Search

Nationwide, about 40 percent of college students take at least one remedial course to prepare for college-level coursework. One cause of this high rate of remedial enrollment is the misalignment of high school graduation standards and college academic expectations. College readiness partnership programs attempt to address this problem by facilitating students' transition to college. This study examines 37 state and local college readiness partnership programs in Texas as well as the partnerships that created these programs. The findings are based on a review of the relevant research and Texas policy literature, analysis of an online scan of college readiness partnership programs in Texas with a web presence, and site visits to high schools, colleges, and community-based organizations in the Houston and Dallas-Fort Worth areas. The authors define college readiness partnership programs as programmatic interventions co-sponsored by secondary and postsecondary institutions and offered to high school students with the goal of increasing students' college readiness. [This report was written with the assistance of Heather D. Wathington, Joshua Pretlow, Beth Hustedt, Nikki Edgecombe, Alissa Gardenhire, and Nicole Clabaugh. This Brief is based on a National Center for Postsecondary Research (NCPR) report titled "Preparing High School Students for College: An Exploratory Study of College Readiness Partnership Programs in Texas." To access this report, see ED532393.]

This paper presents an executive summary of a study that examines a number of college readiness partnership programs operating in Texas and identifies their features, targeted students, and intended outcomes. It also examines the partnerships that created these programs. The findings presented here are based on a search and analysis of the relevant research and Texas policy literature, an online scan of college readiness partnership programs in Texas with a web presence, and site visits to high schools, colleges, and community-based organizations in the Houston and Dallas-Fort Worth areas. The authors observed that most college readiness partnership programs could be classified into two types: those that focused on academic subjects and those that focused on college knowledge. The former tended to be intensive, short-term programs that targeted a small group of students and provided a direct experience of college; the latter tended to be light-touch, long-term programs that were open to all students and provided little direct experience of college. The authors identify a number of implications for college readiness partnership programs and the partnerships themselves. It is clear that college readiness partnerships create opportunities for secondary and postsecondary institutions to leverage each other's services, eliminating redundant services and aligning programming to maximize gains for students. In some cases, college readiness partnership programs also lead to long-lasting relationships between institutions and continued collaboration. College readiness partnership programs may have the best chance of improving outcomes if commonly encountered challenges--such as issues related to student recruitment and program sustainability--are considered early in the planning stages. The authors emphasize the value of choosing interventions that show the greatest promise in a given context and matching students to the interventions that best meet their needs; they also note that building a stronger evidence base would enhance high schools' and colleges' ability to make sound decisions about which potential program models to implement. (Contains 1 figure.) [This paper was written with Heather D. Wathington, Joshua Pretlow, Beth Hustedt, Nikki Edgecombe, Alissa Gardenhire, and Nicole Clabaugh. For the full report, "Preparing High School Students for College: An Exploratory Study of College Readiness Partnership Programs in Texas," see ED532393.]

In 2009, the National Center for Postsecondary Research (NCPR) launched an evaluation of eight developmental summer bridge programs in Texas to assess whether these programs reduce the need for developmental coursework and improve student outcomes in college. The evaluation uses an experimental design to measure the effects of these programs on college enrollment and success. At each college, students who consented to participate in the study were randomly assigned to one of two groups: a program group that was eligible to participate in a developmental summer bridge program and a control group that was eligible to receive their college's regular services. (Random assignment creates two groups that are similar in both characteristics that can be measured, such as age or academic attainment, and those that cannot be reliably measured, such as motivation. This ensures that any differences in observed outcomes--called impacts--between the two groups can be attributed with confidence to participation in the developmental summer bridge programs.) Students participated in the developmental summer bridge programs in summer 2009, and their academic progress is being followed through the 2010-2011 academic year. All developmental summer bridge programs had four common features: an accelerated format, academic support, a "college knowledge" component, and the opportunity for participants to receive a $400 stipend. Eight institutions were selected for inclusion in this study: (1) El Paso Community College (El Paso, TX); (2) Lone Star College-CyFair (Houston, TX); (3) Lone Star College-Kingwood (Houston, TX); (4) South Texas College (McAllen, TX); (5) Texas A&M International University (Laredo, TX); (6) Palo Alto College (San Antonio, TX); (7) San Antonio College (San Antonio, TX); and (8) St. Philip's College (San Antonio, TX). This Brief presents early impact results from the evaluation and information on how the developmental summer bridge programs were implemented. It focuses on the models used, the range of design features incorporated, how the programs were administered, and how they were perceived by those involved, including college and program leaders, faculty, advisors, and students. A cost study of developmental summer bridge programs is also included. The following are the main preliminary findings of this study: (1) All eight programs in the study were implemented with reasonable fidelity to the model framed by the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (THECB), but they varied on some key dimensions; (2) Program costs averaged about $1,300 per student but varied widely; (3) Program group students did not enroll in either the fall or spring semester at significantly different rates than control group students; enrollment rates were high for both groups; and (4) There is evidence that the program students were more likely to pass college-level courses in math and writing in the fall semester following the summer programs. The findings also suggest that program students were more likely to attempt higher level reading, writing, and math courses compared with control group students. [This paper was written with Matthew Zeidenberg, Madeline Joy Weiss, Alison Black, Claire Mitchell, and John Wachen. For "Getting Ready for College: An Implementation and Early Impacts Study of Eight Texas Developmental Summer Bridge Programs," see ED525149.]

In 2007, the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (THECB) funded 22 colleges to establish developmental summer bridge programs. Aimed at providing an alternative to traditional developmental education, these programs involve intensive remedial instruction in math, reading, and/or writing and college preparation content for students entering college with low basic skills. In 2009, the National Center for Postsecondary Research (NCPR) launched an evaluation of eight developmental summer bridge programs in Texas (seven at community colleges and one at an open-admissions four-year university), the early findings of which are described in this report. Students who participated in the study were randomly assigned to the program group or the control group. Program group students participated in the developmental summer bridge programs, while control group students received colleges' regular services. All developmental summer bridge programs had four common features: accelerated instruction in math, reading, and/or writing; academic support; a "college knowledge" component; and the opportunity for participants to receive a $400 stipend. The main findings of this preliminary report are: (1) All eight programs in the study were implemented with reasonable fidelity to the model framed by the THECB, but they varied on some key dimensions; (2) Program costs averaged about $1,300 per student but varied widely; (3) Program group students did not enroll in either the fall or spring semester at significantly different rates than control group students; enrollment rates were high for both groups; and (4) There is evidence that the program students were more likely to pass college-level courses in math and writing in the fall semester following the summer programs. The findings also suggest that program students were more likely to attempt higher level reading, writing, and math courses compared with control group students. (Contains 1 table and 2 footnotes.) [This paper was written with Matthew Zeidenberg, Madeline Joy Weiss, Alison Black, Claire Mitchell, and John Wachen. For the full report, "Getting Ready for College: An Implementation and Early Impacts Study of Eight Texas Developmental Summer Bridge Programs," see ED525149.]