Skip to main content

Community value: The effect of an urban community college's learning community program on developmental English student retention, academic success, and graduation (Risolo 2015)

Review Guidelines

Absence of conflict of interest.

Citation

Risolo, P. L. (2015). Community value: The effect of an urban community college's learning community program on developmental English student retention, academic success, and graduation (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Creighton University, Omaha, NE.

Highlights

  • The study’s objective was to examine the impact of participation in a learning community during the first academic semester on community college students’ retention and graduation rates.
  • The study used a nonexperimental design to compare the outcomes of students who participated in a learning community to those who did not participate. Using data from the college’s Institutional Research Department, the author tested for group differences in student retention after one year and graduation after four years.
  • Compared to nonparticipating students, the study found that learning community students were significantly less likely to be retained after one year but more likely to graduate after four years.
  • The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the author did not ensure that the groups being compared were similar before the intervention. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the learning community program; other factors are likely to have contributed.

Intervention Examined

The learning communities

Features of the Intervention

A two-year urban community college in New York offered the option to enroll in a learning community to all students registering for their first semester. The college’s learning community program consisted of three linked courses: an English course (developmental or college-level) based on the students’ English Assessment Exam, a content course (such as history), and a student development seminar. The learning community included cohorts of students (groupings based on English level as determined by a placement exam), regular meetings with an academic advisor, a dedicated librarian for each cohort, and smaller class sizes.

Features of the Study

The author used a nonexperimental design to compare the outcomes of developmental English students who participated in the learning community to students who chose not to participate. Study participants included all 338 students enrolled in a developmental English course at the college, with 134 students participating in the learning community and 204 students in the comparison group. Outcomes included one-year retention rates and graduation rates after four years. Using data from the college’s Institutional Research Department (IRD), the author conducted chi-square statistics and t-tests to examine differences between the groups.

Findings

Education and skills gain

  • The study found a significant relationship between learning community participation and student retention after one year; however, it was the non-learning community students that were retained at a higher rate than learning community students (69% and 56%, respectively).
  • The study found a significant relationship between learning community participation and graduation rate after four years with 19% of learning community students graduating after four years compared to 8% of non-learning community students.

Considerations for Interpreting the Findings

The author did not account for self-selection into the learning community or preexisting differences between the groups before participation, such as students’ age, race/ethnicity, or degree of financial disadvantage. These preexisting differences between the groups—and not participation in a learning community—could explain the observed differences in outcomes.

Causal Evidence Rating

The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the author did not ensure that the groups being compared were similar before the intervention. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the learning community program; other factors are likely to have contributed.

Reviewed by CLEAR

January 2020

Topic Area