Expanding the Start of the College Pipeline: Ninth-Grade Findings from an Experimental Study of the Impact of the Early College High School Model
Edmunds, Julie A.; Bernstein, Lawrence; Unlu, Fatih; Glennie, Elizabeth; Willse, John; Smith, Arthur; Arshavsky, Nina (2012). Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, v5 n2 p136-159 2012. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ961443
-
examining1,607Students, grade9
Grant Competition
Review Details
Reviewed: February 2018
- Grant Competition (findings for Early College High School)
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations because it is a randomized controlled trial with low attrition.
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
College Prepatory Math Course Completion |
Early College High School vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
77.00 |
70.00 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Algebra I course completion |
Early College High School vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
75.00 |
69.00 |
Yes |
|
|
|
English 1 course completion |
Early College High School vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
87.00 |
84.00 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Attendance |
Early College High School vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- |
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
- B
- A
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- I
- H
- J
- K
- L
- P
- M
- N
- O
- Q
- R
- S
- V
- U
- T
- W
- X
- Z
- Y
- a
- h
- i
- b
- d
- e
- f
- c
- g
- j
- k
- l
- m
- n
- o
- p
- q
- r
- s
- t
- u
- v
- x
- w
- y
North Carolina
-
Race Black 27% Other or unknown 13% White 60%
Study Details
Setting
The study took place in 12 high schools in North Carolina.
Study sample
The intervention condition included 952 students, of which 59% were White, 27.3% were Black, 9% were Hispanic, 41% were Male, 51% were on free or reduced-price lunch and 41% had no college-educated parent. The comparison condition included 737 students, 61.8% of whom were White, 26.1% were Black, 6.6% were Hispanic, 41,9% were Male, 49.8% were on free or reduced-price lunch and 40.5% had no college-educated parent.
Intervention Group
The intervention consisted of early college high schools, designed with an articulated program of study around college readiness principles. In contrast to traditional high schools, these schools are located on the campus of a higher education institution, are small (fewer than 400 students), have autonomous governance, and require students to complete 2 years of college credits while in high school.
Comparison Group
The comparison condition was assignment to the high school the student would have attended if not granted admission by lottery to the early college high school.
Dual Enrollment Programs Intervention Report - Transition to College
Review Details
Reviewed: February 2017
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Additional source not reviewed (View primary source).
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Please see the WWC summary of evidence for Dual Enrollment Programs.
Findings
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Study sample characteristics were not reported.Expanding the Start of the College Pipeline: Ninth-Grade Findings from an Experimental Study of the Impact of the Early College High School Model
Review Details
Reviewed: September 2016
- Single Study Review (729 KB) (findings for Early College High School)
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Additional source not reviewed (View primary source).
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Findings
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Study sample characteristics were not reported.Grant Competition
Review Details
Reviewed: November 2012
- Grant Competition (findings for Early College High Schools)
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Algebra I course completion |
Early College High Schools vs. Business as usual |
9th grade |
Full sample;
|
0.75 |
0.69 |
No |
-- | |
|
English 1 course completion |
Early College High Schools vs. Business as usual |
9th grade |
Full sample;
|
0.87 |
0.84 |
No |
-- | |
|
College Prepatory Math Course Completion |
Early College High Schools vs. Business as usual |
9th grade |
Full sample;
|
0.77 |
0.70 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Attendance |
Early College High Schools vs. Business as usual |
9th grade |
Full sample minus students without attendance data;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- |
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
Female: 59%
Male: 41% -
- B
- A
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- I
- H
- J
- K
- L
- P
- M
- N
- O
- Q
- R
- S
- V
- U
- T
- W
- X
- Z
- Y
- a
- h
- i
- b
- d
- e
- f
- c
- g
- j
- k
- l
- m
- n
- o
- p
- q
- r
- s
- t
- u
- v
- x
- w
- y
North Carolina
-
Race Asian 1% Black 27% Native American 1% Other or unknown 3% White 60% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 8% Not Hispanic or Latino 92%
An indicator of the effect of the intervention, the improvement index can be interpreted as the expected change in percentile rank for an average comparison group student if that student had received the intervention.
For more, please see the WWC Glossary entry for improvement index.
An outcome is the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are attained as a result of an activity. An outcome measures is an instrument, device, or method that provides data on the outcome.
A finding that is included in the effectiveness rating. Excluded findings may include subgroups and subscales.
The sample on which the analysis was conducted.
The group to which the intervention group is compared, which may include a different intervention, business as usual, or no services.
The timing of the post-intervention outcome measure.
The number of students included in the analysis.
The mean score of students in the intervention group.
The mean score of students in the comparison group.
The WWC considers a finding to be statistically significant if the likelihood that the finding is due to chance alone, rather than a real difference, is less than five percent.
The WWC reviews studies for WWC products, Department of Education grant competitions, and IES performance measures.
The name and version of the document used to guide the review of the study.
The version of the WWC design standards used to guide the review of the study.
The result of the WWC assessment of the study. The rating is based on the strength of evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention. Studies are given a rating of Meets WWC Design Standards without Reservations, Meets WWC Design Standards with Reservations, or >Does Not Meet WWC Design Standards.
A related publication that was reviewed alongside the main study of interest.
Study findings for this report.
Based on the direction, magnitude, and statistical significance of the findings within a domain, the WWC characterizes the findings from a study as one of the following: statistically significant positive effects, substantively important positive effects, indeterminate effects, substantively important negative effects, and statistically significant negative effects. For more, please see the WWC Handbook.
The WWC may review studies for multiple purposes, including different reports and re-reviews using updated standards. Each WWC review of this study is listed in the dropdown. Details on any review may be accessed by making a selection from the drop down list.
Tier 1 Strong indicates strong evidence of effectiveness,
Tier 2 Moderate indicates moderate evidence of effectiveness, and
Tier 3 Promising indicates promising evidence of effectiveness,
as defined in the
non-regulatory guidance for ESSA
and the regulations for ED discretionary grants (EDGAR Part 77).