1 / 41

2009 SHEEO/NCES Network Conference and IPEDS Workshop May 21, 2009 J. Keith Brown

A Better Way to Measure Community College Performance: An Achieving the Dream Cross-State Data Initiative. 2009 SHEEO/NCES Network Conference and IPEDS Workshop May 21, 2009 J. Keith Brown North Carolina Community College System. Presentation Summary :.

carl
Download Presentation

2009 SHEEO/NCES Network Conference and IPEDS Workshop May 21, 2009 J. Keith Brown

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. A Better Way to Measure Community College Performance: An Achieving the Dream Cross-State Data Initiative 2009 SHEEO/NCES Network Conference and IPEDS Workshop May 21, 2009 J. Keith Brown North Carolina Community College System

  2. Presentation Summary: • Overview of Achieving the Dream and the Cross-State Data Workgroup • Recommendations for an Alternative Set of Measures for Community College Performance • Introduction of Intermediate Milestones and Final Measures of Student Performance • Implications for Policy and Practice

  3. Achieving the Dream Overview • National initiative to help more community college students succeed (earn degrees, earn certificates, or transfer) • Particularly concerned about student groups that have faced the most significant barriers to success, including low-income students and students of color

  4. 82 Institutions in 15 StatesAR, CT, FL, HI, MA, MI, NC, NM, OH, OK, PA, SC, TX, VA, WA

  5. Achievingthe Dream Values • Student-centered • Equity and excellence • Culture of evidence, inquiry, accountability, and shared responsibility

  6. Cross-State Data Workgroup Initial States Connecticut Florida North Carolina Ohio Texas Virginia States Joining Arkansas Massachusetts New Mexico Oklahoma South Carolina Washington

  7. Data Workgroup Goals • Develop a set of indicators to: • More effectively track student performance • Evaluate the effectiveness of interventions • Learn from the strengths of other community college systems

  8. Test Drive: Six States Pilot Better Ways to Measure and Compare Community College Performance

  9. Recommended Changes: Prior Enrollment • Enrollment Status • Intent at time of Enrollment

  10. Recommended Changes: • Timeframe • Success Outcomes

  11. Tracking transfer students within the 2-year sector Recommended Changes:

  12. Controlling for factors associated with success Recommended Changes:

  13. Results of Cross-State Comparison

  14. Results of Cross-State Comparison

  15. Results of Cross-State Comparison

  16. Results of Cross-State Comparison

  17. Results of Cross-State Comparison

  18. Results of Cross-State Comparison

  19. Results of Cross-State Comparison

  20. Results of Cross-State Comparison

  21. Results of Cross-State Comparison

  22. Next Steps: Developing Intermediate Benchmarks to Measure Student Progress

  23. Intermediate milestones to track students • First-Year Milestones • Persisted fall to spring • Passed 80% or more of attempted hours • Earned 24 or more hours • Second-Year Milestones • Persisted fall to fall • Completed developmental math by year 2 • Earned 48 or more hoursThird-Year Milestones • Passed gatekeeper English or higher by year 3 • Passed gatekeeper math or higher by year 3

  24. First-Year Milestones • Returned spring semester • 16% increase in final success outcomes for full-time students; 28% for part-time students • Earned 24 credits (full-time) or 18 credits (part-time) by the end of the first year • 25% increase in final success outcomes for full-time students; 66% for part-time students • Passed 80% of credits attempted • 12% increase in final success outcomes for full-time students; 46% for part-time students

  25. Second-Year Milestones • Returned in fall of second year • 23% increase in final success outcomes for full-time students; 53% for part-time students • Returned and earned 42 credits (full-time) or 24 credits (part-time) by the end of the second year • 32% increase in final success outcomes for full-time students; 49% increase for part-time students

  26. Second-Year Milestones • Passed developmental mathematics course by the end of the second year • 84% increase in final success outcomes for full-time students; 110% increase for part-time students • Passed developmental English course by the end of the third year • 17% increase in final success outcomes for full-time students; 39% increase for part-time students

  27. Third-Year Milestones • Passed “gatekeeper” mathematics course by the end of the third year • 45% increase in final success outcomes for full-time students; 147% increase for part-time students • Passed “gatekeeper” English course by the end of the third year • 17% increase in final success outcomes for full-time students; 59% increase for part-time students

  28. Tracking toward final success measures • Fourth- and Sixth-Year Measures • Award of less than associate’s degree w/o transfer • Award of associate’s degree or higher w/o transfer • Award of less than associate’s degree and transferred • Award of associate’s degree or higher and transferred • Transferred w/o an award • Still enrolled with 30 or more college hours • Total success rate

  29. Next Steps…finishing data runs • Run benchmarks at state and institutional levels • Disaggregate and analyze performance by: • academic readiness • income • ethnicity • gender • Identify and document promising interventions

  30. What does all this mean and what are the policy implications?

  31. Context of the Data • Reflects the mission of colleges/state systems • Examples: age distribution, award distribution • Reflects differences in state priorities/policies • Example: college transfer policy • Not all measures pertain to all students • Example: gatekeeper math course

  32. Context of the Data • Reflects the mission of colleges/state systems • Examples: age distribution, award distribution • Reflects differences in state priorities/policies • Example: college transfer policy • Not all measures pertain to all students • Example: gatekeeper math course

  33. Impact of state policy on outcomes • Differences in transfer patterns reflect policy differences • Encouraging transfer after earning a degree • e.g. FL – 69% transfer after degree & 7% before • Encouraging transfer without a degree • e.g. TX – 25% transfer without degree • Absence of strong transfer policies • e.g. OH – 22% transfer after degree & 6% before • Balanced approach to transfer • e.g. NC – 16% transfer after degree & 14% before

  34. Context of the Data • Reflects the mission of colleges/state systems • Examples: age distribution, award distribution • Reflects differences in state priorities/policies • Example: college transfer policy • Not all measures pertain to all students • Example: gatekeeper math course

  35. Implications of the Data: College Perspective • Identification of at-risk students • Student advising • Review of policies/practices • Examples: • Course taking sequence/timing • Drop/add policies

  36. Implications of the Data: State/System Perspective • Policy development to improve student success • Review of regulations • Performance indicators • Development/refinement of student database • Benchmarking

  37. Implications of the Data: National Perspective • More appropriate measure of student success: accountability • Financial aid policy • Expand the body of knowledge on successful community colleges/practices

  38. The following individuals are gratefully acknowledged for their contributions to this presentation: Chris Baldwin: Jobs for the Future Pat Windham: Florida Donna Jovanovich: Virginia Corby Coperthwaite: Connecticut Acknowledgements

  39. Achieving the Dream Success is what counts. ww.achievingthedream.org

More Related