Presented By: Ron Pennington, Director Of Institutional Research (rpennington@stchas)

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@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 student’s grade point average during their first semester at a four-year institution when compared to their cumulative GPA at a community college (CC).

4. CC TransferExperience Level of GTSExperienced Eventual 4-yearSuccess 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 timeHills (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. GTS No GTS +.25 -.25 0 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. Study’s 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 (>96 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. - CC Lib Arts Maj (0=N,1=Y) - CC Bus Maj (0=N, 1=Y) + CC Degree (0=N, 1=Y) + CC Financial Aid (0=N, 1=Y) + Cumulative CC Credits - Dev course work + CCGPA Independent Variables - 4-Year ACT CC Academic Challenge CC1 CC2 ± CC3 CC4 CC5 + 4-Year First-Term Credits Transfer Experience + CC Prep (0=not SAT, 1=SAT) + CC Acad Adv (0=no, 1=yes) + CC Fac Adv (0=no, 1=yes) + CC Couns (0=no, 1=yes) + Cred Transfer Success (0=no, 1=yes) + 4-year Couns (0=no, 1=yes) + Age - Gender (0=F, 1=M) - African American (0=AA,1=Oth) + Previous College (0=N, 1=Y)

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

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 study’s 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