Skip to main content

Success of joint programs between junior and senior colleges (Krudysz et al. 2012)

Review Guidelines

Citation

Krudysz, M., Walser, A., & Alting, A. (2012). Success of joint programs between junior and senior colleges. American Society for Engineering Education.

Highlights

    • The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the Joint/Dual (JD) program on retention and graduation rates for community college and undergraduate engineering students who were under-represented minorities and women. JD students received dual admission to a community college as well as a senior college, and transitioned into the upper division of the baccalaureate engineering program at the senior college upon successful completion of lower-division courses and degree requirements at the community college.
    • This study used data from junior and senior colleges within a major urban university system to compare outcomes of a treatment group of JD program participants and a comparison group of transfers into the urban university system from other, nonparticipating community colleges.
    • This study found that first- and second-year retention rates were higher for JD program participants than for transfers from other community colleges, but did not conduct statistical tests of these differences.
    • The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the authors did not include controls for relevant student characteristics in the analysis. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the JD program. Other factors are likely to have contributed.

Intervention Examined

The Joint/Dual Program

Features of the Intervention

The JD program was designed to offer increased educational opportunities for under-represented minorities and women who intended to transfer from community colleges to senior colleges and pursue an engineering degree. JD students received dual admission to the community college as well as the senior college, and transitioned into the upper division of the baccalaureate engineering program at the senior college upon successful completion of lower-division courses and degree requirements at the community college. Program participants received special orientation and advising sessions, application fee waivers, and straightforward transfer credit evaluation. In addition, they were eligible for early registration and were able to register for courses at the senior college while still attending the junior college.

Features of the Study

The study used a nonexperimental design to examine the impacts of the JD program on retention rates in junior and senior colleges in a major urban university system. The treatment group consisted of JD program participants who attended community and senior college at the same time for the first two years of undergraduate study, and who majored in civil, chemical, mechanical, or electrical engineering. The comparison group consisted of students who transferred to a senior college within the university system from other community colleges where no JD program was implemented. The study examined two sets of comparison transfer students: those with Associate in Science (AS) degrees and those without AS degrees.

Findings

    • This study found that first- and second-year retention rates were higher for JD program participants than for transfers from other community colleges, but did not conduct statistical tests of these differences.

Considerations for Interpreting the Findings

The study did not include information on pre-intervention characteristics of treatment and comparison groups and did not include any controls in the analysis. This lack of statistical controls raises concerns that factors other than participation in the JD program could account for observed differences in retention rates between treatment and comparison students. Therefore, the study is not eligible for a moderate causal evidence rating, the highest rating available for nonexperimental designs.

Causal Evidence Rating

The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the authors did not include controls for relevant student characteristics in the analysis. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the JD program. Other factors are likely to have contributed.

Reviewed by CLEAR

February 2016

Topic Area