Your search found 273426 results.

Descriptors:
Postsecondary Education; Educational Attainment; Age; Academic Persistence; School Holding Power; Graduation Rate; Computation; Credentials; Enrollment; Graduation; Colleges; College Transfer Students; Educational Indicators; School Statistics

Abstract:
College completion, earning a degree or certificate, is considered to be a key college success outcome, supported by every educational policymaker. Yet, institutions and policymakers in the U.S. know surprisingly little about the rates of completion for students who follow all but the most traditional of postsecondary pathways. This is because traditional graduation rate calculations are institution based and only count students who finish at the same institution where they started. Building on findings from previous reports in the National Student Clearinghouse Research Center's "Signature Report" series, this new report measures this key college success outcome--rates of first completion--encompassing postsecondary credentials of all levels and types at any institution in any state, whether it is the first, second, third, or more, attended. This report draws on the Clearinghouse database's near-census national coverage of enrollments and awarded degrees to explore the six-year outcomes of a cohort of first-time-in-college degree-seeking students who started in fall 2006 (N=1,878,484). It enhances the traditional graduation rate by reporting in four key ways: (1) Student completion anywhere, beyond institutional boundaries, across state lines, and over time; (2) Persistence anywhere, not just at the starting institution, for those who have not yet completed but are still pursuing a degree; (3) College outcomes broken out by student age at first entry and enrollment intensity, thus addressing questions about the role of students' varied postsecondary pathways in progress toward national completion goals; and (4) Enrollment intensity based on the enrollment status in all terms of enrollment, and not just the first term. Specifically, this report examines: (1) Six-year college outcomes, including the first instance of degree or certificate completion (first completion), persistence, and stop-out. Outcomes are broken out by students' age at first entry, students' enrollment intensity, enrollment intensity within each age group, and type of starting institution; (2) Six-year college outcomes for students who started at four-year public institutions, at two-year public institutions, at four-year private nonprofit institutions, and at four-year private for-profit institutions; and (3) Patterns of completion across state lines, broken out by students' enrollment intensity, students' age at first entry, and enrollment intensity within each age group. The findings presented in this report show that within six years, 12.1 percent of first-time-in-college degree-seeking students who enrolled in fall 2006 completed a degree or certificate at an institution other than their starting institution, raising the overall completion rate from 42.0 percent to 54.1 percent. Mixed enrollment students completed at an institution other than their starting institution at a higher rate (14.6 percent) than exclusively full-time (10.6 percent) and exclusively part-time (3.1 percent) students. Appended are: (1) Methodological Notes; (2) Coverage Tables; and (3) Results Tables. (Contains 29 figures, 34 tables, and 5 footnotes.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

 ERIC Full Text (3064K)

Descriptors:
Community Colleges; Tables (Data); Graphs; Academic Achievement; Teacher Characteristics; Profiles; Educational Finance; College Faculty; College Students; Institutional Mission; School Districts; Values; Goal Orientation; Boards of Education; Trustees; Public Colleges; Population Trends; Family Income; Gender Differences; Racial Differences; Educational Attainment; Enrollment Trends; Student Characteristics; Foreign Students; Continuing Education; Adult Education; Adult Literacy; High Schools; Labor Force Development; White Students; African American Students; Asian American Students; Hispanic American Students; College Credits; Age Differences; Place of Residence; Trend Analysis; Foreign Countries; School Schedules; Distance Education; Developmental Programs; Dual Enrollment; Library Services; Technical Education; English (Second Language); Adult Basic Education; Awards; Graduation Rate; Grades (Scholastic); College Transfer Students; Associate Degrees; Educational Certificates; Costs; College Administration; Pacific Islanders; Educational Facilities; Teacher Salaries; Income; Tuition; Budgets; Expenditures; Resource Allocation; Fees; Student Financial Aid

Abstract:
The Houston Community College (HCC) 2011-2012 Fact Book provides statistical information about the college district. It is important for the reader to be aware that data presented in this publication may differ slightly from statistics found in other district reports. Such variances may result from differences methodology including the source of information used, the reporting period covered (semester, academic year), or the student base included (semester credit, continuing education, adult education and literacy). The source of the information in each table and graph is cited, along with the date generated, the reporting period, and the students included. [For "Houston Community College 2010-2011 Fact Book," see ED531754.] Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

 ERIC Full Text (3011K)

Descriptors:
Educational Objectives; Outcomes of Education; Educational Indicators; Foreign Countries; Educational Demand; Educational Policy; Cross Cultural Studies; Academic Achievement; Education Work Relationship; Employment Qualifications; Spreadsheets; Educational Attainment; Adults; Trend Analysis; Secondary Education; Postsecondary Education; Graduation Rate; Age Differences; Foreign Students; Adult Education; Gender Differences; Employment Level; Unemployment; Economic Factors; Income; Wages; Social Influences; Public Health; Correlation; Trust (Psychology); Politics; Salaries; Costs; Expenditures; Expenditure per Student; Financial Support; Student Financial Aid; Paying for College; Resource Allocation; Access to Education; Enrollment Trends; Student Participation; Study Abroad; Student Characteristics; Educational Environment; Time; Teacher Student Ratio; Class Size; Teacher Salaries; Faculty Workload; Teaching Conditions; School Choice; Parent Influence; Parent Participation; High Schools; Colleges

Abstract:
"Highlights from Education at a Glance 2010" is a companion publication to the OECD's flagship compendium of education statistics, Education at a Glance. It provides easily accessible data on key topics in education today, including: education levels and student numbers, economic and social benefits of education, education spending, the school environment (hours of instruction, class size, etc.) and school choice and parent voice. Each indicator is presented on a two-page spread. The left-hand page explains the significance of the indicator, discusses the main findings, examines key trends and provides readers with a roadmap for finding out more in the OECD education databases and in other OECD education publications. The right-hand page contains clearly presented charts and tables, accompanied by dynamic hyperlinks (StatLinks) that direct readers to the corresponding data in Excel[TM] format. "Highlights from Education at a Glance 2010" is an ideal introduction to the OECD's unrivalled collection of internationally comparable data on education and learning. (Contains 4 tables and 73 charts.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Student Characteristics; Educational Finance; Measurement; Probability; Expenditures; Universities; Scores; Error of Measurement; Public Colleges; Student Personnel Services; College Entrance Examinations; Cost Effectiveness; Input Output Analysis; Economics; Correlation; Regression (Statistics); Graduation Rate; College Graduates; Graduation

Abstract:
Using detailed individual-level data from public universities in the state of Ohio, I estimate the effect of various institutional expenditures on the probability of graduating from college. Using a competing risks regression framework, I find differential impacts of expenditure categories across student characteristics. I estimate that student service expenditures have a larger impact on students with low SAT/ACT scores, while instructional expenditures are more important for high test score students and those majoring in scientific/quantitative fields. The individual-level nature of these data allows me to address measurement error and endogeneity concerns the previous literature has been unable to deal with. (Contains 2 tables.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Dropouts; Educational Change; Limited English Speaking; Low Income Groups; Graduation; High Schools; Graduation Rate; Economically Disadvantaged; Dropout Prevention; Elementary Schools; Middle Schools; Attendance; Educational Improvement; College Readiness; Careers; Educational Policy; Public Policy; Transitional Programs; Compulsory Education; Mentors; Accountability; Public Schools; Educational Practices; Academic Achievement; Academic Standards; State Standards; Dropout Rate; Educational Objectives; Goal Orientation; School Districts; Nonprofit Organizations

Abstract:
This fourth annual update on America's high school dropout crisis shows that for the first time the nation is on track to meet the goal of a 90 percent high school graduation rate by the Class of 2020--if the pace of improvement from 2006 to 2010 is sustained over the next 10 years. The greatest gains have occurred for the students of color and low-income students most affected by the dropout crisis. Many schools, districts and states are making significant gains in boosting high school graduation rates and putting more students on a path to college and a successful career. This progress is often the result of having better data, an understanding of why and where students drop out, a heightened awareness of the consequences to individuals and the economy, a greater understanding of effective reforms and interventions, and real-world examples of progress and collaboration. These factors have contributed to a wider understanding that the dropout crisis is solvable. While progress is encouraging, a deeper look at the data reveals that gains in graduation rates and declines in dropout factory high schools occurred unevenly across states and subgroups of students (e.g. economically disadvantaged, African American, Hispanic, students with disabilities, and students with limited English proficiency). As a result, large "graduation gaps" remain in many states among students of different races, ethnicities, family incomes, disabilities and limited English proficiencies. To repeat the growth in graduation rates in the next ten years experienced in the second half of the last decade, and to ensure progress for all students, the nation must turn its attention to closing the graduation gap by accelerating progress for student subgroups most affected by the dropout crisis. This report outlines the progress made and the challenges that remain. "Part 1: The Data" analyzes the latest graduation rates and "dropout factory" trends at the state and national levels. "Part 2: Progress and Challenge" provides an update on the nation's shared efforts to implement the Civic Marshall Plan to reach the goal of at least a 90 percent high school graduation rate for the Class of 2020 and all classes that follow. "Part 3: Paths Forward" offers recommendations on how to accelerate the nation's work and achieve its goals, with all students prepared for college and career. The report also offers "snapshots" within schools, communities, and organizations from Orlando to Oakland that are making substantial gains in boosting high school graduation rates. Appended are: (1) Dropout Factory High Schools, by Region and State, 2002 and 2011; (2) Averaged Freshman Graduation Rate (AFGR) and Four-Year Adjusted Cohort Graduation Rate (ACGR), by State, 2003-2011; (3) 2010-2011 Four-Year Adjusted Cohort Graduation Rates (ACGR), by State and Subgroup; (4) Four-Year Adjusted Cohort Graduation Rate (ACGR) Data Links, by State; (5) Four-Year Adjusted Cohort Graduation Rate (ACGR) Public Availability, by State, District, and School, Classes of 2010 and 2011; (6) Change in Number of Dropout Factory High Schools, by Locale, 2002 to 2011; (7) Civic Marshall Plan State Index--Samples; (8) Subgroup Definitions; (9) Graduation Rate FAQ; (10) Civic Marshall Plan Leadership; (11) Civic Marshall Plan Principles; and (12) Key Programs of the Grad Nation Campaign. (Contains 10 tables, 3 figures and 116 endnotes.) [For "Building a Grad Nation: Progress and Challenge in Ending the High School Dropout Epidemic. Annual Update, 2012," see ED530320.] Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

 ERIC Full Text (28269K)

Descriptors:
Graduation Requirements; Educational Attainment; Colleges; Graduation; Young Adults; High Schools; Labor Market; Labor Force; Grade 11; Grade 12; High School Seniors; Public Schools; College Preparation; Student Needs; Predictor Variables; Multivariate Analysis; Access to Education; Course Selection (Students); Academic Achievement; Career Readiness; College Readiness; Advanced Placement; College Admission; Core Curriculum; Comparative Analysis; Advanced Placement Programs

Abstract:
In a 2010 address to the College Board, U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan laid out a vision for high school that advances the Obama administration's goal of the U.S. once again leading the world in educational attainment. There is no grade in which the magnitude and complexity of this shift becomes clearer than in senior year. Historically, senior year has been a time of finishing up graduation requirements as most students entered the work force after high school. In this new economy, most students now hope to go to college and those who are not entering college face a rapidly eroding labor market for young adults with only a high school education. This changing educational landscape means that students' coursework and activities in senior year are becoming increasingly important. If the new purpose of high schools is to be a "launching pad rather than a last stop destination," what does that mean for senior year? The bottom line is that there is much work to do if CPS is to shift the focus of twelfth grade from finishing graduation requirements to preparing for college and employment or training. A central theme of this report is that there is no single answer to the question, "What is a good senior year?" Students are coming into senior year with very different needs. In order to look at differences in needs across students, the authors group students by their college qualifications at the end of eleventh grade. Thus, throughout this report, the authors focus on identifying the set of issues that educators need to grapple with for students on different trajectories. Appended are: (1) Data Used in This Report; (2) Determining Who is a Senior and Who Persists in Four-Year Colleges; (3) Variables Used in the Analysis; (4) Latent Class Analysis; (5) Identifying College Access; and (6) Methodology. (Contains 33 figures, 16 tables, and 70 endnotes.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

 ERIC Full Text (11277K) |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library

Descriptors:
Graduation Requirements; Higher Education; Educational Finance; Educational Attainment; Kindergarten; Graduation; Public Education; Elementary Secondary Education; Master Plans; Preschool Education; Access to Education; Teacher Supply and Demand; State Boards of Education; College Admission; Education Work Relationship; Partnerships in Education; High Schools; Academic Standards; State Standards; Accountability; Academic Achievement; Educational Indicators; Educational Improvement; College Readiness; Graduation Rate; Career Readiness; Alignment (Education)

Abstract:
This paper complies with the requirements established in T.C.A. Section 49-1-302(a)(10). The act directs the State Board of Education and the Tennessee Higher Education Commission to provide a report to the Governor and General Assembly, all public schools, and institutions of higher learning and their respective boards. This report is to include, but is not limited to, a discussion of the following four areas: (1) Minimizing Duplication: The extent of duplication in elementary, secondary and postsecondary education; (2) Compatibility: The extent of compatibility between high school graduation requirements and admission requirements of postsecondary institutions; (3) Master Plan Fulfillment: The extent to which respective master plans of the board and the higher education commission are being fulfilled; and (4) State Needs in Public Education: The extent to which state needs in public education are being met as determined by such board and commission. This year's joint report marks the continuation of a new era for education in Tennessee, which began during the special session of the 106th General Assembly (2010) and included passage of the First to the Top and the Complete College Tennessee Acts. Both Acts focus on raising the level of statewide accountability and support in K-12 schools and institutions of higher education. Legislation from the 106th General Assembly provides the framework for collaboration between all state systems of education, addressing the overarching need to produce a higher proportion of college- and career-ready graduates. Tennessee will use this framework to make significant progress toward increasing postsecondary educational attainment to the national average by 2025. Appended are: (1) Tennessee High School Graduation Requirements; (2) Minimum High School Course Requirements for Regular Undergraduate Admissions to Tennessee Public Higher Education Institutions; and (3) Tennessee College and Career Ready Goals and Indicators. (Contains 3 tables, 1 figure and 3 footnotes.) [For "Annual Joint Report on Pre-Kindergarten through Higher Education in Tennessee, 2012", see ED540084.] Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

 ERIC Full Text (350K)

Descriptors:
Student Attrition; Credits; Educational Attainment; Methods; Graduation; Costs; Graduation Rate; Academic Persistence; Goal Orientation; Enrollment; Benchmarking; Trend Analysis

Abstract:
The collision between funding realities and the paramount goal of increasing educational attainment has brought new attention to ways to reduce postsecondary attrition and get more students who enroll in college to complete a degree or credential. Reductions in attrition are both educationally effective and cost effective. Students reach high-value learning outcomes at less cost in time and money, while degree production costs are lowered. Despite a good deal of attention to retention and graduation, there is neither a commonly understood measure of student attrition, nor a way to determine its cost. Attrition is not just the difference between graduation rates and 100 percent because graduation rates do not distinguish between students who leave higher education altogether versus those that stop or transfer between institutions en route to a degree. Moreover, historically, the institutional costs of attrition have been virtually invisible, particularly in large public institutions with high levels of student enrollment demand and funding models that generate revenues for credits whether or not they attach to degrees. Students who leave early are replaced by others knocking at the door. While many institutions and states have undertaken efforts to improve graduation rates, they typically do not zero in on the relationship between spending and student success, and on ways that reducing attrition costs can also reduce degree production costs by translating a higher proportion of credits into degrees. An understanding of the different types and costs of attrition can equip institutional leaders and policymakers with the tools to make strategic choices about where, when, and how to invest time and attention towards increased graduation rates and lower production costs. This project has been designed to generate such metrics and produce recommendations on ways to use these measures to increase student success. The elements of this analysis include the following: (1) A recommended definition of attrition, as well as a methodology for estimating attrition and ascribing costs to it; (2) An example of the application of the methodology using national data samples, including findings about the patterns and costs of attrition; and (3) Recommendations to institutions and states about ways to use the measures to support efforts to reduce attrition, including setting benchmarks and goals, and rewarding progress as part of performance-or outcomes-based budgeting. (Contains 3 tables, 3 figures, and 5 footnotes.) ["Measuring (and Managing) the Invisible Costs of Postsecondary Attrition. Policy Brief" was Commissioned by the Delta Cost Project.] Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

 ERIC Full Text (237K)

Descriptors:
Resource Allocation; Financial Support; Achievement; Higher Education; Models; Performance; Goal Orientation; State Government; Educational Attainment; Institutional Mission; Educational Finance; Rewards; At Risk Students; Graduation; Measurement Techniques; Research Methodology; Standards; Incentives; Program Implementation; Program Development; Barriers; Educational Quality

Abstract:
Performance funding--the linking of allocation of resources to accomplishment of certain desired outcomes--is an idea that is once again finding favor with policymakers. It has intuitive appeal; what's not to like about paying for results? While it is a notion that makes common sense to most decisionmakers, it is an idea with a very checkered past--it has been tried, found wanting, and with few exceptions abandoned. A review of past experiments suggests that it's not the idea that failed, but the design and implementation of the strategies that derived from the idea. This brief paper presents a set of first principles for putting in place an approach to performance funding that will help policymakers avoid many of the pitfalls that plagued prior efforts in this arena. The principles presented fall into two categories--those dealing with design of the system, and a separate set dealing with implementation. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

 ERIC Full Text (595K)

Descriptors:
Credentials; Community Colleges; College Graduates; Success; Goal Orientation; Graduation Rate; Program Effectiveness; Job Skills; Educational Attainment; Career Development; College Administration; Administrator Role; Graduation; Strategic Planning; Labor Force Development

Abstract:
In the wake of President Obama's challenge to again make the United States the world's No. 1 producer of college graduates and degree and certificate holders, the nation's community college leaders are shifting their focus from access to success. Fueled by the president's goals, and six months of conversation and deliberation within the college community, Maryland's Anne Arundel Community College (AACC) launched Student Success 2020, an effort to double the number of degrees, certificates, and workforce credentials awarded at the college by 2020, with milestones established at three-year intervals. Student Success 2020 expands the definition of completion to include credentials that help students prepare for jobs and careers, as well as for continuing their education. It recognizes that students enter and exit community colleges at various stages of their lives and at differing points of their educations. In this article, the author stresses that if students are to identify a pathway to educational and career success, it's up to college leaders to point them in the direction of their goals. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website