This article introduces “dual enrollment equity pathways” (DEEP)—a research-based framework for rethinking à la carte dual enrollment as a more equitable on-ramp to college programs of study that lead to high-opportunity careers for students historically underserved in dual enrollment. Using interview data collected from six sites (six community colleges and 12 of their high school partners) that have expanded access and early college success of underrepresented student groups through à la carte dual enrollment, the manuscript describes key themes and emerging evidence of DEEP related to each of the four practice areas of the DEEP framework: (1) outreach to underserved students and schools; (2) aligning dual enrollment to college degrees and careers in fields of interest; (3) early career and academic exploration, advising, and planning; and (4) high-quality college instruction and academic support. The chapter concludes with considerations for how the DEEP framework influences dual enrollment practice.

Using administrative data from nearly 270,000 transfer-intending students who began at 70 community colleges across three state systems, this paper seeks to identify a set of metrics that will be useful to community college leaders as they formatively assess their colleges’ efforts to improve STEM transfer outcomes. We find that a relatively simple set of STEM momentum metrics—notably Calculus and other non-math science and engineering coursework specified on statewide STEM transfer pathways, and to a lesser degree the pre-requisites to these types of courses—are reliable indicators of subsequent STEM transfer success across a wide-ranging set of state and institutional contexts, as well as across race/ethnicity and gender. However, community colleges have relatively low rates of completion of these key STEM courses, and disparities in completion of these courses by race/ethnicity and gender are common.

A primary focus among colleges implementing student success reforms has been to increase overall rates of completing any credential and to reduce racial and socioeconomic equity gaps in such completion rates. The focus on general completion may overlook inequities in the type of program students complete, which is particularly significant given the wide variety of credentials offered at community colleges and the resulting variation in labor market returns among completers. Our study examines racial/ethnic stratification among community college students as they enter and progress through programs leading to higher or lower opportunities in the labor market. Using a discrete-time survival analysis and longitudinal enrollment and transcript data. We track enrollment, completion, and transfer for up to 9 years. We also measure achievement of academic milestones (such as credit accrual) along educational pathways associated with higher rates of credential completion and transfer over the long term. Results suggest that a significant gap in the likelihood of bachelor's degree completion between Black and White students emerges episodically, while the gap between Hispanic and White students develops earlier and remains consistent over time. Results also suggest that, while all students generally benefit from attainment of academic milestones, doing so disproportionately benefits Black and Hispanic students.

In this article, researchers from the Community College Research Center reflect on what they have learned from their study of Guided Pathways reforms at over 100 colleges nationally since the publication in 2015 of . They examine five areas of practice: (1) program design, (2) new student onboarding, (3) remediation and academic support, (4) ongoing student advising, and (5) teaching and learning. For each area, they describe how their thinking about Guided Pathways has evolved from the model presented in and discuss the implications for practice. In the conclusion, they provide guidance to college and state system leaders about how to advocate for adequate state fiscal support for evidence-based reforms needed for achieving more equitable student outcomes and ensuring college survival in a very challenging environment for community colleges and their students.

This article documents the patterns of White-Black and White-Hispanic enrollment gaps in Advanced Placement (AP) and Dual Enrollment (DE) programs across thousands of school districts in the United States by merging several data sources. We show that the vast majority of districts have racial enrollment gaps in both programs, with wider gaps in AP than DE. Results from fractional regression models indicate that geographic variations in these gaps can be explained by both local and state factors. We also find that district-level resources and state policies that provide greater access to AP and DE are also associated with wider racial enrollment gaps, implying that greater resources may engender racial disparity without adequate efforts to provide equitable access and support for minority students.

Using detailed administrative data from Virginia, this paper examines whether community college "vertical transfer" students who resemble "native four-year" students in their accumulated college-level credits and performance at their point of entry into the four-year sector perform equally well in terms of both academic and labor market outcomes. We compare matching strategies typically used in existing literature to one where we match vertical transfer and native four-year students based on prior credits earned, accumulative GPA, and the destination four-year institution, and find substantial differences in estimates based on different matching strategies. We also examine potential mechanisms underlying vertical transfer students' relative performance at the four-year institution and in the labor market. The results show that vertical transfer students' probability of baccalaureate attainment is comparable to that of similar native students attending the same four-year institution. However, when considering their earnings eight years after initial college enrollment, vertical transfer students experience a significant and nontrivial earnings penalty. Subsequent analyses examining possible mechanisms suggest the earning decrement is partly due to a delayed entry into the labor market as a result of credit loss at the point of transfer.

Objective: This study develops an analytical framework for identifying effective partnerships between 2- and 4-year institutions that enable community college entrants to transfer to a 4-year institution and earn a bachelor’s degree in a timely fashion. Method: Using the individual term-by-term college enrollment and degree records from the National Student Clearinghouse for the entire 2007 fall cohort of first-time-in-college community college students nationwide, we use regressions to control for student and institutional characteristics in identifying effective partnerships in two steps: first, we identify community colleges with large residual values (better than expected outcomes); and second, we identify the 4-year partners of those community colleges with large residual values. Results: Descriptive results on the variation in transfer outcomes among the thousands of unique transfer partnerships nationally are presented alongside results from regressions used in the two-step effective transfer partnership identification. Contributions: Recommendations and considerations for using this framework to evaluate and benchmark institutional performance in supporting the academic success of vertical transfer students for baccalaureate attainment are also discussed.

Objective: The objective of this study was to describe practices of 2- and 4-year institutional partnerships effective in supporting transfer student success. Method: Using student records from the National Student Clearinghouse (NSC) for the entire 2007 fall cohort of first-time-in-college community college students nationwide, researchers identified partnerships of 2- and 4-year institutions that were more effective than expected (controlling for student and institutional characteristics) in enabling community college entrants to transfer to a 4-year institution and earn a bachelor’s degree. Based on this methodology, and in partnership with the Aspen Institute’s College Excellence Program, researchers visited six pairs of 2- and 4-year college transfer partnerships identified as high performers, interviewing more than 350 faculty, student-facing and senior-level staff, and transfer students. Results: From these in-depth interviews, researchers identified a set of essential transfer practices common among these highly effective institutional partnerships. The practices were grouped under three broad strategies: (a) make transfer a priority, (b) create clear programmatic pathways with aligned high-quality instruction, and (c) provide tailored transfer advising. Contributions: This study offers a set of essential transfer practices culled from national fieldwork to 2- and 4-year institutional transfer partnerships identified using NSC data as highly effective in supporting transfer student success.

Outside offers, defined as comparable offers of employment at another organization, are means by which faculty determine their relative market worth and increase their salary at their home institution. Despite the career advantages associated with outside offers, little is known about the groups of faculty most likely to receive them. For example, given unexplained pay differences between men and women faculty at research universities, it is important to understand whether there are gender differences in who receives outside offers. This study used survey data from (n = 784) faculty respondents at a large, public university and exploratory logistic regression to examine the relationship between receiving outside offers and gender, partner status and having dependents, rank, and time in rank. Key findings suggested that rank was associated with outside offers, with those in higher ranks more likely to receive outside offers. Men were more likely to receive outside offers than women. We draw implications from this exploratory study for future research and for constructing retention policies that do not unintentionally disadvantage certain subsets of faculty.