Visher, Mary G.; Weiss, Michael J.; Weissman, Evan; Rudd, Timothy; Wathington, Heather D. (2012). National Center for Postsecondary Research. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED533825
Reviewed: July 2021
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 |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Passed college-level math |
Linked Learning Communities vs. Business as usual |
2 Semesters |
Queensborough Community College;
|
10.00 |
10.40 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Passed college-level composition |
Linked Learning Communities vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Baltimore Community College;
|
26.80 |
29.60 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Passed college-level math |
Linked Learning Communities vs. Business as usual |
2 Semesters |
Females - Queensborough;
|
11.70 |
8.50 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Passed college-level math |
Linked Learning Communities vs. Business as usual |
2 Semesters |
Males - Queensborough;
|
7.90 |
13.00 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Enrollment |
Linked Learning Communities vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Queensborough Community College;
|
71.90 |
69.10 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Full-time registration |
Linked Learning Communities vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Queensborough Community College;
|
53.00 |
50.10 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Number of regular credits earned |
Linked Learning Communities vs. Business as usual |
2 Semesters |
Queensborough Community College;
|
12.40 |
11.80 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Full-time registration |
Linked Learning Communities vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Houston Community College;
|
26.30 |
25.00 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Number of regular credits earned |
Linked Learning Communities vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Houston Community College;
|
4.70 |
4.70 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Enrollment |
Linked Learning Communities vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Baltimore Community College;
|
64.20 |
64.60 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Enrollment |
Linked Learning Communities vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Houston Community College;
|
61.00 |
60.90 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Number of semesters registered |
Linked Learning Communities vs. Business as usual |
2 Semesters |
Queensborough Community College;
|
2.40 |
2.30 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Number of semesters registered |
Linked Learning Communities vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Houston Community College;
|
1.50 |
1.50 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Number of semesters registered |
Linked Learning Communities vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Baltimore Community College;
|
1.50 |
1.50 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Number of regular credits earned |
Linked Learning Communities vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Baltimore Community College;
|
5.90 |
6.00 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Full-time registration |
Linked Learning Communities vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Baltimore Community College;
|
39.10 |
43.60 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Number of regular credits earned |
Linked Learning Communities vs. Business as usual |
2 Semesters |
Females - Queensborough;
|
13.20 |
11.80 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Number of semesters registered |
Linked Learning Communities vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Females - Houston;
|
1.60 |
1.50 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Number of semesters registered |
Linked Learning Communities vs. Business as usual |
2 Semesters |
Females - Queensborough;
|
2.40 |
2.30 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Number of regular credits earned |
Linked Learning Communities vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Females - Houston;
|
5.20 |
5.00 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Number of semesters registered |
Linked Learning Communities vs. Business as usual |
2 Semesters |
Males - Queensborough;
|
2.40 |
2.40 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Number of regular credits earned |
Linked Learning Communities vs. Business as usual |
2 Semesters |
Males - Queensborough;
|
11.40 |
11.70 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Number of regular credits earned |
Linked Learning Communities vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Males - Houston;
|
3.50 |
4.30 |
Yes |
|
||
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
| Asian | 5% | |
| Black | 40% | |
| Other or unknown | 40% | |
| White | 15% |
| Hispanic | 32% | |
| Not Hispanic or Latino | 68% |
The study includes students from New York, Texas, and Maryland. Students in New York were from Queensborough Community College in Brooklyn and Queens; students in Texts were from Houston Community College; and students in Maryland were from the Community College of Baltimore County (CCBC).
The majority of study participants across colleges were females, with percentages ranging from 55.9% to 66.7% in each college. Most students were traditional age. At the three colleges, the study samples were racially diverse, and Queensborough had no racial majority. Most of the study participants were Latino at Houston (54.9% respectively), and most of the study participants at CCBC were Black (54.9%). The percentage of White students ranged between 3.1% at Houston to 31.5% at CCBC. Most study participants did not have children of their own; however, 28% of the Houston sample had children. Most students across the three colleges had high school diplomas.
Linked learning communities are programs that provide social and curricular linkages, based on academic themes and content. Colleges generally provide a shared curriculum, organized around a common theme and structures to build a community of learners within an entering cohort of students. The colleges varied in the types of programs provided and themes that were emphasized. The four components of the intervention are: linked courses with student cohorts, faculty collaboration, thematic instructional practices, and integrated student support services.
Students in the comparison group received standard services from the college.
Support for implementation varied by colleges, and generally included some form of professional development or training for faculty.
Reviewed: October 2016
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 |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
College enrollment |
Linked Learning Communities vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Full sample;
|
0.84 |
0.83 |
Yes |
-- |
|
|
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
College enrollment |
Linked Learning Communities vs. Business as usual |
2 Semesters |
Full sample;
|
0.64 |
0.63 |
No |
-- | ||
|
College enrollment |
Linked Learning Communities vs. Business as usual |
3 Semesters |
Full sample;
|
0.50 |
0.50 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
College-level credits earned |
Linked Learning Communities vs. Business as usual |
3 Semesters |
Full sample;
|
9.90 |
9.80 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
College-level credits earned |
Linked Learning Communities vs. Business as usual |
1 Semester |
Full sample;
|
6.87 |
6.72 |
No |
-- | ||
|
College-level credits earned |
Linked Learning Communities vs. Business as usual |
2 Semesters |
Full sample;
|
3.35 |
3.29 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Completed targeted developmental course sequence by the third semester |
Linked Learning Communities vs. Business as usual |
3 Semesters |
Full sample;
|
0.38 |
0.35 |
Yes |
-- |
|
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
The pooled student sample includes students from six U.S. locations (California, Florida, New York, Texas, and Maryland). The Community College of Baltimore County is in Baltimore, MD. Hillsborough Community College is in Tampa, FL. Houston Community College is in Houston, TX. Kingsborough Community College and Queensborough Community College are in Brooklyn and Queens, New York, respectively. Merced College is in Merced, California. Across these sites, students participated in one of 174 learning communities.
The majority of study participants across colleges were females (with percentages ranging from 51.3% to 66.7%), and primarily traditionally aged students. At the six colleges, the study samples were racially diverse, and at three of them (Hillsborough, Kingsborough, and Queensborough), had no racial majority. Most of the study participants were Latino at Merced and Houston (54.8% and 54.9% respectively), and most of the study participants at CCBC were African-American (54.9%). Most study participants did not have children of their own, however 28% of the Houston sample had children, and 26% of the Merced sample had children. Most students across six colleges had high school diplomas, however at Kingsborough, 31% had GEDs. Up to 40% of students were the first in their families to attend colleges, and the proportion of first-generation students varied across colleges. The percentage of white students ranged between 3.1% (at Houston) to 31.5% (at CCBC). No information about baseline socio-economic status was provides aside from information about whether students received financial aid during the semester of assignment, which had a large proportion of missing values (from 22.4% to 37.9%) and was not presented for one of the six schools (Kingsborough).
Linked learning communities are programs that provide social and curricular linkages, based on academic themes and content. Colleges generally provide a shared curriculum, organized around a common theme and structures to build a community of learners within an entering cohort of students. Colleges vary in the types of programs provided and themes that are emphasized. Among four components of the intervention, colleges may be at basic, midrange, or advanced levels. The four components are: linked courses with student cohorts, faculty collaboration, thematic instructional practices, and integrated student support services.
Students in the comparison group received standard services from the college.
Support for implementation varied by colleges, and generally included some form of professional development or training for faculty.
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