Student Success in Comparative Perspective: Bachelor Degree Completion in the US and UK

Thomas Weko

This presentation is based upon research carried out in the United Kingdom between September 2003 and March 2004. The research was supported by the Atlantic Fellowship Programme of the British Foreign and Commonwealth

Office, and hosted by the Higher Education Policy Institute.

2

Study Questions

1. Are rates of bachelor degree completion in the UK significantly higher than those in US?

2. If so, why?

3. What might the US learn from UK’s experience with respect to bachelor degree completion?

3

US bachelor degree completion rate is well below UK (and OECD average) (Survival rate in tertiary type A education, number of graduates divided by the number of new entrants in the typical year of entrance to the

specified programme)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Japa

n

Ireland

Kore

a

Gre

ece

Unite

dKi

ngdo

m

Neth

erland

s

Belgium

(Fl.) Sp

ain

Turk

ey

Ger

man

y

Finlan

d

Portu

gal

Austra

lia

Poland

Austria

Czec

hRe

public

Hung

ary

Swed

en

New

Zealan

d

Unite

d St

ates Mex

ico

2000 2004

Countries are ranked in descending order of tertiary-type A survival rates in 2004.Source: OECD. Table A3.2. See Annex 3 for notes (www.oecd.org/edu/eag2006) .

%

OECD average (2004)

4

Low completion cannot be explained simply by wider entry. Many other OECD nations have wide access – and higher completion

Rates of Initial Entry and Survival in Tertiary Education Programmes 3-5 Years in Length For 21 OECD Nations

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Rate of Entry

Rat

e of

Sur

viva

l

US

UK

Y= -.1026x + 78.23p=.54

Source: OECD, Education At A Glance, 2002, Table C2.1 (Entry Rates) and Table A2.2 (Survival Rates)

Sweden

Italy

Finland

Ireland

Netherlands

Iceland

Japan

Czech Republic

5

CompletionAnd Its Measurement

UK: Higher Education Funding Council (HEFCE) projects a completion rate for all full-time first degree (bachelor degree) students

For individual HEIs, 1-39 percent of full-time first degree students projected to leave without transferring or completing a higher education qualification.

For UK university system as a whole, 82 percent completion rate

US: Many ways of measuring completion.For individual HEIs, calculated according to federal SRTK,

definitions, average is 46 percent non-completionFor entire starting cohort (defined below), NCES sample-based

estimates range from 63-67 percent

6

Alternative Measures of Completion Rates in the US

Cohort Duration Completion AtNumber of

Postsecondary Credits Completed

Percent Completing Bachelor's Degree

freshmen beginning at four-year institutions

1998-2003

same institution 51.6

first-time fulltime students beginning at four-year institutions

1995-2001

same institution 54.0

all students in Beginning Postsecondary Study who began as full-time first-time students at

four-year institutions, with bachelor's degree goal

1995-2001 any 4-year 65.6

all students in High School and Beyond sample who enrolled in

four-year institution

1982-1993 any 4-year 62.9

all students in High School and Beyond sample who enrolled in 4-

year institution at any time and completed > 10 postsecondary

credits and

1982-1993 any 4-year >10 credits completed 64.7

all students in National Education Longitudinal Study who completed

>10 postsecondary credits and any credits from 4-year institution

1992-2000 any 4-year >10 credits completed 67.3

7

Why differences in rates of university completion? Due in part to how government incentives shape the

operation of institutions

England• benchmarked performance

indicators for HEIs• press scrutiny, government

scrutiny (NAO), and ministerial pressure

• completion-related funding

US states• no benchmarks of institutional

performance• institutional funding methodology

typically input (FTE) based, not linked to completion

US federal government• Student Right to Know Act—Title

IV institutions must report four and six-year graduation rates to prospective students—no benchmarks or comparisons

• Pell Grants –no completion related funding elements

8

UK rate of participation in HE more than doubled with no systematic increase in bachelor degree noncompletion

Rates of Participation in Higher Education and Noncompletion in UK Universities

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

83-84  84-85 85-86 86-87 87-88 88-89 89-90 90-91 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95   95-96  96-97 97-98 98-99 99-00 00-01

Year

Perc

ent Noncompletion Rate

Higher Education Age Participation Index

Age Participation Index: the number of home domiciled young (under 21) initial entrants into full-time courses of higher education, expressed as a proportion of the averaged 18-19 year old-population of Great Britain

Noncompletion Rate: For 1983/4-1995/6 rate based upon a DfES comparsion of the number of starters and qualifiers; for 1996/97 and later based upon HEFCE projections applied to entering cohort of students.

9

y = 0.1792x + 14.576

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

83-84  84-85 85-86 86-87 87-88 88-89 89-90 90-91 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95   95-96  96-97 97-98 98-99 99-00Year

Perc

ent N

ot C

ompl

etin

g D

egre

e

Completion-related funding introduced

Performance indicators introduced

What was the impact of policy on rates of completion?

10

Do differences between UK/US completion rates result from who enters and how they progress?

Entry• Limited and selective entry from secondary

system closely aligned to demands of university study;

• Sharp separation from other forms of post-compulsory education and training.

Entry• Broad entry and highly variable selectivity;

secondary system not aligned to the demands of university study;

• Close links between university and other post-compulsory institutions.

Progression• Homogeneous, motivated, and young

student body;• Ecclesiastical study: continuous and full-

time, to the exclusion of other activities;• Unitary course, and pedagogical frame set

by instructors.

Progression• Entrants range widely in age, academic

preparation, motivation;• Credit transfer and modularization make

possible variable patterns of attendance; many are not exclusively students;

• Relatively open pedagogical frame marked by student choice

Elite Model Mass Model

11

UK: Still elite entry? What proportion university entrants take traditional path of upper secondary

academic preparation for university?

Type of Qualification Among Entrants to Full-time First Degree Study in UK, 1999-2000

69%

10%

7%

5%

5%

4%

Upper secondary academic qualifications only (Alevel, Scottish higher, baccalaureate)

Other HE and professional qualifications (e.g.HNC, HND, BTEC)

Vocational qualifications at level 3 (e.g. GNVQ)

Combinations of upper secondary academic andvocational qualifications

Foundation and access

Other non-advanced/no formal qualification

12

How closely joined is upper secondary education A-level curriculum and assessment to the demands of university education?

• A-level originally “an entrance examination controlled by universities and geared to serve their needs.”

• Changes to upper secondary curriculum and assessment in 1980’s diminish university control.

• Example: in A-level maths, increased emphasis on statistics, diminished emphasis on calculus, resulting in mismatch between skill set of entrants and university curriculum in maths and engineering.

• 1990’s: introduction of diagnostic testing for students entering university in maths, modern languages.

Mike Tomlinson, (Review of 14-19 education) 2004:

It isn’t that young people at university aren’t able to do this—it’s not been an integral part of their programme and it has not been encouraged and supported by the way in which they are assessed. It’s not their fault, and it’s not the fault of their teachers.

13

Emergence of students who are not yet fully prepared for their course upon entry to university -- and provision for them

A. Programs

• Entry into year 1 of course if summer-length module(s) successfully completed; • Bridging Programs for students entering from years 2 or 3 from HND or foundation

degree programs;• Remedial Instruction within year one, including lower level transition modules,

additional assessed modules, supplementary lectures, etc.

B. How many students?

• No national data available from HESA: data not kept at modular level, and no consistent definition of these modules across institutions.

• >60 departments of Mathematics, Physics and Engineering give diagnostic tests in mathematics to their new undergraduates.

• An estimated 15-20 percent on incoming students now assessed for readiness, and many of those need remedial instruction

14

Entry to university education in the US

1. Weak Alignment

No distinct period of specialized study within “upper secondary” education. Students enter university, not course (England) or faculty (Scotland). Secondary curriculum and assessment not directly linked to university entry and curriculum.

2. No Common Standard of University Selectivity or Preparation

• 2,000+ bachelor degree institutions with wide range of entry standards, open admissions to highly selective.

• Most students enter moderately selective institutions: CSU system (319,000 UG) admits top 1/3 of HS class. University of California system (154,000 UG) admits top 1/8th of HS class.

• Nearly one in three university entrants have not completed a notional university preparatory curriculum consisting of intermediate/advanced secondary coursework in maths, natural sciences, and modern languages (NCES longitudinal studies).

3. Low Exclusivity of Academic Secondary to University Path

Students may enter from vocational secondary, or from tertiary type B institutions. In some US states nearly half of bachelor graduates begin at two-year institutions (WA state, 41%), while rates much lower in England (5%) and Scotland (13%).

15

A significant proportion of students are not fully prepared for university at entry, the incidence of which varies sharply across universities.

4. Remediation (rates based upon NCES sample-based data)

• 1/4 of US university entrants need some (one or more remedial modules)

• 1/6 need extensive remediation (i.e. reading, or more than two courses in maths or writing, shown to be associated with noncompletion).

• Rates vary sharply across institutions, from 0 to 75 percent of entrants requiring remediation.

o 27 percent of (moderately-highly selective) institutions do not provide remediationo CSU system: 59 percent of entrants “not proficient in all subjects”o CSU-LA, 74 percent need maths, 76 percent English

Evidence weak, but about 25 percent of US students in entering cohort may not be fully prepared – as compared to 10-15 percent (?) in UK universities

16

Student Progression: The Persistence of Elite Practice in England?

• Elite model of student progression: continuous and full-time study at the institution and on the course of origin; to the exclusion of other activities; within pedagogical frame set by instructors.

• Since 1980’s, widespread adoption of semester, module, and credit in England. By 1995 HEQC estimates that “90 percent” of courses are modularized.

• Critics say that there has been a change in nomenclature, but no increase mobility,

choice, or flexibility for learners, and no move away from ecclesiastical model.

• Evidence (see below) supports critics.

17

Progression in US and UK remains, in spite of modularization and credits—”one institution, fixed and limited time”

UK: projected outcomes for fulltime first degree entrants; US actual outcomes bachelor degree graduates in BPS 96/01 cohort (col. 1-3) and NELS92/00 cohort (col. 4)

Interruptions From Fulltime and Continuous Study in Initial Institution and Course

26

23

34

39.7

5

23

5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

% transfer to another university % stopping out combination of FT and PTenrollment

change initial course/major

Perc

ent

USUK

18

Why fewer interruptions to continuous fulltime study in UK?Example: alternating part- and full-time study

• US: modularized, credit-based system; no full and part-time programmes, only students with varying credits loads, choosing rate of work that suits their needs. Student aid prorated according to credit load.

• England:– Institutions may not make part-time study available (at pre-1992

universities few degrees available through part-time study);– Institutions may restrict ability to change FT to PT due to annual cycle

for assessment of fee payment by local council;– Part-time students ineligible to participate in maintenance loan;– Institutions may be penalized for intermittent study or variation between

full- and part-time study. UEL finance and accounting course: “no confidence in their academic standards” and “failing in quality of learning opportunities.” In part because "over the past three years between 25 and 30 percent of students have withdrawn, with an average of around 40 percent not completing within three years."

19

Who are the US students who depart from the path of continuous and fulltime study?

Characteristics of US University Students: Exclusively Fulltime vs. Mixed/Part-time

20

11.2 11

22.424.4

8.6

23.5

34

27.8

34.636.4

10.5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Median Age Married Percent with Dependent Hours Worked PerWeek

Parent High SchoolDiploma or Less

Reported Disability

Characteristic

Perc

ent

Exclusively Fulltime Mixed or Part-time

20

Benefits of greater flexibility in progression?

Wider access for non-traditional students? (table one) Provision better adapted to adult needs (table two)

US UKPercent of fulltime bachelor degree

entrants age 21 and older

8.48 21.2

Characteristics of Bachelor Degree Students, 1999-2000Student Characteristic US UK

age 25 and older 27.4 18.2paid work during term 73 46reported disability 7.7 4.8has dependent(s) 18 not availablemarried 14.8 not available

At the cost of lowering completion rates. Flexibility results in a) high risk students; b) high risk behaviors (work, intermittent enrolment); c) diminished attachment to course and cohesion of cohort.

21

Do the benefits of increased flexibility outweigh its costs?

US -- Benefits Outweigh Costs?

US: “completion is best, but something is better than nothing” – evidence in econometric studiesWhy?

• After one century of culture of credit accumulation and modularization: study is divisible, not unitary

• High school diploma has very weak labour market returns

Focus is on false negatives, or providing opportunity to any willing student with any promise of success

UK – Costs Outweigh Benefits?

England: “nothing is better than something” – borne out by labour market analysisWhy?

• The “course" is unitary; the culture of credit and module has not been assimilated into universities and labor markets.

• A-level results

Focus is on false positives; “it is in nobody’s interest…to provide incentives for institutions to recruit students who are unlikely to complete“ (Howard Newby, HEFCE)

22

For the US, what might be the best opportunities for policy borrowing from England?

For the US states…

o HEFCE-style benchmarking of completion indicators o 40 states now have student unit record data systems, some are highly

developed. Those with SURs could, singly or collaboratively (through regional compacts) develop an agreed upon methodology of institutional benchmarking for completion.

o Completion-related institutional funding methodologies

o Alignment of secondary and higher education o Data (Kentucky—feedback reports)o curriculum and assessment (Washington—WASL as a criterion for university

admission)

o …While preserving wide entry and flexible progression.