Embed
Email

Persistence to Graduation for Transfer and Native Students A

Document Sample
Persistence to Graduation for Transfer and Native Students A
Persistence to Graduation for

Transfer and "Native" Students:

A Case Study



John W. Miller, Ph.D.

President, Central Connecticut State University

Braden J. Hosch, Ph.D.

Assessment,

Director of Institutional Research & Assessment CCSU

Association for Institutional Research Annual Forum

Seattle, WA

May 26, 2008

Overview

Institutional Profile



p

Overview of the problem → to what extent do

differences in earned credit hours contribute

to differences in graduation rates?



Methodology and Results



Conclusions and Implications

Institutional Profile: Central

Connecticut State University

p y

Public – part of Connecticut State Univ. System

Carnegie 2005 Master’s-larger programs

Fall 2007 Enrollment:

12,106 headcount (9,704 undergraduate, 23% residential);

9,288 full-time equivalent enrollment

52% female; 16% minority y

Full-time, first-time students: 1,469 (56% residential)

Full-time, new transfer students: 678

Six-year

Six year graduation rates:

44% full-time, first-time students

56% transfer students (full-time upon entry)

Methodology

Divide subjects by origin

Full-time first-time student

Full time

Full-time transfer students

Group subjects by credits earned rather than

by fall of entry

y y

Measure time to graduation (Fall-to-Fall),

regardless of time at institution

e.g. after earning 76-90 credits, how many

graduated in 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 10 years?

Produce descriptive statistics and run logistic

regressions

Study Population

Unduplicated, Full-Time Students in Study Population, Fall 1991-2006



Native Students Transfer Students Grand

Race/Ethnicity Women Men Total Women Men Total Total

Non-Resident Alien 125 141 266 64 49 113 379

African American/Black 664 757 1,421 370 378 748 2,169

American Indian 43 40 83 25 18 43 126

Asian 168 210 378 146 184 330 708

Hispanic 542 504 1,046 283 195 478 1,524

White 7,612 7,455 15,067 3,675 3,679 7,354 22,421

Unknown 397 434 831 234 243 477 1,308

Grand Total 9,551 9,541 19,092 4,797 4,746 9,543 28,635





Total observations (duplicated individuals): 86,342 over 16 years

Graduation Rates by Credits Earned

Credits Earned at Beginning of Fall Semester

Yr. Of 16-30 31-45 45-60 61-75 76-90 91-105 106+

Entry* FTFT Transf FTFT Transf FTFT Transf FTFT Transf FTFT Transf FTFT Transf FTFT Transf



In 1 Yr Graduated (%) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 14% 9% 46% 32% 72% 56%

91-'06 Basis Obs. (N) 10,640 2,403 4,017 2,706 7,012 3,905 4,101 3,802 4,881 3,679 3,693 3,308 4,738 5,598



In 2 Yrs Graduated (%) 0% 1% 1% 3% 13% 11% 37% 27% 64% 46% 77% 64% 84% 75%

91-'05 Basis Obs. (N) 9,858 2,217 3,648 2,503 6,481 3,595 3,671 3,481 4,408 3,390 3,286 3,025 4,160 5,160



In 3 Yrs Graduated (%) 11% 10% 25% 26% 54% 41% 66% 53% 78% 64% 83% 76% 87% 81%

91-'04 Basis Obs. (N) 9,108 2,041 3,257 2,324 5,899 3,273 3,257 3,177 3,883 3,090 2,894 2,759 3,606 4,739



In 4 Yrs Graduated (%) 41% 31% 50% 44% 67% 54% 72% 61% 81% 70% 85% 79% 89% 83%

91-'03 Basis Obs. (N) 8,389 1,854 2,899 2,092 5,254 2,994 2,855 2,888 3,410 2,805 2,506 2,517 3,105 4,312



In 5 Yrs Graduated (%) 52% 41% 56% 49% 71% 59% 74% 64% 83% 73% 86% 80% 90% 84%

91-'02 Basis Obs. (N) 7,520 1,683 2,507 1,916 4,674 2,719 2,459 2,613 2,974 2,535 2,167 2,293 2,685 3,923



In 6 Yrs Graduated (%) 55% 44% 58% 53% 73% 62% 76% 66% 85% 75% 88% 82% 91% 85%

91-'01 Basis Obs. (N) 6,765 1,513 2,128 1,721 4,096 2,464 2,106 2,346 2,552 2,314 1,839 2,059 2,260 3,522

Differences in Graduation Rates

CCSU Native Students vs. All Transfer Students : Graduation within Six

Years from Time of Earning Designated Number of Credits

100%

90%

80%

70%

Percent graduated









60%

%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

16-30 31-45 45-60 61-75 76-90 91-105 106+

p g g

Credits Completed as of the Beginning of the Fall Semester



First-Time Full-Time Students Transfer Students

Logistic Regression (1)

Two variable model (Forward conditional)

B S.E. Wald Exp(B)

Total C ed ts Earned

ota Credits a ed 00

0.021 0 000

0.000 5,9

5,921 0

1.022

Transfer -0.437 0.024 343 0.646

Constant -0.449 0.015 886 0.638

Probability of graduating from within 6 years of

completing specified credits

All variables significant at

p<0.001

Probabilit of graduating within 6









100%

90%

80%

w









70% Model accuracy:

60%

50% 68.9% correct

years









40%

30%

Native

Cox & Snell R2: 0.138

Transfer

20% Nagelkerke R2: 0.188

0 188

ty









10%

0%

103

111

119

15

23

31

39

47

55

63

71

79

87

95









Credits completed at beginning of fall term

Logistic Regression (2)

Multivariate model (Forward conditional)

B S.E. Wald Exp(B)

Total Credits Earned 0.020 0.000 3,518 1.020

Transfer

T f 0 413

-0.413 0 026

0.026 248 0 661

0.661

GPA Earned 1st Fall 0.240 0.018 170 1.271

Hrs Attempted 1st Fall 0.075 0.005 224 1.078

GPA Earned in Fall of Analysis 0.893 0.016 3,299 2.443

Constant -4.026 0.070 3,274 0.018



sig. p<0.001

All variables sig at p<0 001 Additional Significant Variables:

Female

Model accuracy: African American/Black

75.1% correct Hispanic

Cox & Snell R2: 0.273

0 273

Nagelkerke R 2: 0.371 But model accuracy improved by only

0.1% or less with inclusion

Major Findings

Total credits earned is most significant

predictor of graduation

g g

Native students graduated at higher rates

than transfer students after controlling for

credits earned

Other significant predictors:

First semester GPA

Credits attempted first semester

GPA in term of analysis

Conclusions and Implications (1)

1 At CCSU, and I suspect at other institutions,

1.

we need to recognize the lower success rate

of our transfer students by comparing their

progress to their equivalent credit

counterparts.



2. While recognizing and respecting the

i f f d

experiences of transfer students, we must

appreciate that they still need similar support

(e.g.

to FT/FTs modified for them (e g FYTE

course).

Conclusions and Implications (2)

3 More careful exploration of our transfer

3.

compacts to determine how to better pave

the way for transition is required.



py y g

4. We must more deeply study our “counting”

of credits as meeting requirements, used as

electives, or not counted at all to ensure

i i

maximum appropriate progress toward d

completion at time of transfer.

Persistence to Graduation for

Transfer and "Native" Students:

A Case Study



Contact Information:

John W. Miller, Ph.D.

President, Central Connecticut State University

millerjw@ccsu.edu



Braden J. Hosch, Ph.D.

Director of Institutional Research & Assessment, CCSU

hoschbrj@ccsu.edu


Related docs
Other docs by MitchBurroughs
Power Point presentation[113]
Views: 25  |  Downloads: 2
Forms Instructions for Purchase Requisition
Views: 9  |  Downloads: 0
Sole Member LLC Certified Resolution
Views: 11  |  Downloads: 0
Study_Abroad_Course_Proposal_Form
Views: 2  |  Downloads: 0
Analysis Basel 1A ANPR vs. Basel 1A NPR
Views: 8  |  Downloads: 0
Issues from the 110th Congress Letter[238]
Views: 4  |  Downloads: 0
Letter
Views: 2  |  Downloads: 0
Carolyn Healy Latin America Regional Update
Views: 3  |  Downloads: 0
By registering with docstoc.com you agree to our
privacy policy

You are almost ready to download!

You are almost ready to download!