Report of Achieving the Dream
Data Team
October 10, 2007
Contents
 Methodology
 Developmental Courses with Observations
 High Enrollment, High Failure Courses with Observations
 High Failure 2000-level Courses with Observations
 Advisement
 Persistence and Retention with Observations
 Next Steps
2
Methodology
 Achieving the Dream (AtD) defines student success in a
course as a grade of A, B, C, or S; students earning a
grade of D, F, U or W are defined as unsuccessful.
 Initially, five Zero-level courses and five 1000-level
course were identified as having a high rate of
unsuccessful students and were analyzed using
demographic data.
 With guidance from our AtD Data Coach, the analysis
shifted from demographics to other course attributes
where change might have a broader impact.



Time of day
Length of course
Delivery method
3
Methodology
 All Zero-level MATH and LS courses were selected since
unsuccessful completion of these courses is a barrier to
enrollment in college level courses.
 1000-level courses were selected by high enrollment (300 or
greater) and high failure rates (30% or greater).
 2000-level courses were selected by high enrollment (100 or
greater) and high failure rates (30% or greater)
 All persistence and retention data is based on the ATD cohort,
which includes all students who enter OCCC for the first-time in
the fall semester.
 AtD Data Team surfaced summary observations during
meetings.
4
Developmental or Zero–Level Courses
 All Zero-level MATH and LS courses were selected.
 Larger percentage of students receive a D, F, or U than
withdraw.
 Online sections are less successful than traditional sections.
 8-week sections are more successful than 16-week.
 The failure rate for College Reading I has increased over the
last three years.
 Night sections in Math courses are more successful than
other times of the day.
 Study Skills has a consistently higher failure rate in spring
semesters.
 Intermediate Algebra has a consistently higher failure rate in
fall semester.
5
Developmental Failure Rates By Year
53.2%
53.0%
52.5%
47.3%
46.8%
40.4%
32.7%
31.1%
AY 2005
Remdial LS
AY 2006
Remedial Math
32.1%
AY 2007
Institution
6
High-Enrollment, High-Failure Courses
 1000-level courses were selected by high enrollment (300 or
greater) and high failure rates (30% or greater).
 Math and Science courses had a greater percentage
withdrawing than failing. English and History courses were
the reverse.
 When offered, 2-, 5-, and 8-week sections had a lower failure
rate than 16-week sections. (Exceptions: CS 1103, Math
1513)
 When offered, online sections had a higher failure rate than
traditional sections. (Exceptions: BIO 1023, BIO 1114, SOC
1113).
 Telecourse sections had a higher failure rate than any other
delivery method.
7
High-Enrollment, High-Failure Courses
 Failure rates in night sections are equal to or lower than
morning sections. (Exceptions: MATH 1513, CHEM 1115).
 The following courses show a continued increase in failure
rate over time: APPM 1313, BIO 1314,CHEM 1115, ENGL
1113, HIST 1483, and HIST 1493.
 Courses that have consistently lower failure rates in fall
semesters: BIO 1114, BIO 1314, ENGL 1113.
 ENGL 1213 has a consistently lower failure rate in spring
semesters.
 Courses that have increased in number of students per
semester: BIO 1023, BIO 1314, POLSC 1113.
 CS 1103 is the only course that has continued to decrease in
number of students per semester.
8
High-Enrollment, High-Failure By Year
36.1%
36.4%
34.1%
32.7%
32.1%
31.1%
AY 2005
AY 2006
1000 Level
AY 2007
Institution
9
2000 Level Courses
 2000-level courses were selected by high enrollment (100 or
greater) and high failure rates (30% or greater)
 According to AtD Data Coach, high failure rates in 2000 level
courses are unusual for AtD schools.
 Most 2000-level courses had a higher withdrawal rate than
failure rate (Exceptions: ECON 2113, MGMT 2053).
 Night sections had a lower failure rate than other times of the
day.
 When offered, 5- and 8-week sections had lower failure rates
than 16-week sections.
 When offered, online sections had noticeably higher failure
rates than traditional sections. (Exception: GEOG 2603)
10
2000 Level Courses
 Five out of nine courses show an increase in the failure rate
over time (Exceptions: ACCT-2123; ACCT 2113; COM-2213;
MGMT-2053).
 BUS 2023 has consistently lower failure rates in spring
semesters.
 GEOG 2603 has consistently lower failure rates in fall
semesters.
 One out of every two students who enroll in ACCT 2113 and
BIO-2215 fail.
11
2000 Level Failure Rates By Year
40.1%
37.8%
36.2%
32.7%
31.1%
AY 2005
AY 2006
2000 Level
32.1%
AY 2007
Institution
12
Advisement
Why Advisement
 Identified as key piece of student success
 Opportunity to talk one-on-one with a student
 Advising is both formal and informal
 Advising is multi-faceted
13
Advisement
OCCC DUAL MODEL OF ADVISEMENT
 OCCC Administrative Procedure No. 5049 dtd 1-02-1991
 OCCC Administrative Procedure No. 5056 dtd 6-01-1996
 Advantages
 Trained staff; central access; economy of scale
 Disadvantages
 Unclear definition of advising
 Communication of responsibilities
14
Advisement
FA/VA
Center
Academic
Advisor Admissions
Career &
Employment
Transfer
Center
Success
Course
Advising
Mine
Online
Class
Schedule
Course
Catalog
Distance
Advising
International
Graduation
Faculty
Advisor
15
Advisement
Areas of Concern
 Communication – internal and external
 Roles and procedures not clearly defined
 Training for Faculty Advisors
 Transition from Academic Advisor to Faculty Advisor
 Self-Advisement
 Loophole
16
Persistence and Retention
 Fall 2004 and Fall 2005 AtD Cohorts, which includes all students
who enter OCCC for the first-time in the fall semester.
 Persistence is defined as a student from a fall cohort attending
the following spring semester. (Fall to Spring)
 Retention is defined as a student from a fall cohort attending
OCCC the following fall semester. (Fall to Fall)
 Looking at the demographic profile of the two AtD Cohorts in
comparison to all students enrolled at OCCC’s during the same
time frame, the following differences can be seen:
 AtD Cohorts have a higher percentage of males.
 AtD Cohorts have a higher percentage of 18-24 year olds.
 AtD Cohorts have a higher percentage in all race/ethnic
groups except Asian.
17
 Females persisted and were retained at a higher percentage
than males.
 Asian and Hispanics persist and are retained at a higher rate
than other minority groups or Caucasians.
 Black/African Americans have a lower success rate than other
minority groups or Caucasians.
 Asians have a higher success rate than other minority groups or
Caucasians.
 Minority groups as a whole persist and are retained at a lower
rate than Caucasians. This is more evident in the Fall 2005
Cohort.
18
 Both persistence and retention declined from Fall 2004
Cohort to Fall 2005 Cohort in basically all areas.
(Exception: 30-34 age group)
 Although the persistence percent of 30-34 year olds
decreased from Fall 2004 to Fall 2005, the retention rate
increased.
 The opposite was true for 40-44 year olds.
 A student in the Fall 2004 Cohort had approximately:




three in five chance of persisting
one in two chance of being successful in spring classes
almost a two in five chance of being retained
less than a one in three chance of being successful in fall
classes
19
Fall to Fall Retention
GENDER
AGE GROUPS
60
80
50
70
40
60
30
50
40
20
30
10
20
10
0
Males
Females
0
2 4 &B e lo w
Fall 2004 Cohort
Fall 2005 Cohort
25-29
30-39
40-49
5 0 &A bo v e
OCCC Fall Semester
F a ll 2 0 0 4 C o ho rt
F a ll 2 0 0 5 C o ho rt
O C C C F a ll S e m e s t e r
20
Retention Demographics
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Persistence
Fall 2004
Retention
Fall 2005
IPEDS/OCCC
21
Breakout Group Process
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Divide into three breakout groups. (see sheets on tables. )
Each group should appoint a presenter and recorder. The recorder will list
items in the laptop provided.
The tasks for each group are as follows:

Table 1 should brainstorm potential causes of the problems shown
by the data about developmental course completion from the Data
Team as well as any other data that may be relevant on
developmental course failures.

Table 2 should brainstorm potential causes of the problems shown
by the data about course completion in 1000-level (gatekeeper
courses) and 2000-level courses from the Data Team as well as any
other data that may be relevant on course completion failures.

Table 3 should brainstorm potential causes of the problems shown
by the data about persistence and retention from the Data Team as
well as any other data that may be relevant on retention failures.
Once you have brainstormed the list of issues or potential causes, separate
them into Symptoms or Underlying Causes by adding a “S” or “U” next to the
item.
Each group should then list any additional data they would like to see from
the Data Team that would assist in analyzing their assigned subjects.
Save the list on the flash drive provided and each presenter will have five
minutes to present to the combined group.
22
AtD Data Team Members
Alan Stringfellow
Brandi Henson
E.J. Warren
Harold Case
Joyce Morgan-Dees
Stephen Crynes
Yutika Kim
23
AtD Data Team Members
LINKS
2004 Cohort
2005 Cohort
Zero Level
1000 Level
2000 Level
24