CCTI Evaluation Overview

1
CCTI Evaluation Overview

• Jack Kent Cooke Foundation National Forum
• Grantees Meeting
• June 27, 2006

2
Todays Plan

• Share our approach
• Discuss underlying assumptions
• Review general design
• Next steps
• QA yours and ours

3
Our Evaluation Approach(see packet for fuller
description)

• Work in close partnership with sponsoring
  organizations
• Assess both short and long-term outcomes AND how
  and why programs and services work
• See evaluation as a way not only to prove whether
  a program worked but also to improve the way it
  works

4
Our Approach (continued)

• Help organizations increase their internal
  capacity to evaluate program effectiveness and
  outcomes
• Generate knowledge that advances social justice
• Make knowledge productive

5
Underlying Assumptions

• CCTI
• Students
• Faculty, Staff, Administrators
• Institution

6
Assumptions CCTI

• Grants will increase access to selective 4-year
  colleges and universities for highly qualified
  low- to moderate-income community college
  transfer students.
• Address barriers to transfer
• Increase outreach to high-achieving community
  college students with financial need
• Leverage the institutions existing resources to
  accomplish these goals
• Measure the extent to which CCTI has succeeded

7
Assumptions Students

• CC transfer students can succeed. Selective
  institutions can provide support to enhance that
  success
• Students who might not otherwise have the
  opportunity can graduate from selective
  institutions and access all the benefits that
  accrue
• Best practices from this can inform the
  recruitment and retention of all students

8
Assumptions Faculty, Staff and Administrators

• Initiative can become part of the teaching and
  learning mission of the campus
• Faculty support is key to student success
• Senior leadership is key to sustainability

9
Assumptions Institution

• Initiative can become a lasting institutional
  strategy
• Long-term pathways can be created between ccs
  and selective institutions
• Project can increase diversity in innovative ways
• Models can be replicated
• Project can inform general efforts to engage low-
  to moderate-income students, cc students, and
  transfer students
• The presence of these students can enrich the
  experience of other students, faculty, and staff

10
Evaluation Overview
The story by institutional type How do campus
cultures, characteristics and customs affect
these outcomes?
Examples of common variables Time to degree,
GPA, Financial Aid, Partnership with CC
Examples here include mission, location and size
11
Evaluation focus

• Students
• Faculty, Staff, Administrators
• Institution

12
Students

• Cohort model, first year pre- and post-, then
  annual post-tests
• Interviews or focus groups during site visits
• Secondary analysis of student data (e.g., GPA,
  hours attempted, earned) comparison groups
• Question Domains
• Demographics Work experience
• Transition experiences Aspirations
• Institutional Commitment
• Help with data collection
• Identify students
• Provide point person

13
Faculty, Staff and Administrators

• Focus on faculty who are advisors, administrators
  and other key student affairs staff
• Pre-test at beginning of the project, post- at
  end
• Annual interviews
• Question Domains
• Attitudes and expectations Knowledge of
  resources
• Impact Experience
• Institutional Commitment
• Identify faculty
• Identify key administrators

14
Institution

• Informed by the Self Assessment Inventory (SAI),
  Dowd, et al.
• Annual site visits
• Questions in the Faculty and Student surveys
  regarding institutional supports and barriers
• Institutional Commitment
• Assist with IRB approval
• Provide point person for site visits

15
Next Steps

• Office hours and follow-up calls review
  timelines, plans, institutional assessment
  efforts, etc.
• Refine evaluation strategy
• Contact regarding IRB, data acquisition, students
• Initial site visit evaluation planning
• Evaluation timeline is in your packet

16
www.cctievaluation.org
17
Contact Information

• Co PIs
• Cathy Burack, burack_at_brandeis.edu(781) 736-3762
• Susan Lanspery, lanspery, -3739
• Project team
• Ginger Fitzhugh, fitzhugh, -3729
• Faye Cohen, fcohen, -3598

18
Knotty Issues

• Who do you consider your Cooke students?
• When should we give students the baseline survey?
• What are the best ways to incorporate the
  community colleges?
• Insert your question(s) here