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 FastStart Math Program at Denver Community College.
- This nonexperimental study used regression analysis and propensity score matching to compare the outcomes of students who participated in the FastStart math 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 FastStart Math Program had significantly higher course completion rates and course enrollment rates 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 FastStart Math Program, but other factors might also have contributed.
Intervention Examined
Accelerated Developmental Education
Features of the Intervention
In 2006, the Community College of Denver started a FastStart accelerated program for their three developmental math courses (Math 030, Math 060, Math 090). The program combined the three courses into two pairs of courses that could be completed in two semesters rather than the traditional three. The three-course development track could be completed in two semesters by taking Math 030/060 followed by Math 090 or by taking Math 030 followed by Math 060/090. If students only needed the two upper level courses, they could complete them in one semester by taking the combined Math 060/Math 090 course. The program also included a dedicated case manager that relayed expectations to students and provided additional supports. The acceleration did not reduce overall credit hours.
Features of the Study
The study used regression analysis and propensity score matching to estimate the impact of the FastStart Math Program on gatekeeper course completion and college-level credit accumulation. 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 FastStart math classes between Spring of 2006 and Spring of 2008 were the treatment group and students who enrolled in the non-accelerated developmental math course were the comparison group. Study participants included 133 students who enrolled in the FastStart math classes and 1,222 students in the comparison group. 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 FastStart Math Program were significantly more likely to complete a gatekeeper math course than students in the comparison group (15% more likely after one year and 11% more likely over three years).
- The study found that students in the FastStart Math Program were significantly more likely to enroll in a gatekeeper math course than students in the comparison group (20% more likely after one year and 14% more likely over three years).
- The study did not find a significant difference between the groups on college-level credit accumulation.
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 FastStart Math Program, but other factors might also have contributed.