Random Assignment Process and the Sample MembersMDRC’s evaluation targeted students at BMCC, KCC, and LGCC who met the followingeligibility criteria when they entered the study:• Family income below 200 percent of the federal poverty level or eligible fora Pell Grant (or both)• In need of one or two developmental courses based on CUNY AssessmentTests 3• New student or continuing student who had earned 12 credits or fewer andhad at least a 2.0 grade point average• New York City resident• Said they were willing to attend college full time• In an ASAP-eligible major (the colleges excluded a few majors that have requirementsthat make graduating quickly difficult) 4The eligibility criteria for the evaluation mirror those for ASAP when the study started,with two exceptions. First, ASAP accepted some college-ready students who did not need anydevelopmental courses, but the evaluation did not. MDRC chose to focus on the effects ofASAP for students with developmental education needs. In fall 2009, the semester before theevaluation began, 77 percent of the students who began in ASAP across the six colleges neededone developmental course or more and 23 percent did not. 5 During the semesters of sampleintake, the ASAP programs at the three colleges in the evaluation enrolled only students withdevelopmental education needs, while the three colleges that were not in the evaluation continuedto enroll some college-ready students.Second, ASAP serves some students who are undocumented immigrants. These studentsare ineligible to receive federal or state financial aid and thus ineligible for the ASAPtuition waiver. The colleges in the evaluation continued to serve undocumented immigrantsduring the sample intake period, but because the evaluation was designed to test the effects of3 In other words, students need one math course, one English course, two math courses, two English courses,or one math course and one English course.4 The excluded majors at the time were: at BMCC, Allied Health Sciences, Pre-Clinical Nursing, ForensicScience, and Engineering Science; at KCC, Nursing; and at LGCC, Allied Health Sciences and EngineeringScience.5 Linderman and Kolenovic (2012).10
the full package of ASAP services including the tuition waiver, these students were not includedin the evaluation sample. 6ASAP staff at BMCC, KCC, and LGCC invited students who met the eligibility criteriato participate in the evaluation through letters, e-mails, and phone calls. Students who attendedan intake session on campus, during which time staff described the ASAP program and evaluation,and who agreed to take part in the study completed an Informed Consent Form and aBaseline Information Form (BIF) containing questions about their background. After completingthe forms, each student was randomly assigned (using a computer program at MDRC) eitherto the program group, whose members had the opportunity to participate in ASAP, or to thecontrol group, whose members had the opportunity to receive the usual college services. Ascompensation for their time, students who were randomly assigned to either group received aone-week MetroCard for use on public transportation. 7Two groups (or cohorts) of students were randomly assigned for the MDRC evaluation:one just before the spring 2010 semester and the other just before the fall 2010 semester.(BMCC and KCC assigned students before both semesters; LGCC assigned students onlybefore the fall 2010 semester.) A total of 896 students are in the sample — 451 in the programgroup and 445 in the control group.The right-most column of Table 2.1 shows selected characteristics of the evaluationsample from the BIF and data from CUNY. As the table shows, 62 percent are women andstudents’ average age was 21.5 when they entered the study. Although the majority of thestudents in the sample were relatively young when they were randomly assigned, almost onefourth(23 percent) were 23 years of age or older. The sample is racially and ethnically diverse:44 percent are Hispanic, 34 percent black, 10 percent white, and 8 percent Asian or PacificIslander. The vast majority of the sample members (88 percent) were receiving a Pell Grant.According to available data, 60 percent of the sample needed developmental instruction in onesubject (math, reading, or writing) and 27 percent needed instruction in two subjects. 8 AppendixTable A.1 shows some additional characteristics of the students in the sample from the BIF. Asthat table shows, most sample members were unmarried and did not have any children whenthey entered the study, and most lived with their parents. About one-third reported that they6 According to CUNY, 19 undocumented immigrants entered the ASAP program at the three colleges inthe study during the sample intake period.7 The MetroCard covered unlimited subway and bus fares for seven days and cost $27.8 Developmental education need is shown in Table 2.1 as “unknown” for students who did not haveCUNY Assessment Test data in all subject areas.11
- Page 1: DOUBLINGGRADUATIONRATESThree-Year E
- Page 4 and 5: The ASAP evaluation is supported by
- Page 7 and 8: ContentsOverviewList of ExhibitsPre
- Page 9 and 10: List of ExhibitsTableES.1 Key Diffe
- Page 11: PrefaceCommunity colleges provide r
- Page 14 and 15: ing students. Several ASAP staff wo
- Page 16 and 17: • Financial supports: Students re
- Page 18 and 19: Evaluation of Accelerated Study in
- Page 20 and 21: Evaluation of Accelerated Study in
- Page 22 and 23: ed. ASAP provides enhanced student
- Page 24 and 25: public transportation. By the end o
- Page 27 and 28: Chapter 1IntroductionPostsecondary
- Page 29 and 30: lation and graduation rates of any
- Page 31 and 32: The same may be said about the ASAP
- Page 33: Finally, MDRC examined the costs of
- Page 38 and 39: CharacteristicEvaluation of Acceler
- Page 40 and 41: tal courses, the characteristics of
- Page 42 and 43: the program. Transcript data prior
- Page 44 and 45: Evaluation of Accelerated Study in
- Page 46 and 47: included the ASAP Assistant Directo
- Page 48 and 49: Advisers discussed both full-time e
- Page 50 and 51: Evaluation of Accelerated Study in
- Page 52 and 53: participating in the program: conta
- Page 54 and 55: Table 3.3 (continued)SOURCE: MDRC c
- Page 56 and 57: survey respondents, 49 percent comp
- Page 58 and 59: Evaluation of Accelerated Study in
- Page 60 and 61: Other Student ServicesASAP offered
- Page 62 and 63: equired to work with academic depar
- Page 64 and 65: Service contrast: In general, non-A
- Page 66 and 67: The average tuition waiver among pr
- Page 68 and 69: Box 3.4Javier and the Value of the
- Page 70 and 71: Evaluation of Accelerated Study in
- Page 72 and 73: Evaluation of Accelerated Study in
- Page 74 and 75: Looking to the Next ChapterOverall,
- Page 76 and 77: Evaluation of Accelerated Study in
- Page 78 and 79: 52Enrollment rate (%)10090807060504
- Page 80 and 81: ASAP consistently increased student
- Page 82 and 83: Evaluation of Accelerated Study in
- Page 84 and 85: Table 4.2 (continued)SOURCE: MDRC c
- Page 86 and 87:
(See Table 4.3 for more details.) A
- Page 88 and 89:
Evaluation of Accelerated Study in
- Page 90 and 91:
cohort (spring or fall). 16 A forma
- Page 92 and 93:
Table 4.5 (continued)SOURCE: MDRC c
- Page 94 and 95:
Table 4.6 (continued)SOURCE: MDRC c
- Page 96 and 97:
ASAP has had a dramatic effect on t
- Page 98 and 99:
$16,284 of additional investment in
- Page 100 and 101:
Evaluation of Accelerated Study in
- Page 102 and 103:
• Career and employment services
- Page 104 and 105:
college, which is not the case. 8 F
- Page 106 and 107:
cost is equal to the average cost p
- Page 108 and 109:
Evaluation of Accelerated Study in
- Page 110 and 111:
program group is $13,423 (11.4 perc
- Page 112 and 113:
credits than control group students
- Page 114 and 115:
Students in CUNY’s focus groups a
- Page 116 and 117:
tion’s Finish Faster initiative,
- Page 118 and 119:
least 6 percent were married. 11 AS
- Page 120 and 121:
college, the results will shed ligh
- Page 123 and 124:
Evaluation of Accelerated Study in
- Page 125:
Evaluation of Accelerated Study in
- Page 129 and 130:
This appendix addresses two aspects
- Page 131 and 132:
Evaluation of Accelerated Study in
- Page 133 and 134:
and among survey respondents would
- Page 135 and 136:
2. Creation of Survey ScalesThis se
- Page 137:
A scale is created as the unweighte
- Page 141 and 142:
Evaluation of Accelerated Study in
- Page 143 and 144:
Evaluation of Accelerated Study in
- Page 145 and 146:
Evaluation of Accelerated Study in
- Page 147 and 148:
Evaluation of Accelerated Study in
- Page 149 and 150:
Evaluation of Accelerated Study in
- Page 151 and 152:
ReferencesAdelman, Clifford. 2005.
- Page 153 and 154:
Rutschow, Elizabeth Zachry, and Emi
- Page 155:
About MDRCMDRC is a nonprofit, nonp