1. Non-credit ESL Student Transitions to Credit at CCSF
City College of San Francisco
Sharon Seymour
CATESOL State Conference
April, 2008

2. “Pathways and Outcomes Tracking ESL Student Performance”
A Longitudinal Study of English As a Second Language Service at City College of San Francisco,
By Steven Spurling, Sharon Seymour, Forrest P. Chisman
Council for Advancement of Adult Literacy, January 7, 2008

3. Components of Study Enrollment Patterns Persistence Learning Gains
Transition to Credit
Success of Non-credit ESL Students in Credit
Stop-Outs
Variables affecting Success

4. ESL Enrollment at CCSF ESL is the largest Department at CCSF
34% of all enrollment from
58% of non-credit enrollment
10% of credit enrollment
Non-credit ESL Enrollment
25,361 in 2006
Credit ESL Enrollment
3,981 in 2006

5. Non-credit Program 1998-2006 General ESL (ESLN): 67% of enrollment
10 levels: Literacy to Low Advanced Level 9
Focus ESL (ESLF): 19% of enrollment
Vocational ESL: increased by 170%
Citizenship: decreased by 36%

6. Description of Cohort Studied
All ESL students who first enrolled in noncredit or credit ESL in 1998, 1999, 2000
38,095 in non-credit ESL
6,666 in credit ESL
Studied progress of cohort over 7 years
Studied only non-credit students first enrolled in ESLN and/or ESLF (focus ESL)

7. Non-credit Cohort Characteristics
New students, not all students
Only those enrolled for 8 or more hours in non-credit ESL
39% Hispanic, 35% Asian
52% 30 years old or more
67% first enrolled in Literacy or Beginning Low (CCSF 1 and 2)

8. Persistence of Non-credit ESL Students in Cohort
21 terms of enrollment in 7 years possible (fall, spring, short summer term)
38% enrolled for only one term
68% enrolled for one to three terms
15% enrolled for seven or more terms

9. Non-credit Level Advancement
Advancement measured by advancing a level
(CCSF ESLN 1 to CCSF ESLN 2)
Promotion decisions primarily made at end of semester
ESLN classes are 175 hours
(10 hrs/wk for 17/5 wks)
Students generally not promoted in summer

10. Level Advancement of Non-credit ESL Students in Cohort
56% students did not advance even one level
Of 44% who advanced:
39% advanced one level
26% advanced two levels
Students who first enrolled at lower levels more likely to advance
Low rates of persistence a major reason level advancement was limited

11. Level Advancement of Non-credit ESL Students in Cohort
Of the 44% who advanced
39% advanced one level
26% advanced two levels
Students who first enrolled at lower levels more likely to advance
Low rates of persistence a major reason level advancement was limited
Students who advanced more levels received more hours of instruction

12. Level Advancement of Cohort
It took students about 108 hours to advance a level (Asians 152 hrs., Hispanics 86 hrs.)
Students who first enrolled at higher levels required fewer hours to advance
The students who didn’t advance were primarily those who attended few class hours.
Half of the students who did not advance attended fewer than 50 hours
Another 30% attended 150 or fewer hours
95% of the 44% of students who advanced received 50 or more hours of instruction

13. Level Advancement
Students needed to not only enroll in more semesters but also attend enough hours in a semester to advance
Percentage and number of students at lower levels who advanced was greater than at higher levels
-lower levels more willing and able

14. Transitions to Credit of Non-credit Cohort
8% of non-credit ESL students transitioned to some kind of credit during 7 years studied
Transfer, degree applicable, non-degree applicable
Of those who transitioned
88% took academic transfer courses
74% took credit ESL courses

15. Transitions to Credit
Credit ESL was a pathway to academic transfer courses
Only a small number of those who took academic transfer courses did not enroll in credit ESL
Many students co-enrolled in credit ESL and transfer courses, some enrolled in transfer courses prior to or after taking credit ESL

16. Who transitioned?
Last Level of enrollment in non-credit ESL was the strongest predictor of whether students would make the transition
The higher the last level of enrollment the more likely the transition, regardless of the first level of enrollment in non-credit
23% of students with Intermediate last level transitioned
3% of students with Literacy, Level 1-3 last level transitioned

17. Who transitioned?
The more non-credit levels completed the more likely students were to transition
Less strongly related than last level of non-credit enrollment
Majority of students who transitioned completed multiple levels
Transition to credit positively related to hours of attendance in non-credit
but increase in transition rates for each 100 hours of attendance was modest

18. Who transitioned?
Asians transitioned to credit at a higher rate than Hispanics (16% compared to 5%)
Students age transitioned at the highest rate (17%). Transition rates about the same for other age groups (8%-11%) but declined to 3% for students who were 50 or older

19. Success of Non-credit Origin Students in Credit
45% of credit ESL students in cohort had previously enrolled in non-credit ESL.
Transition students were as successful in both credit ESL and academic credit courses as were credit origin ESL students in terms of GPA and credit hours passed
Transition students placed at lower levels in credit ESL than did credit origin ESL students but took same number of levels of credit ESL as credit origin students

20. Success of Non-credit Origin Students in Credit
Success of most transition students in credit courses did not vary significantly depending on number of non-credit ESL levels taken or last non-credit level taken
Probably because most transitioned from Intermediate Levels
However, transition students whose last non-credit level was Intermediate High (CCSF Level 7 or 8) succeeded in credit courses at slightly higher rates

21. Success of Non-credit Origin Students in Credit
25% of transition ESL students attained a degree or certificate
The same rate as credit origin ESL students
Three times the rate of general new credit student population
ESL students, both credit-origin and transition, attained nearly a third of the certificates and half of the degrees awarded to students who first enrolled in 1998, 1999, 2000.

22. Transfer of ESL Students to Four Year Educational Institutions
All Credit ESL 23%
Credit origin ESL 25%
Noncredit origin ESL 16%
All New Credit 23%

23. Matriculation Services increase Transitions
Matriculation services studied:
Placement testing
Counseling
Orientation
Receipt of matriculation services is
Associated with number of hours of non-credit ESL and persistence, but relationship is not strong
Strongly related to transition to credit

24. Enhancements Increasing Transitions
Enhancements studied:
Enrollment in ESLF courses
Enrollment in Accelerated ESL courses
Enrollment in other non-credit courses
14% of students in cohort took advantage of one or more enhancement
Most selected only one option
Most popular option was ESLF (33%)
27% enrolled in other non-credit
2% enrolled in Accelerated courses

25. Effects of Program Enhancements
Students who began at higher levels more likely to take advantage of all enhancements
Students who took advantage of enhancements
Enrolled in ESL for significantly more terms than cohort
Advanced more ESL levels
Enhancements strongly related to transitions
81% of of students who transitioned took advantage of one or more enhancement

26. Effects of Program Enhancements
Enhancements had a cumulative effect
Students who selected two or more options persisted longer, took more levels of ESL and were far more likely to transition
Students who selected all three options out-performed those who selected two
Could not determine if educational experiences provided by these options created these effects or whether students who chose them were highly motivated and would have performed a higher levels anyway

27. What might be done?
Structure programs to maximize opportunities for students to advance in proficiency level
Try management enrollment to encourage persistence and attendance
Try fast-track programs
Provide matriculation services and other student services to encourage success
Target students most likely to succeed
Create culture of success that expects high level of achievement and transitions