Everybody Else is Doing it, So Why Can’t We? Challenges and Variations of Corequisite Remediation

• In Event: Statewide Developmental Education Reform in California: Lessons From A Five-Year Mixed-Methods Study

Abstract

Although colleges used a variety of cocurricular support models in response to AB 705, the most common cocurricular approach across the system has been corequisite remediation (Cuellar Mejia et al., 2023). Corequisites have received extensive research attention and have been shown to produce higher completion rates than traditional DE sequences (Boatman, 2012; Cho et al., 2012; Cuellar Mejia et al., 2020; Jenkins et al., 2010; Logue et al., 2016; Logue et al., 2019; Ran & Lin, 2022). However, analyses in California present a less uniform picture of outcomes among students enrolled in corequisite courses. While some colleges have seen improved outcomes among students enrolled in corequisite courses, others have experienced higher completion rates among students enrolled in course sections without this support and significantly lower completion rates among those enrolled in corequisite-paired courses (Cuellar Mejia et al., 2023). These mixed outcomes may be partly due to the lack of consistent implementation, as our research aligns with other literature (Ryu et al., 2022) indicating high variation in the design and structure of this model.
This paper draws on in-depth case studies at 15 colleges and data from 65 institutions who completed spreadsheets indicating the structure and supports available in all sections of their introductory transfer-level English and math courses. These data allow us to provide insights related to the prevalence of the corequisite model, as well as insights from faculty and administrators regarding the challenges associated with implementing this approach.
Our spreadsheet data indicate that while the corequisite model is the most common cocurricular approach utilized by California community colleges, the majority of English and math departments are implementing this structure for fewer than 20% of their introductory transfer-level course sections. Comparing data from the 2021-22 and 2022-23 academic years, we see that more colleges experienced decreases than increases in the percentage of course sections offering the corequisite model (see Figure 1).
Our qualitative data suggests that these decreases are largely in response to concerns that the model is not working as intended. Our findings suggest that there are two primary concerns: corequisites add additional units (time) and cost, but those units do not transfer, which many respondents highlight as a burden. Additionally, most California community colleges are not requiring any students to enroll in corequisite-paired sections, which means that students who would benefit most are often not enrolling in them. Our research aligns with literature surfacing other issues with implementation, including variation in the timing of academic supports, instructional modalities used (e.g., online vs. in-person, with or without embedded tutoring), and class composition and size (Ryu et al., 2022). We additionally heard concerns from our study participants that the corequisite support lab was sometimes used to provide additional content instead of support on course material, and that course registration and grading can be complicated.
While corequisite remediation clearly demonstrates promise in helping students complete gateway courses and progress to higher-level coursework, colleges are urged to carefully consider the design of their corequisite courses and provide adequate support to faculty to ensure successful outcomes.

Authors

• Mark Duffy, Research for Action

• Kri Burkander, Research for Action

• Molly Pileggi, Research for Action