Teachers and students across the state are adjusting to the Common Core standards, which promise to help more young people become ready for college. In the words of State Board of Education President Michael Kirst, the standards represent “a unique opportunity to strengthen alignment across the divide between K-12 and post-secondary education in California.”

Kirst and other advocates of the new standards were motivated to support them, in part, by sobering data showing that a large proportion of high school graduates require remedial courses when they go to college. In math, for example, about 85 percent of community college students and about a third of California State University students confront at least one remedial course.

A chief goal of the new standards is to reduce those rates by ensuring that more students finish high school with the knowledge and skills that colleges expect. The standards, however, assume colleges’ expectations are static. In fact, as a new policy report by LearningWorks and Policy Analysis for California Education that I authored reveals, those expectations are shifting as colleges and universities seek to make their remedial math programs more effective.

Therefore there may be a mismatch between the math students are being taught in high school based on the Common Core and new curricular innovations being implemented at the higher education level.

What is happening is that dozens of community colleges in California are offering a subset of their students alternative remedial math sequences that emphasize statistics preparation, while the Common Core math standards place a priority on algebra.

In the typical scenario, students take two years of algebra during high school that ideally prepares them for college-level math courses required to earn a four-year degree. In reality, many students end up taking one or both as remedial courses during college, based on their scores on placement tests.

Algebra 2 is a graduation requirement for students pursuing an associate degree. Community college students seeking to transfer to four-year universities must also show proficiency in Algebra 2 on a placement test, or take a remedial class, before they can enroll in a college-level course required to transfer to a four-year university.

Designed for community college students pursuing non-technical majors, the new math pathways place a greater priority on preparation in statistics and quantitative reasoning than in the traditional algebra-intensive course sequence.

The alternative approaches are growing rapidly in community colleges. That’s in part because of promising early results, showing that students who attempt the new sequences are three to four times as likely to pass a college-level math course, such as Statistics, as students enroll in traditional remedial courses.

It’s also because, while two years of algebra courses provide direct preparation for science and engineering majors, applied math courses such as Statistics are more relevant for students in many other academic fields, including the social sciences.

Requiring every student to demonstrate proficiency in Algebra 2 via remedial courses increasingly strikes community college leaders as unnecessary, unwise, and unfair – particularly since evidence shows that the vast majority of students required to take remedial math courses never complete college.

It’s not just community college standards that are starting to shift. Both the CSU and University of California systems are entertaining new approaches, acknowledging the case for basing students’ math requirements on their academic and career goals. UC’s admissions committee recently approved a two-course alternative remedial sequence (including a pre-statistics course and a college-level statistics course) for community college students seeking to transfer, despite the program’s relatively slim algebra content.

And some CSU campuses have reduced the amount of algebra students placed into remedial math courses must study before enrolling in college-level courses such as Introductory Statistics.

What do these changes mean about college readiness for California’s high school students? For admission to UC and CSU, students still need the equivalent of two years of algebra in high school. And despite its practical emphasis on developing mathematical maturity and sense-making, Common Core math includes a healthy dose of Algebra 1 and 2.

For now, the idea of expanding the Common Core standards to include an alternative course pathway at the high school level is a sensitive one. U.S. students don’t choose majors until they are in college, and educators are understandably wary of limiting students’ options by letting them graduate from high school with fewer than two years of algebra. But the traditional practice has also limited high school students’ options, because many struggle with algebra, especially Algebra 2.

The new standards promise to change that, by ensuring that more students succeed in high school math, not just passing courses but actually understanding the mathematical ideas. But K-12 education reformers could learn from new programs at the college level that suggest that for all students to succeed there may need to be more than one pathway through mathematics.

*Pamela Burdman **is a Berkeley-based higher education policy analyst and a former program officer at the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation. Her latest publication is DEGREES OF FREEDOM: Varying Routes to Math Readiness and the Challenge of Intersegmental Alignment*.

**The opinions expressed in this commentary represent those of the author. EdSource welcomes commentaries representing diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.**

**One more thing… Help shape EdSource’s future, and tell us how to better serve you. Please take a few minutes to fill out our audience survey here.**

S Nelson6 years ago6 years agoPamela hit a problem with a lot of math preparation for technology jobs that has been known in industry since at least the 1990's. Engineers at (the then) Bell Labs and Intel were able to gain prodigious increases in productivity for new product processes - only by being able to tackle manufacturing by Experimental Design techniques, all based on statistics. Most of these advanced processes - needed no more than Algebra II. I hope … Read More

Pamela hit a problem with a lot of math preparation for technology jobs that has been known in industry since at least the 1990’s. Engineers at (the then) Bell Labs and Intel were able to gain prodigious increases in productivity for new product processes – only by being able to tackle manufacturing by Experimental Design techniques, all based on statistics. Most of these advanced processes – needed no more than Algebra II.

I hope that the new college level statistics courses – are based much more on ‘real world’ problems rather than boring theory-only. There are a tremendous number of public data sets out there – just ripe for mining by interested students. I’m not as familiar with the social sciences – but there is also a lot of educational K-12 public data avaliable.

I’m a public school trustee, I support Common Core math, and I worked as an R&D engineer at University of California, Xerox PARC, and several other Silicon Valley high-technology firms. I also have a CA math teaching credential (only throught Algeba 1). My views are not even 2 sigma off the mean of people with similar backgrounds 🙂

Doug Liser6 years ago6 years agoHigh school algebra is already a pretty low bar for college admission. I would hate to have to teach even the most basic class in applied stats for social science to students who didn’t understand variables or functions.

Maria Consuelo7 years ago7 years agoThe writer obviously does not have a child in the k-12 system currently. If she did she would see the toxic climate that The Common Core has created in the classroom. The reformers were not K-12 educators and their reform efforts were not funded by K-12 educators. They were funded by billionaires who assume they have the answers. Hence the new standards are developmentally inappropriate. Children are stressed by the new standards. There have been … Read More

The writer obviously does not have a child in the k-12 system currently. If she did she would see the toxic climate that The Common Core has created in the classroom. The reformers were not K-12 educators and their reform efforts were not funded by K-12 educators. They were funded by billionaires who assume they have the answers. Hence the new standards are developmentally inappropriate. Children are stressed by the new standards. There have been cases of children throwing up before and after exams. There has been a huge surge in children visiting the school nurses offices because they have headaches. Most teachers do not support the standards because they know through experience that the standards are not sound or appropriate. Why were so few teachers consulted about a test that they are responsible for administering? They are the experts not Ivy League academics. This will fail because it reeks of superficiality. The Common Core is not playing out very well in California no matter how many biased news reports say it is.