Transcript Slide 1

An Alternate Approach to Studying
Transfer Student Outcomes
Sam Houston State University
Office of Institutional Research & Assessment
Suresh Gangireddy, GRA
Lakshmi Kokatla, GRA
Fang Duan, Former GRA
Xiaohong Li, GRA
Rita Caso, Director
TAIR 2008 Conference, 2/6/08
1
PRESENTATION OUTLINE
SAM HOUSTON STATE UNIVERSITY BACK GROUND
WHY DO WE STUDY TRANSFER STUDENTS?
HOW DO WE STUDY TRANSFER STUDENTS?
FREQUENTLY USED METHOD
PROPOSED NEW METHOD
COMPARING FREQUENTLY USED METHOD TO PROPOSED
NEW METHOD
CONCLUSION
TAIR 2008 Conference, 2/6/08
2
ABOUT SAM HOUSTON STATE UNIVERSITY
(SHSU)
Located in Huntsville, TX (Piney Hills, East TX) 90 miles north of Houston
Founded in 1879, member of the Texas State University System, and Carnegie Classified
Doctoral, Professional Dominant
There are 79 undergraduate degree programs, 52 masters' programs, and 5 doctoral
programs
There are 5 colleges within the university: Arts and Sciences, Business Administration,
Criminal Justice, Education, and Humanities and Social Sciences
 Fall 2007 Total Enrollment of approximately 16,416 of whom 28% are minorities, and 1%
are International students
Average class size is 31 students and the Faculty: Student ratio is 1:20
 SAT Admissions standards are above the national average
 In Fall 2007, 1755 new transfers enter SHSU, compared to an 2213 New Freshmen.
TAIR 2008 Conference, 2/6/08
3
WHY DO WE STUDY TRANSFER
STUDENTS?
To determine if we are providing the best environment
& experiences to promote their success and to improve
these for better outcomes
i.e.,
•Enrollment Mgmt
•Enrichment and Support Programs;
•Student Services
•Academic Depts with Articulation Agreements
To satisfy external accountability requirements
TAIR 2008 Conference, 2/6/08
TX Association of Institutional Research (TAIR) 2008 Conference, 2/5-7/08
4
HOW DO WE STUDY TRANSFER STUDENTS?
Examine outcomes such as retention, graduation rates
and final GPAs by..
Comparing outcomes among subgroups within
the transfer population. I.e.,
•Gender,
•Ethnicity
•Type of transfer
•Entry cohort
•# of SCHs transferred at entry, etc.
Comparing them against pre-existing “idealized,”
external, ‘or internal benchmarks
Comparing transfer student outcomes to native
student outcomes.
TAIR 2008 Conference, 2/6/08
TX Association of Institutional Research (TAIR) 2008 Conference, 2/5-7/08
5
EXAMPLE:
Comparison with pre-existing benchmarks
external, or internal benchmarks
New Transfer Cohort 2001
Idealized benchmarks:
• Graduation within three years if entering with 30 or more credits
o 54% of Transfers with >29 credits graduate in three years
• Graduation within four years if entering with <30 credits
o 40% of Transfers with <30 credits graduate in four years
External benchmarks:
•State benchmark for Fall 2005 Cohort = 44%
Internal benchmarks
TAIR 2008 Conference, 2/6/08
6
EXAMPLE:
Comparing Transfers to New Freshman Natives
Who Entered in Same Year
Comparison of Graduation Rates up to S2007 by ethnicity for..
•Students who entered SHSU as New Freshmen (NFN)
•University Transfers (UT)
•Community College Transfers (CCT)
Cohort Fall 2001(NFN/UT/CCT) Graduation rate by
Ethnicity S2007
Graduation Rate
120.00%
100.00%
80.00%
66.67%
58.33%
60.00%
40.00%
25%
32.83%
39.04%
43.18%
Fall 2001 Cohort NFN
20.00%
Fall 2001 Cohort UT
0.00%
Fall 2001 Cohort CCT
Ethnicity
TAIR 2008 Conference, 2/6/08
7
EXAMPLE:
Comparing Transfers to New Freshman Natives
Who Entered in Same Year on Graduation GPA
Comparison of GPA up to S2007 by ethnicity for..
•Students who entered SHSU as New Freshmen (NFN)
•University Transfers (UT)
•Community College Transfers (CCT)
Graduation GPA
Cohort Fall 2001 (NFN/CCT/UT) GPA by Ethnicity up
to S2007
3.50
3.00
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
3.15
3.21
3.28
2.81
2.90
3.03
Fall 2001 Cohort NFN
Fall 2001 Cohort UT
Fall 2001 Cohort CCT
Ethnicity
TAIR 2008 Conference, 2/6/08
8
ALTERNATE APPROACH:
Comparing New Transfers to Credit-Comparable Natives
Graduation Rates of F2001University Transfers (UT) and Community College Transfers (CCT)
with credits between 12-30; 31-45; 46-60; and >60
VS.
Native Students with Comparable Credits in F2001 (CCN)
Cohort Fall 2001 CCN/UT/CCT Graduation Rate (up to
S2007)
70.00%
65.11%
60.59%
60.00%
Graduation Rate
54.12%
50.00%
47.35%
40.00%
Fall 2001 Cohort CCN
30.00%
Fall 2001 Cohort UT
20.00%
Fall 2001 Cohort CCT
10.00%
0.00%
Entering with Entering with Entering with Entering with
12-30 credits 31-45 credits 46-60 credits 61 credits or
more
Credits
Note: CCN’s are Students who are previously enrolled as Native Freshmen.
TAIR 2008 Conference, 2/6/08
9
Comparing Results
Using Native New Freshmen (NFN) vs.
Credit-Comparable Natives as Cohorts (CCN)
By Ethnicity, On Graduation Rates
Cohort Fall 2001(CCN/UT/CCT) Graduation
rate by Ethnicity up to 2007
Cohort Fall 2001(NFN/UT/CCT) Graduation
rate by Ethnicity up to S2007
120.00%
100.00%
80.00%
66.67%
58.33%
60.00%
39.04%
40.00%
25%
43.18%
32.83%
20.00%
0.00%
Graduation Rate
Graduation Rate
120.00%
100.00%
80.00%
57.53%
60.00%
40.00%
42.50%
51.68%
46.84%
39.39%
49.69%
20.00%
0.00%
Fall 2001 Cohort CCN
Fall 2001 Cohort NFN
Ethnicity
Fall 2001 Cohort UT
Fall 2001 Cohort CCT
TAIR 2008 Conference, 2/6/08
Ethnicity
Fall 2001 Cohort UT
Fall 2001 Cohort CCT
10
Comparing Results
Using Native New Freshmen (NNF) vs.
Credit-Comparable Natives as Cohorts (CCN)
By Ethnicity, On Graduation GPA
Cohort Fall 2001 CCN/UT/CCT Graduation GPA
by Ethnicity (up to S2007)
Cohort Fall 2001 (NFN/UT/CCT) Graduation GPA
by Ethnicity up to S2007
3.00
3.50
3.15
3.28
3.21
2.81
2.90
3.03
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
Graduation GPA
Graduation GPA
3.50
2.89
3.00
2.50
3.04
2.98
2.70
2.84
2.94
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
0.00
Fall 2001 Cohort CCN
Fall 2001 Cohort NFN
Fall 2001 Cohort UT
Ethnicity
Fall 2001 Cohort CCT
TAIR 2008 Conference, 2/6/08
Ethnicity
Fall 2001 Cohort UT
Fall 2001 Cohort CCT
11
Comparing Results
Using Native New Freshmen (NFN) vs.
Credit-Comparable Natives (CCN) as Cohorts
By Gender, On Graduation GPA
3.30
3.20
3.10
3.00
2.90
2.80
2.70
2.60
2.50
Cohort Fall 2001 (CCN/UT/CCT) GPA by
Gender up to 2007
3.30
3.20
2.98
Fall 2001 Cohort NFN
Fall 2001 Cohort UT
2.76
Fall 2001 Cohort CCT
Graduation GPA
Graduation GPA
Cohort Fall 2001 (NFN/UT/CCT) GPA by
Gender up to S2007
3.10
3.05
3.00
2.86
2.90
Fall 2001 Cohort CCN
2.80
Fall 2001 Cohort UT
2.70
Fall 2001 Cohort CCT
2.60
F Female
M Male
Gender
2.50
F Female
M Male
Gender
TAIR 2008 Conference, 2/6/08
TX Association of Institutional Research (TAIR) 2008 Conference, 2/5-7/08
12
WHO ARE SHSU’S TRANSFER STUDENTS?
Comparison of Fall 2001
Cohorts
Gender
Age at entry
Ethnicities
Credit Comparable
Natives
New Transfers
Male
Female
41.80%
47.28%
43.60%
58.20%
51.63%
56.40%
18-21
22-25
>25
94.70%
35.61%
65.88%
1.00%
21.36%
18.52%
1.24%
9.09%
15.60%
American Indian
Asian
African American
Hispanic
International
White
0.50%
1.30%
0.44%
0.90%
0.70%
1.10%
13.70%
15.10%
10.40%
9.10%
9.20%
8.60%
1.10%
0.55%
1.10%
74.70%
72.80%
77.80%
1st
Top 5
Graduating
Majors
New Freshmen
Natives
2nd
3rd
4th
5th
Criminal Justice
Gen Bussiness
Adminstration
Kinesiology
Academic Studies -El Ed Criminal Justice
Academic Studies–El
Criminal Justice
Ed
Gen Business
Gen Bussiness
Administration
Adminstration
Marketing
General Studies
Kinesiology
Political Science
Kinesiology
Accounting
TAIR 2008 Conference, 2/6/08
TX Association of Institutional Research (TAIR) 2008 Conference, 2/5-7/08
13
How Different Are the NFN and CCN Comparison Populations?
Graduation rates upto 2007
NFN
CCN
AM American Indian/Alaskan Native
25.00%
42.50%
AP Asian Or Pacific Islander
66.67%
57.53%
BL Black, Non-Hispanic
32.83%
51.68%
HI Hispanic
39.04%
46.84%
IN International
58.33%
39.39%
Difference
-17.50%
9.14%
-18.85%
-7.80%
18.94%
UT
.
33.33%
CCT
66.67%
63.64%
46.67%
44.09%
50.00%
50.00%
57.27%
100.00%
WH White, Non-Hispanic
43.18%
49.69%
-6.51%
56.10%
56.83%
NFN
CCN
51.63%
Difference
-5.71%
UT
55.47%
CCT
62.43%
F Female
45.93%
M Male
39.92%
47.28%
-7.36%
52.71%
46.89%
Cumulative GPA up to S2007
NFN
CCN
Difference
UT
CCT
AM American Indian/Alaskan Native
3.15
2.89
0.26
.
3.08
AP Asian Or Pacific Islander
3.21
2.98
0.23
2.83
3.18
BL Black, Non-Hispanic
2.81
2.70
0.11
2.78
2.71
HI Hispanic
2.90
2.84
0.06
3.08
2.84
IN International
3.28
3.04
0.24
3.26
2.70
WH White, Non-Hispanic
3.03
2.94
0.09
3.05
2.97
NFN
CCN
Difference
UT
CCT
F Female
3.05
2.98
0.07
3.18
3.02
M Male
2.86
2.76
0.10
2.87
2.79
TAIR 2008 Conference, 2/6/08
14
How Different Are the NFN and CCN Comparison Populations?
Cohort Fall 2001 (NFN/CCN/Difference)
Graduation Rates by Gender up to S2007
Cohort Fall 2001 (NFN/CCN/Difference)
Graduation Rates by Gender up to S2007
60.00%
80.00%
70.00%
60.00%
50.00%
40.00%
30.00%
20.00%
10.00%
0.00%
-10.00%
-20.00%
-30.00%
50.00%
40.00%
30.00%
NFN
20.00%
NFN
CCN
CCN
Difference
10.00%
Difference
0.00%
F Female
M Male
-10.00%
-20.00%
TAIR 2008 Conference, 2/6/08
15
How Different Are the NFN and CCN Comparison Populations?
Cohort Fall 2001 (NFN/CCN/Difference)
Graduation GPA by Gender up to S2007
Cohort Fall 2001 (NFN/CCN/Difference) GPA
by Gender up to S2007
3.50
3.50
3.00
2.50
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
3.00
2.50
2.00
NFN
NFN
CCN
1.50
Difference
CCN
Difference
1.00
0.50
0.00
F Female
TAIR 2008 Conference, 2/6/08
M Male
16
Conclusion
•
One justification for comparing New Transfers to Credit-Comparable Natives, rather than
Freshman New Natives is that this improves the authenticity of the comparison based on
greater underlying similarities between these groups
•
However, in this case, the CCNs were NOT much more similar to the New
Transfer s except in its representation of older students
•
With regard to graduation rate outcomes of New Transfers compared to Credit
Comparable Natives, the CCN population did provide a closer comparison than New
Freshman Natives.
TAIR 2008 Conference, 2/6/08
17
Conclusion
HOWEVER, regarding GPA outcomes…
•The CCN population was found to have lower GPAs than the NFNs overall, with statistical
significance between genders
•There was also statistically significant difference between CNN and NFN population GPAs
among Asian, Black and White students .
•
Among both males and females , the GPAs of CCNs are less comparable to New
Transfers
•
Among Whites, the GPAs of the CCNs were less comparable to New Transfers
•
Among Asians, the GPAs of CCNs were more comparable to University Transfer
Students
•
Among Blacks, GPAs of CCNs were more comparable to Community College
Transfers.
TAIR 2008 Conference, 2/6/08
18