Davis Jenkins

Do Student Success Courses Actually Help Community College Students Succeed

Many first-time college students arrive on campus unprepared to succeed in college. This is especially the case at community colleges, which pursue an “open door” mission of serving all students, regardless of prior educational background. According to a survey of degree-granting institutions by the National Center for Education Statistics (2003), 42 percent of entering first-time students at public two-year colleges in fall 2000 took at least one remedial course (or one “developmental” course; we use these terms interchangeably), compared to 20 percent of entering students at public four-year institutions. Among recent high school graduates who entered higher education through community colleges in the mid-1990s, over 60 percent took at least one remedial course (authors’ calculations based on the National Education Longitudinal Survey of 1988 [NELS: 88]). Underpreparation is typically viewed in terms of deficiencies in students’ basic academic skills, specifically in those skills integral to the reading, writing, and mathematics subject areas. Community college educators maintain, however, that many entering students are also unprepared in other important ways. It is widely believed that many students have poor study habits and lack clear goals for college and careers. Some experts contend that helping students address these non-academic deficiencies is just as important as helping them acquire basic academic skills through remedial classes, which typically do not address issues such as study skills, goal setting, and the like (Boylan, 2002; Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991). In response to this increasingly acknowledged need, community colleges now offer “student success” courses that teach students how to write notes, take tests, and manage their time; that help students explore their learning styles; and that encourage students to develop plans for college and careers (Derby & Smith, 2004). A wide spectrum of students may find these courses useful. Although such courses are not themselves considered to be remedial, sometimes colleges require that they be taken by students who need academic remediation. Student success courses have certainly become wellestablished. Indeed, several publishers offer textbooks for these courses, in some cases allowing colleges to customize the course material with institution-specific information such as support services available on a given campus. Student success courses, and their effectiveness, are the focus of this Brief. Despite the prevalence of these courses at community colleges, little research has been conducted on their effectiveness. Recently a research team headed by Dr. Patricia Windham at the Florida Department of Education compared the outcomes of students who completed a student success course — which in Florida is known as a “student life skills,” or “SLS,” course — with those of students who did not take or complete such a course (Florida Department of Education, 2006). They found that SLS course completers were more likely than non-completers to achieve one of the following three indicators of success: earning a community college credential, transferring to the state university system, or remaining enrolled in college after five years. Results of this study are shown in Figure 1. Among students who needed at least one remedial course, those who passed an SLS course were more likely to achieve these milestones than were those who did not take or complete an SLS course. The same pattern holds for students who were required to take remedial courses in all three subject areas — students who are generally plagued by high rates of failure. In Florida’s 28 community colleges, SLS courses are open to all students, but some of the colleges require that certain students take them. According to an earlier study (Florida Department of Education, 2005), 13 colleges have no requirement that any particular students take an SLS course; it is, rather, an elective course. Most of the other colleges tie a requirement to enroll in SLS to enrollment in developmental courses, although the rule varies in terms of which, and how many, developmental courses students need to enroll in before they are required to take SLS. One college requires all students NUMBER 36 JUNE 2007 ISSN 1526-2049

Get with the Program: Accelerating Community College Students' Entry into and Completion of Programs of Study

Most students who enter higher education through a community college fail to earn a postsecondary credential. One reason for this is that many students do not enter a college-level program of study. This paper presents a practical method for measuring rates of program entry and completion using data on students’ actual course-taking behaviors rather than declared major or intent. This method is used to track the progress and outcomes of first-time college students over five years using data from an anonymous sample of community colleges. The analysis shows that students must enter a program of study as soon as possible. Students who do not enter a program within a year of enrollment are far less likely to ever enter a program and therefore less likely to earn a credential. The paper suggests ways community colleges can rethink their practices at key stages of students’ experience to substantially increase rates of student completion.

Does Age of Entrance Affect Community College Completion Probabilities? Evidence From a Discrete-Time Hazard Model

Research has consistently shown that older students—those who enter college for the first time at age 25 or older—are less likely to complete a degree or certificate. The authors estimate a single-risk discrete-time hazard model using transcript data on a cohort of first-time community college students in Florida to compare the educational outcomes of older and traditional-age students. Contrary to conventional wisdom, the authors’ results suggest that after controlling for cognitive mathematics ability, older students enrolled in Florida community colleges have a higher conditional probability of completing a degree or certificate in the observed event period.

Using Longitudinal Data to Increase Community College Student Success: A Guide to Measuring Milestone and Momentum Point Attainment

Most community colleges and many state community college systems collect extensive data on individual students. Unfortunately, these data are often underutilized in efforts to improve outcomes for individual students and colleges. Community college systems and their constituent colleges have only recently come to realize the potential for using student unit record (SUR) data for more than reporting student enrollments and program graduates. By organizing these data into termby-term student transcript records over several years and incorporating individual student demographic data, colleges and states can create a powerful resource for understanding patterns of student progression and achievement over time. Understanding how students actually progress through their college programs is essential in developing strategies and choosing appropriate interventions to improve student outcomes. The challenge is to build expertise and capacity in college and state agency research departments to transform raw SUR data into meaningful information of practical use for policymakers and practitioners.

The Effects of Institutional Factors on the Success of Community College Students.

Community colleges are the gateway to higher education for many students who would otherwise have limited access to college, particularly those who are from low-income households or are ethnic minorities, firstgeneration college students, or immigrants. Yet only about one-third of all community college students receives any degree or certificate even eight years after initial college enrollment. And credit accumulation and completion rates are even lower for minority and low-income students. Meanwhile, community college student outcomes, as measures of college effectiveness, are of increasing concern for institutional accountability. The Bush administration and many legislators in Congress would like to hold postsecondary institutions to higher standards of accountability, just as they have done with elementary and secondary schools. Institutional reporting requirements to the Department of Education now include data for graduation rates overall and broken out by gender and race/ethnicity. More than half of all states take into account the performance of public colleges when determining higher education appropriations. The use of completion rates as the primary yardstick for accountability puts pressure on community colleges to improve student outcomes. Yet, community college advocates have resisted the use of completion rates either as an accountability measure or as a normative goal. They argue that many community college students only want to learn new skills or enroll for personal enrichment – goals for which such students may obtain tangible benefits. Further, many factors that may create barriers to student completion are beyond the control of colleges, such as a student’s poor academic preparation. Because community colleges must accept all eligible students seeking to enroll, they often have student populations comprised of individuals who would not be admitted to more selective institutions or who may have many challenges to graduation. For such reasons, standard completion measures such as graduation rates may judge community colleges unfairly. Still, measuring institutional graduation rates can provide useful information about differences among colleges, such as leading researchers to identify policies and practices that might promote student success at those colleges with higher relative rates. For an individual college, analysis of its completion rates can be an important way to measure the effectiveness of its policies and practices relative to other similar institutions. This Brief summarizes a research project, conducted by the Community College Research Center (CCRC) and one component of a Ford Foundation-funded study on minority degree attainment at community colleges, which used institution-level data to analyze the effect of community college characteristics on student performance. The study provides an important first step in identifying the institutional factors – characteristics, policies, and programs – that contribute to improved educational outcomes for community college students.

What Community College Management Practices are Effective in promoting Student Success? A Study of High- and Low-Impact Institutions

Funding for this study was generously provided by Lumina Foundation for Education as part of the Achieving the Dream: Community Colleges Count initiative. (For more information, see http://www.achievingthedream.org.) The study was conducted in partnership with the Florida Department of Education’s Division of Community Colleges and Workforce Education. The author would like to thank David Armstrong and Pat Windham of the Florida Department of Education for sharing the data used to select colleges for field research and encouraging these colleges to take part. Thanks also to the administrators, faculty, staff, and students at the six anonymous Florida community colleges who participated in the field study for their hospitality and openness to discussing their policies and practices and the impact on student success. The other members of the CCRC research team were Thomas Bailey, Peter Crosta, Timothy Leinbach, James Marshall, Andrea Soonachan, and Michelle Van Noy.

Institutional Effectiveness and Student Success: A Study of High- and Low-Impact Community Colleges.

There has been little research on institutional effectiveness at community colleges. A key challenge is how to compare colleges that serve students with widely varying characteristics. Using transcript-level data on over 150,000 Florida community college students, we estimated the effect on the graduation, transfer, and persistence rates of minority students at each of the 28 Florida community colleges as a proxy for institutional effectiveness. We ranked the colleges based on these estimated effects and selected six colleges for field research—3 that had a high impact on minority student success and three that had a low impact. Our fieldwork focused on a set of 7 elements of institutional policy, practice, and culture that we hypothesized are important for promoting student success. We found that the high-impact colleges were more likely than the low-impact colleges to coordinate their programs and services to support student success. We also found that minority students were generally more successful in colleges that had support services targeted specifically to their needs. The study suggests that a more important factor for institutional effectiveness than adopting particular policies or practices is how well a college manages and aligns its programs and services to support student success.

Institutional Research and the Culture of Evidence at Community Colleges

who were instrumental in carrying out the data collection and analysis for the report. a multiyear national initiative to help more community college students succeed. The initiative is particularly concerned about student groups that traditionally have faced significant barriers to success, including students of color and low-income students. Achieving the Dream works on multiple fronts, including efforts at community colleges and in research, public engagement and public policy. It emphasizes the use of data to drive change. is the leading independent authority on the nations more than 1,200 two-year colleges. CCRCs mission is to conduct research on the major issues affecting community colleges in the United States and to contribute to the development of practice and policy that expands access to higher education and promotes success for all students. interests include organizational change in community colleges and the evolving missions and roles of these institutions. Morest recently co-edited the volume, Defending the Community College Equity Agenda, published by the Johns Hopkins University Press. She holds a doctorate in sociology and education from Teachers College, Columbia University. Jenkins conducts research on how to increase access to economic opportunity for disadvantaged youths and adults. He is currently directing a series of CCRC studies that use longitudinal student unit record data collected by state agencies to chart the paths of students within and across educational systems to identify determinants of educational and labor market success. He holds a doctorate in public policy analysis from Carnegie Mellon University. Executive Summary In recent years, community college leaders have begun to consider expanding the traditional role of institutional research (IR) at their colleges. This is due in part to several outside influences. Federal and state governments are pressing colleges to provide more data demonstrating evidence of student outcomes and institutional performance. Accreditation agencies are also asking colleges to provide evidence of student learning and achievement, and they want colleges to establish systems of institutional self-assessment to produce such evidence. The desire for more data and better analysis is also influenced by a growing enthusiasm among educators and advocates to use data to guide decisions about college management and about the design of college programs and services. This notion holds that data should be used not only for the purpose of accountability, but also for the explicit purpose of improving student outcomes and institutional performance. The Achieving the Dream: Community Colleges Count initiative, now in its third …

Access and Success with Less: Improving Productivity in Broad-Access Postsecondary Institutions

Achieving national goals for increased college completion in a time of scarce resources will require the postsecondary institutions that enroll the majority of undergraduates—community colleges and less-selective public universities—to graduate more students at a lower cost. Davis Jenkins and Olga Rodríguez examine research on how these “broad-access” institutions can do so without sacrificing access or quality. Research indicates that the strategies broad-access institutions have relied on in the past to cut costs—using part-time instructors and increasing student-faculty ratios—may in fact reduce productivity and efficiency. The limited evidence available suggests that some of the most popular strategies for improving student success are not cost-effective. New strategies to cut costs and improve college success are therefore imperative. Some believe that redesigning courses to make use of instructional technologies will lead to better outcomes at lower cost, although the evidence is mixed. Recently, a growing number of institutions are going beyond redesigning courses and instead changing the way they organize programs and supports along the student’s “pathway” through college. These efforts are promising, but their effects on cost per completion are not yet certain. Meager funding has so far hampered efforts by policy makers to fund colleges based on outcomes rather than how many students they enroll, but some states are beginning to increase the share of appropriations tied to outcomes. Jenkins and Rodríquez argue that as policy makers push colleges to lower the cost per graduate, they must avoid providing incentives to lower academic standards. They encourage policy makers to capitalize on recent research on the economic value of postsecondary education to measure quality, and urge colleges and universities to redouble efforts to define learning outcomes and measure student mastery.

Can Community Colleges Afford to Improve Completion? Measuring the Cost and Efficiency Consequences of Reform:

Community colleges are under pressure to improve completion rates and efficiency despite limited economic evidence on how to do so and the consequences of different reform strategies. Here, we set out an economic model of student course pathways linked to college expenditures and revenues. Using detailed data from a single college, we calculate baseline efficiency and differences in efficiency for students who follow different pathways. We simulate changes in output, expenditures, revenues, net revenues, and efficiency assuming that the college meets performance targets. We find substantial differences in efficiency across pathways and significant differences in efficiency across strategies to help students complete college. The model has wide practical application for community colleges.