PROVISIONAL ADMISSION:ENHANCING COLLEGE OPPORTUNITYFOR ACADEMICALLY UNDERPREPARED STUDENTS

Andrew Howard Nichols, Ph.D.Senior Research AnalystThe Pell Instituteandrew.nichols@pellinstitute.orghttp://www.pellinstitute.org/

Student Financial Aid Research NetworkPhiladelphia, PA (June, 2011)

2

SESSION OUTLINE

Overview Definition of Provisional Admission Rationale Design Quantitative Qualitative Discussion / Recommendations Questions and comments

3

STUDY OVERVIEW

Joint venture with National Association of College Admission Counseling (NACAC)

Funded by the Lumina Foundation for Education

Study is complete & report to be published later this summer (2011)

4

WHAT IS PROVISIONAL ADMISSION?

A mechanism for colleges to enroll students who show potential to succeed in college but may not meet standard or preferred academic qualifications.

Provisionally admitted students are asked to satisfy requirements beyond what is expected of regularly admitted students. Meet certain academic performance requirements, Take specific classes or a reduced course load Utilize or participate in special student services

Provisional admission practices also are referred to by other names, such as conditional admission.

5

THE CASE FOR PROVISIONAL ADMISSION Initial enrollment at a 4-year college is positively

related to bachelor’s degree attainment

Programs / policies often include additional support and structure

Help enhance institutional diversity

Relatively unexplored in the research literature

6

DESIGN – MIXED METHODS APPROACH Quantitative: 17-item survey sent to

admission office personnel at 1,263 distinct 4-year institutions. 26% response rate. Administered in Fall 2010 as part of NACAC’s

Annual Admission Trends Survey

Qualitative: Document analysis, interviews, & focus group discussions during site visits to 5 four-year campuses with provisional admission programs / policies

SURVEY

Sample (n = 330) Sample was fairly representative with regard

to: Control– slightly more privates (73%) Region – S/SW slightly underrepresented Enrollment – smaller colleges underrepresented Selectivity

Analysis – frequencies & percentages with crosstabular, correlation, and mean comparison Control, enrollment, %Pell, and selectivity

8

SURVEY FINDINGS

57% (148) of respondents had PA initiatives according to our definition PA positively related to %Pell and acceptance

rate

Average size = 104 (F2009) & 107(F2010) Larger at public institutions Size positively related to enrollment Provisional admits about 5% of full-time, first-

time admits in F2010

SURVEY FINDINGS (CONT.)

79% of institutions DIDN’T target specific student populations Most selective more likely to target selected

students Public more likely to target athletes Larger schools more likely to target racial/ethnic &

1st-gen students

Only 18% of institutions conducted special outreach Selective more likely to reach out

SURVEY FINDINGS (CONT.)

Program components Specific courses (62%) Reduced course load (61%) Minimum GPA (50%) Orientation (48%) Full-time attendance (63%)

70% Private, 33% Public (High %Pell were less likely to require) Only 18% offered financial support

Required Services Regular meetings with advisor (88%) Mandated tutoring (67%) Peer Mentoring (36%)

11

SURVEY FINDINGS (CONT.)

Evaluation & Success 72% indicated they evaluate…something

1st year GPA (84%) 1st to 2nd year retention (82%) Cumulative GPA (58%) 4 year graduation rate (51%) 6 year graduation – Public (67%), Private (34%)

72% of students in these programs were retained to the second year Moderate negative relationship between %Pell and 1st

year completion

12

CONCLUSIONS FROM SURVEY

Provisional admission initiatives can be expanded, particularly at 4yr public institutions

Increase outreach & target services toward historically underrepresented groups

Programs seem fairly successful with 1st year retention – our data compared favorably to IPEDS & ACT data

Long-term impact of these programs needs to be examined. Unable to obtain 6yr graduation rates

SITE VISIT SELECTION CRITERIA

The institution must be a 4-year, bachelor degree-granting institution within the United States that receives Title IV funds.

The institution must exceed their respective sector’s percent increase between 1998/99 and 2007/08 in Pell grant recipients. 26.5% for public institutions 28.9% for private institutions

SITE VISIT SELECTION CRITERIA (CONT.) The institution’s percentage of undergraduates

receiving Pell grants must exceed their respective sector’s representation of all Pell grant recipients in 07/08. 30.3% for public institutions 13.6% for private institutions

The institution must have a broad academic focus. Schools were removed if they had a specific focus (e.g., bible colleges, medical, art, etc.)

SITE VISIT SELECTION CRITERIA (CONT.) Started with over 1,500 institutions Ended up with slightly over 200 6 item screening survey was sent to schools

that were NACAC member institutions Browsed websites and made phone calls Invited 13 schools to participate and 5 agreed

Pine Manor College (MA), California State University – Stanislaus (CA), Fayetteville State University (NC), Winthrop University (SC), and Notre Dame College (OH)

16

SITE VISIT FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS Discovered three PA models

Supplemental tutoring model Winthrop University Notre Dame College

Cohort-based curricular instruction model Pine Manor College

Summer bridge experience model California State University, Stanislaus Fayetteville state university

17

SITE VISIT FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS Students Benefits of PA

Provided educational opportunity Promoted academic success

Academic skill building Study and time management skills Helped build confidence

Helped students build relationships Peer friendships Connections with faculty

18

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PA INITIATIVES No “best” provisional model Require academic support Clearly outline policies and requirements Involve faculty Establish early contact Encourage engagement Monitor student performance Maintain contact Evaluate

COMMENTS & QUESTIONS

Andrew Howard Nichols, Ph.D.Senior Research AnalystThe Pell Instituteandrew.nichols@pellinstitute.orghttp://www.pellinstitute.org/