Edmunds, Julie A.; Unlu, Fatih; Glennie, Elizabeth; Bernstein, Lawrence; Fesler, Lily; Furey, Jane (2017). Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness v10 n2 p297-325. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED575019
Reviewed: August 2017
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.
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Postsecondary enrollment - two-year institution |
Early College High School vs. Business as usual |
6 Years |
Full sample;
|
0.99 |
0.57 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Postsecondary enrollment |
Early College High School vs. Business as usual |
6 Years |
Full sample;
|
0.99 |
0.74 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Postsecondary enrollment - four-year institution |
Early College High School vs. Business as usual |
6 Years |
Full sample;
|
0.40 |
0.32 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Associates degree attainment |
Early College High School vs. Business as usual |
6 Years |
Full sample;
|
0.28 |
0.03 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Postsecondary degree attainment |
Early College High School vs. Business as usual |
6 Years |
Full sample;
|
0.56 |
0.04 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Technical credential attainment |
Early College High School vs. Business as usual |
6 Years |
Full sample;
|
0.02 |
0.01 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Bachelor's degree attainment |
Early College High School vs. Business as usual |
6 Years |
Full sample;
|
0.01 |
0.00 |
Yes |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Five-year high school graduation rate (%) |
Early College High School vs. Business as usual |
5 Years |
Full sample;
|
0.88 |
0.81 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
College credits earned in high school |
Early College High School vs. Business as usual |
4 Years |
Full sample;
|
21.60 |
2.80 |
Yes |
|
|
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
| Black | 27% | |
| White | 60% |
| Hispanic | 8% |
Students participating in the study applied to attend one of 12 early college high schools in North Carolina. Students who were not admitted to the early college high school attended their traditional district high school or another high school. All participating early college high schools had more applicants than space available.
The study sample was 26.7% black, 8.3% Hispanic, and 60.2% white. The sample was 41% male, 40.8% first-generation college students, and 50.7% free/reduced price lunch eligible. 80 percent of the sample passed the 8th grade math exam and 79.5% passed the 8th grade reading exam. The sample included 2.9% disabled or impaired students, 14.8% gifted students, and 4.1% students who had ever been retained.
The study examines the effectiveness of the early college high school model, which is a school reform model of concurrent enrollment in high school and college. The study took place in North Carolina. The early college high schools that participated in the study were primarily located on a two- or four-year college campus. Early college high school students are expected to take a college preparatory course of study and graduate with two years of transferable college credit or an associate's degree. Early college high schools coordinate with their college partners to offer courses that allow students to earn a high school degree and college credit, including dual-credit courses. Most early college high schools allow students five years to complete a degree. North Carolina early college high schools are expected to adhere to six design principles: ensuring that students are ready for college, instilling powerful teaching and learning, providing high student/staff personalization, redefining professionalism, leadership, and implementing a purposeful design.
Students in the comparison condition generally enrolled in the traditional high school in their district. Two percent of students enrolled in early college high schools.
The study does not describe any support for implementation. Schools were expected to implement a specific set of principles developed by North Carolina New Schools, a public-private partnership that managed the early college high schools in North Carolina.
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).
Resources
Newsflash
Contact Us
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube