Absence of conflict of interest.
Citation
Jaggars, S. S., Hodara, M, Cho, S., & Xu, D. (2015). Three accelerated developmental education programs: Features, student outcomes, and implications. Community College Review 43(1), 3-26. doi: 10.1177/0091552114551752
Highlights
- The study’s objective was to examine the impact of three accelerated developmental education programs on gatekeeper (entry-level) course completion and college-level credit accumulation. This summary focuses on the accelerated developmental reading/writing program at Chabot College in California.
- This nonexperimental study used regression analysis and propensity score matching to compare the outcomes of students who participated in the accelerated reading/writing program to those who did not. The study reported outcomes one year and three years after students first enrolled in the course.
- The study found that students who participated in the accelerated program had significantly higher course completion rates, course enrollment rates, and credit accumulation than comparison students one year and three years after enrollment.
- The quality of causal evidence presented in this study 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 accelerated reading/writing program, but other factors might also have contributed.
Intervention Examined
Accelerated Developmental Education
Features of the Intervention
In the 1990s, Chabot College, a community college located in Hayward, CA, started an option for an accelerated version of their two developmental reading and writing English courses. The accelerated version took what would normally be eight credits over two semesters and offered a version that was four credits in one semester, covering the same material. The coursework and style of the course did not change; the accelerated version was just faster paced and reduced time for practice and review. Staff thought the accelerated version was more reflective of the actual workload for a college level course. Initially, the accelerated courses were part of a learning community but in the later cohorts there were no additional supports offered to students in the accelerated course.
Features of the Study
The study used regression analysis and propensity score matching to estimate the impact of the accelerated reading/writing program on gatekeeper course completion and college-level credit accumulation for students entering the college between the Summer of 1999 and the Fall of 2010. The college provided anonymous individual-level data for the analyses. Students were designated as program participants or comparison group based on which style of course they attempted first. Based on course transcript data, students who enrolled in the accelerated developmental English course were the treatment group and students who enrolled in the non-accelerated developmental English course were the comparison group. The authors calculated one-year outcomes using students who enrolled from Summer 1999-Fall 2009 (treatment = 3,853; comparison = 4,757) and three-year outcomes for those who enrolled from Summer 1999-Fall 2007 (treatment = 2,644; comparison = 3,732). The authors used statistical models with controls for baseline characteristics to examine differences between the groups, both one year and three years after enrollment.
Findings
Education and skills gain
- The study found that students in the accelerated program were significantly more likely to complete a gatekeeper English course than the comparison group (24% more likely after one year and 17% more likely over three years).
- The study found that students in the accelerated program were significantly more likely to enroll in a gatekeeper English course than the comparison group (29% more likely after one year and 21% more likely over three years). There was no significant difference in the pass rates once enrolled.
- When compared to students in the comparison group, the study found that participation in the accelerated program significantly increased credit accumulation with accelerated students earning 3.41 more college-level credits after one year and 4.23 more after three years.
Considerations for Interpreting the Findings
Although the authors used a well-implemented nonexperimental design, treatment group participants self-selected into the accelerated developmental course. Students who self-selected into the course could differ in observable and unobservable ways, affecting the observed outcomes.
Causal Evidence Rating
The quality of causal evidence presented in this study 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 accelerated reading/writing program, but other factors might also have contributed.