Georgia Proposal Narrative Statements

Transcription

1 Georgia Proposal Narrative Statements Proposal Narrative Statements All proposals are required to include an implementation plan addressing one or two of the Innovation Challenge focus areas. Applicants will outline their state s implementation plan, how the proposal was developed and how the work aligns with state labor needs. States will provide explanations of the capacity and authority of their leadership teams and timelines of process benchmarks for implementing work. The narrative portions of the proposal will also explain how the state will leverage its existing work to improve college completion. Applicants must address all of the following points. Visuals are welcome. 1) State s college completion goals. Maximum length: 250 words Describe the state s existing college completion goals. Georgia s College Completion Goals Georgia s participation in Complete College America has galvanized collaborative statelevel work around postsecondary completion. The CCA Council involves the Governor s office, the agency heads and board chairs of the University System of Georgia (USG), the Technical College System of Georgia (TCSG), and the Georgia Department of Education (DOE), the Georgia Student Finance Commission, key business, community, and philanthropic leaders. Since being selected to participate in CCA, this group has actively engaged in setting goals and developing actionable plans around four targeted areas. Specifically, Georgia has set an ambitious goal of increasing postsecondary attainment by 4.6% annually with a focus on year-olds as the prime candidates for the future workforce. This goal is attainable due to a number of factors. First, the State s two public systems, USG and TCSG, have reached record enrollments during the last several years, boosting the pool of potential graduates. Secondly, considerable work is already underway, specifically in the areas of remediation and time-to-degree. Thirdly, Georgia has an aligned structure in place, the Alliance of Education Agency Heads (AEAH), which serves as the P-20 Council for seamless education, and is guided by high-level leaders within key education agencies. There is deliberate overlap between the CCA Council and AEAH. The distinction is that CCA is focused on postsecondary completion whereas AEAH is the entire pipeline. This alignment enables Georgia to drive appropriate policies across the P-20 continuum and to link P-12 attainment through Race to the Top with postsecondary completion.

2 2) State s work to achieve its college completion goals. Maximum length: 750 words How does the state plan to achieve its state-, state system-, and campus-level goals? How do system and campus-level completion goals align with the statewide goals? What specific steps have already been taken, and what are the anticipated critical next steps? How is data collection embedded into a higher education accountability system? How have the state and its implementation partners demonstrated success in prioritizing and achieving measurable progress in improving college completion? Plan for achieving state-, state system-, and campus-level goals. Georgia will employ a collaborative, metric driven implementation/accountability system. Because Georgia s CCA Council is aligned to an existing P-20 policy structure ( AEAH ), the leveraging of effort is by design. GA s CCA goals are strategically aligned with the goals of the AEAH, which includes the CEO s of all state education agencies and the Governor s Office. In addition, Georgia participates actively with a number of external partners, including Achieve, ADP, and SREB. The CCA Council has already initiated detailed planning through its four working groups. Georgia s CCA Council Alignment of System, Campus-level, and State-wide goals Groundwork has been laid within both of Georgia s two public postsecondary systems to connect and align institutional goals with those of the systems and the state. Within USG, a

3 Progression, Retention, and Graduation Task Force was created in Fall Taking a bottom-up approach, the presidents of all 35 USG institutions were asked to create campus-level plans for increasing completion. These plans constitute a strong beginning point for aligning system and campus-level plans within USG. Within TCSG, the TCSG Presidents Council Learning Support Task Force, established February 2011, was charged with constructing a comprehensive set of recommendations to improve the outcomes of learning support education in TCSG colleges. This proposal will leverage the work underway by: 1) providing deep campus-level impact at four sites; 2) deepening efforts for cross agency collaboration and policies focused on completion and build consensus for change; 3) creating a national advisory team to serve as advocates/critics/thought leaders. Specific Steps: Past and Future Steps taken to achieve Georgia s college completion goals include: 1) planning by the CCA Council and statewide consensus-building; 2) collaborative development of the Common Completion Metrics; 3) recommendations by the Transforming Remediation CCA Working Group; 4) CCA Council s selection of state priorities and strategies, with a focus on remediation; and 5) changes in USG Learning Support policies. Critical next steps are: 1) dissemination and campus level analysis of metrics; 2) development of campus-level models in priority areas, including remediation; 3) increased public awareness of importance of college completion; 4) policy change to support and incent college completion; 5) continued refinements and recommendations by work groups. Data Collection and Higher Education Accountability System Georgia has made important strides with respect to its Statewide Longitudinal Data System (SLDS), which now contains all 12 America COMPETES Act elements. The state s Race to the Top funding will provide resources to implement its expansion plan, which is jointly constructed to include data from all agencies belonging to the AEAH. Georgia has developed a data governance structure which sets out ownership of data, clear business processes for collecting and reporting data, accountability for data quality, and processes for data access. Two key research personnel from USG and TCSG, who are heavily involved in the SLDS plan, and developed Georgia s Common Completion Metrics, will continue to integrate data work across this proposal. Success in Prioritizing and Achieving Measurable Progress Georgia joined CCA with significant progress: Active participation in the ADP network, Achieve, college completion initiatives led by SREB, and targeted systems changes focused the needs of adult completers. Rigorous new high school graduation requirements for all students. USG and TCSG faculty engagement in P-12 standards/assessment is ongoing to ensure alignment.

4 Increased access ramp options for students including dual enrollment funding, Early Colleges, Career Academies, Move On When Ready legislation, etc. While work is ongoing in all key areas designated by the CCA Council, Georgia has prioritized building a college completion team and working infrastructure, developing and enacting a policy agenda, constructing a set of Common College Completion Metrics, improving transfer and articulation among state institutions, and strategically planning logical and feasible next steps. The state has made substantial progress in these areas within a short period of time: A well-established CCA Council with four cross-agency Working Groups. A completed set of metrics. USG revised Learning Support policy. Modularized courses, course redesign, accelerated programming, and supplemental instruction, major components of this proposal, are included. HB 186, a key component is placement testing in the 10 th grade to determine college and career readiness and accompanying remediation - May, Stronger working relationships between USG and TCSG. Preparation for implementation of statewide online transfer and articulation portal (GATRACS) launch Fall Resolutions re: importance of completion passed by USG and TCSG - April, Public forum highlighting postsecondary completion hosted by Georgia Partnership for Excellence in Education - April, ) State s use of metrics. Maximum length: 500 words Describe how the applicant s state-level and, if relevant, campus-level Common Completion Metrics were used to inform this proposal. Describe how the state is currently using and will continue to use the Common Completion Metrics. Georgia s Common Completion Metrics paint a dismal picture of the number and success rates of remedial (Learning Support or LS) students. These metrics have been a key tool in developing and informing this proposal. Both the scope of the problem and the disparate metrics indicate that a focus on remediation should be a top State priority. The number and percentage of students in Georgia who participate in Learning Support are quite high. Of first-time entry students at all two and four-year institutions in 2006, 18.2 % enrolled in math-only remedial courses, 9.8% enrolled in English only, and 6.3% enrolled in both math and English (Fall 2006). Based on the total 60,444 first-time entry students, remedial education affects 20,751 (students Progress Metric 1). Of particular importance is Progress Metric 3, which shows strong correlations between student participation in remedial courses and failure to complete Gateway (College-Level courses) within two academic years of entry. Two years after they entered in 2006, only 29.5% of remedial education students compared with 53.2% of non-remedial students had completed at least one Gateway course.

5 The gap widens when looking at Progress Metric 4 (credit accumulation). Only 22.4% of full-time remedial students had completed 24 credit hours within the first academic year compared with 64.7% of non-remedial students. Retention rates (Progress Metric 5) show this continued disparity, and as might be expected, the disparity between remedial and nonremedial students is reflected in the Outcome Metric for degree production. There was a 65.8% growth in Associate degree completion between AY03 to AY08 versus 21% growth for remedial students. More disturbingly, the Bachelor degree completion rate for remedial students actually fell 29.3% while that for non-remedial students increased 28.4%. Graduation rates for Associate Degree non-remedial students were almost double those of remedial students (24% and 11% respectively). Comparable percentages for Bachelors degree completion are even worse : 58% for non-remedial students vs. 25% for remedial students. Campus-level metrics reflect similar patterns. However, Athens Technical College and DeKalb Technical College are among leaders in the transformation of remediation and are examining just-released campus-level data to examine and refine their strategies. Georgia Gwinnett College is a new four-year state college and as such has relatively little data available. GGC s course completion rates ranging from 82.5 to 86.8% indicate capacity and commitment to the CCA agenda. Similarly, the College of Coastal Georgia, has incomplete but promising metrics. The College of Coastal Georgia just moved to four-year status in October 2009, so metrics apply to its former two-year status. Of note is the increase of 76.9% in degree production (Outcome Metric 1) from The campuses will continue to use the Common Completion Metrics to evaluate the success of the transforming remediation strategies contained in this proposal. CCA Georgia will similarly examine these metrics, compare them with statewide metrics, and use them to inform recommendations by USG and TCSG Taskforces as well as the statewide, cross- System Remediation Taskforce, an initiative contained in this proposal to encourage statewide adoption of successful remediation strategies. 4) Proposed plan for implementing initiatives in one or two of the Innovation Challenge focus areas. Maximum length: 1700 words Describe the structure of the plan and how it addresses one or two of the focus areas. Describe how the state will implement this plan and the implementation timeline. Describe the leadership team that will drive the plan s implementation and how the composition of this team reflects the proposed work. Describe the role that institutions and state system boards will play in implementing the proposed work.

6 Structure and Focus Georgia s focus area is Transforming Remediation with secondary emphasis on Deploying Transformative Technology. The need to transform remediation is apparent from data, which indicate that overall 50% of students entering access colleges need remediation. Fewer than 26% of two-year college students who enter remediation receive an associate s within 3 years or bachelor s degree within 6 years. The cost of remediation to the state is conservatively estimated at $22.3 million annually. Georgia s plan will transform remediation by moving away from traditional learning support into approaches that better meet the needs of students. The transformation will be framed by five guiding strategies: Implementation of technology-based diagnostic assessments to determine level of remediation needed; Development of modularized content remediation coursework appropriate to level of student as determined by diagnostic testing; Option for students to work at an accelerated rate using mastery approach; Opportunities for students who fall below the cut scores on the placement exam to concurrently enroll in college-level courses and diagnostic-based learning support; and Student success skills offerings / support. Four institutional partners will implement new strategies, all within the same guiding framework but each based on specific campus contexts and student needs. Approximately 12,000 students will be impacted at these institutions. The partners are the two USG colleges, College of Coastal Georgia (southeastern coastal region) and Georgia Gwinnett College (metropolitan Atlanta), and two TCSG colleges, Athens Technical College (northeastern Georgia) and DeKalb Technical College (metropolitan Atlanta). The four institutional partners will work with a state-level, grant-supported Transforming Remediation Implementation Team, which will act as critical friends, provide advocacy at public postsecondary institutions across the state, collect/analyze data, using the College Completion Metrics at state and campus levels, remove policy barriers, institute policy enablers, connect Transforming Remediation to overall CCA College Completion Plan, build public will and provide information. A national advisory board of experts will inform the collaborative work of the Implementation Team. Initial members will include Dr. Donna Alvermann, Dr. Tim Bostic, and Dr. Rich DeMillo. Action Plan and Implementation Timeline The state has established an action plan and timeline to coordinate work on the campus, System, and State levels. It is aligned with the benchmarks described in Section 6 and indicates activities by quarters beginning with an anticipated start date of August 2011.

7 Georgia s Transforming Remediation Action Plan and Implementation Timeline Activity Quarter 1 Responsible Party Procure equipment 1 Institutional Partners Identify Redesign faculty/staff (IP) Begin transformation of remediation courses content to modules Provide professional development for faculty Develop communications forums / meetings 1 Transforming Establish cross institutional, cross-system taskforce to build faculty and administrative support and buy-in at non-partner institutions, make recommendations 1 Remediation Implementation Team (IT) and lead redesign efforts at all state public postsecondary institutions Represent grant activities to state CCA 1-6 Convene regional Taskforce meetings 2-6 Initiate Higher Education Funding Study Committee 1- ongoing Governor s Office (GOV) Complete modularization of remediation courses 2 IP Begin teaching transformed courses 2 Meet monthly to evaluate progress, make adjustments and report to IT 2-6 Compile initial results and report data to IT 3 IP Develop recommendations for statewide 4-5 Task Force implementation of Transforming Remediation strategies. Complete comparative analysis of first 4 IT and IP sections/students Plan Fall semester implementation Complete plans for statewide Taskforce/grant partner 4 IT meetings Begin development of policy to scale-up /sustain 5 IT strategies Implement third semester redesign 6 IP Analyze / report data Analyze /share student success (progression toward 6 IT 1 Q1: August-October 2011; Q2: November 2011-January 2012; Q3: February-April 2012 Q4: May-July 2012 Q5: August-October 2012 Q6: November

8 degree) with CCA, the Board of Regents (USG) and State Board (TCSG) Present policy recommendations to CCA, USG and 6 IP, Task Force TCSG Boards Statewide dissemination meeting 6 IT, GOV Non-participating institutions begin to transform remediation 6-7 All USG and TCSG institutions Implement Transforming Remediation policies statewide at USG and TCSG institutions All institutions implement transformed remediation courses Summary of Institutional Plans 8 All USG and TCSG institutions Professional development workshops 8 USG and TCSG Analyze metrics long term planning 12 Georgia CCA, USG and TCSG Boards College of Coastal Georgia Implement the redesign Emporium Model (National Center for Academic Transformation) math. Professional development for math faculty. Convert content to modular assignments. Allow students to work at an accelerated pace. Place students who score near the exempt level into special sections of reading and focus instructors and Supplemental Instruction on identified areas of need through specific modules. For writing develop two models: 1) Mainstream students near exempt scores into collegiate-level English and provide 1-2 hour intensive class and Supplemental Instruction Specialists; 2) Modular model for all writing courses using mastery approach and exit after successful module completion. Develop sections of College Success Seminar for remedial students designed to complement assignments in other courses. Georgia Gwinnett College Employ ALEKS diagnostic software to assess students who place into remedial math. Use ALEKS content modules starting each student at the module appropriate to his/her level as determined by the diagnostic testing, allow students to work at an accelerated pace (using the mastery approach) with the ability to complete content early and move onto collegiate-level courses. Employ electronic writing analysis software to identify and diagnose student writing problems. Develop a modularized writing remediation course. Provide opportunity for concurrent enrollment in both remedial and collegiate-level courses in math and writing. Provide additional support.

9 Develop a mentoring model that facilitates student engagement with the college and student environment and incorporates modules designed to ensure student success. Provide professional development for faculty in course redesign. Athens Technical College Compress two levels of remedial English into one course and embed modified College Success Course that incorporates skills development component. Streamline process for students near cut scores to register for college-level English. Implement modularized remedial curriculum and integrate into College Success course. Implement mathematics course with a three-week express review that provides remediation and then compresses college-level mathematics into remainder of semester. Implement modularized curriculum. DeKalb Technical College Implement diagnostics to enable students to start at point of need. Modularize remedial courses based on course competencies and student learning outcomes and deliver in modularized remedial lab environment. Provide multiple test-out points within semester. Provide college study skills course for remedial students and require for students who test into two or more remedial subject areas. Redesign to include hour long lecture session per week with full-time instructor or learning coach, and combined remedial classes. Transforming Remediation Leadership Team Co-PIs Georgia s Transforming Remediation Implementation Team will be co-chaired by Erin Hames, Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy for Governor Nathan Deal, and Dr. Lynne Weisenbach Vice Chancellor, USG, and state Liaison, CCA. The Co-PIs will maintain regular communications with the Georgia CCA Council and with AEAH. They will coordinate with the fiscal agent, the Governor s Office of Planning and Budget, also on the IT. Project Director/Associate Project Director The Project Director, Dr. Virginia Michelich, Assistant Vice Chancellor for Student Achievement, also serves as lead for the Remediation Working Group for Georgia s CCA. Associate Project Director is Joe Dan Banker, Executive Director for Academic Affairs, TCSG. Transforming Remediation Design Teams Institutional work will be implemented through Transforming Remediation Design Teams on each campus, led by the Vice-Presidents of Academic Affairs (VPAAs). The four VPAAs will represent campus progress and concerns to ensure regular feedback to and from the campuses. Design Teams will include the VPAA, Learning Support faculty from each

10 content area, and the Student Support Success Director. Management Team Structure Policy Leadership and Connections Governor Deal s Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy, Erin Hames, and the Governor s Education Policy Advisor, India Moorhouse, will represent the Governor s interests and policy directions. Josephine Reed-Taylor, Deputy Commissioner, TCSG, Joe Dan Banker, Associate Project Director, TCSG, the Co-PI, Dr. Lynne Weisenbach, and Project Director, Dr. Virginia Michelich, (USG) will coordinate proposed policy changes with their respective Systems and the Governor s Office. Alignment with Georgia s CCA Plan The Governor s Deputy Chief of Staff, the State liaison with CCA, and the chairs of the four CCA Working Groups (Remediation, Time to Degree, Data and Measurement, and Delivery Systems) will link the work of this proposal into the other three working group focus areas. The working relationships and alignment between Georgia s CCA plan and the Leadership structure for the proposal are indicated below:

11 Role of Institutions and State System Boards The complementary roles of institutions and Boards will be integrated throughout the Transforming Remediation implementation plan. Georgia is well-positioned to make major and systemic changes given that both public postsecondary systems (USG and TCSG) have instituted Task Forces focused on improving remediation. The USG Learning Support Task Force was led by Dr. Virginia Michelich, Assistant Vice Chancellor, Chair of the CCA Remediation Working Group, and Project Director for this proposal. The Task Force was formed in Fall 2009 and its recommendations are being implemented. In February 2011, Commissioner Ron Jackson formed the TCSG Presidents Council Learning Support Task Force with the charge to construct a comprehensive set of recommendations to improve the outcomes of learning support education in TCSG Colleges. Specific charges directly related to the current proposal are to explore alternative instructional methods for learning support coursework that both aligns with college level coursework when students are prepared to move on and that help the students success in college, beyond learning support and to increase the effectiveness of its programs to help students who do enroll in TCSG institutions underprepared and do not score high enough on the COMPASS assessment for placement in their program of choice. TCSG Task Force

12 recommendations are anticipated by Summer ) Description of how the state s plan advances the goals of the other focus areas and how this plan will integrate with and accelerate the state s larger completion goals. Maximum length: 1200 words Describe how use of these funds will leverage progress in the state. Describe why funding for the selected Innovation Challenge focus area(s) is critical to creating measurable increases in completion in the state. Describe how the proposed work will improve completion given the challenges and barriers the state faces. Describe how the proposed work responds to the needs of the state s labor market. Describe how the proposed work addresses racial and socioeconomic completion gaps in the state. Describe the state s prior success in this area and how this plan builds upon previous and existing work. Use of Funds Funding provides a deep dive at the campus level, dissemination and strengthening of public will, and capacity building so that work can continue post-grant. A key benchmark of success will be a favorable cost-benefit ratio for as well as anticipated cost savings to the state through implementation of more efficient and effective remediation strategies. Funding Critical to Achieving Measurable Increases in Completion Funding is critical in demonstrating that initial investments can pay off in measurable college completion increases. As public will builds for a college completion agenda, the fact remains that institutions and Systems will bear the upfront costs of implementation. Once the return on investment is calculated increased college completion rates and corresponding efficiencies in state expenditures the state will be able to target limited resources toward strategies that have been applied in the field, measured, and evaluated.

13 Proposed Work to Improve Completion Given Challenge and Barriers The proposed work is a critical priority of the state s CCA plan because of the scope and severity of the remediation issue and because transforming remediation will positively and directly impact other College Completion metrics. The proposed work is a major component of the Transforming Remediation Working Group s recommendations and addresses challenges related to the variation in student readiness, insufficient use of technology, lack of innovation in course structure/ delivery, and false perceptions about student ability and efficacy of traditional remediation structures. Concurrently, cutbacks in the state s lottery-funded merit-based scholarships and grants (HOPE) coupled with rising tuition are raising the ante for students to complete remediation in a timely and cost-effective way. Similarly, budgetary cutbacks and anticipated establishment of a Higher Education Funding Study Committee will add leverage for transformative change. Concurrently, major work is underway to address barriers within the K-12. Leadership from the Governor s Office and legislation passed during the recent session indicate that the time is right for widespread change. Proposed Work Responds to Needs of State s Labor Market According to Georgia s Unified Plan for FY10 under the Workforce Investment Act, 3.1 million Georgians are in occupations that do not require any formal education beyond high school, with half in low-skill, low-pay jobs requiring only on-the-job training. This job category is declining. Long-term occupational employment projections for indicate that careers requiring an associate s degree or post-secondary occupational training made up only 8.7% of all jobs in 2006, but will grow more than 70% faster than those requiring no education beyond high school by In fact, these jobs are the fastest growing group in the state, surpassing overall growth rates for occupations requiring a bachelor s degree or more. Workers in occupations usually requiring a bachelor s degree or more held 20.5% of all jobs in the state in 2006, for a total of almost 900,000 jobs. The tenyear job growth rate for this group of jobs is projected to be almost 1.1 million jobs - or a 21.1% job share by Proposed Work Addresses Racial and Socioeconomic Completion Gaps in the State Gaps in racial and socioeconomic college completion exist across the range of progress and outcome metrics and are particularly apparent within Progress Metrics 1, 2, and 3. Black, non-hispanic and Hispanic students are enrolled in remedial education in larger percentages than other racial groups. For math only remediation, 27% of Black students and 20.5% of Hispanic students are enrolled vs. 7.7% Asian and 14.6%% for white, non-hispanic students. Black, non-hispanic students also complete remediation and gateway courses at rates disproportionately lower than completion rates for other groups. The picture for high- and low SES students is somewhat different. Low-SES students (as identified through Pell) are enrolled in remediation at rates approximately twice as high as those for high-ses students in both mathematics and English. For mathematics only, 27.3%

14 of Pell-eligible students are enrolled in learning support vs. 14.3% for non-pell; for English only, the percentages are 15.9% for Pell vs. 7.2% for non-pell. However, Progress Metric 2 shows the differential narrowing to a few percentage points between the two populations. It is clear that fixing what s broken in remediation will substantively help underrepresented populations break through the remediation barrier and thus help close racial and socioeconomic gaps. Plan Builds on State s Previous and Existing Work and Prior Success Infrastructure As noted previously, Georgia now has a cohesive structure for intensive work toward improving postsecondary completion. The CCA Council operates in conjunction with the Governor s Office and the AEAH. Georgia s CCA membership has driven state efforts to focus on the higher education end of the P-20 continuum. The College Completion Metrics included in this proposal are a major step forward to provide usable data for purposes of improving college completion. Additionally, the state s CCA participation has provided a significant focus as well as resources which have increased momentum among high-level state leaders, including the Governor s Office. Rigorous Standards and Curriculum The proposed plan is a logical extension of significant work Georgia has been engaged in over the last several years. Georgia joined with the American Diploma Project and Achieve in implementing a K-12 curriculum based on rigorous college-and career ready standards. In 2004 Georgia completed the development of and began implementation of the Georgia Performance Standards (GPS). ( This led to a new high school graduation rule which was put into effect with entering freshmen in 2008 which eliminated the dual track diploma ensuring all students graduate college and career ready. Georgia has adopted the Common Core Standards. Gap Closing: Criterion Referenced Competency Tests Georgia s implementation of the GPS is showing results in eliminating achievement gaps between subgroups. The table below illustrates this pattern for white, black, and Hispanic 8 th graders taking the state s Criterion Referenced Competency Test (CRCT) mathematics exam.

15 100 Closing the Achievement Gap Percent of 8 th Graders Meeting/Exceeding Standards in Mathematics We will lead the nation in improving student achievement. White Black Hispanic Gap Closing: Advanced Placement: The 7 th Annual AP Report to the Nation, February 2011 ranks Georgia among the top 12 states leading the nation in strong AP programs and exemplary practices for building and growing quality AP. The Report ranks Georgia 11 th in the percentage of seniors in the Class of 2010 scoring 3 or higher in AP exams and 3 rd in the percentage of Black/African American students receiving 3 or higher on at least one AP exam taken during high school. System Focus Remediation has been a key focus within both TCSG and USG with task forces making recommendations and action plans aligned with recommendations that are aligned to this proposal. Governor s Study Committee: The Governor has indicated his plan to establish a higher education funding study committee by Executive Order. The Study Committee will consider remediation, time to complete, structure and performance funding in this committee. HB 186 HB 186, called the Career Pathways Bill, was passed by the Georgia Legislature and signed by the Governor May Changes include: Extending career pathways for high school students using the 16 nationally recognized career clusters. Providing placement testing in HS to determine college readiness in order to ensure all high school students have the opportunity to begin earning college credit as early as 11 th grade. Providing readiness courses for students who are not ready to ensure they will be ready upon graduation. Test out option by focusing on mastery so students can move on when ready.

16 6) Benchmarks against which the state will evaluate its progress against this plan. Maximum length: 350 words Provide ambitious and realistic 3-month, 6-month, 12-month, 18-month, 24-month and 36-month benchmarks for the proposed activities. Provide a three-year outline for sustaining work that explains how the proposed actions will continue to improve completion rates beyond the grant period. Describe the implementation team s plan and process for assessing which changes in state- and campus-level metrics are attributable to work implemented through the Innovation Challenge.

17 Benchmarks Implementation and Outcome Benchmarks are included. Outcome baselines will be determined using Spring 201l numbers from the four institutions with the overall goal to meet the outcomes in the State Benchmark Matrix. Time Implementation Benchmarks Met Outcome Benchmarks Met 3 months Faculty hired Equipment procured Modularization begins Professional development provided Initial sections taught 6 months Modularization completed Full set of transformed courses offered and taught 9 months Transformed courses taught via modularization 12 months Plans completed for statewide dissemination meeting Implementation analyzed and reported to CCA Fall semester implementation planned 10/11 9/11 8/11 8/11 8/11 Number of transformed remediation courses increases Number of faculty trained to teach the transformed courses increases 12/11 % of students successfully 1/12 completing transformed course(s) is greater than percentage in traditional remediation courses Students successfully exit remediation prior to semester end 3/12 % of students exiting prior to semester end increases 6/12 7/12 7/12 % of students exiting remediation increases % of students exiting prior to semester end increases % of students in remediation who simultaneously complete gateway courses increases % of students exiting remediation is greater than the percent of students exiting traditional remediation 10/11 10/11 12/11 12/11 4/12 6/12 6/12 6/12 6/12

18 18 months Transformed models fully implemented Transforming Remediation Team develops policy recommendations and presents to CCA, USG and TCSG Non-participating institutions begin transforming remediation 24 months Policy changes implemented All institutions transform remediation 36 months Implementation and analysis continues 1/13 11/12-1/13 1/13 7/13 7/13 Same as 12 month outcomes except for last bullet % of students who complete at least one college level math and English course increases Same as 18 month outcomes % of full time students completing 24 credit hours in first year increases % of part time students completing 12 credit hours in first year increases % of students retained increases 1/13 1/13 7/13 7/13 7/13 7/13 7/14 Same as 24 months 7/14 7) State s proposal development process. Maximum length: 250 words What institutions, agencies and individuals does the state intend to collaborate with in the proposed plan? Describe the roles and input of these collaborators in the development of this proposal. Collaborative Institutions, Agencies, and Individuals This proposal is a collaborative effort of the following: Office of Governor Nathan Deal o Erin Hames, Deputy Chief of Staff for Policiy o India Moorhouse, Education Policy Advisor o Governor s Office of Planning and Budget (OPB) USG, Primary Implementation Partner o Lynne Weisenbach, Vice Chancellor and CCA State Liaison o Virginia Michelich, Assistant Vice Chancellor, o Susan Campbell, Assistant Vice Chancellor o Patricia Paterson, Director o Sheila Jones, Executive Director

19 TCSG o Josephine Reed-Taylor, Deputy Commissioner, o Kathryn Hornsby, Assistant Commissioner o Andy Parsons, Executive Director o Joe Dan Banker, Executive Director College of Coastal Georgia Ann Crowther, Assistant VPAA Georgia Gwinnett College John Muth, Director Athens Technical College Dan Smith, VPAA DeKalb Technical College Catrenia McLendon, Coordinator Roles and Inputs of Collaborators in Proposal Development Proposal development has been a joint effort of the partners listed above. The Proposal Writing Team (PWT) met regularly to develop and review implementation plan, proposal, MOUs, and make final decisions. Roles and inputs included: Governor s Office co-lead and convener for PWT; policy direction and guidance; proposal development and review; liaison with OPB (fiscal agent). USG co-lead and convener for PWT; lead for proposal development and writing; liaison for Georgia s CCA plan, and USG Learning Support Task Force; review of institutional and System plans. TCSG proposal development; CCA Council support; review of institutional and System plans. Institutional Partners institutional plans and budget development; proposal development and review.