Coaching to completion: Impacts of success coaching on community college student attainment in North Carolina
Valentine, J. L., & Price, D. V. (2020). Association for the Study of Higher Education Conference., https://www.dvp-praxis.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Impact-of-Success-Coaching-Working-Paper-Valentine-Price_June-2021.pdf.
-
examining10,769Students, gradePS
Single Study Review
Review Details
Reviewed: February 2023
- Single Study Review (findings for Success Coaching)
- 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Any credential (associate’s or certificate) |
Success Coaching vs. Business as usual |
6 Semesters |
Full sample;
|
29.20 |
28.50 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Fall-to-spring retention |
Success Coaching vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
67.00 |
66.90 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Fall-to-spring retention |
Success Coaching vs. Business as usual |
2 Semesters |
Full sample;
|
44.20 |
42.50 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Fall-to-Fall Retention |
Success Coaching vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Full sample;
|
50.00 |
48.80 |
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: 65%
Male: 35% -
Rural
-
- 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 2% Black 19% Native American 3% Other or unknown 8% White 69% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 8% Other or unknown 92% -
Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch Other or unknown 100%
Study Details
Setting
The study was conducted in 10 community colleges located in North Carolina.
Study sample
Of the total sample, the majority was female (65%) and White (69%). Remaining races were 19 percent Black, 3 percent American Indian or Alaska Native, and 2 percent Asian. A total of eight percent identified their ethnicity as Hispanic. Over half (55%) were Pell grant recipients.
Intervention Group
Students in the intervention condition were assigned to a success coach. The coach was an employee of the college who was responsible for reaching out and establishing relationships with the students in their caseload, monitoring student grades and attendance using case management software, connecting students to other college and community resources, and following up with students. As in the comparison condition, students in the intervention condition received automated alerts pertaining to their attendance and grades. What differentiated the intervention and comparison conditions was that the success coaches received the alerts for the intervention students.
Comparison Group
Students in the comparison condition received business-as-usual advising services, which included receiving automated alerts related to attendance and academic performance and standard procedures for responding to early-warning alerts initiated by college faculty.
Support for implementation
Coaches participated in a 2-day training to learn how to use the case management software to monitor student academic performance and attendance. Coaches also received training throughout the course of the study related to outreach and communication skills, working with select groups of students, cultural competence, and facilitation skills.
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).