Data is a definitive force when it comes to legislation, but when your legislation affects real people, what happens to the outliers?

Under AB 1705, non-transfer-level math and English courses have been eliminated in the hope that more, though not all, students will transfer or graduate faster. There may be data behind this claim,  but students are now expected to fit the data instead of being supported by it. AB 1705 is a bill that undermines the purpose of community colleges — to provide for all types of learners — by removing student and teacher autonomy, prioritizing transfer rate speed instead of learning, and limiting access to foundational courses. In prioritizing efficiency, AB 1705 disregards the complexity of the student body it affects.

California community colleges serve a diverse population from working parents and first-generation students to recent high school graduates and people thinking of changing careers. According to the textbook Governing California in the Twenty-First Century, “About 80 percent of California’s 3 million college students attend a University of California (UC), California State University (CSU), or community college campus, with 44 percent of the total attending community colleges” (Michelson et al. 7). California community colleges are cheaper, easier to enroll in, and, in general, just more accessible. All these qualities make community colleges the best option for people to start their journey in higher education. 

Recently, the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) released a Gates Foundation-funded report: Has Universal Access to Transfer-Level Courses Changed Student Outcomes at California Community Colleges? Many positive trends are noted in the report, including completion rates for transfer-level math courses, especially statistics and liberal arts math. The authors also point out that more students are earning their associate’s degree and transferring to four-year institutions. However, two underlying issues identified in this report could undermine these otherwise encouraging headlines: selection bias and grade inflation.

This report brings up the issue of selection bias in footnote #17. It points out that students post-AB 705 are earning a higher overall grade point average (GPA) in their first year in college. The authors go on to state: “This indicates possible selection effects—specifically, that lower-performing students were more likely to stop enrolling, which may explain the improved long-term outcomes.”

If you’re like me and enjoy spending winter break analyzing data from the state Chancellor’s office, then you might be interested in the effects of AB 705 on completion levels in math and English. 

AB 705 was legislation that prohibited, except under very narrow circumstances, colleges from requiring students to enroll in remedial math and English. The logic was that if not enough students were completing transfer-level math and English classes within a one-year timeframe because they were taking remedial classes, then if we eliminate remedial classes they will finish  faster, correct? The main data source is their Management Information Systems Data Mart. I was interested in looking at enrollment trends over the last several years, and, not surprisingly, we see a downward trend in enrollment. Below are the enrollment totals statewide and in General Math (TOP Code 170100) and English (TOP Code 150100)