Considerations for Forming and Kicking Off Guided Pathways and Student Financial Stability Workgroups for A2I2 Colleges

Prepared by: Rob Johnstone, NCII

Introduction

For most A2I2 colleges, the foundation-setting of Visits 1 & 2 paves the way for a shift in the work in preparation for Visit 3. At this time, the college should focus on creating or evolving a workgroup structure to make actionable the work of planning and implementing guided pathways and student financial stability reforms at scale for all entering students. During this process, colleges can leverage an existing taskforce or workgroup structure or use the straw man “Planning to Implementation (P2I)” team structure created by NCII. In either case, the college needs to ensure that these workgroups operate differently than the classic standing college committee, and this document provides considerations for colleges as they approach this work.

Forming the Workgroups

A2I2 Colleges need to make an initial decision about the number of workgroups that will serve to structure the college’s guided pathways-related work. Below you will find a list of recommended functional work areasthat need to be addressed as guided pathways and financial stability reform evolves in the coming years at your college:

  • Program mapping, including pathways for transfer and for direct entry to workforce
  • Metamajors (Career Focus Areas / Institutes / Academies)
  • Exploring interests / career exploration
  • Transfer-level math/English reform (dev edreform)
  • Advising, including entry advising, progress monitoring and early intervention
  • Communications and engagement
  • Onboarding / recruiting / working with high schools
  • Student financial stability
  • Marketing / website / student- facing materials
  • Teaching & learning under guided pathways
  • Technology to support pathways

A2I2 colleges should also consider the sequencing of these workgroups; in most cases it is recommended that 2-4 workgroups begin their work earlier than the others in order to phase in the implementation, generate momentum and demonstrate early wins. We strongly suggest that the metamajors and program mapping workgroups are in the initial set of workgroups that kick off the work, as they provide the foundation for many of the other workgroups. Finally, these workgroups need to have a defined timeline for their work – with a clear start date and an end date to guide planning and workflow.

We suggest strongly that the college identify a Fall term in the future – perhaps two or three Fall terms from the current term – that represents when the first entering cohort of students will experience the implementation of guided pathways at scale. This will be “version 1.0” of guided pathways, and the college will continue to evolve its efforts from there - but it’s important to have an initial implementation term to work back from to conceptualize and then plan the work. We learned from early guided pathways pioneers that a college only discovers the problems of implementation at scale when it rolls out the first version of guided pathways reforms - at scale - for all entering students who need them. This is an important guiding principle that should be incorporated into the work – that there is no “right answer” that you are working toward, but rather that this work is intended to be an ever-evolving learning experience on how best to optimize conditions for your students.

Process for Kicking Off Workgroups

The following are steps necessary to ensure that each workgroup reaches its goals:

  • Step 1 – Determine membership of the group
  • NCII suggests no more than 10 members per working group / task force and that they represent a cross-functional set of faculty, student services professionals, staff from support areas and administrators
  • Step 2 – Select one or two members of the group to chair / co-chair the group
  • NCII recommends that at least one of these chairs or co-chairs be practitioners
  • Step 3 - Establish a charge / mission for each group
  • Note that project leadership (steering committee or similar group) should review the charges /missions for each group to help determine the interconnections between groupsand thus to optimize the work and avoid duplication
  • For the task undertaken, answer the question, “Who decides?” That is, what is the shared governance process that should be undertaken (and included in the timeline), and who has the final approval?
  • Step 4 – Have each group determine a vision of the desired future state for the student experience relevant to their workgroup
  • As a first step the workgroup should process map or “whiteboard” the current state for the key student experiences the group is tasked with addressing
  • Step 5 – Establish design principles/planning assumptions for the group
  • Design principles are guidelines that help steer the work and simplify decisions.Examples might include:
  • “design to solve problems for 80% of the entering student population first”
  • “work on transfer pathways for our three biggest transfer partners first”
  • “our district will have one set of metamajors”
  • “assume no new funding initially”
  • Step 6 – Establish a timeline for the work
  • Project leadership will need to review the timelines of individual workgroups to ensure that they are working toward the common goal of rolling out “version 1.0” as referenced above.
  • Step 7–Identify key deliverables or artifacts for the work
  • The artifacts are critical to demonstrate to the larger college community what is happening and how the work will unfold
  • Step 8 – Identify and sequence tasks for getting from the current state to the desired future state
  • These will of course morph as the project work unfolds, but it’s important to have a guiding set of tasks to organize the work to serve as a point of departure
  • Step 9 – Utilize an action planning template or similar document to record and share the plan
  • A sample template from is provided as attachment for your consideration
  • Step 10 – Determine a two-way communication structure to ensure clarity and a feedback loop between workgroups and administrators involved in guiding the work

Final Thought

This document is intended as a point of departure for your A2I2 College’s consideration of how to structure and shepherdthe necessary work for guided pathways reforms. We strongly encourage each college to customize the approach to your college culture and unique trajectory. As always, feel free to contact Dr. Rob Johnstone at with any comments or questions.

Page | 1