Replicating Success:
CUNY’s Accelerated Study
In Associate Programs
(ASAP)
@aypf_tweets
Webinar Technical Support
•
GoToWebinar Technical
Assistance: 1-800-263-6317
•
To submit live questions,
please use the “Questions” box
on the control panel
• A recording of the webinar and other
resources will be available at
www.aypf.org
Presenters
Donna Linderman, University Dean
for Student Success Initiatives,
Office of Academic Affairs, City
University of New York
Susan Scrivener, Senior
Associate, MDRC
Brett Visger, Associate Vice Chancellor,
Institutional Collaboration & Completion,
Ohio Board of Regents
Comprehensive Supports to Improve Graduation Rates:
CUNY Accelerated Study in Associate Programs (ASAP)
Donna Linderman
University Dean for Student Success Initiatives and ASAP Executive Director
CUNY Office of Academic Affairs
American Youth Policy Forum Webinar
March 19, 2015
ASAP THEORY OF ACTION
 Remove financial barriers to full-time study
 Provide structured degree pathways and comprehensive, well-coordinated
support services
 Establish clear expectations for all students
 Build community through early engagement and a cohort model
More fully engaged students who graduate in a timely manner
Goal: At least 50% of students earn an associate degree within three years
ASAP INCEPTION
2007:
 CUNY funded by Mayor’s
Center for Economic
Opportunity (CEO) for
three-year pilot
 ASAP launched with 1,132
fully skills proficient
students* across six CUNY
community colleges in the
fall
* 28% of fall 2007 ASAP students had some developmental needs when recruited that were addressed over summer.
ASAP Total Enrollment by Semester
Fall 2007 to Fall 2014
4,500
4,238
4,000
3,500
3,205
3,000
Fall 2012: First
expansion begins
2,500
2,204
2,000
Fall 2011: Funding
‘baselined’ by CEO
1,500
1,250
1,132
1,000
500
909
1,286
795
Fall 2009: Began to
admit dev edu students
0
Fall 2007 Fall 2008 Fall 2009 Fall 2010 Fall 2011 Fall 2012 Fall 2013 Fall 2014
Average Graduation Rates of ASAP and CUNY-Constructed
Comparison Group Students:
Fall 2007-Fall 2012 Cohorts
60%
ASAP
Comparison Group
51.9%
50%
40%
26.1%
22.2%
30%
20%
9.0%
10%
0%
All
All
2-Year Graduates
(ASAP N=4,547; Comp N=19,087)
3-Year Graduates
(ASAP N=2,985; Comp N=15,042)
Source: CUNY Office of Institutional Research and Assessment, CUNY ASAP participating colleges, and National Student Clearinghouse.
ASAP SELECTION CRITERIA
 Must be City resident and/or eligible
for in-state tuition
 Agree to study full-time in an ASAPapproved major
 Most majors other than nursing and allied
health are offered
 Continuing/transfer students: less
than 15 credits and in good academic
standing
 Be fully skills proficient or have no
more than two developmental course
needs at application
 Receive some need-based financial
aid (Pell and/or TAP)
Summary Profile of Combined ASAP and CUNY Community College Students
Total Enrollment
Gender
Female
Ethnicity
American Indian/Native Alaskan
Asian/Pacific Islander
Black
Hispanic
White
Age
Admission Type
First-time Freshmen
Developmental Students
At Time of Application to ASAP/CUNY
GED Recipients
Pell Receipt
Combined
ASAP Students
(Fall 2007-Fall 2014)
CUNY Community
Colleges (Fall 2013)
N
8,670
97,751
%
58.1
56.9
%
%
%
%
%
mean
0.4
11.5
32.0
42.6
13.6
21
0.3
15.9
28.1
39.0
16.6
23
%
%
%
%
%
66.6
71.5
80.1
11.6
74.3
81.1
6.6
56.9
Source: CUNY Office of Institutional Research and Assessment (OIRA).
ASAP PROGRAM ORGANIZATION
Bronx
ASAP
ASAP
QCC
NYCCT
ASAP
(F’15)
Medgar
Evers
ASAP
Colleges:
 Recruitment
 Direct services to
students
 Local staffing
Monitoring student
progress/engagement
 Program integration at
college level
BMCC
ASAP
CUNY
Academic
Affairs
LaGuardia
ASAP
CSI
ASAP
(F’ 15)
Hostos
ASAP
Kingsborough
ASAP
CUNY OAA:
 Overall program
administration
 Program-wide
resource needs
 Evaluation/data
management
 External partnerships
 Citywide outreach
ASAP CORE ELEMENTS
 Financial Resources
 Tuition waivers (for financial aid eligible students)
 Free use of textbooks
 Monthly Metrocards
 Structured Pathways
 Consolidated full-time course schedules (ie: am,
afternoon, evening, weekend)
 Immediate/continuous developmental course taking
 Winter and summer courses to build academic
momentum
ASAP CORE ELEMENTS
 Comprehensive and Coordinated Supports
 High-touch advisement
 Embedded career development services
 Tutoring resources (mandated for some students)
 Referrals to campus resources (Single Stop, counseling, etc.)
 Early Engagement and Connected Community
 Summer developmental course taking and advisor contact
 ASAP Summer Institute
 First-year blocked courses
ASAP EVALUATION
INTERNAL EVALUATION
 Ongoing quasi-experimental analysis (using official CUNY data)

Web-based data management system

Annual student surveys and focus groups

Data reviewed regularly to assess impact, measure movement
towards goals, and improve program practice
EXTERNAL EVALUATION

Cost-benefit study by the Center for Benefit Cost Studies in Education
(CBCSE), Teachers College, Columbia University led Dr. Henry Levin

Five-year random assignment study by MDRC
ASAP GROWTH & REPLICATION
 Expand to 13,000 students by 2017
supported by the Mayor’s Office ($35m):
 Focus on serving more STEM majors
 Addition of College of Staten Island
and New York City College of
Technology in fall 2015
 ASAP pilot at John Jay College in fall 2015
(with support from Robin Hood
Foundation)
 Replication demonstration project in Ohio
with MDRC, Ohio Board of Regents, Great
Lakes Higher Education Corporation, and
three colleges
Donna Linderman
University Dean for Student Success Initiatives and ASAP Executive Director
Donna.linderman@mail.cuny.edu
www.cuny.edu/asap
Audience Q&A
• To submit
questions,
please use the
“Questions”
box on the
control panel
Evaluation of CUNY ASAP
Sue Scrivener, Senior Associate
AYPF Webinar
March 19, 2015
Why Look at ASAP?

CUNY’s ASAP is comprehensive and long-lasting
• Brings together many promising reforms
• Provides services for three years

One of the most ambitious efforts in the country to
boost graduation rates for community college students
The Evaluation

MDRC studied the implementation and cost of ASAP,
and its impacts on students’ academic outcomes over
three years

Study took place at three of CUNY’s community
colleges: Borough of Manhattan, Kingsborough, and
LaGuardia
Random Assignment Research Design
Target
Consent &
Data
Random
Assignment
• Targeted students invited to participate in
study
• Participants give consent
• Baseline data collected
• Program group – Students can enroll in ASAP
• Control group – Students can receive standard
college services
Evaluation Target Group

Family income at or below 200% of federal poverty level
or Pell-eligible

Needed one or two developmental courses
 ASAP also serves college-ready students but they were not
included in the MDRC study

Incoming freshman or continuing student with 12 or
fewer credits and 2.0+ GPA

Willing to attend school full time
Characteristics of Students at Start of the Evaluation

900 students randomly assigned in 2010

62% women

Average age 21.5

Racially diverse

6% married, 15% had a child

31% employed
ASAP Provided Much More Intensive Student Supports
Average reported
meetings in first year
with:
Program group
students
Control group
students
Advisor
38
6
Career services
9
2
Tutoring
24
7
ASAP Affected Course Enrollment

Most program group students took an ASAP seminar for
three semesters – a course with exclusively ASAP
students that covered topics such as goal-setting, study
skills, and academic planning

Most program group students took at least one
additional course with a concentration of ASAP students
ASAP’s Financial Benefits Were Well Implemented

Most students received monthly MetroCards, and text
books

ASAP provided a tuition waiver to students who needed
it
 3 – 11 percent of program group, depending on semester
ASAP Increased Enrollment

In most semesters, a higher proportion of program
group members than control group members enrolled in
college

Increases were particularly large during winter and
summer “intersessions”
ASAP Increased Credit Accumulation

ASAP consistently increased the number of credits
students earned

By the end of three years, program group students
earned an average of about 9 credits more than control
group students
ASAP Almost Doubled Graduation Rates

40.1 percent of program group earned a degree after
three years, compared with 21.8 percent of control
group

Biggest increase in graduation – by far – MDRC has
found

Program group also more likely to be enrolled in fouryear school at end of study
ASAP Cost-Effective at Three-Year Point

Cost per graduate was lower in ASAP, despite the
substantial investment required for the program,
because ASAP led so many more students to graduate
than usual college services
What Have We Learned?

Comprehensive, long-term program can substantially
boost students’ success

Pairing a full-time requirement with a wide array of
supports was central to improving and accelerating
students’ progress
What Have We Learned?

Monitoring students’ program participation and
providing a meaningful benefit to those who participate
can substantially increase engagement

Developmental education students’ outcomes can be
markedly improved without changing what happens in
the classroom
Key Remaining Research Questions

What are CUNY ASAP’s longer-term effects on
graduation?
 MDRC hopes to raise money to continue tracking study
students

Can other colleges operate ASAP-like programs and
achieve substantial effects for students?
 MDRC and CUNY working with Ohio Board of Regents to
replicate ASAP at three colleges
 MDRC exploring other options to replicate or adapt ASAP
For Additional Information
See www.mdrc.org for
reports from the ASAP
evaluation
Questions? Email
sue.scrivener@mdrc.org.
Audience Q&A
• To submit
questions,
please use the
“Questions”
box on the
control panel
Replication Efforts in Ohio
Brett Visger
Associate Vice Chancellor, Institutional
Collaboration & Completion
Ohio Board of Regents
What is Ohio’s Interest in ASAP?
•
•
•
•
•
Outcomes-based funding
Completion agenda
Assist institutions
Inform policy context
Collaborate on research
Participating Ohio Colleges
• Cincinnati State & Technical College
– C-State Accelerate
• Cuyahoga Community College (Tri-C)
– D3 (Degree in 3)
• Lorain County Community College
– SAIL (Students Accelerating in Learning)
Opportunities in Ohio
• Maintain fidelity to ASAP model within Ohio context.
• Identify possible policy levers and/or barriers.
– OCOG eligibility example
• What does scale look like?
Audience Q&A
• To submit
questions,
please use the
“Questions”
box on the
control panel
Questions for Today’s Presenters
Donna Linderman, University Dean
for Student Success Initiatives,
Office of Academic Affairs, City
University of New York
Susan Scrivener, Senior
Associate, MDRC
Brett Visger, Associate Vice Chancellor,
Institutional Collaboration & Completion,
Ohio Board of Regents
Thank You
 Please fill out the survey upon exiting the webinar.
Your feedback is important to us!
 To learn more and access copies of the slides and
event recording, please visit
www.aypf.org