Persistence Data Team Recommendationon CSN ATD Pilot Groups

As team members are aware, Achieving the Dream (ATD) is designed to increase the academic success of community college students, with a special emphasis on low-income students and students of color. CSN is now at a point in the ATD pilot process where student cohort data has been disaggregated and analyzed in light of the three performance measures or “themes” of Persistence, Developmental Math and English, and Course Completion. In this context, the disaggregation and analysis of data “allows a college to determine where it should focus its time and resources.”[1]

It is important to recognize that the purpose of this pilot process is to create an initial success that emanates from a scalable, repeatable model that shows the potential for future expansion to the broader student population. Successful interventions can then be extended to a substantial population with the ultimate goal of improving student outcomes institution-wide.

The Institutional Research (IR) department and the ATD Data Team have played an important role in this process. The focus of IR and the Data Team in the first component has been on using CSN’s data resources to inform us which students are most at risk of not succeeding and identifying the ideal subgroups for the pilot process.

Methodology

In accordance with ATD methodologies and guidelines, the CSN IR team extracted data to create the 2009 cohort. A cohort is defined as “first-time college students — those who enter at a particular point in time, with no previous college credits.”[2] The proper establishment of the initial cohort is vital for the long term success and scalability of the ATD project. As ATD researchers have pointed out: "Cohort analysis can help colleges improve their understanding of the points at which any given number of students fail or succeed and bring information on actual patterns of student progression and success to discussions that sometimes reflect personal biases or desired outcomes, rather than reality. This can help focus efforts to improve student success on areas where large-scale gains in achievement can be attained.”[3]

The total population size of the CSN 2009 CSN ATD Cohort is 8,278 students. This population was disaggregated by gender and ethnicity over the FA 2009 to SPR 2010 time period (see appendix 1). The data was initially disaggregated by additional variables, including age and Pell-eligibility, but gender and ethnicity presented the clearest targets for additional analysis.

The specific performance metric used to measure persistence (students persist if they continue to be enrolled or retained) is the Retention Rate. “The words “persistence” and “retention” are often used interchangeably. The National Center for Education Statistics, however, differentiates the terms by using “retention” as an institutional measure and “persistence” as a student measure. In other words, institutions retain and students persist.”[4] In line with standard definitions, we calculated the Retention Rate (RR)as: (RR) = (# Retained + # Graduated) / (# in Cohort).

Target Group #1

In light of the retention rates over the time period we havearrived at the conclusion that African American femalesmake the best candidates for the first target population (target group #1) for the persistence theme (see appendix 2). African American female students show themost significant declines in first-semester and first-year retention rates. This is displayed graphically by the chart (see appendix 3) which shows African American female students with the steepest slope-in other words the Fall-Spring and Fall-Fall one year Retention Rate of African American female students declines faster than any other group/gender.

Addressing this target group is in alignment with the ATD focus and not dissimilar from what many other leader colleges have initiated. As they explain: "Since its inception, Achieving the Dream has placed a high priority on improving the outcomes of low-income students and students of color. At first, the initiative focused only on those colleges with large proportions of African American, Hispanic, Native American, or low-income students, and the Round 1 colleges were expected to commit to overcoming the achievement gaps between these students and the rest of the student body."[5]

Not surprisingly, the initial cohorts of the ATDcolleges have focused on African Americanstudents. As an example:

“Valencia made promising strides from 2004 to 2008 in narrowing the achievement gap between its African American and Caucasian students”[6]

“After discovering that persistence and graduation rates among its African American male students were lower than those of other student groups, Durham Tech observed promising increases in students' persistence rates, which were higher than the average persistence rate of other African American male students”[7]

“Tallahassee Community College also noted gaps in the persistence, attendance, and grades of its African American male students.”[8]

Target Group #2

An alternative target group contains what we are calling “unconventional" students. These students attend CSN exclusively viaonline courses and/or nighttime courses as opposed to students who take at least one class on a campus during normal operating hours. Thus, unconventional students attend class and require campus resources outside of the times and locations that such resources are traditionally offered.

Our data suggests that while the unconventional “online/night” student group is smaller in size than the “daytime” student group, the unconventional students significantly under-perform in term-to-term persistence compared to those students who have at least one on-ground class scheduled during the daytime. Appendix 4 displays the difference in retention rate between daytime and unconventional students.

Low retention for online-only students is not unique to CSN. Numerous sources in the literature cite lower retention for students in online classes. As a sample:

“Retention has always been an issue in higher education, but it is particularly important in online learning. “We’re at the mercy of high disenrollment rates; 5 to 17 times higher than in a face-to-face environment,” says Phil Ice, vice president of research and development for the American Public University System (APUS).”[9]

"Student retention in online education is a concern for students, faculty and administration. Retention rates are 20% lower in online courses than in traditional face-to-face courses."[10]

“Despite the tremendous growth of distance education, retention remains its Achilles’ heel. Estimates of the failed retention rate for distance education undergraduates range from 20 to 50 percent. Distance education administrators believe the failed retention rate for online courses may be 10 to 20 percent higher than for face-to-face courses.”[11]

Unconventional students (target group #2) present a clear target for interventions supporting student persistence. Both online-only and nighttime students are important segments of the CSN student body. As a community college, CSN is committed to providing expanded access to education beyond the traditional format of college classes. Enabling students to attend college exclusively online or at night allows non-traditional students to pursue college while balancing work, family and other commitments. However, retention rates for these students need to rise to a level more in line with students who participate in traditional daytime classrooms.

The unconventional group is replete with opportunity for intervention, simply because so little has yet been done for a population in such apparent need. Guided by input from focus group members of this population, interventions with the unconventional group can be developed that would have a large positive impact relative to the intervention. Data derived from this group will provide useful context within which student services can be refined, made more relevant and streamlined. Outcome data from the unconventional group would provide the early success and momentum needed to further expand ATD beyond the pilot program at CSN.

Appendix 1

Cohort Term-to-Term Retention by Ethnicity and Gender – Fall 2009 to Fall 2010

ATD 2009 Cohort / Fall 2009 / Retained Spring 2010 / Retained Fall 2010
F / M / Total / F / M / Total / F / M / Total
Native American/AK Native / 36 / 34 / 70 / 26 / 26 / 52 / 14 / 16 / 30
Asian / 432 / 347 / 779 / 299 / 255 / 554 / 225 / 196 / 421
Black / 748 / 583 / 1331 / 483 / 375 / 858 / 263 / 221 / 484
Hispanic / 1014 / 1001 / 2015 / 693 / 635 / 1328 / 515 / 453 / 968
HI Pac Islander / 158 / 108 / 266 / 107 / 72 / 179 / 72 / 56 / 128
Multiple Groups / 81 / 71 / 152 / 56 / 48 / 104 / 36 / 28 / 64
Unknown/Unreported / 148 / 156 / 304 / 108 / 111 / 219 / 73 / 75 / 148
White / 1747 / 1614 / 3361 / 1252 / 1048 / 2300 / 863 / 749 / 1612
Total / 4364 / 3914 / 8278 / 3024 / 2570 / 5594 / 2061 / 1794 / 3855
ATD 2009 Cohort / Fall 2009 / Retained Spring 2010 / Retained Fall 2010
F / M / Total / F / M / Total / F / M / Total
Native American/AK Native / 36 / 34 / 70 / 72.2% / 76.5% / 74.3% / 38.9% / 47.1% / 42.9%
Asian / 432 / 347 / 779 / 69.2% / 73.5% / 71.1% / 52.1% / 56.5% / 54.0%
Black / 748 / 583 / 1331 / 64.6% / 64.3% / 64.5% / 35.2% / 37.9% / 36.4%
Hispanic / 1014 / 1001 / 2015 / 68.3% / 63.4% / 65.9% / 50.8% / 45.3% / 48.0%
HI Pac Islander / 158 / 108 / 266 / 67.7% / 66.7% / 67.3% / 45.6% / 51.9% / 48.1%
Multiple Groups / 81 / 71 / 152 / 69.1% / 67.6% / 68.4% / 44.4% / 39.4% / 42.1%
Unknown/Unreported / 148 / 156 / 304 / 73.0% / 71.2% / 72.0% / 49.3% / 48.1% / 48.7%
White / 1747 / 1614 / 3361 / 71.7% / 64.9% / 68.4% / 49.4% / 46.4% / 48.0%
Total / 4364 / 3914 / 8278 / 69.3% / 65.7% / 67.6% / 47.2% / 45.8% / 46.6%

Appendix 2

Differences in Persistence: Retention Rate % Points Above/Below the Average (Total) Rate

ATD 2009 Cohort / Diff in SPR 2010 RR
(% points) / Diff in FA 2010 RR
(% points)
F / M / F / F / M / Total / F / M / Total
Native American/AK Native / 36 / 34 / 70 / 4.6 / 8.9 / 6.7 / -7.7 / 0.5 / -3.7
Asian / 432 / 347 / 779 / 1.6 / 5.9 / 3.5 / 5.5 / 9.9 / 7.5
Black / 748 / 583 / 1331 / -3.0 / -3.3 / -3.1 / -11.4 / -8.7 / -10.2
Hispanic / 1014 / 1001 / 2015 / 0.8 / -4.1 / -1.7 / 4.2 / -1.3 / 1.5
HI Pac Islander / 158 / 108 / 266 / 0.1 / -0.9 / -0.3 / -1.0 / 5.3 / 1.6
Multiple Groups / 81 / 71 / 152 / 1.6 / 0.0 / 0.8 / -2.1 / -7.1 / -4.5
Unknown/Unreported / 148 / 156 / 304 / 5.4 / 3.6 / 4.5 / 2.8 / 1.5 / 2.1
White / 1747 / 1614 / 3361 / 4.1 / -2.6 / 0.9 / 2.8 / -0.2 / 1.4
Total / 4364 / 3914 / 8278 / 1.7 / -1.9 / 0.0 / 0.7 / -0.7 / 0.0

Appendix 3

Target Group 1: African-American Females

African American females show the most significant decline in persistence (Fall to Spring and Fall to Fall) of any other group/gender, displayed by the steepest slope in the graph.

African-American Females Term-to-Term Retention Rate by Gender

Appendix 4

Target Group #2: Unconventional (Night/Online) Students

“Unconventional" Students, defined as students who exclusively take online courses and/or attend nighttime hours, also significantly under-perform in persistence.

1

[1] Kenneth P. Gonzalez, Using Data to Increase Student Success: A Focus on Diagnosis, 2009, P. 2

[2]R. Voorhees and J. Lee, Basics of Longitudinal Cohort Analysis, 2009, P. 1 (Accessed 12/26/2012)

[3] Ibid, P. 2

[4] Linda S. Hagedorn,How to define retention: A New Look at an Old Problem, P. 6

[5] Rutschow et al., Turning The Tide: Five Years of Achieving the Dream in Community Colleges, P. 21

[6] Ibid, P. 30

[7] Ibid, P. 31

[8] Ibid, P. 31

[9] Jennifer P. Lorenzetti, Zeroing In on Online Retention Issues, Recruitment & Retention in Higher Education; Mar2012, Vol. 26 Issue 3, P. 6-8

[10]Ali, R and Leeds, E.M., The Impact of Face-to-Face Orientation on Online Retention: A Pilot Study, Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, Volume XII, Number IV, Winter 2009 P. 1

[11] Christopher Hill, Strategies for Increasing Online Student Retention and Satisfaction P. 2