300 likes | 389 Views
Rethinking Grade Transfer Shock: Examining Its Importance In The Community College Transfer Process (Article published In The Journal Of Applied Research In The Community College Vol. 14, No. 1, Fall 2006, p. 19-33). Presented By: Ron Pennington, Director Of Institutional Research
E N D
Rethinking Grade Transfer Shock: Examining Its Importance In The Community College Transfer Process (Article published In The Journal Of Applied Research In The Community College Vol. 14, No. 1, Fall 2006, p. 19-33). Presented By: Ron Pennington, Director Of Institutional Research (rpennington@stchas.edu) 6th Annual Conference Of The Institute For The Study Of Transfer Students January 23-25, 2008 Dallas, Texas
What is Grade Transfer Shock (GTS)?A decrease in a student’s grade point average during their first semester at a four-year institution when compared to their cumulative GPA at a community college (CC).
CC TransferExperience Level of GTSExperienced Eventual 4-yearSuccess Why Is GTS A Problem? • Native student studies: CC transfers have lower graduation rates even with SES and academic ability controls • GTS could be an intervening variable adversely affecting four-year student success • Academic integration first/social integration later • Native four-year students will not experience GTS
Research Shows GTS Is A Persistent Problem • Review of the literature suggests students lose about1/3 of a grade point e.g. 3.0 down to 2.70 2.5 down to 2.20 • Studies consistent over timeHills (1965) Richardson & Doucette (1980) Diaz (1992) Carlan & Byxbe (2000)
Why Might CC Transfers Experience GTS? • Poor academic prep at the CC level (Dougherty, 2000) • Within an institution – academic in-process measures • Between institutions • Poor transfer prep (Nolan & Hall, 1978; Holahan & Kelley, 1978; Land, 1996; Laanan, 1996; Lee & Hoey, 1996; Rhine, 2000, Debard, 1996) • Poor cognitive maps (Lovitts, 2001) • Attribution Theory(Heidner, 1958; Weiner, 1974)
Potential Interventions To Reduce GTS • Change the emphasis from traditional transfer counseling strategies like: • Where to transfer • Meeting the prerequisites of four-year schools To: • More proactive strategies designed to reduce GTS • Workshops on the new four-year academic culture • Student mentoring programs at the four-year school(Laanen, 1996; Rhine et al., 2000)
Research Questions • Is GTS related to four-year student success? • Does GTS occur when student demographic and institutional process variables are controlled? • Do traditional two-year and four-year transfer counseling practices reduce GTS levels?
Measuring GTS Is Problematical • Gain score: • (4-year term GPA) – (2-year cumulative GPA) • Problem: The two GPA measures are different • Based on two schools’ grading system • 4-year term GPA is less reliable than the CC cumulative GPA • Less course taking • Shorter time period • Regression to a lower 4-year GPA scale
GTS No GTS +.25 -.25 0 Two Basic Solutions • Using a lower level of measurement: • A dichotomous variable • An ordinal variable • Regress the CC cumulative GPA on the 4-year term GPA Negative Grade Change (GTS) Positive Grade Change No Grade Change -.25 +.25 0
Data Collection Methods • Telephone survey of MO community college transfer students – Summer 1999 • Student data came from community colleges • Demographic • Academic in-process measures • Student outcome data (MO EMSAS file)
Study’s Sample • Initial list of 7,055 CC transfer students completed 24 credit hours from 1995 to 1998 • 2,656 were surveyed using several call back attempts (response rate = 38%) • Many outdated telephone numbers • Additional criteria used to eliminate cases • Senior transfers (>96 credits) • Pooling of 5 urban community colleges • First-time transfers prior to fall 1998 semester • Usable cases = 686
Modest relationship between GTS and CC transfer success at four-year schools. • Grade measure of GTS better predictor of transfer success than survey measure
Nearly three times as many students actually experienced GTS than reported it in the survey
Regression Findings • Does GTS occur when student demographic and institutional process variables are controlled? • Do transfer two-year and four-year traditional counseling practices reduce GTS levels?
- CC Lib Arts Maj (0=N,1=Y) - CC Bus Maj (0=N, 1=Y) + CC Degree (0=N, 1=Y) + CC Financial Aid (0=N, 1=Y) + Cumulative CC Credits - Dev course work + CCGPA Independent Variables - 4-Year ACT CC Academic Challenge CC1 CC2 ± CC3 CC4 CC5 + 4-Year First-Term Credits Transfer Experience + CC Prep (0=not SAT, 1=SAT) + CC Acad Adv (0=no, 1=yes) + CC Fac Adv (0=no, 1=yes) + CC Couns (0=no, 1=yes) + Cred Transfer Success (0=no, 1=yes) + 4-year Couns (0=no, 1=yes) + Age - Gender (0=F, 1=M) - African American (0=AA,1=Oth) + Previous College (0=N, 1=Y)
Summary Of Key Regression Findings • CC GPA was the strongest predictor variable of 4-year GPA by 4 to 1 • 4-year and 2-year academic challenge variables were the second strongest set of predictors • Other significant variables were: • Taking developmental CC coursework (indicator of academic readiness?) • Age (indicator of maturation?) • CC financial aid (indicator of financial dependency at the CC?) • 4-year credits (indicator of clearer transfer goals) • Controls on demographic and institutional process variables actually enhanced GTS • Traditional counseling variables were not significant individually or as a set
GTS can be measured as a • CC GPA 4-year regression study Or • As a dummy variable in a regression study
Regression study question • Will the relationship between GTS and 4-year outcome success hold up under various controls? • This study shows that the GTS variables should be split at -.25 to -.30 if coded as a dummy variable
Other predictor variables should be examined • More academic process variables at the CC level • Like this study’s CC developmental coursework, CC financial aid, and 4-year credit variables • Other examples: school attendance, course scheduling (Karl Boughhan) • Student engagement • Inter-institutional variables like the 4-ACT and set of CC variables • Will be needed for institutional accountability assessments • Hierarchical linear modeling could be used to “level out the playing field”
Need to test if new transfer counseling programs should be adopted • Specific program interventions • Better financial aid assistance and information • Counseling program (two or four-year) targeted to increase students’ Cognitive maps (campus visits, student mentoring, etc.) • More systemic strategies and explanations • Attributional Theory vs. • Academic and Social Integration models
What is Attributional Theory? • A psychological theory – instead of a sociological theory • An achievement-motivational theory that predicts a person's future motivation to act based on causative explanations for why certain outcomes have occurred in the past • Concepts include: • Locus of control • Controllability • Event stability
Many have argued that intervention programs based on attribution theory could improve the academic success of CC transfers (Finley & Cooper, 1983; Pascarella, Edison, Hagedorn, Nora, & Terenzini, 1996; Perry, Hector, Menec, & Weinberg, 1993; St. Clair, 1993; Valla, 1989) • But all future program interventions to improve GTS need to be evaluated • Need a program logic for how the intervention is suppose to work • Need to implement an experimental design to see if it does work