Can re-enrollment campaigns help dropouts return to college? Evidence from Florida community colleges
Ortagus, J. C., Tanner, M. J., & McFarlin Jr., I. (2020). National Bureau of Economic Research.
-
examining27,028Students, gradePS
Single Study Review
Review Details
Reviewed: May 2020
- Single Study Review (findings for Re-enrollment campaigns)
- 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 re-enrollment |
Re-enrollment campaigns vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Information + One-Course Waiver Group;
|
8.60 |
7.10 |
Yes |
|
|
|
|
College re-enrollment |
Re-enrollment campaigns vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample - Information Only - All Institutions;
|
7.60 |
7.10 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
College Re-enrollment: Full-Time |
Re-enrollment campaigns vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Information + One-Course Waiver Group;
|
2.80 |
2.30 |
-- |
-- | ||
|
College Re-enrollment: Part-Time |
Re-enrollment campaigns vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Information + One-Course Waiver Group;
|
6.40 |
5.50 |
-- |
-- | ||
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.
-
13% English language learners -
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
Florida
-
Race Black 24% Other or unknown 76%
Study Details
Setting
The authors of the study point out that students can experience financial and other social benefits after completing a degree, yet many students drop out of college even after making substantial progress toward completing school. College re-enrollment campaigns encourage students to re-enroll in and complete their degree. This study examined the effects of a text message-based campaign to nudge former students to re-enroll in community colleges. The study was conducted during the 2018-19 academic year with five community colleges in Florida. These colleges each enrolled about 64,000 students.
Study sample
Former students were eligible for the study if they: (1) accrued 30 credit hours; (2) established a grade point average (GPA) of 2.0 or better; (3) had no behavioral or financial holds preventing their re-enrollment; and (4) were previously enrolled in a degree-seeking program, but “stopped out” in the past three years. The study sample included 27,028 former students who were randomly assigned to (1) receive text-based nudges to re-enroll (Information-Only Group); (2) receive text-based nudges plus tuition waiver for one course (Information + One Course Waiver); or (3) a comparison group. The sample that informed the Information + One Course versus comparison sample had 18,019 students. Approximately 42 percent of the sample was male; the average age was just over 31 years. About 24 percent of individuals in the control group were Black, 16 percent were Hispanic, 29 percent identified as multi-racial, and close to 13 percent reported having limited English skills. Participants’ average GPA was 2.8, and the average number of credits they accumulated was 45. Approximately 12 percent of study participants were previously enrolled full-time and 20 percent of the sample transferred to a community college from a different post-secondary institution. Finally, about 49 percent of individuals in the study received need-based aid. There were no statistically significant differences across the three groups at the beginning of the study, except the Information-Only Group had a slightly higher GPA (0.015 points) than the comparison group. This difference was accounted for in the statistical analysis.
Intervention Group
Former college students in Information-Only Group received 10 text messages meant to nudge them toward re-enrolling in college. Former students who replied to any of the texts received an automated reply directing them to their custom website to streamline the re-enrollment process, apply for financial aid, or contact an assigned advisor for assistance. Former students in the Information + One Course Waiver group received these same texts, but were also offered a one-course tuition waiver. This waiver offered the equivalent of 3 credit hours of in-state tuition at the college. Depending on the college, this waiver could be conditional in that it would be offered only if other financial aid did not cover course tuition, or unconditional, meaning that the credit was refundable even if all other tuition was covered by aid. Three colleges made the waiver conditional and two college made the waiver unconditional.
Comparison Group
Students in the comparison group received no text messages or course waivers, but they had access to the same opportunities for advising and financial aid assistance offered by the college as students in the intervention group.
Support for implementation
The study authors worked with a third-party vendor to ensure that all study participants had an active cell phone number. The study authors also used data from the National Student Clearinghouse to ensure that study participants had not already enrolled in or graduated from another college or university.
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).