INCREASING DEGREE ATTAINMENT IN CALIFORNIA: POLICY FACTORS
AFFECTING THE NEAR COMPLETION POPULATION
Jennifer Lee Murphy
B.A., Arizona State University, 1995
M.B.A., University of Phoenix, 2002
DISSERTATION
Submitted in partial fulfillment of
the requirements for the degree of
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
in
EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP
at
CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, SACRAMENTO
SPRING
2012
Copyright © 2012
Jennifer Lee Murphy
All rights reserved
ii
INCREASING DEGREE ATTAINMENT IN CALIFORNIA:
POLICY FACTORS AFFECTING THE NEAR COMPLETION POPULATION
A Dissertation
by
Jennifer Lee Murphy
Approved by Dissertation Committee:
_________________________________
Dr. Su Jin Jez, Chair
_________________________________
Dr. Nancy Shulock
_________________________________
Barbara Halsey
SPRING 2012
iii
INCREASING DEGREE ATTAINMENT IN CALIFORNIA: POLICY FACTORS
AFFECTING THE NEAR COMPLETION POPULATION
Student: Jennifer Lee Murphy
I certify that this student has met the requirements for format contained in the
University format manual, and that this dissertation is suitable for shelving in the
library and credit is to be awarded for the dissertation.
___________________________, Graduate Coordinator
Caroline S. Turner, PhD.
iv
_________________
Date
DEDICATION
With every ounce of my head and my heart, I dedicate this to my family.
Rori, you are indeed a very special daughter. Thank you for your love and
support during this process. Thank you for entertaining yourself while I studied, for
making copies and stapling papers, for baking cookies for the dissertation proposal
defense, and for keeping me real... you are correct, you can always call me 'Mom', not
'Dr. Mom.'
Christen, you helped me find my voice when it was lost and you taught me the
real meaning of being a role model and a mom. I will forever treasure you and the
special relationship that we have.
Mom and Dad, there is so much to say, yet no words will every truly convey
the love that I have for you and the appreciation I feel for the foundation you provided.
You taught me to work hard, stand up for myself, and to always be myself. I am so
very grateful for your love, support, and the conversational happy hours that are a true
family tradition... 'Oh happy day'!
Terry, this process was unpredictable and sometimes felt impossible, yet you
were there for me every day and in every possible way. You gave me space, reminded
me to laugh, helped me process the illogical thoughts in my head, and you loved me
through it all. You have indeed earned the title, Mr. Doctor Murphy!
v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I want to acknowledge and thank my dissertation committee- Dr. Su Jin Jez,
Dr. Nancy Shulock, and Executive Director Barbara Halsey.
Thank you Dr. Jez for modeling a passion for research and policy. Your
enthusiasm, commitment, and no nonsense approach to scholarly work are everything
that I needed in a dissertation chair and mentor. I am grateful that you challenged me
in a way that has forever expanded my view of policy and my ability to make
meaningful change.
Thank you Dr. Nancy Shulock for being an amazing role model for women in
policy and in education. The authenticity that drives your work is inspiring and I have
benefitted greatly from your scholarship and your advice.
Thank you Barbara Halsey for your leadership to the state of California. I am
privileged to know how much you have influenced and are continuing to change the
landscape of workforce development. I hope to influence policy with the grace and
wisdom that you model.
Thank you to the individuals who shared their thoughts and expertise on policy
and degree attainment in California. Your insights are reflected throughout the
findings and will continue to inform the way I approach my work.
I also want to acknowledge and thank the California State Legislature for
supporting SB 724 that enabled the applied doctorate degree within the CSU system. I
want to thank the leaders at Sacramento State for creating a program that balances
vi
leadership, policy, and data-driven decision-making. Thank you to the Doctorate
Program leadership, staff, and faculty for a challenging and rewarding program. Kim
Harrington, thank you for suggesting that I pursue the Ed.D.
I want to thank the College of Continuing Education for supporting me in this
endeavor. Christine Irion, thank you for the intellectual conversations that help me
balance ideas and reality. Jill Matsueda, thank you for introducing me to the world of
degree completion. Alice Tom and Cris Galeste, thank you for the professional and
personal support of female oriented leadership. Candice Palaspas, thank you for
recommending journal articles and providing insights on adult education. Hebe Mares,
thank you for listening, meeting me at the gym, and always cheering me on.
Allison Shaw, thank you for being a faithful cheerleader, a good friend, and a
brilliant writing coach. Dr. LeAnn Fong-Batkin, thank you for the advice, support,
and friendship.
Thank you Cohort 3! We are an incredibly diverse group of spirited and smart
individuals and you feel like family to me. Together we laughed, cried, debated, and
celebrated; knowing all of you forever changes me. Thank you Dr. Berner, Dr. Diaz,
and Dr. Meyerson... your friendship and support provide inspiration and sanity.
vii
CURRICULUM VITAE
EDUCATION
B.A. Communication, Arizona State University
M.B.A., University of Phoenix
Professional Employment
Senior Director, College of Continuing Education, California Sate University,
Sacramento
FIELDS OF STUDY
Policy and degree attainment in Higher Education
viii
Abstract
of
IMPROVING DEGREE COMPLETION IN CALIFORNIA:
POLICY FACTORS AFFECTING THE NEAR COMPLETION POPULATION
by
Jennifer Lee Murphy
Although many individuals complete some college-level education, too few
attain a degree. In California, there are nearly 20 million working-age adults of which
22%, or 4.5 million, have some college, but no degree (Lumina Foundation, 2010).
Emerging data indicates that many of these individuals actually qualify for a degree or
are within 15 credits of completing an academic program of study (Institute for Higher
Education Policy, 2011a). The literature review confirmed that the focus on near
completion is new in national policy conversations and also illustrated that California
is not among the nine states focusing on near completion as part of statewide efforts to
increase degree attainment.
The purpose of this study was to identify and understand the state-level policy
affecting degree completion at the associate and baccalaureate levels for the near
completion population in California. To gain this understanding, I sought answers to
the following research questions: (1) Are there state-level policies in California that
ix
specifically address near completion? (2) How do state-level policies help or hinder
access and success for the near completion population?
The research study confirmed that California's existing state-level policy in
higher education, workforce development, and economic development is devoid of
specific programs, initiatives, or regulations to move the near completion population
toward degree completion. The policy audit demonstrated that policies affecting the
near completion population are frequently the same policies identified as affecting
college completion in general. Therefore, investing in cross cutting efforts to improve
degree completion will benefit near completers and current students. The research also
revealed that many leaders and key staff are unaware of the near completion
population in California and near completion projects in other states.
Two hundred seventy-two artifacts from 14 higher education, workforce
development, and economic development entities in California’s executive branch of
government were categorized into nine areas of an existing framework and then
audited for impact to the near completion population. The following nine areas from
the CAEL Adult Learning Policy Review Framework (Council for Adult and
Experiential Learning, 2008) were utilized in collecting and categorizing policy:
governance, strategic plans, performance measures, state agency programs,
postsecondary education programs, finance, student financial assistance, consumer
information, and stakeholder involvement. The following six public policy priorities,
adapted from Shulock and Moore’s (2007) audit of California Community Colleges’
x
finance policy, formed the policy audit criteria: access, completion, workforce,
affordability, readiness, and efficiency. Nineteen interviews with state level policy
leaders and key staff provided insight on the policy context and on specific policies.
The research also confirmed that existing policy not targeted at near
completion does indeed affect access and success for the near completion population.
The study highlights specific policies in order to demonstrate that policy that supports,
hinders, or works at cross purposes in moving the near completion population to
degree completion. At the same time, since there are no specific efforts targeting near
completion, there are also no state-level policies preventing efforts or services. A
summary chart in Chapter 5 notes specific activities that higher education, workforce
development, and economic development can do to improve access and success for the
near completion population.
These findings have important implications for policy, leaders, and support the
use of data informed decision making. The findings shed light on the near completion
phenomenon and how it is linked to umbrella policy regarding degree completion. The
study's focus on near completers highlights the opportunity for some immediate
success as part of a comprehensives completion agenda. The lack of data on the near
completion population and near completion programs indicates the need for a
coordinated data system. The importance of measurement supports the need for
universal data and points to the urgency in reevaluating completion formulas and
completion metrics. The lack of degree attainment goals points to a need for
xi
coordinated oversight and leadership across higher education, workforce development,
and economic development.
Near completers are closer to a college degree than incoming freshman and
addressing the near completion population should be one part of increasing the overall
degree attainment levels in California and across the nation.
xii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Dedication..................................................................................................................... v
Acknowledgements ..................................................................................................... vi
Curriculum Vitae ....................................................................................................... viii
List of Tables .............................................................................................................. xv
List of Figures............................................................................................................ xvi
Chapter
1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1
Overview of the Study ...................................................................................... 1
2. LITERATURE REVIEW ....................................................................................... 8
Introduction ...................................................................................................... 8
What Do We Know About the Near Completion Population? ......................... 9
Why Do Near Completers Exist? ................................................................... 11
What Barriers do the Near Completion Population Face? ............................. 13
How do Other States Working with the Near Completion Population? ......... 17
Summary and Conclusions ............................................................................. 25
3.
METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................. 27
Overview ........................................................................................................ 27
The Policy Review Framework ...................................................................... 29
Policy Audit Criteria....................................................................................... 31
Data Collection and Analysis ......................................................................... 33
Setting and Environment ................................................................................ 39
Summary......................................................................................................... 42
4.
RESEARCH FINDINGS .................................................................................... 43
Introduction and Overview ............................................................................. 43
The Policy Review and Policy Audit Findings .............................................. 45
Governance ..................................................................................................... 46
xiii
Strategic Planning ........................................................................................... 55
Performance Measures ................................................................................... 59
State Agency Programs .................................................................................. 61
Postsecondary Education Programs ............................................................... 64
Finance ........................................................................................................... 68
Student Financial Assistance .......................................................................... 71
Consumer Information.................................................................................... 73
Stakeholder Involvement ................................................................................ 76
Summary......................................................................................................... 78
5.
IMPLICATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS ......................................................... 79
Introduction .................................................................................................... 79
Recommendations .......................................................................................... 79
Solutions Possible Within Current Policy ...................................................... 86
Future Research .............................................................................................. 92
Concluding Comments ................................................................................... 93
6.
APPENDICES .................................................................................................... 95
Appendix A. California State Government Organizational Chart................ 96
Appendix B. CAEL Framework Notes Grid ................................................ 98
Appendix C. Criteria Guide Analysis Sheet ............................................... 100
Appendix D. Summary Grid....................................................................... 102
Appendix E. Interview Protocol ................................................................. 104
Appendix F. Artifact Inventory List Sorted by Framework, Entity,
Artifact Type ......................................................................... 107
REFERENCES ......................................................................................................... 124
xiv
LIST OF TABLES
Tables
Page
1.
IHEP’s Classification of the Near-Completion Population ............................. 10
2.
Summary of Barriers Faced by Adult Students ............................................... 14
3.
Activities and Outcomes for the Policy Review and Policy Audit ................. 35
4.
Executive Branch Entities Included in the Study ............................................ 40
5.
Summary of Policy Alignment to Priorities for Near Completers .................. 45
6.
Activities That Could Improve Near Completion Outcomes .......................... 89
xv
LIST OF FIGURES
Figures
Page
1.
Levels of Education in California...................................................................... 5
2.
Estimation of Near Completers in California .................................................... 6
3.
Policy Review and Policy Audit Diagram ....................................................... 28
4.
California State Government Organizational Chart ........................................ 41
xvi
1
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
Overview of the Study
Although many individuals complete some college-level education, too few
attain a degree. Emerging data indicates that many of these individuals actually qualify
for a degree or are within 15 credits of completing an academic program of study
(Institute for Higher Education Policy, 2011a). These near completers represent an
often over-looked opportunity to increase degree attainment in the United States and
in California. This dissertation focuses on state-level policy affecting degree
completion at the associate and baccalaureate levels for the near completion
population in California.
The near completion population, also referred to as the adult ready population
in some states (Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education (WICHE),
2010), is generally defined as individuals who have earned most or all of their
academic course credits, but have no degree (Institute for Higher Education Policy,
2011a). The Institute for Higher Education Policy (IHEP) categorizes near completers
into two distinct groups: eligibles and potentials (2011b). Eligibles are those
individuals who have met the requirements, but have not been granted a degree due to
uncoordinated administrative processes, knowledge gaps about the degree completion
process, transfer to a four-year institution without applying for an associate degree,
issues with residency or testing requirements, or qualifying for a degree in an area that
they were not pursuing (IHEP, 2011b). Potentials are those individuals who need less
2
than 15 credits to complete degree requirements or may have to meet non-academic
course requirements, such as a freshman seminar or orientation, (IHEP, 2011b).
Media publications like Inside Higher Ed refer to the near completion
population as low-hanging fruit (Murphy, 2011). These individuals require fewer
credits or less administrative paperwork to move into the completion category than
any other population that has stopped out or dropped out of higher education.
Regarding efforts to increase degree attainment, the near completion population
represents an opportunity for rapid results, especially in terms of return on investment
(ROI), for the state of California.
The near completers themselves have already invested in their education, and
because state taxes support higher education in California, the general public has also
made an investment in this group. Yet neither the individuals nor society are reaping
the benefits that degree attainment provides. IHEP (2011a) notes that near completers
miss out on pay differentials, advancement, and other job opportunities while society
misses out on an increased tax base, enhanced civic engagement, and the social capital
a community gains with high levels of degreed individuals.
Because there is a parallel relationship between formal education and wages,
moving near completers through the final steps of degree completion is important for
both those individuals and society. Carnevale, Smith, and Strohl (2010) examined
2008 data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and concluded that over the course of a
lifetime, individuals with an associate's degree earn $488,000 more than a high school
graduate and individuals with a bachelor's degree earn $1,100,000 more than those
3
with an associate's degree. These earnings not only support the individual and his or
her dependents, but higher salaries also increase a state's tax base. In addition to higher
earning power, individuals with college degrees are less dependent on social service
programs, have the lowest unemployment rates even in a recession, and have the most
options for securing employment during an economic recovery (CAEL, 2008b;
Carnevale et al., 2010). Educated workers enjoy better working conditions and more
workplace training and are more likely to accrue paid vacation time and have
employer-provided health insurance (Baum & Ma, 2007; Carnevale et al., 2010; IHEP,
1998).
The Georgetown Center for Workforce and the Economy reports that the 2009
recession eliminated more than 7.8 million jobs and when jobs begin to grow again,
many of the old jobs will be obsolete (Carnevale et al., 2010). As the economy shifts
from industry-based to service-based it will require more college graduates than the
current pipeline can provide. Carnevale et al. (2010) predict that by 2018 the United
States economy will create 46.8 million jobs and that 63% of those jobs will require
workers with a college degree. In terms of the lack of alignment between higher
education and the changing needs of the workforce, the recession has served as a
focusing event by bringing this nationwide issue to the attention of policymakers,
education leaders, and the general public.
In California, employer demands are also changing and the need for collegedegreed workers continues to increase. By 2025, California’s population is expected to
reach 44 million people (Public Policy Institute of California, 2008) and experts
4
estimate a shortage of at least one million individuals with baccalaureate degrees
(Johnson, 2009; Johnson & Sungupta, 2009). Experts at the Georgetown Center for
Workforce and the Economy predict a shortage of 1.33 million individuals in
California with any type of postsecondary credential or baccalaureate degree by 2018
(Carnevale et al., 2010). Experts at the Lumina Foundation anticipate a need for 3.4
million more Californians with postsecondary credentials and degrees by 2025
(Lumina Foundation, 2011a). While no state is immune to workforce shortage issues,
California’s rapidly expanding Latino/Latina population creates an additional
challenge not found in most other states. By 2020 the Latino/Latina population will be
the largest racial/ethnic group in California (Public Policy Institute of California,
September, 2008) yet historically this group has the lowest college attendance and
graduation rates when compared to the general population or other underrepresented
groups (Johnson, 2009).
To address the shortage of graduates some experts suggest that California’s
public community colleges should focus on completion in addition to access (Moore,
Shulock, Ceja, & Lang, 2007). Others suggest that even with an increased focus on
completion, two-year and four-year public postsecondary institutions in California
lack the capacity to support the population growth, and that private nonprofit and forprofit institutions should be part of the state's solution to building capacity (Jez, 2011;
Tierney & Hentschke, 2011). With completion rates in California falling below 61%
and trailing the nation (Complete College America, 2011), something clearly needs to
change. If California and the United States are to be internationally competitive by
5
2025 (CAEL, 2008a), the near completion population must be part of California’s
postsecondary degree attainment solution. This dissertation focuses on the state-level
policies that affect degree completion at the associate and baccalaureate levels for the
near completion population.
There are nearly 20 million working-age adults in California (Lumina
Foundation, 2010b). Figure 1 shows that 22.7% of these 20 million people, or 4.5
million individuals, have some college-level education but no degree (Lumina
Foundation, 2011).
(from Lumina Foundation, 2011)
Figure 1. Levels of Education in California.
Current research does not specifically identify what percentage of those 4.5
million individuals meet IHEP’s established criteria of a near completer. However, by
applying the IHEP near completion estimation formula (IHEP, 2011b) shown in
Figure 2, to California, the numbers indicate that there could be 726,400 eligibles and
6
405,000 potentials for a total of 1,131,400 near completers (author's calculations).
That is nearly four times more potential degrees than the 239,441 degrees actually
conferred in California in 2008/09.
IHEP Near Completion Estimation Formula (IHEP, 2011b)
16% of the total number of individuals with some college, but no degree = eligibles
9% of the total number of individuals with some college, but no degree = potentials
Calculations with California’s Numbers (author’s calculations with 2008 data from
Lumina)
Eligibles: 0.16 x 4,540,000 = 726,400
Potentials: 0.09 x 4,540,000 = 239,441
Total Estimated Near Completers in California is 1,131,400
Figure 2. Estimation of Near Completers in California.
Compelled by the need for California to increase degree attainment and
informed by the data on the working-age population with some college experience, but
no degree, this research primarily focuses on identifying and understanding state-level
policy affecting the degree completion of the near completion population in
California. To gain this understanding, I sought answers to the following two research
questions:
1. Are there state-level policies in California that specifically address near
completion?
7
2. How do state-level policies help or hinder access and success for the near
completion population?
The information presented in Chapter 2 brings together various aspects of near
completion to establish a platform for this study. As near completion is a relatively
new concept in postsecondary education, the literature review covers the following
areas: non-traditional and adult student demographics, attrition issues, barriers faced
by near completers, and highlights from programs in other states designed to help near
completers move toward completion. Chapter 3 describes the research methods
including the policy review framework and the policy audit criteria. Chapter 4 presents
the research findings. Chapter 5 provides recommendations for leaders; state-level
policy; and the use of data-driven decision making in the areas of governance,
strategic plans and goals, performance measures, state agency programs,
postsecondary education programs, finance, student financial assistance, consumer
information, and stakeholder involvement, as well as suggestions for future research.
8
Chapter 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
The near completion population is a relatively new focus area in education
policy. The literature review enabled me to create a conceptual framework for
understanding this group by bringing together research on non-traditional students and
adult learners, summarizing attrition issues, describing the barriers near completers
face, and highlighting how other states work with the near completion population. The
chapter concludes with a summary of key findings.
The literature reviewed for this study came from a variety of sources, including
empirical studies, published reports, conference presentations, journal articles, books,
policy briefs, and working papers. The search focused on the past 10 years of work;
however, I also reviewed some older original works of prominent scholars. The
primary searches utilized resources from the University Library at California State
University, Sacramento, including searches in the following electronic databases:
Dissertation Abstracts, ERIC, MLA, PAIS International, PsychINFO, Social Science
Abstracts, and Sociological Abstracts. Internet searches on the following entities
located additional contemporary research reports: Lumina Foundation, Ford
Foundation, Gates Foundation, Council for Adult and Experiential Learning (CAEL),
National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Western Institute for Higher
Education (WICHE), Institute for Higher Education Policy (IHEP), Institute for
Higher Education Leadership & Policy (IHELP), California Legislative Analyst’s
9
Office (LAO), and California Postsecondary Education Commission (CPEC).
Individuals and scholars who regularly publish in this field of study or work directly
with non-traditional students provided additional suggestions of literature to review.
What Do We Know About the Near Completion Population?
IHEP (2011b) describes near completers as individuals with some college-level
education but no degree and further classifies them into two distinct groups: eligibles
and potentials. Because near completion is a relatively new concept in higher
education, current research does not include student profiles associated with near
completion terminology. In the absence of concrete research devoted to the near
completion population, I created the working profile for this dissertation by combining
demographic profiles and research on degree-seeking non-traditional students and
degree-seeking adult learners.
Research makes little distinction between the terms non-traditional student and
adult learner. In both cases, these individuals are more likely than the 18-24 year old
student to work, have dependents or children, and attend school part time (Kasworm,
2003; Pusser et al, 2007; Schuetze & Slowey, 2002). Additionally, data collected on
single parent status, socioeconomic status, and re-entry patterns indicate that these
students may face more childcare challenges and financial pressures than traditional
college students and have stopped out or dropped out of postsecondary education at
some point in the past. Non-traditional students/adult learners are usually re-entering
postsecondary education after stopping out or dropping out and are not coming
directly from high school or through transfer from a community college.
10
What separates near completers from the general non-traditional student/adult
learner population is their closer proximity to degree completion. While almost any
student who does not fall within the traditional 18-24 year-old college student
demographic can be considered a non-traditional student or adult learner, near
completers are currently eligible for a degree or have the potential to complete a
degree by obtaining 15 or fewer credits. Table 1 illustrates the difference between the
eligible and the potentials.
Table 1
IHEP's Classification of the Near-Completion Population
(IHEP, 2011b, p 2)





Eligibles
Accumulated the required number of
credits, completed the required courses,
and hold a grade point average (GPA)
above the minimum required for a degree,
but have not been granted a degree.
May not realize that they had crossed the
degree qualification threshold within their
program of study.
May qualify for a degree that is different
from the one they were initially seeking.
May not have met residency requirements
or non-academic testing requirements.
Degree may have been withheld because
of financial holds or incomplete
paperwork.




Potentials
Need to earn a relatively low
number of credits (15 or fewer).
May need to fulfill specific courses
or competency requirements.
May be nearly eligible for the
degree they were seeking or for
another, academically similar,
degree.
May not have met all nonacademic requirements.
11
Why Do Near Completers Exist?
Within one year of high school graduation, over 60% of California’s high
school graduates enroll in California’s postsecondary education institutions (PPIC,
2012). Many students, however, lack sufficient academic preparation and adequate
financial resources to succeed. The California State University system's six-year
graduation rates are near 50% for those who entered as freshman. The University of
California's system delivers higher completion rates with four of every five students
graduating within the six year window (PPIC, 2012). And while nearly half of all
undergraduate students in the United States enroll in community colleges (American
Association of Community Colleges, 2000) and 50% of all students receiving a
bachelor’s degree started their postsecondary education at a two-year institution
(Cohen & Brawer, 2003; National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), 2007),
transfer rates to four-year institutions are less than 10% for California community
college students (PPIC, 2012). In a national study on community college students,
Bailey et al. (2005) found that academic success is enhanced when students are
academically prepared for college and have the necessary financial resources for
tuition, books, housing, and transportation. They also found that student success
decreases as college size increases, use of part-time faculty increases, or student body
demographics become more diverse. Baily et al.'s study did not include data on the
length of time in comparison to student attrition.
Research on California community colleges indicated that completion rates
declined if students were Latino/Latina, African American, or came from lower
12
income families (Moore et al., 2007; Moore, Shulock, & Offenstein, 2009). Scholars
also identified an inverse relationship between age and completion, thus the older an
individual is, the less likely he or she is to graduate.
Tinto’s Model of Institutional Departure (1993) focuses on a student’s need for
formal and informal integration within a university's academic and social systems.
Formal integration includes academic performance and organized extracurricular
activities while informal integration includes interactions with faculty and staff and
social or peer group activities. Astin's research (1993) indicates that peer groups
provide the most influence during an individual's adjustment period to college life.
Studies that build on Tinto and Astin indicate that most dropouts occur before the end
of the first year (Enochs & Roland, 2006; Levitz, Lee, & Richter, 2002). Near
completers navigated postsecondary education long enough to be eligible or to be a
potential candidate for a degree. In examining attrition in older commuter students,
Bean and Metzner's (1985) seminal study produced the Student Attrition Model
indicating that dropout is rooted in the direct and indirect effect of four sets of
variables on one another: academic performance, background variables, environmental
variables, and intent to leave. Academic performance is the student’s grade point
average in conjunction with student study habits, attendance, commitment to major,
institutional advising, and course availability. Background variables include age,
ethnicity, gender, enrollment status, residence location, education goals, and high
school performance. Environmental variables were described as finances, employment
hours, external encouragement, family responsibilities, and transfer opportunities.
13
Intent to leave is a decision point influenced by psychological outcomes of
satisfaction, goal commitment, stress, and coursework utility. Any combination of
variables identified by Bean and Metzner could drive a near completer to drop out and
many of the same variables may challenge individuals attempting to re-enter higher
education and move toward degree completion.
Regardless of any other factors, individuals who work full time or part time
while they attend school frequently do not complete their education. The literature
often depicts the competing priorities of work and school as "at-risk" indicators (Bean,
1980; Shulock & Moore, 2007; Tinto, 1993). The competing priorities impact
enrollment patterns and part time or inconsistent course taking patterns negatively
correlate with student success (Moore et al., 2007; Tinto, 1993). However, according
to Kienzle (2008), the competing priorities of work and school did not result in as
many dropouts during challenging labor markets. Therefore, the volume of near
completers may be impacted by external employment factors as well as institutional or
individual factors.
What Barriers do the Near Completion Population Face?
While not all adults aspire to earn a college degree and not all dropouts aspire
to return many do. Yet barriers prevent them from achieving this goal. Research
conducted in the 1970s and 1980s, and confirmed by recent studies, identified three
types of barriers faced by students over the age of 24: dispositional, situational, and
institutional (ASTD, 2008; Chreighton & Hudson, 2001; Cross, 1981; Fairchild, 2003;
Kasworm, 2003; Lynch & Chickering, 1984; Pusser et al., 2007; Sewall, 1986;
14
Schuetze & Slowey, 2002). These barriers, presented in Table 2, appear to exist both
for individuals with delayed entry into higher education and for individuals returning
to higher education (ASTD, 2008 CAEL, 2008; Kasworm, 2003; Pusser et al., 2007).
Table 2
Summary of Barriers Faced by Adult Students
(Cross, 1981)







Situational
Lack of time
Unreliable
transportation
Job responsibilities
Family responsibilities
Financial difficulty
Lack of study space
Inadequate childcare




Dispositional
Lack of self-efficacy
Lack of energy and
stamina
Absence of study skills
Concerns of fitting in
with younger students







Institutional
Unavailable courses
Limited locations
Cumbersome
administrative
processes
Limited program
choices
Program length
Semester/course
scheduling
Inflexible attendance
policies
Situational barriers are factors that occur at a particular time in an individual's
life. Lynch and Chickering (1984) found, and more recent scholars confirmed (ASTD,
2008; CAEL, 2008; Kasworm, 2003; Pusser et al., 2007), that situational barriers
emerge from real-life situations and include such things as insufficient study,
inadequate study space, lack of transportation, job or family responsibilities, financial
difficulty, or childcare needs. While academic institutions do not create situational
barriers, they do have an opportunity to influence the degree to which these factors
prevent students from returning to higher education. For example, on-campus
15
childcare services are not typically available in the evening or on weekends when
many near completers would most benefit and other student support services like
tutoring and writing labs are only open between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. when many
near completers are working.
Dispositional barriers emerge from an individual's perception of him/herself,
attitudes and past experiences, lack of energy, or low self-confidence in terms of
academic ability (Cross, 1981). These barriers may be an even greater deterrent to near
completers than other populations as near completers have already attempted degree
completion in the past and fallen short of that goal.
Experts differ in their conclusions about adult learner motivation. In
Kasworm's (1990) meta-analysis of 96 research articles on adult learners, she found
that no distinctive patterns of educational motivation exist for adults. To the contrary,
Baker and Velez (1996) found that non-traditional students may actually be the most
academically talented, motivated, and resilient students on many campuses. Many
scholars agree that adults who re-enter postsecondary institutions have a strong
motivation and desire to enhance earnings and expand career opportunities (Aslanian
& Brickell, 1980; Johnstone & Rivera, 1965; Pusser et al., 2007; Sewall, 1986;
Schuetze & Slowey, 2002).
Although dispositional barriers, such as motivation, are often considered the
responsibility of the individual, institutional characteristics and practices can influence
an individual’s self-efficacy or ability to fit in. For example, staffing student support
services with young adults limits the opportunity for more mature students to connect
16
with a peer. Older students may also be intimidated to ask for or seek advice from a
much younger individual. Later scholars confirm the continued existence of
dispositional barriers (Bash, 2003; Fairchild, 2003; Sissel, Hansman, & Kasworm,
2001) and current policy reports and briefs echo the same factors.
Affecting students of all ages, institutional barriers are factors within the
educational system that prohibit or discourage successful participation in educational
pursuits (Boeke, Zis, & Ewell, 2011; Brenneman et al., 2010; CAEL, 2008b; Pusser et
al., 2007; Shulock & Moore, 2007). These factors are generally the result of
institutional policies (Cross, 1981; Fairchild, 2003; Lynch & Chickering, 1984; Pusser
et al., 2007). Institutional barriers may include constrained class schedules, limited
locations, cumbersome processes, unavailable courses, inconvenient semester
programming, and rigorous attendance or residency policies (CAEL, 2008a; Cross,
1981; Lynch & Chickering, 1984; Pusser et al., 2007). Removing institutional barriers
for all students is important, but it is critical for successfully serving the near
completion population, which has more demands placed on its available time and
money than traditional college students.
Institutional barriers may also be the unintended consequences of statewide
policy. Invest in Success: How Finance Policy Can Increase Student Success at
California's Community Colleges, Shulock and Moore's (2007) audit of finance policy
in the California Community Colleges, found that most finance policies encouraged
behaviors by students and colleges that were not well aligned with goals of workforce,
completion, and efficiency. For example, the community colleges do not require
17
students to enroll in degree programs in order to take courses. This policy aligns with
workforce goals of providing educational opportunity to those seeking skill upgrades,
but works at cross purposes in terms of completion rates because it doesn't provide
incentives for persistence and degree completion (Shulock & Moore, 2007). Skill
upgrade courses may be one activity that actually grows and sustains a flow of
working-age adults with some college experience, but no degree.
The research focused on institutional barriers concludes that institutions need
to be more understanding and responsive to the different needs of students’ varying
ages, ethnicities, and backgrounds (Brenneman et al, 2010; Karp, Hughs, O’Gara,
2008; Lumina, 2010; Moore et al., 2007; Pusser et al., 2007; Shulock & Moore, 2007).
Adapting services to a wider range of needs could improve access and success for all
students, but the near completion population would benefit most from the
implementation of prior learning assessments, outcome-based learning, concierge
services, alternative childcare, flexible payment plans, online course offerings,
accelerated class schedules, and cohort-based evening and weekend programs (Baker
& Velez, 1996; Brenneman et al, 2010; Karp, et al., 2008; Lumina, 2010; Pusser et al,
2007; Schuetze & Slowey, 2002).
How do Other States Work with the Near Completion Population?
With one in five adults in the United States having some college experience,
but no formal degree (CAEL, 2005), California is clearly not alone in its need to
increase degree attainment. The following states have identified the opportunity to
emphasize the adult learner and/or the near completion population: Arkansas,
18
Colorado, Indiana, Kentucky, Nevada, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South
Dakota, and Texas. This section begins with the results of a national study on state
policy and includes highlights of programs that focus on non-traditional students/adult
learners and indirectly serve the near completion population. The final example
describes a multi-state project targeting the near completion population.
A National Policy Study
In a recent National Center for Higher Education Management Systems
(NCHEMS) study, researchers created a 50-state inventory of policies and practices
related to the pipeline for adults entering higher education (Boeke et al., 2011). The
scope focused on policies and practices in finance, programming, and information
dissemination. The research was grounded in the idea that most state policies related
to access and student success center on a traditional college path, which they defined
as the path of an 18-year-old high school graduate who enters postsecondary study
within nine months of completing high school (Boeke et al., 2011). The research
primarily focused on state-level policy as it pertained to the following three groups of
adults:

Young adults (25-34) who did not finish high school

Those who never enrolled in postsecondary education

Those who began postsecondary education, but did not finish
Near completers would be a portion of the population who began postsecondary
education, but did not finish.
19
The study’s methodology followed research methods from previous national
studies and sought answers from the State Higher Education Executive Officer
(SHEEO) in each state via an emailed list of questions. Because policies on the adult
entry pipeline are often fragmented and lack documentation, the research project
focused on filling that void by seeking to understand the scope of state responsibility
in fiscal, programmatic, and information dissemination policies for adult learners.
The study found that 29 of the 50 states have identified a primary agency to
take full responsibility for adult students (Boeke et al., 2011). Those primary agencies
in the 29 states run the spectrum from the state education entity to the community
college system to the workforce and labor agency. The study singled out California as
having the most decentralized scope of responsibility for adult education programs.
The participant from California described adult learning as a "discretionary activity
engaged in by the individual school districts and community colleges under their own
governing authority" (Boeke et al., 2011, p. 5).
Fourteen states, not including California, specifically direct state-level funding
to programs or projects that target adult learners (Boeke et al., 2011):

The state department of education funds adult education in the community
colleges in Idaho, Maine, Missouri, New York, and Oregon.

Tennessee financially rewards postsecondary institutions for enrolling adult
students. South Dakota previously had this in place.

Oklahoma funds a consortium that provides leadership and services to
adult degree completion programs.
20

Colorado has institutions funded primarily to serve adults.

Washington has a separate appropriation for low-income adults and worker
retraining in its I-BEST program.
In terms of adult learning programmatic policies and practices, some states
centralize services while others provide incentives for programs to encourage
behaviors (Boeke et al., 2011). States often cited prior-learning assessments (PLAs) as
an effective practice for serving adult students over the age of 25. One state runs PLA
activities at the state level while 34 others note that PLAs are handled at the
institutional level (Boeke et al., 2011). Four states charge the community colleges with
responsibility for PLAs and two other states have designated institutions that
administer PLAs on the state’s behalf. California is among the nine states that have no
statewide policy or regulations regarding PLAs (Boeke et al., 2011).
Adult-Focused Efforts in Kentucky
For the past two years, Kentucky’s Council on Postsecondary Education has
targeted Kentucky residents in the 25-40 age range who earned some postsecondary
credits but were no longer enrolled. All eight of Kentucky’s public universities
completed CAEL’s Adult Learner Focused Inquiry (ALFI) assessment and created
implementation plans. The plans included the following strategies for re-engaging
adult learners (IHEP, 2011a):

Adult learning advocates on each campus

Re-evaluation of policies on credit for college-level experiential learning
21

Transferability of credit for prior learning

Improved financial aid applications

Development of flexible degree programs

Coordinated college outreach strategies for adults
CAEL funding supported each campus of Kentucky’s public universities in their
implementation efforts. As of March, 2012, no reports or updates have been released.
Adult-Focused Efforts through the Non-Traditional No More Project
Through the Western Interstate Commission on Higher Education's (WICHE)
Non-Traditional No More project, five states (Arkansas, Colorado, Nevada, New
Jersey, and South Dakota) are identifying the "ready adult" population in order to
build pathways for degree completion (Brenneman et al., 2010). This project has
identified barriers to reenrollment and defined initial strategies for removing them.
A lack of staff resources and course-taking data was a barrier to student service
divisions conducting degree audits and preliminary transcript evaluations. The
decentralized nature of university record keeping between business services divisions,
academic affairs divisions, and student services divisions created challenges for
individuals seeking information on how to return to school, complete coursework, or
remove financial holds. Institutional practices and policy interpretations served as
barriers in removing financial holds or using waivers differently. A lack of student
services available online or outside the traditional hours of 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
prevented working individuals from asking questions or resolving issues. Finally, the
lack of opportunity for individuals to complete credit through the use of prior learning
22
assessments (PLA's), distance-delivered courses, competency-based testing, or
accelerated offerings in the evening or on weekends prevented returning individuals
from completing courses in a timely and efficient manner.
Of the states involved in the Non-Traditional No More project, Nevada led the
way in creating an innovative method for addressing re-enrollment challenges.
Borrowing a model from its tourism industry, Nevada's institutional leaders and
policymakers implemented an adult-ready concierge staff to serve as a single point of
contact and guide returning adult students through the application, enrollment, and
registration processes (WICHE, 2010). Working across the university, the concierge
staff also addresses and resolves challenges for both the student and the university.
Adult-Focused Efforts in Pennsylvania
Graduate Philidelphia!’s mission is to increase the number of college degrees
in the Greater Philadelphia area. Although this program does not restrict itself to near
completers, any effort to move non-completers toward graduation also provides
support for the near completion population. The 2005 joint initiative between the
Philadelphia Workforce Investment Board and the United Way of Southeastern
Pennsylvania is operated by the Philadelphia Education Fund and funded by the City
of Philadelphia and the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation (Brenneman et al.,
2010; www.graduatephilidelphia.com, 2011). The initiative focuses on raising
awareness of adult degree attainment issues, influencing policy, and developing and
piloting innovative programs. It partners with 15 local colleges and universities that
23
have a proven track record of high graduation rates, are regionally accredited, and
offer flexible, focused, and convenient programs for adults.
Graduate Philadelphia! reports a 52% college re-enrollment rate and a 95%
retention rate for adults who return to college. The population is primarily first
generation college students; 90% in the low-to-moderate income range, and 70%
African American (Brenneman et al., 2010; www.graduatephilidelphia.com, 2011).
Workforce Strategy in Applied Baccalaureate Degrees
Applied degrees at the associate and baccalaureate level are degrees that
include technical coursework as part of an academic path in degree completion
(Bragg, Townsend, & Ruud, 2009). An applied degree can be a differentiating factor
in the workforce as individuals with applied degrees qualify for jobs with degree
requirements, not just those that require certificates or experience. For near
completers, an applied baccalaureate or associate’s degree could increase
opportunities to efficiently meet degree requirements. The technical coursework that
complements general education can be learned in accelerated programs or awarded
through PLAs or through competency-based testing. Florida, Texas, Washington, and
Wisconsin implemented applied baccalaureate degree programs in their postsecondary
institutions in an effort to address workforce demands, geographical gaps, and equity
concerns around degree completion (Perez, 2010). None of California’s public higher
education systems currently authorize the applied baccalaureate or applied associate’s
degree.
24
Adult-Focused Institutional Practices at Western Governor’s University
When they emerged in the late 1990s online courses represented the
technology frontier and a paradigm switch from institution-centered learning to
student-centered learning (Berg, 1998). Even though the debate over quality and
effectiveness in online education continues, the volume of online courses and
programs continues to grow. Developed in 1996 to serve the adult learner population,
Western Governor’s University (WGU) delivers curriculum to those who cannot
access education in a traditional format. For example, WGU does not restrict students
to a semester schedule or to semester-based tuition. Students pay a monthly fee and
complete in a self-paced manner, as few or as many courses as they desire each month.
Using this model, near completers could finish coursework in an accelerated manner
regardless of their geographical location. Research on WGU is limited; however, its
presence continues to grow. As of March 2012, three states with a focus on adult
learners, Indiana, Texas, and Washington, have officially partnered with WGU
(Lumina, 2010).
Near Completion Focus Through Project Win-Win
This IHEP initiative in Florida, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, New York,
Ohio, Oregon, Virginia, and Wisconsin supports the identification and subsequent
awarding of associate degrees to eligibles and provides completion options for
potentials. Participating institutions identify former students with the number of
credits required for graduation, confirm that they are not enrolled elsewhere, and
conduct a degree audit to validate eligibility and level (IHEP, 2011a). Those eligible
25
for completion and those who could be eligible with minimal assistance are presented
with a roadmap for completing their degree.
According to IHEP (2011a), the program experienced a major expansion after
the 2009/10 pilot project and now includes 64 institutions. The process, which
includes an analysis of data and individual student records, is planned as part of a twoyear degree audit cycle. As of August 2011, 27 of the Project Win-Win institutions had
identified a combined 44,000 students who fit the near completer profile and
completed 12,000 degree audits. The results indicated that 2,800 students were eligible
for an associate’s degree and an additional 6,200 were within 15 credits of completion.
Even with promising numbers and examples of success, the participating institutions
identified the following challenges:

Locating students can be difficult.

Lack of alignment between state and local data collection systems causes
problems.

Many near completers do not have transcripts and documents from their
previously-attended institutions.
Summary and Conclusions
The literature review confirms that the near completion population is a sub-set
of the more familiar non-traditional student and adult learner population and
represents a new demographic for consideration by policymakers and education
leaders. With an estimated 4.5 million near completers in California, this population
26
represents one of the greatest opportunities for rapid degree-attainment results,
especially in terms of return on investment (ROI), for the state of California.
Research also indicates that policies and practices designed for traditional
students in a traditional academic pathway contribute to dropout rates and create
institutional barriers for re-enrolling adult students and moving near completers
toward degree completion. However, while a wide variety of factors contribute to the
creation of a near completion population, there are key situational, dispositional, and
institutional barriers, that if addressed, could significantly increase access and success
for the near completion population.
The literature also illustrates that while nine states focus on near completion as
part of an overall focus on adult students or statewide efforts to increase degree
attainment, California does not.
Because research on the near completion population is minimal and initiatives
specifically targeting near completers are relatively new, policy targeted at the near
completion population in California is not readily apparent. Understanding California
policy that directly or indirectly impacts near completers is critical to catalyzing near
completion efforts and increasing degree attainment levels. Under the construct that
statewide policy drives institutional action, the linkage between the two cannot be
ignored. Chapter 3 describes the methodology used to understand the state-level policy
affecting degree completion of the near completion population in California.
27
Chapter 3
METHODOLOGY
Overview
This chapter describes the methodology for conducting a policy review and
audit in order to understand: if state-level policy in California specifically addressing
near completion exists and how state-level policies help or hinder access and success
for the near completion population even if the policies do not specifically target the
population. This study examines the broader context of state-level policy in higher
education, workforce development, and economic development in California.
An existing policy review framework from the Council on Adult and
Experiential Learning (CAEL) guided the data gathering process. The framework,
titled the CAEL Adult Learning Policy Review Framework includes the following
nine areas: governance, strategic plans, performance measures, state agency programs,
postsecondary education programs, finance, student financial assistance, consumer
information, and stakeholder involvement. Gathering state-level policy documents,
also referred to as artifacts, from state-level entities in each of the nine areas enabled a
multi-dimensional view of each entity included in the study and a holistic view of the
state-level policy environment in higher education, workforce development, and
economic development.
In order to examine the artifacts, I formed the policy audit criteria using six
higher education policy priorities identified in previously proposed legislation: access,
completion, workforce, affordability, readiness, and efficiency. Shulock and Moore
28
(2007) used these six priorities in their audit of California Community Colleges
finance policy. Pending state legislation, Assembly Bill 2 (AB2) introduced by
Assembly Member Portantino in December, 2010, also uses these priorities to outline
the changes needed for aligning educational goals and economic goals in California.
The artifacts were collected from public higher education systems, workforce
development entities, and economic development entities included in California's
executive branch of government. Interviews with state-level officials, key staff, and
experts provided additional information regarding policies, constraints, and
opportunities. Interviews with leaders and experts outside California provided
additional insight on the sources and impact of policy. Figure 3 depicts the policy
review and policy audit diagram.
CAEL Framework
Artifacts & Intervies
focussed on:
Governance
Strategic Plans
Performance Measures
State Agency Programs
Postsecondary Education
Programs
Finance
Student Financel
Assistance
Consumer Information
Stakeholder Involvement
State-Level Policy
Policy Areas:
Higher
Education
Workforce
Development
Economic
Development
Policy Audit
Criteria:
Access, Completion, Workforce, Affordability, Readiness, Efficiency
Figure 3. Policy Review and Policy Audit Diagram.
29
The Policy Review Framework
Created as a tool to assist states in assessing and evaluating their internal
policies, practices, and resulting performance in relation to adult learning, CAEL's
Adult Learning Policy Review Framework (CAEL, 2008b) provides a schema for
identifying policies regarding adult-friendly education. Since the near completion
population is comprised of adult and non-traditional students, CAEL's framework (see
Appendix A) served as a useful tool to identify existing or missing policies related to
near completion efforts in California.
The policy review framework focuses primarily on the higher education
community directly engaged in providing programming and services that lead to
degree completion. Because a state's economy is largely based on the education level
of its population (Carnevale, Rose, & Chea, 2011), workforce development entities
and economic development entities were also included.

Governance is the management of power and policy. The artifacts gathered for
this study included historical information on institutional formation and
membership. Entity organizational charts and descriptions of key roles and
functions were also reviewed.

Strategic Plans are the guideposts for operation and implementation. The
artifacts for this study consisted of documents guiding an organization’s
mission, goals, and activities. Some of these documents contained information
relating to special populations, performance targets, and current initiatives.
30

Performance Measures explain how organizations set and measure goals, and
include units, frequency, and mechanism(s) for reporting data. Artifacts
containing this information included reports, government code, and procedure
manuals.

State Agency Programs included a review of divisions or common activities
that support degree completion, workforce development or economic
development. Artifacts included program offering lists, special initiatives,
progress reports, and procedural documents outlining the rules or
memorandums governing programmatic activities offered through the state.

Postsecondary Education Programs included a review of processes and
practices related to degree completion. Artifacts included procedural
documents outlining the rules or memorandums governing programmatic
activities and special initiatives offered through the public postsecondary
education segments.

Finance includes the funding structures, funding sources, budgeting models,
and rules governing the ensuing expenditures. The artifacts also included
government code on funding formulas and procedural documents for mandates
and allocations as well as expenditure reports.

Student Financial Assistance includes a source of funding or support that
enabled additional purchasing power for the student through subsidies,
31
waivers, or loans. Artifacts included regulations, codes, and formulas regarding
support provision and distribution.

Consumer Information is comprised of the policies and procedures for
providing information to external constituents. These artifacts included
regulations on the content types and associated distribution channels regarding
programs, opportunities, and guidelines. Information describing practices for
reaching the target audience was also reviewed.

Stakeholder Involvement describes specific collaborations or partnerships and
their corresponding practices. Artifacts included government code on group
composition, membership lists for specific stakeholder groups, and information
describing the composition the entities responsible for coordination or
oversight.
Policy Audit Criteria
A policy audit identifies existing policies that trigger barriers or create
incentives (Jones & Paulson, 2001). The criteria for the policy in this study were
modeled after the policy audit framework that Shulock and Moore (2007) used for
Invest in Success: How Finance Policy Can Increase Student Success at California's
Community Colleges. At the time of their study, the state priorities were part of
pending legislation, SB 325 (Scott), ultimately vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger.
The same state priorities are currently proposed in the California legislature via AB 2
(Portantino). The pending legislation is intended to establish a framework to align and
32
measure goals by collecting and reporting information that answers the following six
statewide policy questions:
1. “Are enough Californians prepared for postsecondary education?
2. Are enough Californians going to college?
3. Is the state's postsecondary education system affordable to all Californians?
4. Are enough Californian's successfully completing certificates and degrees?
5. Are college graduates prepared for life and work in California?
6. Are California's people, communities, and economy benefiting?”
Just as Shulock and Moore adapted the language to align with the focus of their study,
this study also adapted the language. I reviewed policy artifacts and conducted semistructured interviews to understand how policies affect the near completion population
in California. The following questions guided the data examination:

How does policy provide access to near completion students?

How does policy support a goal of increased completion for the near
completion population?

How does policy align near completion goals with the state’s current and
future workforce needs?

How does policy ensure that completion programs and services are
affordable to near completers?

How does policy provide opportunity for near completers to be assessed
regarding their readiness to complete a degree?
33

How does policy maximize efficiency and past investments by quickly
moving near completers toward completion?
Data Collection and Analysis
Data analysis occurred throughout the data collection process, keeping the
process focused and on schedule. In order to systematically use the integrated
approach, I used three information templates (see Appendices B-D) to organize and
examine the data.
I collected, coded, examined, and analyzed two types of data in this study. The
first type of data consisted of existing information found in organizational artifacts
(Merriam, 2002). These artifacts included department definitions, strategic plans,
program offering lists, funding charts, performance reports, collaboration or
partnership lists, organizational charts, and legislation or legal code. This data,
considered a matter of public information and record, came from Internet websites,
promotional materials, and organizational reports. I electronically catalogued the
digital artifact information and catalogued the print material in binders, highlighting
and annotating excerpts and key information. The artifact inventory list can be found
in Appendix F.
The second type of data consisted of semi-structured interviews with statelevel officials, key personnel, and industry experts. The purpose of the interviews was
to further illuminate factors affecting the near completion population in California.
The interview questions focused on information not readily available in the artifacts. I
initially contacted interview candidates via email. The email included the research
34
protocol, a brief overview of the study, the semi-structured interview questions, and a
consent statement (see Appendix E).
During the interviews, I asked participants to provide an overview of their
organization and describe their individual role and scope of responsibility. I then asked
participants to describe initiatives or programs within their organization that target the
near completion population. After discussing organizational efforts or the lack of
organizational focus on the near completion population, I asked the participants to
provide insights on how California can improve outcomes for this target population. I
also asked participants to share their thoughts on including the near completion
population as part of California’s overall efforts to increase degree attainment.
I recorded the interviews with a digital recording device, took notes during the
interview, and wrote more detailed field notes immediately after the interview. I
assigned each interview participant a pseudonym code in the findings to maintain
confidentiality.
The data gathering activities in each framework area informed other
framework areas. Throughout the data collection process, I grouped the artifacts and
interview information into the nine CAEL framework areas and examined them
through the policy audit framework. Conversations with experts and leaders in other
states also followed the CAEL framework.
Organized in the sequential manner of the CAEL framework, Table 3 outlines
the policy review and policy audit activities and outcomes aligned with the specific
research question being addressed.
35
1. Are there state-level policies in California that specifically address the near
completion population?
2. How do state-level policies help or hinder access and success for the near
completion population?
Table 3
Activities and Outcomes for the Policy Review and Policy Audit
Framework Review Area 1: Governance
Research
Question
1, 2

1, 2

2

1, 2

2
1, 2


Audit Activities
Review the executive branch of
California state government
organizational chart to identify agencies
that may have policy or programs
relating to the near completion
population.
Investigate the agencies' role in near
completion and the policies that shape
their participation.
Interview leaders to understand which
policies matter most in terms of serving
the near completion population.
Generate a brief description of the
agencies including primary functional
divisions, key leaders and staff, and
reporting structures.
Identify partners or collaborators.
Correspond and/or meet with leaders,
staff, and experts to confirm information
and discover gaps.
Outcome
 A summary and analysis of
the policies that shape the
participation and role of
agencies with the near
completion population.
36
Framework Review Area 2: Strategic Plans and Goals
Research
Question
1, 2

2

1, 2

Audit Activities
Collect the strategic documents from all
entities identified in Framework Area 1
and examine them for goals and policies
regarding completion efforts for
increasing the degree attainment levels
of working-age adults.
Interview leaders to understand which
policies internally or externally create
incentives or barriers for targeting the
near completion population or meeting
degree attainment goals.
Correspond and/or meet with leaders,
staff, and experts to confirm
information and discover gaps.
Outcome
 An analysis of goals, plans, or
statements of intent relating
to near completion or
increased degree attainment
levels of the near completion
population.
Framework Review Area 3: Performance Measures
Research
Question
1

1, 2

1

1, 2

1, 2

Audit Activities
Find federal- and state-level program
performance measures relating to degree
completion and/or increased degree
attainment levels of Californians.
Examine the policies in the performance
measures for incentives or specific goals
that encompass the near completion
population.
Collect a recent example of evaluation
results if performance measures exist.
Interview leaders to understand which
incentives and polices matter most for
the near completion population or
degree attainment goals of working-age
adults.
Correspond and/or meet with leaders,
staff, and experts to confirm information
and discover gaps.
Outcome
 An analysis of polices and
performance measures
relating to near completion
efforts, the near completion
population, or the degree
attainment levels of
working-age adults.
37
Framework Review Area 4: State Agency Programs
Research
Question
1, 2

1, 2

2

2

1, 2

Audit Activities
Identify and review state-level policies
that drive agency programs targeted at
the near completion population.
Interview leaders to understand which
policies matter most in terms of serving
the near completion population.
Contact program directors to understand
the impact of policies and practices in the
areas of re-engagement, assessment,
affordability, and completion recognition.
Seek out examples of best practices from
program directors, leaders, staff, and
experts.
Correspond and/or meet with leaders,
staff, and experts to confirm information
and discover gaps.
Outcome
 An analysis of policies that
promote or prevent statelevel programming targeted
at the near completion
population.
 An analysis of practices,
successes, and/or barriers
in delivering these
programs to the near
completion population.
Framework Review Area 5: Postsecondary Education Programs
Research
Question
1, 2

1, 2

2

2

1, 2

Audit Activities
Identify and review postsecondary
policies that drive programs targeted at
the near completion population.
Interview leaders to understand which
policies matter most in terms of serving
the near completion population.
Contact program directors to understand
the impact of policies and practices in the
areas of re-engagement, assessment,
affordability, and completion recognition.
Seek out examples of best practices from
program directors, leaders, staff, and
experts.
Correspond and/or meet with leaders,
staff, and experts to confirm information
and discover gaps.
Outcome
 An analysis of policies that
promote or prevent statelevel programming targeted
at the near completion
population.
 An analysis of practices,
successes, and/or barriers
in delivering these
programs to the near
completion population.
38
Framework Review Area 6: Finance
Research
Question
1, 2

1, 2

1, 2

1, 2

Audit Activities
Identify and review polices that determine
the amount and source of funding for all
programs in the inventories for
Framework Areas 4 and 5.
Describe the elements of funding policies
that have a positive or negative effect on
the state's commitment to the near
completion population.
Interview leaders to understand which
policies matter most in terms of serving
the near completion population.
Correspond and/or meet with leaders,
staff, and experts to confirm information
and discover gaps.
Outcome
 An analysis of programs,
funding, and sources that
creates the state's total
commitment to near
completion programs.
Framework Review Area 7: Student Financial Assistance
Research
Question
2

1, 2

2

1, 2

1, 2

Audit Activities
Identify and review policies governing
financial assistance programs and
appropriations available to the near
completion population.
Examine and describe the financial
assistance policies that have a positive or
negative effect on the state's commitment
to the near completion population.
Examine incentives for participation by the
near completion population.
Interview leaders to understand which
policies matter most in terms of serving
the near completion population.
Correspond and/or meet with leaders,
staff, and experts to confirm information
and discover gaps.
Outcome
 An analysis of policies that
guide financial assistance
programs, appropriations,
and participation levels
for the near completion
population.
39
Framework Review Area 8: Consumer Information
Research
Question
2

2

1, 2

1, 2

Audit Activities
Identify and review policy documents that
guide communication practices regarding
completion or near completion.
Analyze practices to determine how the
burden of action for completion is shared
or distributed.
Interview leaders to understand which
policies create the biggest barriers or best
incentives.
Correspond and/or meet with leaders,
staff, and experts to confirm information
and discover gaps.
Outcome
 An analysis of policies that
guide communication
practices or requirements.
Framework Review Area 9: Stakeholder Involvement
Research
Question
1

1, 2

1, 2

Audit Activities
Identify and review policies that determine
purpose and composition of advisory or
policymaking groups with a primary focus
on near completion or degree attainment
levels of the working-age population.
Interview leaders to understand which
policies matter most.
Correspond and/or meet with leaders, staff,
and experts to confirm information and
discover gaps.
Outcome
 An analysis of the policies
that determine the
purpose, the groups, the
composition, and the
responsibility for
interagency cooperation
and external partnerships.
Setting and Environment
Martinez and Richardson (2003) describe a policy environment as a
compilation of political culture, state traditions, constitutional status of institutions,
and the authority of state-level of government. This study of policy factors affecting
the near completion population is set within California's state-level policy
environment of higher education, workforce development, and economic
development.
40
The legislature and governor make laws and policies official in California; the
agencies and departments in the executive branch interpret and implement them
(VanVechten, 2010). The California executive branch organizational chart (October,
2011) in Figure 4 and also in Appendix A, includes 149 entities including the Office
of the Governor. A cursory review of the websites for these 149 entities generated a
list of entities possibly responsible for programs and policy that affect the near
completion population. Further examination of entity authority to grant degrees,
provide financial aid, fund education, or coordinate information narrowed the list to 14
executive branch entities with responsible for policy in higher education, workforce
development, or economic development. The policy review and policy audit will
enable a better understanding of how policy within and between these entities affects
the near completion population with or without explicit intent. Figure 4 lists these 14
state-level entities within divisional categories.
Table 4
Executive Branch Entities Included in the Study







Higher Education
Board of Governors, Community
Colleges (BOG)
Trustees of State Universities (BOT)
University of California Regents
(Regents)
Department of Consumer Affairs
(DCA)
California Postsecondary Education
Commission (CPEC)
California Student Aid Commission
(CSAC)
Department of Veterans Affairs
(CalVET)





Workforce Development
Labor and Workforce
Development Agency
(LWDA)
Employment Development
Department (EDD)
California Workforce
Investment Board (CWIB)
Employment Training Panel
(ETP)
Office of Statewide Health
Planning and Development
(OSHPD)
Economic Development
 Business,
Transportation, and
Housing Agency
(BTH)
 Governor’s Office of
Business
Development (GOBiz)
41
Figure 4. California State Government Organizational Chart.
42
Summary
The manner of the data collection process allowed for the data in one portion
of the study to inform other portions of the study and the overall understanding of the
problem. The policy review framework guided the collection of artifacts and the
interview questions. The policy audit of the combined artifact data and the interview
data enabled a better understanding of the factors affecting the near completion
population in California. Chapter 4 includes the results of the policy review and policy
audit to describe the policy factors affecting degree completion for the near
completion population in California.
43
Chapter 4
RESEARCH FINDINGS
Introduction and Overview
This chapter includes research findings that answer the following research
questions:
1. Are there state-level policies in California that specifically address near
completion?
2. How do state-level policies help or hinder access and success for the near
completion population?
The six public policy priorities (access, completion, workforce, affordability,
readiness, and efficiency) guided the analysis during the policy audit in higher
education, workforce development, and economic development for evidence of policy
affecting the near completion population. The 272 state-level policy artifacts were
comprised of coded legislation, pending legislation, member rosters, meeting minutes,
regulation manuals, funding reports, strategic goals, policy guidelines, annual reports,
performance measures, assessment reports, planning documents, communication
policies, mandated reports, promotional materials, press releases, and web content. A
total of 19 interviews with state-level leaders, key staff, and experts provided a more
comprehensive understanding of the state-level policy context and frequently led to
the discovery of additional artifacts for examination.
The examination of artifacts and interview responses resulted in a list of
policies that affect near completers even though the policies do not specifically target
44
the near completion population. The artifact inventory list in Appendix F includes all
policy artifacts used to draw conclusions for this study. Following Shulock and
Moore's model (2007), the left column in Table 5 lists CAEL Framework categories
where specific policy was examined in order to understand how state-level policy
helps or hinders access and success for the near completion population. Numerous
policies were categorized into more than one CAEL Framework area. For example,
Senate Bill 1440 contains policy pertaining to governance, strategic plans, and
postsecondary education programs. The top row lists the six public policy criteria. The
cells of the matrix note whether or not policies support or hinder access and success
for near completers, such that:

A “+” indicates that policy helps to support access and success for the near
completion population.

A “-” indicates that policy hinders access and success for the near
completion population.

A “+/-” indicates that policy works at cross purposes because it both helps
and hinders access and success for the near completion population.

A shaded section indicates that no evidence of policy was found.
This study does not interpret the relationship between policies or their level of impact.
45
Table 5
Summary of Policy Alignment to Priorities for Near Completers
CAEL
Framework
Governance
Strategic
Goals
Performance
Measures
State Agency
Programs
Postsecondary
Education
Programs
Finance
Student
Financial
Assistance
Consumer
Information
Stakeholder
Involvement
Access
Completion
Workforce
Affordability
+
-
-
+/+/-
+
+
+
-
+
+
+/ -
+/-
+
-
+
+
+
+
+/-
-
+
+
-
-
+/-
-
+/+/-
+
+
-
-
+
+/-
-
-
+
+
-
+
+/-
-
Readiness
Efficiency
-
The Policy Review and Policy Audit Findings
The review and audit confirmed that no state-level policy specifically
addressing the near completion population exists in California. The review and audit
also confirmed that policy not specifically targeting the near completion population
actually does affect the access and success of near completers in California. The
shaded sections of the artifact inventory Appendix F indicate examples of policies that
help support, hinder, or work at cross purposes in the goals of access and success of
the near completion population.
46
The analysis of executive branch entities determined that even though the
higher education, workforce development, and economic development communities
share many of the same constituents, stakeholders, commission members, and funding
sources, the organizations are disconnected from one another in many ways. The
following sections describe the impact of disconnection for the near completion
population in CAEL Framework areas.
Governance
The disconnected governance within higher education, workforce
development, and economic development, as well as between these communities,
leaves California’s near completers without a centralized connection point or
formalized champion at the state level. The findings from the policy review and policy
audit on governance are grouped into the following three categories: composition and
authority, structural connections, and coordination.
Governance - Composition and Authority
The governor of California has direct or indirect authority for every
organization in the executive branch. Direct authority allows the governor to make
immediate decisions, whereas indirect authority means that the governor will work
through a governing group to reach decisions. Direct authority is demonstrated by the
appointment and direct reporting structure of agency secretaries and department
directors. Indirect authority is visible in the appointment of board members and
commissioners and through actual participation on governing boards in higher
education. Of the 14 entities ultimately included in this study, two agencies, one
47
office, and one department report directly to the governor. Two other departments
report to an individual agency that ultimately reports to the governor. Executive
directors, appointed by the governor, operate the remaining seven entities that report
to a board or commission. One commission, led by a gubernatorial appointee, was
defunded and dismantled after this study began. If the governor does not demonstrate
awareness or concern for specific degree attainment levels in California, then the state
entities reporting to the governor are unlikely to identify near completers as one part
of the solution for reaching those goals.
The Board of Governors (BOG) for the California Community College (CCC)
system is a 17-member board, appointed by the governor, which determines policy
and provides guidance to the CCCs. The CCC system is comprised of 72 districts and
112 individual community colleges that report to locally-elected boards for operational
and budgetary decisions, yet the state legislature controls the system’s funding levels,
establishes tuition rates, and generates regulations intended to guide institutional
behavior. Neither the BOG nor the local boards are required to establish specific
degree completion goals for the CCCs; however, they do have authority to introduce
or approve initiatives that include or target the near completion population. For
example, the California Community College Student Success Task Force (CCC, 2012)
is recommending an equity scorecard for each campus that includes completion rates.
The BOG will be asked to approve the recommendations of the task force and in turn,
the California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office (CCCCO) will provide
implementation strategies for the local campuses and districts to utilize when
48
developing local implementation plans. A focus on overall completion rates may
trigger an effort to serve the near completers as one way to improve completion
statistics.
The CSU and its governing body, the CSU Board of Trustees (BOT), were
established through the Donahoe Higher Education Act in 1960. Before that time the
individual state teacher's colleges, later known as state universities, reported to the
California Department of Education. The governor serves as the BOT president and
appoints 19 of the 25 members. The BOT is responsible for system oversight and
delegates decision-making authority to the CSU chancellor. The chancellor is the chief
executive officer who is also a member of the board (Standing Order, 2006). The state
legislature determines the amount of general fund support that the CSU receives and
the BOT approves tuition rates for the 23-campus system. Neither the BOT nor the
chancellor is accountable for establishing degree completion rates for the CSU system
or the individual university campuses; however, the chancellor and board do have the
authority to report data beyond the mandated requirements and establish initiatives.
For example, the CSU Graduation Initiative outlines the intent to increase six-year
graduation rates by 8% (CO Coded Memo, 2005). As the individual campuses create
plans for improving completion rates, it is possible that efforts focused on the near
completion population will evolve.
According to Article IX, Section 9 in the California Constitution, the
University of California (UC) was written into the state constitution in 1879. The UC
Board of Regents (Regents) sets and approves policy while the UC president
49
supervises the 13 campus chancellors. The legislature does not have authority in the
UC system. The Regents and the president have authority to establish graduation
goals, but are not mandated to do so. With a graduation rate of 80% (EX_HE_CA_a,
personal comment, March 2, 2012), the UC remains more focused on access for
underrepresented minorities and non-traditional students than graduation rates.
Because UC graduation rates are lower for both African-American and
Chicano/Latino students, a targeted initiative for minority near completers could
support access goals and also sustain or increase graduation rates as well.
The BPPE, which regulates the private and proprietary postsecondary
institutions operating within California, operates through the Department of Consumer
Affairs (DCA). The governor appoints the director of DCA who reports to the
secretary of the State and Consumer Affairs Agency. The director of DCA appoints
the chairperson and four members of BPPE. The legislature appoints the other four.
Licensing requires that institutions submit data (California Code of Regulations, Title
5, Division 7.5, Article 2, Section 74112), but meeting specific graduation
requirements is not linked to licensing.
The state legislature created the California Student Aid Commission (CSAC)
in 1955 (http:www.csac.ga.gov; History Link, para 1) to administer the state's
financial aid programs. The governor appoints 11 of the 15 commission members. The
legislature appoints the other four. CSAC is responsible for administering financial aid
programs for California, such as the Cal Grant programs, the State Nursing
50
Assumption Program of Loans for Education program, the California Chafee Grant
Program, and the Federal Direct Loan Program.
The Office of Statewide Health Planning (OSHPD) administers programs that
provide financial support to students and institutions in the health care industry. The
director of OSHPD is appointed by the governor, but reports to the secretary of the
California Health and Human Services Agency. OSHPD programs could benefit near
completers with an academic background in the health or biological sciences.
The director of the California Department of Veterans Affairs (CalVet) is
appointed by and reports to the governor. Of the many services provided to veterans,
CalVet supports educational attainment through the use of veteran-focused financial
programs; however, CalVet does not call attention to the current degree attainment
levels of veterans and does not establish degree attainment goals for veterans or their
families.
The federal Workforce Investment Act (WIA) of 1998 (Public Law 105-220)
defines the states’ role in workforce development. In accordance with the federal law,
the state governor appoints board members and the executive director. The California
Workforce Investment Board (CWIB) director reports to the secretary of the
California Labor and Workforce Development Agency (LWDA). CWIB provides
recommendations on statewide planning and the composition of the board is legislated
to include stakeholders in education, business, and other areas of government.
Like CWIB, the director of the California Employment Development
Department (EDD) is appointed by the governor and reports to the secretary of
51
LWDA. Like CWIB, EDD operates under WIA to provide services such as
unemployment insurance and labor market information and also funds programs
targeted at improving workplace skills that reduce unemployment. Near completers
could benefit from EDD-funded education programs that enable degree completion,
improving their employment status and higher lifetime earning potential.
The Employment Training Panel (ETP) was established in the Unemployment
Insurance Code, section 10200-10217, as one of California’s economic development
tools. ETP is responsible for administering training programs to private sector
employers and is funded by the Employment Training Tax. Three individuals of the
eight person panel are appointed by the governor, four members are appointed by the
legislature, and the final member is the secretary for the Business, Transportation, and
Housing Agency (BTH). Qualifying employers in qualifying industries could access
ETP funds for improving employee skills if near completers exist within the employee
population.
The BTH agency secretary reports to and is appointed by the governor. BTH,
like ETP, is identified as an economic development entity; however, its focus is on
physical infrastructure for livable communities and efficient business climates, not on
the human infrastructure created by an educated workforce. State-level projects that
enhance local-level economic development efforts can be the catalyst for growing
current businesses as well as attracting new business, and both need educated workers.
Moving near completers toward completion with the support of local-level funding is
an efficient method for increasing the education attainment levels within the region.
52
Governance - Structural Connections
Organizational experts Bolman and Deal describe organizational structure as a
blueprint or map for internal employees and external constituencies (2008). Without a
structural map, duplication of services, competing agendas, and unleveraged resources
are likely to occur. This is particularly true of executive-level government in
California.
California’s public higher education segments; the California Community
Colleges (CCC), the California State University (CSU), and the University of
California (UC), lack structural connections between one another. There is also no
structural connection between the public higher education segments and the Bureau of
Private Postsecondary Education (BPPE). This lack of structural connection may
contribute to the absence of shared higher education performance goals. Without
shared performance goals it is more difficult for state-level postsecondary institutions
to identify near completers as part of a solution for increasing degree attainment in
California.
The California Student Aid Commission (CSAC), the Department of Veterans
Affairs (CalVET), and the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development
(OSHPD) all provide financial support to students, yet they are not structurally
connected to one another nor are they structurally connected to any of the education
entities. Because the state does not acknowledge and recognize the near completion
population, there is no opportunity for the entities providing financial support to be
aware of their existence and include them in financial aid programming decisions.
53
The workforce development entities focus their resources on providing skill
improvement programs and ensuring that employers have an available skilled
workforce. The California Workforce Investment Board (CWIB), the Employment
Development Department (EDD), and the Employment Training Panel (ETP) are
structurally connected by reporting channels to the Labor and Workforce
Development Agency (LWDA), which is the umbrella agency for seven major
departments, boards, and panels. The workforce development entities are not
structurally linked to the higher education entities or to the student financial aid
entities. A lack of a structural connection may be one reason why degree attainment
levels in the workforce are not linked to the graduation rates of educational
institutions. Without aligned goals for attainment and completion, it is less likely that
near completers will be identified as a shared opportunity to improve California's
economy.
The Governor's Office of Business and Economic Development (GO-Biz) is
housed in the governor's office and is not structurally connected to the Business,
Transportation, and Housing Agency (BTH) or the eclectic set of departments,
commissions, and programs reporting to BTH. Although ETP is described as an
economic development tool, it is housed under LWDA and is not linked to BTH or
GO-Biz in any structural way. Without a shared focus on the importance of degree
attainment as a tool to attract new investments and grow current businesses, the
economic development entities will not see that near completers represent the best
opportunity to increase the number of degreed Californians available in the workforce.
54
Governance - Oversight and Coordination
Structural connections do not guarantee effective oversight and coordination,
but do increase the likelihood of their occurrence. Without established structural
connections, the governor is the only unifying factor across the 14 entities. With the
numerous competing priorities inherent in governing a state as large and complex as
California, it is unreasonable to expect the governor to provide an appropriate level of
oversight and coordination that would result in structural connection. The absence of
an official office or individual to coordinate this effort ultimately fosters institutional,
rather than statewide agendas. Although the higher education, workforce development,
and economic development communities are represented to one another through
various legislated panels and boards, the lack of centralized oversight and coordination
prohibits seamless interaction with clients, constituents, taxpayers, and students on
overlapping issues like near completion.
Until November 18, 2011, the California Postsecondary Education
Commission (CPEC) served a state-level role for coordinating higher education data
that was used in workforce planning and development as well as by policy leaders. In
1974, CPEC replaced the Coordinating Council for Higher Education originally
outlined in the 1960 Master Plan for Higher Education per California Education Code
66900-66906. CPEC served as the state's only independent coordinating body for
higher education information and data. Prior to its closure, CPEC was comprised of 16
members representing education leaders, students, and the general public. Although
Governor Brown cut CPEC's funding from the state's budget resulting in its demise, its
55
role and function remain a part of California's Education Code for higher education
and could be revived in better economic times (EX_HE_CA-a, personal comment,
March 2, 2012).
Strategic Planning
The CAEL framework described strategic plans as a method for understanding
not only where an organization is headed, but also where it has been. The historical
roots and ensuing evolution of all state-level entities are as much a part of the policy
environment as the current regulations and administration.
Strategic Goals - Mission, Function, and Goals for Higher Education
The mission for public postsecondary education derives from the legislation
(Senate Bill 33) that proposed the California Master Plan for Higher Education. The
California Master Plan for Higher Education, (California Education Code 66010.166010.8) adopted in 1960, was created during a time of growth in California. The 15year plan served as a policy framework to differentiate the missions of the three public
higher education segments, outline expansion policy, define the CSU BOT as the
governing body for the CSU, and ensure a coordinating advisory council for higher
education.
The Master Plan for Higher Education designated the UC system as the
primary research institution with exclusive jurisdiction to provide doctoral degrees and
professional degrees in law, medicine, dentistry, veterinary medicine, and architecture.
The UC system was also tasked with providing baccalaureate and graduate degrees to
California’s top performing students. The CSU system was designated as the primary
56
provider of undergraduate and graduate degrees including teacher and professional
education. The California Community College system was directed to provide
academic and vocational instruction through the first two years of undergraduate
education and remedial instruction, English as a Second Language instruction, adult
noncredit instruction, community service courses, and workforce training services.
Colloquially, community colleges are referred to as the land of second chances. The
Master Plan for Higher Education, however, assigned no state-level entity with the
responsibility for second chances, delayed enrollment, working adults, or those who
left institutions just short of degree completion.
A fundamental tenet of the Master Plan was access. Access was defined as free
education for Californians with open doors to all high school graduates and
community members who can benefit. At that time, California’s population was less
than 16 million people. Today California's population exceeds 40 million people and
the reality of open access ultimately comes down to space availability in courses and
programs. The historical roots of access encourage entry into the system, but do not
ensure that individuals leave with a degree or credential (Shulock & Moore, 2007).
The unintended consequence of increasing access without a plan for productivity is
low completion rates. Near completers represent a portion of the students who
originally gained access to education, but left the academic community without a
degree.
57
Strategic Goals - Mission, Function, and Goals for Workforce Development
The 1998 Workforce Investment Act (WIA), a federal policy specifically
outlining the role of the state in workforce development, defined specific state-level
requirements for California. WIA provides funding for workforce activities that
increase employment and occupational attainment, increase employee retention,
increase participant earnings, improve overall workforce quality, reduce dependency
on social services, and improve the productivity and competiveness of the economy
(Workforce Investment Act of 1998). The funds support youth, adult, and employer
programs. In California, WIA led to the creation of the California Workforce
Investment Board (CWIB).
CWIB is a policy body at the state level and each of the 49 Local Workforce
Investment Boards (LWIB) is a policy body at the local level. The 49 LWIBs in
California set policy for local One-Stop Centers, which provide services for dislocated
workers, hard to employ populations, and local employers. The 2005 Workforce
Training Act (SB 293) and the 2008 Green Collar Job Act (AB 3018) both include the
capacity for California-specific policy to enhance the role of CWIB. Both acts
broadened the scope of strategic workforce planning in California by creating a larger
cross-section of stakeholders. A workforce development expert described the intent of
the legislation and the collaborative efforts as an acknowledgment of the changing
workforce and a shared understanding of the need to conduct comprehensive planning
(EX_WF_CA_b, personal comment, February 10, 2012). Therefore, CWIB's role
58
could be focused on the near completion population by passing additional legislation
focused on near completers.
EDD administers unemployment programs and job connection services as part
of an overall effort to decrease dependency on social services and aid. EDD funds
programs for individuals, employers, and regions with funds collected through
employment taxes (KS_WF, personal comment, January 30, 2012). EDD works
collaboratively with all other departments, boards, and panels under LWDA and is
integrated with the local workforce regions through WIA accountability requirements
in California Unemployment Code, section 9600.5.
The Employment Training Panel (ETP) was established in the Unemployment
Insurance Code in 1982 and its activities run parallel to the purposes outlined in WIA.
According to its current strategic plan (ETP, 2011a), ETP provides programs, funded
through taxation of business and industry, to develop the private sector workforce. The
Unemployment Insurance Code, section 10200-10217, describes the need for
California to "invest in a skilled and productive workforce, and in developing the
skills of frontline workers...frontline worker means a worker who directly produces or
delivers goods or services". In the second decade of the 21st century, a skilled and
productive workforce requires additional education and frontline workers require more
than a high school degree. While ETP policy does not prohibit the coordination and
funding of near completion programs that support private sector employer needs,
especially in high-need industries like health care and biotechnology, this coordination
does not currently exist.
59
According to Senate Bill 1236 (Alcorn), codified in 1998, the California Labor
and Workforce Development Agency (LWDA) has two main priorities: improving
access to employment and training, and ensuring that California businesses can excel.
Working through its own departments, boards, and panels, LWDA involves
stakeholders from business, labor, education, and other government agencies in its
work. LWDA’s strategic goals do not include specific educational attainment goals for
California so the near completion population is not identified as a strategic solution to
meeting agency goals.
Performance Measures
Performance measures yield quantitative data that inform organizations about
how well they are meeting their goals. Performance measures include the item or unit
being measured and the number of units being measured as they relate to a goal or an
objective (Bess & Dee, 2008). Currently California has not established state-level
performance goals for higher education.
Performance Measures - Reporting Requirements
The higher education reporting requirements outlined in California's Education
Code (66070-66072) describe the performance areas monitored by the legislature and
include: student diversity, employee diversity, student transfer rates, student retention
rates, and adherence to improvements through formal program reviews. California's
Education Code does not include any reporting requirements for the actual number of
degrees completed. There was no evidence found that indicates any practice of
completion reporting.
60
In contrast to higher education, the reporting requirements for workforce
development programs and services are achievement oriented. CWIB uses job
attainment, wage increases, or reduction of welfare dependency, rather than
participation and progress, as indicators of success (California Code of Regulations,
Chapter 1.5). WIA funding for these programs is tied to performance measures. Near
completers who obtained steady employment or secured higher wages as a result of
WIA-funded programs would be a success under WIA reporting requirements;
however, completing a degree would not.
Performance Measures - Higher Education Completion Formulas
On the national level, the Voluntary System of Accountability (VSA) provides
the opportunity for reporting and comparing data across public and private higher
education institutions throughout the United States. California participates in the VSA,
but the common formula for reporting numbers is flawed in regards to the near
completion population. The graduation and transfer rates are based on first-time fulltime freshman students and first-time transfer students making up the fall cohort of
any given year. This calculation formula excludes freshman and transfer students
beginning in the spring semester, students who transfer across multiple institutions,
and students who earn their degree through special session offerings (KS_HE_f,
personal comment, March 5, 2012). Without a policy focus on completion, regulations
for completion formulas are non-existent at the state level. A near completer would be
more impactful to graduation rates if completions were measured by total headcount,
not across cohorts.
61
Performance Measures - Proposed Legislation for Higher Education
Accountability
Senate Bill 721 (Lowenthal) proposes legislation that would establish state
goals for postsecondary education. The goals are intended to clarify expectations for
education leaders, hold the segments accountable for responsible fiscal management in
meeting the state's workforce needs, and continue to ensure access (EX_HE_CA_a,
personal comment, March 2, 2012). The goals would be developed through a work
team led by the Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO) that establishes reporting metrics
for the three segments of public postsecondary education in California. The proposed
legislation indicates a need for publically-available data that can be disaggregated in
demographic categories and enrollment patterns. If data on full-time and part-time
students who drop out or stop out becomes more readily available, near completers
may be easier to identify and profile. With readily-available data that tracks the
populations that leave higher education without completing a degree, near completers
in underrepresented minority groups or from disciplines where there is high employer
need could be targeted for re-enrollment.
State Agency Programs
Even if some individuals benefit from improving their skills without
completing a degree (KS_HE_a, personal communication, March, 1, 2012), the
cumulative number of degrees in California matters when it comes to attracting
businesses and investments (KS_HE_c, personal communication, March 1, 2012).
And because parental education levels directly correlate with the college-going rates
62
of offspring, current completion efforts will impact the future workforce (KS_HE_c,
personal communication, March 1, 2012). This section focuses on state-level programs
that relate to workforce development or support education and training in some way.
Programs that provide financial support are addressed in the Finance section.
State Agency Programs – One-Stop Career Services
The 49 Local Workforce Investment Boards (LWIB) support regionally-driven
sector strategies which operate through California’s One-Stop Career Centers. The
One-Stop Career Centers operate throughout the state and provide services for
employers, incumbent and dislocated workers, and other special populations with
barriers to employment (http://www.cwib.ca.gove/about_us.htm). Under the
authorization of the federal Workforce Investment Act (WIA) the local One-Stop
Centers provide core services to any individual entering a center. If individuals need
additional services they may qualify for intensive services and are subsequently
eligible for education or training, making degree completion more affordable (EDD
Report, 2010). Each level of workforce services includes more in-depth assessment of
existing skills. In policy, screening practices help support moving near completers
toward completion though an opportunity to identify them and provide specific
services, but in practice, near completion is not assessed.
State Agency Programs - Employee Training Provider List
Established in compliance with WIA, the Eligible Training Provider List
(ETPL) is designated as the official source of qualified training providers for adults
and dislocated workers. EDD operates ETPL as a service to local workforce
63
investment boards, job seekers, and employers. Even though the workforce
development community does not currently identify the near completion population,
near completers who are eligible for the California Training Benefits Program could
enroll in academic and non-credit courses from higher education institutions if the
specific courses are approved and listed on the ETPL (EDD Fact Sheet, 2011).
State-level policy allows for the inclusion of academic programs on the list,
which would enable near completers to take courses; however, operational policies
and practices at the local level would hinder attention to near completion. Local OneStop Career Centers are reimbursed for training services that result in sustained
employment or increased wages, not when individuals complete a training or
education program. Since colleges and universities do not track employment, nor does
a degree necessarily result in immediate employment, there is little incentive to
undertake the work necessary to qualify academic programs for the ETPL.
State Agency Programs - Employment Training Panel
Section 10201.5 of the California Unemployment Code established the
Employment Training Panel (ETP) in an effort to provide financial support for
specialized worker training that helps grow California's economy through a
competitive workforce. ETP uses the funds collected through the Employment
Training Tax to partner with businesses and employers in high-need industries and in
high-unemployment areas of the state. The funds are reimbursed to training providers
when trainees increase their current wage earning or secure and maintain employment
for an established period of time. There are no state-level policies preventing the use
64
of academic courses to accomplish ETP’s training goals (ETP, 2010b), but in practice
it may difficult to identify a consortium of employers willing to increase wages for
current near completers or able to provide sustainable employment for near completers
who move to completion.
Postsecondary Education Programs
The Master Plan for Higher Education set a path for managing the growth of
California’s three higher education segments between 1960 and 1975 (EX_HE_CA_a,
personal comment, March 12, 2012). While the intention of access set forth in the
Master Plan still exists today, California's education codes developed since 1960 often
work at cross purposes as they relate to access and success.
Postsecondary Education Programs - Applied Degrees
An applied degree recognizes lower division technical courses as valid means
to moving toward degree completion (Townsand, Bragg, & Rudd, 2008). The public
postsecondary education segments in California do not offer or recognize applied
associate degrees or applied baccalaureate degrees. However, there are private and forprofit postsecondary institutions in California that offer applied degrees. These
institutions are licensed by the state of California through the Bureau for Private
Postsecondary Education (BPPE), an entity operating within oversight of the
California Department of Consumer Affairs (CDA). There are 143 for-profit colleges
and another 146 accredited and/or licensed non-profit colleges in California (National
Center for Education Statistics (NCES), 2011).
65
For near completers, state-level policy as it relates to applied degrees works at
cross purposes because policy both helps to support and simultaneously hinders access
and success. This conflicting message ties back to governance, specifically the lack of
coordination and oversight of all higher education in California. Because the public
institutions do not award applied degrees, near completers with technical coursework
taken at a public community college could seek out completion options at a for-profit
institution. However, with a private or for-profit institution, the costs would be fully
absorbed by the student with no state subsidy, hindering affordability to the individual
and efficient use of state funds.
Postsecondary Education Programs - Associate Degree for Transfer
In 2010 the Student Transfer Achievement Reform Act created the Associate
in Arts Degree (AA-T) and Associate in Science Degree (AS-T) transfer programs
through collaboration between the CCC system and the CSU. The act ensures that
students with an AA-T or AS-T are guaranteed admission into the CSU at the junior
status level and is codified in California Education Code 66745-66749. This new
degree model may decrease the number of near completers in the future as individuals
who transfer, but do not complete a baccalaureate degree, will still have attained an
associate degree and never be considered a near completer.
Because the new transfer policy does not apply to all associate degrees, its
implementation may not easily help move near completers toward completion. The
policy also does not address a reverse articulation scenario. For example, individuals
who transferred to a four-year institution and completed coursework in a major area,
66
but dropped out just short of a baccalaureate degree are not guaranteed that a CCC will
accept those credits if the individual chooses to finalize an associate degree rather than
go without any level of completion.
Near completers who exist because they completed coursework at several
community colleges but ultimately stopped out because each college refused to accept
credit from the others may benefit from the Student Transfer Achievement Reform
Act triggering new institutional practices. For example, the Academic Senate for
California Community Colleges (ASCCC), the state-level faculty governance entity
for the CCC system, recommends that local academic senates adopt policies that
enable students "who have taken courses in good faith (p. 2)" from one college to be
accepted at another college so long as the courses are in the transfer pattern (ASCCC
Resolutions, 2011). Under this Act, near completers who can map their previous
course-completion history into the transfer pattern may find themselves currently
eligible for a degree.
Postsecondary Education Programs - Degree Audits and Personal Completion
Plans
A degree audit would assess if an individual fits the definition of a near
completer. Current course completion data exists at the institutional levels, but the
absence of a common course numbering system throughout the postsecondary
segments and an integrated set of student records hinders the ability to accurately
identify California's near completion population.
The lack of state-level policy pertaining to degree audits hinders success for
67
the near completion population. The existence of degree audit policy would encourage
higher education entities to implement self-service degree audit tools. Additionally,
state-level entities could provide information about degree completion on higher
education and workforce development websites that enables near completers to
identify themselves as such and take action toward degree completion. If an individual
qualified for WIA-funded programs and the core services screening recommended a
degree audit, the audit could be included under the intensive services category.
Individuals needing degree audits could be directed to a local community college or
university, or to self-directed online degree audit tools.
At the college or system level, a degree audit could be the first step in
identifying the possible number of individuals who left an institution just short of a
degree. The data might also identify individuals who transferred to four-year
institutions and did not complete a baccalaureate degree, but have a course-completion
history that meets associate degree requirements. In either scenario, these individuals
might benefit from personalized completion plans.
Personalized completion plans could enable near completers to clearly
understand the required steps for completion, reducing the individual and institutional
resources required to move them toward completion. Personalized completion plans
could also increase the use of prior learning assessments, industry certifications,
credits from other institutions, and competency assessments, which also reduce the
resources needed to move an individual toward completion. Personalized completion
planning tools could be used by case managers, academic advisors, or by near
68
completers utilizing self-service degree audit tools. Incorporating personalized
completion plans into the practices that exist under current student advising policy or
workforce screen policy would support student success for the near completion
population.
Finance
Higher education funding rewards enrollments and workforce development
funding rewards job attainment and wage increases. There is no funding that
specifically rewards completion. This may mean that moving near completers toward
completion carries no immediate financial incentive for the higher education
community or the workforce development community.
Finance - Postsecondary Education Funding
Funding for California's postsecondary education system is comprised of
taxpayer dollars at the local, state, and federal level, student fees and tuition, and
external grants or fee-for-service revenue. For public institutions, taxpayer funding is
calculated on predicted enrollment numbers whereas student fees and tuition are
provided through actual enrollment.
The Full-Time-Enrollment (FTE) funding formula, used as a measure of
instructional workload for state funding in the public higher education institutions
(California Education Code 84500, 84501), actually provides an incentive to keep the
institutions overflowing with students. While translating credit hours and headcounts
into FTEs is simply intended as a means for calculating funding, it ultimately impacts
practices in many different ways. For example it provides incentive to recruit near
69
completers when institutions need funding, but when institutions are full and are not in
need of FTEs, there is little financial incentive to seek out near completers. In times of
declined enrollments, FTEs provide incentive to retain students rather than graduate
them quickly, thus stipulations like two years of courses like foreign language are
added to graduation requirements (KS_HE_b, personal comment, February 28, 2012).
Recruiting near completers would support FTE needs, but near completers, by
definition, are within 15 units of completing a degree and would not remain in the
institution for a long period of time. Therefore, there is more incentive to enroll a firsttime freshman who will be counted in FTE formulas for a longer period of time than a
near completer. Additionally, it is easier to find and recruit high school students or
community college transfer students than it is to identify and locate near completers
(KS_HE_b, personal communication, February, 28, 2012). Critics of enrollment-based
funding note that it creates incentives by financially rewarding institutions for keeping
students enrolled rather than moving them to transfer or completion (Little Hoover
Commission, 2012). FTE formulas hinder access and success for the near completion
population.
Finance - CSU Special Session Programs
Self-support divisions within the CSU administer educational programming
without the use of taxpayer dollars in the form of state funds. The self-support
language depicts the fee recovery model often found in non-profit entities. In the CSU,
self-supported courses are offered through special sessions. Executive Order (EO) 802
states: "Special sessions are a means whereby the instructional programs of the CSU
70
can be provided to matriculated students on a self-support basis at times and in
locations not supported by State General Fund appropriations" (2002). EO 802
provides examples that include offerings on military bases, between college year
terms, or for specific client groups. For near completers, special session offerings in
accelerated formats may provide the most efficient means to completing degree
requirements.
Counter to support of special sessions, Assembly Bill 2427 (Butler) was
introduced in February 2012 and "prohibits special session fees at all campuses"
within the CSU. If this legislation passes as is, the self-support courses that serve
working adults in an effective manner would no longer be available, further hindering
access and success for the near completion population.
Finance - Workforce Development
Like the community colleges, the workforce development entities are funded at
the state level, but governed at the local level (WIA, 1998). Federal WIA funding
administered through the state-level workforce entities is administered through
reimbursement formulas based on performance outcomes rather than enrollment
formulas. With WIA monies, EDD and ETP reimburse training providers based on
performance outcomes in employment tenure or wage increase (EDD Report, 2010).
The funding for both entities comes from employer taxes and the following programs:
Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Technical Act, the Trade Adjustment Reform Act, the
Workforce Investment Act, and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
71
Because WIA funding focuses on outcomes, a case worker has more incentives
to approve a medical transcription training program for a dislocated worker because
there are 150 job openings within a 20-mile radius than to approve the use of training
dollars to finish an associate degree in business. An additional incentive for the
workforce development entities to avoid using postsecondary institutions stems from
the fact that public higher education segments have no policy related to employment
tracking while workforce funding requires that information to meet reporting and
monitoring requirements.
The workforce development entities have state- and local-level programs that
can serve near completers by funding approved academic offerings (California Code
of Regulations, Chapter 1.5) and the workforce agencies have existing mechanisms for
working with all types of postsecondary institutions. Near completers could be
identified and targeted for completion.
Student Financial Assistance
Because California does not acknowledge or recognize the near completion
population, there is very little opportunity for the entities providing financial support
to be aware of their existence and include them in financial aid programming
decisions. However, there are loan and grant programs as well as fee waivers that may
affect near completers.
Student Financial Assistance - California Student Aid Commission
The California Student Aid Commission (CSAC) awards financial aid for
demonstration of financial need, (CSAC Fact Sheet, 2012) not on demonstration of
72
movement toward degree completion. Near completers participating in acceleratedformat courses like those offered through summer sessions or weekend intensives,
which are completed in less than four months, are not eligible for Cal Grants (Cal
Grant Disqualification Fact Sheet, 2012). Near completers may also face challenges
with financial aid eligibility if they previously accessed and exhausted financial aid
award amounts with non-credit or vocational courses.
Student Financial Assistance - Board of Governor's Waiver
California residents who meet eligibility requirements may use the fee waiver
to offset costs for enrollment fees, but the waiver is not tied to student performance or
progression. The waiver is meant to increase access by supporting low income
students, but may work against near completers whose income places them above
qualification thresholds but is not high enough for the full costs of college attendance
to be affordable. The Student Success Task Force recommends tying course
completion and academic performance to eligibility (Student Success Task Force,
2012).
Student Financial Assistance – Health Care Workforce
The Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development (OSHPD) provides
financial assistance to employers and individuals through grants, scholarships, and
loan repayment programs. The California State Loan Repayment Program is designed
to administer loan repayment to health care professionals working in designated
shortage areas like nurse practitioners, counselors, social workers, and dental
hygienists along with physicians in a variety of fields (OSHPD Fact Sheet, 2011).
73
Loan repayment affects near completers by providing incentive and affordability to
those who stopped out, but had already accrued student loan debt. The specific
targeted areas in health care support the needs of the changing workforce.
The Healthcare Workforce Development Division at OSHPD also provides
funding for institutional equity programs and individual scholarship programs. A
department leader described her division's role in supporting individuals "on the cusp"
of stopping out which she actually described as near completers (SO_WF, personal
comment, March 5, 2012) Although OSHPD currently provides financial support for
students currently enrolled, its practice, not policy, prevents OSHPD from using these
funds to also target those who recently left higher education just short of a degree.
Consumer Information
The state-level policies that guide information dissemination to stakeholders
primarily focus on reporting dates and report content as it pertains to specific
audiences. Communication policy regarding degree attainment and degree completion
was sought out for this research study.
Consumer Information - Postsecondary Education Completion Rate Reporting
Formula
As previously described, the reported graduation rates for the CSU and UC
systems are based on first-time, full-time freshman students and first-time transfer
students making up the fall cohort of any given year. This calculation formula does not
account for freshman and transfer students beginning in the spring or summer,
students who transfer across multiple institutions, and students who earn their degree
74
through special session offerings. This means that individuals who became near
completers may never have been included in the counting formulas. If they are never
missed it is unlikely that institutions see the incentive to support programs that bring
them into the institutions again.
State-level reporting requirements found throughout the postsecondary
segment artifacts like the Accountability Reporting for Community Colleges (ARCC)
(2012 (draft)); CSU Statistical Reports at http://www.calstate.edu/as/stats.shtml and
websites like the UC StatsFinder at http://statfinder.ucop.edu/library/default.aspx,
mirror the data submitted to the National Center for Education Statistics through the
Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System. A central oversight body for higher
education could require additional reporting categories like near completion; however,
with the defunding of CPEC there is no longer an entity performing this task in
California.
Consumer Information - Integrated Data Coordination
Even when CPEC did serve as a coordinating body of higher education data;
the coordination function did not provide authority to require data beyond national
standards (EX_HE_CA_a, personal comment, March 2, 2012). According to state
officials and key staff (KS_E, personal comment, March 7, 2012; KS_HE_e, personal
comment, March 10, 2012; EX_HE_CA_a, personal comment, March 2, 2012), all
three segments of California's postsecondary education system possess more data than
CPEC required. However, without a single oversight body or a direct reporting line to
75
the governor, the type of additional data shared externally is at the discretion of the
segments.
Without communication of student attrition or degree completion milestones,
leaders in higher education, workforce development, and economic development, as
well as society at large, are left in the dark regarding the return on taxpayer
investments in education. Lack of communication regarding the near completion
phenomenon prevents awareness at the state and local levels.
Consumer Information - Veterans and Military
The California Department of Veterans Affairs (CalVet) provides financial
support for education and training for military families and veterans. CalVet supports
educational attainment through the use of veteran-based financial programs, but no
policy was found indicating efforts to increase degree attainment among the veteran
population. While communication policies supporting education attainment and the
use of financial support could not be identified through CalVet, the CSU's Troops to
College program specifies that each of the 23 campuses designates a Veteran's Affairs
Coordinator to work with military members, veterans, and their dependants in order to
support participation in higher education (http://www.calstate.edu/veterans, 2012).
The individual communication is intended to yield a better understanding of student
needs and institutional options. An increased effort in communicating the steps to
move from near completion to completion could be handled at the organizational level
through CalVet or the individual level through academic counselors.
76
Stakeholder Involvement
Stakeholder involvement is based on the belief that expertise does not rest
solely within an organization. Stakeholders are persons or organizations that have
investments in the outcome or activities of a program or an institution. Stakeholders
themselves are individuals or representatives who may be affected by the decisions.
Stakeholder Involvement - California Workforce Investment Board
Currently, the CCC system is the only higher education institution represented
on the 26-member CWIB board (Membership Roster,
http://www.cwib.ca.gov/membership.htm). The near completion phenomenon is not in
the purview of CWIB as they are not responsible for establishing or meeting degree
attainment goals for California's workforce and without participation from additional
higher education entities, degree attainment and its link to the future economy may go
unrecognized.
For example, the 2008 Green Collar Job Act brought state officials from the
California Energy Commission, the California Air Resources Board, and the
California Public Utilities Commission together with employers, labor, and education
to address workforce shortages in a green economy
(http://www.cwib.ca.gov/sc_green_collar_jobs_council.htm). In alignment with the
composition of CWIB, the CCCs served as the only stakeholder for the public
postsecondary education segment. Other stakeholders, like the California Health and
Human Services Agency were brought into the conversation at the direction of a
visionary leader, not because of membership policy.
77
Stakeholder Involvement - Economic Development
Conventional wisdom yields an understanding that the economy creates jobs
and higher education responds by creating educational programs. In contrast,
economic development principles support the philosophy that knowledgeable and
skilled workers are a catalyst for recovery because they are more productive and
innovative (Lumina, 2010). Since California lacks state-level economic development
entities focusing on education attainment, the local economic development agencies
would benefit from conversation and collaboration with workforce development
entities and postsecondary institutions. Stakeholder collaboration and alignment could
attract grant funding, industry funding, or employer-supported projects that help move
near completers toward completion.
Stakeholder Involvement - Unified Planning
The Workforce Investment Act (WIA) includes a provision for any state to
submit a unified plan for any of the Department of Labor workforce programs (WIA
section 501(b)(2)). This means that California state-level entities could submit one
five-year strategic plan for WIA, the Wagner-Peyser Act, the Trade Adjustment Act,
and the Veteran's Program, as well as any programs under the Unemployment
Insurance Code, which would include ETP and EDD in California. There was no
evidence that California has ever utilized unified planning as described in WIA. The
policy helps support access and student success, but the practice of not using unified
planning hinders the opportunity to develop cross-cutting solutions to identify the near
completion population and move them toward completion.
78
Summary
The policy review and policy audit revealed that California's state-level policy in
higher education, workforce development, and economic development is devoid of
initiatives, regulations, or services specifically targeted for the near completion
population. In fact, near completion did not even appear to be an understood concept
in California. The review and audit also revealed that existing policy not specifically
targeted at the near completion population does indeed affect its access and success.
While there are no specific efforts targeting near completion, there are also no statelevel policies preventing efforts or services.
79
Chapter 5
IMPLICATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
Introduction
The governor, the legislature, state-level leaders, and the people of California
need to care about degree attainment levels in California because the economy
depends on an educated workforce. Based on the findings from this study, this chapter
discusses recommendations for leaders and policy, both of which include the use of
data driven decision-making. The chapter also includes suggestions for further
research on the near completion phenomenon.
Recommendations
In an ideal scenario the governor would establish, and the legislature would
incentivize, specific higher education attainment goals for California. The specific
goals would encourage higher education, workforce development, and economic
development communities to deliver degrees, fund degree completion programs, and
promote education as an economic development tool in California. An overarching
goal would serve as a catalyst for innovative solutions and would encourage
alternative pathways to increasing degree attainment, such as moving near completers
toward completion. However, without an overarching goal or policy, transformational
leaders in higher education, workforce development, and economic development have
the take action to include the near completion population in their plans to improve
educational attainment in California.
80
The recommendations are organized using the CAEL Policy Review
Framework and are not mutually exclusive. Effective policy reform requires
comprehensive plans and strategies.
Governance
The diversity in California's industry, population, and geography warrant dayto-day autonomy and decentralized operations; however the size of the economy and
the population warrant centralized coordination of information, goals, and
measurements. The primary policy recommendation is to establish a central point of
coordination, direction, and accountability for higher education, workforce
development, and economic development. This central point of coordination could
provide data regarding the volume of individuals who left postsecondary education
just short of a degree, including demographics and discipline, which would enable
improvements in creating equity and aligning with California's workforce needs.
Strategic Plans
The findings from this study indicate that all three segments of the California
public higher education system have the data necessary to determine if the students
who dropped out or stopped out are near completers. It was not confirmed if the
private or for-profit institutions posses this data. Leaders are recommended to
calculate the number of near completers in order to establish a data point for
calculating the resources required for a legitimate near completion effort. Real
numbers would then enable ROI calculations with scenarios based on demographic
81
characteristics, geographical regions, high-need employment industries, or the use of
private and for-profit institutions to increase capacity.
Leaders are also advised to investigate local or regional completion efforts in
California's public and independent institutions to identify programs or activities that
currently serve or could serve the near completion population. Identifying the
transferrable strategies of near completion programs in Florida, Louisiana, Michigan,
Missouri, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Virginia, and Wisconsin would enable California
to learn from other states' successes and challenges. Modeling near completion
programs after other states and or scaling up programs existing at the local levels
would increase efficiency.
Performance Measures
Performance measures on degree completion could serve as a catalyst to
improving completion for all students and provide incentives to locate and move
toward completion those who stopped out or dropped out just short of a degree. A
policy recommendation is to establish, measure, and reward degree attainment goals.
Leaders are advised to ensure that effective goals for educational attainment align with
workforce needs, and ultimately the economic needs of California. Leaders are also
encouraged to ensure that measurements include outcomes and progress that account
for the composition of the state's population, socioeconomic factors, and the industry
sectors that create jobs and benefit California. Leaders can also ensure that metrics
reflect true completion numbers, not just first-time full-time freshman in a fall cohort
82
or first-time transfer students that only attend one four-year institution. This reporting
method is simply historical practice, not policy.
State Agency Programs
Leaders are recommended to incorporate near completion screenings into the
intake process of workforce and education programs. A screening would assess if the
individual has some college, but no degree and could lead to recommendations for
individualized degree audits or participation in special degree completion programs.
Screening for near completion is an efficient use of time as it can support the best use
of resources and appropriate processes for moving near completers toward completion.
Adding simple screening activities to existing practices aligns with the state priorities
of access, affordability, readiness, and efficiency.
Postsecondary Education Programs
The capacity to serve the near completion population through the public,
private, and for-profit education sectors must be evaluated. Given the fiscal challenges
that create capacity issues in California's public higher education segments, the
utilization of private and for-profit institutions represents a pathway for near
completion. Currently, public postsecondary institutions have more students than
capacity so adding a new population, regardless of importance, will not improve
completions for the near completers if the courses are full or not offered at all. While
the use of private, for-profit, or self-support offerings often requires higher out-ofpocket expense for students, the accelerated time to completion could yield immediate
wage increases or job opportunities for near completers. Leaders are advised to
83
support increased capacity beyond public institutions in order to support the state
priorities of access, completion, workforce, and efficiency.
California could also adopt stackable certificate models at the state level.
Incorporating associate and baccalaureate degree completion programs that are
integrated with certificate programs, apprentice programs, vocational programs, and
training programs can occur within existing policy. These stackable certificate
pathways could enable near completers to access a broad base of courses and bundle
various programs together in order to move more quickly toward completion. For near
completers, stackable certificate models align with the state priorities of access,
completion, workforce, and efficiency.
Prior learning assessments (PLAs) represent a methodology for acknowledging
previous learning. Examples include challenge exams, portfolio-based assessments,
advanced placement exams, and evaluation of local training programs. By recognizing
learning gained outside of the traditional academic institutions, students are able to
meet requirements in an efficient manner. Leaders can encourage the use of PLAs in
their institutions and system-level policy makers can incentivize the use of these
existing, but under utilized tools.
Finance
Existing policy allows for local partners to pursue and receive grants and
discretionary funding for targeted state-level near completion programming. Leaders
could utilize these types of funding streams for activities, initiatives, and projects that
84
include outreach, education screenings, degree audits, PLAs, concierge services, or
data mining in the postsecondary education and workforce development systems.
Leaders could also pursue other opportunities to garner funding for specific
near completion programs, which include participation in existing national projects
that serve the near completion population. Leaders are recommended to consider two
specific options: Project Win-Win through the Institute for Higher Education Policy
(IHEP) and the Non-Traditional No More project through the Western Interstate
Commission for Higher Education (WICHE). These projects focus on moving
individuals toward completion through a variety of services. Leveraging existing
models would enable California to move quickly in making near completion programs
available. Working with the Lumina Foundation to sponsor these projects would
reduce the start-up and implementation costs, further ensuring efficiency and
affordability.
Student Financial Assistance
Affordability and efficiency are improved when entities in education,
workforce, and economic development promote the use of scholarships, waivers,
specially funded programs, and employer-paid training to the near completion
population. Utilizing current student financial aid tools in new ways aligns with the
state priorities of access, completion, affordability, workforce, and efficiency. Leaders
are recommended to ensure policy interpretations that support completion.
Leaders within postsecondary institutions could approve waivers, scholarships,
and special funds to be used for moving near completers toward completion. Using
85
institutional waivers for the near completers who have met academic course
requirements and graduation requirements, but have overdue library fees or lost
paperwork could increase institutional graduation rates without adding students into
currently overcrowded institutions.
Military personnel and military families are eligible for numerous educational
benefits, but often struggle to complete degrees because their mobile lifestyle leaves
many individuals with credits that are not accepted at other institutions. Leaders at
CalVet could publicize near completion profiles and provide pathways for utilizing
military benefits to move toward completion.
Encouragement from leaders to add courses to approved education lists in the
workforce community would enable near completers to utilize Career Based Training
funds to pay for the courses needed to complete a degree. The addition of courses
would also enable private sector employers to utilized ETP funding for academic
courses that move near completer employees toward completion.
Consumer Information
Leaders are recommended to establish baseline data regarding degree
attainment and attrition rates in terms of nearness to completion, not just completion
rates on time to graduation or demographic ratios. The baseline measurements must go
beyond federal and segment requirements in order to provide the comprehensive
information needed for informed decision making by leaders at all levels.
Measurement decisions should be determined by leaders and supported by policy, not
based on the availability or ownership of a data system.
86
Inquiries at the system level revealed that the CCCCO, the CSU, and the UC
system-level data include the necessary information to conduct a high level near
completion audit. This data includes number of courses, course types, grades, and field
of study. Leaders are advised to review this data and support analysis activity. Data
analysis would enable enrollment pattern evaluation that could be used to determine
how to prevent near completion in the future and identify barriers, like common
courses, that the near completion population failed to complete. It would also provide
preliminary estimates useful in determining the feasibility of implementing a near
completion focus or program at the system level.
Stakeholder Involvement
Leaders are encouraged to initiate specific conversations about the near
completion population at the local and regional levels. At the state level, CWIB is
encouraged to include the private and for-profit postsecondary education systems as
well as the UC and CSU. Focused conversations on the day-to-day opportunities
between higher education, workforce development, and economic development could
help move near completers toward completion. Leaders in economic development and
workforce development are encouraged to use discretionary funding to sponsor near
completer students or near completion programs that produce graduates in high-need
occupations for their region.
Solutions Possible Within Current Policy
State-level policy establishing state-level degree attainment goals would serve
as a catalyst for the higher education, workforce development, and economic
87
development entities to simultaneously focus on completion rates. Near completers
would quickly be identified as an efficient way to increase completion rates and
degree attainment levels. In fact, if state-level degree attainment goals were
established, there are mechanisms already in place that could incorporate the near
completion population. Even if policy on degree attainment is not created, leaders can
support completion for the near completers within existing policy and specific
examples are described in the following paragraphs. Through the examination of
policy within each of the 14 state-level entities in California's executive branch of
government I identified operational mechanisms that could enable entities to
incorporate services into existing practices and/or enable near completers to take
action and move toward completion.
Readiness and access could be improved by incorporating near completion
screenings and degree audits into the intake process of individuals in the workforce
and education communities. Completion and efficiency could be improved through the
use of customized completion plans and recognition of prior learning, industry
certifications, credits from other institutions, and competency assessments as part of a
completion plan.
Access and affordability could be improved by including academic courses and
programs on approved education lists for the workforce community. In addition to
improving access and affordability for individuals, the needs of employers and the
workforce could be improved when special programs target the near completion
population in high-need employment areas by funding from the workforce and
88
economic development communities.
Affordability and efficiency could be improved when entities in higher
education, workforce development, and economic development promote the use of
scholarships, waivers, specially funded programs, and employer-paid training to the
near completion population. Access, completion, and efficiency could be improved
when institutions specializing in degree completion are licensed in California.
Table 6 summarizes how California could improve outcomes for the near
completion population by adding or changing practices under an existing policy. The
activities listed highlight how specific entities can impact the near completion
population. The chart also contains columns indicating if the activities could improve
access and/or completion outcomes in line with the state's current and future
workforce needs; could ensure that near completion programs and services are
affordable; could provide opportunities for near completers to be assessed regarding
their readiness to complete a degree; and could maximize efficiency of past
investments by quickly transitioning near completers toward completion. A ""
indicates with which policy priority(s) the activity aligns. The findings are the result of
analyzing regulations, procedures, descriptions, definitions, and communication
policies gathered under the CAEL Framework. The entities and corresponding
acronyms in the left column were first introduced in Chapter 3.
89
Table 6
CCCC
California
Community College
System




CSU
California State
University System



UC
University of
California System


Affordability
Efficiency

Higher Education
Create completion plan
blueprints that can be
individualized by an advisor
or student
Include screening for
previous education and
experience upon enrollment
Utilize BOG waivers for near
completers without income
requirement restrictions
Work with employers in the
Economic and Workforce
Development (EWD)
programs to screen for
possible near completers
Include academic credit
courses in EWD programs
Include screening for
previous education and
experience upon enrollment
Authorize waivers and grants
for use with near completion
students
Create completion plan
blueprints that can be
individualized by an advisor
or student.
Include screening for
previous education and
experience upon enrollment
Authorize waivers and grants
for use with near completion
students
Create completion plan
blueprints that can be
individualized by an advisor
or student
Readiness

Workforce
What
√


√
√
√
Access
Entity
Completion
Activities That Could Improve Near Completion Outcomes
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
90

CDA
Department of
Consumer Affairs

CPEC
California
Postsecondary
Education
Commission
SCAC
California Student
Aid Commission
CalVET
California Veteran's
Administration




EDD
Employee
Development
Department
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
Defunded and dismantled

LWDA
Labor and Workforce
Development Agency
Link completion rates to
licensing renewal
requirements
Approve the licensing of
credit clearinghouses


Provide marketing
information about financial
aid programs that fit the
needs of near completers
Add information on near
completion to existing
promotions and education
campaigns
Workforce
Support the promotion and
funding of near completion
through agencies,
departments, boards, and
panels
Authorize the use of
workforce funds for near
completion projects
Approve courses and
programs that serve near
completers on the ETPL list
Include screenings and/or
degree audits into the core
and intensive Services at the
One Stop Career Centers
Include near completion
programs on lists of
allowable programs
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
91


CWIB
California Workforce
Investment Board


ETP
Employment Training
Panel
OSHPD
Office of Statewide
Health Planning and
Development

Fund academic courses as
part of training projects

Include near completion
programs in ETP-funded
projects
Fund near completion
training in the healthcare
services field


BTH
Business,
Transportation, and
Housing Agency
GO-Biz
Governor's Office of
Business and
Economic
Development
Encourage the approval of
near completion courses and
programs at the local level
and fund near completion
projects at the state level
Include screenings and/or
degree audits at the OneStop Career Centers and in
the local workforce
programs
Encourage local partners to
include near completion
programs on lists of
allowable programs and
include near completion
projects in Requests for
Proposals (RFPs)
Include screenings with
employer training programs



Economic Development
Promote education
attainment levels
Actively engage with
workforce and education on
the employment needs of
business and industry
Promote education
attainment levels
Actively engage with
workforce and education on
the employment needs of
business and industry
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
92
Future Research
Derived from the limitations in this study, the following suggestions outline a
research agenda on the near completion population.
Future Research - Profile the Near Completion Population
Understanding the profiles within the near completion population is paramount
to addressing its existence and its needs. For instance, what are the relationships
among factors such as age, ethnicity, wealth, enrollment period, discipline, attendance
pattern, geographical location, or use of financial aid? Equally important is identifying
course completion patterns to determine if relationships exist between course topics,
course frequency, or programs of study. For example, is there a type of course or
requirement commonly lacking in near completers' academic records?
Future Research - Calculate the Return on Investment on Near Completer
Completion
Since California's economy is dependent on degreed citizens, and there is a
predicted shortfall of graduates in the workforce, studies calculating ROI are critical.
The ROI should be calculated for the individual and the state as well as across
industries and between differing levels of degrees. For example, is the return on
investment for an individual who completes a bachelor's degree in history from a
private non-profit institution different from the ROI for completing a criminal justice
degree at a for-profit institution or an associate degree in engineering at a public
community college? The ROI calculations should also include scenarios that factor in
the two-year and four-year for-profit and non-profit colleges, which include for-profit
93
and private institutions. For example, how can independent colleges play a role in
increasing efficiency and completion for the near completers?
Future Research - National Studies
Research that compares policy, programs, and outcomes of near completion
efforts in other states is critical to informing the national completion agenda. These
studies should address the following research questions: What policy factors affect the
near completion population in the United States? What are other states learning about
the near completion population? What does it take for every state to focus on the near
completion population as one part of the overall solution to increasing degree
attainment in the United States?
Concluding Comments
The literature review revealed that the focus on near completion is new in
national policy conversations. The research study confirmed that California's existing
state-level policy in higher education, workforce development, and economic
development are devoid of specific programs, initiatives, or regulations to move the
near completion population toward completion. The policy audit demonstrated that
policies affecting the near completion population are frequently the same policies
identified as affecting college completion in general. Therefore, investing in crosscutting efforts to improve degree completion will benefit both the near completion
population and current students. The research also revealed that many leaders and key
staff are unaware of this population’s presence in California and near completion
projects in other states.
94
The findings of this study shed light on the near completion phenomenon and
how it is linked to umbrella policy regarding degree completion. The study's focus on
near completers highlights the opportunity for some immediate success as part of a
comprehensives completion agenda. The lack of data on the near completion
population and near completion programs indicates a need for a coordinated data
system. The importance of measurement supports the need for universal data and
points to the urgency in re-evaluating completion formulas and completion metrics.
The lack of degree attainment goals points to a need for coordinated oversight and
leadership across higher education, workforce development, and economic
development. Near completers are closer to a college degree than incoming freshman
and addressing the near completion population should be a part of increasing the
overall degree attainment levels in California and across the nation.
95
APPENDICES
96
APPENDIX A
California State Government Organizational Chart
97
98
APPENDIX B
CAEL Framework Notes Grid
99
CAEL Framework Notes Grid
Governance
Strategic Plans
Performance Measures
State Agency Programming / Postsecondary Education Programs
Finance
Student Financial Assistance
Consumer Information
Stakeholder Involvement
100
APPENDIX C
Criteria Guide Analysis Sheet
101
Criteria Guide Analysis Sheet
How does this policy…

Provide access to near completion programs?

Support the goal of increased completion for the near completion population?

Align completion near goals with the state’s current and future workforce needs?

Ensure that completion programs and services are affordable to near
completers?

Provide opportunities for near completers to be assessed regarding their
readiness to complete a degree?

Maximize efficiency and past investments by quickly transitioning near
completers to completers?
102
APPENDIX D
Summary Grid
103
Access
Governance
Strategic Plans
& Goals
CAEL Framework
Performance
Measures
State Agency
Programs
Postsecondary
Education
Programs
Finance
Student
Financial Aid
Consumer
Information
Stakeholder
Involvement
Completion
Public Policy Priorities
Workforce
Affordability
Readiness
Efficiency
104
APPENDIX E
Interview Protocol
105
Overview of the Research
You are being asked to participate in research that will be used by Jenni
(Helfrich) Murphy, a student in the Doctorate in Educational Leadership Program
and an employee of the College of Continuing Education at Sacramento State.
The study will examine factors affecting the near completion population in
California. Near completers are individuals that actually qualify for a degree or
are less than 15 credits from completing an academic program of study. These
near completers represent an often over-looked opportunity to increase degree
attainment in California.
Consent to Participate in Leader Interviews
You are being asked to participate in an interview that is expected to take 45-60
minutes. The interview will be recorded on a digital recording device and
summarized in a text document.
The interview questions focus on your professional role and are very general in
nature thus allowing you to respond in broad, general, or specific terms. You may
opt out of answering any questions or participating at all in the interview at any
time during the interview process.
Your participation and ensuing answers will remain confidential unless you
desire otherwise. Direct quotes in publications will be given a pseudo name or a
general term such as ‘a leader in an institution’. No quotes will be used if the
reader would be able to reasonably discern who the interview was. I will allow
you to review any quotes for accuracy.
By participating in the leader interview, you will have the opportunity to frame
the opportunities and challenges facing near completion efforts in California. You
will receive a copy of the published results so that it may inform your leadership
practice.
This is an unfunded research project and there is no compensation for
participation.
If you have any questions, comments, or concerns about this research, please
contact Jenni (Helfrich) Murphy at 916-600-8642 or jhelfrich@csus.edu.
Participation in this research is entirely voluntary. Your participation in the
interview indicates that you have read this page, understand your role and agree
to participate.
106
Interview Guide

Please describe your organization and elaborate on your role and scope of
responsibility.

Please share your insights on how California can improve outcomes for this
target population.

Please describe any programs or initiatives that target the near completion
population.

Please share your thoughts on including the near completion population as
part of California's overall efforts to increase degree attainment.

Is there anything else you'd like to share about improving access and success
for near completers?
Thank you for sharing your thoughts.
107
APPENDIX F
Artifact Inventory List
Sorted by Framework, Entity, Artifact Type
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
REFERENCES
Academic Senate for California Community Colleges (2011). Summary of resolutions
related to SB 1440. Retrieved on February 17, 2012 from
http://www.sb1440.org/
American Association of Community Colleges. (2000). National profile of community
colleges: Trends & statistics. Washington, DC: Philippe, K.A. & Patton.
Community College Press.
American Society for Training and Development (ASTD). (2008). 2008 State of the
industry report. Alexandria, VA. Retrieved on November 11, 2011, from
http://www.astd.org/content/research/stateOfIndustry.htm
Assembly Bill 2 (Portantino) (December 6, 2010). Postsecondary education:
Educational and economic goals for California higher education. Retrieved on
October 11, 2011 from http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/1112/bill/asm/ab_0001-0050/ab_2_bill_20101206_introduced.html
Assembly Bill 2427 (Butler) (February 24, 2012). California State University: Special
session fees. Retrieved on March 8, 2012 from
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/asm/ab_24012450/ab_2427_bill_20120224_introduced.html
Aslanian, C. B., & Brickell, H. M. (1980). Americans in transition: Life changes as
reasons for adult learning. New York: College Entrance Examination Board.
Astin, A. W. (1993). What matters in college? Four critical years revisited. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass
125
Bailey, T., Calgano, C., Jenkins, D., Kienzl, G., & Leinbach, T. (2005). Community
college student success: What institutional characteristics make a difference?
New York: Community College Research Center, Teachers College, Columbia
University.
Baker, T. L., & Vélez, W. (1996). Access to and opportunity in postsecondary
education in the United States: A Review. Sociology of Education, 69, 82-101.
Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3108457
Bash, L. (2003). Adult learners: Why they are important to the 21st Century college or
university. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 51(3), 18-26. doi:
10.1080/07377366.2003.10400261.
Baum, S. & Ma, J. (2007). Education Pays The Benefits of Higher Education for
Individuals and Society. Retrieved from College Board website:
http://www.collegeboard.com/prod_downloads/about/news_info/trends/ed_pay
s_2007.pdf
Bean, J. P. (1980). Dropouts and turnover. The synthesis and test of a causal model of
student attrition. Research in Higher Education, 12(1) 55-87.
Bean, J. P., & Metzner, B. S. (1985). A conceptual model of nontraditional
undergraduate student attrition. Review of Educational Research, 55(4), 485540.
Berg, G. A. (1998). Public policy on distance learning in higher education California
State and Western Governors Association Initiatives. Education Policy
Analysis Archives, 6(11).
126
Bess, B. L., & Dee, J. R. (2008). Understanding college and university organization:
Theories for effective policy and practice. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.
Boeke, M., Zis, S., & Ewell, P. (2011). State policies affecting the “adult re-entry
pipeline” in postsecondary education: Results of a fifty-state inventory.
Boulder, CO: National Center for Higher Education Management Systems.
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2008). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and
leadership (4th ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bragg, D., Townsend, B., & Ruud, C. (2009). The adult learner and the Applied
Baccalaureate: Emerging lessons for state and local implementation. The
Office of Community College Research and Leadership, University of Illinois.
Retrieved February 12, 2012 from http://occrl.illinois.edu/projects/lumina
Brenneman, M. W., Callan, P. M., Ewell, P. T., Finney, J. E., Jones, P. D., & Zis, S.
(2010). Good policy, good practice ii, improving outcomes and productivity in
higher education: A guide for policymakers. Boulder, CO: National Center for
Higher Education Management Systems.
California Code of Regulations. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://government.westlaw.com/linkedslice/default.asp?SP=CCR-1000
127
California Community Colleges, Student Success Task Force (2012). Advancing
student success in the California Community Colleges. Retrieved on January
30, 2012, from
http://californiacommunitycolleges.cccco.edu/PolicyInAction/StudentSuccessT
askForce.aspx
California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office. (2010). Career Technical
Education Pathways Initiative. Sacramento, CA: Author
California Labor and Workforce Development Agency. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.labor.ca.gov/
California Student Aid Commission (CSAC). (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.csac.ca.gov/
California Student Aid Commission (2012). CSAC disqualification fact sheet. G-20.
Retrieved on March 1, 2012 from
http://www.csac.ca.gov/pubs/forms/grnt_frm/g20_disqualificationfactsheet.pdf
California Student Aid Commission (2011). CSAC Important facts. Retrieved on
March 1, 2012 from
http://www.csac.ca.gov/pubs/forms/grnt_frm/ImportantfactsaboutyourCalGran
t.pdf
California State University Office of the Chancellor. (2008). College portrait of
undergraduate education: California State University, Sacramento. Long
Beach, CA: Author.
128
California Unemployment Insurance Code. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/calawquery?codesection=uic
California Workforce Investment Board. (n.d.). Available at
http://www.cwib.ca.gove/about_us.htm
Carnevale, A. P., Rose, S. J., & Cheah, B. (2011). The college payoff: Education,
occupation, lifetime earnings. Washington, DC: Georgetown University,
Center on Education and the Workforce.
Carnevale, A. P., Smith, N., & Strohl, J. (2010). Help wanted: Projections of jobs and
education requirements through 2018. Washington, DC: Georgetown
University Center on Education and the Workforce.
Cohen, A. M., & Brawer, F.B. (2003). The American community college (4th ed.). San
Francisco: Josey Bass
Coded Memo. (2005). Facilitating graduation. Long Beach, CA: CSU Office of the
Chancellor, AA-2005-21. Retrieved on February 16, 2012 from
http://www.calstate.edu/acadaff/codedmemos
Complete College America. (2011). Time is the enemy: The surprising truth about
today’s college students aren’t graduating… and what needs to change.
Washington, DC: Author.
Council for Adult and Experiential Learning (CAEL). (2005). Principles in practice:
Assessing adult learning focused institutions. Chicago: Author.
Council for Adult and Experiential Learning (CAEL). (2008a). Adult learning in
focus: National and state-by-state data. Chicago: Author.
129
Council for Adult and Experiential Learning (CAEL). (2008b). State policies to bring
adult learning adult learning into focus: A companion guide. Chicago: Author.
Council for Adult and Experiential Learning (CAEL). (n.d.) Summary of CAEL’s
Adult Learning Focused Institution (ALFI) Initiative activities: November 2001
to October 2007. Chicago: Author.
Council for Adult and Experiential Learning (CAEL). (2011). Undeserved students
who earn credit through Prior Learning Assessment (PLA) have higher degree
completion rates and shorter time-to-degree. Chicago: Author.
Creighton, S., & Hudson, L. (2001). Participation trends and patterns in adult
education. Education Statistics Quarterly, 3(4), 15-18.
Cross, K. P. (1981). Adults as learners. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Employment Development Department (2010). Report on the Workforce Investment
Act Program funding availability and training expenditures by Local
Workforce Investment Area for the state fiscal year ended June 30, 2010.
Retrieved January 5, 2012, from
http://www.edd.ca.gov/About_EDD/pdf/Training_by_Local_Workforce_Inves
tment_Boards2010.pdf
Employment Development Department (2011). California Training Benefits Program
(EDD Publication DE8714U Rev. 11 (5-11)). Retrieved March 1, 2012 from
http://www.edd.ca.gov/unemployment/forms_and_publications.htm
Employment Training Panel (2011a). Strategic plan 2011-2012. Retrieved January 8,
2012, from http://www.etp.ca.gov
130
Employment Training Panel (2011b). ETP regulations. Retrieved January 8, 2012,
from http://www.etp.ca.gov
Enochs, W., & Roland, C. (2006). Social adjustment of college freshmen: The
importance of gender and living environment. College Student Journal, 40(1),
63-73.
Executive Order 802 (2002). Special sessions. The California State University.
Retrieved March 30, 2012, from http://www.calstate.edu/eo/
Fairchild, E. E. (2003). Multiple roles of adult learners. New Directions for Student
Services, 102, (11-16).
Institute for Higher Education Policy. (2011a). Near completion: Framing the issue.
Washington, DC: Author.
Institute for Higher Education. (2011b). Crossing the finish line: A national effort to
address near completion. Washington, DC: Author.
Institute for Higher Education Leadership & Policy. (2009). Student flow analysis:
CSU student progress toward graduation (report). Sacramento, CA: California
State University, Sacramento.
Jez, S. J. (2011). The role of for-profit colleges in increasing postsecondary
completions in California [PowerPoint slides]. Sacramento, CA: Author.
Johnson, H. (2009). Educating California: Choices for the future. San Francisco:
Public Policy Institute of California.
Johnson, H., & Sengupta, R. (2009). Closing the gap: Meeting California’s need for
college graduates. San Francisco: Public Policy Institute of California.
131
Johnstone, J. W., & Rivera, R. (1965). Volunteers for learning: A study of the
educational pursuits of adults. Hawthorn, NY: Aldine.
Jones, D. P, & Paulson, K. (2001). Some next steps for states: A Follow-up to
Measuring Up 2000 Report #01-2. San Jose, CA: National Center for Public
Policy and Higher Education.
Karp, M., Hughes, K., & O’Gara, L. (2008, May). An exploration of Tinto’s
integration framework for community college students. New York: Community
College Research Center, Teachers College, Columbia University.
Kasworm, C. E. (1990). Adult Undergraduates in Higher Education: A Review of past
Research Perspectives. Review of Educational Research, 60(3), 345-372.
Kasworm, C. E. (2003). Setting the stage: Adults in higher education. New Directions
for Student Services, 102, 3-10.
Kienzl, G. (2008). Recent participation in formal learning among working-age adults
with different levels of education. National Center for Education Statistics,
Institute of Education Sciences Issues Brief (NCES 2008-041). Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Levitz, R. S., Noel, L., & Richter, B. (1999). Strategic moves for retention success.
New Directions for Higher Education, 27(4), 31-49.
Little Hoover Commission (2011). Serving students, serving California: Updating the
California Community Colleges to meet evolving demands.
http://www.lhc.ca.gov/studies/210/report210.html
132
Lumina Foundation for Education. (2010). Bringing adults back to college: Designing
and implementing a statewide concierge model. Indianapolis, IN: Author.
Lumina Foundation for Education. (2011a). A stronger nation through higher
education – and California’s role in that effort. Indianapolis, IN: Author.
Lynch, A. Q., & Chickering, A. W. (1984). Comprehensive counseling and support
programs for adult learners: Challenge to higher education. Paper written for
the Higher Education for Adult Mental Health Project sponsored by the
National Institute of Mental Health, Memphis, TN.
Martinez, M., & Richardson, R. C. (2003). A view of the market through studies of
policy and governance. American Behavioral Scientist, 46(7), 883-901.
Merriam, S. (2002). Qualitative research. San Francisco: John Wiley and Sons.
Moore, C., & Shulock, N. (2009a). The grades are in – 2008: California higher
education regional performance profiles. Sacramento, CA: Institute for Higher
Education Leadership & Policy. California State University, Sacramento.
Moore, C., & Shulock, N. (2009b). Student progress toward degree completion:
Lessons from the research literature. Sacramento, CA: Institute for Higher
Education Leadership & Policy. California State University, Sacramento.
Moore, C., & Shulock, N. (2010). Divided we fail: Improving completion and closing
racial gaps in California’s Community Colleges. Sacramento, CA: Institute for
Higher Education Leadership & Policy. California State University,
Sacramento.
133
Moore, C., Shulock, N., & Offenstein, J. (2009). Steps to success: Analyzing milestone
achievement to improve community college student outcomes. Sacramento,
CA: Institute for Higher Education Leadership & Policy. California State
University, Sacramento.
Moore, C., Shulock, N., & Offenstein, J. (2011). The road less traveled: Realizing the
potential of career technical education in the California Community Colleges.
Sacramento, CA: Institute for Higher Education Leadership & Policy.
California State University, Sacramento.
Moore, C., Shulock, N., Ceja, M., & Lang D. M. (2007). Beyond the open door:
Increasing student success in the California Community Colleges. Sacramento,
CA: Institute for Higher Education Leadership & Policy. California State
University, Sacramento.
Murphy, E. (2011, September 14). Low hanging fruit. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved
from
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/09/14/institute_for_higher_educati
on_policy_summit_on_near_completers
National Center for Education Statistics (2007). The condition of education. NCES
2007-064. Jessup, MD: Author.
National Center for Education Statistics (2011). Digest of education statistics.
Available at http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/2011menu_tables.asp
134
Offenstein, J., Moore, C., & Shulock, N. (2010). Advancing by degrees: A framework
for increasing college completion. Sacramento, CA: Institute for Higher
Education Leadership & Policy. California State University, Sacramento.
Offenstein, J., & Shulock, N. (2010). Taking the next step: The promise of
intermediate measures for meeting postsecondary completion goals.
Sacramento, CA: Institute for Higher Education Leadership & Policy.
California State University, Sacramento.
Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development (OSHPD), (2011). California
State loan repayment program fact sheet. Retrieved March 3, 2012, from
http://www.oshpd.ca.gov/hwdd/slrp.html
Ogbu, J. U., & Simons, H. D. (1998). Voluntary and involuntary minorities: A
cultural-ecological theory of school performance with some implications for
education. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 29(2), 155-188.
Perez, V. (2010). Is the Applied Baccalaureate Degree right for California?
(Unpublished master’s thesis). California State University, Sacramento.
Public Policy Institute of California. (2005, June). Getting to 2025: Can California
Meet the Challenges? (Issue 100). San Francisco: Author.
Public Policy Institute of California. (2008). Today’s choices, tomorrow’s changes.
San Francisco: Author.
Public Policy Institute of California. (2012). Planning for a better future: California
2025, 2012 update. San Francisco: Author.
135
Pusser, B, Breneman, D. W., Gansneder, B. M., Kohl, K. J., Levin, J. S., Milam, J. H.,
& Turner, S. E. (2007). Returning to learning: Adults’ success in college is key
to America’s future. Indianapolis, IN: Lumina Foundation for Education.
Schuetze, H. G., & Slowey, M. (2002). Participation and exclusion: A comparative
analysis of non-traditional students and lifelong learners in higher education.
Higher Education, 44(3/4), 309-327.
Senate Bill 33 (1959) The Donahoe Act. Retrieved June, 5, 2011, from
http://www.cpec.ca.gov/Billtrack/Donahoe_Act.pdf
Senate Bill 721 (Lowenthal), (January 4, 2011). Postsecondary education statewide
goals. Retrieved October 11, 2011, from http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/1112/bill/sen/sb_0701-0750/sb_721_cfa_20120110_112547_sen_comm.html
Senate Bill 1236 (Alarcon), (2002). Labor and Workforce Development Agency.
Retrieved January 17, 2012, from http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/0102/bill/sen/sb_1201-1250/sb_1236_bill_20020925_chaptered.html
Sewall, T. J. (1986, April). Nontraditionals in a traditional setting: Why older adults
return to college. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American
Education Research Association, San Francisco.
Shulock, N. & Moore, C. (2007). Rules of the game: How state policy creates barriers
to degree completion and impedes student success in the California
Community Colleges. Sacramento, CA: Institute for Higher Education
Leadership & Policy. California State University, Sacramento.
136
Sissel, P. A., Hansman, C. A., & Kasworm, C. E. (2001). The politics of neglect:
Adult learners in higher education. New Directions for Adult and Continuing
Education, 91, 17-27.
Standing Order. (2006). Delegation to the Chancellor. Section II, CSU Board of
Trustees. Retrieved January 20, 2012, from
http://www.calstate.edu/bot/documents/standing_orders.pdf
Tierney, W. G., & Hentschke, G. C. (2011). Making it happen: Increasing college
access and participation in California higher education. Retrieved from
http://www.uscrossier.org/pullias/wpcontent/uploads/2012/02/2011_Tierney__Hentschke_Making_It_Happen.pdf
Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student
attrition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Townsend, B. K., Bragg, D. D., & Ruud, C. M. (2008). The adult learner and the
Applied Baccalaureate: National and state-by-state inventory. Retrieved from
education.missouri.edu/orgs/cccr/_files/Final%20Inventory.pdf
U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2001). Employment outlook
2000-2010: Occupational employment projections to 2010. Retrieved
December 2, 2011, from http://stats.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2001/11/at4ful.pdf
United States Government Accountability Office. (2012). Workforce Investment Act:
Innovative collaborations between workforce boards and employers helped
meet local needs (GAO-12-97). Washington, DC: Author.
University of California. (n.d). State higher education profiles. Oakland, CA: Author.
137
University of California Commission on the Future. (2010). Final report. Oakland,
CA: Author.
U.S. Department of Education. (2011). Profile of degree/certificate-seeking entering
undergraduate students, by control and level of institution. Washington, DC:
Author.
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2007). The
condition of education 2007 (NCES 2007-064). Washington, DC: U.S.
Government Printing Office.
VanVechten, R. B. (2010). California politics: A primer. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education (WICHE). (2010). Bringing
adults back to college: Designing and implementing a statewide concierge
model. Non-traditional no more: Policy solutions for adult learners. Boulder,
CO: Author.
Workforce Investment Act of 1998, Public Law, 105-220, 112 Stat. 936. Retrieved
December 29, 2011, from http://www.doleta.gov/usworkforce/wia/wialaw.txt