
It should be pointed out that
Title 5, §55530(c) states that, "Whenever possible, students
should be permitted to avoid additional testing by submitting scores
on recently taken tests that correlate with those used by the district.
Districts should thus develop ways to recognize the results of assessments
students may have obtained in other districts. This would constitute
another way for students to satisfy a prerequisite: appropriate
assessment result in another district.
Corequisites
The levels of scrutiny to be applied to corequisites are the same
as those for prerequisites. Corequisites are to assure "that
a student acquires the necessary skills, concepts, and/or information,
such that a student who has not enrolled in the corequisite is highly
unlikely to receive a satisfactory grade in the course or program
for which the corequisite is being established" [Title 5 §55201(c)(3)].
The basic concept involved
in corequisites is that content in the two corequisite courses is
so intertwined that a student cannot reasonably pass either class
without the other. One example might be a nursing clinical practice
lecture class and the corresponding in-hospital clinical class.
Another might be a computer programming lecture class and the associated
lab class in which the student actually writes programs. Because
such paired courses ("two-way" corequisites) are part
of the same sequence, justification typically consists of a documented
content review. Information submitted to the curriculum committee
might reasonably be 1) a narrative-style rationale and 2) a section
in each course outline on "corequisite skills" which is
clearly connected to the "student outcomes" section in
the other outline.
Another situation for which
corequisites meet a curriculum need is that of an ancillary course
whose content is dependent on a main course, but the content of
the main course can stand alone, a so-called "one-way"
corequisite. An example would be a general education geology lecture
class and an associated geology lab class. The lab class has the
main class as corequisite because the principles of geology are
essential before doing field work. Students may take the lecture
class alone to meet general education requirements but may add the
lab to meet the laboratory requirement as well. A common occurrence
is that students taking only the lecture may become inspired to
subsequently enroll in the field course. To enable this option,
the catalog description of the field course, Geology 10L, might
be "Corequisite: Geology 10 (may be taken previously)."
The lecture course, Geology 10, would have no corequisite.
Health
and Safety Prerequisites
Health and safety skills constitute a separate category of prerequisites
[Title 5 §55201(c)(4), Model District Policy II.A.1.f.]. Such
a prerequisite is established by a documented content review. In
identifying the needed skills, faculty should concentrate on those
specific skills, concepts, and information without which the students
would create a hazard to themselves or those around them. Those
skills must be listed in the course outline, and faculty should
suggest a mechanism both for how the student would acquire those
skills and how the college would determine that the student possesses
them. Two options for achieving these latter two objectives are
described as follows.
In some cases it may be that
the needed skills are taught in another course. For example, the
nursing program may have a course, or a separate instructional unit
in a course, such as "Safe Practices in Clinical Situations."
By demonstrating that the health and safety prerequisite skills
for the target course are taught in this particular course (perhaps
using the grid method above), sufficient documentation is provided.
If the skills are a single unit within a more general course, however,
it is essential that successful mastery of those health and safety
skills be a requirement for passing the class. In the case of a
program such as nursing, the separate safety course could be used
as a program prerequisite which students would have to meet before
enrolling in the program.
It may be possible to distill
the necessary health and safety skills down to a single document
such as "Procedures for a Safe Chemistry Lab" or "Avoiding
Hazards in the Machine Shop." If so, the document could be
made available to students in advance of the class and an assessment
made of students' comprehension of the information. To satisfy the
need for multiple measures, testing of comprehension of both written
and oral information is possible. Written assessment could be in
the form of an objective test. It would be necessary to validate
appropriate cutoff scores and to assure that no group of students
is disproportionately impacted. Oral assessment is achieved by showing
the students a video tape giving instructions for avoiding typical
hazards. The students are then asked to respond aloud to a series
of questions asked orally (with very structured prompts and assessment
of sufficient student responses).
Thus, when health and safety
skills are found to be essential to avoiding hazards to students
and those around them, four approaches are possible.
1) Teach the skills within
the course and do not allow students to enter hazardous situations
until those skills are demonstrated. No prerequisite is needed.
2) Teach the skills as a separate
course or a unit within an existing course and make that course
a prerequisite to the target course in which the student will encounter
the hazardous situation(s).
3) Teach the skills in a separate
course which becomes a prerequisite to the program in which the
hazards exist.
4) Provide information on the
skills in a separate document, video, etc. and then assess the skills
using multiple measures.
Ability to avoid the creation
of hazards is often closely tied to students' communication and
computation skills. Health and safety prerequisites must be based
on very specific skills associated with the particular hazards that
students will encounter. Use of a general English or math course
as a health and safety prerequisite is not allowed. Remember that
such general communication and computation skill prerequisites must
be established by data collection and analysis.
Program
Prerequisites
An educational program is "an
organized sequence of courses leading to a defined objective, a
degree, a certificate, a diploma, a license, or transfer to another
institution of higher education" [Title 5 §55000]. Programs
are approved by the Chancellor's Office and are published in the
Inventory of Approved Degree and Certificate Programs. Several sections
of Title 5 are relevant to program prerequisites.
§55201. Policies for Prerequisites,
Corequisites, and Advisories on Recommended Preparation.
(b)(1) Determinations about
prerequisites and corequisites shall be made on a course-by-course
or program-by-program basis.
(c)(2) The prerequisite will
assure, consistent with Section 55002(a)(2)(D), that a student has
the skills, concepts, and/or information that is presupposed in
terms of the course or program for which it is being established,
such that a student who has not met the prerequisite is highly unlikely
to receive a satisfactory grade in the course (or at least one course
within the program) for which the prerequisite is being established.
§58106. Limitations on
Enrollment
In order to be claimed for
purposes of state apportionment, all courses shall be open to enrollment
by any student who has been admitted to the college, provided that
enrollment in specific courses or programs may be limited as follows:
(a) Enrollment may be limited
to students meeting prerequisites and corequisites established pursuant
to Sections 55200-55202 of this Division,
(b) Enrollment may be limited
due to health and safety considerations, facility limitations, faculty
workload, the availability of qualified instructors, funding limitations,
the constraints of regional planning, or legal requirements imposed
by statutes, regulations, or contracts. The governing board shall
adopt policies identifying any such limitations and requiring fair
and equitable procedures for determining who may enroll in affected
courses or programs. Such procedures shall be consistent with one
or more of the following approaches:
(1) limiting enrollment to
a "first-come, first-served" basis or using other nonevaluative
selection techniques to determine who may enroll; or
(2) limiting enrollment using
a registration procedure authorized by Section 58108; or
(3) in the case of intercollegiate
competition, honors courses, or public performance courses, allocating
available seats to those students judged most qualified; or
(4) limiting enrollment in
one or more sections of a course to a cohort of students enrolled
in one or more courses, provided however, that a reasonable percentage
of all sections of the course do not have such restrictions....
In summary, program prerequisites
may be established by justification for a single course or a collection
of courses within the program or for performance in the entire program.
Programs cannot have a separate admission process; students are
admitted to the college (open access) and enrolled in its courses
and programs, although an application for such program enrollment
is permitted. The pool of students qualified to enroll in a program
is created by identifying those who have met the prerequisites for
the program. If fewer seats are available for courses in the program
than the number of qualified students in the pool, a non-evaluative
process must be used to determine who will be in the classes. Beyond
the registration priority system established for all courses at
the college through Title 5 §58108, determination of which
students will enroll in the program may be based on health and safety
considerations; limitations imposed by statute, regulation or contract;
or a selection process such as first-come-first served, waiting
list, or lottery. The Board of Trustees must act to establish policies
for registration priorities, health and safety limitations, statutory/regulatory/contractual
limitations, and the nonevaluative selection process to be used.
Thus the activities involved
in selecting students for enrollment in programs fall into two areas:
establishing prerequisites and other limitations on enrollments
and then devising a process for selection among those in the qualified
pool.
The structure of programs which
typically need prerequisites usually begins with students taking
courses from the general curriculum and then, based on that performance,
advancing to specific courses that constitute the program. One example
might be a biotechnology program, during the first year of which,
students take general courses in biology, math, chemistry, and physics.
Based on satisfactorily completing these fundamental courses, students
are selected for enrollment in the program, consisting of specific
biotechnology courses, for their second year of study. Another example
would be a nursing AA degree program in which students would be
expected to meet general education requirements and satisfactorily
complete core courses in biology, chemistry and safe clinical practices
before being selected to enroll in the program. Only those enrolled
in the program would be eligible to take the specific courses that
constitute the two-year nursing program.
Establishing program prerequisites
follows the same levels of scrutiny as prerequisites for courses.
For a course prerequisite, justification requires basic content
review plus 3 UC/CSU equivalencies for transferable courses, documented
content review for courses within or across sequences and for which
UC/CSU comparability is not available, and data collection and analysis
for communication and computation skills. Non-course prerequisites
also require data collection and analysis. Health and safety prerequisites
require documented content review. The process is typically to find
the course within the program which is most dependent on the prerequisite
skills under consideration. Then, using the appropriate scrutiny,
justify the prerequisite for that course and thus for the program.
It may be that this process is best applied to a collection of courses
or for performance in the entire program. Some examples may help.
-
A biotechnology program
may have an advanced course in toxicology for which certain
skills in chemistry are essential. Through a documented content
review, those skills are identified, and general college chemistry
is found to have each of those skills among its student outcomes.
This is justification for having general chemistry as a prerequisite
for the course and thus for the program.
-
An emergency medical technician
program has a series of critical care courses for which understanding
of human anatomy is essential. No one course is dependent on
all the aspects of anatomy, but, when taken together, success
in the critical care series is highly dependent on the skills
taught in human anatomy. Thus the course in anatomy constitutes
a prerequisite both for the critical care series and for the
entire program.
-
An electronics program
contains a course in circuit diagrams in which students are
highly unlikely to succeed without certain algebra skills, found
to be taught in intermediate algebra. Through data collection
and analysis (following the college-based process), success
in the circuit course is found to be highly dependent on success
in intermediate algebra. This means that intermediate algebra
can be a program prerequisite as well.
-
A dental hygiene program
is observed to have an unacceptable drop-out rate. Profiling
those who have unsuccessfully left the program indicates that
poor grades in a composite of anatomy, physiology, and chemistry
seem to be a common factor. Being a non-course prerequisite,
the GPA in these classes is correlated by sound research practices
to the success rate in the program as a whole, with the greatest
gain in accuracy obtained at a cutoff of 2.75 in the composite
GPA for anatomy, physiology, and chemistry, thus establishing
a prerequisite for the program.
-
A fire science program
is operated under an instructional agreement with the county.
The contract, as adopted by the Board of Trustees, specifies
that the work experience portion of this program requires a
Fire Fighter Academy 1 Certificate and an EMT certificate. This
contract is sufficient justification for these certificates
as a limitation on enrollment in the work experience course
but NOT to the program as a whole (as this is not specified
in the contract). Note that this is a limitation on enrollment,
not a prerequisite. As such, establishing this limitation for
the course cannot be generalized as a limitation on enrollment
in the program because this would go beyond the language of
the contract.
-
A commercial photography
program is having trouble with high drop out rates. A content
review shows complex analytical and critical thinking skills
that may be acquired in a variety of degree-credit courses.
In an attempt to identify those who have those skills, a study
is done on the correlation between GPA in previous degree-credit
courses and performance in the program, both by course and in
the program as a whole. No acceptable level of correlation is
found, and no prerequisite is established.
-
A nursing program has been
using a point system for enrollment in the program consisting
of points for GPA in all college courses, for GPA in science
courses, for grade in English 1A, and for performance in an
interview. Content review shows skills needed in sciences, English,
and interpersonal skills as well. Through sound research practices,
the two GPA factors are found to be significant at 2.75 overall
GPA and 3.00 GPA in science courses and are thus retained as
program prerequisites. Research shows that the grade in English
1A is not well correlated with student success in the program
or its courses. English 1A is retained as an advisory on the
basis of the content review. The faculty is concerned about
the lack of an English prerequisite and the impact on safety
in clinical situations. As a result, a course entitled "Safe
Clinical Procedures" is implemented and a documented content
review places this course as a program prerequisite. The interview
process is found to be too inconsistent to meet the requirements
of Title 5 and is eliminated. The qualified pool of those with
an overall GPA of 2.75, a GPA of 3.00 in the sciences and a
passing grade in "Safe Clinical Procedures" still
exceeds the number of seats available in the program. Thus a
waiting list process is instituted, using the registration priority
system for general courses, and is approved by the Board of
Trustees.
-
The last example illustrates
the final step in producing a workable enrollment system for
impacted programs. Usually, the process begins with a requirement
for students to fill out an application for enrollment (not
admission) to the program by a certain cutoff date. After the
pool of qualified students is determined by using prerequisites,
non-evaluative enrollment measures must be used to determine
who among those remaining will actually get a seat in the program's
courses. Typically, one of three processes is used.
-
A lottery is held to determine
who is enrolled. If 24 seats exist for the program, 24 names
are chosen randomly, and those applicants are sent acceptance
letters asking them to respond affirmatively by a certain date.
A negative or non-response removes the students from the list
and more names are drawn from the hat and the process repeated
until a full complement of students is obtained. Some colleges
hold previous applications over for the following year and some
require students to reapply. Even if old applications are retained,
there is little predictability as to when a given student will
actually be allowed to enroll. This factor probably makes a
lottery the least favored of these three choices.
-
Enrollment is determined
by first-come-first served. Post marked dates on the required
application determine the order in which qualified students
are accepted. If one of those selected does not accept by a
certain date, the next person on the list is sent an acceptance
letter. By rolling the list over from year to year, students
are given more certainty of the year in which they will be allowed
to enroll.
-
A waiting list is established,
the priorities within the pool of qualified applicants being
determined using non-evaluative criteria such as those in the
registration priority system used for general courses in the
college. Examples of such factors which can produce a prioritized
list include continuing enrollment status, total units at the
college, percentage of W's, and matriculation status. The same
type of letter-by-an-acceptance-date process is used to fill
the seats in the program. The waiting list can be rolled over
to the next year with new qualified applicants added to the
bottom. This give students who are not accepted in a given year
some indication of when they would make it into the program.
Alternatively, the old and new applicants can be reprioritized
each year. This practice has engendered some student complaints
regarding uncertainty in predicting when they will actually
be allowed to enroll in the program.
Title 5 §58106 requires
the Board of Trustees to act upon which non-evaluative enrollment
method the college will use. This is typically just a general policy
without the specifics of the procedures as discussed above.
Other
Limitations on Enrollment
Section 58106 of Title 5 specifies
that all courses shall be open to enrollment by any student who
has been admitted to the college but allows the Board of Trustees,
by enacting specific policies and requiring fair and equitable procedures,
to limit enrollment in specific courses or programs by using:
1) prerequisites and corequisites;
2) health and safety considerations;
3) practical considerations
such as facilities limitations, faculty workload and availability,
and funding limitations;
4) registration systems such
as first-come-first-served or a priority system within the constraints
of §58108;
5) statutory, regulatory, or
contractual requirements;
6) for intercollegiate competition,
honors, or public performances courses, procedures allocating available
seats to those judged must qualified; or
7) limiting enrollment in one
or more sections of a course to a cohort of students, provided that
no more than a reasonable number of sections are restricted.
The last three of these "other
limitations" will be covered in the following categories: 1)
performance courses (intercollegiate competition and public performances),
2) honors courses, 3) blocks of courses or sections, and 4) legal
requirements (statutory, regulatory, or contractual). See the Model
District Policy II.C. It should be pointed out that these are NOT
prerequisites and are not subject to the levels of scrutiny described
earlier in the paper.
Because curriculum is an academic
and professional matter, the policies and procedures adopted by
the Board to enact these "other limitations" should be
based on recommendations of the academic senate. It would be good
practice for the academic senate to develop such policies with a
campus-wide committee. Typically, this would be the senate's Educational
Policy committee or other standing or ad hoc group. These policies
should be passed as resolutions of the senate and sent to the Board
as recommendations.
Performance courses may have
limitations such as tryouts for intercollegiate athletic teams and
auditions for courses involving public performance, e.g., band,
orchestra, theater, competitive speech, chorus, journalism, and
dance. The Model District Policy specifies that such limitations:
1) should not block student access to a degree or certificate, 2)
should be reviewed during the regular six-year program review cycle,
and 3) should not result in disproportionate impact on historically
underrepresented groups.
For example, consider a Drama
1A course which contains a public performance of a stage play and,
as a consequence, requires a successful audition for enrollment.
This course cannot then be a requirement for an AA degree in drama.
It could, however, be part of a list of restricted electives, any
one of which must be taken to get the drama degree. In this way
students who do not audition successfully have an option to take
another course to get a degree in drama. Note that it is not the
audition itself which triggers these strictures but rather its use
to limit enrollment. It could be that ALL students are allowed to
enroll in the course and the audition is used to determine the roles
within the performance. All should have an opportunity to benefit
from instruction, although some may do so in lead roles, others
in supporting roles, and perhaps some through acting in front of
the class rather than in the public performance.
The Model District Policy also
specifies that the course outline list the degrees and certificates
for which the performance course is a restricted elective and include
the other courses the student has the option to take. In cases such
as this, the program requirements are typically listed in the college
catalog, so not a great deal of effort should be involved in gathering
this information.
Performance courses must be
reviewed on a regular six-year cycle to determine if the audition
or try-out is still needed. The basis for the review is up to the
faculty in that discipline. One of the considerations should be
the impact on historically underrepresented groups. Model #12 in
Assessment Validation Project Local Research Options (February 1991)
gives an example of research methods to do this analysis. If bias
is found, it may be possible to broaden the base of participation
through recruiting efforts or better articulation with related programs
in feeder high schools.
The "fair and equitable
procedures" requirement of §58106 implies that students
should be fully aware of the limitations on their enrollment. The
course description in the catalog and schedule of classes should
contain a statement such as "enrollment subject to audition;
see page XXX" and the full information on the audition (date,
time, place, skills assessed, etc.) should appear on page XXX or
in another referenced publication easily accessible to students.
Honors courses, or sections
of courses, if used to restrict enrollment as the other limitations
in this section, must be enacted by Board policy (upon recommendation
by the senate), usually as an "honors program." As with
performance courses, honors courses cannot block student access
to a degree and must be structured in a fair and equitable manner.
The Model District Policy, however, does not specify any special
program review or disproportionate impact studies for honors courses.
The criteria for enrollment
in an honors program (really, its courses and sections) can be based
on any fair and equitable criteria. Typically, students are expected
to maintain a respectable GPA and continue in good status in the
college. The catalog description of honors courses and the schedule
of classes description of honors sections might be something like
"enrollment limited to honors students; see page XXX."
Again, page XXX or another readily available publication would tell
students how to become part of the honors program. With this restriction,
only those students identified by the college as part of the honors
programfollowing the Board adopted policywould be permitted
to enroll in these courses and sections. A less restrictive process
is to designate the courses or sections as "designed primarily
for honors students; see page XXX." In this way, any student
is free to enroll. Honors students may be identified as a cohort
of students and then block enrolled in the course, but any remaining
seats can then be filled through regular enrollment. This type of
honors program does not limit enrollment and so takes no special
Board action.
Some honors courses are uniquely
designed, but most are modifications of existing courses. To what
extent does the curriculum in an honors course or section differ
from the regular course or section? If it is the section of the
course which is designated as honors, then the required student
outcomes are the same as for all sections. The "honors"
nature is justified by optional topics beyond those in the course
outline and/or the stimulation offered by being among more talented
students. If it is the course which is honors, then a unique course
outline must be written and presented to the curriculum committee.
It is NOT sufficient to just turn in the same outline as for History
17 and call it honors History 17H! Each course must meet a distinct
need in the curriculum and must have a unique course outline of
record. History 17H would be expected to have more advanced student
outcomes, a broader and deeper content, more challenging assignments,
more invigorating instructional methods, more rigorous grading,
and/or an exceptional text and instructional materials. Creation
of honors courses is not to be undertaken lightly. A good deal of
planning is involved, particularly because the creation of such
new courses means that they must be articulated separately from
the base course.
Blocks of courses or sections
are identified to create a cohort of students who will all enroll
together in that set of classes. Again, limiting enrollment in such
blocks of classes cannot create a barrier to attainment of degrees
and certificates. It is specified by the Model District Policy that,
if part of a restricted elective for a degree, course outlines of
block enrolled sections must list that degree and the other courses
on the restricted elective list as options for students. Typically,
cohorts of students are part of a special program such as GAIN,
PACE, or Puente. As with the other limitations, restricting enrollment
in courses or sections for the specific use of students in these
programs requires Board action. There is no specification of special
reviews or impact studies for block enrollment.
To maintain fair and equitable
practices, courses or sections for block enrollment are identified
in the catalog and/or schedule with language such as "enrollment
limited to those in the Puente program; see page XXX" where
the mentioned page lets students know how to become part of the
Puente program. With such a limitation in place, just students in
the specified cohort may enroll. A less restrictive approach might
say "designed for students in the Puente program; see page
XXX." The students in the cohort would be enrolled as a block,
and then remaining seats could be filled through regular enrollment.
It may be that enrollment in
certain courses is restricted because of statutory, regulatory,
or contractual requirements. The Board policy in establishing such
limitations need only cite the regulation or statute. Adoption by
the board of a contract for an instructional agreement containing
enrollment limitations is sufficient to put such contractual enrollment
restrictions in place.
For example, Title 22, Section
101216(g)(3) of the California Code of Regulations, established
by the state Department of Social Services, specifies that all those
providing services in a child care facilityincluding volunteers
doing so as part of a courseshall be in good health and shall
pass a tuberculosis test.
Title 22, California Code of
Regulations: Division 12, Chapter 1
Child Day Care General Licensing
Requirements
101216 Personnel Requirements
(g)(3) The good physical health
of each volunteer who works in the facility shall be verified by:
(A) A statement signed by each
volunteer affirming that he/she is in good health.
(B) A test for tuberculosis
performed not more than one year prior to or seven days after initial
presence in the facility.
A course such as "Early
Childhood Development 12: Preschool Practicum" would then have
a catalog description specifying "Enrollment limited to those
in good physical health with TB clearance."
In another case, the college
may have an instructional agreement with the county fire department
to provide work experience training. The contract may specify the
certificates such students should possess. A course such as "Fire
Science 95: Work Experience" might then have a statement such
as "Enrollment limited to those with a State Fire Fighter I
Academy Certificate and an EMT Certificate."
Again, these are NOT prerequisites.
The only action required is that of the Board in citing appropriate
laws or regulations or in accepting the terms of the contract. In
its action the Board must specify the fair and equitable procedures
to be used in implementing such limitations on enrollment. In approving
outlines of record for such courses, the curriculum committee would
merely record in its own minutes the citation of the applicable
Board of Trustees minutes.
Strategies
to Enforce Prerequisites
Prerequisites, by their very
nature, assure that only students who have the necessary skills
are permitted to enroll in the target class. That notion is reinforced
by Title 5 §55200(a): "'Prerequisite' means a condition
of enrollment that a student is required to meet in order to demonstrate
current readiness for enrollment in a course or educational program"
(emphasis added). Thus colleges are required to develop mechanisms
for enforcing enrollment blocks on students who do not have the
stated prerequisites. The Model District Policy, Section I.E., says
that such enforcement "must be done in some consistent manner
and not left exclusively to the classroom instructor." It goes
on to specify that "every attempt shall be made" to enforce
such limitations prior to enrollment.
The most comprehensive method
to enforce prerequisites is undoubtedly the use of computer checks.
Most colleges now have student historical records on file and the
capacity to flag enrollment requests which do not meet prerequisite
criteria. In most cases it is a matter of searching the historical
file to ascertain if the student has taken the particular prerequisite
course.
Some situations can be a bit
more complex, however. A quite common occurrence is that of a student
who has taken the prerequisite course at another institution. It
is extremely important that students are notified of the prerequisite
blocking system both in writing when they apply and during orientation.
Particularly, students with course work at other colleges should
have their records on handfor a variety of reasons, just one
of which is to have their transcript analyzed for course work equivalent
to college prerequisites. Of course, this implies that the college
has a mechanism in place to do transcript analysis and enter the
results in the computer to remove the blocks. It is good practice
for community colleges within each region to have agreed-upon comparability
of courses, particularly in math and English. This comparability
might be displayed, for example, in grid form as shown below. With
such information close at hand, it becomes a relatively straight-forward
clerical task to find the comparable courses on the transcript.
Those doing such an analysis should have computer clearance to enter
the appropriate codes to clear the blocks.
|
English Sequence Comparability Chart - City
College
|
|
City College
|
Lake College
|
River College
|
Valley College
|
Level
|
|
English 200A
|
English 98A
|
English 201
|
English 8
|
1
|
|
English 200B
|
English 98B
|
English 202
|
English 9
|
2
|
|
English 100A
|
English 99A
|
English 101
|
English 100A
|
3
|
|
English 100B
|
English 99B
|
English 102
|
English 100B
|
4
|
|
English 1A
|
English 100A
|
English 1A
|
English 101A
|
5
|
|
English 1B
|
English 100B
|
English 1B
|
English 101B
|
6
|
When an assessment process
is used as a prerequisite, the placement result must be entered
into the computer and accessed during the prerequisite check. In
the case of math and English, many colleges establish a number for
the "steps in the ladder" of the sequence. This allows
the assessment recommendation to be entered with the same code as
the corresponding course in the sequence. Comparable courses at
other colleges can also be entered with that coding system. For
example, student A might have placed into the English sequence by
taking an assessment test which, combined with the college-approved
multiple measures, led to a placement code of 4 (fourth step in
the English sequence; see above chart). Student B started with the
entry level English course at the college and has now passed courses
to earn the same placement code of 4. Student C took English courses
at a neighboring college which were comparable to those at the present
college to give the same placement code of 4. Student D challenged
the prerequisite and demonstrated knowledge equivalent to a placement
at level 4 of the English sequence. (See the next section for a
discussion of student challenges.) By the way, these four options
constitute the only legitimate ways to remove a prerequisite computer
block. No one person, not a counselor, not the instructor of the
course signing an add card, not the college president, can remove
a waive a prerequisite. No one can allow a student to "walk
by" a prerequisite.
Computer checks can be done
on-line while the student is standing at the registration window.
However, the extensive computer searching necessary can slow down
the process considerably, for example, from 20 seconds or so to
something like a minute or more. This may not seem like much, but
when multiplied by the number of students registering, a considerable
delay can result. When implementing such an on-line computer check
system, it is prudent to budget for the hardware to produce a reasonable
increase in computing speed and memory if processing time is anticipated
to be a problem. Most colleges have put such systems in place gradually,
testing the impact on the system and making adjustments accordingly.
Because of the complex nature of the process, most colleges initially
just use computer checks for a subset of courses, typically math,
English, and ESL.
A common situation which arises
when using computer blocks is the need to enroll students in the
target course for the spring term while they are still in the midst
of taking the prerequisite in the fall term. A common approach is
to program the computer so that active enrollment in the prerequisite
course also removes the block. Once grades are available, a computer
run is done to identify those who did not succeed in the prerequisite
course. Those students are involuntarily dropped from the course
and sent a letter to that effect. It is imperative that students
be warned of this consequence when enrolling. It will also change
the students fee status, usually necessitating a refund. It is also
a good idea to print out a roster of such involuntarily dropped
students for use by the instructor of record. In this way, students
who may mistakenly show up for class can be notified of the situation
by the instructor.
An increasingly popular innovation
is telephone registration. While programming prerequisite checks
for on-line phone registration is certainly feasible, it is not
often a high priority when instituting such a system. However, it
is not unreasonable to plan for its addition to the system. Even
without on-line blocks, the issue of prerequisite enforcement can
still be addressed. It may be possible to trigger a recorded message
when a student attempts to enroll in a course with a prerequisite.
Depending on the approach favored by the college, the student could
be instructed to come to the college in person to enroll in such
classes or could be told that prerequisites will be checked at a
later time, and, if found lacking, result in the student being involuntarily
dropped.
An alternative for colleges
with limited computer capacityor limited staff resources to
do the necessary programmingis to substitute batch runs at
periods of low activity for on-line computer checks. It may be possible,
for instance, to do a computer run each night to identify those
who have enrolled without the necessary prerequisites. Those students
are involuntarily dropped from the course and sent a letter to that
effect. The disadvantage is that these students are no longer physically
present to deal with the consequences: choosing a more appropriate
class, paying the correct fee for the adjusted units, and so forth.
It therefore becomes essential for the college to provide students
with accessible information and adequate warning of the outcome
of enrolling in a course for which they do not have the prerequisite.
Those students will be involuntarily dropped from the course, may
need to choose a more appropriate class, and will have to request
a refund of fees.
Less effectively, a computer
run could be done at the time rosters are printed, involuntarily
dropping students who do not have the prerequisite, sending a letter
to those involved, and printing a list of such students for each
class affected to be sent to the instructor of record.
Non-automated prerequisite
checks are allowed as long as they are applied consistently. Each
student entering a given course should be checked for prerequisites
in the same manner. Probably the most common non-computer method
in use is that of roster checking. In this method the instructor
checks the printed roster against a record of those students who
have met the prerequisite. Those who do not are identified and informed
by the instructor on the first day of class. If this system is to
work effectively, the college must provide a reliable record of
students who are qualified for courses with prerequisites. Several
examples may help to illustrate the point. College A has a complete
historical data base of student grades but no automated computer
blocking mechanism. Instructors teaching classes with prerequisites,
do, however, have access to the system and can query the data base
as to whether or not students on their roster have met the prerequisite.
(In this example, instructors have a "right to know" because
they are enforcing the college policy on prerequisites.) College
B maintains a data base of English course grades and assessment
results in the division office. Students are required to get a print
out authorizing their enrollment in the appropriate English class
and present that print out at registration. College C also maintains
an English data base in the division office but makes it available
only to English instructors for roster checks. College D has a "paper
data base" consisting of an alphabetical print out of students
who have either taken English or the assessment and the appropriate
placement level. College E has a paper data base that consists of
photocopies of past student grades and assessment results. Instructors
must leaf through these to ascertain the prerequisite status of
their students. As you can tell, examples A to E vary from the more
to the less technological and so also gradually become less consistent
and place a greater burden on the classroom instructor. Such departmental
or divisional roster checks tread perilously close to violating
the Model District Policy statement that prerequisite enforcement
be "not left exclusively to the classroom instructor."
They also do not follow the Model District Policy guideline that
"every effort be made" to check prerequisites prior to
enrollment. More than that, instructors checks allow the instructor
access to the level of preparation of the individual students. This
opens the instructorand the collegeto claims of discriminatory
behavior if this information is used to the detriment of the student.
They do, however, meet the letter of the regulation, Title 5 §55202(g).
The determination of whether
a student meets a prerequisite shall be made prior to his or her
enrollment in the course requiring the prerequisite, provided, however,
that enrollment may be permitted pending verification that the student
has met the prerequisite or corequisite. If the verification shows
that the student has failed to meet the prerequisite, the student
may be involuntarily dropped from the course if the applicable enrollment
fees are promptly refunded . . . .
Student
Challenges
The Board policy on prerequisites must include the bases and process
for an student to challenge a prerequisite [Title 5 §55201(b)(4)].
The grounds for a student to challenge a prerequisite are set forth
in Title 5 §55201(f): 1) the prerequisite has not been established
following the district's policy; 2) the prerequisite has not been
established in accord with Title 5; 3) the prerequisite is discriminatory
or applied in a discriminatory manner; 4) the student can demonstrate
knowledge equivalent to the prerequisite; and 5) the student progress
is unduly delayed because the prerequisite course is not reasonably
available. The regulation points out that "the student shall
bear the initial burden of showing that grounds exist for the challenge."
The college will resolve the challenge in a "timely manner"
and, if the challenge is upheld, allow the student to enroll in
the class. The Model District Policy, in section I.B.1., specifies
that the challenge be resolved within 5 days and that a seat in
the class, if available, be held for the student for that time.
The Model District Policy also states that the evaluation of equivalent
knowledge be done by a faculty member in the discipline but, if
possible, not by the instructor of the section of the course into
which the student is attempting to enroll. The Policy also states
that, when an appeal is decided by a single person rather than a
committee, the student be given the right to an appeal.
Most colleges have met the
requirement for a student challenge process with 1) a Board policy,
2) a detailed process, and 3) a form for the student to initiate
the process. Adequate information about the challenge process must
be in the catalog and schedule of classes. It is good practice to
publish the information in the student handbook, or any other such
written material, and to present the concept of prerequisites and
the student right to challenge during orientation. It is NOT good
practice to just hand students a challenge form. This is a complex
issue which is best covered by a one-on-one discussion with a competent
staff member. Many times students pursue the challenge because they
are uninformed about the prerequisite process, and a bit of sensible
conversation can settle the matter without initiating a time-consuming
paper process. It is a good idea to have the contact staff person
be in an accessible office. Commonly, students are asked to go to
the matriculation office or to the appropriate division office.
The majority of challenges
cite equivalent knowledge as the basis. In these cases the form
and attached documentation are reviewed by a faculty member who
teaches the course which has the prerequisite being challenged.
Because such challenges often occur during registration periods
when classes are not in session, it is important for the office
where the student made first contact to get in touch with the appropriate
faculty member as soon as possible. Most instructors recognize the
importance of having qualified students in their classes and are
more than willing to take the time to drop by the college and go
over the documentation. Some areas where challenges are common,
such as English, might want to form a committee to become well aware
of the process and to stand available to review challenges.
The "timely manner"
required in Title 5 to settle the challenge is refined to "five
working days" by the Model District Policy. Many colleges also
require the challenge to be filed before the first day of class.
If the challenge is filed later than that, or there is no space
available in the class, the challenge establishes the student's
eligibility to enroll in the course for the next term.
In evaluating equivalent knowledge,
instructors must be consistent in applying standards. For example,
a common challenge on equivalent knowledge is that of a computer
science sequence for which a student submits materials related to
work experience in the field. If one student is judged to have met
the prerequisite by being an experienced programmer, the next such
challenger must also. It is good practice for discipline faculty
to have a written description of the kind of evidence which has
been accepted as precedent for establishing equivalent knowledge.
It may even be possible for the person first contacted by the student
to relate the substance of this past practice to the student to
aid in the preparation of documentation.
A note of caution is appropriate
here. Granting a student request to waive a prerequisite on the
basis of equivalent knowledge does NOT give the student academic
credit for that course. For example, a student may be allowed to
enroll in French 3 by demonstrating knowledge equivalent to French
2, but no credit for French 2 will be granted. If the students needs
credit for French 2, to meet degree or transfer requirements for
example, it might be more appropriate to advise the student to pursue
the college's credit by examination process. If successful, French
2 would appear on the student's transcript with the appropriate
units AND the student would also meet the prerequisite for French
3.
When more than one faculty
member is not available to review a challenge, the student has the
right to an appeal. This may be a subsequent review by another faculty
member on a content basis or by an administrator on a process basis.
It is good practice for the instructor(s) doing the review to not
be the instructor of record for the section of the course into which
the student is asking to be placed. When this is not possible, it
is a good idea for the initial contact person to remove any references
to the identity of the student. If measures such as these are not
taken, a situation may develop in which the student feels that knowledge
about the challenge is being used in a discriminatory manner by
the instructor in the class. Where possible, routine practices should
remove even the possibility of discrimination.
Implementation
Strategies for Reviewing Prerequisites
This section will address various
ways which colleges have found to be effective in putting the prerequisite
requirements into place. At this point in time, colleges are at
various stages of implementation and not all of this will be relevant
to each situation. Even if your college is well into the prerequisite
process, some of the discussion of the early stages may give you
hints for improvement.
If a college has not initiated
a comprehensive plan to meet the standards, a prerequisite team
should be considered to do the work needed. Listed below are some
key functions of those who might be on the team.
Because the institution of
prerequisites, corequisites, and advisories requires Curriculum
Committee review and changes in the course outline of record, the
role of the committee chair is central.
Institutional support for the
prerequisite process is essential. Advancement of the needed policies,
assignment of classified staff and reassigned time for faculty to
do the work requires administrative support. Changes in the catalog
and schedule are substantive and need administrative coordination.
Prerequisites affect the implementation
of almost all of the other seven components of matriculation. In
addition, the strategies developed for implementation of prerequisites
must be included in the matriculation plan. In areas where deviations
from the Model District Policy are sought, the coordinator can work
with the Chancellor's Office to obtain approval. Prerequisite compliance
is maintained through the matriculation site visit process for which
the matriculation coordinator is the point person.
Prerequisites require both
a content review and a data collection process, areas of expertise
of the institutional researcher. Assessment validation, also a function
of the researcher, is required before placement results can be used
as prerequisites.
Coordination with student services
is key for components such as orientation, multiple measures and
student rights.
Computer blocks are an efficient
tool for prerequisite enforcement and require good understanding
of the prerequisite process on the part of those setting up the
system.
After the team becomes well
informed about the Title 5 regulations and the Model District Policy,
a Board Policy should be constructed. Section 55201(b) gives the
minimum areas such a policy should address:
-
a process for establishing
prerequisites, corequisites, and advisories, such process to
require that the prerequisite or corequisite be "necessary
and appropriate for achieving the purpose for which it is being
established;"
-
specification of the level
of scrutiny to be applied, minimally a content review and specifically
data collection and analysis for communication and computation
skills used as prerequisites or corequisites;
-
procedures to assure that
courses with prerequisites or corequisites are taught to the
course outline; and
-
a process for review at
least every six years.
The next step is typically
identification of the prerequisites, corequisites, advisories, and
other limitations on enrollment currently in use, that is, listed
in the catalog. Because colleges have been given six years (through
July 1, 2000) to review legally established prerequisites (see the
list below), it is not necessary to immediately toss out the entire
collection of prerequisites. Those which do not meet Title 5 standards
should be removed, as well as those approved subsequent to the effective
date of the new regulations (October 1, 1993) which were not reviewed
in accord with the new regulations. Those which were "grand
parented" and so do not need to be reviewed until July 1, 2000
are specified in Title 5 §55201(d) as:
1) those established before
July 6, 1990, and are part of a sequence of degree-applicable courses
within a discipline; or
2) those established between
7/6/90 and 10/1/93 which met the requirements of the regulations
at the time; or
3) those required by statute
or regulation; or
4) those part of a lab-lecture
corequisite pair; or
5) those required by four year
institutions.
The result will be two lists:
those which will immediately be removed from the catalog and not
enforced and those which can stay in place but will require review
within six years.
It may also be that, in the
joint opinion of discipline faculty and the curriculum committee,
some prerequisites are not really needed. It is a good idea to send
out the list of prerequisites which will need to be reviewed to
the faculty with a recommendation that they consider which among
them should be continued and undergo the new review process. By
responding in writing to the curriculum committee stating those
prerequisites which can be dropped and those which can be converted
to advisories, the committee can act to refine the current needs
of the college in terms of prerequisites needed to maintain academic
standards in its courses and programs. The result will be a refined,
and most likely significantly reduced, list of prerequisites, corequisites,
advisories, and other limitations which will need to be reviewed.
In reviewing the need for prerequisites,
the discipline faculty and the curriculum committee should consider
the available alternatives to prerequisites. It may be that student
success can be enhanced without the need to limit access through
prerequisites. Faculty may wish to enrich those portions of the
course content which are taught early in the term and serve to provide
foundation skills for learning material taught subsequently. Many
of us realize that student success is not just dependent on previous
skills but is connected to a whole host of characteristics including
study skills particular to the subject, access to study time and
place, and an encouraging atmosphere both in the classroom and outside.
As a result, many of us have instituted practices such as tutorials,
study groups, math/writing/you-name-it labs, review sessions, mastery
learning styles, classroom research, and so on. It may very well
be that, through dedication to these techniques, students who enter
our courses poorly prepared can nonetheless finish them having achieved
the stated student outcomes.
While this initial refining
of needed prerequisites is occurring, the team can work on setting
up policies and procedures for the process. These include:
-
content review;
-
data collection and analysis;
-
student challenges;
-
health and safety;
-
program prerequisites and
enrollment practices;
-
other limitations: performance,
honors, and block enrolled courses; and
-
identifying regulatory,
statutory, or contractual limitations.
Many colleges find it useful
to design forms for each of these functions and to gather the procedures
and forms into a "prerequisite guide" to assist faculty
in the process. Consideration of the methods of enforcement to be
used for prerequisites should take place at this time as well.
Of course, not all of these
policies can be put in effect immediately and not all prerequisites
can be reviewed at once. Priority should first be given to stopping
illegal practices. Then a time line should be developed to accomplish
full implementation by 7/1/00. Because so many of these college
practices interact, some pieces must be in place before others.
Most colleges have a validated set of assessment practices for math, |