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 Learning Program (ALP) at the Community College of Baltimore.
- This nonexperimental study used regression analysis and propensity score matching to compare the outcomes of students who participated in the ALP 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 ALP students 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 Learning Program, but other factors might also have contributed.
Intervention Examined
Accelerated Developmental Education
Features of the Intervention
In 2007, the Community College of Baltimore started offering an Accelerated Learning Program (ALP) for developmental writing. Students who tested into the highest level of developmental writing could instead enroll in the regular English 101 course along with college-ready students as long as they also registered for a special supplemental section of developmental writing. These additional sections had small class sizes (limited to eight students) and provided additional time with the same instructor for six hours a week. This style of acceleration is known as mainstreaming with developmental support.
Features of the Study
The study used regression analysis and propensity score matching to estimate the impact of the ALP on gatekeeper course completion and college-level credit accrual for students entering between Fall 2007 and Fall 2011. 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 Fall 2007-Fall 2010 (treatment = 592; comparison = 5,545) and three-year outcomes for those who from Fall 2007-Fall 2008 (treatment = 143; comparison = 2,258). 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 students in the comparison group (29% more likely after one year and 28% 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 students in the comparison group (44% more likely after one year and 44% more likely over three years).
- When compared to students in the comparison group, the study found that participation in ALP significantly increased credit accumulation with accelerated students earning 1.77 more college-level credits after one year and 5.68 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 Learning Program, but other factors might also have contributed.