Student Success Report
2014-2015
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVESUMMARY ................................................................................................................................................. V
USING THIS REPORT TO IMPROVE STUDENT SUCCESS ......................................................................................................... VIII
Understanding the Student Success Report .......................................................................................................................viii
Using Data to Improve Student Success .............................................................................................................................. ix
First-Time Credit-Seeking Cohort Tracking ........................................................................................................................... x
STUDENT SUCCESS CATEGORIES,MEASURES, AND INDICATORS ............................................................................................... 1
SUCCESSFUL PROGRESSION ..............................................................................................................................................1
District High School Students................................................................................................................................................. 2
College-Level Enrollment of Sender High School Students through First Year after Graduation ....................................... 2
Persistence ............................................................................................................................................................................. 3
Fall to Spring and Fall to Fall Persistence ........................................................................................................................... 3
Performance in Developmental Courses .............................................................................................................................. 4
Course Success: Developmental Courses ........................................................................................................................... 4
Success in Developmental Math ........................................................................................................................................ 5
Success in Developmental Writing ..................................................................................................................................... 6
Success in Developmental Reading .................................................................................................................................... 7
Developmental Students Moving to Gatekeeper Course Work and Completion ............................................................... 8
Students Starting in any Developmental Math Course Completing Developmental and Gatekeeper Math ..................... 8
Students Starting in any Developmental Reading/Writing Course Completing Developmental and Gatekeeper English 10
Performance in College-Level Courses ................................................................................................................................ 12
Course Success: All College-Level Courses ....................................................................................................................... 12
Course Success: College-Level Math and English ............................................................................................................. 13
Success in Gatekeeper Math ............................................................................................................................................ 14
Success in Gatekeeper English ......................................................................................................................................... 15
Earning Credits Toward Completion ................................................................................................................................... 16
Earning 15 and 30 College Credits: All Credential-Seeking Students................................................................................ 16
Earning 15 and 30 College Credits: Students Starting in College-Level Courses............................................................... 17
Earning 15 and 30 College Credits: Students Starting in any Developmental Course ...................................................... 18
Earning 15 and 30 College Credits: Students Starting in any Developmental Math Course ............................................ 19
Earning 15 and 30 College Credits: Students Starting in any Developmental Reading/Writing Course ........................... 20
Student Engagement ........................................................................................................................................................... 21
Community College Survey of Student Engagement (CCSSE) ........................................................................................... 21
Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Inventory (SSI) .............................................................................................................. 22
COMPLETION AND TRANSFER..........................................................................................................................................23
Credentials and Completers ................................................................................................................................................ 24
Number of Credentials Conferred .................................................................................................................................... 24
Number of Completers ..................................................................................................................................................... 25
Completion and Transfer Rates........................................................................................................................................... 26
Students Completing or Transferring ............................................................................................................................... 26
WORKFORCE AND EMPLOYMENT.....................................................................................................................................27
Employment in Field Related to Harper Program of Study................................................................................................ 28
Employment Status.............................................................................................................................................................. 29
i
DEMOGRAPHICS....................................................................................................................................................... 30
SUCCESSFUL PROGRESSION ............................................................................................................................................30
Persistence ........................................................................................................................................................................... 30
Fall to Spring Persistence by Gender ................................................................................................................................ 31
Fall to Spring Persistence by Race/Ethnicity..................................................................................................................... 32
Fall to Spring Persistence of Developmental Students ..................................................................................................... 33
Fall to Spring Persistence by Full-/Part-Time Status ......................................................................................................... 34
Fall to Spring Persistence by Age Group ........................................................................................................................... 35
Fall to Spring Persistence by Pell Status ........................................................................................................................... 36
Fall to Fall Persistence by Gender .................................................................................................................................... 37
Fall to Fall Persistence by Race/Ethnicity ......................................................................................................................... 38
Fall to Fall Persistence of Developmental Students ......................................................................................................... 39
Fall to Fall Persistence by Full-/Part-Time Status ............................................................................................................. 40
Fall to Fall Persistence by Age Group ............................................................................................................................... 41
Fall to Fall Persistence by Pell Status ................................................................................................................................ 42
Performance in Developmental Courses: Math ................................................................................................................. 43
Success in Developmental Math by Gender ..................................................................................................................... 44
Success in Developmental Math by Race/Ethnicity.......................................................................................................... 45
Success in Developmental Math by Full-/Part-Time Status .............................................................................................. 46
Success in Developmental Math by Age Group ................................................................................................................ 47
Success in Developmental Math by Pell Status ................................................................................................................ 48
Performance in Developmental Courses: Writing .............................................................................................................. 49
Success in Developmental Writing by Gender.................................................................................................................. 50
Success in Developmental Writing by Race/Ethnicity ...................................................................................................... 51
Success in Developmental Writing by Full-/Part-Time Status .......................................................................................... 52
Success in Developmental Writing by Age Group ............................................................................................................ 53
Success in Developmental Writing by Pell Status ............................................................................................................. 54
Performance in Developmental Courses: Reading............................................................................................................. 55
Success in Developmental Reading by Gender................................................................................................................. 56
Success in Developmental Reading by Race/Ethnicity ..................................................................................................... 57
Success in Developmental Reading by Full-/Part-Time Status ......................................................................................... 58
Success in Developmental Reading by Age Group ........................................................................................................... 59
Success in Developmental Reading by Pell Status ............................................................................................................ 60
Developmental Students Moving to Gatekeeper Course Work and Completion: Math .......................................................... 61
Math Success by Gender .................................................................................................................................................. 62
Math Success by Race/Ethnicity ....................................................................................................................................... 64
Math Success by Full-/Part-Time Status ........................................................................................................................... 66
Math Success by Age Group ............................................................................................................................................. 68
Math Success by Pell Status ............................................................................................................................................. 70
ii
Developmental Students Moving to Gatekeeper Course Work and Completion: English ........................................................... 72
English Success by Gender ............................................................................................................................................... 73
English Success by Race/Ethnicity .................................................................................................................................... 75
English Success by Full-/Part-Time Status ........................................................................................................................ 77
English Success by Age Group .......................................................................................................................................... 79
English Success by Pell Status ........................................................................................................................................... 81
Performance in College-Level Courses: Math ..................................................................................................................... 83
Success in Gatekeeper Math by Gender .......................................................................................................................... 84
Success in Gatekeeper Math by Race/Ethnicity ............................................................................................................... 85
Success in Gatekeeper Math by Developmental Placement ............................................................................................ 86
Success in Gatekeeper Math by Full-/Part-Time Status ................................................................................................... 87
Success in Gatekeeper Math by Age Group ..................................................................................................................... 88
Success in Gatekeeper Math by Pell Status ...................................................................................................................... 89
Performance in College-Level Courses: English .................................................................................................................. 90
Success in Gatekeeper English by Gender ........................................................................................................................ 91
Success in Gatekeeper English by Race/Ethnicity............................................................................................................. 92
Success in Gatekeeper English by Developmental Placement ......................................................................................... 93
Success in Gatekeeper English by Full-/Part-Time Status ................................................................................................. 94
Success in Gatekeeper English by Age Group ................................................................................................................... 95
Success in Gatekeeper English by Pell Status ................................................................................................................... 96
Earning Credits Toward Completion ................................................................................................................................... 97
Earning 15 and 30 College Credits by Gender .................................................................................................................. 98
Earning 15 and 30 College Credits by Race/Ethnicity ..................................................................................................... 100
Earning 15 and 30 College Credits by Developmental Placement .................................................................................. 102
Earning 15 and 30 College Credits by Full-/Part-Time Status ......................................................................................... 104
Earning 15 and 30 College Credits by Age Group ........................................................................................................... 106
Earning 15 and 30 College Credits by Pell Status ........................................................................................................... 108
COMPLETION AND TRANSFER........................................................................................................................................110
Completers ......................................................................................................................................................................... 110
Number of Completers by Gender ................................................................................................................................. 111
Percentage of Completers by Gender ............................................................................................................................ 112
Number of Completers by Race/Ethnicity ...................................................................................................................... 113
Percentage of Completers by Race/Ethnicity ................................................................................................................. 114
Completion Rates ............................................................................................................................................................... 115
Completion Rates by Gender ......................................................................................................................................... 116
Completion Rates by Race/Ethnicity .............................................................................................................................. 117
Completion Rates of Developmental Students .............................................................................................................. 118
Completion Rates by Full-/Part-Time Status .................................................................................................................. 119
Completion Rates by Age Group .................................................................................................................................... 120
Completion Rates by Pell Status ..................................................................................................................................... 121
iii
Transfer Rates .................................................................................................................................................................... 122
Combined Completion and Transfer by Gender ............................................................................................................. 123
Transfer Rates by Gender ............................................................................................................................................... 124
Transfer Rates by Race/Ethnicity.................................................................................................................................... 125
Transfer Rates of Developmental Students .................................................................................................................... 126
Transfer Rates by Full-/Part-Time Status ........................................................................................................................ 127
Transfer Rates by Age Group .......................................................................................................................................... 128
Transfer Rates by Pell Status .......................................................................................................................................... 129
APPENDIX: DEFINITIONS .................................................................................................................................... 130
iv
Executive Summary
The purpose of this document is to provide data in actionable detail for improving student success at
Harper College. This report is organized around three key categories: Successful Progression, Completion
and Transfer, and Workforce and Employment. These categories are analyzed at the aggregate level by
several measures, then indicators, and finally they are disaggregated by selected target demographics.
Important findings are discussed in detail below.
Successful Progression
Persistence
Persistence is measured by the percentage of a student cohort that continues to re-enroll at Harper
during a given time period. Both fall to spring and fall to fall persistence are included in this report. Over
the time period analyzed, fall to spring student persistence has shown a slight increase, and fall to fall
persistence has remained fairly stable with the exception of the 2011 cohort. Females and males tend to
persist at similar rates. Fall to spring persistence increased for black students in the 2013 cohort, despite
having traditionally lagged overall college persistence. Persistence of developmental students is similar
to that of the College overall, while the students age 19 and under and full-time students have high
persistence rates in comparison to other demographic groups.
Performance in Developmental Courses
Overall success rates for developmental courses have remained steady over time but showed a slight
decrease in 2013-14. Success in developmental math, writing and reading increased for the most recent
cohort, with writing and reading showing substantial gains from the 2007 cohort to the 2011 cohort.
Female students and students age 25-29 tended to have the highest completion rates for any
developmental math course within three years of starting at the College. Additionally, female students,
Asian students, and students age 19 and under had the highest rates of success in any developmental
writing course. Similarly, female students, Asian students, full-time students and students age 19 and
under had the highest success rates in any developmental reading course.
Progression from Developmental to Gatekeeper
Approximately 53 to 58 percent of students who pass the highest level developmental math course
continue on to successfully complete a gatekeeper math course. With respect to developmental
students attempting gatekeeper math, female students are more successful at progressing through the
sequence than male students, and Asian and white students progress at higher rates than black and
Hispanic students. Approximately 61 to 68 percent of students who pass the highest level
developmental reading/writing course continue on to successfully complete the gatekeeper English
course. Of those developmental students who attempt gatekeeper English, female students again are
more successful progressing through the sequence than male students; Asian students tend to have the
highest rate of success amongst racial/ethnic groups; and students 18 and under are more successful
than other age groups.
v
Performance in College-Level Courses
Success rates for students in gatekeeper math (MTH101, MTH103, MTH130, MTH165 and MGT225)
decreased over time, while gatekeeper English (ENG101) success rates have remained fairly stable.
Female students consistently perform better than male students in both gatekeeper math and English.
Asian and white students tend to perform better in gatekeeper courses than other racial/ethnic groups,
but the results have been more variable for gatekeeper math. Students who initially placed into
developmental math often do not perform as well in the gatekeeper courses as do those who were not
referred to developmental math. However, students who were initially placed into developmental
reading and/or writing generally perform as well or better in gatekeeper English than do students who
were not referred to developmental course work.
Earning Credits toward Completion
In addition to reviewing performance in specific areas, student cohorts were tracked at four momentum
points (enrolling in 15 college-level credits, successfully completing 15 college-level credits, enrolling in
30 college-level credits, and successfully completing 30 college-level credits) as well as the target
milestone of earning a credential. Overall, approximately 53 to 56 percent of students earned 15 credit
hours within three years at Harper, and 35 to 38 percent of students earned 30 credit hours within the
same period. Females in these cohorts had higher success rates in gaining 15 and 30 credits than males,
Asian and white students had higher rates than black and Hispanic students, and students age 18 and
under performed better than other age groups.
Student Engagement
According to the most recent Community College Survey of Student Engagement (CCSSE), Harper
College was lower than the mean score on all CCSSE benchmarks. In 2012, all categories but the
Student-Faculty Interaction score showed a decrease from the previous CCSSE benchmarks three years
earlier. For both the 2011 and 2014 administrations of the Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Inventory
(SSI), the College placed between 5 and 6 on a 7-point scale (where 6 correlates to “satisfied”) in all
eight scale satisfaction scores.
Completion and Transfer
The number of credentials conferred at Harper College increased from 2,452 in 2009-10 to 3,743 in
2013-14. In 2011-12, Harper achieved its highest number of credentials conferred: 4,487. All gender and
ethnic/racial groups also increased the number of completers that have earned credentials. However,
the number of completers decreased from 2011-12 to 2013-14 for all groups except Hispanic graduates.
The large increase in credentials and completers over time is largely due to the College’s Completion
Concierge and efforts to stack career certificates that lead to degrees.
From the 2007 to the 2010 cohort, graduation rates as measured by IPEDS increased. The 2011 AtD
cohort exhibited the first decrease in credential completion rate during the period examined in this
report.
For many community college students, success is not only completing a degree, but also transferring to
another institution for continued study. The IPEDS combined graduation and transfer rate increased to
53.5 percent for the 2010 cohort, the highest level during the period examined in this report. However,
IPEDS transfer rates (excluding graduates) decreased for the 2009 and 2010 cohorts. Overall transfer
rates as measured through AtD cohorts have dropped substantially for the 2011 cohort. Additionally,
transfer rates for certain demographic groups, such as Hispanic students, developmental reading and
writing students, and part-time students, lag behind other groups.
vi
Workforce and Employment
Overall, Harper career graduates are employed at slightly higher rates than they were in 2009. The
percentage of survey respondents who were employed in their related field increased from 45.9 percent
for 2009 graduates to 48.6 percent for 2013 graduates.
Conclusion
The data in this Harper College Student Success Report indicate improvement in some areas of student
success over time as well as areas where more progress is needed. Over the time periods and cohorts
studied, the College has successfully increased the college-level enrollment of students from sender high
schools, course success rates, and some persistence rates. However, gaps remain in the progress of
some developmental students and between different demographic groups. As such, this report is a
resource and reference guide intended to indicate where success is evident and improvement is needed
as the College goes forward with its commitment to student success and carrying out its mission to
serve the community.
vii
Using This Report to Improve Student Success
Understanding the Student Success Report
This report provides our student success data in four levels to help the College focus on the institutional
impact of our efforts while providing actionable detail for student success interventions. The four levels
of data include Student Success Categories, Measures, Indicators, and Demographics:
•
Student Success Category
o Measure
 Indicator
• Demographics
What is a Student Success Category?
Harper’s Student Success report groups student success data into three topical areas representing the
progression of students into and through the College and eventually into the workplace. These areas are
known as Student Success Categories and define the way the College determines how well our students
are performing throughout their relationship with the College. The three Student Success Categories
are: Successful Progression; Completion and Transfer; and Workforce and Employment.
What is a Measure?
Each Student Success Category encompasses multiple measures. As used here, a measure is a
conceptual definition of student progress within the general topical area. For example, Completion and
Transfer consists of three measures: Completers, Completion Rates and Transfer Rates. Progression,
however, is a much larger area and includes measures such as Persistence, Performance in
Developmental Courses, and Performance in College-Level Courses.
What is an Indicator?
Some measures further consist of one or more indicators. An indicator is a specific operational definition
of a measure and its results. For example, one of the measures under the Successful Progression
category is Persistence. Persistence is divided into two indicators: Fall to Spring and Fall to Fall. Each
indicator may have a slightly different outcome, population or time frame. Some indicators are more
useful depictions of student success than others depending on the student success barrier being
examined.
Demographics
Finally, many indicators included in this report have additional demographic breakouts to help provide
more in-depth descriptive information about Harper College students. Fall to Spring Persistence, for
example, is provided in breakouts by gender, race/ethnicity, developmental status, full-/part-time
status, age group, and Pell status. This information helps the College determine whether there are any
specific groups of students that need particular attention in relation to a given measure or indicator.
viii
Using This Report to Improve Student Success
Using Data to Improve Student Success
One of the most important functions of the Student Success Report is to explain the data underlying
each indicator so that the College can address the barriers to success our students face. These data are
provided as a resource to faculty, staff and administrators at the College to facilitate informed decision
making and support evaluation of improvements across the institution.
Common uses for this information:
Strategic Planning
Program Review
Program and Project Development
Overall Institutional Effectiveness and Continuous Improvement
How, specifically, can we use data to make improvements at the College? Below is an example of how
the College defined an area of student need during development of the 2010-2015 Strategic Plan, and
then implemented a successful student intervention based on that need and continued evaluation.
Example: Project Success/Early Alert
During development of the 2010-2015 Strategic Plan, three groups of focus were identified; research
indicated that these groups had success and completion rates consistently lower than the overall Harper
College student population. Thus, Project Success was developed under the Strategic Goal “Decrease
student achievement gaps of developmental, young male and black non-Hispanic students, while
increasing academic achievement for all.”
Beginning immediately in their first semester, Project Success provides at-risk students the opportunity
to receive early interventions aimed at maximizing academic success and persistence. The program
focuses on first semester students placing into two or more developmental courses or a sequence of
developmental courses. Led by the Student Development division, the program is facilitated through
collaboration with several internal partners, including Student Development counselors, academic
department chairs/coordinators and faculty, information technology, institutional research, and support
services such as tutoring.
After two successful pilots, as reported by qualitative and quantitative measures on the project
evaluation plan, Project Success was institutionalized within the College’s regular operations. Qualitative
measures included annual surveys and focus groups seeking feedback from all participating constituent
groups (students, faculty, counselors, front office staff from each counseling center, and academic
support staff). The results were used to assess the effectiveness of the overall process and flow of the
intervention, and the information gleaned was used to make improvements.
Project Success has had a significantly positive impact on student success. From fall 2011 to spring 2014,
the fall to spring persistence rate of students who were flagged and saw a counselor was an average of
26.3 percent higher than the persistence rate for those who did not see a counselor. Completer success
rates of students who were flagged and saw a counselor were an average of 29.8 percent higher than
for students who did not see a counselor. These student outcomes played a key role in the decision to
institutionalize the program.
ix
Using This Report to Improve Student Success
First-Time Credit-Seeking Cohort Tracking
Cohort tracking is used to assess student success throughout the majority of this report. Cohorts are
helpful when examining student success information because they allow for tracking of students over
time, instead of providing snapshots of how all students are doing at a given point in time. After the
initial semester of data has been determined for that specific cohort, the students are continually
tracked in subsequent semesters on a variety of measures. This report uses Achieving the Dream (AtD)
cohorts for the majority of cohort tracking.
The cohorts are comprised of first-time credential-seeking Harper College students enrolling in the fall
semester of a given year. Both full-time and part-time students are included. Although these cohorts do
not include all Harper students (for example, those who first enroll in spring or are not credentialseeking), they do reveal trends in overall student progress that would not be possible without cohort
tracking. The following page includes the demographic categories of students used in this report, based
on these cohorts.
x
Using This Report to Improve Student Success
First-Time Credit-Seeking Cohort Tracking
Achieving the Dream (AtD) Cohort 1
Overall Number of Students in Cohort
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2,740
2,693
2,778
2,740
2,688
2,359
3,369 2
N
Gender
Race/Ethnicity
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
N
%
1,308 47.7% 1,314 48.8% 1,408 50.7% 1,337 48.8% 1,268 47.2% 1,080 45.8% 1,697 50.4%
Asian 3
294
10.7%
267
9.9%
273
9.8%
203
7.4%
206
7.7%
200
8.5%
342
10.2%
Black/African American,
non-Hispanic 4
156
5.7%
184
6.8%
224
8.1%
267
9.7%
289
10.8%
169
7.2%
201
6.0%
Hispanic
364
13.3%
377
14.0%
477
17.2%
439
16.0%
454
16.9%
464
19.7%
683
20.3%
College-level
Referred to
developmental math
Referred to
developmental reading
Referred to
developmental writing
Referred to any
developmental course
Full-time
Part-time
19 or younger
Pell Status 6
(First Term)
N
Male
Other
Age Group 5
(First Term)
%
1,432 52.3% 1,379 51.2% 1,370 49.3% 1,403 51.2% 1,394 51.9% 1,279 54.2% 1,672 49.6%
White, non-Hispanic
Status
(First Term)
N
Female
4
Developmental
Placement
%
1,695 61.9% 1,522 56.5% 1,678 60.4% 1,636 59.7% 1,489 55.4% 1,323 56.1% 1,980 58.8%
231
8.4%
343
12.7%
126
4.5%
195
7.1%
250
9.3%
203
8.6%
163
4.8%
1,512 55.2% 1,468 54.5% 1,488 53.6% 1,398 51.0% 1,448 53.9% 1,363 57.8% 1,968 58.4%
1,078 39.3% 1,080 40.1% 1,147 41.3% 1,213 44.3% 1,095 40.7%
900
38.2% 1,230 36.5%
485
17.7%
558
20.7%
553
19.9%
593
21.6%
560
20.8%
401
17.0%
528
15.7%
276
10.1%
336
12.5%
357
12.9%
384
14.0%
344
12.8%
238
10.1%
307
9.1%
1,228 44.8% 1,225 45.5% 1,290 46.4% 1,342 49.0% 1,240 46.1%
996
42.2% 1,401 41.6%
1,749 63.8% 1,795 66.7% 1,795 64.6% 1,755 64.1% 1,675 62.3% 1,446 61.3% 2,152 63.9%
991
36.2%
898
33.3%
983
35.4%
985
35.9% 1,013 37.7%
913
38.7% 1,217 36.1%
1,697 61.9% 1,697 63.0% 1,710 61.6% 1,651 60.3% 1,603 59.6% 1,437 60.9% 2,294 68.1%
20 to 24
520
19.0%
476
17.7%
453
16.3%
491
17.9%
478
17.8%
416
17.6%
554
16.4%
25 to 29
185
6.8%
199
7.4%
215
7.7%
200
7.3%
226
8.4%
178
7.5%
218
6.5%
30 years or older
337
12.3%
313
11.6%
400
14.4%
398
14.5%
379
14.1%
328
13.9%
303
9.0%
Pell
460
16.8%
479
17.8%
738
26.6%
932
34.0%
905
33.7%
722
30.6% 1,154 34.3%
Non-Pell
2,280 83.2% 2,214 82.2% 2,040 73.4% 1,808 66.0% 1,783 66.3% 1,637 69.4% 2,215 65.7%
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
1
Years are based on AtD cohorts. Due to rounding, not all percentages will sum to 100 percent.
The 2013 cohort shows a large increase over previous cohorts. This change is due to the addition of students who previously took courses at
Harper, prior to enrolling at the College full-time the fall after graduation from high school (former dual credit students, REACH students, etc.).
3
Asian includes Pacific Islander for the 2007 cohort.
4
Hereafter, “black/African American, non-Hispanic” is referred to as “black” and “white, non-Hispanic” is referred to as “white.”
5
Missing demographic information for students in some cohorts will result in the number of students not summing to the cohort total. Age
groups are different for data that did not come from the AtD submission.
6
“Pell” refers to students who received a Pell grant of any amount during their first fall semester at Harper. “Non-Pell” refers to students who
did not receive a Pell grant during their first fall semester, either because they did not apply or because they applied but did not meet grant
requirements.
2
xi
Student Success Categories, Measures, and Indicators
Successful Progression
Successful Progression includes persistence, performance in developmental courses, progression from
developmental to gatekeeper courses, performance in college-level courses, earning credits toward
completion, and student engagement. The Progression section helps with understanding the students’
ability to move throughout their courses of study at the College and ultimately reach their academic
goals. This section can be used to help faculty, staff, and administrators at the College determine where
students may be having difficulty, and develop plans to assist students at those points.
This section uses data from several sources: Achieving the Dream (AtD) cohorts, Harper’s Student
Information System and related cohorts, the Community College Survey of Student Engagement (CCSSE),
and Noel-Levitz. Each source and the specific use of that source are provided in the notes beneath each
graph. For additional information about AtD cohorts, see pages x-xi in the Introduction to this report.
1
Successful Progression
District High School Students
College-Level Enrollment of Sender High School Students through First Year after Graduation
In recent years, Harper College has been partnering with district high schools to help improve the
percentage of students who are prepared for college-level courses. As a result of these partnerships, the
percentage of students enrolling in college-level courses has been increasing over time. In 2014, 72.9
percent of students enrolling in math were college-level, an increase of 27.1 percent since 2010. During
the same period, the percentage of students enrolling in college-level English increased by 9.0 percent,
from 78.8 percent to 87.8 percent.
100%
81.8%
78.8%
80%
87.8%
86.8%
85.2%
72.9%
67.1%
60%
53.1%
57.1%
45.8%
40%
20%
0%


2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
% enrolled college-level math
45.8%
53.1%
57.1%
67.1%
72.9%
N enrolled college-level math
775
889
953
1,165
1,179
% enrolled college-level English
78.8%
81.8%
85.2%
86.8%
87.8%
N enrolled college-level English
1,356
1,383
1,430
1,489
1,375
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Year is based on June graduation. Percentages are based on students who enrolled in either math or English. Includes Township High School
Districts 211 (Conant, Fremd, Hoffman Estates, Palatine, Schaumburg), 214 (Buffalo Grove, Elk Grove, Hersey, Prospect, Rolling Meadows,
Wheeling) and Community Unit School District 220 (Barrington). Data as of January 30, 2015.
2
Successful Progression
Persistence
Fall to Spring and Fall to Fall Persistence
Persistence measures the rate that students enroll at Harper College in the fall semester and then reenroll in the spring semester of the same fiscal year or the fall of the following year. Although the
College’s fall to spring persistence rate shows an overall upward trend, persistence for the 2013 cohort
was the same as persistence for the 2010 cohort. Fall to fall persistence was at its lowest point in five
years for the 2011 cohort, dropping 3.7 percent to 56.9 percent, but reached its highest point for the
2012 cohort, 60.8 percent.
100%
80%
60%
77.8%
78.1%
76.0%
59.3%
60.7%
60.6%
78.1%
77.8%
76.7%
56.9%
60.8%
40%
20%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
76.0%
77.8%
78.1%
76.7%
77.8%
78.1%
2,063
1,835
2,630
56.9%
60.8%

% persisting fall to spring
N persisting fall to spring
2,046
2,160
2,140

% persisting fall to fall
59.3%
60.7%
60.6%
N persisting fall to fall
1,597
1,687
1,661
1,530
1,434
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts. Graduates are not included in the enrollment number unless the student re-enrolls in a subsequent program of
study.
LINKS TO
RELATED
FIGURES:
Fall to Spring
Persistence by
Gender
Page 31
Fall to Spring
Persistence by
Race/Ethnicity
Page 32
Fall to Spring
Persistence of
Developmental
Students
Page 33
Fall to Spring
Persistence by
Full-/Part-Time
Status
Page 34
Fall to Spring
Persistence by
Age Group
Page 35
Fall to Spring
Persistence by
Pell Status
Page 36
Fall to Fall
Persistence by
Gender
Page 37
Fall to Fall
Persistence by
Race/Ethnicity
Page 38
Fall to Fall
Persistence of
Developmental
Students
Page 39
Fall to Fall
Persistence by
Full-/Part-Time
Status
Page 40
Fall to Fall
Persistence by
Age Group
Page 41
Fall to Fall
Persistence by
Pell Status
Page 42
3
Successful Progression
Performance in Developmental Courses
Course Success: Developmental Courses
Course success rates in developmental courses have remained relatively stable since the 2009-10
academic year, but reached the highest point in 2010-11. These rates are approximately 14 to 18
percent lower than overall Harper College course success rates, which are approximately 73 to 75
percent (see page 12).
100%
80%
56.3%
58.7%
57.1%
57.9%
56.8%
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
2012-13
2013-14
% successful completions
56.3%
58.7%
57.1%
57.9%
56.8%
N successful completions
3,460
4,410
3,855
3,041
2,759
N course enrollments
6,141
7,511
6,755
5,253
4,857
60%
40%
20%
0%
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Successful completions include those earning a C or better in a course.
Course Success:
All College-Level
Courses
Page 12
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
4
Successful Progression
Performance in Developmental Courses
Success in Developmental Math
Success in developmental math is measured over a period of three years; students attempting
developmental math courses (those numbered below 90 at the College) are included as being successful
if they passed any single developmental math course with a C or better during this time period. Thus,
these numbers do not represent overall success rates in developmental math, but instead show the
percentage of students who are able to successfully complete a developmental math course within
three years.
Developmental math success rates reached 70.8 percent for the 2011 cohort, which was the highest
success rate for the cohorts examined in this report. These success rates take into account only those
students who are attempting developmental courses. Students who placed into developmental courses,
but did not attempt a developmental course during their first three years at Harper, are not included in
this figure.
100%
80%
70.8%
70.2%
69.5%
67.0%
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
67.7%
70.2%
69.5%
67.0%
70.8%
67.7%
60%
40%
20%
0%
% successfully completed any dev. math
N successfully completed any dev. math
N attempted any dev. math
779
758
764
769
716
1,150
1,080
1,100
1,147
1,012
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts; results are through year three. Developmental math attempts include all credential-seeking students who were
enrolled in developmental math courses numbered below 90. Successful completions include those earning a C or better in one of those
courses within three years.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success in
Developmental
Math by Gender
Page 44
Success in
Developmental
Math by
Race/Ethnicity
Page 45
5
Success in
Developmental
Math by Full-/
Part-Time Status
Page 46
Success in
Developmental
Math by Age
Group
Page 47
Success in
Developmental
Math by Pell
Status
Page 48
Successful Progression
Performance in Developmental Courses
Success in Developmental Writing
Success in developmental writing is measured over a period of three years; students attempting
developmental writing courses (English courses numbered 100 and below at the College) are included as
being successful if they passed any single developmental writing course during this time period with a C
or better. Thus, these numbers do not represent overall success rates in developmental writing, but
instead show the percentage of students who are able to successfully complete a developmental writing
course within three years.
Developmental writing cohort success rates have varied greatly over time, from a low of 66.1 percent
for the 2007 cohort to a high of 76.0 percent for the most recent, 2011 cohort. These success rates take
into account only those students who are attempting developmental writing courses. Students who
placed into developmental courses, but did not attempt a developmental writing course during their
first three years at Harper, are not included in this figure.
100%
80%
76.0%
74.4%
75.3%
70.7%
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
% successfully completed any dev. writing
66.1%
74.4%
75.3%
70.7%
76.0%
N successfully completed any dev. writing
254
311
339
326
316
N attempted any dev. writing
384
418
450
461
416
66.1%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts; results are through year three. Developmental writing attempts include all credential-seeking students who
were enrolled in developmental English courses numbered 100 and below. Successful completions include those earning a C or better in one of
those courses within three years.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success in
Developmental
Writing by
Gender
Page 50
Success in
Developmental
Writing by
Race/Ethnicity
Page 51
6
Success in
Developmental
Writing by Full-/
Part-Time Status
Page 52
Success in
Developmental
Writing by Age
Group
Page 53
Success in
Developmental
Writing by Pell
Status
Page 54
Successful Progression
Performance in Developmental Courses
Success in Developmental Reading
Success in developmental reading is measured over a period of three years; students attempting
developmental reading courses (those numbered below 100 at the College) are included as being
successful if they passed any single developmental reading course during this time period with a C or
better. Thus, these numbers do not represent overall success rates in developmental reading, but
instead show the percentage of students who are able to successfully complete a developmental
reading course within three years.
Developmental reading cohort success rates have increased over time, from a low of 67.8 percent for
the 2007 cohort to 81.1 percent for the 2011 cohort. These success rates take into account only those
students who are attempting developmental reading courses. Students who placed into developmental
courses, but did not attempt a developmental course during their first three years at Harper, are not
included in this figure.
100%
80%
78.1%
78.1%
81.1%
72.7%
67.8%
60%
40%
20%
0%
% successfully completed any dev. reading
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
67.8%
72.7%
78.1%
78.1%
81.1%
N successfully completed any dev. reading
263
314
338
370
356
N attempted any dev. reading
388
432
433
474
439
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts; results are through year three. Developmental reading attempts include all credential-seeking students who
were enrolled in developmental reading courses (those numbered below 100 at the College). Successful completions include those earning a C
or better in one of those courses within three years.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success in
Developmental
Reading by
Gender
Page 56
Success in
Developmental
Reading by
Race/Ethnicity
Page 57
7
Success in
Developmental
Reading by Full/Part-Time
Status
Page 58
Success in
Developmental
Reading by Age
Group
Page 59
Success in
Developmental
Reading by Pell
Status
Page 60
Successful Progression
Developmental Students Moving to Gatekeeper Course Work and Completion
Students Starting in any Developmental Math Course Completing Developmental and
Gatekeeper Math
Of students who successfully complete the highest level of developmental math, less than 60 percent go
on to successfully complete a gatekeeper math course. This rate was at its lowest for the 2010 cohort,
53.4 percent, but reached its highest for the 2011 cohort, 58.0 percent.
100%
80%
60%
56.5%
57.7%
53.4%
58.0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
56.5%
57.7%
53.4%
58.0%
446
456
502
417
252
263
268
242
40%
20%
0%
% successfully completing gatekeeper math after
successfully completing developmental math
N successfully completed highest level
developmental math
N successfully completed gatekeeper math
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Developmental math student definition: students in credential-seeking cohort that enrolled in at least one developmental math course (those
numbered below 90 at the College) through year three.
8
Successful Progression
Developmental Students Moving to Gatekeeper Course Work and Completion
Students Starting in any Developmental Math Course Completing Developmental and
Gatekeeper Math
Overall, approximately 40 percent of students who begin their course work at Harper in developmental
math successfully complete the highest level of developmental math. Fewer than 25 percent of students
who begin their course work at Harper in developmental math successfully complete a gatekeeper math
course. Students in this group also earn credentials at a comparatively low rate, with only 16.5 percent
of the 2011 cohort earning a credential within three years.
2008
2009
2010
2011
N developmental math students
1,076
1,099
1,156
1,024
% enrolled in highest level developmental math
59.8%
57.6%
61.3%
60.6%
% successfully completed highest level developmental math
41.4%
41.5%
43.4%
40.7%
% enrolled in gatekeeper math
31.6%
32.1%
33.1%
32.1%
% successfully completed gatekeeper math
23.4%
23.9%
23.2%
23.6%
% earned credential
17.3%
18.4%
19.4%
16.5%
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Developmental math student definition: students in credential-seeking cohort that enrolled in at least one developmental math course (those
numbered below 90 at the College) through year three.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success Rate of
Developmental
Students in
College-Level
English
Pages 10-11
Math Success by
Gender
Pages 62-63
Math Success by
Race/Ethnicity
Pages 64-65
Math Success by
Full-/ Part-Time
Status
Pages 66-67
Math Success by
Age Group
Pages 68-69
Math Success by
Pell Status
Pages 70-71
9
Successful Progression
Developmental Students Moving to Gatekeeper Course Work and Completion
Students Starting in any Developmental Reading/Writing Course Completing Developmental
and Gatekeeper English
Of students who successfully complete the highest level of developmental reading or writing, only 60 to
70 percent go on to successfully complete a gatekeeper English course. This rate has been decreasing
over time, from a high of 68.2 percent for the 2009 cohort to a low of 61.6 percent for the 2011 cohort.
100%
80%
67.4%
68.2%
66.1%
61.6%
60%
40%
20%
0%
% successfully completing gatekeeper English after
successfully completing developmental reading/writing
N successfully completed highest level developmental
reading/writing
N successfully completed gatekeeper English
2008
2009
2010
2011
67.4%
68.2%
66.1%
61.6%
374
403
422
378
252
275
279
233
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Developmental reading/writing student definition: students in credential-seeking cohort that enrolled in at least one developmental reading
(below 100) or writing (100 and below) course through year three.
10
Successful Progression
Developmental Students Moving to Gatekeeper Course Work and Completion
Students Starting in any Developmental Reading/Writing Course Completing Developmental
and Gatekeeper English
Overall, approximately 63 to 66 percent of students who begin their course work at Harper in
developmental reading or writing successfully complete the highest level of that developmental
sequence. Approximately 39 to 45 percent of students who begin their course work at Harper in
developmental reading or writing successfully complete a gatekeeper English course. Students in this
group also earn credentials at a comparatively low rate, with only 12.2 percent of the 2011 cohort
earning a credential within three years.
2008
N developmental reading/writing students
2009
2010
2011
568
609
641
598
% enrolled in highest level developmental reading/writing
88.6%
84.7%
81.4%
82.1%
% successfully completed highest level developmental reading/writing
65.8%
66.2%
65.8%
63.2%
% enrolled in gatekeeper English
60.2%
56.2%
52.1%
49.2%
% successfully completed gatekeeper English
44.4%
45.2%
43.5%
39.0%
% earned credential
12.0%
14.1%
14.5%
12.2%
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Developmental reading/writing student definition: students in credential-seeking cohort that enrolled in at least one developmental reading
(below 100) or writing (100 and below) course through year three.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success Rate of
Developmental
Students in
College-Level
Math
Pages 8-9
English Success
by Gender
Pages 73-74
English Success
by
Race/Ethnicity
Pages 75-76
English Success
by Full-/ PartTime Status
Pages 77-78
English Success
by Age Group
Pages 79-80
English Success
by Pell Status
Pages 81-82
11
Successful Progression
Performance in College-Level Courses
Course Success: All College-Level Courses
Overall college-level course success rates have shown improvement over time, from 73.0 percent during
the 2009-10 academic year to 74.7 percent during the 2013-14 academic year.
100%
80%
73.0%
73.0%
74.3%
75.2%
74.7%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
2012-13
2013-14
% successful completions
73.0%
73.0%
74.3%
75.2%
74.7%
N successful completions
70,075
69,798
67,308
65,385
63,215
N course enrollments
96,004
95,582
90,556
86,944
84,666
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Successful completions include those earning a C or better in a course.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Course Success:
Developmental
Courses
Page 4
12
Course Success:
College-Level
Math and English
Page 13
Successful Progression
Performance in College-Level Courses
Course Success: College-Level Math and English
Course success rates for math and English courses have also shown improvement over time, from a low
of 64.1 percent during the 2010-11 academic year to 66.5 percent during the 2013-14 academic year.
These rates fall approximately 8-10 percent below overall Harper college-level course success rates.
100%
80%
66.2%
66.5%
2011-12
2012-13
2013-14
64.3%
66.2%
66.5%
65.0%
64.1%
64.3%
2009-10
2010-11
65.0%
64.1%
60%
40%
20%
0%
% successful completions
N successful completions
9,464
9,123
8,834
9,240
9,527
N course enrollments
14,568
14,236
13,734
13,963
14,316
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Successful completions include those earning a C or better in a course.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Course Success:
Developmental
Courses
Page 4
13
Course Success:
All College-Level
Courses
Page 12
Successful Progression
Performance in College-Level Courses
Success in Gatekeeper Math
Success rates for gatekeeper math courses have varied over time but reached a five-year low of 70.5
percent for the most recent (2011) cohort. The 2007 cohort showed the highest success rate, 77.2
percent, during the five-year period.
100%
80%
77.2%
75.5%
74.4%
73.6%
70.5%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
% successfully completed gatekeeper math
77.2%
74.4%
75.5%
73.6%
70.5%
N successfully completed gatekeeper math
688
659
716
678
574
N attempted gatekeeper math
891
886
948
921
814
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts; results are through year three. Gatekeeper math includes MTH101, MTH103, MTH130, MTH165 and MGT225.
Successful completions include those earning a C or better in one of those courses.
LINKS TO
RELATED
FIGURES:
Success in
Gatekeeper
Math by
Gender
Page 84
Success in
Gatekeeper
Math by
Race/Ethnicity
Page 85
Success in
Gatekeeper
Math by
Developmental
Placement
Page 86
14
Success in
Gatekeeper
Math by Full/Part-Time
Status
Page 87
Success in
Gatekeeper
Math by Age
Group
Page 88
Success in
Gatekeeper
Math by Pell
Status
Page 89
Successful Progression
Performance in College-Level Courses
Success in Gatekeeper English
Student success in gatekeeper English has remained relatively stable over time. Within three years of
beginning course work at Harper College, approximately 80 percent of students attempting gatekeeper
English are successful in that course. This percentage reached a five-year high of 83.1 percent for the
2010 cohort.
100%
82.6%
83.1%
79.8%
81.1%
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
% successfully completed gatekeeper English
82.6%
79.8%
81.1%
83.1%
80.3%
N successfully completed gatekeeper English
1,342
1,312
1,383
1,371
1,256
N attempted gatekeeper English
1,624
1,644
1,706
1,650
1,565
80%
80.3%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts; results are through year three. Gatekeeper English includes only ENG101. Successful completions include those
earning a C or better in that course.
LINKS TO
RELATED
FIGURES:
Success in
Gatekeeper
English by
Gender
Page 91
Success in
Gatekeeper
English by
Race/Ethnicity
Page 92
Success in
Gatekeeper
English by
Developmental
Placement
Page 93
15
Success in
Gatekeeper
English by Full/
Part-Time
Status
Page 94
Success in
Gatekeeper
English by Age
Group
Page 95
Success in
Gatekeeper
English by Pell
Status
Page 96
Successful Progression
Earning Credits Toward Completion
Earning 15 and 30 College Credits: All Credential-Seeking Students
Between 52 and 57 percent of Harper credential-seeking students earn 15 college-level credits within
three years of beginning course work at the College. Between 35 and 38 percent of students earn 30
college-level credits within three years.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
N all credential-seeking students
2,691
2,777
2,769
2,720
% Enrolled in 15 college-level credits
71.9%
72.7%
73.5%
70.4%
% Earned 15 college-level credits
54.4%
56.2%
55.8%
52.7%
% Enrolled in 30 college-level credits
51.8%
53.2%
52.9%
48.9%
% Earned 30 college-level credits
37.9%
38.0%
38.0%
35.2%
% Earned credential
20.6%
23.3%
24.3%
22.9%
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
LINKS TO
RELATED
FIGURES:
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits:
College-Level
Courses
Page 17
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits:
Developmental
Courses
Page 18
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits:
Developmental
Math
Page 19
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits:
Developmental
Reading/Writing
Page 20
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits by
Gender
Pages 98-99
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits by
Race/Ethnicity
Pages 100-101
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits by
Developmental
Placement
Pages 102-103
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits by
Full-/Part-Time
Status
Pages 104-105
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits by
Age Group
Pages 106-107
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits by
Pell Status
Pages 108-109
16
Successful Progression
Earning Credits Toward Completion
Earning 15 and 30 College Credits: Students Starting in College-Level Courses
Approximately half of college-ready students earn 15 college-level credits within their first three years at
the College. Between 34 and 36 percent of college-ready students earn 30 college-level credits within
their first three years.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
N college-level students
1,616
1,692
1,617
1,657
% Enrolled in 15 college-level credits
61.3%
61.6%
63.7%
63.3%
% Earned 15 college-level credits
50.7%
50.7%
51.4%
51.2%
% Enrolled in 30 college-level credits
44.6%
45.3%
46.6%
45.3%
% Earned 30 college-level credits
35.5%
35.3%
35.7%
34.8%
21.8%
24.6%
26.5%
25.6%
% Earned credential
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
LINKS TO
RELATED
FIGURES:
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits:
All CredentialSeeking Students
Page 16
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits:
Developmental
Courses
Page 18
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits:
Developmental
Math
Page 19
17
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits:
Developmental
Reading/Writing
Page 20
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits by
Developmental
Placement
Pages 102-103
Successful Progression
Earning Credits Toward Completion
Earning 15 and 30 College Credits: Students Starting in any Developmental Course
Between 49 and 57 percent of developmental students earn 15 college-level credits within three years
of beginning course work at the College. Between 32 and 37 percent of students earn 30 college-level
credits within three years.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
N developmental students
1,210
1,250
1,300
1,174
% Enrolled in 15 college-level credits
78.0%
78.2%
77.4%
73.8%
% Earned 15 college-level credits
53.3%
56.2%
54.9%
49.8%
% Enrolled in 30 college-level credits
55.6%
56.7%
54.6%
49.4%
% Earned 30 college-level credits
36.9%
36.6%
36.4%
32.5%
% Earned credential
16.7%
18.3%
18.8%
16.9%
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Developmental student definition: students in credential-seeking cohort that enrolled in at least one developmental course (math below 90,
reading below 100, or English 100 and below) through year three.
LINKS TO
RELATED
FIGURES:
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits:
All CredentialSeeking Students
Page 16
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits:
College-Level
Courses
Page 17
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits:
Developmental
Math
Page 19
18
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits:
Developmental
Reading/Writing
Page 20
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits by
Developmental
Placement
Pages 102-103
Successful Progression
Earning Credits Toward Completion
Earning 15 and 30 College Credits: Students Starting in any Developmental Math Course
Between 51 and 58 percent of developmental math students earn 15 college-level credits within three
years of beginning course work at the College. Between 33 and 39 percent of developmental math
students earn 30 college-level credits within three years.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
N developmental math students
1,076
1,099
1,156
1,024
% Enrolled in 15 college-level credits
80.0%
79.3%
79.1%
74.5%
% Earned 15 college-level credits
54.8%
57.3%
56.6%
51.2%
% Enrolled in 30 college-level credits
56.7%
57.4%
55.8%
49.9%
% Earned 30 college-level credits
38.3%
37.5%
37.4%
33.3%
% Earned credential
17.3%
18.4%
19.4%
16.5%
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Developmental math student definition: students in credential-seeking cohort that enrolled in at least one developmental math course (those
numbered below 90 at the College) through year three.
LINKS TO
RELATED
FIGURES:
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits:
All CredentialSeeking Students
Page 16
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits:
College-Level
Courses
Page 17
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits:
Developmental
Courses
Page 18
19
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits:
Developmental
Reading/Writing
Page 20
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits by
Developmental
Placement
Pages 102-103
Successful Progression
Earning Credits Toward Completion
Earning 15 and 30 College Credits: Students Starting in any Developmental Reading/Writing Course
Between 38 and 47 percent of developmental reading/writing students earn 15 college-level credits
within three years of beginning course work at the College. Fewer than 30 percent of developmental
reading/writing students earn 30 college-level credits within three years.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
568
609
641
598
% Enrolled in 15 college-level credits
69.0%
72.2%
68.0%
64.2%
% Earned 15 college-level credits
42.6%
45.3%
47.0%
38.6%
% Enrolled in 30 college-level credits
47.0%
47.3%
46.0%
39.6%
% Earned 30 college-level credits
25.0%
26.6%
29.5%
21.7%
% Earned credential
12.0%
14.1%
14.5%
12.2%
N developmental reading/writing students
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Developmental reading/writing student definition: students in credential-seeking cohort that enrolled in at least one developmental reading
(below 100) or writing (100 and below) course through year three.
LINKS TO
RELATED
FIGURES:
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits:
All CredentialSeeking Students
Page 16
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits:
College-Level
Courses
Page 17
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits:
Developmental
Courses
Page 18
20
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits:
Developmental
Math
Page 19
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits by
Developmental
Placement
Pages 102-103
Successful Progression
Student Engagement
Community College Survey of Student Engagement (CCSSE)
Harper College administers the Community College Survey of Student Engagement (CCSSE) every three
years. The most recent survey was administered in spring 2012 and includes benchmarks against three
years of colleges participating in the survey. According to CCSSE:
Benchmarks are groups of conceptually related items that address key areas of student engagement.
CCSSE’s five benchmarks denote areas that educational research has shown to be important in quality
educational practice. The benchmarks are active and collaborative learning, student effort, academic
challenge, student-faculty interaction, and support for learners.
Every college has a score for each benchmark, computed by averaging the scores on survey items that
comprise that benchmark. Benchmark scores are standardized so that the mean — the average of all
participating students — always is 50 and the standard deviation is 25. The most valuable use of
benchmarks is to see an individual college’s deviation from the mean, and the standardized score
provides an easy way to assess whether an individual college is performing above or below the mean (50)
on each benchmark. (Source: http://www.ccsse.org/benchmarkpopup.html)
Harper College was lower than the mean score on all CCSSE benchmarks in 2012. Additionally, all but
one score showed a decrease since both the 2006 and 2009 surveys were conducted. Student-Faculty
Interaction scored slightly higher than in 2009, but continues to fall below 2006 benchmark levels. The
next CCSSE will be administered at Harper in spring 2015.
100
75
CCSSE benchmark
50
score (mean = 50)
25
0
 2006
Active and
Collaborative
Learning
48.0
 2009
46.2
 2012
45.6
Student Effort
Academic
Challenge
Student-Faculty
Interaction
Support for
Learners
48.0
50.2
48.6
49.5
48.4
50.3
47.9
49.2
47.6
49.6
48.0
47.7
Source: CCSSE 2006, 2009 and 2012 Institutional Reports.
21
Successful Progression
Student Engagement
Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Inventory (SSI)
In fall 2011 and fall 2014, Harper College administered the Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Inventory
(SSI). One outcome of the survey is a scale satisfaction report, indicating students’ aggregate satisfaction
with a variety of categories such as Student Centeredness and Campus Climate. Students respond to the
questions on a scale of 1 to 7, with a “6” representing “satisfied” and a “7” representing “very satisfied,”
while “1” and “2” represent “very dissatisfied” and “dissatisfied,” respectively.
Harper’s results were similar from the 2011 to the 2014 administration of the SSI, with all scale
satisfaction scores averaging between 5 and 6. In both years, Admissions and Financial Aid Effectiveness
scored lowest (5.40-5.41) and Campus Services scored highest (5.91-5.98).
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Student
Instructional
Centeredness Effectiveness
Safety and
Security
 2011
5.75
5.76
5.49
 2014
5.74
5.74
5.52
Admissions
Academic
and
Advising
Financial Aid
Effectiveness
Effectiveness
5.42
5.40
5.43
5.41
Campus
Services
Registration
Effectiveness
Campus
Climate
5.98
5.84
5.94
5.91
5.79
5.90
Source: Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Inventory 2011 and 2014 Institutional Reports.
22
Completion and Transfer
Completion and Transfer are communicated through a variety of measures. The number of credentials
conferred as well as individuals earning credentials (completers) are provided by Harper College
Enrollment Services and Harper Banner Student Information System and shown on pages 24 and 25.
Graduation and transfer rates, using definitions from the Integrated Postsecondary Data System (IPEDS)
are presented on page 26. Demographic breakouts for these measures are included in the Completers,
Completion Rates and Transfer Rates sections of this report. These breakouts come from a variety of
sources, such as the Harper Banner Student Information System, IPEDS and AtD.
The number of credentials conferred at Harper College increased from 2,452 in 2009-10 to 3,743 in
2013-14. In 2011-12, Harper achieved its highest number of credentials conferred: 4,487. The large
increase in credentials over time as well as the peak seen in 2011-12 is largely due to our Completion
Concierge and our efforts to stack career certificates that lead to degrees.
From the 2007 to the 2010 cohort, graduation rates as measured by IPEDS also increased, while IPEDS
transfer rates have decreased since the 2007 cohort. The combined graduation and transfer rate was at
its highest during the five-year period for the most recent (2010) cohort, at 53.5 percent.
23
Completion and Transfer
Credentials and Completers
Number of Credentials Conferred
In 2010, Harper College adopted a new Strategic Plan with a primary focus of degree and certificate
completion. Through the Strategic Plan, the College began several new initiatives such as the
Completion Concierge, which focused on helping students complete degrees and certificates. These
initiatives led to a large increase in the number of credentials conferred in subsequent years. Although
the number of credentials decreased from 2011-12 to 2012-13 and again to 2013-14, the number of
credentials conferred remains higher than those earned prior to adoption of the new Strategic Plan.
5,000
4,500
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
Number of credentials
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
2012-13
2013-14
2,452
3,838
4,487
3,930
3,743
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
24
Completion and Transfer
Credentials and Completers
Number of Completers
This report defines a completer as a student who earned a degree and/or certificate within a given year.
A single completer can earn multiple degrees and/or certificates each year, giving the College a higher
number of completions than completers each year. The highest number of completers was reached in
2011-12, with a decrease to 3,482 in 2012-13 and to 3,355 in 2013-14. The large increase in completers
over time, as well as the peak in 2011-12, is largely due to the College’s Completion Concierge and
efforts to stack career certificates that lead to degrees.
5,000
4,500
4,000
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
Number of completers
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
2012-13
2013-14
2,197
2,534
3,824
3,482
3,355
Source: Illinois Community College Board (ICCB) official A1 submission.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Number of
Completers by
Gender
Page 111
Percentage of
Completers by
Gender
Page 112
25
Number of
Completers by
Race/Ethnicity
Page 113
Percentage of
Completers by
Race/Ethnicity
Page 114
Completion and Transfer
Completion and Transfer Rates
Students Completing or Transferring
Current IPEDS graduation cohorts, unlike the AtD cohorts used throughout most of this report, include
only full-time students during their first semester at the College (those who attend 12 or more credit
hours). Like AtD cohorts, only students beginning at the College during a fall semester are included.
Harper College’s three-year graduation rate increased from 13.9 percent for the 2007 IPEDS cohort to
24.1 percent for the 2010 IPEDS cohort.
Transfer rates decreased 6.3 percent from the 2007 to the 2010 cohort. For the fall 2010 cohort, 29.4
percent of students transferred out of the College instead of obtaining a degree or certificate. In total,
53.5 percent of first-time full-time credential-seeking students in the 2010 cohort received a credential
or transferred out of Harper College within three years of beginning their course work at the College.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2007
2008
2009
2010
% graduated
13.9%
19.0%
20.4%
24.1%
N graduated
236
311
314
371
% transferred
35.7%
33.2%
29.0%
29.4%
N transferred
607
545
446
452
% graduated or transferred
49.6%
52.2%
49.4%
53.5%
N graduated or transferred
843
856
760
823
Source: IPEDS. Transfer includes only students who transferred without graduating. See Appendix for full IPEDS definitions.
LINKS TO
RELATED
FIGURES:
Completion
Rates by
Gender
Page 116
Completion
Rates by
Race/Ethnicity
Page 117
Completion
Rates of
Developmental
Students
Page 118
Completion
Rates by Full-/
Part-Time
Status
Page 119
Completion
Rates by Age
Group
Page 120
Completion
Rates by Pell
Status
Page 121
Transfer Rates
by Gender
Page 124
Transfer Rates
by
Race/Ethnicity
Page 125
Transfer Rates
of
Developmental
Students
Page 126
Transfer Rates
by Full-/PartTime Status
Page 127
Transfer Rates
by Age Group
Page 128
Transfer Rates
by Pell Status
Page 129
26
Combined
Completion
and Transfer
by Gender
Page 123
Workforce and Employment
Workforce and employment data are obtained through the Harper College Career Graduate Follow-Up
Survey. The follow-up survey is administered once per year to Harper career graduates, and is therefore
self-reported data. These data provide information about graduate employment in the field related to
the program of study as well as breakouts by full- and part-time status.
Overall, Harper career graduates are employed at slightly higher rates than they were in 2009. The
percentage of survey respondents who were employed in their related field increased from 45.9 percent
for 2009 graduates to 48.6 percent for 2013 graduates.
27
Workforce and Employment
Employment in Field Related to Harper Program of Study
Career graduate employment was measured via the Illinois Community College Board (ICCB) graduate
survey question “How closely is your present job related to your former community college program?”
(Related, Not related). Harper’s most recent employment in related field, 48.6 percent, is higher than
any previous period during the five years included in this report. Harper’s rate is currently below the
national median of 58.5 percent, provided by the National Community College Benchmark Project
(NCCBP).
100%
80%
60%
48.6%
47.8%
46.5%
2010 graduates
2011 graduates
2012 graduates
2013 graduates
45.9%
45.1%
47.8%
46.5%
48.6%
195
294
508
628
578
425
652
1,062
1,350
1,190
45.9%
45.1%
2009 graduates
% employed in related field
N employed in related field
N completers responding
40%
20%
0%
Source: Harper College Career Graduate Follow-Up Survey: “How closely is your present job related to your former community college
program?” (Related, Not related). Percentage calculated on number of students responding “related” to this item, divided by the total number
of students completing the survey question.
28
Workforce and Employment
Employment Status
The majority of 2013 ICCB career graduate survey respondents were working either full-time (47.2
percent) or part-time (29.2 percent) after they left Harper. In all, 76.4% of 2013 graduate survey
respondents were employed either full- or part-time at the time they completed the survey, a rate
similar to the employment rate for 2011 and 2012 graduates.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2009
graduates
47.3%
2010
graduates
40.0%
2011
graduates
49.5%
2012
graduates
47.5%
2013
graduates
47.2%
Employed part-time – less than 30 hours per week
26.1%
31.6%
26.7%
28.8%
29.2%
Unemployed, seeking employment
15.3%
11.0%
12.4%
14.7%
12.9%
Unemployed, not seeking employment
11.3%
17.3%
11.4%
8.9%
10.7%
425
652
1,056
1,343
1,180
Employed full-time – 30 hours or more per week
Number of respondents
Source: Harper College Career Graduate Follow-Up Survey: “What is your present employment status?” (Employed full-time; Employed parttime; Full-time military service; Unemployed, seeking employment; Unemployed, not seeking employment). Graduates responding “Full-time
military service” are included in the “Employed full-time” category for the purposes of this report. Percentage calculated on number of students
responding to each category of this item, divided by the total number of students completing the survey question.
29
Demographics
Successful Progression
Persistence
Persistence is measured by the percentage of a student cohort that continues to re-enroll at Harper
during a given time period. Both fall to spring and fall to fall persistence are included in this report.
Students included in fall to spring persistence are those who enrolled as new Harper credential-seeking
students in a given fall semester and then re-enrolled in the spring semester of the same fiscal year.
Students included in fall to fall persistence are those who enrolled as new Harper credential-seeking
students in a given fall semester and then re-enrolled the following fall semester. Achieving the Dream
cohorts are used to track fall to spring and fall to fall persistence of Harper students (see pages x-xi).
Over the time period analyzed in this report, fall to spring persistence has shown a slight increase. Fall to
fall persistence has also increased slightly over time, despite a drop for the 2011 cohort. The following
pages provide more detailed information about persistence for demographic groups by gender,
race/ethnicity, developmental status, full-/part-time status, age group and Pell status.
Persistence is a vital measure of students’ ability and willingness to continue their studies at Harper
College. The relatively low persistence rates for the 2011 cohort indicate a need to further examine
reasons for changes in persistence over time as well as potential solutions for improving persistence for
future Harper students.
30
Successful Progression
Persistence
Fall to Spring Persistence by Gender
Females and males persist from fall to spring at similar rates. Males 20-24, a student group of focus for
the Harper College Strategic Plan, have a lower persistence rate than the overall College rate, and that
rate has decreased over time. For the 2013 cohort, the male 20-24 fall to spring persistence rate was
16.6 percent below the College’s overall fall to spring persistence rate.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
Female % persisting
78.2%
78.7%
78.3%
77.7%
78.6%
Female N persisting
1,072
1,104
1,091
994
1,315
Male % persisting
77.3%
77.5%
75.4%
77.9%
77.5%
Male N persisting
1,088
1,036
956
841
1,315
Male 20-24 % persisting
68.4%
68.7%
65.8%
66.3%
61.5%
Male 20-24 N persisting
154
160
144
122
174
Overall % persisting
77.8%
78.1%
76.7%
77.8%
78.1%
Overall N persisting
2,160
2,140
2,063
1,835
2,630
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts. This is a self-reported category; therefore there are missing responses and categories do not always sum to
overall total. Missing responses are included in the overall total. Fall graduates are not included in the spring enrollment number unless the
student re-enrolls in a subsequent program of study.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Fall to Spring
and Fall to Fall
Persistence
Page 3
31
Fall to Fall
Persistence by
Gender
Page 37
Successful Progression
Persistence
Fall to Spring Persistence by Race/Ethnicity
In general, black and Hispanic students persist at rates below the College’s overall fall to spring
persistence rates. Black students have shown wide variation in persistence rates over time, increasing
from a low of 62.6 percent for the 2011 cohort to a high of 77.6 percent for the 2013 cohort. For the
2013 cohort, black students persisted at a rate comparable to the overall Harper persistence rate.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
Asian % persisting
78.8%
81.3%
80.1%
77.0%
81.6%
Asian N persisting
215
165
165
154
279
Black % persisting
70.1%
69.3%
62.6%
63.9%
77.6%
Black N persisting
157
185
181
108
156
Hispanic % persisting
73.4%
74.0%
73.1%
76.5%
73.9%
Hispanic N persisting
350
325
332
355
505
White % persisting
79.9%
79.7%
79.7%
78.9%
78.9%
White N persisting
1,340
1,304
1,187
1,044
1,562
Overall % persisting
77.8%
78.1%
76.7%
77.8%
78.1%
Overall N persisting
2,160
2,140
2,063
1,835
2,630
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts. Due to a small number of students, some racial/ethnic groups such as American Indian/Alaskan Native are not
listed separately in this report. This is a self-reported category; therefore there are missing responses. Additional racial/ethnic groups and
missing responses are included in the overall total. Fall graduates are not included in the spring enrollment number unless the student reenrolls in a subsequent program of study.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Fall to Spring
and Fall to Fall
Persistence
Page 3
32
Fall to Fall
Persistence by
Race/Ethnicity
Page 38
Successful Progression
Persistence
Fall to Spring Persistence of Developmental Students
Students placing into developmental math persist at a similar rate to the overall Harper College fall to
spring persistence rate. However, students placing into developmental reading and writing tend to have
lower persistence rates than both the overall Harper rate and the persistence rate of students placing
into developmental math. Thus, in general, reading and writing developmental placement correlate with
lower fall to spring persistence rates.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
Dev. math % persisting
78.6%
77.8%
78.4%
77.9%
75.2%
Dev. math N persisting
902
944
859
701
925
Dev. reading % persisting
80.7%
76.1%
74.5%
74.6%
72.5%
Dev. reading N persisting
446
451
417
299
383
Dev. writing % persisting
77.6%
73.7%
71.2%
73.5%
72.0%
Dev. writing N persisting
277
283
245
175
221
Any dev. % persisting
79.5%
78.1%
78.3%
77.5%
75.5%
Any dev. N persisting
1,026
1,048
971
772
1,058
Overall % persisting
77.8%
78.1%
76.7%
77.8%
78.1%
Overall N persisting
2,160
2,140
2,063
1,835
2,630
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts. Developmental courses are those numbered below 90 in math, below 100 in reading, or 100 and below in
English. Fall graduates are not included in the spring enrollment number unless the student re-enrolls in a subsequent program of study.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Fall to Spring
and Fall to Fall
Persistence
Page 3
33
Fall to Fall
Persistence of
Developmental
Students
Page 39
Successful Progression
Persistence
Fall to Spring Persistence by Full-/Part-Time Status
Because all students within AtD cohorts are credential-seeking, part-time students should be expected
to continue their studies at a similar rate to full-time students in order to reach their goal of completing
a degree or certificate. However, the figure below shows that full-time students persist at a rate
between 20 and 27 percent higher than part-time students.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
Full-time % persisting
87.0%
85.5%
86.0%
86.7%
86.0%
Full-time N persisting
1,562
1,500
1,441
1,253
1,850
Part-time % persisting
60.8%
65.0%
61.4%
63.7%
64.1%
Part-time N persisting
598
640
622
582
780
Overall % persisting
77.8%
78.1%
76.7%
77.8%
78.1%
Overall N persisting
2,160
2,140
2,063
1,835
2,630
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts. Full- and part-time status are as of the student’s first fall semester at the College. Fall graduates are not
included in the spring enrollment number unless the student re-enrolls in a subsequent program of study.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Fall to Spring
and Fall to Fall
Persistence
Page 3
34
Fall to Fall
Persistence by
Full-/Part-Time
Status
Page 40
Successful Progression
Persistence
Fall to Spring Persistence by Age Group
Students age 19 and under consistently persist at higher rates than all other age groups. These students
have persistence rates that are approximately 6-7 percent higher than the overall Harper average.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Age 19 and under % persisting
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
84.8%
84.3%
83.5%
85.1%
84.3%
Age 19 and under N persisting
1,450
1,392
1,338
1,223
1,934
Age 20-24% persisting
71.5%
68.0%
67.4%
68.8%
63.2%
Age 20-24 N persisting
324
334
322
286
350
Age 25-29 % persisting
62.8%
70.0%
66.4%
65.2%
69.3%
Age 25-29 N persisting
135
140
150
116
151
Age 30 and over % persisting
62.8%
68.8%
66.5%
64.0%
64.4%
Age 30 and over N persisting
251
274
252
210
195
Overall % persisting
77.8%
78.1%
76.7%
77.8%
78.1%
Overall N persisting
2,160
2,140
2,063
1,835
2,630
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts. This is a self-reported category; therefore there are missing responses and categories do not always sum to
overall total. Missing responses are included in the overall total. Age groups are as of the student’s first fall semester at the College. Fall
graduates are not included in the spring enrollment number unless the student re-enrolls in a subsequent program of study.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Fall to Spring
and Fall to Fall
Persistence
Page 3
35
Fall to Fall
Persistence by
Age Group
Page 41
Successful Progression
Persistence
Fall to Spring Persistence by Pell Status
Students receiving Pell grants consistently exhibit higher persistence rates than do students who do not
receive Pell grants. For the 2013 cohort, the fall to spring persistence rate of Pell students was 85.1
percent, which was more than 10 percent higher than non-Pell student persistence.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Pell % persisting
Pell N persisting
Non-Pell % persisting
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
84.0%
82.6%
82.1%
85.2%
85.1%
620
770
743
615
982
75.5%
75.8%
74.0%
74.5%
74.4%
Non-Pell N persisting
1,540
1,370
1,320
1,220
1,648
Overall % persisting
77.8%
78.1%
76.7%
77.8%
78.1%
2,160
2,140
2,063
1,835
2,630
Overall N persisting
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts. Pell status is as of the student’s first fall semester at the College. Fall graduates are not included in the spring
enrollment number unless the student re-enrolls in a subsequent program of study.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Fall to Spring
and Fall to Fall
Persistence
Page 3
36
Fall to Fall
Persistence by
Pell Status
Page 42
Successful Progression
Persistence
Fall to Fall Persistence by Gender
Although males had fall to fall persistence rates 0.8% higher than females for the 2012 cohort, females
tend to have slightly higher fall to fall persistence rates than do males. After a decrease for the 2011
cohort, all groups showed an increase in fall to fall persistence for the 2012 cohort. Male fall to fall
persistence increased 6.2 percent from the 2011 to the 2012 cohort, while female fall to fall persistence
increased 1.6 percent over the same period. Males age 20-24 have persistence rates lower than the
overall Harper fall to fall persistence rate.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Female % persisting
Female N persisting
Male % persisting
Male N persisting
Male 20-24 % persisting
Male 20-24 N persisting
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
60.9%
61.5%
61.6%
58.8%
60.4%
840
842
864
819
773
57.6%
60.0%
59.6%
55.0%
61.2%
757
845
797
698
661
44.4%
44.4%
48.1%
32.4%
47.3%
103
100
112
71
87
Overall % persisting
59.3%
60.7%
60.6%
56.9%
60.8%
Overall N persisting
1,597
1,687
1,661
1,530
1,434
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts. This is a self-reported category; therefore there are missing responses and categories do not always sum to
overall total. Missing responses are included in the overall total. Previous fall and spring graduates are not included in the fall enrollment
number unless the student re-enrolls in a subsequent program of study.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Fall to Spring
and Fall to Fall
Persistence
Page 3
37
Fall to Spring
Persistence by
Gender
Page 31
Successful Progression
Persistence
Fall to Fall Persistence by Race/Ethnicity
The overall fall to fall persistence rate increased for all racial/ethnic groups from the 2011 to the 2012
cohort, with the exception of Asian students. Asian student persistence decreased 9.3 percent from the
2010 to the 2011 cohort and 5.6 percent from the 2011 to the 2012 cohort. Black and Hispanic students
showed the largest increases in fall to fall persistence, 14.5 percent and 5.2 percent, respectively for the
2012 cohort.
Beyond the trends that each group exhibits, there is a notable gap between overall persistence and
persistence for black students. Black student persistence has been extremely variable, trending
approximately 10 to 30 percent below the overall fall to fall persistence rate.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Asian % persisting
61.0%
65.6%
73.4%
64.1%
58.5%
Asian N persisting
163
179
149
132
117
Black % persisting
49.5%
44.6%
40.8%
28.7%
43.2%
Black N persisting
91
100
109
83
73
Hispanic % persisting
51.5%
57.2%
57.6%
52.6%
57.8%
Hispanic N persisting
194
273
253
239
268
White % persisting
62.6%
62.9%
62.7%
61.9%
63.0%
White N persisting
953
1,056
1,026
922
833
Overall % persisting
59.3%
60.7%
60.6%
56.9%
60.8%
Overall N persisting
1,597
1,687
1,661
1,530
1,434
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts. Due to a small number of students, some racial/ethnic groups such as American Indian/Alaskan Native are not
listed separately in this report. This is a self-reported category; therefore there are missing responses. Additional racial/ethnic groups and
missing responses are included in the overall total. Previous fall and spring graduates are not included in the fall enrollment number unless the
student re-enrolls in a subsequent program of study.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Fall to Spring
and Fall to Fall
Persistence
Page 3
38
Fall to Spring
Persistence by
Race/Ethnicity
Page 32
Successful Progression
Persistence
Fall to Fall Persistence of Developmental Students
Like fall to spring persistence, the fall to fall persistence rate of students testing into developmental
math is consistent with overall persistence for Harper College. However, persistence rates of those
testing into developmental reading and writing tend to be lower than the overall Harper rates, with
developmental writing student persistence falling approximately 4 to 8 percent below overall Harper
persistence rates.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Dev. math % persisting
60.0%
61.0%
61.1%
56.6%
58.1%
Dev. math N persisting
648
700
741
620
523
Dev. reading % persisting
56.8%
60.8%
57.5%
53.2%
53.9%
Dev. reading N persisting
317
336
341
298
216
Dev. writing % persisting
53.0%
56.3%
55.7%
50.6%
52.9%
Dev. writing N persisting
178
201
214
174
126
Any dev. % persisting
59.6%
62.1%
61.0%
57.1%
58.3%
Any dev. N persisting
730
801
819
708
581
Overall % persisting
59.3%
60.7%
60.6%
56.9%
60.8%
Overall N persisting
1,597
1,687
1,661
1,530
1,434
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts. Developmental courses are those numbered below 90 in math, below 100 in reading, or 100 and below in
English. Previous fall and spring graduates are not included in the fall enrollment number unless the student re-enrolls in a subsequent program
of study.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Fall to Spring
and Fall to Fall
Persistence
Page 3
39
Fall to Spring
Persistence of
Developmental
Students
Page 33
Successful Progression
Persistence
Fall to Fall Persistence by Full-/Part-Time Status
Credential-seeking, full-time students persist from fall to the following fall at a higher rate than do their
part-time counterparts. The gap between persistence for full-time and part-time students is
approximately 23 to 26 percent. Both full-time and part-time student persistence increased in
conjunction with the overall total from the 2011 to the 2012 cohort.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Full-time % persisting
67.2%
69.1%
69.7%
66.2%
70.9%
Full-time N persisting
1,206
1,240
1,223
1,109
1,025
Part-time % persisting
43.5%
45.5%
44.5%
41.6%
44.8%
Part-time N persisting
391
447
438
421
409
Overall % persisting
59.3%
60.7%
60.6%
56.9%
60.8%
Overall N persisting
1,597
1,687
1,661
1,530
1,434
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts. Full- and part-time status are as of the student’s first fall semester at the College. Previous fall and spring
graduates are not included in the fall enrollment number unless the student re-enrolls in a subsequent program of study.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Fall to Spring
and Fall to Fall
Persistence
Page 3
40
Fall to Spring
Persistence by
Full-/Part-Time
Status
Page 34
Successful Progression
Persistence
Fall to Fall Persistence by Age Group
Similar to the fall to spring persistence pattern, the fall to fall persistence rate for students age 19 and
under was consistently higher than all other cohort groups. Students age 20 and over have similar
persistence rates, which generally fall more than 10 percent below the overall average. Students age 30
and over have had the most variable fall to fall persistence rates, ranging from a low of 38.7 percent for
the 2008 cohort to a high of 49.0 percent for the 2010 cohort.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Age 19 and under % persisting
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
67.8%
70.2%
69.2%
67.6%
69.7%
Age 19 and under N persisting
1,151
1,201
1,143
1,083
1,001
Age 20-24 % persisting
48.5%
47.5%
47.7%
40.2%
47.1%
Age 20-24 N persisting
231
215
234
192
196
Age 25-29 % persisting
46.2%
46.5%
44.5%
41.6%
47.2%
Age 25-29 N persisting
92
100
89
94
84
Age 30 and over % persisting
38.7%
42.8%
49.0%
42.2%
46.6%
Age 30 and over N persisting
121
171
195
160
153
Overall % persisting
59.3%
60.7%
60.6%
56.9%
60.8%
Overall N persisting
1,597
1,687
1,661
1,530
1,434
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts. This is a self-reported category; therefore there are missing responses and categories do not always sum to
overall total. Missing responses are included in the overall total. Age groups are as of the student’s first fall semester at the College. Previous
fall and spring graduates are not included in the fall enrollment number unless the student re-enrolls in a subsequent program of study.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Fall to Spring
and Fall to Fall
Persistence
Page 3
41
Fall to Spring
Persistence by
Age Group
Page 35
Successful Progression
Persistence
Fall to Fall Persistence by Pell Status
Fall to fall persistence has remained fairly stable over time for both Pell and non-Pell students. Pell
student persistence decreased 8.2 percent from the 2010 to the 2011 cohort, but increased 9.5 percent
for the 2012 cohort. With the exception of the 2011 cohort, fall to fall persistence is comparable
between the two sets of students.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Pell % persisting
Pell N persisting
Non-Pell % persisting
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
58.5%
61.1%
61.3%
53.1%
62.6%
280
451
571
481
452
59.5%
60.6%
60.3%
58.8%
60.0%
Non-Pell N persisting
1,317
1,236
1,090
1,049
982
Overall % persisting
59.3%
60.7%
60.6%
56.9%
60.8%
Overall N persisting
1,597
1,687
1,661
1,530
1,434
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts. Pell status is as of the student’s first fall semester at the College. Previous fall and spring graduates are not
included in the fall enrollment number unless the student re-enrolls in a subsequent program of study.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Fall to Spring
and Fall to Fall
Persistence
Page 3
42
Fall to Spring
Persistence by
Pell Status
Page 36
Successful Progression
Performance in Developmental Courses: Math
In this report, performance in developmental math provides the percentage of a student cohort that
enrolls in developmental math courses and successfully completes at least one of those courses within
three years. Developmental math attempts include all credential-seeking students who were enrolled in
developmental math courses numbered below 90. Successful completion includes students who earn a
C or better in a course. Achieving the Dream cohorts are used to track Harper student developmental
math completion (see pages x-xi).
The 2011 cohort exhibited the highest overall developmental math success rates during the period
examined in this report, increasing 3.8 percent from the 2010 cohort. The following pages provide more
detailed information about developmental math completion for demographic groups by gender,
race/ethnicity, full-/part-time status, age group and Pell status.
Performance in developmental math is a measure of developmental students’ ability to progress on the
path needed to complete a credential at Harper College. The increase in developmental math success
from the 2010 to 2011 cohort indicates positive movement in Harper student success.
43
Successful Progression
Performance in Developmental Courses: Math
Success in Developmental Math by Gender
Female students’ developmental math success rates are consistently higher than developmental math
success rates for males. For the 2011 cohort, females succeeded in developmental math at a rate 15.1
percent higher than males. Females exhibited higher developmental math success rates for the 2011
cohort than any other cohort examined in this report.
The large variation in the success rates for males age 20-24 is likely due to the small number of students
in that group that attempted developmental math. Although males age 20-24 have lower success rates
in developmental math courses than do females, they do not consistently perform above or below
overall male success rates.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Female % completed any dev. math
Female N completed any dev. math
Male % completed any dev. math
Male N completed any dev. math
Male 20-24 % completed any dev. math
Male 20-24 N completed any dev. math
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
71.4%
74.1%
76.0%
73.4%
78.0%
404
389
403
414
405
64.2%
66.5%
63.3%
60.9%
62.9%
375
369
361
355
307
54.3%
71.3%
54.4%
63.8%
55.1%
44
62
43
51
38
Overall % completed any dev. math
67.7%
70.2%
69.5%
67.0%
70.8%
Overall N completed any dev. math
779
758
764
769
716
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts; results are through year three. Developmental math attempts include all credential-seeking students who were
enrolled in developmental math courses numbered below 90. Successful completions include those earning a C or better in one of those
courses within three years. This is a self-reported category; therefore there are missing responses and categories do not always sum to overall
total. Missing responses are included in the overall total.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success in
Developmental Math
Page 5
Success in
Developmental Writing
by Gender
Page 50
44
Success in
Developmental Reading
by Gender
Page 56
Successful Progression
Performance in Developmental Courses: Math
Success in Developmental Math by Race/Ethnicity
On average, approximately 67 to 71 percent of students taking developmental math courses successfully
complete at least one of these courses within their first three years at Harper College. Among the
racial/ethnic groups, Asian and white students perform consistently above the overall Harper average,
while black students consistently perform below the overall Harper average. Black student success in
developmental math reached its highest rate for the 2011 cohort, but remains approximately 10 percent
lower than the overall success rate.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Asian % completed any dev. math
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
66.7%
76.5%
75.6%
80.3%
79.2%
Asian N completed any dev. math
50
62
59
66
42
Black % completed any dev. math
40.9%
56.7%
46.8%
45.9%
61.0%
Black N completed any dev. math
38
59
59
68
75
Hispanic % completed any dev. math
68.5%
71.9%
68.1%
64.2%
68.8%
Hispanic N completed any dev. math
124
123
141
136
143
White % completed any dev. math
72.6%
71.9%
74.2%
72.1%
73.7%
White N completed any dev. math
512
425
482
473
400
Overall % completed any dev. math
67.7%
70.2%
69.5%
67.0%
70.8%
Overall N completed any dev. math
779
758
764
769
716
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts; results are through year three. Developmental math attempts include all credential-seeking students who were
enrolled in developmental math courses numbered below 90. Successful completions include those earning a C or better in one of those
courses within three years. Pacific Islanders are included in the Asian group for the 2007 cohort. Due to a small number of students, some
racial/ethnic groups such as American Indian/Alaskan Native are not listed separately in this report. This is a self-reported category; therefore
there are missing responses. Additional racial/ethnic groups and missing responses are included in the overall total.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success in
Developmental Math
Page 5
Success in
Developmental Writing
by Race/Ethnicity
Page 51
45
Success in
Developmental Reading
by Race/Ethnicity
Page 57
Successful Progression
Performance in Developmental Courses: Math
Success in Developmental Math by Full-/Part-Time Status
Students in the 2011 cohort showed improvement in developmental math success rates. These
improvements were made by both full-time and part-time students, with part-time students improving
success rates by more than 10 percent beyond 2010 cohort rates.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Full-time % completed any dev. math
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
67.5%
70.8%
70.7%
68.1%
70.0%
Full-time N completed any dev. math
623
639
631
621
556
Part-time % completed any dev. math
68.7%
67.2%
63.9%
63.0%
73.4%
156
119
133
148
160
Overall % completed any dev. math
Part-time N completed any dev. math
67.7%
70.2%
69.5%
67.0%
70.8%
Overall N completed any dev. math
779
758
764
769
716
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts; results are through year three. Developmental math attempts include all credential-seeking students who were
enrolled in developmental math courses numbered below 90. Successful completions include those earning a C or better in one of those
courses within three years. Full- and part-time status are as of the student’s first fall semester at the College.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success in
Developmental Math
Page 5
Success in
Developmental Writing
by Full-/Part-Time
Status
Page 52
46
Success in
Developmental Reading
by Full-/Part-Time
Status
Page 58
Successful Progression
Performance in Developmental Courses: Math
Success in Developmental Math by Age Group
Successful completion rates for developmental math by age group show variation across cohorts and
groups. However, success rates for students age 19 and under remained relatively stable across the five
cohorts. Additionally, students age 20-24 tended to have lower developmental math success rates than
did other age groups.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Age 19 and under % completed any dev. math
68.7%
69.6%
70.1%
66.8%
70.9%
Age 19 and under N completed any dev. math
631
597
602
595
543
Age 20-24 % completed any dev. math
58.8%
75.8%
58.5%
63.1%
66.7%
Age 20-24 N completed any dev. math
90
113
83
101
102
Age 25-29 % completed any dev. math
82.1%
76.5%
83.7%
80.0%
75.0%
Age 25-29 N completed any dev. math
32
26
41
32
33
Age 30 and over % completed any dev. math
66.7%
55.3%
76.0%
73.2%
77.6%
Age 30 and over N completed any dev. math
26
21
38
41
38
Overall % completed any dev. math
67.7%
70.2%
69.5%
67.0%
70.8%
Overall N completed any dev. math
779
758
764
769
716
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts; results are through year three. Developmental math attempts include all credential-seeking students who were
enrolled in developmental math courses numbered below 90. Successful completions include those earning a C or better in one of those
courses within three years. Age groups are as of the student’s first fall semester at the College. This is a self-reported category; therefore there
are missing responses and categories do not always sum to overall total. Missing responses are included in the overall total.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success in
Developmental Math
Page 5
Success in
Developmental Writing
by Age Group
Page 53
47
Success in
Developmental Reading
by Age Group
Page 59
Successful Progression
Performance in Developmental Courses: Math
Success in Developmental Math by Pell Status
For the majority of cohorts, Pell students and non-Pell students have exhibited similar developmental
math success rates. In general, non-Pell students perform slightly better than Pell students, with the
exception of the 2007 cohort.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Pell % completed any dev. math
68.7%
69.0%
68.7%
64.7%
70.0%
Pell N completed any dev. math
160
158
235
303
301
Non-Pell % completed any dev. math
67.5%
70.5%
69.8%
68.6%
71.3%
Non-Pell N completed any dev. math
619
600
529
466
415
Overall % completed any dev. math
67.7%
70.2%
69.5%
67.0%
70.8%
Overall N completed any dev. math
779
758
764
769
716
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts; results are through year three. Developmental math attempts include all credential-seeking students who were
enrolled in developmental math courses numbered below 90. Successful completions include those earning a C or better in one of those
courses within three years. Pell status is as of the student’s first fall semester at the College.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success in
Developmental Math
Page 5
Success in
Developmental Writing
by Pell Status
Page 54
48
Success in
Developmental Reading
by Pell Status
Page 60
Successful Progression
Performance in Developmental Courses: Writing
In this report, performance in developmental writing shows the percentage of a student cohort that
enrolls in developmental writing courses and successfully completes at least one of those courses within
three years. Developmental writing attempts include all credential-seeking students who were enrolled
in developmental English courses numbered 100 and below. Successful completion includes students
who earn a C or better in a course. Achieving the Dream cohorts are used to track Harper student
developmental writing completion (see pages x-xi).
The 2011 cohort exhibited the highest overall developmental writing success rates during the period
reviewed in this report. The following pages provide more detailed information about developmental
writing completion for demographic groups by gender, race/ethnicity, full-/part-time status, age group
and Pell status.
Performance in developmental writing is a measure of developmental students’ ability to progress on
the path needed to complete a credential at Harper College. The increase in developmental writing
success from the 2010 to 2011 cohort is an encouraging indication of potential success for future Harper
students.
49
Successful Progression
Performance in Developmental Courses: Writing
Success in Developmental Writing by Gender
Overall success in developmental writing increased for the 2011 cohort for both female and male
students. Additionally, the 5.5 percent difference between females and males in the 2011 cohort was
the smallest gap exhibited for the five cohorts being examined.
Although males age 20-24 have lower than average success rates in developmental writing courses,
these success rates have been increasing over time. The large variation in the success rates for males
age 20-24 can be attributed to the small number of students in that group that attempted
developmental writing courses.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Female % completed any dev. writing
72.2%
83.1%
82.3%
74.0%
79.2%
Female N completed any dev. writing
114
148
153
145
145
Male % completed any dev. writing
61.9%
67.9%
70.5%
68.3%
73.7%
Male N completed any dev. writing
140
163
186
181
171
Male 20-24 % completed any dev. writing
40.0%
48.3%
48.3%
58.8%
63.6%
Male 20-24 N completed any dev. writing
12
14
14
20
21
Overall % completed any dev. writing
66.1%
74.4%
75.3%
70.7%
76.0%
Overall N completed any dev. writing
254
311
339
326
316
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts; results are through year three. Developmental writing attempts include all credential-seeking students who
were enrolled in developmental English courses numbered 100 and below. Successful completions include those earning a C or better in one of
those courses within three years. This is a self-reported category; therefore there are missing responses and categories do not always sum to
overall total. Missing responses are included in the overall total.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success in
Developmental Writing
Page 6
Success in
Developmental Math by
Gender
Page 44
50
Success in
Developmental Reading
by Gender
Page 56
Successful Progression
Performance in Developmental Courses: Writing
Success in Developmental Writing by Race/Ethnicity
Most racial/ethnic groups perform slightly better than the overall Harper developmental writing success
rate. However, black student success in developmental writing was lower than the overall success rate
in all of the years examined. Despite small numbers of students affecting the variability within the
minority racial/ethnic groups, over time black students have been less likely than other racial/ethnic
groups to successfully complete a developmental writing course within their first three years at Harper
College.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Asian % completed any dev. writing
77.8%
83.7%
92.3%
87.5%
78.3%
Asian N completed any dev. writing
28
36
36
28
18
Black % completed any dev. writing
40.8%
73.8%
58.7%
51.3%
68.9%
Black N completed any dev. writing
20
48
44
39
51
Hispanic % completed any dev. writing
66.7%
73.9%
83.8%
76.2%
76.7%
Hispanic N completed any dev. writing
50
51
83
80
79
White % completed any dev. writing
73.1%
73.3%
75.0%
72.1%
79.8%
White N completed any dev. writing
144
143
168
163
146
Overall % completed any dev. writing
66.1%
74.4%
75.3%
70.7%
76.0%
Overall N completed any dev. writing
254
311
339
326
316
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts; results are through year three. Developmental writing attempts include all credential-seeking students who
were enrolled in developmental English courses numbered 100 and below. Successful completions include those earning a C or better in one of
those courses within three years. Pacific Islanders are included in the Asian group for the 2007 cohort. Due to a small number of students, some
racial/ethnic groups such as American Indian/Alaskan Native are not listed separately in this report. This is a self-reported category; therefore
there are missing responses. Additional racial/ethnic groups and missing responses are included in the overall total.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success in
Developmental Writing
Page 6
Success in
Developmental Math by
Race/Ethnicity
Page 45
51
Success in
Developmental Reading
by Race/Ethnicity
Page 57
Successful Progression
Performance in Developmental Courses: Writing
Success in Developmental Writing by Full-/Part-Time Status
Over time, part-time students are less likely than are full-time students to successfully complete the
developmental writing courses in which they enrolled. The largest differences between full- and parttime students were shown for the 2009 and 2010 cohorts; the success rate of part-time students in the
2010 cohort was 13.7 percent lower than the full-time success rate for the same cohort. Note that small
numbers of part-time students enrolling in developmental writing courses may affect the variability seen
in part-time success rates.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Full-time % completed any dev. writing
66.4%
73.4%
77.5%
73.9%
77.5%
Full-time N completed any dev. writing
200
251
262
261
237
Part-time % completed any dev. writing
65.1%
78.9%
68.8%
60.2%
71.8%
Part-time N completed any dev. writing
54
60
77
65
79
Overall % completed any dev. writing
66.1%
74.4%
75.3%
70.7%
76.0%
Overall N completed any dev. writing
254
311
339
326
316
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts; results are through year three. Developmental writing attempts include all credential-seeking students who
were enrolled in developmental English courses numbered 100 and below. Successful completions include those earning a C or better in one of
those courses within three years. Full- and part-time status are as of the student’s first fall semester at the College.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success in
Developmental Writing
Page 6
Success in
Developmental Math by
Full-/Part-Time Status
Page 46
52
Success in
Developmental Reading
by Full-/Part-Time
Status
Page 58
Successful Progression
Performance in Developmental Courses: Writing
Success in Developmental Writing by Age Group
Students age 19 and under had developmental writing success rates comparable to or above the overall
Harper College rates. By contrast, students age 20-24 had developmental writing success rates 9.2 to
21.7 percent lower than the overall Harper success rates. However, the large variation in the age 20-24
group may be due to the small number of students from that group that attempted developmental
writing during the period under examination.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Age 19 and under % completed any dev. writing
69.3%
75.5%
78.1%
72.3%
78.8%
Age 19 and under N completed any dev. writing
223
268
286
266
253
Age 20-24 % completed any dev. writing
47.8%
65.2%
53.6%
60.3%
64.5%
Age 20-24 N completed any dev. writing
22
30
30
38
40
Overall % completed any dev. writing
66.1%
74.4%
75.3%
70.7%
76.0%
Overall N completed any dev. writing
254
311
339
326
316
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts; results are through year three. Developmental writing attempts include all credential-seeking students who
were enrolled in developmental English courses numbered 100 and below. Successful completions include those earning a C or better in one of
those courses within three years. Age groups are as of the student’s first fall semester at the College. Due to a small number of students, age
intervals with fewer than 10 students were excluded from the line graph; breakouts for students age 25-29 and students age 30 and over are
excluded from this figure. This is a self-reported category; therefore there are missing responses. Additional age groups and missing responses
are included in the overall total.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success in
Developmental Writing
Page 6
Success in
Developmental Math by
Age Group
Page 47
53
Success in
Developmental Reading
by Age Group
Page 59
Successful Progression
Performance in Developmental Courses: Writing
Success in Developmental Writing by Pell Status
Pell and non-Pell student success in developmental writing have been variable over time. Neither Pell
nor non-Pell students have consistently exceeded the overall Harper developmental writing success
rates.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Pell % completed any dev. writing
62.2%
80.6%
77.5%
70.0%
72.2%
Pell N completed any dev. writing
69
83
131
152
140
Non-Pell % completed any dev. writing
67.8%
72.4%
74.0%
71.3%
79.3%
Non-Pell N completed any dev. writing
185
228
208
174
176
Overall % completed any dev. writing
66.1%
74.4%
75.3%
70.7%
76.0%
Overall N completed any dev. writing
254
311
339
326
316
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts; results are through year three. Developmental writing attempts include all credential-seeking students who
were enrolled in developmental English courses numbered 100 and below. Successful completions include those earning a C or better in one of
those courses within three years. Pell status is as of the student’s first fall semester at the College.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success in
Developmental Writing
Page 6
Success in
Developmental Math by
Pell Status
Page 48
54
Success in
Developmental Reading
by Pell Status
Page 60
Successful Progression
Performance in Developmental Courses: Reading
In this report, performance in developmental reading provides the percentage of a student cohort that
enrolls in developmental reading courses and successfully completes at least one of those courses
within three years. Developmental reading attempts include all credential-seeking students who were
enrolled in developmental reading courses numbered below 100. Successful completion includes
students who earn a C or better in a course. Achieving the Dream cohorts are used to track Harper
student developmental reading completion (see pages x-xi).
Overall developmental reading success rates have increased from 67.8 percent for the 2007 cohort to
81.1 percent for the 2011 cohort. The following pages provide more detailed information about
developmental reading completion for demographic groups by gender, race/ethnicity, full-/part-time
status, age group and Pell status.
Performance in developmental reading is a measure of developmental students’ ability to progress on
the path needed to complete a credential at Harper College. Students who cannot complete
developmental reading courses are at a disadvantage in their other Harper courses. The increase in
developmental reading success indicates an increased likelihood of success for future Harper students.
55
Successful Progression
Performance in Developmental Courses: Reading
Success in Developmental Reading by Gender
Success in developmental reading has shown improvement over time. However, a gap remains between
female and male students as well as between all students and males age 20-24. Female success rates
improved by 7.4 percent from the 2007 to the 2011 cohort, while male success rates improved by 18.7
percent during the same period. Despite the large improvements, males continue to have lower
developmental reading success rates than do females (76.3 vs. 85.8 percent for the 2011 cohort).
The large variation in the success rates for males age 20-24 can be attributed to the small number of
students in that group that attempted developmental reading. However, over time males age 20-24
have lower than average success rates in developmental reading courses.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Female % completed any dev. reading
78.4%
76.9%
84.1%
83.3%
85.8%
Female N completed any dev. reading
149
170
174
194
193
Male % completed any dev. reading
57.6%
68.2%
72.6%
73.0%
76.3%
Male N completed any dev. reading
114
144
164
176
161
Male 20-24 % completed any dev. reading
47.6%
50.0%
42.1%
66.7%
60.0%
Male 20-24 N completed any dev. reading
10
15
8
22
15
Overall % completed any dev. reading
67.8%
72.7%
78.1%
78.1%
81.1%
Overall N completed any dev. reading
263
314
338
370
356
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts; results are through year three. Developmental reading attempts include all credential-seeking students who
were enrolled in developmental reading courses numbered below 100. Successful completions include those earning a C or better in one of
those courses within three years. This is a self-reported category; therefore there are missing responses and categories do not always sum to
overall total. Missing responses are included in the overall total.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success in
Developmental Reading
Page 7
Success in
Developmental Math by
Gender
Page 44
56
Success in
Developmental Writing
by Gender
Page 50
Successful Progression
Performance in Developmental Courses: Reading
Success in Developmental Reading by Race/Ethnicity
Most racial/ethnic groups perform slightly better than the overall Harper developmental reading success
rate. However, black student success fell below the overall Harper rate in all but one of the years
studied in this report. By contrast, Asian student success was higher than the overall Harper rate for all
five years examined.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Asian % completed any dev. reading
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
81.0%
87.8%
84.8%
84.8%
88.9%
Asian N completed any dev. reading
34
43
39
28
16
Black % completed any dev. reading
30.6%
73.7%
60.0%
60.2%
66.3%
Black N completed any dev. reading
Hispanic % completed any dev. reading
Hispanic N completed any dev. reading
White % completed any dev. reading
15
42
48
50
55
68.7%
70.0%
80.9%
81.6%
84.4%
46
56
76
84
92
76.9%
70.2%
83.1%
82.0%
84.7%
White N completed any dev. reading
153
144
167
187
166
Overall % completed any dev. reading
67.8%
72.7%
78.1%
78.1%
81.1%
Overall N completed any dev. reading
263
314
338
370
356
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts; results are through year three. Developmental reading attempts include all credential-seeking students who
were enrolled in developmental reading courses numbered below 100. Successful completions include those earning a C or better in one of
those courses within three years. Pacific Islanders are included in the Asian group for the 2007 cohort. Due to a small number of students, some
racial/ethnic groups such as American Indian/Alaskan Native are not listed separately in this report. This is a self-reported category; therefore
there are missing responses. Additional racial/ethnic groups and missing responses are included in the overall total.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success in
Developmental Reading
Page 7
Success in
Developmental Math by
Race/Ethnicity
Page 45
57
Success in
Developmental Writing
by Race/Ethnicity
Page 51
Successful Progression
Performance in Developmental Courses: Reading
Success in Developmental Reading by Full-/Part-Time Status
Over time, part-time students are less likely than full-time students to successfully complete a
developmental reading course in which they enrolled. However, both full- and part-time students have
increased success rates over time, with part-time students in the 2011 cohort showing rates 24.5
percent higher than the 2007 cohort and only 0.8 percent lower than the full-time student rate.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Full-time % completed any dev. reading
70.6%
73.9%
79.5%
80.7%
81.3%
Full-time N completed any dev. reading
221
260
275
301
265
Part-time % completed any dev. reading
56.0%
67.5%
72.4%
68.3%
80.5%
Part-time N completed any dev. reading
42
54
63
69
91
Overall % completed any dev. reading
67.8%
72.7%
78.1%
78.1%
81.1%
Overall N completed any dev. reading
263
314
338
370
356
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts; results are through year three. Developmental reading attempts include all credential-seeking students who
were enrolled in developmental reading courses numbered below 100. Successful completions include those earning a C or better in one of
those courses within three years. Full- and part-time status are as of the student’s first fall semester at the College.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success in
Developmental Reading
Page 7
Success in
Developmental Math by
Full-/Part-Time Status
Page 46
58
Success in
Developmental Writing
by Full-/Part-Time
Status
Page 52
Successful Progression
Performance in Developmental Courses: Reading
Success in Developmental Reading by Age Group
Students age 19 and under increased the rate of success in developmental reading courses from the
2007 to the 2011 cohort. Students age 20-24 had decreasing success rates from the 2007 to the 2009
cohort, but showed an increased success rate for the 2010 and 2011 cohorts. The large variation in the
age 20-24 results may be due to the small number of students from that group that attempted
developmental reading during the period under examination.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Age 19 and under % completed any dev. reading
69.1%
74.3%
79.9%
80.6%
83.5%
Age 19 and under N completed any dev. reading
233
274
295
311
293
Age 20-24 % completed any dev. reading
64.3%
63.5%
53.8%
63.1%
66.0%
Age 20-24 N completed any dev. reading
27
33
21
41
35
Overall % completed any dev. reading
67.8%
72.7%
78.1%
78.1%
81.1%
Overall N completed any dev. reading
263
314
338
370
356
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts; results are through year three. Developmental reading attempts include all credential-seeking students who
were enrolled in developmental reading courses numbered below 100. Successful completions include those earning a C or better in one of
those courses within three years. Age groups are as of the student’s first fall semester at the College. Due to a small number of students, age
intervals with fewer than 10 students were excluded from the line graph; breakouts for students age 25-29 and students age 30 and over are
excluded from this figure. This is a self-reported category; therefore there are missing responses. Additional age groups and missing responses
are included in the overall total.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success in
Developmental Reading
Page 7
Success in
Developmental Math by
Age Group
Page 47
59
Success in
Developmental Writing
by Age Group
Page 53
Successful Progression
Performance in Developmental Courses: Reading
Success in Developmental Reading by Pell Status
Over time, the developmental reading completion rate for non-Pell students has been comparable to
the overall Harper College success rate in developmental reading. Pell recipients have shown greater
variation in success, including a low of 62.2 percent for the 2007 cohort and a high of 80.6 percent for
the 2008 cohort.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Pell % completed any dev. reading
Pell N completed any dev. reading
Non-Pell % completed any dev. reading
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
62.2%
80.6%
77.5%
75.4%
79.1%
69
83
131
169
163
67.8%
72.4%
74.0%
80.4%
82.8%
Non-Pell N completed any dev. reading
185
228
208
201
193
Overall % completed any dev. reading
67.8%
72.7%
78.1%
78.1%
81.1%
Overall N completed any dev. reading
263
314
338
370
356
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts; results are through year three. Developmental reading attempts include all credential-seeking students who
were enrolled in developmental reading courses numbered below 100. Successful completions include those earning a C or better in one of
those courses within three years. Pell status is as of the student’s first fall semester at the College.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success in
Developmental Reading
Page 7
Success in
Developmental Math by
Pell Status
Page 48
60
Success in
Developmental Writing
by Pell Status
Page 54
Successful Progression
Developmental Students Moving to Gatekeeper Course Work and Completion: Math
In this report, performance of developmental math students moving to gatekeeper course work
provides the percentage of students that enroll in developmental math courses and subsequently enroll
in gatekeeper math. Demographic breakouts are reported using cohort data from Harper’s Student
Information System (SIS).
According to the data, overall success rates of developmental students in gatekeeper math courses have
increased since the 2010 cohort. The following pages provide more detailed information about
enrollment and success rates for demographic groups by gender, race/ethnicity, full-/part-time status,
age group and Pell status.
Performance of developmental students in gatekeeper math is a measure of developmental students’
ability to progress on the path needed to complete a credential at Harper College. The increase in
success of developmental students in gatekeeper math indicates an increased likelihood that Harper
students are on the path to completing a credential.
61
Successful Progression
Developmental Students Moving to Gatekeeper Course Work and Completion: Math
Math Success by Gender
Female and male students have similar success rates when completing the developmental math
sequence and subsequently enrolling in gatekeeper math. For the 2011 cohort, 58.0 percent of these
students successfully completed the gatekeeper math course in which they enrolled.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Female % successfully completing gatekeeper math
after successfully completing developmental math
Female N successfully completing gatekeeper math
after successfully completing developmental math
Male % successfully completing gatekeeper math
after successfully completing developmental math
Male N successfully completing gatekeeper math
after successfully completing developmental math
Overall % successfully completing gatekeeper math
after successfully completing developmental math
Overall N successfully completing gatekeeper math
after successfully completing developmental math
2008
2009
2010
2011
55.4%
57.4%
53.0%
57.1%
134
140
149
133
57.8%
58.0%
53.8%
59.0%
118
123
119
108
56.5%
57.7%
53.4%
58.0%
252
263
268
242
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Developmental math student definition: students in credential-seeking cohorts that enrolled in at least one developmental math course
numbered below 90. Results are through year three.
62
Successful Progression
Developmental Students Moving to Gatekeeper Course Work and Completion: Math
Math Success by Gender
Although male students enroll in the highest level of developmental math at rates similar to female
students, female students are more likely to complete both the developmental math sequence and
gatekeeper math. Female students are also more likely to earn a credential. For the 2011 cohort, 22.3
percent of female developmental math students earned a credential, while 10.3 percent of male
developmental math students earned a credential.
Female
2008
N developmental math students
2009
2010
2011
524
530
566
528
% enrolled in highest level developmental math
60.7%
59.2%
64.5%
60.4%
% successfully completed highest level developmental math
46.2%
46.0%
49.6%
44.1%
% enrolled in gatekeeper math
33.2%
33.8%
37.1%
32.8%
% successfully completed gatekeeper math
25.6%
26.4%
26.3%
25.2%
% earned credential
22.1%
24.3%
26.5%
22.3%
Male
2008
2009
2010
2011
N developmental math students
552
569
590
494
% enrolled in highest level developmental math
58.9%
56.1%
58.3%
60.9%
% successfully completed highest level developmental math
37.0%
37.3%
37.5%
37.0%
% enrolled in gatekeeper math
30.1%
30.6%
29.3%
31.4%
% successfully completed gatekeeper math
21.4%
21.6%
20.2%
21.9%
% earned credential
12.7%
12.8%
12.5%
10.3%
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Developmental math student definition: students in credential-seeking cohorts that enrolled in at least one developmental math course
numbered below 90. Results are through year three.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success Rate of
Developmental
Students in
College-Level
Math
Pages 8-9
63
English Success
by Gender
Pages 73-74
Successful Progression
Developmental Students Moving to Gatekeeper Course Work and Completion: Math
Math Success by Race/Ethnicity
Due to a small number of students in many race/ethnicity cohorts, there is wide variation in the
developmental to gatekeeper math success rates over time. However, white students successfully
complete gatekeeper math after completing the highest level of developmental math at a consistently
higher than average rate, while black and Hispanic students successfully complete at a consistently
lower than average rate.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Asian % successfully completing gatekeeper math
after successfully completing developmental math
Asian N successfully completing gatekeeper math
after successfully completing developmental math
Black % successfully completing gatekeeper math
after successfully completing developmental math
Black N successfully completing gatekeeper math
after successfully completing developmental math
Hispanic % successfully completing gatekeeper math
after successfully completing developmental math
Hispanic N successfully completing gatekeeper math
after successfully completing developmental math
White % successfully completing gatekeeper math
after successfully completing developmental math
White N successfully completing gatekeeper math
after successfully completing developmental math
Overall % successfully completing gatekeeper math
after successfully completing developmental math
Overall N successfully completing gatekeeper math
after successfully completing developmental math
2008
2009
2010
2011
52.6%
64.1%
71.7%
43.2%
20
25
33
16
48.0%
56.0%
32.1%
40.7%
12
14
9
11
53.7%
43.0%
45.2%
51.2%
36
34
38
43
58.4%
61.3%
55.3%
63.9%
160
182
176
152
56.5%
57.7%
53.4%
58.0%
252
263
268
242
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Developmental math student definition: students in credential-seeking cohorts that enrolled in at least one developmental math course
numbered below 90. Results are through year three.
64
Successful Progression
Developmental Students Moving to Gatekeeper Course Work and Completion: Math
Math Success by Race/Ethnicity
Asian and white students enroll in the highest level of developmental math at higher rates than do black
and Hispanic students. Asian and white students are also more likely to successfully complete both the
developmental math sequence and gatekeeper math. White students are the group most likely to earn a
credential. For the 2011 cohort, 18.3 percent of white developmental math students earned a
credential, while 15.8 percent of Asian, 8.1 percent of black, and 15.5 percent of Hispanic
developmental math students earned a credential.
Asian
N developmental math students
% enrolled in highest level developmental math
% successfully completed highest level developmental math
% enrolled in gatekeeper math
% successfully completed gatekeeper math
% earned credential
2008
82
67.1%
46.3%
36.6%
24.4%
17.1%
2009
80
66.3%
48.8%
38.8%
31.3%
8.8%
2010
77
72.7%
59.7%
51.9%
42.9%
20.8%
2011
57
80.7%
64.9%
47.4%
28.1%
15.8%
Black
N developmental math students
% enrolled in highest level developmental math
% successfully completed highest level developmental math
% enrolled in gatekeeper math
% successfully completed gatekeeper math
% earned credential
2008
102
41.2%
24.5%
20.6%
11.8%
13.7%
2009
124
30.6%
20.2%
16.1%
11.3%
12.9%
2010
147
35.4%
19.0%
12.2%
6.1%
6.8%
2011
124
40.3%
21.8%
16.9%
8.9%
8.1%
Hispanic
N developmental math students
% enrolled in highest level developmental math
% successfully completed highest level developmental math
% enrolled in gatekeeper math
% successfully completed gatekeeper math
% earned credential
2008
170
57.1%
39.4%
25.3%
21.2%
15.3%
2009
209
55.5%
37.8%
28.2%
16.3%
14.4%
2010
219
56.2%
38.4%
26.5%
17.4%
19.2%
2011
219
55.3%
38.4%
27.4%
19.6%
15.5%
White
N developmental math students
% enrolled in highest level developmental math
% successfully completed highest level developmental math
% enrolled in gatekeeper math
% successfully completed gatekeeper math
% earned credential
2008
602
64.3%
45.5%
35.2%
26.6%
19.6%
2009
651
62.1%
45.6%
35.8%
28.0%
22.1%
2010
659
67.5%
48.3%
37.9%
26.7%
22.2%
2011
547
66.0%
43.5%
35.6%
27.8%
18.3%
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Developmental math student definition: students in credential-seeking cohorts that enrolled in at least one developmental math course
numbered below 90. Results are through year three.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success Rate of
Developmental
Students in
College-Level
Math
Pages 8-9
65
English Success
by
Race/Ethnicity
Pages 75-76
Successful Progression
Developmental Students Moving to Gatekeeper Course Work and Completion: Math
Math Success by Full-/Part-Time Status
Part-time students are substantially less likely than full-time students to successfully complete
gatekeeper math after completing the highest level of developmental math. Additionally, very few of
these part-time students attempt the gatekeeper math course within three years of beginning at
Harper.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Full-time % successfully completing gatekeeper math
after successfully completing developmental math
Full-time N successfully completing gatekeeper math
after successfully completing developmental math
Part-time % successfully completing gatekeeper math
after successfully completing developmental math
Part-time N successfully completing gatekeeper math
after successfully completing developmental math
Overall % successfully completing gatekeeper math
after successfully completing developmental math
Overall N successfully completing gatekeeper math
after successfully completing developmental math
2008
2009
2010
2011
57.4%
60.8%
55.5%
60.0%
225
244
236
207
50.0%
34.5%
41.6%
48.6%
27
19
32
35
56.5%
57.7%
53.4%
58.0%
252
263
268
242
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Developmental math student definition: students in credential-seeking cohorts that enrolled in at least one developmental math course
numbered below 90. Results are through year three.
66
Successful Progression
Developmental Students Moving to Gatekeeper Course Work and Completion: Math
Math Success by Full-/Part-Time Status
Full-time students are more likely to complete both the developmental math sequence and gatekeeper
math than are part-time students. Full-time students are also more likely to earn a credential. For the
2011 cohort, 17.3 percent of full-time developmental math students earned a credential, while 13.5
percent of part-time developmental math students earned a credential.
Full-time
2008
2009
2010
2011
N developmental math students
902
906
918
802
% enrolled in highest level developmental math
62.5%
61.1%
65.7%
64.2%
% successfully completed highest level developmental math
43.5%
44.3%
46.3%
43.0%
% enrolled in gatekeeper math
34.0%
36.0%
36.6%
35.4%
% successfully completed gatekeeper math
24.9%
26.9%
25.7%
25.8%
% earned credential
17.4%
18.9%
19.7%
17.3%
Part-time
2008
2009
2010
2011
N developmental math students
174
193
238
222
% enrolled in highest level developmental math
45.4%
40.9%
44.5%
47.7%
% successfully completed highest level developmental math
31.0%
28.5%
32.4%
32.4%
% enrolled in gatekeeper math
19.0%
14.0%
19.7%
20.3%
% successfully completed gatekeeper math
15.5%
9.9%
13.4%
15.8%
% earned credential
16.7%
16.1%
18.1%
13.5%
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Developmental math student definition: students in credential-seeking cohorts that enrolled in at least one developmental math course
numbered below 90. Results are through year three. Full- and part-time status are as of the student’s first fall semester at the College.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success Rate of
Developmental
Students in
College-Level
Math
Pages 8-9
67
English Success
by Full-/PartTime Status
Pages 77-78
Successful Progression
Developmental Students Moving to Gatekeeper Course Work and Completion: Math
Math Success by Age Group
Students age 18 and under successfully complete gatekeeper math after completing the highest level of
developmental math at a consistently higher than average rate, while students age 19-24 and students
age 25 and over successfully complete at a consistently lower than average rate. Due to a small number
of students over age 18, there is wide variation in the developmental to gatekeeper math success rates
for those students over time.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Age 18 and under % successfully completing gatekeeper
math after successfully completing developmental math
Age 18 and under N successfully completing gatekeeper
math after successfully completing developmental math
Age 19-24 % successfully completing gatekeeper math
after successfully completing developmental math
Age 19-24 N successfully completing gatekeeper math
after successfully completing developmental math
Age 25 and over % successfully completing gatekeeper
math after successfully completing developmental math
Age 25 and over N successfully completing gatekeeper
math after successfully completing developmental math
Overall % successfully completing gatekeeper math after
successfully completing developmental math
Overall N successfully completing gatekeeper math after
successfully completing developmental math
2008
2009
2010
2011
57.0%
60.6%
56.7%
61.4%
184
206
215
189
55.9%
50.6%
40.2%
51.8%
57
42
37
44
52.4%
45.5%
51.6%
37.5%
11
15
16
9
56.5%
57.7%
53.4%
58.0%
252
263
268
242
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Developmental math student definition: students in credential-seeking cohorts that enrolled in at least one developmental math course
numbered below 90. Results are through year three. Age is as of the student’s first fall semester at the College.
68
Successful Progression
Developmental Students Moving to Gatekeeper Course Work and Completion: Math
Math Success by Age Group
Students age 18 and under enroll in the highest level of developmental math at higher rates than do
students age 19-24 and students 25 and over. Students age 18 and under are also more likely to
successfully complete both the developmental math sequence and gatekeeper math. However, students
age 25 and over are the group most likely to earn a credential. For the 2011 cohort, 23.0 percent of
developmental math students age 25 and over earned a credential, while 17.3 percent of developmental
math students age 18 and under and 12.5 percent of developmental math students age 19-24 earned a
credential.
Age 18 and Under
2008
2009
2010
2011
N developmental math students
737
746
761
658
% enrolled in highest level developmental math
63.8%
63.3%
67.5%
67.9%
% successfully completed highest level developmental math
43.8%
45.6%
49.8%
46.8%
% enrolled in gatekeeper math
34.6%
37.5%
40.3%
39.4%
% successfully completed gatekeeper math
25.0%
27.6%
28.3%
28.7%
% earned credential
17.0%
17.7%
19.3%
17.3%
Age 19-24
2008
2009
2010
2011
N developmental math students
273
255
304
279
% enrolled in highest level developmental math
54.2%
46.7%
49.7%
51.6%
% successfully completed highest level developmental math
37.4%
32.5%
30.3%
30.5%
% enrolled in gatekeeper math
27.1%
21.2%
19.1%
21.5%
% successfully completed gatekeeper math
20.9%
16.5%
12.2%
15.8%
% earned credential
16.1%
15.3%
14.5%
12.5%
Age 25 and Over
2008
2009
2010
2011
66
98
91
87
% enrolled in highest level developmental math
37.9%
42.9%
48.4%
34.5%
% successfully completed highest level developmental math
31.8%
33.7%
34.1%
27.6%
% enrolled in gatekeeper math
16.7%
19.4%
19.8%
11.5%
% successfully completed gatekeeper math
16.7%
15.3%
17.6%
10.3%
25.8%
31.6%
36.3%
23.0%
N developmental math students
% earned credential
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Developmental math student definition: students in credential-seeking cohorts that enrolled in at least one developmental math course
numbered below 90. Results are through year three. Age is as of the student’s first fall semester at the College.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success Rate of
Developmental
Students in
College-Level
Math
Pages 8-9
69
English Success
by Age Group
Pages 79-80
Successful Progression
Developmental Students Moving to Gatekeeper Course Work and Completion: Math
Math Success by Pell Status
Pell and non-Pell students generally have similar success rates when completing the developmental
math sequence and subsequently enrolling in gatekeeper math. However, for the 2011 cohort, 55.3
percent of Pell students successfully completed the gatekeeper math course in which they enrolled,
while 59.8 percent of non-Pell students successfully completed the gatekeeper math course in which
they enrolled.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Pell % successfully completing gatekeeper math
after successfully completing developmental math
Pell N successfully completing gatekeeper math after
successfully completing developmental math
Non-Pell % successfully completing gatekeeper math
after successfully completing developmental math
Non-Pell N successfully completing gatekeeper math
after successfully completing developmental math
Overall % successfully completing gatekeeper math
after successfully completing developmental math
Overall N successfully completing gatekeeper math
after successfully completing developmental math
2008
2009
2010
2011
56.2%
58.1%
53.0%
55.3%
50
72
98
89
56.6%
57.5%
53.6%
59.8%
202
191
170
153
56.5%
57.7%
53.4%
58.0%
252
263
268
242
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Developmental math student definition: students in credential-seeking cohorts that enrolled in at least one developmental math course
numbered below 90. Results are through year three. Pell status is as of the student’s first fall semester at the College.
70
Successful Progression
Developmental Students Moving to Gatekeeper Course Work and Completion: Math
Math Success by Pell Status
Non-Pell students are more likely to complete both the developmental math sequence and gatekeeper
math than are Pell students. Non-Pell students are also more likely to earn a credential. For the 2011
cohort, 19.1 percent of Non-Pell developmental math students earned a credential, while 13.0 percent
of Pell developmental math students earned a credential.
Pell
2008
2009
2010
2011
N developmental math students
228
342
471
438
% enrolled in highest level developmental math
56.6%
51.5%
56.7%
53.9%
% successfully completed highest level developmental math
39.0%
36.3%
39.3%
36.8%
% enrolled in gatekeeper math
29.8%
27.8%
28.2%
27.9%
% successfully completed gatekeeper math
21.9%
21.1%
20.8%
20.3%
% earned credential
15.4%
20.2%
18.9%
13.0%
Non-Pell
2008
2009
2010
2011
N developmental math students
848
757
685
586
% enrolled in highest level developmental math
60.6%
60.4%
64.5%
65.7%
% successfully completed highest level developmental math
42.1%
43.9%
46.3%
43.7%
% enrolled in gatekeeper math
32.1%
34.1%
36.5%
35.3%
% successfully completed gatekeeper math
23.8%
25.2%
24.8%
26.1%
% earned credential
17.8%
17.6%
19.7%
19.1%
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Developmental math student definition: students in credential-seeking cohorts that enrolled in at least one developmental math course
numbered below 90. Results are through year three. Pell status is as of the student’s first fall semester at the College.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success Rate of
Developmental
Students in
College-Level
Math
Pages 8-9
71
English Success
by Pell Status
Pages 81-82
Successful Progression
Developmental Students Moving to Gatekeeper Course Work and Completion: English
In this report, performance of developmental reading and writing students moving to gatekeeper course
work provides the percentage of students that enroll in developmental reading and/or writing courses
and subsequently enroll in gatekeeper English. Demographic breakouts are reported using cohort data
from Harper’s Student Information System (SIS).
According to the data, overall success rates of developmental students in gatekeeper English courses
have decreased since the 2009 cohort. The following pages provide more detailed information about
enrollment and success rates for demographic groups by gender, race/ethnicity, full-/part-time status,
age group and Pell status.
Performance of developmental students in gatekeeper English is a measure of developmental students’
ability to progress on the path needed to complete a credential at Harper College. The decrease in
success of developmental students in gatekeeper English indicates a need to further examine reasons
for the decrease as well as potential solutions for improving success for future Harper students.
72
Successful Progression
Developmental Students Moving to Gatekeeper Course Work and Completion: English
English Success by Gender
Since the 2008 cohort, female students have decreased the rate at which they successfully complete
gatekeeper English after completing the highest level of developmental reading or writing. During the
same period, male students have increased the rate at which they successfully complete gatekeeper
English after completing the highest level of developmental reading or writing. For the 2011 cohort, the
male student success rate (63.2 percent) surpassed the female student success rate (60.3 percent) for
the first time during the period being reviewed.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Female % successfully completing gatekeeper English
after successfully completing dev. reading/writing
Female N successfully completing gatekeeper English
after successfully completing dev. reading/writing
Male % successfully completing gatekeeper English
after successfully completing dev. reading/writing
Male N successfully completing gatekeeper English
after successfully completing dev. reading/writing
Overall % successfully completing gatekeeper English
after successfully completing dev. reading/writing
Overall N successfully completing gatekeeper English
after successfully completing dev. reading/writing
2008
2009
2010
2011
77.9%
71.9%
71.5%
60.3%
152
141
148
123
55.9%
64.7%
60.9%
63.2%
100
134
131
110
67.4%
68.2%
66.1%
61.6%
252
275
279
233
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Developmental reading/writing student definition: students in credential-seeking cohorts that enrolled in at least one developmental reading
(below 100) or writing (100 and below) course. Results are through year three.
73
Successful Progression
Developmental Students Moving to Gatekeeper Course Work and Completion: English
English Success by Gender
Female students are more likely to enroll in and complete both the developmental reading or writing
sequence and gatekeeper English than are male students. Female students are also more likely to earn a
credential. For the 2011 cohort, 15.7 percent of female developmental reading/writing students earned
a credential, while 9.0 percent of male developmental reading/writing students earned a credential.
Female
2008
2009
2010
2011
N developmental reading/writing students
266
274
287
286
% enrolled in highest level dev. reading/writing
90.2%
87.2%
86.8%
85.3%
% successfully completed highest level dev. reading/writing
73.3%
71.5%
72.1%
71.3%
% enrolled in gatekeeper English
71.8%
60.9%
58.9%
53.1%
% successfully completed gatekeeper English
57.1%
51.5%
51.6%
43.0%
% earned credential
17.3%
18.6%
20.9%
15.7%
Male
2008
2009
2010
2011
N developmental reading/writing students
302
335
354
311
% enrolled in highest level dev. reading/writing
87.1%
82.7%
77.1%
79.4%
% successfully completed highest level dev. reading/writing
59.3%
61.8%
60.7%
55.9%
% enrolled in gatekeeper English
50.0%
52.2%
46.6%
45.7%
% successfully completed gatekeeper English
33.1%
40.0%
37.0%
35.4%
% earned credential
7.3%
10.4%
9.3%
9.0%
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Developmental reading/writing student definition: students in credential-seeking cohorts that enrolled in at least one developmental reading
(below 100) or writing (100 and below) course. Results are through year three.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success Rate of
Developmental
Students in
College-Level
English
Pages 10-11
74
Math Success by
Gender
Pages 62-63
Successful Progression
Developmental Students Moving to Gatekeeper Course Work and Completion: English
English Success by Race/Ethnicity
Asian students successfully complete gatekeeper English after completing the highest level of
developmental reading/writing at a consistently higher than average rate, while black and Hispanic
students successfully complete at a consistently lower than average rate. Note that the small number of
students in many race/ethnicity cohorts likely contributes to the wide variation in developmental
reading/writing to gatekeeper English success rates over time.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Asian % successfully completing gatekeeper English
after successfully completing dev. reading/writing
Asian N successfully completing gatekeeper English
after successfully completing dev. reading/writing
Black % successfully completing gatekeeper English
after successfully completing dev. reading/writing
Black N successfully completing gatekeeper English
after successfully completing dev. reading/writing
Hispanic % successfully completing gatekeeper English
after successfully completing dev. reading/writing
Hispanic N successfully completing gatekeeper English
after successfully completing dev. reading/writing
White % successfully completing gatekeeper English
after successfully completing dev. reading/writing
White N successfully completing gatekeeper English
after successfully completing dev. reading/writing
Overall % successfully completing gatekeeper English
after successfully completing dev. reading/writing
Overall N successfully completing gatekeeper English
after successfully completing dev. reading/writing
2008
2009
2010
2011
82.6%
77.3%
78.9%
83.3%
38
34
30
20
52.1%
48.9%
37.0%
55.3%
25
23
17
26
64.2%
62.2%
63.7%
46.0%
43
56
58
46
66.3%
73.1%
71.2%
66.3%
118
155
161
124
67.4%
68.2%
66.1%
61.6%
252
275
279
233
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Developmental reading/writing student definition: students in credential-seeking cohorts that enrolled in at least one developmental reading
(below 100) or writing (100 and below) course. Results are through year three.
75
Successful Progression
Developmental Students Moving to Gatekeeper Course Work and Completion: English
English Success by Race/Ethnicity
Asian and white students enroll in the highest level of developmental reading/writing at higher rates
than do black and Hispanic students. Black students are least likely to successfully complete both the
developmental reading/writing sequence and gatekeeper English. Asian students are the group most
likely to earn a credential. For the 2011 cohort, 19.4 percent of Asian developmental reading/writing
students earned a credential, while 8.8 percent of black, 11.3 percent of Hispanic, and 13.2 percent of
white developmental reading/writing students earned a credential.
Asian
N developmental reading/writing students
% enrolled in highest level dev. reading/writing
% successfully completed highest level dev. reading/writing
% enrolled in gatekeeper English
% successfully completed gatekeeper English
% earned credential
2008
58
93.1%
79.3%
77.6%
65.5%
15.5%
2009
56
91.1%
78.6%
67.9%
60.7%
8.9%
2010
48
85.4%
79.2%
64.6%
62.5%
20.8%
2011
31
87.1%
77.4%
67.7%
64.5%
19.4%
Black
N developmental reading/writing students
% enrolled in highest level dev. reading/writing
% successfully completed highest level dev. reading/writing
% enrolled in gatekeeper English
% successfully completed gatekeeper English
% earned credential
2008
74
83.8%
64.9%
54.1%
33.8%
9.5%
2009
99
67.7%
47.5%
35.4%
23.2%
7.1%
2010
104
70.2%
44.2%
25.0%
16.3%
3.8%
2011
102
72.5%
46.1%
32.4%
25.5%
8.8%
Hispanic
N developmental reading/writing students
% enrolled in highest level dev. reading/writing
% successfully completed highest level dev. reading/writing
% enrolled in gatekeeper English
% successfully completed gatekeeper English
% earned credential
2008
98
88.8%
68.4%
66.3%
43.9%
11.2%
2009
130
88.5%
69.2%
53.8%
43.1%
12.3%
2010
144
76.4%
63.2%
47.2%
40.3%
16.9%
2011
151
82.1%
66.2%
43.0%
30.5%
11.3%
White
N developmental reading/writing students
% enrolled in highest level dev. reading/writing
% successfully completed highest level dev. reading/writing
% enrolled in gatekeeper English
% successfully completed gatekeeper English
% earned credential
2008
279
90.0%
63.8%
57.3%
42.3%
12.5%
2009
308
88.0%
68.8%
62.0%
50.3%
18.2%
2010
316
86.1%
71.5%
61.4%
50.9%
16.1%
2011
272
85.3%
68.8%
57.0%
45.6%
13.2%
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Developmental reading/writing student definition: students in credential-seeking cohorts that enrolled in at least one developmental reading
(below 100) or writing (100 and below) course. Results are through year three.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success Rate of
Developmental
Students in
College-Level
English
Pages 10-11
76
Math Success by
Race/Ethnicity
Pages 64-65
Successful Progression
Developmental Students Moving to Gatekeeper Course Work and Completion: English
English Success by Full-/Part-Time Status
Part-time students are substantially less likely than full-time students to successfully complete
gatekeeper English after completing the highest level of developmental reading/writing. Additionally,
very few of these part-time students attempt the gatekeeper English course within three years of
beginning at Harper.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Full-time % successfully completing gatekeeper English
after successfully completing dev. reading/writing
Full-time N successfully completing gatekeeper English
after successfully completing dev. reading/writing
Part-time % successfully completing gatekeeper English
after successfully completing dev. reading/writing
Part-time N successfully completing gatekeeper English
after successfully completing dev. reading/writing
Overall % successfully completing gatekeeper English
after successfully completing dev. reading/writing
Overall N successfully completing gatekeeper English
after successfully completing dev. reading/writing
2008
2009
2010
2011
69.7%
70.6%
67.6%
65.3%
214
230
234
188
56.7%
58.4%
59.2%
50.0%
38
45
45
45
67.4%
68.2%
66.1%
61.6%
252
275
279
233
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Developmental reading/writing student definition: students in credential-seeking cohorts that enrolled in at least one developmental reading
(below 100) or writing (100 and below) course. Results are through year three. Full- and part-time status are as of the student’s first fall
semester at the College.
77
Successful Progression
Developmental Students Moving to Gatekeeper Course Work and Completion: English
English Success by Full-/Part-Time Status
Full-time students are more likely to enroll in and complete both the developmental reading/writing
sequence and gatekeeper English than part-time students. Full-time students are also more likely to
earn a credential. For the 2011 cohort, 13.2 percent of full-time developmental reading/writing students
earned a credential, while 9.4 percent of part-time developmental reading/writing students earned a
credential.
Full-time
2008
N developmental reading/writing students
2009
2010
2011
462
473
492
439
% enrolled in highest level dev. reading/writing
90.0%
86.5%
84.6%
83.8%
% successfully completed highest level dev. reading/writing
66.5%
68.9%
70.3%
65.6%
% enrolled in gatekeeper English
62.1%
60.5%
56.7%
54.4%
% successfully completed gatekeeper English
46.3%
48.6%
47.6%
42.8%
% earned credential
12.8%
15.6%
15.9%
13.2%
Part-time
2008
2009
2010
2011
N developmental reading/writing students
106
136
149
159
% enrolled in highest level dev. reading/writing
82.1%
78.7%
71.1%
77.4%
% successfully completed highest level dev. reading/writing
63.2%
56.6%
51.0%
56.6%
% enrolled in gatekeeper English
51.9%
41.2%
36.9%
34.6%
% successfully completed gatekeeper English
35.8%
33.1%
30.2%
28.3%
% earned credential
8.5%
8.8%
10.1%
9.4%
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Developmental reading/writing student definition: students in credential-seeking cohorts that enrolled in at least one developmental reading
(below 100) or writing (100 and below) course. Results are through year three. Full- and part-time status are as of the student’s first fall
semester at the College.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success Rate of
Developmental
Students in
College-Level
English
Pages 10-11
78
Math Success by
Full-/Part-Time
Status
Pages 66-67
Successful Progression
Developmental Students Moving to Gatekeeper Course Work and Completion: English
English Success by Age Group
Students age 18 and under successfully complete gatekeeper English after completing the highest level
of developmental reading/writing at a consistently higher than average rate, while students age 19-24
successfully complete at a consistently lower than average rate. Due to a small number of students over
age 18, there is more variation in developmental reading/writing to gatekeeper English success rates for
those students over time.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Age 18 and under % successfully completing gatekeeper
English after successfully completing dev. reading/writing
Age 18 and under N successfully completing gatekeeper
English after successfully completing dev. reading/writing
Age 19-24 % successfully completing gatekeeper English
after successfully completing dev. reading/writing
Age 19-24 N successfully completing gatekeeper English
after successfully completing dev. reading/writing
Age 25 and over % successfully completing gatekeeper
English after successfully completing dev. reading/writing
Age 25 and over N successfully completing gatekeeper
English after successfully completing dev. reading/writing
Overall % successfully completing gatekeeper English after
successfully completing dev. reading/writing
Overall N successfully completing gatekeeper English after
successfully completing dev. reading/writing
2008
2009
2010
2011
71.2%
71.1%
70.9%
63.4%
200
214
214
173
56.3%
59.0%
53.3%
55.6%
45
46
49
45
53.8%
62.5%
57.1%
62.5%
7
15
16
15
67.4%
68.2%
66.1%
61.6%
252
275
279
233
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Developmental reading/writing student definition: students in credential-seeking cohorts that enrolled in at least one developmental reading
(below 100) or writing (100 and below) course. Results are through year three. Age is as of the student’s first fall semester at the College.
79
Successful Progression
Developmental Students Moving to Gatekeeper Course Work and Completion: English
English Success by Age Group
Students age 18 and under enroll in the highest level of developmental reading/writing at higher rates
than do students age 19-24 and students 25 and over. Students age 18 and under are also more likely to
successfully complete both the developmental reading/writing sequence and gatekeeper English.
However, students age 25 and over are the group most likely to earn a credential. For the 2011 cohort,
15.2 percent of developmental reading/writing students age 25 and over earned a credential, while 13.6
percent of developmental reading/writing students 18 and under and 7.4 percent of developmental
reading/writing students age 19-24 earned a credential.
Age 18 and Under
2008
2009
2010
2011
N developmental reading/writing students
401
427
427
403
% enrolled in highest level dev. reading/writing
92.3%
86.2%
83.8%
85.6%
% successfully completed highest level dev. reading/writing
70.1%
70.5%
70.7%
67.7%
% enrolled in gatekeeper English
66.1%
62.8%
58.5%
55.8%
% successfully completed gatekeeper English
49.9%
50.1%
50.1%
42.9%
% earned credential
12.7%
15.0%
16.9%
13.6%
Age 19-24
2008
2009
2010
2011
N developmental reading/writing students
146
143
176
149
% enrolled in highest level dev. reading/writing
79.5%
81.8%
75.6%
72.5%
% successfully completed highest level dev. reading/writing
54.8%
54.5%
52.3%
54.4%
% enrolled in gatekeeper English
44.5%
39.2%
35.8%
34.9%
% successfully completed gatekeeper English
30.8%
32.2%
27.8%
30.2%
% earned credential
9.6%
10.5%
8.0%
7.4%
Age 25 and Over
2008
2009
2010
2011
21
39
38
46
% enrolled in highest level dev. reading/writing
81.0%
79.5%
81.6%
82.6%
% successfully completed highest level dev. reading/writing
61.9%
61.5%
73.7%
52.2%
% enrolled in gatekeeper English
57.1%
46.2%
55.3%
37.0%
% successfully completed gatekeeper English
33.3%
38.5%
42.1%
32.6%
14.3%
17.9%
18.4%
15.2%
N developmental reading/writing students
% earned credential
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Developmental reading/writing student definition: students in credential-seeking cohorts that enrolled in at least one developmental reading
(below 100) or writing (100 and below) course. Results are through year three. Age is as of the student’s first fall semester at the College.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success Rate of
Developmental
Students in
College-Level
English
Pages 10-11
80
Math Success by
Age Group
Pages 68-69
Successful Progression
Developmental Students Moving to Gatekeeper Course Work and Completion: English
English Success by Pell Status
Over time, non-Pell students have had higher success rates than Pell students in completing
developmental reading/writing and subsequently successfully completing gatekeeper English. Pell
student success rates have been decreasing over time, from 67.4 percent for the 2008 cohort to 55.2
percent for the 2011 cohort.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Pell % successfully completing gatekeeper English
after successfully completing dev. reading/writing
Pell N successfully completing gatekeeper English after
successfully completing dev. reading/writing
Non-Pell % successfully completing gatekeeper English
after successfully completing dev. reading/writing
Non-Pell N successfully completing gatekeeper English
after successfully completing dev. reading/writing
Overall % successfully completing gatekeeper English
after successfully completing dev. reading/writing
Overall N successfully completing gatekeeper English
after successfully completing dev. reading/writing
2008
2009
2010
2011
67.4%
64.6%
61.7%
55.2%
62
93
113
90
67.4%
70.3%
69.5%
66.5%
190
182
166
143
67.4%
68.2%
66.1%
61.6%
252
275
279
233
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Developmental reading/writing student definition: students in credential-seeking cohorts that enrolled in at least one developmental reading
(below 100) or writing (100 and below) course. Results are through year three. Pell status is as of the student’s first fall semester at the College.
81
Successful Progression
Developmental Students Moving to Gatekeeper Course Work and Completion: English
English Success by Pell Status
In most cases, non-Pell students are more likely to enroll in and complete both the developmental
reading/writing sequence and gatekeeper English than are Pell students. However, both groups have
earned credentials at varying rates over time. For the 2008 and 2009 cohorts, Pell students earned
credentials at higher rates than non-Pell students, while non-Pell students earned credentials at higher
rates for the 2010 and 2011 cohorts.
Pell
2008
N developmental reading/writing students
2009
2010
2011
128
223
293
277
88.3%
81.6%
79.9%
81.9%
% successfully completed highest level dev. reading/writing
71.9%
64.6%
62.5%
58.8%
% enrolled in gatekeeper English
64.8%
51.6%
46.8%
42.6%
% successfully completed gatekeeper English
48.4%
41.7%
38.6%
32.5%
% earned credential
14.8%
15.2%
13.3%
9.7%
Non-Pell
2008
2009
2010
2011
% enrolled in highest level dev. reading/writing
N developmental reading/writing students
440
386
348
321
% enrolled in highest level dev. reading/writing
88.6%
86.5%
82.8%
82.2%
% successfully completed highest level dev. reading/writing
64.1%
67.1%
68.7%
67.0%
% enrolled in gatekeeper English
58.9%
58.8%
56.6%
54.8%
% successfully completed gatekeeper English
43.2%
47.2%
47.7%
44.5%
% earned credential
11.1%
13.5%
15.5%
14.3%
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Developmental reading/writing student definition: students in credential-seeking cohorts that enrolled in at least one developmental reading
(below 100) or writing (100 and below) course. Results are through year three. Pell status is as of the student’s first fall semester at the College.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success Rate of
Developmental
Students in
College-Level
English
Pages 10-11
82
Math Success by
Pell Status
Pages 70-71
Successful Progression
Performance in College-Level Courses: Math
Performance in college-level math provides the percentage of a student cohort that enrolls in
gatekeeper math courses and successfully completes at least one of those courses within three years.
Gatekeeper math attempts include all credential-seeking students who were enrolled in MTH101,
MTH103, MTH130, MTH165 and MGT225. Successful completion includes students who earn a C or
better in a course. Achieving the Dream cohorts are used to track Harper student gatekeeper math
completion (see pages x-xi).
Overall gatekeeper math success has decreased 6.7 percent since the 2007 cohort. The following pages
provide more detailed information about gatekeeper math completion for demographic groups by
gender, race/ethnicity, developmental placement, full-/part-time status, age group and Pell status.
Performance in gatekeeper math is a measure of college-level students’ ability to progress on the path
needed to complete a credential at Harper College. The decrease in gatekeeper math success indicates a
need to further examine reasons for the decrease as well as potential solutions for improving success for
future Harper students.
83
Successful Progression
Performance in College-Level Courses: Math
Success in Gatekeeper Math by Gender
Overall success in gatekeeper math has decreased over time. Female success is higher than male
success, with the gap ranging from 4.4 to 15.6 percent across the cohorts being tracked. Males 20-24
tend to successfully complete gatekeeper math at a lower rate than the overall Harper average.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Female % completed gatekeeper math
79.6%
78.6%
78.8%
77.4%
78.5%
Female N completed gatekeeper math
331
330
341
345
307
Male % completed gatekeeper math
75.2%
70.6%
72.8%
70.1%
62.9%
Male N completed gatekeeper math
357
329
375
333
265
Male 20-24 % completed gatekeeper math
66.7%
69.8%
65.0%
62.0%
51.1%
Male 20-24 N completed gatekeeper math
28
37
26
31
24
Overall % completed gatekeeper math
77.2%
74.4%
75.5%
73.6%
70.5%
Overall N completed gatekeeper math
688
659
716
678
574
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts; results are through year three. Gatekeeper math attempts include all credential-seeking students who were
enrolled in MTH101, MTH103, MTH130, MTH165 or MGT225. Successful completions include those earning a C or better in one of those
courses. This is a self-reported category; therefore there are missing responses and categories do not always sum to overall total. Missing
responses are included in the overall total.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success in
Gatekeeper
Math
Page 14
84
Success in
Gatekeeper
English by
Gender
Page 91
Successful Progression
Performance in College-Level Courses: Math
Success in Gatekeeper Math by Race/Ethnicity
With the exception of white students, Harper’s racial/ethnic groups showed high variability in
gatekeeper math success from year to year. The high variability is likely due to the relatively low number
of students in each group for each cohort. Black students were the only group that fell consistently
below the overall Harper average.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Asian % completed gatekeeper math
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
85.1%
68.2%
83.0%
87.2%
72.6%
Asian N completed gatekeeper math
86
58
73
68
53
Black % completed gatekeeper math
43.8%
46.9%
66.7%
64.9%
44.4%
Black N completed gatekeeper math
Hispanic % completed gatekeeper math
Hispanic N completed gatekeeper math
White % completed gatekeeper math
7
15
26
24
16
64.3%
81.1%
66.4%
69.3%
66.1%
63
77
93
79
80
78.5%
76.5%
76.5%
72.3%
72.5%
White N completed gatekeeper math
474
426
485
442
363
Overall % completed gatekeeper math
77.2%
74.4%
75.5%
73.6%
70.5%
Overall N completed gatekeeper math
688
659
716
678
574
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts; results are through year three. Gatekeeper math attempts include all credential-seeking students who were
enrolled in MTH101, MTH103, MTH130, MTH165 or MGT225. Successful completions include those earning a C or better in one of those
courses. Pacific Islanders are included in the Asian group for the 2007 cohorts. Due to a small number of students, some racial/ethnic groups
such as American Indian/Alaskan Native are not listed separately in this report. This is a self-reported category; therefore there are missing
responses. Additional racial/ethnic groups and missing responses are included in the overall total.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success in
Gatekeeper
Math
Page 14
85
Success in
Gatekeeper
English by
Race/Ethnicity
Page 92
Successful Progression
Performance in College-Level Courses: Math
Success in Gatekeeper Math by Developmental Placement
Students who were referred to developmental math prior to starting gatekeeper math tend to be
slightly less likely to complete gatekeeper math than students who were not placed into developmental
courses. However, this trend was not followed for the 2008 or 2011 cohorts, when students referred to
developmental courses performed slightly better in their gatekeeper course work than students who
were not referred to developmental courses. In this figure, referral to developmental math does not
necessarily indicate completion of a developmental math course.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Referred developmental math;
% completed gatekeeper math
Referred developmental math;
N completed gatekeeper math
Not referred developmental math;
% completed gatekeeper math
Not referred developmental math;
N completed gatekeeper math
Overall % completed gatekeeper math
Overall N completed gatekeeper math
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
72.3%
74.5%
74.2%
67.4%
70.3%
193
193
207
219
175
79.3%
74.3%
76.1%
77.0%
70.6%
495
466
509
459
399
77.2%
74.4%
75.5%
73.6%
70.5%
688
659
716
678
574
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts; results are through year three. Gatekeeper math attempts include all credential-seeking students who were
enrolled in MTH101, MTH103, MTH130, MTH165 or MGT225. Successful completions include those earning a C or better in one of those
courses.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success in
Gatekeeper
Math
Page 14
86
Success in
Gatekeeper
English by
Developmental
Placement
Page 93
Successful Progression
Performance in College-Level Courses: Math
Success in Gatekeeper Math by Full-/Part-Time Status
Due to a small number of part-time students attempting gatekeeper math, no significant trends were
revealed in the success rates of these students. For the five cohorts being examined, part-time students
did not fall consistently above or below full-time students and the Harper College average, and parttime success rates were more variable than overall success. However, it is important to note that parttime students have been attempting gatekeeper math at rates much lower than full-time students.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Full-time % completed gatekeeper math
77.8%
73.8%
76.1%
74.3%
69.9%
Full-time N completed gatekeeper math
606
589
647
601
517
Part-time % completed gatekeeper math
73.2%
79.5%
70.4%
68.8%
77.0%
Part-time N completed gatekeeper math
82
70
69
77
57
Overall % completed gatekeeper math
77.2%
74.4%
75.5%
73.6%
70.5%
Overall N completed gatekeeper math
688
659
716
678
574
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts; results are through year three. Gatekeeper math attempts include all credential-seeking students who were
enrolled in MTH101, MTH103, MTH130, MTH165 or MGT225. Successful completions include those earning a C or better in one of those
courses. Full- and part-time status are as of the student’s first fall semester at the College.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success in
Gatekeeper
Math
Page 14
87
Success in
Gatekeeper
English by Full/Part-Time
Status
Page 94
Successful Progression
Performance in College-Level Courses: Math
Success in Gatekeeper Math by Age Group
Students age 30 and older had the highest gatekeeper math success rates for most cohorts, exceeding
85 percent for all cohorts except 2009. By contrast, students age 20-24 had success rates lower than the
Harper average for most cohorts, decreasing to 60.0 percent for the 2011 cohort. There were very few
students age 25-29 or age 30 and over that attempted gatekeeper math courses.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Age 19 and under % completed gatekeeper math
77.6%
74.0%
76.0%
73.8%
71.2%
Age 19 and under N completed gatekeeper math
596
564
617
581
509
Age 20-24 % completed gatekeeper math
72.7%
78.0%
67.1%
68.2%
60.0%
Age 20-24 N completed gatekeeper math
64
71
51
58
48
Age 25-29 % completed gatekeeper math
72.7%
69.6%
84.4%
71.4%
81.8%
Age 25-29 N completed gatekeeper math
16
16
27
15
9
Age 30 and over % completed gatekeeper math
91.7%
88.9%
75.0%
85.7%
100.0%
Age 30 and over N completed gatekeeper math
11
8
21
24
8
Overall % completed gatekeeper math
77.2%
74.4%
75.5%
73.6%
70.5%
Overall N completed gatekeeper math
688
659
716
678
574
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts; results are through year three. Gatekeeper math attempts include all credential-seeking students who were
enrolled in MTH101, MTH103, MTH130, MTH165 or MGT225. Successful completions include those earning a C or better in one of those
courses. Age groups are as of the student’s first fall semester at the College. This is a self-reported category; therefore there are missing
responses and categories do not always sum to overall total. Missing responses are included in the overall total.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success in
Gatekeeper
Math
Page 14
88
Success in
Gatekeeper
English by Age
Group
Page 95
Successful Progression
Performance in College-Level Courses: Math
Success in Gatekeeper Math by Pell Status
Pell and non-Pell students had relatively stable and similar success rates in gatekeeper math. Pell
student success rates have been slightly more variable, decreasing from a high of 79.1 percent for the
2009 cohort to a low of 68.4 percent for the 2011 cohort.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Pell % completed gatekeeper math
Pell N completed gatekeeper math
Non-Pell % completed gatekeeper math
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
79.0%
73.1%
79.1%
74.1%
68.4%
113
114
197
212
182
76.9%
74.7%
74.2%
73.4%
71.5%
Non-Pell N completed gatekeeper math
575
545
519
466
392
Overall % completed gatekeeper math
77.2%
74.4%
75.5%
73.6%
70.5%
Overall N completed gatekeeper math
688
659
716
678
574
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts; results are through year three. Gatekeeper math attempts include all credential-seeking students who were
enrolled in MTH101, MTH103, MTH130, MTH165 or MGT225. Successful completions include those earning a C or better in one of those
courses. Pell status is as of the student’s first fall semester at the College.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success in
Gatekeeper
Math
Page 14
89
Success in
Gatekeeper
English by Pell
Status
Page 96
Successful Progression
Performance in College-Level Courses: English
Performance in college-level English provides the percentage of a student cohort that enrolls in
gatekeeper English courses and successfully completes at least one of those courses within three years.
Gatekeeper English attempts include all credential-seeking students who were enrolled in English 101.
Successful completion includes students who earn a C or better in a course. Achieving the Dream
cohorts are used to track Harper student gatekeeper English completion (see pages x-xi).
Overall gatekeeper English success reached a five-year low of 80.3 percent for the 2011 cohort. The
following pages provide more detailed information about gatekeeper English completion for
demographic groups by gender, race/ethnicity, developmental placement, full-/part-time status, age
group and Pell status.
Performance in gatekeeper English is a measure of college-level students’ ability to progress on the path
needed to complete a credential at Harper College. The decrease in success of students in gatekeeper
English indicates a need to further examine reasons for changes in success over time as well as potential
solutions for improving gatekeeper English success rates for future Harper students.
90
Successful Progression
Performance in College-Level Courses: English
Success in Gatekeeper English by Gender
Success in gatekeeper English has remained fairly steady over time. However, there is a gap in success
rates between female and male students as well as between all students and males age 20-24. Males
continue to have lower gatekeeper English success rates than do females (76.1 percent vs. 84.5 percent
for the 2011 cohort). Additionally, males age 20-24 have lower than average success rates in gatekeeper
English courses. However, the high variation in success rates for males age 20-24 is likely due to the
small number of students in that group that attempted gatekeeper English.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Female % completed gatekeeper English
Female N completed gatekeeper English
Male % completed gatekeeper English
Male N completed gatekeeper English
Male 20-24 % completed gatekeeper English
Male 20-24 N completed gatekeeper English
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
85.9%
83.4%
84.5%
88.8%
84.5%
689
683
665
735
656
79.4%
76.2%
78.1%
77.4%
76.1%
653
629
718
636
591
65.1%
75.5%
63.4%
68.0%
57.8%
54
71
59
66
48
Overall % completed gatekeeper English
82.6%
79.8%
81.1%
83.1%
80.3%
Overall N completed gatekeeper English
1,342
1,312
1,383
1,371
1,256
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts; results are through year three. Gatekeeper English attempts include all credential-seeking students who were
enrolled in ENG101. Successful completions include those earning a C or better in that course. This is a self-reported category; therefore there
are missing responses and categories do not always sum to overall total. Missing responses are included in the overall total.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success in
Gatekeeper
English
Page 15
91
Success in
Gatekeeper
Math by
Gender
Page 84
Successful Progression
Performance in College-Level Courses: English
Success in Gatekeeper English by Race/Ethnicity
Black and Hispanic student success in gatekeeper English tend to fall below overall Harper success rates
in gatekeeper English. The smaller cohorts of black students increase the variability of outcomes for that
group, but over time, black students have been less likely than other racial/ethnic groups to successfully
complete a gatekeeper English course within their first three years at Harper College.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Asian % completed gatekeeper English
88.1%
84.7%
89.7%
89.8%
89.2%
Asian N completed gatekeeper English
141
127
139
114
107
Black % completed gatekeeper English
62.7%
69.8%
63.2%
70.1%
66.0%
Black N completed gatekeeper English
37
67
67
75
64
Hispanic % completed gatekeeper English
77.3%
75.4%
77.0%
80.1%
78.0%
Hispanic N completed gatekeeper English
170
178
218
197
199
White % completed gatekeeper English
84.2%
81.3%
82.1%
84.0%
81.5%
White N completed gatekeeper English
893
786
885
882
760
Overall % completed gatekeeper English
82.6%
79.8%
81.1%
83.1%
80.3%
Overall N completed gatekeeper English
1,342
1,312
1,383
1,371
1,256
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts; results are through year three. Gatekeeper English attempts include all credential-seeking students who were
enrolled in ENG101. Successful completions include those earning a C or better in that course. Pacific Islanders are included in the Asian group
for the 2007 cohort. Due to a small number of students, some racial/ethnic groups such as American Indian/Alaskan Native are not listed
separately in this report. This is a self-reported category; therefore there are missing responses. Additional racial/ethnic groups and missing
responses are included in the overall total.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success in
Gatekeeper
English
Page 15
92
Success in
Gatekeeper
Math by
Race/Ethnicity
Page 85
Successful Progression
Performance in College-Level Courses: English
Success in Gatekeeper English by Developmental Placement
Placement into developmental reading and/or writing does not appear to have a significant effect on
students’ ability to successfully complete a gatekeeper English course within three years. For the most
recent cohort (2011), students who had been referred to developmental reading had higher gatekeeper
success rates than did students who were not referred to developmental reading or writing.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Referred developmental reading;
% completed gatekeeper English
Referred developmental reading;
N completed gatekeeper English
Referred developmental writing;
% completed gatekeeper English
Referred developmental writing;
N completed gatekeeper English
Not referred developmental reading or
writing; % completed gatekeeper English
Not referred developmental reading or
writing; N completed gatekeeper English
Overall % completed gatekeeper English
Overall N completed gatekeeper English
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
81.0%
75.9%
81.2%
85.0%
81.5%
209
224
229
232
190
79.3%
78.5%
81.1%
82.9%
78.8%
88
106
120
126
104
83.0%
81.0%
80.9%
82.5%
80.4%
995
976
1,048
1,035
1,252
82.6%
79.8%
81.1%
83.1%
80.3%
1,342
1,312
1,383
1,371
1,256
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts; results are through year three. Gatekeeper English attempts include all credential-seeking students who were
enrolled in ENG101. Successful completions include those earning a C or better in earning a C or better in that course.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success in
Gatekeeper
English
Page 15
93
Success in
Gatekeeper
Math by
Developmental
Placement
Page 86
Successful Progression
Performance in College-Level Courses: English
Success in Gatekeeper English by Full-/Part-Time Status
Part-time students are slightly less likely than full-time students to successfully complete the gatekeeper
English course in which they enrolled. For the 2011 cohort, part-time students showed gatekeeper
English success rates 2.4 percent lower than their full-time counterparts when given three years to
successfully complete the course.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Full-time % completed gatekeeper English
82.8%
80.9%
82.6%
83.2%
80.7%
Full-time N completed gatekeeper English
1,086
1,092
1,129
1,092
1,018
Part-time % completed gatekeeper English
81.8%
74.8%
74.9%
82.5%
78.3%
Part-time N completed gatekeeper English
256
220
254
279
238
Overall % completed gatekeeper English
82.6%
79.8%
81.1%
83.1%
80.3%
Overall N completed gatekeeper English
1,342
1,312
1,383
1,371
1,256
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts; results are through year three. Gatekeeper English attempts include all credential-seeking students who were
enrolled in ENG101. Successful completions include those earning a C or better in that course. Full- and part-time status are as of the student’s
first fall semester at the College.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success in
Gatekeeper
English
Page 15
94
Success in
Gatekeeper
Math by Full/Part-Time
Status
Page 87
Successful Progression
Performance in College-Level Courses: English
Success in Gatekeeper English by Age Group
Students age 20-24 tend to complete gatekeeper English at rates below the overall Harper average. All
age groups other than students age 20-24 showed improvement for the 2009 to 2011 cohorts over the
success rates of the 2008 cohort.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Age 19 and under % completed gatekeeper English
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
83.7%
80.3%
82.4%
84.5%
81.1%
Age 19 and under N completed gatekeeper English
1,116
1,063
1,120
1,081
1,004
Age 20-24 % completed gatekeeper English
70.6%
77.4%
69.9%
73.1%
69.1%
Age 20-24 N completed gatekeeper English
125
147
121
141
125
Age 25-29 % completed gatekeeper English
85.2%
81.0%
82.7%
85.9%
85.5%
Age 25-29 N completed gatekeeper English
Age 30 and over % completed gatekeeper English
46
47
67
55
53
91.5%
76.8%
80.6%
82.5%
88.0%
Age 30 and over N completed gatekeeper English
54
53
75
94
73
Overall % completed gatekeeper English
82.6%
79.8%
81.1%
83.1%
80.3%
Overall N completed gatekeeper English
1,342
1,312
1,383
1,371
1,256
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts; results are through year three. Gatekeeper English attempts include all credential-seeking students who were
enrolled in ENG101. Successful completions include those earning a C or better in that course. Age groups are as of the student’s first fall
semester at the College. This is a self-reported category; therefore there are missing responses and categories do not always sum to overall
total. Missing responses are included in the overall total.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success in
Gatekeeper
English
Page 15
95
Success in
Gatekeeper
Math by Age
Group
Page 88
Successful Progression
Performance in College-Level Courses: English
Success in Gatekeeper English by Pell Status
Pell recipients and students who did not receive a Pell grant had comparable gatekeeper English
completion rates to the overall Harper College rate, with Pell recipients showing success rates slightly
lower than the overall Harper average. The only deviation from this pattern occurred for the 2007
cohort, when Pell recipients had a higher gatekeeper English completion rate than non-Pell students.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Pell % completed gatekeeper English
Pell N completed gatekeeper English
Non-Pell % completed gatekeeper English
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
86.5%
79.0%
80.4%
81.9%
78.7%
243
244
373
470
417
81.8%
80.0%
81.3%
83.7%
81.1%
Non-Pell N completed gatekeeper English
1,099
1,068
1,010
901
839
Overall % completed gatekeeper English
82.6%
79.8%
81.1%
83.1%
80.3%
Overall N completed gatekeeper English
1,342
1,312
1,383
1,371
1,256
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts; results are through year three. Gatekeeper English attempts include all credential-seeking students who were
enrolled in ENG101. Successful completions include those earning a C or better in that course. Pell status is as of the student’s first fall semester
at the College.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Success in
Gatekeeper
English
Page 15
96
Success in
Gatekeeper
Math by Pell
Status
Page 89
Successful Progression
Earning Credits Toward Completion
This section provides information about Harper students moving through their studies at the College.
Students are tracked at four momentum points (enrolling in 15 college-level credits, successfully
completing 15 college-level credits, enrolling in 30 college-level credits, and successfully completing 30
college-level credits) as well as the target milestone of earning a credential. The following pages provide
more detailed information about enrollment and success rates for demographic groups by gender,
race/ethnicity, full-/part-time status, age group and Pell status. This information is reported using cohort
data from Harper’s Student Information System (SIS).
Performance of Harper students in earning a credential at Harper College decreased for most
demographic groups for the 2011 cohort. These decreases in earned credential rates indicate a need to
further examine reasons for the reduction as well as potential solutions for improving the ability for
future Harper students to earn credentials.
97
Successful Progression
Earning Credits Toward Completion
Earning 15 and 30 College Credits by Gender
Females and males earn 15 and 30 college credits at similar rates. However, males lag slightly behind
females, with a 3.0 percent lower rate for earning 15 credit hours and a 2.7 precent lower rate for
earning 30 credit hours for the most recent (2011) cohort.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
Female % earning 15 college credits
55.2%
56.8%
58.7%
54.3%
Female % earning 30 college credits
39.7%
38.9%
40.1%
36.7%
Male % earning 15 college credits
53.6%
55.7%
52.7%
51.3%
Male % earning 30 college credits
36.0%
37.1%
35.7%
34.0%
Overall % earning 15 college credits
54.4%
56.2%
55.8%
52.7%
Overall % earning 30 college credits
37.9%
38.0%
38.0%
35.2%
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Includes students in credential-seeking cohorts during a three-year tracking period. Results are through year three.
98
Successful Progression
Earning Credits Toward Completion
Earning 15 and 30 College Credits by Gender
Although males enroll in 15 and 30 college-level credits at higher rates than females, females complete
those credits at a higher rate. Females also earn credentials at higher rates than males. Of females in the
2011 cohort, 27.5 percent earned a credential, while only 17.9% of males in the 2011 cohort earned a
credential.
Female
2008
2009
2010
2011
N credential-seeking students
1,381
1,370
1,415
1,415
% Enrolled in 15 college-level credits
70.0%
70.2%
73.0%
70.1%
% Earned 15 college-level credits
55.2%
56.8%
58.7%
54.3%
% Enrolled in 30 college-level credits
50.7%
52.0%
53.3%
48.1%
% Earned 30 college-level credits
39.7%
38.9%
40.1%
36.7%
% Earned credential
25.6%
27.4%
30.1%
27.5%
Male
2008
2009
2010
2011
N credential-seeking students
1,310
1,407
1,354
1,292
% Enrolled in 15 college-level credits
73.8%
75.2%
74.1%
71.4%
% Earned 15 college-level credits
53.6%
55.7%
52.7%
51.3%
% Enrolled in 30 college-level credits
53.0%
54.2%
52.4%
50.2%
% Earned 30 college-level credits
36.0%
37.1%
35.7%
34.0%
% Earned credential
15.4%
19.2%
18.3%
17.9%
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Includes students in credential-seeking cohorts during a three-year tracking period. Results are through year three.
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits:
All CredentialSeeking Students
Page 16
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
99
Successful Progression
Earning Credits Toward Completion
Earning 15 and 30 College Credits by Race/Ethnicity
Asian and White students tend to earn 15 and 30 college credits at a higher than average rate. Black and
Hispanic students earn 15 and 30 college credits at a lower than average rate, with black students
showing substantially lower rates over time.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
Asian % earning 15 college credits
53.2%
59.1%
63.4%
59.0%
Asian % earning 30 college credits
35.7%
38.5%
50.4%
39.6%
Black % earning 15 college credits
41.1%
34.1%
30.0%
23.9%
Black % earning 30 college credits
20.0%
22.0%
16.1%
12.1%
Hispanic % earning 15 college credits
46.4%
48.9%
48.8%
43.5%
Hispanic % earning 30 college credits
29.4%
29.9%
28.9%
27.3%
White % earning 15 college credits
58.9%
60.3%
60.2%
58.8%
White % earning 30 college credits
43.0%
41.9%
41.6%
39.3%
Overall % earning 15 college credits
54.4%
56.2%
55.8%
52.7%
Overall % earning 30 college credits
37.9%
38.0%
38.0%
35.2%
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Includes students in credential-seeking cohorts during a three-year tracking period. Results are through year three.
100
Successful Progression
Earning Credits Toward Completion
Earning 15 and 30 College Credits by Race/Ethnicity
Asian and white students enroll in and complete 15 and 30 college-level credits at rates substantially
higher than black and Hispanic students. However, Hispanic students complete credentials at rates
similar to Asian students, while black students earn credentials at the lowest rate among the
racial/ethnic groups included in this report.
Asian
N credential-seeking students
% Enrolled in 15 college-level credits
% Earned 15 college-level credits
% Enrolled in 30 college-level credits
% Earned 30 college-level credits
% Earned credential
2008
269
69.9%
53.2%
52.0%
35.7%
18.2%
2009
286
73.4%
59.1%
53.1%
38.5%
14.7%
2010
232
75.4%
63.4%
61.2%
50.4%
22.4%
2011
227
73.6%
59.0%
54.6%
39.6%
20.3%
Black
N credential-seeking students
% Enrolled in 15 college-level credits
% Earned 15 college-level credits
% Enrolled in 30 college-level credits
% Earned 30 college-level credits
% Earned credential
2008
185
67.6%
41.1%
39.5%
20.0%
15.1%
2009
223
57.8%
34.1%
36.8%
22.0%
13.0%
2010
267
56.6%
30.0%
30.0%
16.1%
13.9%
2011
289
49.5%
23.9%
23.9%
12.1%
8.7%
Hispanic
N credential-seeking students
% Enrolled in 15 college-level credits
% Earned 15 college-level credits
% Enrolled in 30 college-level credits
% Earned 30 college-level credits
% Earned credential
2008
377
64.2%
46.4%
42.7%
29.4%
17.2%
2009
479
65.1%
48.9%
45.1%
29.9%
18.6%
2010
453
67.3%
48.8%
43.5%
28.9%
21.4%
2011
469
64.0%
43.5%
41.8%
27.3%
21.1%
White
N credential-seeking students
% Enrolled in 15 college-level credits
% Earned 15 college-level credits
% Enrolled in 30 college-level credits
% Earned 30 college-level credits
% Earned credential
2008
1,542
75.2%
58.9%
56.2%
43.0%
23.4%
2009
1,677
76.6%
60.3%
57.4%
41.9%
27.4%
2010
1,644
77.6%
60.2%
57.1%
41.6%
26.5%
2011
1,506
75.0%
58.8%
53.4%
39.3%
25.3%
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Includes students in credential-seeking cohorts during a three-year tracking period. Results are through year three.
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits:
All CredentialSeeking Students
Page 16
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
101
Successful Progression
Earning Credits Toward Completion
Earning 15 and 30 College Credits by Developmental Placement
Students starting course work at Harper in developmental courses tend to earn 15 and 30 college-level
credits at rates slightly higher than their college-ready counterparts. However, for the 2011 cohort, 34.8
percent of college-ready students earned 30 credits within three years, while 32.5 percent of
developmental students earned 30 credits within three years.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
Developmental % earning 15 college credits
53.3%
56.2%
54.9%
49.8%
Developmental % earning 30 college credits
36.9%
36.6%
36.4%
32.5%
College-level % earning 15 college credits
50.7%
50.7%
51.4%
51.2%
College-level % earning 30 college credits
35.5%
35.3%
35.7%
34.8%
Overall % earning 15 college credits
54.4%
56.2%
55.8%
52.7%
Overall % earning 30 college credits
37.9%
38.0%
38.0%
35.2%
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Includes students in credential-seeking cohorts during a three-year tracking period. Results are through year three. For these results, the
college-level cohort is based on first semester enrollment; the developmental cohort is based on enrollment at any point during the three year
period. Therefore, the college-level cohort duplicates some developmental students.
102
Successful Progression
Earning Credits Toward Completion
Earning 15 and 30 College Credits by Developmental Placement
Students beginning developmental course work at Harper tend to enroll in and earn college-level credits
at a higher rate than college-ready students. However, developmental students earn credentials at a
lower rate. For the 2011 cohort, 16.9 percent of developmental students earned a credential, while 25.6
percent of college-ready students earned a credential.
Developmental
2008
2009
2010
2011
N credential-seeking students
1,210
1,250
1,300
1,174
% Enrolled in 15 college-level credits
78.0%
78.2%
77.4%
73.8%
% Earned 15 college-level credits
53.3%
56.2%
54.9%
49.8%
% Enrolled in 30 college-level credits
55.6%
56.7%
54.6%
49.4%
% Earned 30 college-level credits
36.9%
36.6%
36.4%
32.5%
% Earned credential
16.7%
18.3%
18.8%
16.9%
College-Level
2008
2009
2010
2011
N credential-seeking students
1,616
1,692
1,617
1,657
% Enrolled in 15 college-level credits
61.3%
61.6%
63.7%
63.3%
% Earned 15 college-level credits
50.7%
50.7%
51.4%
51.2%
% Enrolled in 30 college-level credits
44.6%
45.3%
46.6%
45.3%
% Earned 30 college-level credits
35.5%
35.3%
35.7%
34.8%
% Earned credential
21.8%
24.6%
26.5%
25.6%
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Includes students in credential-seeking cohorts during a three-year tracking period. Results are through year three. For these results, the
college-level cohort is based on first semester enrollment; the developmental cohort is based on enrollment at any point during the three year
period. Therefore, the college-level cohort duplicates some developmental students.
LINKS TO
RELATED
FIGURES:
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits:
All CredentialSeeking Students
Page 16
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits:
College-Level
Courses
Page 17
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits:
Developmental
Courses
Page 18
103
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits:
Developmental
Math
Page 19
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits:
Developmental
Reading/Writing
Page 20
Successful Progression
Earning Credits Toward Completion
Earning 15 and 30 College Credits by Full-/Part-Time Status
Full-time students earn 15 and 30 college credit hours at substanitally higer rates than part-time
students. For the 2011 cohort, 47.1 percent of full-time students earned 30 credits within three years,
compared to 15.9 percent of part-time students.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
Full-time % earning 15 college credits
64.3%
67.4%
65.3%
64.3%
Full-time % earning 30 college credits
48.2%
49.1%
48.1%
47.1%
Part-time % earning 15 college credits
34.6%
34.7%
39.0%
33.7%
Part-time % earning 30 college credits
17.6%
16.6%
20.0%
15.9%
Overall % earning 15 college credits
54.4%
56.2%
55.8%
52.7%
37.9%
38.0%
38.0%
35.2%
Overall % earning 30 college credits
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Includes students in credential-seeking cohorts during a three-year tracking period. Results are through year three. Full-/part-time status is as
of the student’s first fall semester at the College.
104
Successful Progression
Earning Credits Toward Completion
Earning 15 and 30 College Credits by Full-/Part-Time Status
Part-time students earn 15 and 30 college credits and credentials at a lower rate than full-time students.
For the 2011 cohort, 17.9 percent of part-time students earned a credential, compared to 26.0 percent
of full-time students.
Full-time
2008
2009
2010
2011
N credential-seeking students
1,795
1,828
1,769
1,685
% Enrolled in 15 college-level credits
84.5%
86.0%
86.5%
85.5%
% Earned 15 college-level credits
64.3%
67.4%
65.3%
64.3%
% Enrolled in 30 college-level credits
65.8%
68.1%
67.0%
64.7%
% Earned 30 college-level credits
48.2%
49.1%
48.1%
47.1%
% Earned credential
22.3%
25.7%
26.5%
26.0%
Part-time
2008
2009
2010
2011
N credential-seeking students
896
949
1,000
1,035
% Enrolled in 15 college-level credits
46.7%
47.2%
50.5%
45.8%
% Earned 15 college-level credits
34.6%
34.7%
39.0%
33.7%
% Enrolled in 30 college-level credits
23.7%
24.3%
27.9%
23.1%
% Earned 30 college-level credits
17.6%
16.6%
20.0%
15.9%
% Earned credential
17.2%
18.7%
20.5%
17.9%
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Includes students in credential-seeking cohorts during a three-year tracking period. Results are through year three. Full-/part-time status is as
of the student’s first fall semester at the College.
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits:
All CredentialSeeking Students
Page 16
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
105
Successful Progression
Earning Credits Toward Completion
Earning 15 and 30 College Credits by Age Group
Students age 18 and under earn 15 and 30 college credits at a higher than average rate, while students
age 19-24 and students age 25 and over earn 15 and 30 credits at a lower than average rate.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
64.3%
67.4%
66.4%
64.9%
Age 18 and under % earning 30 college credits
48.4%
49.7%
49.6%
48.6%
Age 19-24 % earning 15 college credits
48.4%
47.0%
45.2%
40.8%
Age 19-24 % earning 30 college credits
31.4%
28.9%
27.1%
23.6%
Age 25 and over % earning 15 college credits
35.3%
39.5%
44.1%
39.6%
Age 25 and over % earning 30 college credits
17.5%
19.8%
23.9%
19.0%
Overall % earning 15 college credits
54.4%
56.2%
55.8%
52.7%
Overall % earning 30 college credits
37.9%
38.0%
38.0%
35.2%
Age 18 and under % earning 15 college credits
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Includes students in credential-seeking cohorts during a three-year tracking period. Results are through year three. Age is as of the student’s
first fall semester at the College.
106
Successful Progression
Earning Credits Toward Completion
Earning 15 and 30 College Credits by Age Group
Although students age 25 and over enroll in and earn 15 and 30 credits at a lower rate than students age
18 and under, they tend to earn credentials at similar rates. Students age 19-24 have the lowest
credentials earned rates, with 16.6 percent of this group earning a credential for the 2011 cohort.
Age 18 and Under
2008
2009
2010
2011
N credential-seeking students
1,441
1,477
1,416
1,373
% Enrolled in 15 college-level credits
83.8%
86.9%
85.0%
84.3%
% Earned 15 college-level credits
64.3%
67.4%
66.4%
64.9%
% Enrolled in 30 college-level credits
66.3%
68.8%
67.9%
66.1%
% Earned 30 college-level credits
48.4%
49.7%
49.6%
48.6%
% Earned credential
21.4%
24.8%
25.5%
25.7%
Age 19-24
2008
2009
2010
2011
N credential-seeking students
746
700
764
753
% Enrolled in 15 college-level credits
67.0%
64.9%
66.6%
60.8%
% Earned 15 college-level credits
48.4%
47.0%
45.2%
40.8%
% Enrolled in 30 college-level credits
43.8%
43.3%
42.1%
36.3%
% Earned 30 college-level credits
31.4%
28.9%
27.1%
23.6%
% Earned credential
19.2%
18.3%
19.5%
16.6%
Age 25 and Over
2008
2009
2010
2011
N credential-seeking students
504
600
589
594
% Enrolled in 15 college-level credits
44.8%
47.2%
54.8%
50.5%
% Earned 15 college-level credits
35.3%
39.5%
44.1%
39.6%
% Enrolled in 30 college-level credits
22.0%
26.2%
30.7%
25.1%
% Earned 30 college-level credits
17.5%
19.8%
23.9%
19.0%
% Earned credential
20.6%
25.2%
27.8%
24.4%
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Includes students in credential-seeking cohorts during a three-year tracking period. Results are through year three. Age is as of the student’s
first fall semester at the College.
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits:
All CredentialSeeking Students
Page 16
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
107
Successful Progression
Earning Credits Toward Completion
Earning 15 and 30 College Credits by Pell Status
Pell and non-Pell students tend to earn 15 and 30 college credits at similar rates. However, Pell students
in the 2011 cohort earned 15 credits at a rate 3.7 percent lower than non-Pell students.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2008
2009
2010
2011
Pell % earning 15 college credits
56.3%
58.4%
54.0%
50.2%
Pell % earning 30 college credits
39.7%
39.7%
37.9%
32.4%
Non-Pell % earning 15 college credits
54.0%
55.4%
56.7%
53.9%
Non-Pell % earning 30 college credits
37.5%
37.4%
38.0%
36.7%
Overall % earning 15 college credits
54.4%
56.2%
55.8%
52.7%
Overall % earning 30 college credits
37.9%
38.0%
38.0%
35.2%
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Includes students in credential-seeking cohorts during a three-year tracking period. Results are through year three. Pell status is as of the
student’s first fall semester at the College.
108
Successful Progression
Earning Credits Toward Completion
Earning 15 and 30 College Credits by Pell Status
Although Pell students enrolled in 15 credit hours at a higher rate than non-Pell students, Pell students
in the 2010 and 2011 cohorts completed course work and credentials at lower rates. For the 2011
cohort, 19.1 percent of Pell students completed a credential, compared to 24.9 percent of non-Pell
students.
Pell
2008
2009
2010
2011
N credential-seeking students
478
738
943
918
% Enrolled in 15 college-level credits
80.3%
77.8%
75.3%
74.1%
% Earned 15 college-level credits
56.3%
58.4%
54.0%
50.2%
% Enrolled in 30 college-level credits
55.0%
55.7%
51.2%
47.3%
% Earned 30 college-level credits
39.7%
39.7%
37.9%
32.4%
% Earned credential
21.5%
22.9%
22.1%
19.1%
Non-Pell
2008
2009
2010
2011
N credential-seeking students
2,213
2,039
1,826
1,802
% Enrolled in 15 college-level credits
70.0%
70.9%
72.6%
68.5%
% Earned 15 college-level credits
54.0%
55.4%
56.7%
53.9%
% Enrolled in 30 college-level credits
51.1%
52.2%
53.7%
49.7%
% Earned 30 college-level credits
37.5%
37.4%
38.0%
36.7%
% Earned credential
20.4%
23.4%
25.5%
24.9%
Source: Harper Banner SIS.
Includes students in credential-seeking cohorts during a three-year tracking period. Results are through year three. Pell status is as of the
student’s first fall semester at the College.
Earning 15 and 30
College Credits:
All CredentialSeeking Students
Page 16
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
109
Completion and Transfer
Completers
One method of considering Harper’s success in helping students graduate is to consider the number of
students who earn credentials each year in relation to the number of students who are attending the
College. Data from Harper College’s reports to the Illinois Community College Board (ICCB) are used to
inform these comparisons.
The following pages provide detailed information about completers by gender and race/ethnicity. Over
the time period analyzed in this report, all gender and ethnic/racial groups have increased the number
of completers that have earned credentials. However, completers decreased slightly from 2011-12 to
2013-14 for all groups except Hispanic graduates. The peak seen in 2011-12 is largely due to the
College’s Completion Concierge and new efforts to stack career certificates that lead to degrees.
110
Completion and Transfer
Completers
Number of Completers by Gender
Although the number of female and male credit students enrolling at Harper has decreased in recent
years, 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14 showed substantially higher numbers of graduates for both groups
of students than were seen prior to 2011. Female students enroll and complete at a higher rate than do
male students.
18,000
16,000
14,000
12,000
10,000
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
0
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
2012-13
2013-14
Female graduates
1,432
1,696
2,239
2,080
2,034
Female credit students
15,187
15,487
15,259
14,822
14,348
Male graduates
Male credit students
765
835
1,585
1,400
1,321
12,546
12,406
12,542
12,045
11,709
Source: Illinois Community College Board (ICCB) official A1 submission.
Gender is self-reported; not all students report gender when enrolling. Therefore, the numbers above do not sum to the total number of
completers listed on page 25.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Number of
Completers
Page 25
111
Percentage of
Completers by
Gender
Page 112
Completion and Transfer
Completers
Percentage of Completers by Gender
Females are consistently over-represented among Harper College graduates. Female credit students
represented 54.8 percent of credit students in 2009-10 but 65.2 percent of graduates during the same
year. In 2013-14, females represented 55.1 percent of the credit student population, but 60.6 percent of
graduates were female during the same year. Although recent years have shown improvement in
representation of males among Harper graduates, in 2013-14 there remained a gap of 5.5 percent
between male credit student and graduate percentages.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
2012-13
2013-14
Female graduates
65.2%
66.9%
58.6%
59.7%
60.6%
Female credit students
54.8%
55.3%
54.9%
55.1%
55.1%
Male graduates
34.8%
33.0%
41.4%
40.2%
39.4%
45.2%
44.3%
45.1%
44.8%
44.9%
Male credit students
Source: Illinois Community College Board (ICCB) official A1 submission.
This is a self-reported category; therefore there are missing responses.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Number of
Completers
Page 25
112
Number of
Completers by
Gender
Page 111
Completion and Transfer
Completers
Number of Completers by Race/Ethnicity
The figure below shows the number of credit students and graduates from 2009-10 to 2013-14 by
race/ethnicity. Across all years white students have accounted for the highest proportion of credit
students, followed by Hispanic students, Asian students, and black students. From 2011-12 to 2013-14,
however, there has been a decrease in the number of credit students attending the College for all
reported racial/ethnic groups, with the exception of Hispanic students. The most substantial percentage
decrease was in black credit students.
From 2012-13 to 2013-14, the number of Hispanic graduates increased slightly, while all other reported
racial/ethnic groups showed a decrease in number of completers.
18,000
16,000
14,000
12,000
10,000
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
0
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
2012-13
2013-14
230
234
373
332
325
2,994
2,960
3,009
2,942
2,938
87
109
158
168
147
1,292
1,472
1,556
1,308
1,242
221
273
486
425
499
Hispanic credit students
4,867
4,889
4,784
4,771
5,193
White graduates
1,455
1,717
2,515
2,278
2,249
White credit students
15,966
16,462
16,192
15,599
15,409
Asian graduates
Asian credit students
Black graduates
Black credit students
Hispanic graduates
Source: Illinois Community College Board (ICCB) official A1 submission.
In this figure, Pacific Islander and Asian are combined. Race/ethnicity is self-reported; not all students report their race/ethnicity when
enrolling. Therefore, the numbers above do not sum to the total number of completers listed on page 25.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Number of
Completers
Page 25
113
Percentage of
Completers by
Race/Ethnicity
Page 114
Completion and Transfer
Completers
Percentage of Completers by Race/Ethnicity
White students tend to graduate at higher than expected rates when compared to their share of the
credit student population. In 2012-13 and 2013-14, black students tended to graduate at approximately
the same rates that would be expected when compared to their share of the credit student population.
However, Asian and Hispanic students graduated at comparably low rates when compared to their share
of the credit student population.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
2012-13
2013-14
Asian graduates
10.5%
9.2%
9.8%
9.5%
9.7%
Asian credit students
10.8%
10.6%
10.8%
10.9%
11.3%
Black graduates
4.0%
4.3%
4.1%
4.8%
4.4%
Black credit students
4.7%
5.3%
5.6%
4.9%
4.8%
Hispanic graduates
10.1%
10.8%
12.7%
12.2%
14.9%
Hispanic credit students
17.5%
17.4%
17.2%
17.7%
19.9%
White graduates
66.2%
67.8%
65.8%
65.4%
67.0%
White credit students
57.6%
58.7%
58.2%
58.0%
59.1%
Source: Illinois Community College Board (ICCB) official A1 submission.
In this figure, Asian and Pacific Islander are combined. This is a self-reported category; therefore there are missing responses.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Number of
Completers
Page 25
114
Number of
Completers by
Race/Ethnicity
Page 113
Completion and Transfer
Completion Rates
Completion rates also help to demonstrate the extent of the College’s success in helping students earn
credentials. These completion rates include students who have completed a credential within three
years of first enrolling at Harper. However, IPEDS graduation rates include only full-time students.
Through the 2010 cohort, completion rates reported from AtD increased overall and for nearly all
demographic groups. IPEDS graduation rates showed similar trends. However, AtD completion rates
decreased slightly from the 2010 to the 2011 cohort. The following pages provide detailed information
about completers for demographic groups by gender, race/ethnicity, developmental status, full-/parttime status, age group and Pell status. The gender information is reported using both IPEDS and AtD as
data sources. IPEDS data are not available for all demographic groups, limiting most demographic
reporting to use of only AtD as a source.
115
Completion and Transfer
Completion Rates
Completion Rates by Gender
Both AtD and IPEDS data show a gap between the rates at which females and males earn credentials,
with males consistently completing at lower rates than females. Males remain well below 20 percent for
all cohorts, while females have surpassed 20 percent for the 2008 to 2011 cohorts. Males, however,
improved IPEDS graduation rates 6.5 percent from the 2007 to the 2010 cohort.
100%
80%
AtD
Completion
60%
40%
20%
0%
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Female % completed
18.9%
23.7%
24.5%
26.8%
24.0%
Female N completed
270
327
336
376
335
Male % completed
13.4%
12.8%
16.3%
15.3%
14.0%
Male N completed
175
168
230
205
178
Overall % completed
16.2%
18.4%
20.4%
21.2%
19.3%
Overall N completed
445
495
566
581
518
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission. Years are based on AtD cohorts. Years are based on AtD cohorts; results are
through year three. This is a self-reported category; therefore there are missing responses and categories do not always sum to overall total.
Missing responses are included in the overall total.
100%
80%
IPEDS
Graduation
60%
Students
Completing or
Transferring
Page 26
40%
20%
0%
2007
2008
2009
2010
Female % graduated
17.3%
25.0%
24.4%
31.6%
Female N graduated
133
192
162
227
Male % graduated
11.1%
13.7%
17.3%
17.6%
Male N graduated
103
119
152
144
Overall % graduated
13.9%
19.0%
20.3%
24.1%
Overall N graduated
236
311
314
371
Source: IPEDS. See Appendix for full IPEDS definition of graduation. IPEDS data for 2011 cohort not available.
116
Combined
Completion and
Transfer by
Gender
Page 123
Transfer Rates
by Gender
Page 124
Completion and Transfer
Completion Rates
Completion Rates by Race/Ethnicity
With the exception of white students, all of Harper College’s racial/ethnic groups fall below the College’s
overall completion rates. Although the large number of white students attending the College drives the
overall completion rate, the lower rates of minority racial/ethnic groups are notable. The Hispanic
student cohort was the only group that did not experience a decrease in completion rate for the 2011
cohort. Note that variability in data for some racial/ethnic groups may be due to the small number of
students in those populations.
Overall, less than one in five credential-seeking students completes a degree or certificate at the College
within three years. Thus, there is room for improvement in the overall completion rate as well as for
minority racial/ethnic groups.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Asian % completed
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
14.6%
15.7%
13.9%
20.7%
17.0%
Asian N completed
43
42
38
42
35
Black % completed
7.1%
14.1%
11.6%
14.2%
7.6%
Black N completed
Hispanic % completed
Hispanic N completed
White % completed
11
26
26
38
22
12.9%
14.6%
15.5%
18.2%
18.7%
47
55
74
80
85
18.1%
21.0%
23.8%
22.8%
20.8%
White N completed
307
320
400
373
310
Overall % completed
16.2%
18.4%
20.4%
21.2%
19.3%
Overall N completed
445
495
566
581
518
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts. Pacific Islanders are included in the Asian group for the 2007 cohort. Due to a small number of students, some
racial/ethnic groups such as American Indian/Alaskan Native are not listed separately in this report. This is a self-reported category; therefore
there are missing responses. Additional racial/ethnic groups and missing responses are included in the overall total.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Students
Completing or
Transferring
Page 26
117
Transfer Rates by
Race/Ethnicity
Page 125
Completion and Transfer
Completion Rates
Completion Rates of Developmental Students
Students entering the College after testing into developmental course work complete at a lower rate
than the overall Harper completion rate. All developmental groups decreased completion rates for the
2011 cohort.
Developmental reading and writing students have lower completion rates than developmental math
students, with rates ranging from 7.8 to 12.1 percent. Developmental math students have shown
completion rates between 11.7 and 15.9 percent.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Referred dev. math % completed
11.7%
15.2%
15.9%
15.5%
13.6%
Referred dev. math N completed
126
164
182
188
149
Referred dev. reading % completed
7.8%
11.1%
11.6%
12.1%
9.8%
Referred dev. reading N completed
38
62
64
72
55
Referred dev. writing % completed
8.3%
10.1%
9.2%
9.9%
8.7%
Referred dev. writing N completed
23
34
33
38
30
Referred to any dev. % completed
11.3%
15.3%
15.6%
15.9%
13.9%
Referred to any dev. N completed
139
187
201
214
172
Overall % completed
16.2%
18.4%
20.4%
21.2%
19.3%
Overall N completed
445
495
566
581
518
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts. Developmental courses are those numbered below 90 in math, below 100 in reading, or 100 and below in
English.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Students
Completing or
Transferring
Page 26
118
Transfer Rates of
Developmental
Students
Page 126
Completion and Transfer
Completion Rates
Completion Rates by Full-/Part-Time Status
Full-time students complete degrees and certificates at a higher rate than do part-time students. Within
three years, part-time students tend to complete at a rate of 12.6 to 17.5 percent, whereas full-time
students complete at a rate of 18.3 to 23.3 percent.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Full-time % completed
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
18.3%
20.5%
23.2%
23.3%
22.4%
Full-time N completed
320
368
417
409
375
Part-time % completed
12.6%
14.1%
15.2%
17.5%
14.1%
125
127
149
172
143
Overall % completed
Part-time N completed
16.2%
18.4%
20.4%
21.2%
19.3%
Overall N completed
445
495
566
581
518
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts. Full- and part-time status are as of the student’s first fall semester at the College.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Students
Completing or
Transferring
Page 26
119
Transfer Rates by
Full-/Part-Time
Status
Page 127
Completion and Transfer
Completion Rates
Completion Rates by Age Group
Age may also play a role in students’ ability to complete their course work within three years. Over time,
students who start at Harper between the ages of 20 and 24 are less likely to complete than all other
age groups. Students age 19 and under have slightly higher than average completion rates.
Large differences in completion rates for some groups may be due to the small number of students in
each of those groups.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Age 19 and under % completed
16.6%
19.0%
21.8%
21.8%
21.1%
Age 19 and under N completed
281
322
372
360
339
Age 20-24 % completed
13.5%
17.0%
14.3%
16.5%
13.6%
Age 20-24 N completed
70
81
65
81
65
Age 25-29 % completed
14.6%
19.1%
21.9%
18.0%
14.2%
Age 25-29 N completed
27
38
47
36
32
Age 30 and over % completed
19.6%
16.9%
20.5%
26.1%
21.6%
Age 30 and over N completed
66
53
82
104
82
Overall % completed
16.2%
18.4%
20.4%
21.2%
19.3%
Overall N completed
445
495
566
581
518
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts. Age groups are as of the student’s first fall semester at the College. This is a self-reported category; therefore
there are missing responses and categories do not always sum to overall total. Missing responses are included in the overall total.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Students
Completing or
Transferring
Page 26
120
Transfer Rates by
Age Group
Page 128
Completion and Transfer
Completion Rates
Completion Rates by Pell Status
Students receiving Pell funding tend to complete at a slightly lower rate than do students who are not
receiving Pell funding.
Note that the number of new Harper students receiving Pell funding increased from the 2007 to the
2013 cohorts but decreased for the 2011 and 2012 cohorts. The 2007 cohort included 460 Pell students
(16.8 percent), while the 2013 cohort included 1,154 students (34.3 percent).
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Pell % completed
Pell N completed
Non-Pell % completed
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
14.3%
19.4%
19.9%
19.3%
16.4%
66
93
147
180
148
16.6%
18.2%
20.5%
22.2%
20.8%
Non-Pell N completed
379
402
419
401
370
Overall % completed
16.2%
18.4%
20.4%
21.2%
19.3%
Overall N completed
445
495
566
581
518
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts. Pell status is as of the student’s first fall semester at the College.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Students
Completing or
Transferring
Page 26
121
Transfer Rates by
Pell Status
Page 129
Completion and Transfer
Transfer Rates
For many community college students, success is not only completing a degree, but also transferring to
another institution for continued study. Using National Student Clearinghouse reports, this section
provides the percentage of AtD cohort students who transfer to another institution within three years of
beginning their studies at Harper. Unlike IPEDS, these transfer data include both completers and noncompleters.
The following pages provide detailed information about transfer students by gender, race/ethnicity,
developmental status, full-/part-time status, age group and Pell status. Overall transfer rates remained
fairly steady during the time period analyzed in this report, but dropped for the most recent cohort.
Additionally, large variation has been seen for some demographic groups. As a community college that
focuses on both completion and transfer, transfer rates should be investigated to ensure the College is
fully addressing the needs of its students.
122
Completion and Transfer
Transfer Rates
Combined Completion and Transfer by Gender
The overall IPEDS graduation plus transfer rate at Harper College was 53.5 percent for the 2010 cohort,
the highest rate during the period included in this report. When combining both graduation and
transfer, females perform better than males. Overall, combined graduation and transfer rates have
increased 3.9 percent over time.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2007
2008
2009
2010
Female % graduated or transferred
50.3%
56.7%
52.6%
57.6%
Female N graduated or transferred
388
436
348
414
49.0%
48.2%
46.9%
50.0%
Male % graduated or transferred
Male N graduated or transferred
455
420
412
409
Overall % graduated or transferred
49.6%
52.2%
49.4%
53.5%
Overall N graduated or transferred
843
856
760
823
Source: IPEDS. See Appendix for full IPEDS definitions of graduation and transfer. IPEDS data for 2011 cohort not available at time of print.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Students
Completing or
Transferring
Page 26
123
Completion
Rates by Gender
Page 116
Transfer Rates
by Gender
Page 124
Completion and Transfer
Transfer Rates
Transfer Rates by Gender
Transfer rates of the AtD cohorts decreased from the 2010 to the 2011 cohort. Over time, males and
females have transferred from Harper to other institutions at similar rates. For all cohorts other than
2008, female transfer rates were slightly lower than male transfer rates.
100%
80%
AtD
Transfer
60%
40%
20%
0%
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Female % transferred
37.4%
37.1%
35.1%
35.4%
25.9%
Female N transferred
535
511
481
497
361
Male % transferred
37.8%
36.4%
36.2%
36.8%
27.8%
Male N transferred
495
478
509
492
352
Overall % transferred
37.6%
36.7%
35.6%
36.1%
26.7%
Overall N transferred
1,030
989
990
989
719
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission. Years are based on AtD cohorts; results are through year three. This is a
self-reported category; therefore there are missing responses and categories do not always sum to overall total. Missing responses are
included in the overall total.
100%
80%
IPEDS
Transfer
60%
Students
Completing or
Transferring
Page 26
40%
20%
0%
2007
2008
2009
2010
Female % transferred
33.1%
31.7%
28.1%
26.0%
Female N transferred
255
244
186
187
Male % transferred
37.9%
34.6%
29.6%
32.4%
Male N transferred
352
301
260
265
Overall % transferred
35.7%
33.2%
29.0%
29.4%
Overall N transferred
607
545
446
452
Source: IPEDS. See Appendix for full IPEDS definition of transfer. IPEDS data for 2011 cohort not available.
124
Completion
Rates by
Gender
Page 116
Combined
Completion and
Transfer by
Gender
Page 123
Completion and Transfer
Transfer Rates
Transfer Rates by Race/Ethnicity
Asian and white student transfer rates were relatively stable over time, prior to the overall decrease in
transfer rates for the 2011 cohort. Hispanic transfer has lagged approximately 7 to 11 percent behind
the overall transfer rate for the College. Black student transfer rates have been the most variable,
ranging from 34.0 percent for the 2007 cohort to 48.2 percent for the 2009 cohort.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Asian % transferred
39.1%
37.8%
37.4%
37.4%
32.0%
Asian N transferred
115
101
102
76
66
Black % transferred
34.0%
41.8%
48.2%
40.8%
34.3%
Black N transferred
53
77
108
109
99
Hispanic % transferred
27.5%
28.6%
25.6%
28.7%
16.1%
Hispanic N transferred
100
108
122
126
73
White % transferred
39.4%
36.8%
36.7%
36.0%
26.9%
White N transferred
668
560
615
589
400
Overall % transferred
37.6%
36.7%
35.6%
36.1%
26.7%
Overall N transferred
1,030
989
990
989
719
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts; results are through year three. Pacific Islanders are included in the Asian group for the 2007 cohort. Due to a
small number of students, some racial/ethnic groups such as American Indian/Alaskan Native are not listed separately in this report. This is a
self-reported category; therefore there are missing responses. Additional racial/ethnic groups and missing responses are included in the overall
total.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Students
Completing or
Transferring
Page 26
125
Completion Rates
by Race/Ethnicity
Page 117
Completion and Transfer
Transfer Rates
Transfer Rates of Developmental Students
Developmental student transfer rates have lagged behind transfer rates for the overall credentialseeking cohort populations. Developmental math student transfer rates are only slightly lower than
overall transfer rates (1.5 percent to 3.3 percent), but developmental reading and writing students
transfer at much lower rates than the overall population (7.3 percent to 12.6 percent).
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Referred to dev. math % transferred
35.1%
33.7%
34.0%
32.8%
25.2%
Referred to dev. math N transferred
378
364
390
398
276
Referred to dev. reading % transferred
29.1%
25.6%
28.2%
28.2%
18.6%
Referred to dev. reading N transferred
141
143
156
167
104
Referred to dev. writing % transferred
27.2%
24.1%
28.3%
26.0%
17.2%
Referred to dev. writing N transferred
75
81
101
100
59
Overall % transferred
37.6%
36.7%
35.6%
36.1%
26.7%
Overall N transferred
1,030
989
990
989
719
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts. Developmental courses are those numbered below 90 in math,
below 100 in reading, or 100 and below in English.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Students
Completing or
Transferring
Page 26
126
Completion Rates
of Developmental
Students
Page 118
Completion and Transfer
Transfer Rates
Transfer Rates by Full-/Part-Time Status
Full-time students transfer at a substantially higher rate than do part-time students. Although there was
a decrease in transfer rates for the 2011 cohort, part-time students showed a smaller decrease (6.1
percent) than did full-time students (10.8 percent).
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Full-time % transferred
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
43.7%
43.6%
43.2%
42.6%
31.8%
Full-time N transferred
765
782
775
748
533
Part-time % transferred
26.7%
23.1%
21.9%
24.5%
18.4%
Part-time N transferred
Overall % transferred
Overall N transferred
265
207
215
241
186
37.6%
36.7%
35.6%
36.1%
26.7%
1,030
989
990
989
719
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts. Full- and part-time status are as of the student’s first fall semester at the College.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Students
Completing or
Transferring
Page 26
127
Completion Rates
by Full-/Part-Time
Status
Page 119
Completion and Transfer
Transfer Rates
Transfer Rates by Age Group
Students age 19 and under have been transferring at the highest rates of all age groups. Transfer rates
for students age 30 and over have been relatively stable, but have lagged 11.9 to 21.0 percent behind
the overall transfer rate for the College. Students age 25 to 29 have shown the most variation in transfer
rates, ranging from 20.8 percent for the 2011 cohort to 34.4 percent for the 2009 cohort.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Age 19 and under % transferred
42.8%
42.4%
39.8%
41.8%
30.5%
Age 19 and under N transferred
726
719
681
690
489
Age 20-24 % transferred
37.3%
35.1%
33.6%
32.4%
26.6%
Age 20-24 N transferred
194
167
152
159
127
Age 25-29 % transferred
29.2%
26.1%
34.4%
28.5%
20.8%
Age 25-29 N transferred
54
52
74
57
47
Age 30 and over % transferred
16.6%
16.3%
20.8%
20.9%
14.8%
Age 30 and over N transferred
56
51
83
83
56
Overall % transferred
37.6%
36.7%
35.6%
36.1%
26.7%
Overall N transferred
1,030
989
990
989
719
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts. This is a self-reported category; therefore there are missing responses and categories do not always sum to
overall total. Missing responses are included in the overall total. Age groups are as of the student’s first fall semester at the College.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Students
Completing or
Transferring
Page 26
128
Completion Rates
by Age Group
Page 120
Completion and Transfer
Transfer Rates
Transfer Rates by Pell Status
Pell students transfer at slightly higher rates than do non-Pell students. For the 2008 cohort, Pell
students transferred at rates 7.4 percent higher than non-Pell students, but the difference decreased to
2.3 percent for the 2011 cohort.
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Pell % transferred
39.8%
42.8%
39.0%
38.0%
28.3%
Pell N transferred
183
205
288
354
256
Non-Pell % transferred
37.1%
35.4%
34.4%
35.1%
26.0%
Non-Pell N transferred
847
784
702
635
463
Overall % transferred
37.6%
36.7%
35.6%
36.1%
26.7%
Overall N transferred
1,030
989
990
989
719
Source: Achieving the Dream (AtD) official data submission.
Years are based on AtD cohorts. Pell status is as of the student’s first fall semester at the College.
LINKS TO RELATED
FIGURES:
Students
Completing or
Transferring
Page 26
129
Completion Rates
by Pell Status
Page 121
Appendix: Definitions
Achieving the Dream Definitions 1
Completed: Successfully completed a course with a grade of C or better.
Developmental course: An instructional course designed for students deficient in the general
competencies necessary for a regular postsecondary curriculum and educational setting.
Developmental courses are also known as remedial courses, basic skills courses, preparatory
courses, or compensatory courses.
Developmental math: At Harper, include MTH courses numbered below 90.
Developmental reading: At Harper, includes RDG courses numbered below 100.
Developmental writing: At Harper, includes ENG courses numbered 100 and below.
Gatekeeper course: A college-level or degree-credit (non-developmental) course that students
are required to complete successfully before enrolling in more advanced classes in their major
field of study.
Gatekeeper math: At Harper, includes MTH101, MTH103, MTH130, MTH165 and
MGT225.
Gatekeeper English: At Harper, includes only ENG101.
Full-time student: Student was enrolled for 12 or more credit hours during first (fall) semester
at the College.
Part-time student: Student was enrolled for fewer than 12 credit hours during first (fall)
semester at the College.
Pell student: Student received a Pell grant during first (fall) semester at the College.
Non-Pell student: Student did not receive a Pell grant during first (fall) semester at the College.
Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) Definitions 2
Cohort: Generally, the group of students entering in the fall term established for tracking
purposes. This includes all students, regardless of their status as full-time/part-time/transferred,
entering as first-time, and award-seeking students at your institution during the first term of the
specified year.
Developmental Students: Developmental students were designated by either a developmental
math referral, developmental reading referral, or developmental English referral. Students can
be referred to developmental courses through a counselor, a developmental office, etc. Note
that referral does not equal attempt.
Graduation Rate: This annual component of IPEDS was added in 1997 to help institutions satisfy
the requirements of the Student Right-to-Know legislation. Data are collected on the number of
1
2
Achieving the Dream (2012). Data dictionary—AtD access tool.
IPEDS is the source for U.S. Department of Education data and reporting. http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/glossary/
130
students entering the institution as full-time, first-time, degree/certificate-seeking
undergraduate students in a particular year (cohort), by race/ethnicity and gender; the number
completing their program within 150 percent of normal time to completion; the number that
transfer to other institutions if transfer is part of the institution's mission. This rate is calculated
as the total number of completers within 150 percent of normal time divided by the cohort. A
completer is a student who receives a degree, diploma, certificate, or other formal award. In
order to be considered a completer, the degree/award must actually be conferred.
Transfer-Out Students (NON-COMPLETERS): Total number of students from the cohort or
subcohort who transferred out at any time within 150 percent of normal time to completion. A
transfer-out student is a student who has not completed or graduated from the program in
which he or she was enrolled, but who has subsequently enrolled at another eligible institution
in any program for which the reporting institution provided substantial preparation. (Note that
the transfer data in this report from AtD/National Student Clearinghouse include completers.)
131