Transcript Crossroads Assessment

Crossroads
Assessment:
Spring 2013
JON GORGOSZ
GRADUATE INTERN
MASTODON ADVISING CENTER
IPFW
Purpose

To assess the crossroads program and produce data that
illustrates in a quantifiable manner the numbers of students
successfully completing the transition from Ivy Tech to IPFW.
Crossroads’ Mission Statement

The Crossroads program is a partnership between Indiana UniversityPurdue University Fort Wayne and Ivy Tech Community CollegeNortheast, designed to help transfer students save time, money, and
credits. Students may take a variety of courses at Ivy Tech, then
transfer courses smoothly to IPFW. Additionally, Ivy Tech and IPFW
have partnered to offer associate-to-bachelor's degree programs
that allow students to earn an associate degree at Ivy Tech, then
complete a bachelor's degree at IPFW (Crossroads Website).
Pertinent Questions

How many students were entering IPFW through the Crossroads
program?

Conversely, how many were not?

What types of students were entering IPFW?

What level of success and struggles (defined by G.P.A., Continued
enrollment and graduation) were these students having at IPFW?

How many credits were students collecting prior to transfer and at
IPFW?
Method

For the purpose of precision, the students were separated into 52
different cohorts based on the manner in which they entered the
crossroads system (Established by prior academic history).

The data was collected by cross checking AdvisorTrac, Banner and
Student Academic Transcripts.

All data was entered manually.

Names were generated by crosschecking individuals with 800 numbers
and 900 numbers by reports compiled from the AdvisorTrac system.

These names consist of students “crossing over” through the program during
the 2010-2012 academic years.
Method Continued

For clarity, the analysis does not focus on dual-enrollment students
or guest students attending both institutions.

Rather, this analysis solely focuses on students entering or re-entering
IPFW through enrollment at Ivy Tech.

A separate analysis is needed for IPFW students who enter Ivy Tech
as guest students to earn credits.
Definitions

Crossroad Student (2 types) – An Ivy Tech student who has made
contact with the Crossroads advisor (email or meeting) and enrolled
at IPFW.

Active Crossroad’s Student – A student still enrolled in IPFW classes (as of
Spring 13’) who entered through the Crossroads program and had
contact with the Crossroads advisor (email or meeting).

Inactive Crossroad’s student –A student enrolled at one time at IPFW
(Prior to Spring 13’) who entered through the Crossroads program and
had contact with the Crossroads advisor (email or meeting). The student
could have left the university voluntarily, been dismissed or graduated.
Definitions Continued

Perspective Student (2 types) – A student who has not enrolled at
IPFW at any time but has been in contact with the Crossroads
advisor (email or meeting) about the process of entering IPFW
through the program.

Active Student – Contact with Crossroads advisor within the last year

Inactive Student – NO contact with the Crossroads advisor over the last
year
Definitions Continued

Registered Student (2 types)– A student registered within the
Crossroads program (received emails) but did not meet with the
Crossroads advisor at any point (email or meeting).

Attending – Student attended IPFW

Did not Attend – Student has not attended IPFW
Definitions Continued

Admitted Student – An Ivy Tech student admitted into IPFW who had
contact with the Crossroads advisor (email or meeting) but has not
registered or enrolled in classes.
Cohort System

52 Cohorts designated based on prior enrollment history and the
number of credits earned.

those earning over 42 credits hours from Ivy Tech prior to transferring.

Those with dual credit

Those who left a university due to academic and non-academic issues.

The academic path of the specific individual.

Enrollment at IVY Tech, IPFW, Purdue, Indiana, other university or other
community college taken into account.
Most Significant Cohorts

CR1 = Highschool (no dual credit) > Ivy Tech Crossroads (-42 Hours) >
IPFW

CR2 = Highschool (no dual credit) > Ivy Tech Crossroads (+42 Hours)
> IPFW
Most Significant Cohorts Continued

CR35 = Highschool (no dual credit) > Other university (not
academically dismissed) >Ivy Tech Crossroads (-42) > IPFW

CR36 = Highschool (no dual credit) > Other university (not
academically dismissed) >Ivy Tech Crossroads (+42) > IPFW
Most Significant Cohorts Continued

CR9 = Highschool (no dual credit) > IPFW (academically dismissed) >
Ivy Tech Crossroads (-42) > IPFW

CR11 = Highschool (no dual credit) > IPFW (academically dismissed)
> Ivy Tech Crossroads (42+) > IPFW
Most Significant Cohorts Continued

CR13 = Highschool (no dual credit) > IPFW (not academically
dismissed) > Ivy Tech Crossroads (+42) > IPFW

CR15 = Highschool (no dual credit) > IPFW (not academically
dismissed) > Ivy Tech Crossroads (-42) > IPFW
Overall Results

205 students have successfully entered IPFW through direct contact
with the Crossroads advisor over the two year period studied.

205 of the 524 students entering IPFW from Ivy Tech transferred through
contact with the Crossroads advisor.

Active =

120 students registered for Fall ‘13

155 students registered for Spring ’13

Inactive = 85 (not registered for Fall ‘13)

Admitted (did not attend) = 32
Overall Results


Perspective Students = 375 Students

Active = 29

Inactive = 346
Registered Students

Attended = 24

Did not attend = 143
Crossroads G.P.A. Results

Students Entering IPFW from Ivy Tech with 42 transfer hours or more have a
significantly higher G.P.A.
G.P.A. Comparison (Students
Attending Previous Institution)
G.P.A. (Students Attended Previous
Institution)
4
3.8
3.6
3.4
3.2
3
2.8
2.6
2.4
2.2
2
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
4
3.8
3.6
3.4
3.2
3
2.8
2.6
2.4
2.2
2
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
CR1
CR2
CR35
CR36
G.P.A. Results by Transfer Credit
Hours Continued
4
3.8
3.6
3.4
3.2
3
2.8
2.6
2.4
2.2
2
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
G.P.A. Comparison for Academically
Dismissed Students
CR9
CR11
G.P.A. Comparison (Re-entry Students)
4
3.8
3.6
3.4
3.2
3
2.8
2.6
2.4
2.2
2
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
CR13
CR15
G.P.A. Results by Transfer Credit
Hours Continued

Additionally, re-entry and re-admits students who have completed
over 42 credit hours at Ivy Tech have an increased G.P.A. upon
return to IPFW.
G.P.A. (Re-admit Students After
Returning)
4
3.75
3.5
3.25
3
2.75
2.5
2.25
2
1.75
1.5
1.25
1
0.75
0.5
0.25
0
CR9
CR11
G.P.A. Comparison (Re-entry
Students after Returning)
4
3.75
3.5
3.25
3
2.75
2.5
2.25
2
1.75
1.5
1.25
1
0.75
0.5
0.25
0
CR13
CR15
Dismissal and Probation Status by
Transfer Credit Hours

Students earning under 42 hours prior to entrance into IPFW were
more likely to be placed on probation or dismissed.
Dismissed/Probation
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
CR1
CR2
CR5
Dismissed

CR9
CR15
Probation
This relationship is concurrent with national trends analyzing similar
programs within other institutions. (Santos & Sutton, 2012)
Graduations Rates by Transfer
Credit Hours Continued

Additionally, only students with over 42 transfer hours graduated
from IPFW from the period analyzed.

Number Graduated = 19

Percentage graduated = 9.26%
Graduated Students By Cohort
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
CR1
CR2
CR9
CR11
CR13
CR15
CR35
CR36
Credit Hours Analysis

Credit Hours vary but most require over 120 hours to graduate when
crossing over.

Due to placement into classes that do not transfer to IPFW

Confusion over articulation agreements

Many students take the wrong classes, the agreements change or they try to
“self-advise.”
Credit Hour Analysis Continued
Transfer Hours/ Credit Hours IPFW/ Total Hours
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
CR1
CR2
CR9
Transfer Hours
CR11
CR13
Credit Hours IPFW
CR15
Total Hours
CR35
CR36
Enrollment By Semester
Enrolled/Spr '13/F '13/ Previous Spr '13
250
200
150
100
50
0
Total Enrolled
Enrolleld Spr '13
Enrolled F'13
Previously Enrolled Spr
'13
Enrollment by Semester for Each
Cohort
Enrollment By Cohort
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
CR1
CR2
CR9
# Enrolled (SP13)
CR11
CR13
# Enrolled (F13)
CR15
# Previously Enrolled
CR35
CR36
Results of Adult Learners

A large number of students in the Crossroads program were
returning adults (Born before 1984).
Adult Returning Students
250
200
150
100
50
0
Admitted
Adult Returning
National Trends

There are numerous studies analyzing the process of transferring
from a community college to a 4-year university.

The term “swirling students” defines the trends and behavior of students
entering IPFW through the Crossroads program (Santos & Sutton, p. 969970, 2012).

These students often transfer back and forth from each institution.

Students often dual enroll between each institution.

Though many professionals see the process of transferring as a linear
progression, this data illustrates the opposite.
National Trends

Studies illustrate that students transferring over 42 credit hours are
much more likely to be successful at a 4-year university (Santos &
Sutton, p. 978, 2012).

Higher Graduation Rates

Higher G.P.A.

Higher Continued Enrollment Status
Recomendations

Readdress mission statement of Crossroads program.

Is the goal to provide a cost effective way to earn credit from Ivy Tech
for students?

Is the goal to earn an associates degree for the student to enter IPFW?

Is the goal to earn enough credits (12+ according to admissions) to reenter IPFW? (Rethink the value of this option)
Recommendations Cont.

Define Articulation Agreements

Studies from other universities illustrate that creating standardized,
comparable articulation agreements increases graduation rates and
lowers total credit hours taken by students (Santos & Sutton, 2012).



These well-defined agreements benefit student success.
While viewing records in AdvisorTrac, it became apparent that
confusion over articulation agreements was present.

Especially with Ivy Tech Advisor

The agreements often changed while an individual was in the crossroad
program (no grandfathering system present).

This led to student confusion, frustration and animosity towards IPFW.
5-year plans? Dual-enrollment? Better communication between
institutions?
Recommendations Cont.


Provide academic support to students entering IPFW from Ivy Tech
with under 42 transfer credit hours.

National Trends as well as data collected demonstrate that these
students are more likely to struggle.

CASA’s role?

Program for students re-entering the institution, not just readmits
Configure these student support systems to adhere to the needs of
the numerous adult returning students.

What specific services do these students need to be successful?
Recommendations Cont.

Create an organizational structure that can support the program
(Do not rely on a single advisor).

Appoint a liaison for the program to communicate between IPFW and
Ivy Tech.

Appoint an admissions represenitive who can answer questions
pertaining to financial aid and the admissions process.

Create a position that supports students, especially those under 42
transfer credit hours, in adjusting to the transition from Ivy Tech to IPFW.
Acknowledgements

Sandra Michel – Operations Assistant, IPFW

Kim Myers – Crossroads Advisor, Mastodon Advising Center, IPFW

Rhonda Meriwether – Associate Director, Mastodon Advising Center,
IPFW

Kristine Frye – Mastodon Advising Center, IPFW

Dr. Kasey Price – Director of Special Projects, IPFW

Dr. Bruce Busby, AVC, Academic Success Center, IPFW
Works Cited

Santos, S., & Sutton, F. (2012). Swirling students: Articulation between a
major community college district and a state-supported research
university.Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 36(12),
967-981. Retrieved from
http://www.tandfonline.com.proxy.lib.siu.edu/doi/pdf/10.1080/10668920
903182641
Questions?
Contact: [email protected]