DMRT:  A response from Sarah Martin and Ann Loving

 

The Developmental Mathematics Redesign Team (DMRT) was formed by the VCCS to streamline the developmental  program based on the mathematics needed for success in curricular programs.  We sought to replace a one-size-fits-all duplication of high school mathematics with a structure that would be more flexible and efficient in preparing students for college courses.  The major goal of the DMRT was to better serve our students.  This was one reason for the widespread inclusion of non-mathematics faculty.  For example, Student Support Services play a major role.  Also, policy and financial aid issues must be addressed.  The team was always clear that our goals were to be accomplished while preserving each college's ownership of delivery methodology.

Sarah Martin and Ann Loving were asked to serve on the DMRT, and assume that our positions in VMATYC played a major role in the invitation.  Sarah was on the previous Developmental Education Task Force, and Ann teaches PRISMM classes at JSRCC, so maybe those were factors, too.  All the people on the DMRT were genuinely trying to help; there was no "conspiracy" to go behind anyone's back to force unwelcome changes. 

Much of the impetus for the work of the DMRT came from statements being made by national, state, and local government officials insisting that there must be a greater percentage of the U.S. population holding college degrees.  Also there are both state and national movements in similar directions across the country.

 Even AMATYC is involved in a New Life for Developmental Math initiative.  You can view the presentation from the Fall, 2009 Conference at the link below http://www.amatyc.org/videos/NewLife/rotman.html

There Rosemary Karr and Jack Rotman made several strong cases:

*Great percentages of our students get "lost" in developmental mathematics and are therefore never able to graduate.
*Students pursuing liberal arts and/or occupational-technical career fields simply do not need the same math as those in STEM curricula.

 The consensus of the DMRT is that for STEM students, no real substantive change can be made.  (The work presented by Karr and Rotman seems in line with this thinking as well.)  On the other hand, students in various OT fields have different math needs from one another, best determined by the instructors in those fields.  A one- size-fits-all approach is perhaps unnecessarily burdening our students with too much math.  Finally consensus was reached that students should arrive at college with the most basic of math skills.  (The DMRT is recommending that the base line be placed at operations with whole numbers.)  Below that level, it may be inappropriate to suggest that the VCCS is in the right position to serve students in their endeavors to obtain degrees.

With the one exception of a baseline, just mentioned, the units which are being developed reflect only a reorganization of the content which is already being taught at the VCCS in developmental mathematics.  Ownership of the curriculum will still reside with faculty at the VCCS colleges.  VCCS faculty will be determining the domain of knowledge needed for each course, will be writing the learning objectives for courses, will be determining the appropriate standards for the courses, and will be deciding upon best practices in delivery.  VCCS faculty will also own the development of the relevant placement and diagnostic instruments. 

The work of the DMRT did not propose change to content (with the one exception already noted), did not address pedagogy, and did not address how courses will be managed at individual colleges.

 A committee yet to be designated and consisting of math faculty, will be the ones to work out the details.  There are still a lot of issues to be resolved before the recommendations are implemented.  The final product will have to the be flexible enough to work in both large colleges and small colleges, in colleges using self-paced computer approaches and those using cooperative learning and other group approaches.  It needs to work for students who can move at a faster pace, as well as for those who need to go more slowly.  It needs to work for those who are independent learners and for those who need a lot of structure and face-to-face encouragement.

 Furthermore, there is a desire to make the mathematics taught more relevant to students in various career fields via contextual applications.  The DMRT is proposing that mathematics faculty be instrumental in developing and sharing among ourselves actual applications (automotive, culinary, nursing, etc.) requiring specific mathematics skill sets that are truly needed by our students.

 The new structure has potential to be more successful and more efficient than our current system.  There is no such thing as a guarantee; no amount of research provides that.  However, the level of frustration with the current system is so high that we think many faculty are ready to risk major change.

 The speed at which the DMRT proposes to change VCCS developmental studies may seem fast given the recommendations for substantial change in structure.   Furthermore, there may be difficulties especially for those in very small colleges in determining how to offer so many modules rather than simply offering 3 courses.  Obviously there is still work to be done, but we feel that working together, we can adjust our framework and make changes that better serve our students.

 Please feel free to contact Sarah Martin or Ann Loving with your comments.