Very few schools who have implemented the model use it the same way in year two as they did in year one. This type of change is okay!

We always want to be making progress and moving forward for student success. We, too, must adopt a growth mindset. Throughout the semester, keep a list of what worked and what didn’t. Perhaps you’ll need to tweak the content in either (or both) of your courses. Perhaps you’ll decide to include more study skills. It’s possible that cut scores need to be re-examined. There are many variables that factor into the success of the co-requisite model; making minor tweaks will allow for continuous improvement as you strive toward a better experience for students.

As you continue to meet with the planning committee, here are a few items to evaluate:

  • Data
    • Pass rates
    • Mastery level of learning objectives
    • Retention rates
  • Survey students in the support course
  • Syllabus
    • Are you addressing the appropriate objectives in each course?
  • Cut scores
    • Are the correct students place in the support course?
  • Is additional faculty development needed?


Faculty Tip

If your co-requisite model requires some fine-tuning, don’t worry. The truth is, every implementation needs to be improved over time.

Liz Scott of Angelina College can relate. “I wish I could say we had our co-reqs where they needed to be, but as with anything new, ours will need perfecting.”

Her department continually meets and is constantly working to improve the courses. “We are still building — it is a work in progress.”


Bringing it all together

To help map out what’s ahead of you, request Knewton alta’s corequisite project plan from your Knewton representative, or by emailing Our customizable project plan outlines all the critical stages of developing a co-requisite model using alta. Just add the dates and names and you’re on your way!

Additional resources

  • CUNY guidelines for co-requisites offers basic principles for three different co-requisite models.
  • The Dana Center provides questions to ask, along with some basic guidance, when considering co-requisite implementation in this document.
  • Becky Moening facilitated a webinar for California State University faculty on “Planning Co-Requisite Support for a Quantitative Reasoning Course.” See the PowerPoint presentation here, and reach out if you have any questions!


About the Author

Becky Moening

About the Author

Becky Moening recently left the faculty ranks to become a knerd at Knewton. She spent 10 years at Ivy Tech Community College teaching a variety of mathematics courses while serving on multiple committees, including one that oversaw the development of non-STEM co-requisite courses. Within a support course, Becky trained faculty across the Ivy Tech Community College system on best practices in co-requisite courses. Becky has worked in content development, course redesign, and facilitated trainings around co-requisites and math pathways nationally for the Charles A. Dana Center.

Becky holds an Ed.D. from Ball State University with a research focus on the co-requisite model in higher education mathematics.