**Promoting College Access and Success:**

**A Review of Credit-Based Transition Programs**

**Thomas Bailey and Melinda Mechur Karp**

**Community College Research Center**

**Teachers College/Columbia University**

**November 2003**

**Office of Vocational and Adult Education, U.S. Department of
Education**

**[Introduction]{.underline}**

Promoting college access and building an educational foundation for
success in college are widely accepted educational goals. American high
school students, parents, educators, and policymakers are increasingly
convinced that some postsecondary education is an important prerequisite
for finding reasonably well-paid jobs. Thus, the majority of twelfth
graders say that they "definitely" intend to earn a bachelor's degree
(National Center for Education Statistics, 2001). Yet, many fewer young
people attain a college degree than plan to do so.[^1]

At the same time, the debate continues about the ability of high schools
to prepare students for college, to provide them with the counseling
necessary to select and apply to colleges, or to give them the personal
and academic skills needed to succeed in college. Analysts argue that
the separation between the K-12 and postsecondary systems is a
fundamental cause of these problems (Venezia, Kirst, and Antonio 2003).
Students graduate in good standing from high school only to find
themselves in a remedial class when they enter college. Many disengaged
students remain uninformed about the future importance of academic
learning in high school and the impact their decisions have on future
life opportunities.

Although there are many initiatives and programs designed to facilitate
the transition to college,[^2] one approach that has grown dramatically
in the last decade encourages and allows high school students to take
college courses and to earn college credit while still in high school.
While such programs have existed for many years, they have been used
primarily to accelerate the progress of high-achieving college bound
youth who are already prepared for college level work. But more
recently, as we will show, private foundations, educators, and state and
federal policymakers have sought to use them to facilitate college
access and success for middle performing or even lower-performing
students. Since the common element among these strategies is that they
offer students the opportunity to earn college credit for coursework
completed during high school, we refer to them as *credit-based
transition programs.* Included are: dual enrollment or dual credit;
Advanced Placement (AP); International Baccalaureate (IB); Tech Prep;
and Middle College High Schools.

Despite the growing interest, many questions about these transition
programs remain to be answered. How large are these programs, what are
their characteristics, who are the students, and do the programs
effectively increase college access and success? In this report, using
the existing published and unpublished research literature, we look for
answers to these questions, focusing particularly on the role that
transition programs can play for students other than the traditionally
college-bound youth. We ask what guidance existing research offers now
in conceptualizing and developing these strategies, and what the
important research questions are that remain to be answered.

Our analysis is based on a review of all available literature from 1990
to the present, as well as interviews with state- and college-level
personnel, researchers, and representatives of associations.[^3] In
addition, we have drawn on information from our own fieldwork carried
out between 2000 and 2002 at fifteen community colleges in seven
states.[^4]

We first discuss the rational of these strategies and describe what
reformers hope transition programs will accomplish. In the following
section, we provide a general description of the various credit-based
transition programs and present information on their size and growth. We
then develop a three-part categorization, based on the intensity of the
experience for students. We also present evidence on the characteristics
of students who enroll in each type of program. Next, we review the
empirical evidence on the effectiveness of each of the three categories.
We end with conclusions and recommendations for research and policy.

> **THE RATIONALES FOR CREDIT-BASED TRANSITION PROGRAMS**

Why do policy makers and educators believe that credit-based transition
programs can facilitate access to and success in college? We are
particularly interested in the conceptual basis for believing that
transitions programs can serve poorly prepared students or students who
would not traditionally go to college.

Using credit-based transition programs for less-prepared students may
seem counterintuitive: if students have not been successful in high
school and are not prepared for college, it is not obvious why the
solution is to put them in college even earlier. Moreover, in the past
and even during the more recent period of growing enthusiasm for the
strategy, most transition programs have been aimed at higher achieving
students. Thirty-two of the 45 articles and books we reviewed provided
descriptions about program entry requirements or target students.[^5] Of
those, 25 did require a reasonably high level of academic proficiency
prior to program participation. In general, admissions requirements
stipulated that students be assessed as "college ready" by college
admissions tests or by earning high scores on the SAT or ACT; be
admitted to the college prior to enrollment; or be deemed "academically
proficient" by program staff.

Despite the past use of these programs by advanced students and the
apparent counterintuitive nature of the argument, policy literature,
program information, and practitioners advance a variety of reasons for
why such programs can serve a wide variety of students:

***Prepare students for the academic rigors of college***. Enrolling in
college-level courses can greatly increase students' exposure to
challenging coursework. As research (Adelman, 1999) has found that the
strongest predictor of bachelor's degree completion is the intensity and
quality of students' high school curriculum, this is an important
benefit.

***Provide more realistic information to students about the skills that
they will need to succeed in college**.* By actually participating in
college classes, students will develop a clear idea about whether or not
they are prepared. Moreover, many transition programs require students
to pass a college assessment test before entering the program. Even if
students fail these tests and cannot enroll, they have received a
warning about their lack of preparation for college. Underachieving
students may not realize how important academic achievement in high
school is for their future success in college. By exposing them to
college earlier, these students may understand why they need to apply
themselves to their high school work.

***Help high school faculty prepare their students for the college
experience**.* Frequently, students who do not persist in college cite
non-academic factors as reasons for dropping out: they are overwhelmed
by the new institution, they are unfocused, or they had unrealistic
expectations of the college experience (Noel, Levitz, and Saluri, 1985).
Credit-based transition programs allow high school and college faculty
to work together to convey to students the things young people need to
know and be able to do to achieve their educational goals (Orr, 1998;
1999). And, because many (though not all) dual enrollment programs
include time on campus and exposure to the non-academic side of college,
they allow student to acclimate to the college environment earlier.
Giving students a realistic expectation of what college is like
potentially enables them to adjust more easily to college life upon high
school graduation.

***Expose traditionally non-college-bound students to college.*** Many
high school students whose parents did not attend college may not
consider college to be an option for them. By exposing these students to
college while they are still in high school or by in effect moving some
of college into the high school, transition programs may demystify
college and show students that other young people like them can have
success in college.

***Provide curricular optiosn to students.*** Many students are bored in
class or do not see the relevance of their high school coursework for
their future success (Lords, 2000). Moreover, as schools face budget
crises and eliminate electives and vocational courses, many students are
unable to participate in courses that they find interesting and
inspiring (Robertson, Chapman and Gaskin, 2001). Credit-based transition
programs, particularly those that take advantage of courses offered by
local colleges, can provide students with the opportunity to take
courses no longer available at their high school. It is hoped that
student motivation will increase by expanding their opportunities to
take interesting and challenging courses.

***Improve motivation through high expectations.*** The high
expectations held for students in these programs are also presumed to
increase their internal motivation. This argument is particularly
important for under-achieving students. Some believe that
under-achieving students can perform at a much higher level; these
students are just not motivated to do so because they are bored in class
or see little relationship between their achievement in high school and
their future success (Lords, 2000). Offering these students the
opportunity to earn college credit might promote hard work and high
achievement.

***Lower the cost of postsecondary education for students***. The
rapidly rising cost of college (The College Board, 2001b) has made
attaining a college degree difficult to afford for many students.
Because dual credit programs are free or relatively low cost, they serve
as an inexpensive way for young people to earn college credit, thus
lowering the long-term cost of a college degree and promoting access to
postsecondary education for students who may find the prospect of
college tuition a daunting one (Orr, 2002). The ability of students to
accumulate college credit---in some cases up to almost a full year's
worth---prior to entering college allows them to both shorten the time
it takes to earn their degree and save significantly on the overall cost
of their postsecondary education.

***Promoting institutional relationships between colleges and high
schools**.* Underlying most of these views are a very negative
assessment of the high school. Getting colleges more involved may
improve the high schools' ability to work with at-risk or
lower-achieving students. And in any case, a richer flow of
communication between the two institutions will improve the quality of
information available to high school students.

In short, credit-based transition programs are believed to lead to many
positive outcomes for students.[^6] And some educators argue that even
exposing lower achieving students to college early can improve their
access to college and their success once they are there. These arguments
depend particularly on psychological and motivational effects and on
improving the flow of information.

Does the empirical evidence developed so far support these arguments?
Below we shall review the available research relating to both these
arguments. But before we do that, we will provide a brief description of
the various types of transition programs and develop a three-part
categorization that will be useful in our subsequent discussion of
program effects.

**PROGRAM DESCRIPTIONS AND GROWTH**

**Types of Programs**

Credit-based transition programs include a diverse group of initiatives:

> The ***Advanced Placement*** (AP) program was started in 1955 and is
> administered by the College Board. Students can potentially earn
> college credit by taking an AP exam and many colleges will give credit
> if a student gets a high enough grade on the exams. In 2000, 760,000
> students took over one million AP exams (The College Board, 2001b).
>
> The ***International Baccalaureate program*** (IB) was started in 1968
> as a liberal arts course of study for students in international
> schools around the world. IB students take exams in specific fields
> and earn credit, at the discretion of the college, based on a cutoff
> score. In the U.S., nearly 22,000 students in 292 high schools took IB
> exams in 2001 (IBO, 2001).

***Tech Prep*** is a highly diverse program established by the 1990
reauthorization of the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Technical
Education Act. The foundation of Tech Prep is articulation and
coordination between high school and college courses in particular areas
(usually technical or occupational). College credit for work in high
school is not necessarily a part of this strategy, although in some
cases, students earn credit "in-escrow," in the sense that they are
given college credit for a course taken in high school if they complete
one or more specified courses in college.

***Middle College High Schools*** (MCHS) were established to help
students who were at-risk of dropping out of high school meet graduation
requirements and transition into postsecondary education. They are
usually located on college campuses and provide both high school and
college curricula (AEL, 2002; Wechsler, 2001). Students take high school
courses and, when they are ready, begin to take college courses for dual
credit as part of their MCHS course work. Middle college high schools
are generally local initiatives, though some national organizations,
such as the Middle College High School Consortium, serve as resources
for member schools.

In addition to these specific models, many credit-based transition
programs are based on specific agreements between high schools and
colleges (both community colleges and baccalaureate-granting colleges)
through which high school students can enroll in college courses either
on the college campus or at the high school. This is usually referred to
as ***dual enrollment*** or ***dual credit***. Courses given at the high
school are under the auspices of the college. In these cases, the
college that is involved will recognize the credit, although other
colleges in the state, and especially out of the state, may not.[^7]

**Level of Student Participation**

There is no systematic count of the overall number of students enrolled
in credit-based transition programs, partly because they vary so widely.
National programs, such as AP and IB, do have counts, as noted above,
but even in these cases, we do not know how many students took AP
courses, since they can take AP exams without taking AP courses, and AP
courses without sitting for the exam.

Estimates of student participation in any type of credit-based
transition program are even vaguer. Clark (2001) surveyed state
officials, asking for a count of students enrolled in dual credit
programs. Only 26 states were able to offer even a rough estimate.
Still, extrapolating from the survey results and from data from national
programs, Clark estimates that nearly half of all juniors and seniors in
U.S. high schools participate in at least one form of credit-based
transition program. This is likely an overestimate, however, as he did
not attempt to account for students who participate in more than one
form of program (for example, taking both AP and dual credit courses)
and included all Tech Prep students, many of whom do not earn college
credit in high school. And, most of these students were in AP or Tech
Prep, rather than dual credit, programs.

But while we do not have a good sense of the number of students
currently involved in all of these programs, there is strong evidence
that that number has grown. Both the AP and the IB have doubled in size
in the past decade (The College Board, 2001; IBO, 2001). While both
programs tend to enroll already motivated, successful students, they are
also both seeking ways to expand enrollment to populations not usually
considered "elite." Efforts include the institution of pre-AP and pre-IB
diploma preparation programs (IBO, 2002; J. Mooney, personal
communication, June 2002).

Middle College High Schools, traditionally a much smaller initiative,
have garnered significant attention recently. In 2001, the Bill and
Melinda Gates Foundation pledged \$40 million to start 70 new Middle
College High Schools (called Early College High Schools by the
foundation[^8]) (Arenson, 2002). Most are expected to have opened by the
Fall of 2003; it is estimated that once all 70 are operational, nearly
28,000 students will be attending.

By far the biggest growth in credit-based transition programs has been
in the area of dual enrollment and dual credit. While students have long
been able to enroll in a course at a college during their senior year
under special circumstances, the creation of programs, with state
support and administrative assistance from schools and colleges, is
relatively new, and appears to be expanding rapidly. In Virginia, for
example, there were 6,700 high school students in dual enrollment
programs in 1997, as compared to only 2,000 in 1991 (Andrews, 2001). In
New York City, where a concentrated effort to increase dual enrollment
is underway, the number of colleges offering dual enrollment grew from
six to seventeen between 2000 and 2001 (Kleiman, 2001). Nearly 15,000
New York City high school students are enrolled in a credit-based
college course this school year (J. Garvey, personal communication,
February 2003).

At the state level, support is widespread. A 2001 report by the
Education Commission of the States reported that all but three states
have some sort of dual enrollment program, though the legislative
requirements and institutional arrangements promoting the programs vary
widely (ECS, 2001). Only 26 of these states ensure that students do not
pay more than a minimal fee for participation, for example. And while
some states mandate specific program features, such as admissions
requirements or the ability of high schools to offer dual enrollment
courses, many other states do little but grant students permission to
take college-level courses.

The numbers of students participating in these programs are likely to
continue to rise. According to the Department of Education's proposals
for the Secondary and Technical Education Excellence Act of 2003 (US
Department of Education, 2003), the new law would seek to increase
students' preparation for college and reduce the need for postsecondary
remediation by fostering relationships between community colleges and
secondary schools. Funding would shift from traditional vocational
programs to programs, such as dual enrollment, that promote academic
achievement and smooth transitions from high school to college for all
students. The additional funding for credit-based programs resulting
from this legislation is likely to further increase student
participation.

Before we examine the evidence of program impact, we will first discuss
the wide degree of variation among the various types of programs
subsumed within the broader category of "credit-based transition
programs." It is possible that certain program types are more effective
than others, or that different program types lead to positive outcomes
for different policy goals. We turn now to these differences, and offer
a framework that conceptualizes program variation in a systematic way.

## PROGRAM VARIATION AND CATEGORIZATION

Credit-based transition programs vary widely in terms of course content,
location (at the college or at the high school), instructors (certified
high school teachers or full-time or adjunct college professors),
whether college credit is guaranteed, how college credit is earned
(through a third party test or by simply passing the course), and the
characteristics of students (particularly whether they are high
achieving, college bound, or lower achieving students).[^9]

Analysts have used some of these distinctions to develop typologies of
credit based transition programs, although no scheme includes all of the
transition programs discussed in this paper (Bragg, 2001; Clark, 2001;
Johnstone and Del Genio, 2001). Since we are particularly interested in
the effectiveness of transition programs for middle and lower achieving
students, we have developed a typology that differentiates among
programs in terms of their intensity and their ability to expose
students to a wide range of "college-like" experiences. The typology is
based on the assumption that, especially for students not traditionally
college-bound, the transition from high school to college involves more
than just an increase in academic rigor, although that is indeed a
crucial element. A successful transition requires an understanding of
what is necessary in college as well as the ability to acquire new
behaviors and attitudes. Motivational and psychological factors are
particularly important. The intensity of credit-based transition
programs varies in terms of how much of a students' educational
experience the program covers, how many aspects of the postsecondary
transition are included in the program, the degree to which students are
integrated into a college environment, and the amount of formal
assistance they receive with their transition to college.

We conceive of three broad categories of intensity:

-   ***Singleton programs***, which refer to stand-alone college-level
    courses;

-   ***Comprehensive programs***, which subsume most of a student's
    academic experience; and,

-   ***Enhanced Comprehensive programs***, which offer students college
    coursework coupled with guidance and support to ensure their success
    in postsecondary education.

We discuss each of these in turn, focusing on the ways that these
program types might serve lower-achieving students.

# 

# Singleton Programs

Usually offered as an elective with the primary goal of exposing
students to college-level academics, singleton transition programs are
often only a small part of a student's high school experiences. The goal
of singleton programs is not to recreate the college experience or to
accustom high school students to the expectations of postsecondary
education; rather, the programs aim to enrich the high school curriculum
by offering an opportunity to take a college-level class. A secondary
goal is to provide students with the opportunity to earn college credit
so that they may start their postsecondary education with a "head start"
towards graduation. Other aspects of the high school-college transition,
such as preparing applications or obtaining financial aid, do not
accompany singleton programs.

The Advanced Placement (AP) program is one of the most common singleton
programs. It allows students, as part of their regular high school
curriculum, to take one or more college-level courses during their
junior or senior year, but does not require them to replace the entire
high school curriculum with such courses (The College Board, 2002).
Likewise, many dual credit programs follow this model. Frequently, these
courses are taken before or after the regular school day, so that dual
credit participation becomes an addition to the normal high school
experience (rather than a replacement for it) (Robertson, Chapman, and
Gaskin, 2001; Garvey, personal communication). Finally, some Tech Prep
programs use this model, though it is not the preferred way to implement
Tech Prep (Bragg, 2001).

Singleton programs are generally offered through the high school and are
frequently taught by high school teachers, though some dual credit
programs allow students to take a course on a college campus or use
college faculty to teach high school-based courses. Curricular content
also varies: the AP program and some dual credit programs use a
specially-designed curriculum for high school students, while other dual
credit programs use the same syllabus, books, and exams as regular
college courses. Indeed, in some cases, high school students simply take
regular college courses on the college campus.

Although program and policy language conceives of singleton programs as
meeting the needs of a wide variety of students---for example, the
expansion of AP to a broader student population or the use of dual
credit to motivate middle-range students to challenge themselves in
interesting courses---the majority of the literature reveals that
students in these programs are highly motivated and academically
proficient. Only three of the 22 singleton programs encountered during
the preparation of this paper did not require students to be
college-bound or academically proficient.

Singleton transition credit-based programs, then, seem to provide
already high-performing students with the opportunity to challenge
themselves and further prepare for college-level work. Though they may
offer students the opportunity to learn behaviors and attitudes
necessary for college success, they do not provide a comprehensive
college preparation experience. Most focus only peripherally on teaching
the skills, such as study skills, that make college students successful.

# Comprehensive Programs

Comprehensive credit-based transition programs encompass much more of a
student's educational experience than singleton programs do. Most
programs in this category require that students take many, if not all,
of their courses, usually during the last year or two of high school,
under its auspices, either as an articulated series of courses spanning
many semesters or as their entire curriculum. As such, students may
begin to experience what it is like to "be" a college student, having to
learn to balance many challenging courses with other activities, to
organize their time wisely to complete all of their work, and to act in
ways that are commensurate with the behavioral expectations of a fully
matriculated college student. They may even learn to interact with older
students and to navigate their way around a college campus. However,
such learning is not the primary goal of the programs. Rather,
comprehensive programs, like singletons, see academic rigor and
enrichment, rather than social-psychological preparation for college, as
the primary goal. Therefore, unlike in the enhanced comprehensive
programs discussed in the next section, study habits and college culture
are not explicitly taught in regular comprehensive programs. In essence,
students are "thrown in" to a college-intensive experience without
specially created supports or structures.

The International Baccalaureate (IB) program is an example of a
comprehensive transition program. Students take all of their courses
within the program; as a result, the entire junior and senior years are
characterized by the rigorous academic expectations of the IB program.
Moreover, the level of skill that the IB program requires has prompted a
number of schools to institute pre-IB programs at the freshman and
sophomore levels; conceivably, students could spend their entire high
school experience preparing for college-level work through the IB
program (IBO, 2002). But so far, IB programs have attracted high
achieving students who often get information and support from their
families. As a result, IB programs have not emphasized the types of
support services that might be necessary for less well-prepared students
or those from families and social backgrounds that have not provided
students with insights to the entire college experience.

A second comprehensive program is an intensive version of dual credit,
as exemplified by the Running Start program in Washington State
(Washington State Board for Community and Technical Colleges, 2001;
Community College Research Center fieldwork, winter 2003).[^10] Such
dual credit programs allow students to essentially leave their high
school and enroll in college full-time, while counting their college
coursework toward the credits needed for high school graduation. In
other words, college replaces the high school experience. Students spend
their school days at the college, allowing them to experience the
expectations and lifestyle of a college student. However, these
experiences are an ancillary benefit, rather than an explicit goal. The
focus of Running Start is still rigorous academics and the ability to
earn up to a year's worth of college credit, rather than directly
teaching students about the high school-to-college transition.

Finally, some Tech Prep programs can be counted as comprehensive
transition programs (Bragg, 2001).[^11] In a comprehensive Tech Prep
program, Tech Prep faculty work with a single cohort of students and
focus on instruction that infuses academic preparation with
career-specific training. Students in this form of Tech Prep have a more
intense experience than those in a Tech Prep program that uses a
singleton approach. Tech Prep programs may also allow for a series of
articulated courses, where students enroll for multiple semesters into
successively advanced courses.

The key element of this model is its ability to include students' full
high school experience within a credit-based transition program. As is
evident from the program descriptions above, significant variation still
exists. Comprehensive programs can be located on either the high school
or the college campus, and be taught by either high school or college
teachers. Likewise, they may use specially created curricula, such as
the IB curriculum, or rely on college curriculum, as when dual credit
courses are taught on the college campus. Students may take their
courses with college students, or may be in a classroom with only their
high school peers. And, they may earn their college credit through
examination, through completion of coursework, or in-escrow[^12].

As with singleton credit-based programs, the majority of students in
comprehensive programs are academically advanced and ready for
college-level work. In our review of the literature, we found twelve
comprehensive programs. Six were academically oriented---dual credit or
IB---and were specifically targeted for academically proficient
students. Like the IB program, Running Start caters to more advanced
students. For example, a study conducted by the Washington State Board
for Community and Technical Colleges (2001) found that students enrolled
in Running Start had an average high school grade point average of 3.65
and an average combined SAT score of 1180 prior to program entry.

The six comprehensive programs in our sample that included
middle-achieving students were all Tech Prep programs. These programs
were founded with the mission to serve students from the middle ranges
of academic achievement (Bragg, 2001). However, they often do not lead
directly to college credit; rather, they provide students with
articulated course or credit in-escrow.

Comprehensive credit-based transition programs offer students more
intensive college preparation than singleton programs do. As a result of
their intensity, they may offer students more of an opportunity to learn
the behaviors and attitudes required for success in college than
singletons. However, their primary focus remains on academic
preparation, exposure to rigorous course work, and the ability to earn
college credit. Give the more extensive range of experiences, it is more
likely that these programs will have the psychological and motivational
effects that are in theory the basis of their effectiveness for less
prepared students, but the programs do not build in features to
purposefully promote and strengthen those effects.

**Enhanced Comprehensive Programs**

Enhanced comprehensive programs are the most intensive form of
credit-based transition program is. These programs seek to prepare
students for college, not only through rigorous academic instruction,
but also by offering a wide-range of activities such as counseling,
assistance with applications, mentoring, and general personal support.
They aim to address all elements of the secondary-postsecondary
transition, and encompass the majority of students' high school
experiences. Because of their intensity and reliance on close
student-teacher relationships, these programs are much less common than
those fitting the other two categories. However, they appear to be best
suited to the needs of nontraditional college students and to have the
most potential to move non-academically advanced students into
postsecondary education.

By far the most common type of an enhanced comprehensive program is the
Middle college high school (MCHS). Many of these high schools are
located on community college campuses. As we noted, these were
established to help students at-risk of dropping out of high school meet
graduation requirements and transition into postsecondary education. By
attending school on a college campus, students at MCHS are continually
exposed to the demands and expectations of college, learn how to apply
to the college, and become comfortable in the college environment. The
support offered by MCHS staff often continues after high school
graduation; students who matriculate into the partnered postsecondary
institution can maintain their ties to their high school while adjusting
to full-time college attendance.

Some dual credit programs have also begun to implement intensive college
preparation components. College Now in New York City, for example, often
includes enrichment courses and remedial experiences to students not
qualified for college credit-bearing courses (Garvey, personal
communication, February 2003; Kleiman, 2001). Though these experiences
are somewhat less intense than a true "comprehensive" experience, in
that many occur as supplements to the regular high school curriculum,
the College Now program begins working with students in a structured way
as early as their freshman year; by the time students are in the twelfth
grade, college preparation and transition activities have infused their
high school experience in a way that goes beyond the regular high school
curriculum.

Not all College Now programs include this aspect, but those that do work
to ensure that students are ready for the academic and social challenges
of college.[^13] For example, freshmen and sophomores may take courses
in the history of music that teach them independent research skills, and
sophomores and juniors can participate in SAT preparation courses.
Throughout, students learn about the behavioral expectations of being in
college while honing their academic skills.

Although enhanced comprehensive programs are more likely to be designed
for at-risk or non-college-bound students, many do have restrictive
entrance requirements. For example, recent expansion of the middle
college high school model in New York is predicated on the success of
Simon's Rock College of Bard, a college which is explicitly designed for
academically advanced high school students, although promotes the
earning of college credit prior to traditional "college age" (Simon's
Rock College, 2003).[^14] Thus, New York City has opened four new Early
College high schools that allow students to take advanced coursework on
a college campus and earn credit toward an associate's degree (and in
some cases, the associate's degree itself). All four of these schools
have rigorous entrance requirements. Three use the same entrance exam
the city's most elite high schools use, while the fourth screens
students according to their middle school grades, assessment test
scores, and an interview (Bard High School Early College, 2002; New York
City Board of Education, 2002).

While other middle college high schools, including La Guardia Middle
College High School in New York City, explicitly focus on less
academically advanced students, they also seek students who will "fit"
with the program model (Wechsler, 2001). In other words, it is not clear
that even those programs designed to meet the needs of the average or
educationally disadvantaged student truly do so. Furthermore, there is a
tendency for middle college high schools to escalate their entry
requirements as they feel pressure to improve student outcomes.[^15]

At noted, enhanced comprehensive programs are more likely to be focused
on middle or low achieving students and on youth who are socially or
economically disadvantaged, although many still have restrictive
entrance requirements. They are more likely to be located on a college
campus than other transition programs, though many are located at the
high school. They use a mix of high school and college faculty, as well
as a mix of specially created and regular college curricula. Students
usually remain in classes with their high school peers; the exception
tends to be students in MCHS courses who take dual credit classes at the
college. Finally, students earn college credit through course
completion, although some programs do not offer college credit for their
non-academic activities, such as SAT preparation.

Given evidence (see Tinto, 1993) that the transition from high school to
college involves more than just academics, enhanced comprehensive
programs appear to be the most likely category of program to address the
wide range of student needs. They are distinguished from comprehensive
programs by their explicit attempts to promote the motivational and
psychological effects that are believed to be crucial for the
effectiveness of these programs for less-well prepared students.

## EVIDENCE OF PROGRAM IMPACT

Do credit-based transition programs increase college enrollment and
success, especially for other than the traditionally college bound? In
this section we draw on published and unpublished research to answer
this question.

It is clear from the available literature that research on the effects
of transition programs is at a very early stage. While we reviewed 45
articles and reports, only 21 discussed program outcomes. The remaining
24 studies were qualitative or descriptive, or they focused on student
and parental opinions and attitudes about the programs. They did not
attempt to measure effects of program participation. These articles
varied in terms of the rigor and definitiveness of their methodologies.

Of the 21 that did attempt to report on outcomes, few attempted to take
account of other factors that might influence program outcomes, such as
student characteristics, prior student achievement or motivation. Given
that many programs have entry requirements, it is difficult to discern
whether measured outcomes result from the selectivity of the programs or
the experience that the students have in the programs.

Our report on the available research is divided roughly according to our
three categories: singleton, comprehensive, and enhanced comprehensive.
We recognize that this is somewhat arbitrary since some studies include
programs that could be categorized in more than one group; nevertheless,
our goal is to search for a general sense of any differences among these
approaches.

**Singleton Programs**

Studies have used a variety of outcome measures including college
enrollment, freshman year and subsequent success, or college graduation.
Most studies do come to relatively positive conclusions. In one study
dual enrollment students from one program in Arizona graduated from high
school at higher rates than students who did not participate in dual
enrollment (Finch, 1997). Analysis of institutional data from Monroe
Community College (NY) (2003) found that dual credit students who
enrolled in the college full-time after high school were less likely
than other first time, full-time freshman to score below 80 percent on a
college placement test of reading, had higher first semester grade point
averages, and were more likely to persist to the second semester of
their freshman year. Other studies have shown that dual enrollment
students do as well or better in upper division and advanced coursework
as students who took the prerequisite courses after they started college
(Chatman and Smith, 1998; Morgan and Ramist, 1998; Windham, 1997;
Washington State Board for Community and Technical Colleges, 2001).
However, none of these studies controlled for students' prior academic
performance or other attributes, nor did they focus on possible effects
on students not typically seen as college-bound.

One study of dual enrollment programs, carried out by researchers at the
University of Arizona (1999), did control for prior academic
achievement. The authors compared students who had participated in
either AP or dual enrollment (or both) to those who did not participate
in any credit-based transition program to explore program impact on
early college success. Though participants in the transition programs
had stronger high school achievement than non-participants, the study
was able to control for high school grade point average and SAT scores
in its analysis. The authors found that students who had participated in
transition programs experienced lower drops in their grade point
averages during their freshman year then other students, and the authors
suggested that this difference indicated a positive impact on college
success stemming from participation in AP or dual enrollment. Although
they did control for GPA and SAT scores, it is still possible that
unmeasured differences between the two groups could account for the
contrasting outcomes. And once again, this study was not focused on
lower achieving students, particularly in its focus on AP.

Some studies have tried to explore the implications of different
characteristics within singleton programs. Burns and Lewis (2000)
conducted a tiny exploratory study of six students evenly split between
high school- and college-based dual enrollment courses; the two small
samples were matched so that the students were of similar academic
backgrounds. Through open-ended interviews, the researchers asked
students about their experiences and perceptions of their dual
enrollment course.

All students felt positively about their experience and desired further
opportunities to take college courses, those in high school-based
programs were less satisfied than those in college-based programs. The
students who took their college courses on a high school campus felt
that the courses did not differ much from their other high school
courses. In contrast, students who took their courses on a college
campus felt that they learned more than just academics: they stated that
they felt more independent, responsible, and grown-up.

Some colleges are also more skeptical about dual enrollment courses
given on campus. Johnstone and Del Genio (2001) conducted a survey of
451 postsecondary institutions, asking about their acceptance of college
credit earned while still in high school. Nearly one-third of all
institutions indicated that they were "suspicious" of credit earned
through transition programs offered in the high school; as a result,
many refused to grant credit for those courses.

Hebert (2001) explored the differences between singleton dual enrollment
models that used different types of teachers. She studied the college
transcripts of five dual enrollment cohorts in a math course. Only those
students who earned a C in their course and subsequently enrolled in a
state college were included. The entire sample took their dual
enrollment course on the high school campus, but half had high school
teachers and half had college professors as instructors.

The study found that the mean grade in college mathematics was higher
for those students who had high school teachers for their dual
enrollment course. Likewise, the grade distribution in college math
differed between the two groups, with many more students who had a
college professor for their dual enrollment course earning low grades
and students who had a high school teacher earning more As and Bs. On
the face of it, this conclusion seems in tension with the results of the
Burns and Lewis study. Perhaps, however, students simply find it more
exciting to be on a college campus, although the high school teachers
who teach college courses in high school, and who naturally have more
experience working with high school students, produce more positive
outcomes. Nevertheless, these studies are too preliminary to draw strong
conclusions.

Overall, the results for singleton programs are relatively positive, but
can only be considered tentative. With the exception of the Arizona
study, none take prior academic achievement into account. Moreover, most
students in singleton programs are traditionally college-bound or higher
achieving students.

**Comprehensive Programs**

The body of research on Tech Prep is the largest source of quantitative
studies of credit-based transition programs. Moreover, Tech Prep
programs are, for the most part, not aimed at typical college-bound high
school students. Tech Prep programs are diverse and some could be placed
into all of the three categories outlined in the typology. And as we
have pointed out, earning credit in high school is not necessarily a
fundamental component of Tech Prep. Nevertheless, most Tech Prep
advocates would argue that Tech Prep would work best if it includes a
comprehensive set of courses, so we will consider it a comprehensive
program for our purposes.

As part of the national evaluation of Tech Prep,[^16] Bragg (2001)
conducted a transcript analysis of Tech Prep students and matched
comparison groups in eight Tech Prep consortia. Though the sampling
procedure intended to ensure that Tech Prep students and comparison
students were similar, the two samples differed slightly[^17]. There is
no indication, however, that the two groups differed on measures of
academic performance, such as grade point average or class rank.

The study found that, in each of the eight consortia studied, at least
65 percent of Tech Prep students enrolled in postsecondary education
within three years of high school graduation (but did not state what
percentage of the comparison group did so). Tech Prep students were more
likely than the comparison group to attend a two-year college (though
the difference was not statistically significant). They were also more
likely than comparison students to choose to work full-time instead of
attending postsecondary education.

Another study of Tech Prep was conducted by the New York State
Department of education (Brodsky, et al, 1997; Brodsky and Arroyo,
1999). It also used a matched sample of Tech Prep and comparison
students, although the Tech Prep students did have higher levels of
10^th^ grade academic achievement than the comparison group.
Nonetheless, statistical analyses controlling for these preexisting
differences found that Tech Prep students had higher grade point
averages in 11^th^ and 12^th^ grades than did comparison students, had
better attendance and Regents Math II (New York State academic
assessment) scores, and were more likely to graduate from high school in
four years than the comparison group (Brodsky, et al, 1997). However,
Tech Prep students had lower SAT scores. A follow-up to this study
(Brodsky and Arroyo, 1999) also found positive results, but many
students left the study, meaning that the two samples were no longer
similar. In conducting the follow-up analyses, the authors made
comparisons without controlling for individual differences.

Thus, the research on comprehensive programs, primarily on Tech Prep,
reaches tentatively optimistic results. Some authors of Tech Prep
studies did create matched samples and attempted to control for some
background characteristics and still found positive effects for students
in the program.

**Enhanced Comprehensive Programs**

The middle college high school comes closest to our definition of an
enhanced comprehensive program and there is also a body of research on
the middle college high school model, which, as we have pointed out, is
often focused on at-risk students. Wechsler (2001) reports that internal
evaluations of the original middle college high school, LaGuardia Middle
College, found that MCHS students generally performed better than the
average for students in other alternative schools (which also drew from
at-risk student populations) and for city students as a whole on
measures of academic achievement, and the students had higher graduation
rates and lower dropout rates. However, these studies are dated---most
looked at students who graduated in the late 1970s and 1980s, and none
were published after 1991. They also found that MCHS graduates were
unlikely to earn a bachelor's degree within four years of graduation and
more likely to earn a two-year degree than a four-year degree, and that
graduates felt that their academic preparation was relatively weak
(Wechsler, 2001). Unfortunately, the research was unable to compare
these outcomes to those for other, similar students who did not attend a
middle college high school.

Another study (AEL, 2002) found that students in two California middle
college high schools had high test scores on state assessment tests.
More MCHS students were successful on both math and reading tests
(scoring at advanced, proficient, or basic levels) than district and
county averages. However, some of this aggregate advantage appears to
come from high numbers of students scoring at the "basic" level rather
than at the "advanced" level. Additionally, while the two middle college
high schools included in this study did focus on students with low
levels of academic performance, the students were specially screened to
ensure that they had a high level of potential, as indicated by test
scores at or above grade level and good attendance records (AEL, 2002).

Greenberg (1988) compared student achievement in three credit-based
transition programs, including a middle college high school, to a
national sample of 20,000 college students maintained by the Cooperative
Institutional Research Program at the University of California, Los
Angeles, which collects demographic and academic information on incoming
college students. The programs---Middle College High School (MCHS),
City-as-School, and College Now---all served at-risk students, while the
national sample was drawn from a representative sample of first-time
college students. In their college-level coursework (completed while in
high school), the students were successful, with grades ranging from C
to B-. However, only College Now students performed comparably to the
national sample; students in MCHS and City-as-School had lower grades in
their college courses (taken during high school) than students
nationally. The study did not follow the students into postsecondary
education, so offers no indication of their college performance.

We also categorized the College Now program in New York as an enhanced
comprehensive program (though it is not always implemented as such), and
researchers found that College Now students were less likely than other
City University of New York (CUNY) freshmen to need remediation when
they entered CUNY (Kleiman, 2001). College Now students who enrolled in
the CUNY system were twice as likely as other CUNY students to graduate
from college on time (Kleiman, 2001).

A study of a comprehensive dual enrollment program for
vocationally-oriented, at-risk students found mixed results (AEL, 2002).
Tracking academic outcomes from three cohorts of students, researchers
found that dual enrollment students were generally successful in their
courses, both at the high school and college level. Depending on the
cohort, between 57 and 68 percent of entering dual enrollment students
graduated from high school; comparable numbers for students not in the
program are not given. However, the program became more selective over
time, so it is not clear that these positive results are actually from a
group of students who might be considered disadvantaged.

Finally, in Bragg's (2001) Tech Prep study, she did find that one Tech
Prep consortium followed a model that we would probably categorize as an
enhanced comprehensive strategy. This consortium used an integrated
program model that focused on college readiness and preparation for
baccalaureate education. While she found that students in most Tech Prep
consortia were more likely than students in the comparison group to
enroll in two- rather than in four-year colleges, students in this
consortium were more likely than the comparison group to attend a
four-year college. Thus, Bragg speculates that program model and focus
has an influence on student transition to college (2001, p. 31).

Overall, the research relevant to the enhanced comprehensive model,
primarily research on the middle college high school, is inconclusive.
While the results were mixed, none of the studies used comparison groups
that would allow conclusions about the effectiveness of the MCHS model.
But while these studies were somewhat less positive than the studies of
other models, it should be emphasized that these programs were also more
likely to enroll at-risk or lower achieving students.

**CONCLUSIONS AND DIRECTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH**

Interest in credit-based transition programs has grown dramatically in
the last several years. Although none of the various strategies that
make up these transition programs are new, the last decade has seen a
departure from the past along two dimensions. First is simply the
magnitude of the phenomenon. Advanced Placement, International
Baccalaureate, and dual enrollment/dual credit programs have all grown
dramatically. Tech-Prep was already large, but it has shifted towards a
greater emphasis on dual credit. Nationally, reformers also have plans
to develop new middle college high schools or other forms of high
schools with dual credit components. Second, the enthusiasm among many
of the advocates arises from the growing conviction that this strategy
can work for disaffected and middle and lower performing students.

The appeal of credit-based transition programs is obvious. At a time
when educators and policymakers are discouraged with high schools and
convinced that some postsecondary education is a necessity for everyone,
these programs evoke a powerful image in which disengaged high school
students are pulled into college by setting high expectations and
providing them with concrete information about what college is like,
where they stand in terms of college preparation, and what they need to
do to be successful in college. Although the dual enrollment movement
was well established during the boom of the past decade, the more recent
state and local fiscal crises have given added impetus to a program that
appears to be able to telescope high school and college and thereby save
money for students, state governments, local governments, or some
combination of all three.

This report has sought to summarize what we know about these transition
programs based on existing published and unpublished material both to
help educators and policymakers now and to help establish an overall
research agenda for the future.

If we were to state one conclusion from this review, it would be that so
far we know little that is definitive about the overall characteristics
and effects of these programs. A handful of studies have tried to
measure effects, but most of these do not even take the elementary
statistical step of controlling for prior academic achievement or other
possible personal characteristics that might influence student outcomes.
Experience and logic for the most part have fueled the continued
development of the programs. Arguments in favor of the strategy may be
compelling enough to continue experimentation, but while that is
happening, policymakers and educators need to pursue research in a
variety of areas:

***Gather information on the size and characteristics of the
programs.*** Although it appears that the programs are spreading, we
lack any clear sense of how many students are involved. Many states are
unable to give even rough estimates. Further, we have identified several
important characteristics of dual enrollment programs---for example,
whether the course is given at the high school or the college and
whether it is taught by a high school teacher or college professor---but
there is no comprehensive information about the distribution of these
characteristics among existing programs.

***Examine the content of courses taught in transition programs***.
Credit-based transition programs, in principle, teach college-level
material. Do they? It is likely that this will be the case when high
school students actually participate in college level courses on campus,
but our sense is that this accounts for a minority of students in
transition programs. Some authors are skeptical that courses taught at
the high school are indeed taught at a college level. And to the extent
that lower-achieving students are recruited, then there may be a
tendency to compromise the course content.

***Develop more precise information on the distribution of the
characteristics of students in transition programs**.* Much of the
recent growth in interest in credit-based transition programs results
from a conviction that such programs can improve educational outcomes
for a broad range of students. Nevertheless, we do not have definitive
information on the distribution of characteristics of participating
students. Our overall sense is that these programs are still most likely
to attract traditionally college-bound students, and even those which
seek a broader range of student participants have entry requirements
that may screen out many of the students who need help. We did see an
example of an escalation of entry requirements, and while this is only
one case, it is easy to understand the incentives that lead to this type
of outcome.

***Develop a clearer explanation of the mechanisms through which
credit-based transition programs* *can effectively help middle and lower
achieving students gain greater access to and have more success in
college*.** In the past, transition programs have had a clear and easily
understood role for college-bound students who have completed many of
their high school requirements and are academically ready for college.
But educators and policymakers now have more ambitious plans for these
programs. There are many possible reasons why such programs could serve
a broader range of students. Advocates have not been explicit about
which mechanisms are most important, although generally it appears that
advocates believe that motivational and psychological effects are key.
It is important that this be clarified. Otherwise, it will be more
difficult to resist the tendencies either to make the programs more
selective or to compromise the curriculum.

***Conduct clear, methodologically sound evaluations of credit-based
transition programs***. Overall, the studies that we have reviewed come
to positive conclusions: students in transition programs do as well or
better than other students. But conclusions from this research can only
be considered tentative. Only a handful of studies make any attempt to
construct an appropriate comparison group. Only two studies used
statistical techniques that control for academic ability and other
personal characteristics. And while these tended to find positive
effects, unmeasured factors related to the enrollment selection
processes may account for some or all of the positive results.
Therefore, overall it is difficult to differentiate the effects of the
program from differences in characteristics of the entering students.
Future research should control for student characteristics, take into
account program implementation features, and explore long-term impacts.

***Conduct research on the impact of different program models on student
outcomes**.* Two small-scale studies do suggest that the location of the
course and the type of teacher may influence student outcomes. On the
basis of available research, we are not able to reach conclusions about
differences in the effectiveness of the three different types of
strategies that we defined in out conceptual framework. Indeed, a
superficial reading of the research suggests that the enhanced
comprehensive programs are the least successful. But this may be because
they are the ones most likely to enroll less traditionally college-bound
students.

The literature suggests that transition programs potentially hold
promise, yet does not convincingly document that this promise is
realized. It offers evidence for continued support of such transition
programs, but also draws attention to the need first for much more
comprehensive and reliable information on program and student
characteristics, and also for sound research that both evaluates program
outcomes and explores the mechanisms and program features that
contribute to any positive influence they may have on students'
transitions into and through postsecondary education.

**[Bibliography]{.underline}**

# Adelman, C. (1999). *Answers in the Tool Box: Academic Intensity, Attendance Patterns,*

# *and Bachelor's Degree Attainment*. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education,

# Office of Educational Research and Improvement. 

AEL. (2002). *High Schools on College Campuses.* Charleston, WV: Author.

Andrews, H. (2001). *The Dual-Credit Phenomenon! Challenging secondary
school students across 50 states.* Stillwater, OK: New Forums Press.

Arenson, K.W. (2002, 19 March). "Gates to create 70 schools for
disadvantaged."

*The New York Times*, p. A16.

Bailey, T.R. (2002) "Community College in the 21^st^ Century: Challenges
and Opportunities." In P.A. Gram and N. Stacey (eds.) *The Knowledge
Economy and Postsecondary Education*: *A Report of a Workshop*.
Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Bard High School Early College. (2002). Program materials. Internet:
[www.bard.edu/bhsec/about/](http://www.bard.edu/bhsec/about/) \[Accessed
10 February 2003\].

Bragg, D.D. (2001). *Promising outcomes for Tech Prep participants in
eight local consortia: A summary of initial results*. St. Paul, MN:
National Research Center for Career and Technical Education.

Brodsky, S.M., D.L. Newman, C.G. Arroyo, & J.M. Fabozzi. (1997).
*Evaluation of Tech Prep in New York State.* Final Report. Albany, NY:
New York State Education Department.

Brodsky, S.M., and C.G. Arroyo. (1999). *The College Pairs Study:
Evaluation of Tech Prep in New York State.* Albany, NY: New York State
Education Department.

Burns, H., and B. Lewis. (2000). "Dual-Enrolled Students' perceptions of
the effect of classroom environment on educational experience." *The
Qualitative Report,* 4 (1). Internet:
[www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR4-1/burns.html](http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR4-1/burns.html)
\[Accessed 10 October 2002\].

Chatman S., & Smith, K. (1998, April). "Dual-credit preparation for
further study in foreign languages." *NASSP Bulletin,* 82 (597): 99-107.

Clark, R.W. (2001). *Dual Credit: A report of progress and policies that
offer high school students college credits.* Executive Summary.
Philadelphia: The Pew Charitable Trusts.

Community College Research Center. Fieldwork. Winter, 2003.

Education Commission of the States (ECS). Center for Community College
Policy. (2001). *Postsecondary options: Dual/concurrent enrollment.*
Internet: www.ecs.org \[Accessed: 1/30/02\].

Finch, P. (1997). *Fall 1997 Intervention Assessment: The status of
concurrent/dual enrollment.* Phoenix, AZ: Phoenix Think Tank.

Garvey, J. Director of Pre-College and Collaborative Programs, City
University of New York. Personal communication with the authors. 3
February 2003.

Greenberg, A.R. (1998). "High school students in college courses: Three
programs." Pp. 69-84 in Lieberman, ed, *New Directions for Community
Colleges, 63: Collaborating with High Schools*. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.

Hebert, L. (2001). "A comparison of learning outcomes for
dual-enrollment mathematics students taught by high school teachers
versus college faculty." *Community College Review*, 29 (3): 22-38.

Hudson Valley Community College. (1998). College in the High School
Evaluation Report. Troy, NY: Author.

International Baccalaureate Organization (IBO). (2002). Program
materials. Internet:

[www.ibo.org](http://www.ibo.org/) \[Accessed: 6 June 2002\].

International Baccalaureate Organization (IBO). (2001). *North American
Statistical*

*Summary: May 2001 Examination Session.* New York: Author.

Johnstone, D.B., and B. Del Genio. (2001). *College-level learning in
high school: Purposes, policies, and implications*. Washington, DC:
Association of American Colleges and Universities.

Johnson County Community College, Office of Institutional Research.
(2002). *Follow-up Study of former College Now Students---Class of 2000
and Class of 2001.* Overland Park, KS: Author.

Kleiman, N.S. (2001, June). *Building a highway to higher ed: How
collaborative efforts are changing education in America*. New York: The
Center for an Urban Future.

Lords, E. (2000). "New efforts at community colleges focus on
underachieving teens." *The Chronicle of Higher Education.* June 30,
2000, p. A45.

Melican, C., D. Fekru, & R. Morgan. (1997). "Comparing AP and college
student learning of economics." *The Journal of Economic Education*, 28:
135-142.

Monroe Community College (2003). Dual credit tracking. Rochester, NY:
Monroe Community College, Office of Institutional Research.

Mooney, J. Assistant Director, K-12 Program Management and District &
State

Services, The College Board. Personal communication with the authors. 19
June, 2002.

Morgan, R., and L. Ramist. (1998). *Advanced Placement students in
college: An investigation of course grades at 21 colleges.* Princeton,
NJ: Educational Testing Service.

National Academy Foundation. (2001). Program Materials. New York:
Author.

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). (2001). The condition
of education 2001. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

National Commission on the High School Senior Year. (2001, October).
*Raising our sights: No high school senior left behind*. Princeton, NJ:
The Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation.

New York City Board of Education. (2002). *2002-2003 Specialized High
Schools Student Handbook.* New York: Author.

Noel, L., R. Levitz, and D. Saluri. (1985). *Increasing student
retention*. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Orr, M.T. (2002). *Dual enrollment: Developments, trends and impacts.*
Presentation to the Community College Research Center, Teachers College,
Columbia University. New York, NY. January 25, 2002.

Orr, M.T. (1998). Integrating secondary schools and community colleges
through school-to-work transition and education reform. *Journal of
Vocational Education Research, 23*(2), 93-113.

Orr, M.T. (1999, May). *Community college and secondary school
collaboration on workforce development and education reform: A close
look at four community colleges*. New York: Community College Research
Center, Teachers College, Columbia University.

Robertson, P.F., B.G. Chapman, and F. Gaskin. (2001). *Systems for
offering concurrent enrollment at high schools and community colleges.*
New Directions for Community colleges, No. 113. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.

Simon's Rock College of Bard. (2002). Program materials. Internet:
<http://simons-rock.edu/> \[Accessed 10 February 2003\].

The College Board. (2002). AP program materials. Internet:

[www.apcentral.collegeboard.com](http://www.apcentral.collegeboard.com/)
\[Accessed 6 June 2002\].

The College Board. (2001a). *Access to Excellence: A Report to the
Commission on the Future of the Advanced Placement Program.* New York:
College Entrance Examination Board.

The College Board. (2001b). *Trends in College Pricing.* Washington, DC:
Author.

Tinto, V. (1993). *Leaving College: Rethinking the causes and cures of
student attrition.* Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Second
Edition.

United States Department of Education, Office of Vocational and Adult
Education. (2003). *The Secondary and Technical Education Excellence Act
of 2003: Overview for FY 2004 Budget Release.* Washington, DC: Author.

University of Arizona. (1999). *Community college and AP credit: An
analysis of the impact on Freshman grades.* Tucson, AZ: Author.
Internet:
[www.aer.arizona.edu/Enrollment/Papers/dualenr.pdf](http://www.aer.arizona.edu/Enrollment/Papers/dualenr.pdf)
\[Accessed: 7 January, 2003\].

Venezia, A. M.W. Kirst, and A.L. Antonio. (2003). *Betraying the College
Dream: How Disconnected K-12 and Postsecondary Education Systems
Undermine Student Aspirations*. Palo, Alto CA: The Bridge Project,
Stanford Institute for Higher Education Research.

Washington State Board for Community and Technical Colleges. (2001).
*Running Start: 2000-2001 Annual Progress Report.* Olympia, Washington:
Author.

Wechsler, H. (2001). *Access to Success in the Urban High School: The
Middle College Movement.* New York: Teachers College Press.

Windham, P. (1997). *High School and Community College dual enrollment:
Issues of rigor and transferability.* Tallahassee: FL State Board of
Community Colleges.

ERIC Document: ED413936

[^1]: **[Notes]{.underline}**

    ^?^ Of those who entered postsecondary education for the first time
    in the 1995-1996 school year, 37 percent had left two years later
    without having earned a degree or certificate. In 2000, 66 percent
    of high school graduates aged 25 to 29 had completed some college
    but only 33 percent of graduates held a bachelor's degree (NCES,
    2001).

[^2]: There are many forms of transition programs not included in this
    report. Some, such as the federally funded GEAR UP and TRIO
    programs, provide low-income students or students whose parents did
    not attend college with intensive academic and social experiences.
    Others, particularly those programs run by colleges themselves, are
    focused on orienting students to "college life" by providing them
    with social and emotional support during their initial entry into
    postsecondary education. These varied initiatives are beyond the
    scope of this paper, however.

[^3]: We reviewed 45 published and unpublished reports, articles, and
    books on dual enrollment, AP, IB, Tech Prep, and Middle College High
    Schools. To do so, we conducted an ERIC literature search and sought
    out the references used in others' publications on credit-based
    transition programs. We contacted individuals at the state level and
    at postsecondary institutions in order to find out if institutional
    documents existed. In total, we contacted individuals in ten states,
    as well as from Syracuse University Project Advance, the National
    Alliance of Concurrent Enrollment Programs, the College Board, and
    the International Baccalaureate Organization.

[^4]: See Bragg, et al forthcoming for an extensive discussion of the
    results of this study pertaining to credit-based transition
    programs.

[^5]: We offer these numbers not as representative sample of all
    programs, but as a way to give a rough estimate of the extent to
    which credit-based transition programs require students to be
    academically successful.

[^6]: Although in this report we are discussing benefits to students,
    colleges, high schools, and state and local governments may have an
    institutional interest in these programs. At one college visited by
    the authors, the college received full reimbursement for dual
    enrolled high school students, but the costs were very low---classes
    were held at the high schools and taught by adjuncts or high school
    teachers receiving adjunct pay. In some cases both high schools and
    colleges receive reimbursements for the same student. In general,
    accelerating education (one effect of transition programs) saves
    public funds, since most education, even at the post-secondary
    level, is publicly funded. In some cases, such programs, especially
    in technical areas, obviate the need for high schools to purchase
    expensive equipment. So part of the increase in interest in these
    credit-based transition programs may result from fiscal pressure on
    public education budgets. For a fuller discussion of institutional
    incentives for participation, see (Bailey 2002) and Bragg, et al,
    forthcoming).

[^7]: Johnson County (KS) Community College (2002) conducted a survey of
    726 former dual enrollment students. Of those who had enrolled in
    postsecondary education and requested transcripts in order to earn
    transfer credit, 82 percent reported that they were able to transfer
    all of the credits they earned during high school course-for-course;
    another 6 percent were able to transfer their credits, but as
    electives. Less than 10 percent reported that they were unable to
    transfer any of their credits. Most of the respondents were
    attending state institutions, and no attempt was made to explore
    differences in credit transfer among state versus private or
    out-of-state colleges.

[^8]: www.earlycolleges.org

[^9]: ^?^ For a more detailed discussion of these differences, see
    Bailey, Hughes, and Karp (2002).

[^10]: Some students in Running Start attend college for only part of
    the school day. However, CCRC interviews with school staff indicate
    that most Running Start students do attend college full time.

[^11]: ^?^ It is important to note that not all Tech Prep courses lead
    to college credit; only the more advanced courses do so, and even
    then, some institutional arrangements make it difficult for students
    to receive this credit towards a postsecondary degree.

[^12]: ^?^ "Credit-in-escrow" refers to a common arrangement in Tech
    Prep in which students do not immediately receive college credit for
    high school coursework. Instead, they must successfully enroll in
    and complete a sequence of courses at a community college in order
    to retroactively receive college credit for their high school work.
    This arrangement has come under some controversy, since many
    students are unaware of this arrangement or find it cumbersome, and
    so do not apply to receive college credit for their high school
    courses, causing them to re-take classes or pay needlessly for
    additional college credit (CCRC fieldwork).

[^13]: ^?^ Fieldwork conducted by the Community College Research Center
    during the winter of 2003 found that many aspects of College Now
    extend beyond the academic preparation for college.

[^14]: ^?^ Interestingly, the middle college model as initially
    conceived was intended to meet the needs of at-risk students (see,
    for example, Wechsler's 2001 study of the origins of La Guardia
    Middle College). However, justifications for the expansion of the
    middle college/early college model focuses on Bard College rather
    than on the success of more traditional middle college high schools
    (cf. Arenson, 2002).

[^15]: ^?^ Researchers studying two middle college high schools in
    California (AEL, 2002) found that, over time, the program shifted
    its student mix, so that severely at-risk students and minorities
    were less represented in 2000 than they had been in 1989. High
    attrition rates in the early years of the program (when nearly half
    the entering students were at high risk of dropping out of high
    school) led program administrators to implement screening criteria
    and requirements, including the ability for students to pass a test
    of basic skills (AEL, 2002). As a result, the grade point average of
    students prior to program entry rose dramatically. The median GPA of
    entering students in 1989 was 1.98, and students in this cohort were
    absent from high school an average of 15.5 days the year prior to
    program entry. In contrast, the median GPA for the 2000 cohort was
    2.93, and students were absent an average of eight days in the year
    prior to program entry. Clearly, the focus on at-risk students
    shifted. This shift is attributed to program administrators'
    recognition that the most severely disadvantaged students were
    unlikely to be successful in a program that places them in college
    classes with college students.

[^16]: For both studies of Tech Prep reported on in this section, it is
    not clear that all Tech Prep students participated in courses that
    allowed them to earn college credit while still in high school. It
    is probable, however, that most students had the opportunity to earn
    at least credit-in-escrow.

[^17]: ^?^ Tech Prep students were slightly more likely to be male,
    members of a minority group, and from a family with an income under
    \$30,000 than comparison students.