By DeShawn Preston, Research Associate at MDRC & Strong Start to Finish Advisory Board Member
Over the past decade, colleges have searched for methods to support students enrolled in developmental education through their courses in a timely manner and into college-level courses. Since then, research has consistently shown that students are more likely to succeed in college-level math and English courses when allowed to enroll in them their first semester. Corequisite developmental education allow students deemed underprepared by traditional assessment systems to enroll in college-level courses while getting additional supports. As of 2025, 29 states or state systems allow or require the use of co-requisite support, with this number continuously growing. However, what do these co-requisite courses really look like?
Co-requisite developmental education is often used as an umbrella term. It typically describes when students enroll directly into a college-level while concurrently receiving aligned developmental educational support. There are several approaches colleges may take in offering co-requisite remediation such as mandatory tutoring, where students are required to attend tutoring sessions along with their college level; courses competency-based model, where students take a supporting course to build specific competencies to succeed in the college level course; and paired courses that run before, after, or on opposite days to the college-level courses. The various options colleges can take when implementing co-requisites can lead to confusion when a college is deciding which co-requisite model to implement and to avoid misalignment with their students’ needs. When colleges get more specific when referring to co-requisites, it can help them:
- Inform placement for students. One of the first things a college must do once they have recommended developmental education to a student is determine which course to place a particular student. The concept of placement plays an integral role in traditional developmental education. While evidence-based practices suggest multiple measures assessments have instead of traditional developmental education courses, little is known about placement methods when aligned with co-requisite remediation. What type of placement methods are best suited to place students in co-requisites? Are there particular models that work best for students based on their high school or GED metrics? Clear and specific co-requisite models can help illuminate which placement methods are best suited to place students into different types of models. MDRC has recently launched randomized trials of alternate placement systems for corequisite courses at eight colleges around the country to help inform these questions.
- To identify the most effective co-requisite model. With the growing body of evidence that supports co-requisite remediations and the momentum of adopting such strategies, more data needs to be collected to understand the impact of the different co-requisite models on student outcomes. Yes, it is true there are some positive outcomes when colleges adopt co-requisite remediation, but do we know if specific models produce better outcomes than others? Do we know if certain student groups such as adult-learners, English-language learners, working students, or Black students have better outcomes depending on which co-requisite model they take? Collecting and disaggregating data on the various co-requisite models by race, gender, age, and other student populations allows college to better understand if certain approaches work better than others. More importantly, collecting such data may provide colleges with more insight into which methods result in better outcomes for specific student populations.
- Direct guidance on how to implement co-requisite models. Additionally, being more specific about co-requisite developmental education allows for a more detailed description of the most effective practices when implementing various co-requisite models. As more colleges continue implementing corequisite developmental education, more knowledge should be shared on implementing various co-requisite models with fidelity. With more details, Colleges can determine if they have the necessary resources (e.g. faculty, staff, technology, etc.) or should invest in certain resources to implement their desired model. By sharing how to implement various models, colleges can make more informed decisions on implementing their chosen model with fidelity.
Though there is still further research to be conducted, co-requisite and multiple measures assessment are strategies that are more effective than traditional placement and developmental education when implemented with fidelity. Unfortunately, even with various developmental education reforms, disparities in persistence and completion still exist amongst racial and ethnic minoritized groups, and students from low-income backgrounds compared to other groups that are recommended developmental education. As colleges seek to address barriers students face, especially minoritized students within developmental education, there must be more clarity around co-requisite remediation. College administrators should not only disaggregate the data based on race, gender, and age, but should take it a step further and disaggregate data based on the various co-requisite models. The more details provided on the various co-requisite model should provide colleges with information needed to make an informed decision on which practices work best for their student population. Additionally, sharing the specific model and suggested practices for implementation will better prepare administrators to assess the resources needed to implement their model with fidelity. By specifically naming the co-requisite model of choice provides an opportunity for colleges to make a data form decision about which model works best for their school and creates a blueprint for how other colleges can adopt such practices.
