A Study of the Progress of Basic Skills Students through an Examination of Their Success and Retention Rates
 
Jing Luan
Office of Institutional Research
May1997
 
 
 
Table of Contents
 
 
  Introduction
1
  Cohort Enrolled in English
2
  Course progress
2
  Analysis of demography & educational goals
4
  Cohort Enrolled in Math
7
  Course progress
7
  Analysis of demography & educational goals
10
  Cohort Enrolled in Reading
13
  Course progress
13
  Analysis of demography & educational goals
15
  Cohort Enrolled in ESL
17
  Cohort progress
17
  Analysis of demography & educational goals
19
  Summary of Findings
22
  Appendix - Longitudinal analysis retention and success rates in English, Math, Reading and ESL
24
     
A Study of the Progress of Basic Skills Students through an Examination of Their Success and Retention Rates

(DRAFT)

Jing Luan
Office of Institutional Research
May1997
INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study is to identify: 1) the success and retention rates of basic skills students, and 2) the rates of basic skills students’ progress from basic skills courses to college level courses, and ultimately, transfer level courses.

This study took advantage of the Cabrillo College Datawarehouse which made cohort tracking possible. The study chose its cohorts from the semester of Fall 1994. Essentially, four cohorts were identified:

Students enrolled in ENGL 255 (n=221),

Students enrolled in MATH 256 & 256 (S) (n = 247),

Students in READ 205 and READ 255 (n = 102), and

Students in ESL 200 and ESL 201 (n = 77).

For each basic skills cohort, the study tracked its progress from basic skills courses in Fall 1994 on to the next courses in line (last semester data available: Spring 1996), following the normal sequence of courses. For example, the cohort which took ENGL 255 in Fall 1994 was followed from ENGL 255 to ENGL 100 and to ENGL 1A. Descriptive statistics were reported for all of the tracking. For each cohort’s performance in each course, the study reported the number of students in the class, the grades they received, and the success and retention rates. The study also compared the cohort’s performance to the general population (also called comparison group in this study) that was enrolled in the course in Fall 1994. For example, all students enrolled in ENGL 100 were compared to the students who moved on from ENGL 255 to ENGL 100.

Wherever applicable, the tables in this study used a comparison group - ‘general’ population enrolled in the same courses. In these tables, if there was more than one course of the same level listed, i.e., READ 205 and READ 255, the total of the courses was used.

The definitions used for success and retention in this study are as follows:

Success rate: (A+B+C+CR /A+B+C+CR+D+F+IF+NC+W+XX) x 100

Retention rate: (A+B+C+CR+D+F+IF+NC /A+B+C+CR+D+F+IF+NC+W+XX) x 100

Progress rate: (# in higher level course / # in lower level course) x 100

 
 
FINDINGS

ENGLISH * COHORT ENROLLED IN ENGL 255 IN FALL 1994

There was a total of 221 students enrolled in basic skills ENGL 255 in Fall 1994. The success rate for these students was 55.7% and retention rate 67.4%. Out of this group of 221 students, 101 students moved on to ENGL 100. The progress rate was 45.7%. The success and retention rates in ENGL 100 for these 101 students were 66.3% and 78.2% respectively. Compared to the success and retention rates for all students enrolled in ENGL 100 (n = 1,009) in Fall 1994, the rates were substantially higher. The cohort’s success rate was almost 10 percentage points higher and its retention rate 6 percentage points higher.

Table 1. Grades from ENGL 255 (Basic Skills Level) - Fall 1994

#
%
A
19
8.6%
B
4
1.8%
C
1
0.5%
CR
99
44.8%
D
0
0.0%
F
0
0.0%
IF
5
2.3%
NC
21
9.5%
W
65
29.4%
XX
7
3.2%
Total
221
S Rate:
55.7%
R Rate:
67.4%
Table 2. Grades from ENGL 100 (College Level) - comparisons between the cohort enrolled in ENGL 255 in Fall 1994 and All Students Enrolled in ENGL 100 in Fall 1994
Cohort from 
ENGL 255
All Students in 
ENGL 100
#
%
#
%
A
25
24.8%
205
20.3%
B
31
30.7%
243
24.1%
C
11
10.9%
110
10.9%
CR
0
0.0%
14
1.4%
D
3
3.0%
36
3.6%
F
0
0.0%
41
4.1%
IF
6
5.9%
54
5.4%
NC
3
3.0%
25
2.5%
W
18
17.8%
266
26.4%
XX
4
4.0%
15
1.5%
Total
101
1009
S Rate:
66.3%
56.7%
R Rate:
78.2%
72.2%
 

Table 3. Grades from ENGL 1A (Transfer Level) - comparisons between the cohort enrolled in ENGL 100 and all students enrolled in ENGL 1A in Fall 1994

Cohort from 
ENGL 100
All Students in 
ENGL 1A
#
%
#
%
A
7
22.6%
204
26.2%
B
10
32.3%
186
23.9%
C
5
16.1%
106
13.6%
CR
0
0.0%
2
0.3%
D
1
3.2%
16
2.1%
F
0
0.0%
15
1.9%
IF
3
9.7%
26
3.3%
NC
2
6.5%
31
4.0%
W
1
3.2%
173
22.2%
XX
2
6.5%
19
2.4%
Total
31
778
S Rate:
71.0%
64.0%
R Rate:
90.3%
75.3%
Out of this group of 101 students enrolled in ENGL 100, 31students moved on to ENGL 1A. The progress rate was 30.7%. The success and retention rates in ENGL 1A for the 31 students were 71.0% and 90.3% respectively. Compared to the success and retention rates for all students enrolled in ENGL 1A (n = 778) in Fall 1994, the rates were substantially higher. The cohort’s success rate was more than 10 percentage points higher, and its retention rate 15 percentage points higher.

About half of the students (45.7%) from ENGL 255 moved on to ENGL 100. Out of that group, about a third (30.7%) moved on to ENGL 1A. Fourteen percent of the students from the initial cohort in Fall 94 (ENGL 255) progressed from basic skills English courses to transfer level English courses by Spring 96. Students from the cohort performed better than the comparison group students who enrolled at both the college and transfer level English courses.

 

 

 

 

 

Table 4. The Age of Students Enrolled in English Courses:

ENGL 255
ENGL 100
ENGL 1A
#
%
#
%
#
%
<21
106
48.2%
51
50.5%
20
64.5%
21-25
41
18.6%
11
10.9%
3
9.7%
26-30
26
11.8%
16
15.8%
5
16.1%
31-40
31
14.1%
13
12.9%
2
6.5%
41-50
11
5.0%
7
6.9%
1
3.2%
51-60
2
0.9%
1
1.0%
61-
1
0.5%
1
1.0%
Total
220
101
31
For both ENGL 255 and ENGL 100, almost half of the students were younger than 21. Age did not seem to be a factor in students making the transition from the pre-collegiate level to collegiate level until they reached transfer level. In ENGL 1A, almost 2/3 (64.5%) of the students were younger than 21. This means that younger students are more likely to take transfer level courses. This does not necessarily mean that younger students do better than older students (26 and above).

Table 5. The Gender of Students Enrolled in English Courses:

ENGL 255
ENGL 100
ENGL 1A
#
%
#
%
#
%
F
99
45.0%
49
48.5%
13
41.9%
M
121
55.0%
52
51.5%
18
58.1%
Total
220
101
31
 

Interestingly, the distribution of females and males in basic skills classes goes against the trend in the general population. In absolute numbers, more males (n=121) were enrolled than females (n=99), and this study found that more males (n=18) went into transfer level classes than females (n=13).

 

Table 6. The Ethnicity of Students Enrolled in English Courses:

ENGL 255
ENGL 100
ENGL 1A
#
%
#
%
#
%
AA
4
1.8%
1
1.0%
AI
2
0.9%
1
1.0%
1
3.2%
ASIAN
15
6.8%
3
3.0%
HISPANIC
114
51.8%
57
56.4%
20
64.5%
OTHER
4
1.8%
2
2.0%
WHITE
81
36.8%
37
36.6%
10
32.3%
Total
220
101
31
More than half of the students were Hispanic students and almost 2/3 (64.5%) of the students who went into transfer English classes were Hispanic. The percentage of white students did not change much from being 1/3 of the group in the entire process. Asian students, on the other hand, started out to be 6.8% of the group, but none of them went on transfer English courses.

 

Table 7. The Educational Goals of Students Enrolled in English Courses:

ENGL 255
ENGL 100
ENGL 1A
#
%
#
%
#
%
BA/BS w/ AA/AS
43
19.5%
28
27.7%
11
35.5%
BA/BS w/o AA/AS
12
5.5%
6
5.9%
2
6.5%
AA/AS w/o TRANSFER
16
7.3%
5
5.0%
1
3.2%
AA/AS/V w/o TRANSFER
15
6.8%
5
5.0%
2
6.5%
CERT w/o TRANSFER
9
4.1%
3
3.0%
1
3.2%
CAREER PLANS
20
9.1%
12
11.9%
3
9.7%
SKILLS
26
11.8%
8
7.9%
2
6.5%
UPDATE
8
3.6%
2
2.0%
1
3.2%
LICENSE
3
1.4%
1
1.0%
LEISURE
10
4.5%
3
3.0%
BASIC SKILLS
17
7.7%
11
10.9%
4
12.9%
GED/HSCH
2
0.9%
UNDECIDED
19
8.6%
8
7.9%
2
6.5%
UNKNOWN
20
9.1%
9
8.9%
2
6.5%
Total
220
101
31
More than 1/3 (35.5%) of the students in transfer English had in their original educational goals "to obtain a BA/BS with an Associated Degree, compared to 19.5% in the pre-collegiate level. This means that students were more likely to follow their original intent of study than not. This is further verified by the number of students with "improving basic skills" as their goal. Their percentage increased as students progressed from pre-collegiate level to transfer level classes. However, given the possibility of students changing their educational goals every new term when they registered, caution should be used when examining the educational goals of those students. Another finding is that there did not appear to be any dominant goal clusters among the students. Even though "to obtain BA/BS with an Associate Degree" was 19.5%, almost half of the college’s general population, in actuality, declared that as their goal.

Table 8. The Disability Information of Students Enrolled in English Courses:

ENGL 255
ENGL 100
ENGL 1A
#
%
#
%
#
%
Acq. Brain Inj.
2
6.5%
1
6.3%
Dev. Delayed
1
3.2%
1
6.3%
Learning Disabled
20
64.5%
9
56.3%
3
60.0%
Mobility Impaired
1
3.2%
Other Disability
1
3.2%
Psych Disability
3
9.7%
2
12.5%
1
20.0%
Visually Impaired
3
9.7%
3
18.8%
1
20.0%
Total
31
16
5
The majority of the students who claimed disabilities were learning disabled (64.5% in ENGL 255).

Table 8a. Comparisons of Rate of Progress between All Students in the Cohort and Students with Disabilities.

 
ENGL
255
ENGL
100
  
ENGL
1A
  
 
#
#
prog. rate
#
prog. rate
All Students
220
101
45.7%
31
30.7%
Std. w/ disabilities
31
16
51.6%
5
31.3%
Compared to all students in the cohort, students with disabilities progressed at a higher rate from English 255 to English 100 (51.6% vs. 45.7%). The rate of progress from English 100 to English 1A is almost the same for both groups – a little over 30%. Nine out of 20 students with Learning Disabilities (the majority of disabilities) progressed from English 255 to English 100 - a rate of 45% which is lower than that observed in the entire group of students with disabilities.

Profiling: For a student enrolled in basic skills English courses, he most likely was a young Hispanic male. If he had a disability, it would be a learning disability.

MATH * COHORT ENROLLED IN MATH 256 and MATH 256S IN FALL 1994

There was a total of 247 students enrolled in basic skills MATH 256 and MATH 256S in Fall 1994. The overall success rate for these students was 48.6%, and the retention rate was 80.2%. Students in MATH 256S had a higher success rate (85.4%) than students in MATH 256 (41.3%). The retention rate in MATH 256S was higher (97.6%) than in MATH 256 (76.7%). Out of this group of 247students, 176 moved on to MATH 154 and MATH 154A classes. The progress rate was 71.3%. The success and retention rates in MATH 154 and MATH 154A for the 176 students were 40.9% and 59.7% respectively. Compared to the success and retention rates for all students enrolled in MATH 154, (n = 729) in Fall 1994, the rates were substantially lower. The cohort’s success rate in MATH 154 (MATH 154A had too few students, n = 5), was 16 percentage points lower, and its retention rate almost 15 percentage points lower.

Note: several factors (outside faculty control) may have influenced the progress rate: intended educational goals, and fewer than 4 semesters for tracking a student cohort.

 
Table 9. Grades from MATH 256 and MATH 256S (Basic Skills Level) - Fall 1994
MATH 256
MATH 256S
Total All Courses
#
%
#
%
#
%
A
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
B
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
C
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
CR
85
41.3%
35
85.4%
120
48.6%
D
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
F
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
IF
15
7.3%
2
4.9%
17
6.9%
NC
58
28.2%
3
7.3%
61
24.7%
W
41
19.9%
1
2.4%
42
17.0%
XX
7
3.4%
0
0.0%
7
2.8%
Total
206
41
247
S Rate:
41.3%
85.4%
48.6%
R Rate:
76.7%
97.6%
80.2%
 

 

Table 10. Grades from MATH 154 (College Level 1) - comparisons between the cohort from MATH 256 & 256S in Fall 1994 and all students enrolled in MATH 154 & 154A in Fall 1994

MATH154
MATH 154A
Total Courses
All Students in 
MATH 154
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
A
15
8.8%
0
0.0%
15
8.5%
130
17.8%
B
27
15.8%
0
0.0%
27
15.3%
144
19.8%
C
27
15.8%
3
7.3%
30
17.0%
140
19.2%
CR
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
D
14
8.2%
0
0.0%
14
8.0%
58
8.0%
F
15
8.8%
1
2.4%
16
9.1%
58
8.0%
IF
2
1.2%
1
2.4%
3
1.7%
6
0.8%
NC
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
W
65
38.0%
0
0.0%
65
36.9%
184
25.2%
XX
6
3.5%
0
0.0%
6
3.4%
9
1.2%
Total
171
5
176
729
S Rate:
40.4%
60.0%
40.9%
64.7%
R Rate:
58.5%
100.0%
59.7%
73.5%
Out of this group of 176 students in MATH 154 and 154A, 52 students moved on to MATH 152. The progress rate was 30.0%. The success and retention rates in MATH 152 for these 52 students were 59.6% and 76.9% respectively. Compared to the success and retention rates for all students enrolled in 152 (n = 707) in Fall 1994, the rates were substantially higher. The cohort’s success rate was more than 10 percentage points higher, and its retention rate 7 percentage points higher.

 

 

Table 11. Grades from MATH 152 (College Level 2) - comparisons between the cohort from MATH 154 and all students enrolled in MATH 152 in Fall 1994

MATH 152
All Students in 
MATH 152
#
%
#
%
A
4
7.7%
98
13.9%
B
13
25.0%
104
14.7%
C
14
26.9%
144
20.4%
CR
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
D
5
9.6%
70
9.9%
F
2
3.8%
72
10.2%
IF
2
3.8%
4
0.6%
NC
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
W
8
15.4%
209
29.6%
XX
4
7.7%
6
0.8%
Total
52
707
S Rate:
59.6%
48.9%
R Rate:
76.9%
69.6%
 

Table 12. Grades from MATH 4, 10,11,12,13 (Transfer Level) - comparisons between the cohort from MATH 152 and all students enrolled in MATH 4,10,11,12,13 in Fall 1994

MATH 4,10,11,12,13
All Students in 
MATH 4,10,11,12,13
#
%
#
%
A
1
5.9%
143
21.4%
B
3
17.6%
154
23.1%
C
4
23.5%
107
16.0%
CR
0
0.0%
5
0.7%
D
1
5.9%
34
5.1%
F
0
0.0%
42
6.3%
IF
0
0.0%
6
0.9%
NC
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
W
6
35.3%
160
24.0%
XX
2
11.8%
16
2.4%
Total
17
667
S Rate:
47.1%
61.3%
R Rate:
52.9%
73.6%
Out of this group of 52 students in MATH 152, 17 students moved on to transfer courses of MATH 4, MATH 10, MATH 11, MATH 12 or MATH 13. The progress rate was 32.7%. These transfer MATH courses have been combined into one for this study because of the small number of students enrolled in each course. The success and retention rates in MATH 4, 10, 11, 12, & 13 for these 52 students were 47.1% and 52.9% respectively. Compared to the success and retention rates for all students enrolled in transfer courses of MATH 4, MATH 10, MATH 11, MATH 12 or MATH 13 (n = 667) in Fall 1994, the rates were substantially lower. The cohort’s success rate was almost 14 percentage points lower, and its retention rate 21 percentage points lower. However, the number in Transfer Math for the cohort students (n = 17) was too small to substantiate this finding.

A large percentage of the students (71.3%) from MATH 256 and 256S moved on to MATH 154 and 154A. Out of that group, about one third (30.0%) moved on to MATH 152. Out of the 52 students in MATH 152, about one third (32.7%) moved on to transfer MATH courses. Less than 7% of the students from the initial cohort in Fall 94 (MATH 256 & 256S) progressed from basic skills MATH courses to transfer level MATH courses by Spring 96.

 

 

 

Table 13. The Age of Students Enrolled in Math Courses:

MATH 256, 256S
MATH 154, 154A
MATH 152
TRANSFER MATH 
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
2
0.8%
1
0.6%
1
1.9%
<21
75
30.4%
47
26.1%
10
19.2%
4
23.5%
21-25
67
27.1%
54
30.0%
11
21.2%
4
23.5%
26-30
29
11.7%
18
10.0%
7
13.5%
2
11.8%
31-40
42
17.0%
44
24.4%
15
28.8%
2
11.8%
41-50
26
10.5%
14
7.8%
8
15.4%
5
29.4%
51-60
5
2.0%
2
1.1%
61-
1
0.4%
Total
247
180
52
17
Different from students in basic skills English courses, more students were older than 25. This trend appeared to be stable throughout the entire transition. This means that more older students were likely to enroll in basic skills Math. This may also mean that older students more likely needed to sharpen their math skills after a long period of time since graduating or leaving high school.

 

Table 14. The Gender of Students Enrolled in Math Courses:
 
MATH 256, 256S
MATH 154, 154A
MATH 152
TRANSFER MATH 
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Female
155
62.8%
120
66.7%
33
63.5%
14
82.4%
Male
92
37.2%
60
33.3%
19
36.5%
3
17.6%
Total:
247
180
52
17
Different from English, the enrollment in Math courses consisted of more females (almost 2/3 in all pre-transfer level Math) and a surprising 82.4% in transfer Math.

Table 15. The Ethnicity of Students Enrolled in Math Courses:

MATH 256, 256S
MATH 154, 154A
MATH 152
TRANSFER MATH 
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
AA
7
2.8%
5
2.8%
AI
7
2.8%
5
2.8%
3
5.8%
2
11.8%
ASIAN
5
2.0%
5
2.8%
2
3.8%
1
5.9%
HISPANIC
91
36.8%
81
45.0%
16
30.8%
OTHER
2
0.8%
2
1.1%
1
1.9%
2
11.8%
WHITE
135
54.7%
82
45.6%
30
57.7%
12
70.6%
Total
247
180
52
17
Different from the situation with English, on average, more than half of the students were white. At the transfer level, 70.6% of the students were white. Hispanic students were less likely to progress to Math 152 compared to white students, and none of them took transfer courses.

Table 16. The Educational Goals of Students Enrolled in Math Courses:

MATH 256, 56S
MATH 154, 54A
MATH 152
TRANSFER MATH
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
BA/BS w/ AA/AS
70
28.3%
54
30.00%
20
38.5%
5
29.4%
BA/BS w/o AA/AS
23
9.3%
20
11.1%
6
11.5%
4
23.5%
AA/AS w/o TRANSFER
21
8.5%
12
6.7%
AA/AS/V w/o TRANSFER
12
4.9%
7
3.9%
2
3.8%
1
5.9%
CERT w/o TRANSFER
9
3.6%
8
4.4%
1
1.9%
1
5.9%
CAREER PLANS
20
8.1%
15
8.3%
6
11.5%
4
23.5%
SKILLS
20
8.1%
20
11.1%
1
1.9%
UPDATE
6
2.4%
2
1.1%
LICENSE
6
2.4%
2
1.1%
LEISURE
7
2.8%
4
2.2%
BASIC SKILLS
20
8.1%
15
8.3%
6
11.5%
1
5.9%
GED/HSCH
2
0.8%
1
0.6%
UNDECIDED
15
6.1%
8
4.4%
2
3.8%
1
5.9%
UNKNOWN
16
6.5%
12
6.7%
8
15.4%
Total
247
180
52
17
More than 1/3 (37.6%) of the students declared "Transfer" as their main goal, and no other goals seemed to be dominant besides "transfer". More than half of the students who went into transfer Math courses had their original goal as "transfer". To a certain degree, if a student declared "transfer" as his/her goal, he or she would more likely follow through. What remains to be studied is the high attrition rate for these students: specifically, 1) what happened in their progress which prevented them from accomplishing their goals, and 2) what caused them to change their mind somewhere along the way.

 

 

 

Table 17. The Disabilities of Students Enrolled in Math Courses:

MATH 256, 256S
MATH 154, 154A
MATH 152
TRANSFER MATH* 
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
Acq. Brain Inj.
1
3.2%
1
6.7%
Dev. Delayed
1
3.2%
1
6.7%
Learning Disabled
18
58.1%
6
40.0%
Mobility Impaired
5
16.1%
5
33.3%
4
80.0%
1
100.0%
Other Disability
3
9.7%
1
6.7%
Psych. Disability
2
6.5%
0.0%
Visually Impaired
1
3.2%
1
6.7%
1
20.0%
Total
31
15
5
1
 

A total of 31 students had disabilities, and among them, 58.1% or 18 students had learning disabilities.

Table 17a. Comparisons of Rate of Progress between All Students in the Cohort and Student with Disabilities.
 
 
MATH
256, 256S
MATH
154, 154A
  
MATH 152
  
Transfer
Math
  
 
#
#
prog. rate
#
prog. rate
#
prog. rate
All Students
247
176
71.3%
52
30.0%
17
32.7%
Stds w/ disabilities
31
16
51.6%
5
31.2%
1
20.0%
Compared to all students in the cohort, students with disabilities progressed at a lower rate from Math 256/256S to Math 154/154A (51.6% vs. 71.3%). The rate of progress from Math 154/154A to Math 152 is almost the same for both groups – a little over 30%. The rest of the numbers are too small to draw any meaningful conclusions. Six out of 18 students with Learning Disabilities (the majority of disabilities) progressed from Math 256 to Math 154 at a low rate of 33% compared to the entire group of students with disabilities. None of the students with disabilities went on to Math 152.

 

Profiling: For math courses, this student is likely to be a white female in her mid-twenties.

 

 

READING * COHORT ENROLLED IN READ 205 and READ 255 IN FALL 1994

There was a total of 102 students enrolled in basic skills READ 205 and READ 255 in Fall 1994. The overall success rate for these students was 54.9% and retention rate 75.5%. READ 205 had lower success and retention rates compared to READ 255. Out of this group of 102 students, only 10 students moved on to READ 100. The progress rate was 9.8%. The success and retention rates in ENGL 100 for these 10 students were 50.0% and 90.0% respectively. Compared to the success and retention rates for all students enrolled in READ 100 (n = 35) in Fall 1994, the success rate was 10 percentage points lower, but the retention rate was 10 points higher. However, no conclusions regarding students’ success and retention rates should be drawn from these figures due to the small number of students (n = 10) under study. No students moved on to the transfer level Reading course, READ 52.

 

 

Table 18. Grades from READ 205, READ 255 (Basic Skills Level) - Fall 1994

READ 205
READ 255
Total of Courses
#
%
#
%
#
%
A
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
B
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
C
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
CR
25
44.6%
31
67.4%
56
54.9%
D
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
F
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
IF
4
7.1%
1
2.2%
5
2.8%
NC
9
16.1%
7
15.2%
16
9.1%
W
18
32.1%
7
15.2%
25
14.2%
XX
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
Total
56
46
102
S Rate:
44.6%
67.4%
54.9%
R Rate:
67.9%
84.8%
75.5%
 

 

 

Table 19. Grades from READ 100 (College Level) - comparisons between the cohort from READ 205, READ 255 in Fall 1994 and all students who enrolled in READ 100 in Fall 1994

READ 100
All students in 
READ 100
#
%
#
%
A
5
50.0%
14
40.0%
B
0
0.0%
6
17.1%
C
0
0.0%
1
2.9%
CR
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
D
0
0.0%
1
2.9%
F
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
IF
4
40.0%
1
2.9%
NC
0
0.0%
5
14.3%
W
1
10.0%
7
20.0%
XX
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
Total
10
35
S Rate:
50.0%
60.0%
R Rate:
90.0%
80.0%
 

 

 

Table 20. The Age of Students Enrolled in Reading Courses:

READ 205, 255
READ 100
#
%
#
%
<21
3
2.9%
1
10.0%
21-25
61
59.2%
8
80.0%
26-30
24
23.3%
31-40
2
1.9%
41-50
8
7.8%
1
10.0%
51-60
3
2.9%
61-
1
1.0%
Total
103
10
Of the 103 students, 82.5% were between the ages of 21-30 with most of them in their early 20’s. In other words, the vast majority of the students needing assistance in reading were recent high school students.

 

Table 21. The Gender of Students Enrolled in Reading Courses:

READ 205, 255
READ 100
#
%
#
%
F
46
44.7%
4
40.0%
M
57
55.3%
6
60.0%
Total
103
10
There were more males (55.3%) enrolled than females (44.7%).

Table 22. The Ethnicity of Students Enrolled in Reading Courses:

READ 205, 255
READ 100
#
%
#
%
AA
5
4.9%
AI
2
1.9%
ASIAN
6
5.8%
1
10.0%
HISPANIC
43
41.7%
3
30.0%
OTHER
2
1.9%
1
10.0%
WHITE
45
43.7%
5
50.0%
Total
103
10
The percentage distribution of Hispanic and white students in the group enrolled in Reading 205 and 255 was almost equal (Hispanic 41.7%, white 43.7%). White students were more likely to move on to the collegiate level Reading courses than Hispanic students, although the number is rather small to substantiate such an observation.

Table 23. The Educational Goals of Students Enrolled in Reading Courses:

READ 205, 255
READ 100
#
%
#
%
BA/BS w/ AA/AS
30
29.1%
4
40.0%
BA/BS w/o AA/AS
8
7.8%
2
20.0%
AA/AS w/o TRANSFER
10
9.7%
AA/AS/V w/o TRANSFER
3
2.9%
CERT w/o TRANSFER
7
6.8%
CAREER PLANS
7
6.8%
1
10.0%
SKILLS
10
9.7%
UPDATE
LICENSE
2
1.9%
LEISURE
BASIC SKILLS
7
6.8%
2
20.0%
GED/HSCH
1
1.0%
UNDECIDED
13
12.6%
1
10.0%
UNKNOWN
5
4.9%
Total
103
10
No particular trend can be observed for students with declared educational goals.

Table 24. The Disabilities of Students Enrolled in Reading Courses:

READ 205, 255
READ 100
#
%
#
%
Acq. Brain Inj.
Dev. Delayed
2
11.8%
Learning Disabled
14
82.4%
3
 100%
Mobility Impaired
Other Disability
1
5.9%
Psych. Disability
Visually Impaired
Total
17
3
Of the 103 students under study, 17 of them had a disability (or 17%). Of these, 82.4% had a learning disability.

Profiling: A student enrolled in basic skills Reading courses can be described as either a Hispanic or white student, more likely a male in his early 20’s. Two out of ten times he may have a learning disability.

ESL * COHORT ENROLLED IN ESL 200 and ESL 201 IN FALL 1994

There was a total of 77 students enrolled in basic skills ESL 200 and ESL 201 in Fall 1994. The overall success rate for these students was 68.8% and the retention rate 79.2%. Out of this group of 77 students, 45 students moved on to ESL 100 and ESL 101. The progress rate was 58.4%. The overall success and retention rates in ESL 100 for these 45 students were 62.2% and 73.3% respectively. Compared to the success and retention rates for all students enrolled in ESL 100 and ESL 101 (n = 72) in Fall 1994, the rates were lower. The cohort’s success rate was more than 11 percentage points lower and its retention rate almost 13 percentage points lower.

Out of this group of 45 students in ESL 100 & 101, 14 students moved on to ESL 1, ESL 2, ESL 3 & ESL 4. The progress rate was 31.0%. The success and retention rates in ESL 1,2,3, & 4 (the four classes were combined into one due to small n’s) for these 14 students were the same (92.9%). These rates compared favorably to the success and retention rates for all students enrolled in ESL 1,2,3, & 4 (n = 115) in Fall 1994. However, this may be due to "chance" statistical factors commonly associated with small n’s.

 

Table 25. Grades from ESL 200 and ESL 201 (Basic Skills Level) - Fall 1994

ESL 200
ESL 201
Total of Courses
#
%
#
%
#
%
A
19
29.2%
2
16.7%
21
11.9%
B
15
23.1%
1
8.3%
16
9.1%
C
5
7.7%
0
0.0%
5
2.8%
CR
8
12.3%
3
25.0%
11
6.3%
D
2
3.1%
0
0.0%
2
1.1%
F
1
1.5%
2
16.7%
3
1.7%
IF
1
1.5%
0
0.0%
1
0.6%
NC
1
1.5%
1
8.3%
2
1.1%
W
12
18.5%
3
25.0%
15
8.5%
XX
1
1.5%
0
0.0%
1
0.6%
Total
65
12
77
S Rate:
72.3%
50.0%
68.8%
R Rate:
80.0%
75.0%
79.2%
 

 

Table 26. Grades from ESL 100 and ESL 101 (College Level) - comparisons between the cohort from ESL 200 and ESL 201 in Fall 1994 and all students who enrolled in ESL 100 and ESL 101 in Fall 1994
 
ESL 100
ESL 101
Total of 
ESL 100, 101
All students in
ESL 100
All students in
ESL 101
Overall
for all students in ESL 100, & 101
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
A
11
30.6
3
33.3
14
8.0
14
26.9
11
55.0
25
14.2
B
3
8.3
2
22.2
5
2.8
9
17.3
4
20.0
13
7.4
C
7
19.4
0
0.0
7
4.0
7
13.5
0
0.0
7
4.0
CR
2
5.6
0
0.0
2
1.1
6
11.5
2
10.0
8
4.5
D
1
2.8
0
0.0
1
0.6
1
1.9
0
0.0
1
0.6
F
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
IF
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
6
11.5
1
5.0
7
4.0
NC
3
8.3
1
11.1
4
2.3
1
1.9
0
0.0
1
0.6
W
8
22.2
3
33.3
11
6.3
8
15.4
2
10.0
10
5.7
XX
1
2.8
0
0.0
1
0.6
0
0.0
0
0.0
0
0.0
Total
36
9
45
52
20
72
S Rate:
63.9%
55.6%
62.2%
69.2%
85.0%
73.6%
R Rate:
75.0%
66.7%
73.3%
84.6%
90.0%
86.1%
 

Table 27. Grades from ESL 1, 2, 3, & 4 (Transfer Level) - comparisons between the cohort from ESL 1, 2, 3, & 4 and all students who enrolled in ESL 1,2,3, & 4 in Fall 1994

ESL 1,2,3,4
All students from ESL 1,2,3,4
#
%
#
%
A
4
28.6%
24
20.9%
B
9
64.3%
28
24.3%
C
0
0.0%
26
22.6%
CR
0
0.0%
7
6.1%
D
0
0.0%
9
7.8%
F
0
0.0%
2
1.7%
IF
0
0.0%
1
0.9%
NC
0
0.0%
2
1.7%
W
1
7.1%
16
13.9%
XX
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
Total
14
115
S Rate:
92.9%
73.9%
R Rate:
92.9%
86.1%
More than half of the students (58.4%) from ESL 200 and ESL 201 moved on to ESL 100 and ESL 101. Out of that group, about one third (31.0%) moved on to ESL 1,2,3 & 4. Eighteen percent of the students from the 1994 cohort (ESL 200 and ESL 201) progressed from basic skills ESL courses to transfer level ESL courses.

 

 

 

 

Table 28. The Age of Students Enrolled in ESL Courses:

ESL 200, 201
ESL 100, 101
TRANSFER ESL
#
%
#
%
#
%
<21
2
2.6%
1
2.2%
21-25
4
5.2%
5
11.1%
2
14.3%
26-30
17
22.1%
9
20.0%
2
14.3%
31-40
14
18.2%
7
15.6%
4
28.6%
41-50
23
29.9%
15
33.3%
5
35.7%
51-60
15
19.5%
7
15.6%
61-
2
2.6%
1
2.2%
1
7.1%
Total
77
45
14
The majority of the students enrolled in basic skills ESL courses were non-traditional students 26 years and up. Age does not seem to be a factor in students’ progress from basic skills courses to higher level courses.

 

Table 29. The Gender of Students Enrolled in ESL Courses:

ESL 200, 201
ESL 100, 101
TRANSFER ESL
#
%
#
%
#
%
F
43
55.8%
28
62.2%
9
64.3%
M
34
44.2%
17
37.8%
5
35.7%
Total
77
45
14
More females (55.8%) enrolled in ESL courses and had a higher likelihood to progress to higher level courses compared to male students.

Table 30. The Ethnicity of Students Enrolled in ESL Courses:

ESL 200, 201
ESL 100, 101
TRANSFER ESL
#
%
#
%
#
%
AA
AI
ASIAN
6
7.8%
4
8.9%
2
14.3%
HISPANIC
70
90.9%
41
91.1%
12
85.7%
OTHER
WHITE
1
1.3%
Total
77
45
14
Disproportionately, 90.9% of the students at the basic skills level were Hispanic.

Table 31. The Educational Goals of Students Enrolled in ESL Courses:

ESL 200, 201
ESL 100, 101
TRANSFER ESL
#
%
#
%
#
%
BA/BS w/ AA/AS
3
3.9%
2
4.4%
4
28.6%
BA/BS w/o AA/AS
AA/AS w/o TRANSFER
3
3.9%
AA/AS/V w/o TRANSFER
CERT w/o TRANSFER
2
2.6%
1
2.2%
CAREER PLANS
3
3.9%
6
13.3%
SKILLS
10
13.0%
7
15.6%
UPDATE
2
2.6%
LICENSE
1
1.3%
LEISURE
7
9.1%
4
8.9%
2
14.3%
BASIC SKILLS
37
48.1%
20
44.4%
8
57.1%
GED/HSCH
UNDECIDED
3
3.9%
2
4.4%
UNKNOWN
6
7.8%
3
6.7%
Total
77
45
14
 

Different from students in English, Math and Reading, almost half of the students declared "to improve basic skills" as their educational goal.

None of the ESL students identified having a disability.

Profiling: More likely than not, an ESL basic skills student is a Hispanic female in her late 20’s with the educational goal of improving her basic skills.

 

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Summary Data from February 1997
Study of the Progress of Basic Skills Students
Fall 1994 by Office of Institutional Research

 
 
Classes Retention Success Progression to Next Course Success in Transfer Level Course in 4 Semesters
English 255
67.4%
55.7%
45.7%
10.0%
Math 256/256S
80.2%
48.6%
40.9%
3.2%
Reading 205/255
75.5%
54.9%
9.8%
  
ESL 200/201
79.2%
68.8%
58.4%
16.9%
 
 
Fall 1994 through Spring 1996
 
Retention
Success
 
F94
S95
F95
S96
F94
S95
F95
S96
Engl 255
67%
66%
63%
57%
56%
52%
47%
42%
Math 256
77%
80%
78%
78%
41%
50%
34%
50%
Read 205
68%
65%
85%
66%
45%
50%
64%
47%
Read 255
85%
47%
86%
75%
67%
32%
68%
53%
ESL 200
80%
83%
84%
68%
72%
63%
73%
61%
ESL 201
75%
83%
100%
81%
50%
50%
100%
50%
COHORT ENROLLED IN ENGL 255 IN FALL 1994

About half of the students (45.7%) from ENGL 255 moved on to ENGL 100. Out of that group, about a third (30.7%) moved on to ENGL 1A. Fourteen percent of the students from the initial cohort (ENGL 255) progressed from basic skills English courses to transfer level English courses. Students from the cohort performed better than the comparison group students-all students who enrolled in the same levels of courses in Fall 1994.

Profiling: For a student enrolled in basic skills English courses, he most likely was a young Hispanic male. If he had a disability, it would be learning disability.

COHORT ENROLLED IN MATH 256 and MATH 256S IN FALL 1994

A large percentage of the students (71.3%) from MATH 256 and MATH 256S moved on to MATH 154 and MATH 154A. Out of that group, about one third (30.0%) moved on to MATH 152. Out of the 52 students in MATH 152, about one third of them (32.7%) moved on to transfer MATH courses. Less than 7% of the students from the initial cohort (MATH 256 and MATH 256S) progressed from basic skills MATH courses to transfer level MATH courses. The success and retention rates of the cohort students in MATH 154 were below those of the comparison group. Students who went on to MATH 152, performed better than the comparison group. Only a few students moved on to transfer Math courses. Their number was too small to draw any conclusions regarding their success and retention rates.

Profiling: For math courses, this student is more likely a white female in her mid-twenties.

 

COHORT ENROLLED IN READ 205 and READ 255 IN FALL 1994

Out of a group of 102 students enrolled in READ 205 and 255, only 10 students moved on to READ 100. The progress rate was 9.8%. Compared to the success and retention rates for all students enrolled in READ 100 (n = 35) in Fall 1994, the success rate was 10 percentage points lower, but the retention rate was 10 points higher. However, no conclusions should be drawn from these figures because of the small number of students (n = 10) that were under study. There were no students who moved on to the transfer level Reading course, READ 52.

Profiling: A student enrolled in basic skills Reading courses can be described as either a Hispanic or white student, more likely a male in his early 20’s. Two out of ten times he may have a learning disability.

 

COHORT ENROLLED IN ESL 200 and ESL 201 IN FALL 1994

More than half of the students (58.4%) from ESL 200 and ESL 201 moved on to ESL 100 and ESL 101. Out of that group, about one third (31.0%) moved on to ESL 1,2,3 & 4. Eighteen percent of the students from the 1994 cohort (ESL 200 and ESL 201) progressed from basic skills ESL courses to transfer level ESL courses. Compared to the success and retention rates for all students enrolled in ESL 100 and ESL 101 (n = 72) in Fall 1994, these rates were lower. The cohort’s success rate was more than 11 percentage points lower and its retention rate almost 13 percentage points lower. These rates compared favorably to the success and retention rates for all students enrolled in ESL 1,2,3, & 4 (n = 115) in Fall 1994. However, this may be due to "chance" statistical factors commonly associated with small n’s.

Profiling: More likely than not, an ESL basic skills student is a Hispanic female in her late 20’s with the educational goal of improving her basic skills.

 

 
 
 
APPENDIX
 

s a reference, the study employed the success and retention rates for basic skills courses in English, Math, Reading and ESL courses from Fall 1994 to Spring 1996. This could be used to compare primarily with the success and retention rates for the basic skills courses in this study. There appeared to be a drop in both success and retention rates in ENGL 255 courses over the semesters. The success rate dropped by 14% and retention by 10%. For MATH 256, the trend seemed to be steady with Fall semesters reporting lower success rates, but not lower retention rates. The trend for READ 205 was steady, except for the semester of Fall 1995 which seemed to show an increase in both success and retention. Similar to MATH 256, READ 255 showed a large drop in success and retention in Spring semesters. ESL 200 saw a pattern of drops in success rates in spring semesters. The retention rates remained steady until Spring 1996. The numbers for ESL 201 were too small to conduct meaningful observations.

 

 

Table A1. Longitudinal Analysis of Success and Retention Rates in ENGL 255
 
ENGL 255
F94 S95 F95 S96
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
A
19
8.6%
0
0.0%
11
4.5%
7
3.4%
B
4
1.8%
0
0.0%
10
4.1%
3
1.5%
C
1
0.5%
0
0.0%
12
4.9%
0
0.0%
CR
99
44.8%
103
51.8%
80
32.9%
77
37.4%
D
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
3
1.2%
0
0.0%
F
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
IF
5
2.3%
5
2.5%
11
4.5%
5
2.4%
NC
21
9.5%
24
12.1%
27
11.1%
25
12.1%
W
65
29.4%
67
33.7%
79
32.5%
87
42.2%
XX
7
3.2%
0.0%
10
4.1%
2
1.0%
Total
221
199
243
206
S RATE:
56%
52%
47%
42%
R RATE:
67%
66%
63%
57%
 

 

 

Table A2. Longitudinal Analysis of Success and Retention Rates in Math 256
 
MATH 256
F94 S95 F95 S96
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
A
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
B
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
C
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
CR
85
41.3%
91
50.3%
56
34.4%
69
49.3%
D
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
F
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
IF
15
7.3%
7
3.9%
13
8.0%
6
4.3%
NC
58
28.2%
46
25.4%
58
35.6%
33
23.6%
W
41
19.9%
34
18.8%
27
16.6%
25
17.9%
XX
7
3.4%
3
1.7%
9
5.5%
6
4.3%
Total
206
181
163
140
S RATE:
41%
50%
34%
50%
R RATE:
77%
80%
78%
78%
 

 

Table A3. Longitudinal Analysis of Success and Retention Rates in READ 205
 
READ 205
F94 S95 F95 S96
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
A
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
B
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
C
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
CR
25
43.9%
13
50.0%
42
62.7%
22
46.8%
D
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
F
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
IF
4
7.0%
0
0.0%
4
6.0%
2
4.3%
NC
9
15.8%
4
15.4%
10
14.9%
7
14.9%
W
18
31.6%
9
34.6%
8
11.9%
15
31.9%
XX
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
2
3.0%
1
2.1%
Total
57
26
67
47
S RATE:
45%
50%
64%
47%
R RATE:
68%
65%
85%
66%
 

 

 

 

Table A4. Longitudinal Analysis of Success and Retention Rates in READ 255
 
READ 255
F94 S95 F95 S96
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
A
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
B
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
C
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
CR
31
67.4%
15
31.9%
39
68.4%
28
52.8%
D
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
F
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
IF
1
2.2%
3
6.4%
3
5.3%
2
3.8%
NC
7
15.2%
4
8.5%
7
12.3%
10
18.9%
W
7
15.2%
24
51.1%
7
12.3%
13
24.5%
XX
0
0.0%
1
2.1%
1
1.8%
0
0.0%
Total
46
47
57
53
S RATE:
67%
32%
68%
53%
R RATE:
85%
47%
86%
75%
 

 

Table A5. Longitudinal Analysis of Success and Retention Rates in ESL 200
 
ESL 200
F94 S95 F95 S96
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
A
19
29.2%
13
25.0%
12
21.8%
7
18.4%
B
15
23.1%
9
17.3%
10
18.2%
8
21.1%
C
5
7.7%
10
19.2%
16
29.1%
5
13.2%
CR
8
12.3%
1
1.9%
2
3.6%
3
7.9%
D
2
3.1%
6
11.5%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
F
1
1.5%
2
3.8%
2
3.6%
1
2.6%
IF
1
1.5%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
NC
1
1.5%
2
3.8%
4
7.3%
2
5.3%
W
12
18.5%
9
17.3%
9
16.4%
12
31.6%
XX
1
1.5%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
Total
65
52
55
38
S RATE:
72%
63%
73%
61%
R RATE:
80%
83%
84%
68%
 

 

 

Table A6. Longitudinal Analysis of Success and Retention Rates in ESL 201
 
ESL 201
F94 S95 F95 S96
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
A
2
16.7%
1
8.3%
7
63.6%
1
6.3%
B
1
8.3%
3
25.0%
2
18.2%
4
25.0%
C
0
0.0%
2
16.7%
2
18.2%
0
0.0%
CR
3
25.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
4
25.0%
D
0
0.0%
2
16.7%
0
0.0%
3
18.8%
F
2
16.7%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
1
6.3%
IF
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
NC
1
8.3%
2
16.7%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
W
3
25.0%
2
16.7%
0
0.0%
2
12.5%
XX
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
1
6.3%
Total
12
12
11
16
S RATE:
50%
50%
100%
56%
R RATE:
75%
83%
100%
81%
 

jlpc/c:\moffice7\mword7\matric96\tracking\claire\r&s_full.doc
jlpc/c:\moffice7\mword7\matric96\tracking\claire\r&s_tbls.xls (all data tables)
jlpc/c:\moffice7\mword7\matric96\tracking\claire\r&s_chts.xls (graphic)
jlpc/c:\moffice7\mword7\matric96\tracking\claire\*.dbf (foxpro files by course by level by group)
 

||OIR HOME||      ||OIR REPORTS||