Skip to main content

Citation

Cho, S. W., Kopko, E., Jenkins, D., & Jaggars, S.S. (2012). New evidence of success for community college remedial English students: Tracking the outcomes of students in the Accelerated Learning Program (ALP) (CCRC Working Paper No. 53). New York: Columbia University, Community College Research Center.

Highlights

    • The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Community College of Baltimore County’s Accelerated Learning Program (ALP) on course progression, persistence, and completion outcomes. In this program, students who otherwise would have taken a developmental English course instead took English 101, as well as an eight-person companion course designed to help the students pass English 101.
    • With student-level, college administrative data, the authors used regression models and propensity score matching to compare outcomes of ALP students to those of comparison students in traditional courses.
    • The study found that ALP students were more likely than comparison students to attempt and complete college-level English courses, persist to the next year, and attempt and complete more credits. However, ALP students were less likely to earn a certificate degree than comparison students.
    • The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is moderate because it was based on a well-implemented nonexperimental design. This means we are somewhat confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the ALP, but other factors might also have contributed.

Intervention Examined

The Accelerated Learning Program

Features of the Intervention

In the Community College of Baltimore County’s ALP, students who otherwise would have taken an upper-level developmental English course instead took English 101. Simultaneously, these students also participated in an eight-person, three-credit companion course designed to help them pass English 101. This course was taught by the same instructor and met during the class period following English 101. Any student who was eligible for the developmental English course had the option to sign up for ALP instead.

Features of the Study

Using student-level, college administrative data from 2007–2010, the authors used regression models to compare 592 ALP students to 5,545 students in traditional courses. The authors repeated the approach after using propensity score matching to identify the students in the traditional courses who were the best matches for each of the 592 students in the treatment group. Students were matched based on demographics, enrollment characteristics, placement test scores, and socioeconomic level. Outcomes were measured one year after the end of participating in ALP and during fall 2011, which was one to four years after ALP students had completed the program.

Findings

    • ALP students were 41.7 percentage points more likely to attempt, and 31.3 percentage points more likely to complete, English 101 by fall 2011.
    • ALP students were 29.4 percentage points more likely to attempt, and 18.5 percentage points more likely to complete, English 102 by fall 2011.
    • ALP students were 10.5 percentage points more like to persist to the next year (measured in fall 2011) but 0.9 percentage points less likely to earn a certificate degree by fall 2011.
    • Additionally, ALP students attempted 3.6 more credits and completed 2.4 more college credits after developmental English (measured in fall 2011).

Considerations for Interpreting the Findings

Study authors estimated multiple related impacts on outcomes related to progress toward degree completion. Performing multiple statistical tests on related outcomes makes it more likely that some impacts will be found statistically significant purely by chance and not because they reflect program effectiveness. The authors did not perform statistical adjustments to account for the multiple tests, so the number of statistically significant findings in this domain is likely to be overstated.

Causal Evidence Rating

The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is moderate because it was based on a well-implemented nonexperimental design. This means we are somewhat confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the ALP, but other factors might also have contributed.

Reviewed by CLEAR

January 2016

Topic Area