Answers in the Tool Box. Academic Intensity, Attendance Patterns, and Bachelor's Degree Attainment
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
DOCUMENT RESUME ED 431 363 HE 032 128 AUTHOR Adelman, Clifford TITLE Answers in the Tool Box. Academic Intensity, Attendance Patterns, and Bachelor's Degree Attainment. INSTITUTION National Inst. on Postsecondary Education, Libraries, and Lifelong Learning (ED/OERI), Washington, DC. REPORT NO PLLI-1999-8021 PUB DATE 1999-06-00 NOTE 141p. AVAILABLE FROM ED Pubs, P.O. Box 1398, Jessup, MD 20794-1398; Tel: 877-433-7827 (Toll Free). PUB TYPE Numerical/Quantitative Data (110) Reports Research (143) EDRS PRICE MF01/PC06 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS Academic Achievement; *Academic Persistence; *Bachelors Degrees; College Admission; College Outcomes Assessment; High Schools; Higher Education; Longitudinal Studies; *Predictor Variables; Remedial Instruction; Secondary School Curriculum; Statistical Surveys; Student Surveys; Tables (Data); Time To Degree IDENTIFIERS *Graduation Rates; *High School and Beyond (NCES) ABSTRACT This study of degree completion followed a national cohort of students from 10th grade (in 1980) through 1993 (High School and Beyond/Sophomore data base). Data included high school and college transcripts, test scores, and surveys. Using linear regression techniques, the study identified a model that accounts for about 43 percent of the variance in degree completion. The two most important variables identified were, first, academic resources a composite measure of the academic content and performance the student brings from secondary school, and, second, continuous enrollment. Major conclusions include the following:(1) since many students attend multiple institutions, institutional graduation rates are not very meaningful;(2) college admissions formulas that emphasize test scores and high school grade point average (rather than academic intensity and curriculum quality) are likely to produce lower degree completion rates; and (3) type and amount of remediation matters in relation to degree completion. Part 1 of the report constructs an index of student academic resources; Part 2 analyzes and/or reconstructs the major variables; Part 3 examines new attendance patterns and their significance; and Part 4 builds statistical models to explain findings. Five appendices include technical notes, additional tables, and examples. (Contains 125 references.) (DB) ******************************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. ******************************************************************************** Ilk a la U S DEPARTMENT e Office of Educational ResearchOF EDUCATION TED CATIONAL and Improvement RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) his document has beenreproduced as received from the personor organization ioriginating it 0 Minor changes have been made to BE T C P AVAILA E improve reproduction quality Points of view or opinions stated in this document do not necessarily represent 2 official OERI positionor policy Answers in the Tool Box: Academic Intensity, Attendance Patterns, and Bachelor's Degree Attainment Clifford Adelman Senior Research Analyst Office of Educational Research and Improvement U.S. Department of Education U.S. Department of Education Richard W. Riley Secretary Office of Educational Research and Improvement C. Kent McGuire Assistant Secretary National Institute on Postsecondary Education, Libraries, and Lifelong Learning Carole Lacampagne Director Media and Information Services Cynthia Hearn Dorfman Director June 1999 The findings, conclusions, and opinions in this monograph are those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the U.S. Department of Education. To obtain copies of this report (while supplies last) or ordering information on other U.S. Department of Education products, call toll-free 1-877-4ED-Pubs (877-433-7827) or write Education Publications Center (ED Pubs) U.S. Department of Education P.O. Box 1398 Jessup, MD 20794-1398 TTY/TTD 1-877-576-7734 FAX 301-470-1244 Contents Acknowledgments Executive Summary On Reading Tables in This Study Introduction: Departing from Standard Accounts of Attainment Part I: Cultivating ACRES: the Academic Resources Index Part II: Touchstone Variables: Persistence, Completion, Aspirations, Parents, and Parenthood Part III: The Age of Multi-Institutional Attendance 38 Part IV: Does It Make Any Difference? Common Sense and Multivariate 56 Analysis Conclusion:The Tool Box Story 82 Notes 88 References 99 Appendix A:Technical Notes 109 Appendix B:Inclusions and Exclusions in the Academic Resources Variable 113 Appendix C:Gradations of the Academic Intensity and Quality of High School 114 Curriculum for the High School & Beyond/Sophomore Cohort Appendix D:So They Got a Degree! Why Did It Take So Long? Or Did It? 116 Appendix E:Example of a Customized National Long-Term Degree 121 Completion Report Acknowledgments Whatever value one finds in this monograph owes much to the insistent and insightful world- class reviewers of its drafts: Dennis Carroll, Paula Knepper, Drew Malizio, Ann Mullen, and Jeffrey Owings of the National Center for Education Statistics, Karl Alexander of the Johns, Hopkins University, Alberto Cabrera of the Pennsylvania State University, Aaron Pallas of Michigan State University, and Vincent Tinto of Syracuse University. They all gave generously of their time and care, and were delightfully uncompromising in their requirements for improvement. One is blessed by such teachers. In the final analysis, they are collaborators. Earlier versions of Parts I and III of this monograph were presented as research papers at the 1998 Forum of the Association for Institutional Research (Part I) and the 1998 Annual Conference of the Association for the Study of Higher Education (Part III). On these occasions, colleagues from both organizations poked, prodded, and encouraged the completion of the more embracing story-line contained in these pages.I am indebted to them as I am to the challenges and proddings of Lawrence Gladieux and Scott Swail of the Washington office of the College Board, where I was privileged to serve as a visiting fellow in 1998. Thanks, too, to my colleagues Jim Fox, Harold Himmelfarb, and Joe Teresa for their readings of a very rocky first draft, and for questions that told me where second thoughts and greater clarity were necessary. Smaller pieces of the analysis, along with some of the "tool box" recommendations, have been aired previously in the general and trade press, and I thank Change magazine, University Business, the Chronicle of Higher Education, and the Washington Post for bringing these messages to broader publics than this more technical version will reach. iv Executive Summary Answers in the Tool Box is a study about what contributes most to long-term bachelor's degree completion of students who attend 4-year colleges (even if they also attend other types of institutions). Degree completion is the true bottom line for college administrators, state legislators, parents, and most importantly, studentsnot retention to the second year, not persistence without a degree, but completion. This study tells a story built from the high school and college transcript records, test scores, and surveys of a national cohort from the time they were in the 10th grade in 1980 until roughly age 30 in 1993. The story gives them 11 years to enteehigher education, attend a 4-year college, and complete a bachelor's degree. In these respects-based in transcripts and using a long-term bachelor's degree attainment markerthis story is, surprisingly, new. This study was motivated by four developments in higher education during the 1990s: (1) The growing public use of institutional graduation rates as a measure of account- ability, and the tendency in public policy and opinion to blame colleges for students' failure to complete degrees and/or for failure to complete degrees in a timely manner. (2) An ever expanding proportion of high school graduating classes entering postsecondary education, and new federal policies encouraging even more students to enter or return to higher education. Our system is being challenged simply to maintain, let alone improve, college graduation rates. (3) The increasing tendency, overlooked in both policy and research, for students to attend two, three, or more colleges (sometimes in alternating patterns, sometimes simultaneously) in the course of their undergraduate careers. (4) The rising heat of disputes involving admissions formulas at selective colleges where affirmative action policies have been challenged. These disputes, carried into the media and hence dominating public understanding, involve two indicators of pre-college attainmentgrades/class rank versus test scoreswithout any reference to high school curriculum and its role in the degree completion rates of the mass of minority students. The story of what contributes most to bachelor's degree attainment works toward six ordinary least squares regression equations that progressively add blocks of key variables following the progress of students from high school into higher education and through the first true year of attendance. The penultimate model (the fifth in the series) accounts for about 43 percent of the variance in bachelor's degree completion [p. 74]. The sixth equation simply indicates that one hits a plateau of explanation at this point. For a story-line such as this, 43 percent is a very high number. A five-step logistic regression then provides both a dramatic underscoring of the principal findings and some enlightening