Cal Poly Pomona

P&R Responses for recommendation 98

Recommendation 98
Department Mathematics and Statistics
Consensus Opinion 32 out of 32 faculty/staff : With modifications
Consensus Explanation The name of the "Remedial Math Program" is actually Preparatory Mathematics Program (PMP).

The PMP has existed for well over twenty years. It began as a small program for students who had been away from school for at least five years. Very few of the students were recent high school graduates. PMP is now a much larger program; the overwhelming majority of the students are recent high school graduates.

The unwillingness of the University to fully fund PMP impedes our ability to offer GE courses, service courses, and core courses to our own majors. Consequently the Mathematics and Statistics Department has begun studying ways of streamlining the PMP courses, with an interest in modifying both the content and modes of instruction while still satisfying EO 665.

The Department is also working on an method of assessment that takes into account the purpose of PMP - prepare students to successfully complete an ENTRY LEVEL Mathematics/Statistics course. To do this we will need data from the Data Warehouse that we have not been able to obtain previously.

The Mathematics and Statistics Department shares the concern about the increasing number of students coming to the University in need of remediation. If the University would like to see a decrease in the number of these students the University should find out why this is occurring, and work with high schools to see that their students are better prepared for university level Mathematics. One step that the University should take is to make sure that programs that are supposed to be in place in the high schools to better prepare their students are actually being implemented. One such program is the Early Assessment Program. This is clearly the responsibility of the Admissions and Outreach Office.

As for the rise in the number of students whose GPA is below 2.2, it would be useful to know if the percentage of students whose GPA is below 2.2 has also increased. However if the University is concerned about this then it is incumbent upon the University to find out why this is happening. Only then can we start solving the problem.

The University must not reduce funding for the Remedial Math Program until the need for the program is reduced. The University has a moral obligation to provide courses required of all students.

The University does NOT need to choose between quality or access to education; the University must find an appropriate balance of these two.
Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 98
Department Undergraduate Studies
Consensus Opinion 10 out of 10 faculty/staff : With modifications
Consensus Explanation Recommendation 69 and 98 – Remedial English and Mathematics

Since these two recommendations are almost word-for-word the same, we feel that we can address both of them with one feedback form.

The recommendations correctly put the blame for the rise in the number of remedial students on a failed or nonexistent enrollment management plan. It is important, but difficult, to create a plan that can give priority to both quality and accessibility. The latter is an essential feature of Cal Poly Pomona and it inevitably means that there will be a need for remediation on campus. In fact, we disagree with the conclusion of the Academic Programs Committee that these programs offer nothing to “demand/essentiality”. These programs are required to satisfy EO 665 and allow the University to accept a diversity of students who bring particular backgrounds, views, and talents to the campus.

The recommendations seem to put the cart before the horse. An enrollment management plan that ensures that students who come to Cal Poly Pomona are better prepared for college level work will cause a reduced need for remediation leading to reduced funding for remediation. Reduced funding under the current plan will only cause the English and Mathematics programs to offer bare-bones services that do not promote student success. Rather, it is important that there be funding available for the current alternative approaches to remediation, such as Summer Bridge, Early Start and the Early Assessment Program and for other best practice models to be developed in the future. We should also look to FYE programs to emphasize to students the importance of completing remedial requirements efficiently. The recommendations do not mention specifically taking remediation off campus, although that has been brought up often in the last five years. It must be noted that the recommendations emphasize reducing “the need for [these] programs”. Simply hiding remediation out of sight does not meet this goal.

Finally, there is an implication in the recommendations of a connection between the number of remedial students and the rise in the numbers of students below a 2.2 GPA. At the same time, this connection is described with the phrase “apparent parallel”. To imply a connection that the committee does not know to exist misleads the audience concerning the remediation problem.
Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendations not submitted through the forms are available in this folder. They mainly consist of Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat documents. If none were submitted for this recommendation, the folder will be empty.