The topic area focuses on community colleges, which are public, two-year postsecondary institutions. The studies in this topic area examine the effectiveness of community college policies and programs that are intended to improve academic persistence, degree/certificate completion, and labor market outcomes. The topic area focuses on linked learning communities, accelerated learning, and paid performance incentive programs. The topic area also focuses on community college bridge programs for students in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM), workforce program partnerships, and community-college based interventions intended to improve employment and earning outcomes and the attainment of industry-recognized certificates, certifications and credentials.
Community College
Status: Literature reviewed in this topic area currently covers 1994 - 2019.
Synthesis Reports
Synthesis reports look at the research evidence across studies within a topic area. They also highlight gaps in the literature, and suggest areas in which further research is needed.
Many community college-based interventions improved education outcomes but few improved earnings or employment outcomes.
Paid performance incentives improved education outcomes and show promise to increase earnings.
Accelerated learning interventions increased the rates of course enrollment and completion as well as the rates of degree/certificate completion.
Some studies showed that work-based learning interventions improved education and employment outcomes, but the evidence base is small.
Career pathways interventions had varying degrees of effectiveness across the outcomes.
Evidence on the effectiveness of blended interventions funded by TAACCCT is mixed.
Recently Added
CLEAR searches the existing literature for research relevant to this topic area's focus. Browse the most recently reviewed research below.
Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the impact of Washington State’s Integrated Basic Education and Skills Training (I-BEST) on education and earnings outcomes. The study used a randomized…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the impact of Ohio’s Accelerated Study in Associate Programs (ASAP) on credit accumulation and degree attainment. The study was a randomized controlled…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the impact of the Wisconsin Scholar Grant (WSG) on long-term education outcomes for two-year college students. The authors investigated similar research questions…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the impact of the Susan Thompson Buffet Foundation (STBF) financial aid awards on education outcomes for two-year college students. The authors investigated…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the impact of the Fund for Wisconsin Scholars (FFWS) on employment and earnings. This profile focuses on the outcomes for students enrolled in two-year colleges.…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the impact of New Mexico Legislative Lottery Scholarship (NMLLS) on education outcomes. This study was a difference-in-differences design exploring the…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the net impact of 12 workforce development programs in Washington state on employment, earnings, and public benefits receipt outcomes. This profile focuses on the…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the net impact of 12 workforce development programs in Washington state on employment, earnings, and public benefits receipt outcomes. This profile focuses on…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study's objective was to examine the net impact of 12 workforce development programs in Washington state on employment, earnings, and public benefits receipt outcomes. This profile focuses on the…Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the New Orleans Office of Workforce Development (OWD) Career Pathways training program on employment, earnings, and job satisfaction. This…
CLEAR Icon Key
Below is a key for icons used to indicate important details about a study, such as its type, evidence rating, and outcome findings.
High Causal Evidence
Strong evidence the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Moderate Causal Evidence
Evidence that the effects are caused to some degree by the examined intervention.
Low Causal Evidence
Little evidence that the effects are caused by the examined intervention.
Causal Impact Analysis
Uses quantitative methods to assess the effectiveness of a program, policy, or intervention.
Descriptive Analysis
Describes a program, policy, or intervention using qualitative or quantitative methods.
Implementation Analysis
Examines the implementation of a program, policy, or intervention.
Favorable
The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts.
Mixed
The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain.
None
The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain.
Unfavorable
The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts.
Not applicable
Not applicable because no outcomes were examined in the outcome domain.
Favorable - low evidence
The study found at least one favorable impact in the outcome domain, and no unfavorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Mixed - low evidence
The study found some favorable and some unfavorable impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
None - low evidence
The study found no statistically significant impacts in the outcome domain. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.
Unfavorable - low evidence
The study found at least one unfavorable impact in the outcome domain, and no favorable impacts. The study received a low causal evidence ratings so these findings should be interpreted with caution.