Washington State's Integrated Basic Education and Skills Training (I-BEST) Program in Three Colleges: Implementation and Early Impact Report. Pathways for Advancing Careers and Education. OPRE Report No. 2018-87
Martinson, Karin; Cho, Sung-Woo; Gardiner, Karen; Glosser, Asaph (2018). Administration for Children & Families. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED608003
-
examining455Students, gradePS
Integrated Basic Education and Skills Training (I-BEST) Intervention Report - Postsecondary Career and Technical Education (CTE) Interventions
Review Details
Reviewed: August 2020
- 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.
Please see the WWC summary of evidence for Integrated Basic Education and Skills Training (I-BEST).
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Earned Credential - Any Source |
Integrated Basic Education and Skills Training (I-BEST) vs. Business as usual |
18 Months |
Full sample;
|
33.50 |
18.20 |
Yes |
|
|
|
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Received credentials from a college |
Integrated Basic Education and Skills Training (I-BEST) vs. Business as usual |
18 Months |
Full sample;
|
17.20 |
4.90 |
Yes |
|
||
|
Earned Credential - A Licensing/Certification Body |
Integrated Basic Education and Skills Training (I-BEST) vs. Business as usual |
18 Months |
Full sample;
|
32.00 |
16.70 |
Yes |
|
||
|
Earned Credential - Another education and training institution |
Integrated Basic Education and Skills Training (I-BEST) vs. Business as usual |
18 Months |
Full sample;
|
0.90 |
4.20 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Working in a job paying $12/hour or more |
Integrated Basic Education and Skills Training (I-BEST) vs. Business as usual |
18 Months |
Full sample;
|
23.00 |
23.80 |
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: 58%
Male: 43% -
- 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
Washington
-
Race White 55% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 26% Not Hispanic or Latino 74%
Study Details
Setting
The study took place at three public community colleges in Washington state: Bellingham Technical College, Everett Community College, and Whatcom Community College.
Study sample
Thirty-one percent of students had less than a high school diploma or equivalent, and 58 percent of students were female. Approximately 10 percent reported having attended one or more years of college. Study participants also had low income and were older than traditional college students: almost two-thirds of students (63 percent) were age 25 or older. Slightly more than half (55 percent) were non-Hispanic White, and about one quarter (26 percent) identified as Latino or Hispanic. Two-thirds (67 percent) of study participants were not working at the time of random assignment, with only 13 percent working 35 hours or more.
Intervention Group
The I-BEST program includes courses that are part of a structured pathway. Integrated team-teaching of basic skills and occupational skills was done in most courses on the pathway. Team teaching took several forms. In some courses, the basic skills instructor sat in class with students and stopped the occupational instructor to ask clarifying questions or to explain a concept further. In other courses, the basic skills instructor would either deliver a designated portion of the instruction, or would jointly deliver instruction with the occupational instructor. I-BEST students had access to dedicated advisors, called navigators, who provided guidance on academic issues, helped students navigate the college’s procedures, and helped with career planning. I-BEST also provided “fill the gap” funds for books, tools, other course materials, or transportation. This funding ensured that all members of the intervention group would pay no tuition.
Comparison Group
Comparison group members could not access I-BEST programs and courses at the three colleges; however, they could access other education and training opportunities available to them, including non-I-BEST courses and I-BEST programs at other colleges. Both intervention and comparison group members could access general college advising, tutoring, and financial aid services that were available to all students at the colleges. Both intervention and comparison group members could potentially access financial support through Pell grants, Washington State’s Opportunity Grants, Washington’s Basic Food Employment and Training (BFET) program, veteran’s benefits, and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), depending on eligibility. Both intervention and comparison group members could access their college’s employment and job placement services designed to help program completers find jobs. Whether they enrolled in college classes or not, they also could access other employment assistance in the community, such as the job search and job readiness services at local American Job Centers.
Support for implementation
I-BEST was designed by the Washington State Board for Community and Technical Colleges (SBCTC) and operates at all 34 public community and technical colleges in the state. The three colleges included in this study received additional funding for program enhancements from the Open Society Foundations.
Practice Guide
Review Details
Reviewed: October 2019
- Practice Guide (findings for Integrated Basic Education and Skills Training (I-BEST))
- 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Academic and Workforce Credits Earned |
Integrated Basic Education and Skills Training (I-BEST) vs. Business as usual |
24 Months |
Full sample;
|
24.30 |
11.20 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Certificate or Degree Completion |
Integrated Basic Education and Skills Training (I-BEST) vs. Business as usual |
24 Months |
Full sample;
|
44.20 |
12.00 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Associate Degree or Higher |
Integrated Basic Education and Skills Training (I-BEST) vs. Business as usual |
24 Months |
Full sample;
|
0.30 |
0.30 |
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
Washington
-
Race White 55% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 26% Not Hispanic or Latino 74%
Study Details
Setting
The study took place at three public community colleges in Washington state.
Study sample
Sample members had low levels of education, with 31 percent reporting less than a high school diploma or equivalent. Less than 10 percent reported having attended one or more years of college. They also had low income and were older than traditional college students. Over 70 percent were over age 25. Slightly more than half (55 percent) were non-Hispanic white, and about one quarter (26 percent) identified as Latino or Hispanic. Two-thirds (67 percent) were not working at the time of random assignment, with only 13 percent working 35 hours or more.
Intervention Group
The I-BEST program includes courses that are part of a structured pathway, team-teaching between basic skills instructors and occupational instructors, and reimbursement to the college for 1.75 FTE per student. This intervention also included dedicated advisors (“navigators”) to provide students with guidance on academic issues, navigating the college’s procedures, and career planning; and funds for books, tools, other course materials, or transportation to 'fill the gap'.
Comparison Group
Comparison group members could not access I-BEST programs and courses at the three colleges; however, they could access other education and training opportunities available to them, including non-I-BEST courses and I-BEST programs at other colleges. Both treatment and comparison group members could access general college advising, tutoring, and financial aid services that were available to all students at the colleges. Both treatment and comparison group members could potentially access financial support through Pell grants, Washington State’s Opportunity Grants, its Basic Food Employment and Training (BFET) program, veteran’s benefits, and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), depending on eligibility. Both treatment and comparison group members could access their college’s employment and job placement services designed to help program completers find jobs. Whether they enrolled in college classes or not, they also could access other employment assistance in the community, such as the job search and job readiness services at local American Job Centers.
Support for implementation
I-BEST was designed by the Washington State Board for Community and Technical Colleges (SBCTC) and operates at all 34 public community and technical colleges in the state. The three colleges included in this study received additional funding for program enhancements from the Open Society Foundations.
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).