Table Of ContentKeeping Informed about Achieving the Dream Data
Vol. 2, No. 1 January/February 2007
What Is a Cohort? Different Paths for Different Majors on their 2002 cohort students who transferred
at some point. This analysis was conducted on
A cohort is a group of Some community college students seek specific data reported by these 13 colleges, which repre-
people studied over time. education or training that can be completed at sent one-third of the 2002 Achieving the Dream
The individuals in the their community college. This course of study, cohort, or approximately 27,000 students. The
group have at least one
which can result in a certificate or an associ- following states are represented in this sample:
statistical factor — such
ate degree, usually is preparation or additional Connecticut, Florida, New Mexico, Ohio, Texas
as when they started
training for a specific occupation. Students who and Virginia.
college — in common.
fit this description enroll in terminal-major pro-
The Achieving the grams and are described as such in this analysis. Differences between Terminal-Major
Dream 2002 student Other students begin their education with the and Transfer-Seeking Students
cohort is the group goal of transferring to a four-year college to fin-
of credential-seeking ish bachelor’s degrees. Still others are not sure
students that attended The sample of the 2002 cohort that was ana-
of their goals or are undeclared. In this analysis,
Achieving the Dream lyzed for this discussion began with slightly
these students are described as transfer seeking
institutions for the first more than one-fourth of students enrolled in
and undeclared, respectively.
time in fall 2002. This terminal-major programs during their first
cohort will be tracked term.2 More than half of the 2002 cohort were
What drives some students to seek termi-
until 2008. enrolled in transfer-seeking programs, and the
nal degrees while others enroll intending to
remaining 16 percent had not declared majors
Tracking a cohort over transfer to other institutions? In the April 15,
upon their first enrollment (Figure 1).
time makes it possible 2005, issue of Chronicle of Higher Education,
to compare the progress Thomas Bailey and Davis Jenkins note that
and outcomes of differ- lower-income students might need jobs at an Figure 1. Percentage distribution of the 2002 Achieving the
ent groups of students earlier age than middle-class students.1 Earning Dream cohort by major field type*
(e.g., groups defined by
a terminal degree at a community college may
race, age or other demo-
be a faster way to secure a job than enroll-
graphic characteristics)
ing with the intention to transfer to another 16%
and to determine if there
institution. Further, Bailey and Jenkins note 28%
are gaps in achieve-
ment among groups of that some first-generation college students may
interest. not believe that they can complete bachelor’s or
other degrees beyond those offered by com- 56%
munity colleges. Or, at the community colleges,
some students simply may be more engaged by
applied occupational instruction than by a more
abstract academic education. Terminal Transfer Undeclared
major seeking
The different educational paths (terminal majors
*Based on 13 Achieving the Dream colleges; the distribution of
versus transfer seeking) represent students with
students by major field type in the entire 2002 Achieving the Dream
different objectives and likely different needs,
cohort is 34 percent, terminal major; 52 percent, transfer seeking;
both of which may be related to persistence.
and 14 percent, undeclared.
Understanding these differences is critical for
Students may change from terminal- to transfer-seeking majors
community colleges working to improve student
throughout their academic careers.
outcomes.
The following analysis compares terminal-major Age
and transfer-seeking students. Thirty-five of
The characteristics of transfer-seeking and
the 58 Achieving the Dream institutions have
terminal-major students differ. The major dif-
participated in the initiative long enough to pro-
ference is in the age of the students. As shown
vide cohort data for three academic years. Of
in Figure 2, terminal-major students and those
these 35 colleges, 13 were able to provide data
(continued on next page)
1Bailey, T., and Jenkins, D., “Building a Pathway for Occupational Students.” The Chronicle of Higher Education: The Chronicle
Review, Volume 51, Issue 32, p. B20.
2Students may change from terminal- to transfer-seeking majors throughout their academic careers.
Figure 2. Percentage distribution of the 2002 Achieving the Figure 3. Percentage distribution of the 2002 Achieving the
Dream cohort by age and major field type Dream cohort by race/ethnicity and major field type
2% 1% 3% 100%
100% 7% 10% 12% 17% 15% 16%
90% 14% 10% 90% 25% 24%
16% 15% 80%
80%
20%
70% 26% 70%
60% 26% 60% 24% 56% 59% 56% 56%
47% 50% 56%
50%
42%
40% 38% 40%
30% 34% 30% 51%
20%
1200%% 20% 29% 14% 24% 10% 20% 32% 24% 29% 28%
0%
0% Native Asian/Pacific Black, White, Hispanic Total
Terminal major Transfer seeking Undeclared Total American Islander non-Hispanic non-Hispanic
18 years or less 19 to 23 24 to 34 Terminal major Transfer seeking Undeclared
35 to 49 50 years or older
Pell Grant receipt
Due to rounding, totals may not equal 100 percent.
Because Achieving the Dream does not collect
family income data, the initiative uses Pell Grant
who were undeclared were older than those who
receipt as a proxy for low-income status. Using
were transfer seeking: 24 percent of those in
this proxy, terminal-major students were more
transfer-seeking programs were at least 24 years
likely to have financial need than were transfer-
old, compared with 42 percent of terminal-major
seeking students, but the difference was relatively
students and 51 percent of students with unde-
small: 38 percent of terminal-major students
clared major fields.
received Pell Grants during their first term,
compared with 31 percent of transfer-seeking
Gender
students. Only 12 percent of students with unde-
The difference in enrollment between males and clared major fields received Pell Grants (Figure
females in the three curricular paths was too 5). This could be due in part to the fact that they
small to be significant. Females comprised 60 were more likely to enroll on a part-time basis.
percent of the terminal-major students, 58 per- (Students who are enrolled less than half-time
cent of transfer-seeking students and 59 percent are not eligible for Pell Grants.)
of those with undeclared major fields.
In sum, age was the most obvious factor that
Race/ethnicity differentiated students in the different tracks.
The two other measures that showed noteworthy
In terms of race/ethnicity, Native American differences, receiving a Pell Grant and attending
students were more likely than students in other part-time, suggest that terminal-major students
groups to enroll in terminal-major programs: 51 may be at greater risk of dropping out than
percent of Native American students enrolled transfer-seeking students.
in terminal-major programs, compared with an
average of 28 percent of all students. Further,
Figure 4. Percentage of the 2002 Achieving the Dream
white students were slightly more likely to enroll
cohort enrolled part-time during their first term, by major
in transfer-seeking programs than the average
field type
(59 compared with 56 percent), while black and
Hispanic students were as likely to enroll in
100%
transfer-seeking programs as the average of all
90%
students (Figure 3).
80%
70%
Enrollment status
60%
Terminal-major students were slightly more
50%
likely to enroll on a part-time basis during their
40%
first term: 60 percent of terminal-major stu- 70%
dents enrolled part-time during their first term, 30% 60% 53% 58%
compared with 53 percent of transfer-seeking 20%
students. Seventy percent of the students with 10%
undeclared majors enrolled on a part-time basis 0%
Terminal major Transfer seeking Undeclared Total
(Figure 4).
(continued on next page)
Persistence
2 Data Notes | January/February 2007
After three years, 56 percent of the students Figure 5. Percentage of the 2002 Achieving the Dream
analyzed left college with no degree and did not cohort who received Pell Grants during their first term, by
transfer. The loss rate was 59 percent for termi- major field type
nal-major students and 66 percent for undeclared
students, compared with 52 percent for transfer- 100%
seeking students (Figure 6). 90%
“ 80%
The group that bears the closest review
70%
is undeclared students. These students
60%
were more likely to enroll part-time
50%
and more likely to leave college than
40%
others.”
30%
38%
20%
31% 29%
Based on the data analyzed here, the higher loss
10%
12%
rate for terminal-major students may be attrib-
0%
uted to two facts. First, terminal-major students Terminal major Transfer seeking Undeclared Total
were older, on average, than transfer-seeking
students. Second, they were more likely to receive
Pell Grants, which suggests greater financial need.
Figure 6. Percentage distribution of the 2002 Achieving the
Dream cohort by persistence* and completion status at the
The group that bears the closest review is
end of the third academic year, by major field type
undeclared students. These students were more
likely to enroll part-time and more likely to leave
2%
college than others. They may have enrolled for 100% 45%% 5% 1% 0% 5% 2%
reasons other than seeking terminal degrees. 90% 17%
10% 18% 16%
It may be that not having an educational goal 80%
15%
indicates someone who may need help in evaluat- 70% 22% 24% 22%
ing his or her abilities and interests and matching
60%
them with possible majors.
50% Data Notes is a bimonthly
publication that examines data
40% 66%
What Does This Mean? 30% 59% 52% 56% tfao ciilnlugm Ainchaiteev tihneg cthhea lDlernegaems
Achieving the Dream colleges are dedicated to 20% colleges and to chart their
helping their students succeed. Persistence and 10% progress over time.
employment outcomes are two critical measures 0%
Terminal major Transfer seeking Undeclared Total Achieving the Dream: Com-
of success. An obvious question is whether the
munity Colleges Count is a
differences in student outcomes between terminal- Did not persist Persisted Transferred national initiative to help more
major and transfer-seeking students can be
Attained certificate Attained associate degree community college students,
ascribed to student characteristics or the possibil- particularly students of color
ity that terminal-major students can move into and low-income learners,
*Persistence is defined as enrolling during any term in the third
good jobs without completing their programs. succeed. The initiative works
academic year.
Asking these questions might aid community col- on multiple fronts — including
Due to rounding, totals may not equal 100 percent.
leges in creating meaningful intervention strate- efforts at community colleges
gies to help improve the success of these students. and in research, public engage-
ment and public policy —
and emphasizes the use of
Achieving the Dream’s Database
data to drive change. For
more information, visit
Achieving the Dream colleges can use the www.achievingthedream.org.
Achieving the Dream database created by JBL
Associates to replicate the analysis presented here This issue of Data Notes was
for their own institutions. This analysis might written by John B. Lee, presi-
help colleges identify areas of their curricula or dent, JBL Associates, Inc., and
edited and designed by KSA-
groups of students needing special attention. n
Plus Communications, Inc.
If you have questions regarding
this issue, or if there is a topic
you would like to see addressed
in Data Notes, please contact Sue
Clery at [email protected].
This report uses the August
2006 version of the Achieving
the Dream database.
Data Notes | January/February 2007 3
