Rethinking Grade Transfer Shock: Examining Its Importance In The Community College Transfer Process (Article published In The Journal Of Applied Research In The Community College Vol. 14, No. 1, Fall 2006, p. 19-33).

1
Rethinking Grade Transfer Shock Examining Its
Importance In The Community College Transfer
Process (Article published In The Journal Of
Applied Research In The Community College Vol.
14, No. 1, Fall 2006, p. 19-33).

• Presented By
• Ron Pennington, Director Of Institutional
  Research
• (rpennington_at_stchas.edu)
• 6th Annual Conference Of The Institute For The
  Study Of Transfer Students
• January 23-25, 2008
• Dallas, Texas

2
Introduction
3

• What is Grade Transfer Shock (GTS)?A decrease
  in a students grade point average during their
  first semester at a four-year institution when
  compared to their cumulative GPA at a community
  college (CC).

4
Why Is GTS A Problem?

• Native student studies CC transfers have lower
  graduation rates even with SES and academic
  ability controls
• GTS could be an intervening variable adversely
  affecting four-year student success
• Academic integration first/social integration
  later
• Native four-year students will not experience GTS

5
Research Shows GTS Is A Persistent Problem

• Review of the literature suggests students lose
  about1/3 of a grade point e.g. 3.0 down to
  2.70 2.5 down to 2.20
• Studies consistent over time Hills
  (1965) Richardson Doucette (1980) Diaz
  (1992) Carlan Byxbe (2000)

6
Why Might CC Transfers Experience GTS?

• Poor academic prep at the CC level (Dougherty,
  2000)
• Within an institution academic in-process
  measures
• Between institutions
• Poor transfer prep (Nolan Hall, 1978 Holahan
  Kelley, 1978 Land, 1996 Laanan, 1996 Lee
  Hoey, 1996 Rhine, 2000, Debard, 1996)
• Poor cognitive maps (Lovitts, 2001)
• Attribution Theory (Heidner, 1958 Weiner, 1974)

7
Potential Interventions To Reduce GTS

• Change the emphasis from traditional transfer
  counseling strategies like
• Where to transfer
• Meeting the prerequisites of four-year
  schools To
• More proactive strategies designed to reduce GTS
• Workshops on the new four-year academic culture
• Student mentoring programs at the four-year
  school(Laanen, 1996 Rhine et al., 2000)

8
Research Questions

• Is GTS related to four-year student success?
• Does GTS occur when student demographic and
  institutional process variables are controlled?
• Do traditional two-year and four-year transfer
  counseling practices reduce GTS levels?

9
Methodology
10
Measuring GTS Is Problematical

• Gain score
• (4-year term GPA) (2-year cumulative GPA)
• Problem The two GPA measures are different
• Based on two schools grading system
• 4-year term GPA is less reliable than the CC
  cumulative GPA
• Less course taking
• Shorter time period
• Regression to a lower 4-year GPA scale

11
Two Basic Solutions

• Using a lower level of measurement
• A dichotomous variable
• An ordinal variable
• Regress the CC cumulative GPA on the 4-year term
  GPA

Negative Grade Change (GTS)
Positive Grade Change
No Grade Change
-.25
.25
0
12
Data Collection Methods

• Telephone survey of MO community college transfer
  students Summer 1999
• Student data came from community colleges
• Demographic
• Academic in-process measures
• Student outcome data (MO EMSAS file)

13
Studys Sample

• Initial list of 7,055 CC transfer students
  completed 24 credit hours from 1995 to 1998
• 2,656 were surveyed using several call back
  attempts (response rate 38)
• Many outdated telephone numbers
• Additional criteria used to eliminate cases
• Senior transfers (gt96 credits)
• Pooling of 5 urban community colleges
• First-time transfers prior to fall 1998 semester
• Usable cases 686

14
Findings
15
Is GTS Related To Four-Year Student Success?
16

• Modest relationship between GTS and CC transfer
  success at four-year schools.
• Grade measure of GTS better predictor of transfer
  success than survey measure

17

• Nearly three times as many students actually
  experienced GTS than reported it in the survey

18
Regression Findings

• Does GTS occur when student demographic and
  institutional process variables are controlled?
• Do transfer two-year and four-year traditional
  counseling practices reduce GTS levels?

19
Independent Variables

• - CC Lib Arts Maj (0N,1Y)
• - CC Bus Maj (0N, 1Y)
• CC Degree (0N, 1Y)
• CC Financial Aid (0N, 1Y)
• Cumulative CC Credits
• - Dev course work

• CCGPA

- 4-Year ACT
CC Academic Challenge CC1 CC2
CC3 CC4 CC5
4-Year First-Term Credits
Transfer Experience CC Prep (0not SAT,
1SAT) CC Acad Adv (0no, 1yes) CC Fac Adv
(0no, 1yes) CC Couns (0no, 1yes) Cred
Transfer Success (0no, 1yes) 4-year Couns
(0no, 1yes)

• Age
• - Gender (0F, 1M)
• - African American (0AA,1Oth)
• Previous College (0N, 1Y)

20
Summary Of Key Regression Findings

• CC GPA was the strongest predictor variable of
  4-year GPA by 4 to 1
• 4-year and 2-year academic challenge variables
  were the second strongest set of predictors
• Other significant variables were
• Taking developmental CC coursework (indicator of
  academic readiness?)
• Age (indicator of maturation?)
• CC financial aid (indicator of financial
  dependency at the CC?)
• 4-year credits (indicator of clearer transfer
  goals)
• Controls on demographic and institutional process
  variables actually enhanced GTS
• Traditional counseling variables were not
  significant individually or as a set

21
Regression Findings Results
22
(No Transcript)
23
Implications And Discussion
24

• GTS can be measured as a
• CC GPA ? 4-year regression study Or
• As a dummy variable in a regression study

25

• Regression study question
• Will the relationship between GTS and 4-year
  outcome success hold up under various controls?
• This study shows that the GTS variables should be
  split at -.25 to -.30 if coded as a dummy variable

26

• Other predictor variables should be examined
• More academic process variables at the CC level
• Like this studys CC developmental coursework, CC
  financial aid, and 4-year credit variables
• Other examples school attendance, course
  scheduling (Karl Boughhan)
• Student engagement
• Inter-institutional variables like the 4-ACT and
  set of CC variables
• Will be needed for institutional accountability
  assessments
• Hierarchical linear modeling could be used to
  level out the playing field

27

• Need to test if new transfer counseling programs
  should be adopted
• Specific program interventions
• Better financial aid assistance and information
• Counseling program (two or four-year) targeted to
  increase students Cognitive maps (campus visits,
  student mentoring, etc.)
• More systemic strategies and explanations
• Attributional Theory vs.
• Academic and Social Integration models

28

• What is Attributional Theory?
• A psychological theory instead of a
  sociological theory
• An achievement-motivational theory that predicts
  a person's future motivation to act based on
  causative explanations for why certain outcomes
  have occurred in the past
• Concepts include
• Locus of control
• Controllability
• Event stability

29

• Many have argued that intervention programs based
  on attribution theory could improve the academic
  success of CC transfers (Finley Cooper, 1983
  Pascarella, Edison, Hagedorn, Nora, Terenzini,
  1996 Perry, Hector, Menec, Weinberg, 1993 St.
  Clair, 1993 Valla, 1989)
• But all future program interventions to improve
  GTS need to be evaluated
• Need a program logic for how the intervention is
  suppose to work
• Need to implement an experimental design to see
  if it does work

30
(No Transcript)