1. Post-secondary persistence
Working together to Bridge the Achievement Gap
Presenters: Stacey Smith & Ali Bretthauer,
College of Education, TRIO Pre-College Programs
Welcome and Introduce ourselves.

2. Identifying key indicators in the achievement gap
General Information
Identifying key indicators in the achievement gap

3. Enrollment trends College enrollment is steadily rising.
Between 1999 and 2009, enrollment increased 38%, from 14.8 million to 20.4 million (NCES).
The face of today’s college student is rapidly changing.
Hispanic from 3% to 12%
Asian/Pacific Islander 2% to 7%
Black from 9% to 14%
Nearly 40% considered first generation
In 2008, over half of low-income students graduating high school enrolled in post- secondary education
Students age 25 or over increased by 43% from 2000 to 2009
Increased access due to: population growth, increased enrollment efforts, and increased efforts for under-represented populations through increased financial aid and programs such as TRIO, Gear Up, and CACG.
Enrollment Trends
College enrollment is steadily rising across the nation. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, between 1999 and 2009, post-secondary enrollment increased by 38%, from 14.8 million to 20.4 million.
The face of today’s college student is rapidly changing. With this steady rise in enrollment, underrepresented populations and populations who have not in the past traditionally attended college are increasing at institutions nationwide. For example, NCES reports that the percentage of Hispanic students rose from 3% to 12%, the percentage of Asian/Pacific Islander students rose from 2% to 7%, and the percentage of Black students rose from 9% to 14% between 1976 and In 2009, nearly 40% of college students were considered first generation (NCES), and in 2008, over half of low-income students graduating high school enrolled in post-secondary education (US Census). What’s more, between 2000 and 2009, the enrollment of students age 25 and over increased by 43% between 2000 and 2009.
The increase in enrollment has been a result of: population growth, increased enrollment efforts among institutions, and increased efforts toward college access among under-represented populations through such programs as TRIO, Gear Up, and the College Access Challenge Grant.

4. So what is the Achievement gap?
College graduation rates are stagnant even as enrollment rises.
At the University of Idaho, the trend is similar. Between 1998 and 2006, the six-year graduation rate for first year full-time students averaged 54.7% (University of Idaho IR and Assessment, 9/2011).
UNIVERSITY OF IDAHO
SIX YEAR FULL-TIME GRADUATION RATES
COHORT TOTAL IN COHORT GRADUATED IN SIX YEARS
/54.3%
/57.7%
/54.5%
/53%
/56.6%
/55.6%
/55.1%
/50.9%
What this means…ONLY ABOUT 50% OF STUDENTS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF IDAHO PERSIST AND SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETE COLLEGE WITHIN SIX YEARS, THUS INDICATING AN ACHIEVEMENT GAP.
So what is the achievement gap?
Based upon statistics, while there is still work to be done to increase access especially among underrepresented populations, the real achievement gap among institutions nationwide lays in students success once they arrive on campus. According to Complete College America, even though enrollment rates have steadily risen across nearly every demographic, college graduation rates have stagnated.
At the University of Idaho, the trend is similar. Between 1998 and 2006, the six-year graduation rate for first year full-time students averaged 54.7% (University of Idaho IR and Assesment, 9/2011). The graduation rate peaked at 57.7% in , but dropped to 50.9% in

5. Achievement gap continued
The achievement gap is even larger for under-represented and low SES students.
Six year graduation rates among under-represented populations at the University of Idaho are significantly lower. This is demonstrated by the six year graduation rate of Pell Grant recipients, who are typically from under-represented and low SES populations demographically (UI IR and Assessment, 11/2011).
UNIVERSITY OF IDAHO
SIX YEAR FULL-TIME GRADUATION RATE
FINANCIAL AID CATEGORY COHORT TOTAL IN COHORT GRADUATED IN SIX YEARS
PELL /44.9%
PELL /40%
NON-PELL /62.6%
NON-PELL /55.9%
For under-represented students, the achievement gap is much more dramatic. At the University of Idaho, the six year graduation rate among under-represented populations is significantly lower. This is demonstrated by the six year graduation rate of Pell Grant recipients, who are typically from under-represented and low SES populations demographically. For both the and cohorts, the six year graduation rate for Pell recipients in comparison to non-Pell, non-Direct loan recipients was 17.7% and 15.9% lower respectively.

6. Why is this important?
Institutions not accountable for completion historically
Serving traditional college students vs. nontraditional
Debate over whether institutions should be held accountable
National education agenda trending toward greater accountability
Focus on college success and completion is new
April 2011 – President Obama Unveils Plans to Increase College Graduation Rates
January 2012 – Idaho State Board of Education sets an ambitious goal that 60% of Idaho’s year olds will have a college degree or certificate of value by 2020.
Historically, institutions have not been held accountable for completion rates—the responsibility of completion has been placed in the hands of the student.
Institutions are often set-up to serve traditional college-going populations instead of the diverse populations that they are now encountering. These “non-traditional” student populations are often not equipped to succeed within this setting and present with many barriers.
There is still debate as to whether institutions should be held accountable for completion, but the national education agenda is trending towards holding colleges more accountable and toward offering economic incentives for increased college completion.
While college access has long been an initiative of the federal government with the advent of such legislation as the Higher Education Act in 1968, a focus on and national agenda of college success and completion have only recently come into the picture.
April 2011 – President Obama Unveils Plans to Increase College Graduation Rates
January 2012 – Idaho State Board of Education sets an ambitious goal that 60% of Idaho’s year olds will have a college degree or certificate of value by 2020.

7. College Walk Activity
Identifying Barriers to success for an increasingly diverse student population

8. College Walk Activity
Purpose: To learn how barriers of non-traditional college students can affect college completion even when we are not aware it is happening. Also, to have an opportunity to identify these barriers and subsequently develop a better understanding of how best to support student retention at the University of Idaho.
Five volunteers from the audience should form a straight line at one end of the room.
All five volunteers participating in this activity will be playing the parts of under- represented and/or non-traditional college student populations of some sort, whether from a racially or ethnically diverse background, a low SES background, first-generation background or age 25 or older. The key in this activity is not to focus on the demographics (race, gender, age, economic status) of these students, but on the barriers they will face as they walk through college.
Volunteers will draw from a pot of cards indicating their “next move” in the activity. Each card will include a brief description and instructions as to whether you should take a step forward or backward. Each step should be an average length step.
Each member of the audience may act as a “resource” ONE TIME during the activity, helping one of the volunteers overcome a barrier (and therefore able to take a step forward) using a known resource offered at the University of Idaho.

9. College walk activity post-activity discussion
For the volunteers, what is your “gut reaction” to where you find yourself at the end of this activity? If you graduated, was it a difficult path to walk? What helped you to graduate? If you didn’t graduate, why? Was there something you believe the institution could have done to help you overcome any of the barriers?
For the entire group, what were some of the barriers you identified as students walked through college? What were some of the resources identified by our audience that helped the students overcome these barriers?

10. Identifying our on campus retention resources: how do I fit in?
University of Idaho Retention Resource Toolkit
Identifying our on campus retention resources: how do I fit in?

11. PRACTICE & policy Questions
Do we do this at the University of Idaho? If no, should we?
What proportion of UI students who could benefit from this practice are, in fact. Touched by the practice? Are there particular student groups who are not?
In what ways does/ could the practice contribute to improved student outcomes? If the practice exists, how could it be changed to improve impact on student outcomes?
What type of students are the chief beneficiaries of the practice? How often do/ should they benefit and why? If the practice is beneficial.
For each Practice/ Policy Area, try to answer the following questions.

12. Connecting Practices & Policies
What connections do these practices and policies have with one another?
Do the strengths of one program affect another?
Do the gaps of one program affect another?
How can we use these together to increase retention?
UI Child Care is available, but not an affordable option for most students. Do students then take their children elsewhere? Does this affect a students’ ability to attend class? To be involved? To succeed and persist?

13. What can you do with this information?
Which practices and policies are you a part of? Which can you assist with? How can you be a resource for persistence?