Friendly Placement Testing

Like most community colleges, my college requires students to take a standard math placement test to determine their math level. Like many, my college enforces the resulting score — students can not enroll for any course higher than what their placement test score qualifies them for. How can this standard approach be done so that is fair to students and allows them to begin at the highest reasonable level of mathematics (for their knowledge)?

Let’s agree right at the start … the content of the standard placement tests is not aligned with the best mathematics in those areas of knowledge; the items tend to be basic procedures and basic concepts in a fairly narrow range of topics. However, changing a placement test is a long term (and commercial) process. As much as I would like to see (drastic) changes in the tests, that is not under our control and any changes to those tests will not be seen by students for a while (like 2 or 3 years).

Here are some observations about typical math placement testing systems that affect how friendly it is to students:

Upon admission, community college students usually do not know what will be on the test.
Community college students often do not understand how important the results will be.
Our students usually take a math test without any review.
Options for re-testing (challenging) are often limited, and we tend to not provide information on ‘what to do before retesting’.

You might not agree with all of these observations. I hope you see enough truth in them to agree with this statement: “The advising for students prior to taking a math placement test is not currently adequate in most community colleges”. In fact, many colleges are like mine … the first advising a new student receives is done at an orientation; students are required to complete placement testing BEFORE orientation (and advising). There is a logical reason for this — advising tends to deal with specific questions about enrollment, and this means the results of testing are needed. However, I would suggest that this approach is not student friendly.

If I could do so, I would make the initial advising a two-step process:

An orientation & advising (done in groups) which would cover information on math placement testing, followed by taking the placement test (different day)
Individual advising after placement testing, where possible re-testing is discussed (based on how the student sees their initial results aligns with their background).

Alas, I am not in charge of advising … as I suspect math faculty would not be in charge of advising in general.

In the meantime, here is one specific thing we could consider doing to make the process a little more friendly for our students: Make use of an online homework system for the review prior to retesting.

At my college, some students who want to re-test for math are referred to the math department where they speak with an administrator (usually). For many students, this results in them receiving access to a “MyMathTest” program that provides specific preparation for the placement test they want to retake. We are able to do this because of the cooperation of the publisher, so there is no cost for the student; we are somewhat limited to a total number of users for this program, but the limit is high enough to accommodate the students talking to us about retesting.

We do not have specific results to share about how this is working (gains in math level or not). I hope there are gains there. However, I think this is a good thing to do just because it is student friendly.

If you are interested in using an online homework system as part of the review process for a placement test, start by talking to your book company representatives. We have found the representatives to be helpful, and willing to look at doing something extra that would help students.

Developmental Mathematics Revival!

Bringing a new vitality to college mathematics 2011 to 2019