WWC review of this study

New evidence on integrated career pathways: Final impact report for Accelerating Opportunity.

Anderson, T., Kuehn, D., Eyster, L., Barnow, B., & Lerman, R. I. (2017). Washington, DC: Urban Institute. Retrieved from https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/91436/ao_final_impacts.pdf .

  • Quasi-Experimental Design
     examining 
    42,894
     Students
    , grade
    PS

Reviewed: August 2020

At least one finding shows moderate evidence of effectiveness
At least one statistically significant positive finding
Meets WWC standards with reservations
Earnings (long-run) outcomes—Statistically significant positive effects found
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Earnings

Adult Education vs. Business as usual

12 Months

Illinois;
4,996 students

2030.00

1815.00

Yes

--
More Outcomes

Earnings

Adult Education vs. Business as usual

9 Months

Louisiana;
3,455 students

2077.00

1884.00

Yes

--
Show Supplemental Findings

Earnings

Adult Education vs. Business as usual

6 Months

Illinois;
4,996 students

1192.00

1376.00

Yes

--

Earnings

Adult Education vs. Business as usual

9 Months

Illinois;
4,996 students

1619.00

1682.00

No

--

Earnings

Adult Education vs. Business as usual

6 Months

Louisiana;
3,455 students

1887.00

1721.00

Yes

--
Earnings (short-run) outcomes—Indeterminate effects found
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Earnings

Adult Education vs. Business as usual

3 Months

Illinois;
4,996 students

1157.00

1303.00

Yes

--
More Outcomes

Earnings

Adult Education vs. Business as usual

3 Months

Louisiana;
3,455 students

1737.00

1532.00

Yes

--
Employment (long-run) outcomes—Statistically significant positive effects found
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Employment

Adult Education vs. Business as usual

9 Months

Louisiana;
3,455 students

57.90

53.50

Yes

 
 
4
 
More Outcomes

Employment

Adult Education vs. Business as usual

12 Months

Illinois;
4,996 students

55.70

52.40

Yes

 
 
3
 
Show Supplemental Findings

Employment

Adult Education vs. Business as usual

6 Months

Louisiana;
3,455 students

58.10

51.90

Yes

 
 
6

Employment

Adult Education vs. Business as usual

9 Months

Illinois;
4,996 students

49.50

50.60

No

--

Employment

Adult Education vs. Business as usual

6 Months

Illinois;
4,996 students

44.60

46.70

No

--
Employment (short-run) outcomes—Indeterminate effects found
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Employment

Adult Education vs. Business as usual

3 Months

Louisiana;
3,455 students

54.90

48.60

Yes

 
 
6
More Outcomes

Employment

Adult Education vs. Business as usual

3 Months

Illinois;
4,996 students

41.20

44.10

Yes

-3
 
 


Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.

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
    • x
    • w
    • y

    Illinois, Louisiana
  • Race
    Black
    45%
    Other or unknown
    20%
    White
    35%
  • Ethnicity
    Hispanic    
    13%
    Not Hispanic or Latino    
    87%

Setting

The study took place in four states; however, the findings that meet WWC standards involved only two states. Within these two states, the study took place in 25 community colleges or technical schools.

Study sample

The initial sample from the analyses of the two states that met standards, which were Illinois and Louisiana, consisted of 8,451 learners. These learners either participated in the AO program or were enrolled in one of three recruitment sources in participating states: adult education, career and technical education, or developmental education. The weighted analytic sample is 59 percent female, 35 percent White, 45 percent Black, and 13 percent Hispanic. Twenty-one percent of the learners (weighted percentage) received a Pell grant.

Intervention Group

Learners in the treatment group participated in an integrated education and training (IET) co-teaching model based on the Integrated Basic Education and Skills Trainig (I-BEST) program called Accelerating Opportunity (AO). AO provided funding to community and technical colleges to develop accessible career pathways in high-demand occupations. Career pathways are sequenced programs that allow learners to obtain one credential that can lead to others meaningful to the field. The AO pathway sequence typically includes 12 credits and is designed to be completed in one year or less. The model includes instruction that integrates basic skills with career and technical education, and it provides wraparound and career navigation services.

Comparison Group

The learners in the comparison group continued their existing instructional practices, which could include being enrolled in developmental education or career and technical education programs. The study did not include additional details on the comparison condition.

Support for implementation

The study does not provide specific information about support for implementation.

In the case of multiple manuscripts that report on one study, the WWC selects one manuscript as the primary citation and lists other manuscripts that describe the study as additional sources.

  • Anderson, T., Kuehn, D., Eyster, L., Barnow, B., & Lerman, R. I. (2017). New evidence on integrated career pathways: Final impact report for Accelerating Opportunity. Washington, DC: Urban Institute. Retrieved from https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/91436/ao_final_impacts.pdf.

  • Anderson, Theresa, Eyster, Lauren, Lerman, Robert I., O'Brien, Carolyn, Conway, Maureen, Jain, Ranita, Montes, Marcela. (2015). The Second Year of Accelerating Opportunity: Implementation Findings from the States and Colleges. Urban Institute.

  • Anderson, T., Kuehn, D., Eyster, L., Barnow, B., & Lerman, R. I. (2017). New evidence on integrated career pathways: Final impact report for Accelerating Opportunity. Washington, DC: Urban Institute. Retrieved from https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/91436/ao_final_impacts.pdf.

  • Anderson, T., Kuehn, D., Eyster, L., Barnow, B., & Lerman, R. I. (2017). New evidence on integrated career pathways: Final impact report for Accelerating Opportunity. Washington, DC: Urban Institute. Retrieved from https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/91436/ao_final_impacts.pdf.

Reviewed: August 2020

At least one finding shows moderate evidence of effectiveness
At least one statistically significant positive finding
Meets WWC standards with reservations
Credit accumulation outcomes—Indeterminate effects found
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Earned more than 12 credits

Integrated Basic Education Skills and Training (I-BEST) vs. Business as usual

2 Semesters

Aggregated sample;
42,894 students

45.67

46.88

No

--
More Outcomes
Show Supplemental Findings

Earned more than 12 credits

Integrated Basic Education Skills and Training (I-BEST) vs. Business as usual

2 Semesters

Kentucky;
20,150 students

54.70

39.30

Yes

 
 
15

Earned more than 12 credits

Integrated Basic Education Skills and Training (I-BEST) vs. Business as usual

2 Semesters

Illinois;
4,996 students

36.90

28.70

Yes

 
 
9

Earned more than 12 credits

Integrated Basic Education Skills and Training (I-BEST) vs. Business as usual

2 Semesters

Kansas;
14,293 students

53.60

65.60

Yes

-12
 
 

Total number of credits earned

Integrated Basic Education Skills and Training (I-BEST) vs. Business as usual

2 Semesters

Illinois;
4,996 students

10.30

11.20

Yes

--

Total number of credits earned

Integrated Basic Education Skills and Training (I-BEST) vs. Business as usual

2 Semesters

Kansas;
14,293 students

22.20

26.00

Yes

--

Total number of credits earned

Integrated Basic Education Skills and Training (I-BEST) vs. Business as usual

2 Semesters

Kentucky;
20,150 students

18.80

14.40

Yes

--
Industry-recognized credential, certificate, or license completion outcomes—Statistically significant positive effects found
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Received credentials from a college

Integrated Basic Education Skills and Training (I-BEST) vs. Business as usual

2 Semesters

Aggregated sample;
42,894 students

52.57

32.99

Yes

 
 
19
 
More Outcomes
Show Supplemental Findings

Received credentials from a college

Integrated Basic Education Skills and Training (I-BEST) vs. Business as usual

2 Semesters

Kentucky;
20,150 students

33.60

14.30

Yes

 
 
25

Received credentials from a college

Integrated Basic Education Skills and Training (I-BEST) vs. Business as usual

2 Semesters

Kansas;
14,293 students

81.40

68.60

Yes

 
 
16

Received credentials from a college

Integrated Basic Education Skills and Training (I-BEST) vs. Business as usual

2 Semesters

Illinois;
4,996 students

42.20

31.20

Yes

 
 
11

Number of credentials earned through college

Integrated Basic Education Skills and Training (I-BEST) vs. Business as usual

2 Semesters

Illinois;
4,996 students

0.40

0.30

Yes

--

Number of credentials earned through college

Integrated Basic Education Skills and Training (I-BEST) vs. Business as usual

2 Semesters

Kansas;
14,293 students

2.10

1.50

Yes

--

Number of credentials earned through college

Integrated Basic Education Skills and Training (I-BEST) vs. Business as usual

2 Semesters

Kentucky;
20,150 students

1.70

0.90

Yes

--


Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.

Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.


  • Female: 56%
    Male: 44%
    • 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
    • x
    • w
    • y

    Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana
  • Race
    Black
    19%
    Other or unknown
    19%
    White
    62%
  • Ethnicity
    Hispanic    
    11%
    Not Hispanic or Latino    
    89%

Setting

The intervention was delivered in community college and adult education settings in four states: Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, and Louisiana.

Study sample

The analytic sample is 56 percent female, 62 percent White, 19 percent Black, and 11 percent Hispanic. Thirty-six percent of the analytic sample was eligible to receive a Pell grant.

Intervention Group

Accelerating Opportunity is based on the I-BEST model and is designed to help low-skilled students earn occupational credentials, obtain employment, and sustain careers. Community and technical colleges that were in the intervention condition developed or modified existing programs that offered career pathways for in-demand jobs. A major component of Accelerating Opportunity was integrated instruction, where both basic skills and CTE instructors taught the same class with at least 25 percent overlap. Students also received additional services, including tutoring, academic advising, college navigation, job search assistance, job placement, and case management. Accelerating Opportunity programs partnered with Workforce Investment Boards (WIBs) to connect students to employment.

Comparison Group

The comparison condition entailed standard, business-as-usual instruction and support. The comparison group students were drawn from the same recruitment sources—including adult education, developmental education, or CTE—as the intervention group, but they did not have the opportunity to participate in Accelerating Opportunity.

Support for implementation

No additional implementation details were reported.

In the case of multiple manuscripts that report on one study, the WWC selects one manuscript as the primary citation and lists other manuscripts that describe the study as additional sources.

  • Anderson, T., Kuehn, D., Eyster, L., Barnow, B., & Lerman, R. I. (2017). New evidence on integrated career pathways: Final impact report for Accelerating Opportunity. Washington, DC: Urban Institute. Retrieved from https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/91436/ao_final_impacts.pdf.

  • Anderson, T., Kuehn, D., Eyster, L., Barnow, B., & Lerman, R. (2017). New evidence on integrated career pathways: Final impact report for Accelerating Opportunity. Urban Institute.

  • Anderson, T., Kuehn, D., Eyster, L., Barnow, B., & Lerman, R. (2017). New evidence on integrated career pathways: Final impact report for Accelerating Opportunity. Urban Institute.

  • Kuehn, D., Anderson, T., Lerman, R., Eyster, L., Barnow, B., & Briggs, A. (2017). A cost-benefit analysis of Accelerating Opportunity. Washington, DC: Urban Institute. Retrieved from https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/94876/ao-cba-report.pdf.

  • Spaulding, Shayne,Martin-Caughey, Ananda. (2015). Accelerating Opportunity: A portrait of students and their program experiences from the 2014 student survey. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.

  • Anderson, Theresa, Eyster, Lauren, Lerman, Robert I., O'Brien, Carolyn, Conway, Maureen, Jain, Ranita, Montes, Marcela. (2015). The Second Year of Accelerating Opportunity: Implementation Findings from the States and Colleges. Urban Institute.

  • Anderson, T., Kuehn, D., Eyster, L., Barnow, B., & Lerman, R. I. (2017). New evidence on integrated career pathways: Final impact report for Accelerating Opportunity. Washington, DC: Urban Institute. Retrieved from https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/91436/ao_final_impacts.pdf.

Reviewed: April 2020

At least one finding shows moderate evidence of effectiveness
At least one statistically significant positive finding
Meets WWC standards with reservations
Credit accumulation outcomes—Indeterminate effects found
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Earned more than 12 credits

Accelerating Opportunity vs. Business as usual

2 Semesters

Aggregated sample;
42,894 students

45.67

46.88

No

--
More Outcomes
Show Supplemental Findings

Earned more than 12 credits

Accelerating Opportunity vs. Business as usual

2 Semesters

Kentucky;
20,150 students

57.84

39.30

Yes

 
 
15

Earned more than 12 credits

Accelerating Opportunity vs. Business as usual

2 Semesters

Illinois;
4,996 students

39.01

28.70

Yes

 
 
9

Earned more than 12 credits

Accelerating Opportunity vs. Business as usual

2 Semesters

Kansas;
14,293 students

50.94

65.60

Yes

-12
 
 

Total number of credits earned

Accelerating Opportunity vs. Business as usual

2 Semesters

Illinois;
4,996 students

10.70

11.20

Yes

--

Total number of credits earned

Accelerating Opportunity vs. Business as usual

2 Semesters

Kansas;
14,293 students

22.20

26.00

Yes

--

Total number of credits earned

Accelerating Opportunity vs. Business as usual

2 Semesters

Kentucky;
20,150 students

18.80

14.40

Yes

--
Industry-recognized credential, certificate, or license completion outcomes—Substantively important positive effects found
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Received credentials from a college

Accelerating Opportunity vs. Business as usual

2 Semesters

Aggregated sample;
42,894 students

52.57

32.99

No

--
More Outcomes
Show Supplemental Findings

Received credentials from a college

Accelerating Opportunity vs. Business as usual

2 Semesters

Kentucky;
20,150 students

38.46

14.30

Yes

 
 
25

Received credentials from a college

Accelerating Opportunity vs. Business as usual

2 Semesters

Kansas;
14,293 students

87.64

68.60

Yes

 
 
16

Received credentials from a college

Accelerating Opportunity vs. Business as usual

2 Semesters

Illinois;
4,996 students

42.77

31.20

Yes

 
 
10

Number of credentials earned through college

Accelerating Opportunity vs. Business as usual

2 Semesters

Illinois;
4,996 students

0.40

0.30

Yes

--

Number of credentials earned through college

Accelerating Opportunity vs. Business as usual

2 Semesters

Kansas;
14,293 students

2.10

1.50

Yes

--

Number of credentials earned through college

Accelerating Opportunity vs. Business as usual

2 Semesters

Kentucky;
20,150 students

1.70

0.90

Yes

--
Short-Term Earnings outcomes—Statistically significant negative effects found
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Average quarterly earnings

Accelerating Opportunity vs. Business as usual

1 Year

Illinois;
4,996 students

2030.00

1815.00

Yes

--
More Outcomes

Average quarterly earnings

Accelerating Opportunity vs. Business as usual

9 Months

Louisiana;
3,455 students

2077.00

1884.00

Yes

--
Short-Term Employment outcomes—Statistically significant positive effects found
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Percent Employed

Accelerating Opportunity vs. Business as usual

9 Months

Louisiana;
3,455 students

57.90

53.50

Yes

 
 
4
 
More Outcomes

Percent Employed

Accelerating Opportunity vs. Business as usual

1 Year

Illinois;
4,996 students

55.70

52.40

Yes

 
 
3
 


Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.

Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.


  • Female: 56%
    Male: 44%
    • 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
    • x
    • w
    • y

    Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana
  • Race
    Black
    19%
    Other or unknown
    19%
    White
    62%
  • Ethnicity
    Hispanic    
    11%
    Not Hispanic or Latino    
    89%

Setting

The intervention was delivered in community college and adult education settings in four states: Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, and Louisiana.

Study sample

The analytic sample is 56 percent female, 62 percent White, 19 percent Black, and 11 percent Hispanic. Thirty-six percent of the analytic sample is eligible to receive a Pell grant.

Intervention Group

Accelerating Opportunity (AO) is based on the I-BEST model. Community and technical colleges that were in the AO intervention condition developed or modified existing programs that offered career pathways for in-demand jobs. A major component of AO was integrated instruction, where both basic skills and CTE instructors taught the same class with at least 25 percent overlap. Students also received additional services, including advising, navigational, and financial supports, to help them progress through the program.

Comparison Group

The comparison condition was Business as Usual. The comparison group students were drawn from the same recruitment sources (adult education, developmental education, or CTE) as the intervention group, but they did not have the opportunity to participate in AO.

Support for implementation

None specified.

Reviewed: March 2020



Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.

Study sample characteristics were not reported.
 

Your export should download shortly as a zip archive.

This download will include data files for study and findings review data and a data dictionary.

Connect With the WWC

loading
back to top