Citrus Colleges Acceleration Experience

Fast Track (Compression) Model

Original English Sequence Original Reading Sequence

English 100
Fast Track

Reading 99
LC
Fast Track

English 40
Fast Track

Reading 40
Fast Track

English 30

Reading 19

Do they work? *
Fall 2009 LC ENGL 030 Regular 34.5% (48/139) 78.6% (22/28) 67.7% (268/396) 69.6% (407/585) 71.7% (114/159) 75.9% (22/29) 91.3% (21/23) 78.8% (193/245) 77.2% (345/447) FT 83.0% (78/94) 83.5% (152/182) 84.2% (128/152) 92.1% (58/63) 91.3% (84/92) 96.6% (28/29) 96.8% (30/31) 96.4% (27/28) 87.1% (27/31) 88.1% (52/59) 60.6% (20/33) FT + LC LC Fall 2010 Regular 53.8% (43/80) 66.8% (169/253) 78.9% (343/435) 83.8% (109/130) 71.5% (128/179) 68.7% (215/313) FT 81.5% (75/92) 89.1% (123/138) 86.4% (108/125) 93.5% (58/62) 87.2% (129/148) 95.2% (79/83) 93.9% (31/33) 100% (28/28) 90.9% (30/33) 95.0% (57/60) FT + LC

ENGL 040

ENGL 100

READ 019

READ 040

READ 099

*Preliminary data shows that Fast Track students were successful in English 101 at approximately the same rate as the general population of English 101 students.

OLD ENGLISH AND READING SEQUENCE OF COURSES (BEFORE FALL 2011)

NEW ENGLISH SEQUENCE OF COURSES (BEGINNING FALL 2011)

ENGL 101 (3 units)

ENGL 100 (3 units) ENGL 40 (3 units) ENGL 30 (3 units)

READ 120 (3 units)

READ 99 (3 units) READ 40 (3 units) READ 19 (3 units)

ENGL 101 (3 units)

ENGL 99 (5 units)

ENGL 98 (1 unit lab)

Campus Stakeholders/Supporters
English and Reading Departments Vice President of Academic Affairs Vice President of Student Services Curriculum Committee Chair

Academic Senate
Counseling and Advising College Success Advisory Committee (basic skills committee)

Disabled Students Programs and Services

Admissions and Records Learning Communities Faculty Committee

The Process of Our Curriculum Redesign

Basic skills English faculty expressed concern over length of the sequence Faculty met with Language Arts/Enrollment Management Dean to discuss revising the sequence based on success of Fast Track Dean proposed combining English and reading courses and approached reading faculty who were amenable Basic Skills Director and faculty met with campus stakeholders English and reading faculty worked together to design the new course English and reading faculty worked together to design cross-training for both English and reading faculty Curriculum Committee approval English and reading faculty worked together to design course syllabus and scheduleBlackboard class developed Class piloted Fall 2011 Faculty Lead held monthly meetings to discuss issues related to the course

Curriculum Development
English and reading faculty: Compared course outlines for content and objectives
Eng. 40 and 100/Reading 40 and 99 course outlines

Designed content, objectives and SLOs based on

shared goals for reading and writing

Focused on reading, writing, and critical thinking

Developed custom textbook for course

Cross-training
English and reading faculty met to design training that

mirrored our experience in designing the curriculum

Shared vocabulary Shared content

Shared SLOs

English and reading faculty each led instructors

through suggested content and teaching strategies for integrating reading and writing
Move away from only mode-based writing assignments Reading and writing as a recursive process

First Semester Results