University of Hawaii Community Colleges
Instructional Annual Report of Program Data (ARPD)

Select the desired review year, college, and program from the drop down menus. Once a program has been selected, the results will be displayed.

Review Year: College: Program:

College: Kapiolani Community College
Program: Remedial/Developmental Math

Printer Friendly


The last comprehensive review for this program was on NA (annual only).

Program Description

Program Description:

Kahikoluamea is a dynamic program that provides leadership in sustaining a model of purposeful and intentional learning pathways for students beginning college at the developmental levels in reading, writing and math.  Rooted in Hawaiian values, the program's faculty and support learning staff collaboratively provide unique learning experiences and opportunities to increase student learning, engagement and success,  preparing students to enter college level courses and their degree pathways. Persistence in college continues to be an immediate goal for Kahikoluamea with its deliberate focus on first-year advising, transitional services, career development, and high-impact curricular strategies and innovations that accelerate learning and achievement. Upon timely completion of Kahikoluamea courses, the long term academic goal is for students to identify personal goals and values that result in informed career and academic choices, move forward toward degree completion, and contribute to the broader community upon  graduation or transfer. This program includes the following courses: Math 24 (Elementary Algebra I) 3 credits, Math 25 (Elementary Algebra II) 3 credits, and Math 81 (Foundations of Mathematics) 6 credits.

Mission Statement 

Kahikoluamea means the lashing together of three canoes for stability and strength. The Kahikoluamea Department, rooted in Hawaiian values, integrates First Year Experience, Malama Hawai‘i, and foundational academic skills delivered in English (reading and writing) and in mathematics courses preparatory for college level work. Our mission is to engage, invigorate, enlighten, and retain entering students, encouraging them to identify and acknowledge their personal strengths, values, and interests; develop their life goals, and persevere in their educational pathway.  We do this through classroom experiences, scholarship, and co-curricular services which provide a cohesive system of support through counseling, career planning, innovative pedagogies and models, co-curricular activities, and learning support services. 

Part I. Quantitative Indicators

Overall Program Health: Cautionary
Demand Indicators Program Year Demand Health Call
09-10 10-11 11-12
1 Enrolled in any Remedial/Developmental 1,648 1,650 1,630 Unhealthy
2 Semester Hours Taught 249 312 300
3 * Student Semester Hours (SSH) Taught 6,371 6,318 6,290
4 Full Time Students (Fall) Enrolled 672 628 599
5 Full Time Students (Spring) Enrolled 504 403 394
6 Number of Classes Taught 77 98 93
Achieving the Dream AtD Fall Cohort
2008 2009 2010
7 Percent AtD Cohort with Placement 74% 72% 71%
8 AtD Cohort Placing Remdial/Developmental 42% 42% 41%
9 Cohort Enrolling Remedial/Developmental 294 372 345
9a Percent Cohort Enrolling Remedial/Developmental 50% 50% 47%
10 * Increase Percent Enrolling -14% 0% -3%

Efficiency Indicators Program Year Efficiency Health Call
09-10 10-11 11-12
11 Average Class Size 25.9 20.5 21.2 Healthy
12 * Fill Rate 100% 81% 91%
13 Number of Low-Enrolled (<10) Classes 0 5 1
14 * BOR Appointed Faculty (FTE) 4.5 3.9 4.2
15 Non-BOR Appointed Faculty Teaching Classes 11 14 13
16 Percentage Classes Taught by Regular Discipline Faculty 52% 35% 39%
17 Percentage Classes Taught by non Regular Discipline Faculty 48% 65% 61%
18 Program Budget Allocation $738,189 $805,338 $805,338
18b Tution and Fees $0 $0 $0
19 Cost per SSH $116 $127 $128

Effectiveness Indicators Program Year Effectiveness Health Call
09-10 10-11 11-12
Retention (Course Completion) Cautionary
20 1 Level Below College Level 88% 90% 88%
21 2 Levels Below College Level 88% 85% 95%
22 3 or More Levels Below College Level N/A N/A N/A
Successful completion (Equivalent C or Higher)
23 1 Level Below College Level 48% 56% 59%
23a 1 Level Below College Level 521 625 704
24 Withdrawals (Grade = W) 131 112 140
25 2 Levels Below College Level 42% 42% 57%
25a 2 Levels Below College Level 384 379 435
26 Withdrawals (Grade = W) 113 138 41
27 3 or More Levels Below College Level N/A N/A N/A
27a 3 or More Levels Below College Level 0 N/A N/A
28 Withdrawals (Grade = W) N/A N/A N/A

Achieving the Dream AtD Fall Cohort  
2008 2009 2010
29 Cohort Enrolled in Remedial Developmental Course 294 372 345  
30 Cohort Successful Completion at Least One Remedial/Developmental Course within First Academic Year 159 202 198
31 Percent Cohort Successful Completion 54% 54% 57%
Remedial/Developmental Pipeline
32 AtD Cohort Size 1,375 1,738 1,766
33 Percent AtD Students Placing Into Remedial/ Developmental Level 42% 42% 41%
34 Percent AtD Cohort Enrolled in Remedial/ Developmental Course 21% 21% 20%
35 Percent AtD Cohort Successfully Completing Any Remedial/ Developmental Course Within First Academic Year 27% 27% 27%
36 Percent AtD Cohort Successfully Completing College Level Course Within First Academic Year 35% 31% 43%

Successful Next Level Program Year  
09-10 10-11 11-12
Persistence (Fall to Spring)  
37 * Percent From 1 Level Below College Level, To College Level     65%
37a From 1 Level Below College Level, To College level 174 195 226
38 Percent From 2 Levels Below College Level, To 1 Level Below     65%
38a From 2 Levels Below College Level, To 1 Level Below 131 94 140
39 Percent From 3 or More Levels Below College Level, To 2 Levels Below     N/A
39a From 3 or More Levels Below College Level, To 2 Levels Below N/A N/A N/A
Success in Subsequent Course (Equivalent C or Higher)
40 College Level From 1 Level Below 110 135 132
40a * Percent College Level From 1 Level Below     58%
41 1 Level Below From 2 Levels Below College Level 68 48 71
42 2 Levels Below From 3 or More Levels Below College Level N/A N/A N/A
Last Updated: December 7, 2012
Glossary | Health Call Scoring Rubric

Part II. Analysis of the Program

Demand (Unhealthy)

Kahikoluamea’s math program experienced a slight decrease in enrollment (1.2%) by 20 students overall.  The number of full time students enrolled in fall decreased from 628 to 599, a decrease of 4.6%.  The number of full time students enrolled in spring decreased from 403 to 394, a decrease of 2.25%.  993 full time students take up 61% of our enrollments while 637 part time students take up 39%. The three year data table indicates a consistent 2% decrease in the number of full time students who are enrolling in developmental math. It is not clear without further information as to what factors are causing this trend in student enrollment patterns.

Student semester hours decreased from 628 to 599 hours, a decrease of 4.6%.  The number of classes taught decreased from 98 to 93 sections, a decrease of 5.1%.  These numbers are representative of the restructuring of the Math 24 self-paced model initiative.  Class sizes have been reduced since Fall 2010 to accommodate space limitations on campus due to lack of a computer lab space for these students. At the same time, the number of sections of developmental math offered in the summer session, which are not included in the ARPD data, has increased over the past two summers. For example, in summer 2012, 229 students enrolled in summer developmental math courses compared with 170 students in summer 2011. Students enrolled in summer developmental math classes pay the same tuition rate as fall/spring which allows the department to look at year-round offerings to meet student demand and need.

The percent of the AtD cohort who placed into a developmental math class and who enrolled in the course during the year declined by 3%. This decrease is the basis for the "unhealthy" measure as defined by the developmental education program scoring rubric. It is possible that the addition of summer data could affect this measure, however, the department is keenly aware that efforts to enroll students in developmental math classes during their first year are critical for their success and will take measures to focus on improving this score.

 Efficiency (Healthy)

Looking at the efficiency indicators, average class sizes increased slightly from 20.5 to 21.2, an increase of 3.4%. The continuance of the Math 81 collaborative group course and Math 24 self-paced course demands a reduced class size of 20-22.  The slight increase by 1-2 students per class is indicative of the increasing demand of some of these courses. The fill rates increased from 81% to 91%, only because 1 class low-enrolled.  The reason for this change is we wanted to pilot a new initiative, Math 98, which combines Math 24 and Math 25 in one semester during Spring 2012.  This course had an enrollment of 7 students.

During Fall 2011-Spring 2012, we had a full time faculty member return from sabbatical during this period and one full time faculty member on sabbatical for Spring 2012.  Despite the new credit restriction on lecturers from 15 to 14 credits, the low percentage of full time math faculty continues to be an issue due to difficulty in recruiting and retaining qualified faculty.  Many of our Math 24 and Math 25 courses are taught by lecturers.  To improve these rates, the college allocated an additional 1.0FTE faculty position and the position has been filled for fall 2013, bringing the total number of math faculty to 8.0FTE. Theis means that the maximum possible percentage of sections taught by BOR appointed faculty is 77% if everyone taught a full load.  However, because it is the goal to have Kahikoluamea math faculty teach Math 100/103 as part of Math Pathways, the department will continue to hire lecturers to teach sections not covered by full time faculty.

Effectiveness (Unhealthy)

For students at one level below college level (Math 25 and Math 81), retention rates decreased from 90% to 88%, completion rates increased from 56% to 59%, and withdrawals increased from 112 to 140, an increase of 25%.  Since the ARPD data does not differentiate between Math 25 and Math 81, OFIE reports indicate that in Fall 2011-Spring 2012, Math 81 has success rates of 77% (125 out of 162 students), an increase from the previous year (70.5%, 98 out of 139 students), while Math 25 has success rates of 52.2% (444 out of 849 students) which is still an increase from the previous year (47.6%, 382 out of 802 students). 

For students at two levels below college level (Math 24), retention rates increased from 85% to 95%, completion rates increased from 42% to 57%, and withdrawals decreased from 138 to 41, a decrease of 70.3%.  Several factors may attribute to these numbers, which was an expectation from the John Squires Emporium model.  This is the second year with the continuation of the self-paced model.  Students and faculty by this time have adjusted to the new format of the technology enhanced self-paced model where homework, quizzes, exams, and lectures were online.  Minor adjustments in grading policies, classroom policies, and curriculum changes were made.  Faculty and students were more comfortable and confident with the new delivery mode and were better able to handle technological and curricular issues at an earlier time frame.  The huge decrease in withdrawal rates may be attributed to students staying through to the end of the semester, with the option to continue from where they left off in Math 24 in the following semester rather than starting fresh from the beginning of the course.  This important feature allowed students to complete a Math 24 course within a year and be able to master concepts at his/her own pace.  Students who historically have had to start all over each semester are now able to finish Math 24.  This is a huge leap of progress that previously kept students from continuing or even achieving their certificates or degrees.  The ongoing goal is to have students finish on schedule or ahead of time to take advantage of an early jump on Math 25.  In this second year of the self-paced model, an increasing number of students have been able to do so. 

For both Math 81 and Math 25, only 65% of students who complete those courses in the their first semester end up enrolling in Math 100 or Math 103 in their second semester. This is the same picture for Math 24 where only 65% move on to Math 25 in their second semester. Initiatives are in place for Fall 2012-Spring 2013 to see the effect of timely information of the correct pathways for students to follow (non-STEM vs STEM pathways), increase course offerings of Math 81 so that non-STEM students are able to reach Math 100 in a timely fashion, and increase course offerings of the newly piloted Math 98.

The effectiveness performance score of "Unhealthy" measures the fact that students who successfully complete their first math course in the fall semester are not continuing to follow their math pathway and enrolling in the transfer level course in the spring semester.

The Achieving the Dream cohort data in 2010 show a slight 1.6% increase in cohort size from 1738 to 1766.  Of these students, 41% (724 students) placed into a remedial/developmental level while only 20% (353 students) enrolled in a remedial/developmental course.  This means that 371 students (51.2%) in this pipeline did not enroll in a remedial/development course.  These results are not surprising since not all students readily enroll in a math course in their first year.  Based on this data, mandating enrollment into a math course upon completion of COMPASS testing would increase these rates. 

Achievments should be noted are the10% increase in Math 24 retention (line 21),  15% increase in successful completion rate for Math 24 (line 25), and 12% increase in students completing the remedial/developmental pipeline and completing their college level course in their first year which comes mainly from the increase in success rates of Math 25 and 81 (line 36).

Part III. Action Plan

To achieve higher success rates by decreasing exit points for students, Kahikoluamea is piloting an accelerated learning program, Math 98 for students on the STEM-pathway.  Increased course offerings for Math 81 will also be implemented in order to accommodate non-STEM students a better pathway to reaching Math 100.  The former offering of Math 24 and Math 25 prior to reaching Math 100 to the majority of students provides a lengthy and costly way of achieving this goal.  Timely dispensation of the correct information initially through the New Student Orientations provides students with clearer Math pathways to their certificates and degrees via peer mentors and counselors. In addition, New Student Orientations have been aggressively implementing a new registration initiative requiring the enrollment of a Math and English courses for first year students beginning Summer 2012.

Funds received by the UHCC system has also supported the training of math lecturers allowing them to shadow any new courses or innovations piloted by full time faculty. Because the department will not be fully able to assign all developmental math sections to full time faculty, lecturers will be a critical piece of our staffing plan. We would like to continue to involve them in all professional development activities including compensating them for time spent in professional development.

With support in funding and resources from the administration, faculty will continue to research high impact test support activities, revise policies, dialog with high schools, collaborate with institutional researchers to assess and improve and communicate results to PPAC and other constituencies at the college in order to maintain transparent communication about any potential changes to developmental math courses and activities.

The math discipline coordinator will continue to schedule and support ongoing dialogue among faculty regarding curriculur revisions, math pathway strategies, course policies, etc. and recommend action plans by the end of February 2013 for incorporation into the Department's Program Review for 2013 - 16.

Part IV. Resource Implications

To accommodate student needs and to enable the best possible choices for students, continuance of the New Student Orientation program to aid in registration for students to be able to continue math courses in subsequent semesters.  Technology based classrooms are needed to provide efficient and effective means of providing support for students in Math 81 and Math 24/98.  Three classrooms are completed for these courses. We would like at least one more technology based classroom to provide the minimum amount of forecasted students in future semesters. The additional classroom/lab necessitates that a full time lab monitor position be allocated to the unit.

It will be necessary for the faculty along with the Department Chair, Student Affairs Coordinator and VCSA to conduct a thorough inventory of technology needs, rooms and teaching time slots available to meet the needs and demands of the AtD cohort to be able to enroll in the math and English courses they place in. Our students deserve to begin their academic path with built-in support that allows them to be on track for graduation with a degree or certificate in a timely manner.