Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students

By Vickie Choitz and Heath Prince

A Report by

FutureWorks and Jobs for the Future

for the

Employment and Training Administration

U.S. Department of Labor

April 2008
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 2

Table of Contents

I. Introduction.................................................................................................................. 3

II. The Challenges Facing Adult Learners in Higher Education ................................. 5

III. Alternative Approaches for Delivering

Postsecondary Education to Meet the Needs of Adult Learners ............................... 9

Course Scheduling and Location ........................................................................10

Course Design.....................................................................................................12

Program Design ..................................................................................................13

Distance Learning ...............................................................................................20

IV. Profiles of Innovative Alternative Delivery Designs............................................. 22

Community College of Denver CNA to LPN Program .........................................22

Madisonville Community and Technical College Accelerated

Weekend Nurse Programs ..................................................................................26

Open-Entry/Open-Exit Remedial Math Course ...................................................29

Portland and Mt. Hood Community Colleges ......................................................32

Washington State Integrated Basic Education and Skills Training (I-BEST).......36

V. Barriers and Strategies ............................................................................................ 40

Overview .............................................................................................................42

Online Survey......................................................................................................44

Strategies for Overcoming Barriers. ....................................................................45

VI. Conclusion............................................................................................................... 49

Bibliography .................................................................................................................. 50

Appendix A:

SHEEO Survey Protocol............................................................................................... 52

Appendix B:

Primer on Federal Title IV Student Financial Aid “Eligible Programs”.................... 58

Endnotes........................................................................................................................ 60
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 3

I. Introduction

In a March 2006 report to the Department of Labor, Adult Learners in Higher Education:

Barriers to Success and Strategies to Improve Results, Jobs for the Future,

Eduventures, and FutureWorks assessed the obstacles facing adult learners who want

to earn postsecondary credentials and pointed toward innovative policies and practices

that could improve their postsecondary outcomes. One significant barrier the paper

identified is the inflexible nature of traditional program and course design. Adults need a

range of flexible design and delivery options that recognize the time constraints facing

people who work, have family responsibilities and are trying to upgrade their skills to be

more competitive in the labor market and improve their standard of living. Such designs

are emerging and maturing across the country, particularly in the community college

sector. Yet, the development, expansion, and diffusion of these options, particularly of

entire credential programs, have been slow and isolated in particular pockets of

creativity.

This paper takes a closer look at emerging trends in public postsecondary education that

offer adult learners more flexible access to courses and help accelerate their progress

through credential programs. FutureWorks and Jobs for the Future have examined the

literature and conducted interviews with public postsecondary education practitioners

and research experts and fielded two surveys with state-level experts in an effort to

identify barriers to program development and diffusion, identify promising practices, and

solicit examples of model programs. A companion paper prepared for this project by Dr.

Mary Gatta of Rutgers University, Online Programming for Sub-baccalaureate

Credentials, explores online learning options for lower-skill adult learners. Assessments

of trends in the for-profit sector can be found in reports from Eduventures (see

Bibliography).

The following pages begin with a framework for the paper categorizing and evaluating

different approaches to increasing flexibility and accelerated learning that various

degree-granting institutions have developed, based on a literature review and interviews

with practitioners and research experts then presents profiles of five innovative efforts

that demonstrate how combining multiple flexible delivery options can produce positive

results for adult learners, noting outcomes when available. The profiles highlight:

• Denver Community College;

• Madisonville Community College in Kentucky;

• Housatonic Community College in Connecticut;

• The statewide Pathways to Advancement Initiative in Oregon; and

• The statewide I-BEST program in Washington State.

The next section identifies and discusses common barriers facing postsecondary

institutions seeking to develop innovative alternatives to traditional programs. This

analysis is informed by interviews, program profiles, and two surveys conducted by the

authors in July-August 2006—of members of the State Higher Education Executive

Officers (SHEEO) Association and of the National Association of State Student Grant

and Aid Programs. The paper leads to consideration of policy strategies for addressing

common obstacles to expansion and diffusion of promising program models. The final

section suggests specific recommendations for how the U.S. Department of Labor can
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 4

promote the development and diffusion of more flexible postsecondary programs that

meet adult learners’ particular needs.
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 5

II. The Challenges Facing

Adult Learners in Higher Education

Today’s jobs increasingly require “knowledge workers” who have more education and

more diverse skills than the workforce of the past—and who have the ability to

continuously learn new skills. Of the 20 occupations projected to grow the fastest (in

terms of percentage growth in new and vacant positions), 15 require some form of

postsecondary education and 9 require a bachelor’s degree or higher. Jobs that require

only on-the-job training are on the way out: All 20 occupations projected to have the

sharpest declines in openings require no more than on-the-job training (Jobs for the

Future, Eduventures, and FutureWorks 2006).

These trends would not be alarming if the workforce were keeping pace with educational

demands; but it is not. Just 40 percent of working-age adults in the workforce (age 25-

64) have a credential beyond a high school diploma (Bosworth and Choitz 2002).

Demographic trends indicate that we will not be able to “grow our way” out of this

dilemma because the cohorts of workers following the baby boom generation are smaller

and are projected to be less educated that the current workforce (Jobs for the Future,

Eduventures, and FutureWorks 2006). By some projections, there will be a shortage of 9

million qualified workers by 2014 (Employment Policy Foundation 2004) (a number

larger than the populations of 41 out of the 50 states).

This gap threatens to hobble the nation’s economic competitiveness as well as personal

living standards. Companies that cannot find qualified workers cannot compete in the

global economy. Without enough qualified workers, companies must find “work-around”

solutions, hiring a less-educated workforce or moving to countries that produce a greater

number of highly educated citizens. For workers, having inadequate skills and

credentials limits their earning potential. While this has been true for decades, the wage

gap between high and low earners continues to grow. In 1975, a worker with a

Bachelor’s degree could expect to earn 1.5 times the salary of a worker with just a high

school diploma. By 1999, that ratio had increased to 1.8 (Day and Newburger 2002).

Adults in the workforce understand these trends and are responding. Millions participate

in some form of postsecondary education: In fact, the number of adults in postsecondary

education jumped dramatically from 58 million in 1991 to 90 million in 1999 (Bosworth

and Choitz 2002). This number increased to 93.1 million in 2005, which is the latest data

available from the Adult Education Survey of the National Household Education Surveys

Program (O’Donnell 2006). High percentages of adults are engaged in work-related

education—33 percent of the population over age 25 in 2003, up from 24 percent in

1999 National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) data (Jobs for the Future,

Eduventures, and FutureWorks 2006). Millions of adults study at the nation’s college

campuses—nearly one-third of all undergraduates are older than 24 years, which

represents approximately 4.7 million out of 15 million total undergraduates (Snyder,

Dillow, and Hoffman 2007).

However, while adult demand for postsecondary education is strong and participation is

relatively high, their success rates are poor. Too many adults who work full time and

study part time have trouble completing their educational programs or earning

credentials. For example, 62 percent of workers who considered themselves “employees

who study” had not completed a degree or certificate and were no longer enrolled six
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 6

years after beginning postsecondary studies—compared to 39 percent of students who

considered themselves “students who work”—according to data from the 1999-2000

National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (Berker et al. 2003). These findings are

consistent with data on non-traditional students from the NCES. At community colleges,

nearly half of non-traditional students leave without a degree after three years,

compared to one-fifth of traditional students. At four-year colleges, less than 15 percent

of non-traditional students with at least two risk factors complete a degree within six

years compared to 57 percent of traditional students (Choy 2002).

1

Practitioners and researchers alike have identified various problems that hold adult

success rates down. One key challenge is that the program model that dominates

postsecondary education delivery was designed when the vast majority of students were

recent high school graduates who attended school full-time and worked little if at all.

Unfortunately, these traditional ways of delivering postsecondary education—such as

courses offered during the day Monday through Friday, over a 16-week semester, and

meeting two to three times per week for 1 to 1.5 hours—fail to meet the needs of most

adult workers. Credential and degree programs based on these models take too long to

complete for many adult workers, who must study part-time and fit their learning around

work and family responsibilities.

The Commission on the Future of Higher Education noted this dilemma in its bold call for

change in the way the nation educates postsecondary students. The Commission found

that too many “colleges and universities have not embraced opportunities to be

entrepreneurial, from testing new methods of teaching and content delivery to meeting

the increased demand for lifelong learning . . . state and federal policymakers have also

failed to make supporting innovation a priority” (U.S. Department of Education 2006).

The Commission report continued, “Numerous barriers to investment in innovation risk

hampering the ability of postsecondary institutions to address national workforce needs

and compete in the global marketplace.” The Commission concluded:

We recommend that America’s colleges and universities embrace a culture of

continuous innovation and quality improvement by developing new pedagogies,

curricula and technologies to improve learning, particularly in the area of science and

mathematical literacy.

The conclusions of the Adult Learners in Higher Education report were consistent with

those of the Commission. Section Two noted the following challenges for adult

learners—and innovations that hold out promise to improve their success:

Adult learners have significantly different needs than traditional college students

and face many challenges as they seek postsecondary credentials.

• Adult learners are more likely to work full time and have family responsibilities

that compete for their time, energy, and financial resources.

• Adult learners want to minimize the amount of time they spend in class while

maximizing the economic payoff of their effort.
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 7

The inability of the higher education system to meet these needs is a significant

barrier to access and success for many adult learners.

• Traditional higher education institutions are organized in ways better suited to

younger, traditional students who are more likely to attend full-time, work less,

and have greater flexibility in terms of time and other commitments.

• As a result, adult learners have more trouble staying in college and earning

credentials than do more traditional students.

Public and private institutions that target adult learners seeking postsecondary

credentials emphasize alternatives to the inflexibilities built into traditional higher

education institutions.

Flexible and accelerated program schedules and designs

• Postsecondary institutions are increasingly offering more flexible schedules, such

as weekend-only classes, accelerated vacation programs, online instruction, and

critical support services during nontraditional hours.

• Some institutions offer multiple entry, exit, and re-entry points, including more

frequent start times throughout the year.

• An area with great promise is shortening and modularizing curricula and offering

interim credentials linked to career advancement.

• Some community colleges are improving developmental education by offering

basic-skills and English-language instruction in work-related contexts and

occupational certificate programs.

“Adult-friendly” instructional methods

• For-profit institutions and many college occupational programs are emphasizing

adult-focused teaching methods with applied learning models and "practical"

curricula that tap into adult experiences in work and life.

• New partnerships with employers are helping to integrate job-related content and

teach what students need to advance in their careers.

Easier transitions and transfer across institutions

• Many individual institutions are creating systems that make it easier to move

between non-credit and credit courses and programs.

• Articulation agreements between institutions help students know in advance

which courses will receive credit at their new school; statewide agreements can

help smooth turf battles.

This paper focuses on the first of these innovative approaches: flexible and accelerated

program schedules and designs because there is significant potential for redesigning

education to be more accessible to adults, particularly working adults—and because of

the body of emerging innovative efforts to do so across the country. Policymakers will
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 8

benefit from a better understanding of this trend and both its potential and its fragility as

they develop strategies for improving student learning and outcomes in higher

education, particularly for adult learners.
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 9

III. Alternative Approaches for Delivering Postsecondary

Education to Meet the Needs of Adult Learners

Postsecondary education providers—two- and four-year colleges, for-profit and nonprofit institutions alike—are responding to market signals and developing a range of

methods for increasing adult access to courses and accelerating their time to degree.

The least intensive approaches—those that require the least revamping of institutional

practices and policies—involve scheduling classes at non-traditional times and in nontraditional locations, without altering the design of courses or programs.

The next level of ambition and complexity is represented by efforts to redesign individual

courses, by adding on-line components or shortening their length to less than traditional

semester units through modularization or acceleration. The most ambitious approach—

and the one that holds perhaps the most promise for busy working adults—is

restructuring the design and delivery of entire credential programs. Online delivery of

entire programs is one way to do this, an approach championed by the for-profit sector in

particular (Gallagher and Poroy 2005; Eduventures 2006; Jobs for the Future,

Eduventures, and FutureWorks 2006).

The research exploration in this paper is limited to courses and programs that result in a

postsecondary credential, since these have the greatest potential return for adult

students and for society.

2

This section presents and follows a framework that categorizes and organizes the most

common types of program design innovations that are identified in the literature and

recognizable in institutional innovation. This framework is only that: a way to distinguish

among distinct types of delivery innovations. In “real life,” of course, these strategies are

rarely implemented as separate and isolated approaches. Instead, institutions trying to

address the adult learner market more effectively tend to use a combination of

approaches that seek to optimize flexibility, access, and success for working adult

students.

The remainder of this section defines each alternative approach featured in the

framework and provides short, specific examples to illustrate the innovation. The

following section provides five longer and more in-depth examples of innovative colleges

and statewide initiatives that feature the combination of alternative delivery approaches

to create effective, flexible postsecondary programs that can improve adult learner

access, persistence, and degree completion.
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 10

Framework of Alternative Delivery Approaches in Postsecondary Education

Course Scheduling and Location

• Weekend colleges

• Evening courses

• Branch or satellite campuses

• On-site at workplace

Course Design

• Open entry-open exit courses

• Modularized courses

Program Design

• Modularized programs

• Accelerated programs

• Developmental education-occupational credential

• Degree programs

• Career pathway and “bridge” programs

Distance Learning

Course Scheduling and Location

The most common—and simplest—strategy to increase postsecondary program

flexibility is to change the time and/or location of course offerings. This approach

addresses one of the most significant barriers working adults face in trying to access and

complete credentialed educational programs—their lack of time. “Adult friendly” colleges

offer courses when and where they are most convenient to adult students. This includes

scheduling classes on weekends and at night, when day-shift workers are available. It

also involves offering classes at branch or satellite campuses that are closer than main

campuses to where many adult students live or work. The most creative colleges offer

classes at workplaces, as well.

Weekend Colleges

Weekend colleges consist of courses offered only on Friday evenings, Saturdays, and/or

Sundays, in which, ideally, students can earn most or all of a credential by attending

class on weekends only. Generally, the courses are compressed to accommodate the

shortened time frame. This approach is especially valuable for adults who work Monday

through Friday and have family obligations during the week, but who have time for study

on the weekends. It also is convenient for adults who travel extensively for work during

the week. For example, at Harrisburg Area Community College in Pennsylvania, truck

drivers found value in the weekend college because their work schedules precluded

them from taking classes during the week, even at night. Weekend colleges also serve
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 11

as useful alternatives to distance education for students who need flexible scheduling

but prefer in-person instruction and learn better in a classroom environment.

Weekend colleges have existed since the early 1970s (Mabry 1988). Today, just over 16

percent of all public and private postsecondary institutions (eligible for Title IV programs)

offer weekend courses, according to the most recent data (2004-2005) from the U.S.

Department of Education See Figure 1. Public 2-year institutions offer more weekend

college options than other institutions, with public 4-year institutions a close second.

Interviews with practitioners suggest that the recent growth in distance learning options

may have suppressed the development of weekend colleges and the demand for them.

3

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Integrated Postsecondary

Education Data System (IPEDS), Fall 2001, 2002, 2003, and 2004

One example of a significant weekend college is Madisonville Community College in

western Kentucky. The school has created weekend accelerated Licensed Practical

Nurse and Registered Nurse programs to meet the large and growing demand for

nurses in that part of the state. See profile on page 26.

Evening Courses

One of the most obvious and easiest ways to increase working adults’ access to

postsecondary education is to offer courses at night when many have concluded their

workday. Again, ideally, students can earn most or all of a credential by attending class

only in the evening. Like weekend colleges, evening programming has existed for

decades. The Department of Education does not collect data on the prevalence of

evening programs, but one estimate indicates that nearly 70% of higher education

institutions allow students to complete a degree by taking courses entirely at night or on

the weekends (Jobs for the Future, Eduventures, and FutureWorks 2006). Interviews for

this report confirm that many colleges and universities offer evening programs.

For some occupations, variable schedules demand that training and education

opportunities be offered at different times in the day and week. Police, firefighters and

other first responders are among the workers who need such flexibility. It is not

uncommon for community colleges to offer the same, or similar, courses in both the day

and evening, so that students may attend whichever class fits their schedule each week.

Instructors in day and evening classes typically coordinate their curricula and use the

same learning assessments.
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 12

Branch or Satellite Campuses

Branch or satellite campuses—an increasingly common, even ubiquitous response to

students’ need for greater ease of access and proximity to classes—are physical

locations for college programming that are geographically separate from a college’s

main campus. Branch campuses are permanent entities that often have their own

faculty, administration, and budget and hiring authority. Branch campuses offer entire

degree programs, allowing students to complete degrees closer to home. Satellite

campuses usually are smaller and set up to serve specific needs in an area (therefore,

they can be temporary locations). Both branch and satellite campuses are located in

neighborhoods or other places that are convenient to particular sub-groups of students,

especially working adults. Both individual institutions and state systems can operate

branch and satellite campuses. For example, Bunker Hill Community College in Boston

has one branch and five satellites. The Georgia Technical College System has 32

branch campuses and several satellite campuses.

On-site at the Workplace

Some colleges are especially dedicated to serving working adults and set up classes at

their place of employment. Non-credit, non-credentialed workforce education and

training programs are frequently offered on site at the workplace. However, a growing

number of colleges also are delivering credentialed postsecondary education programs

there to meet increasing demand, though for-credit courses remain far less common.

Delivery models may include classroom learning with a group of workers, distance

learning with individual students, or a combination of the two. Some programs build in

student projects related to the workplace in order to provide “authentic assessments,”

focused on the practical application of learning in “real world” contexts.

One example can be found in northeast Chicago at Truman College, which has

developed an employer-based, online hybrid nursing curriculum for University of

Chicago Hospital employees. The schedule includes online instruction two days each

week, plus classroom instruction and a lab on Fridays at the hospital. A community

college partner, Harold Washington College, provides pre-requisite classes in math and

English at the hospital for workers who need to brush up on these skills. Upon

completion of the program, participants earn an Associate's Degree in Nursing (ADN).

Course Design

Often colleges need to do more to meet the needs of working adult students than offer

courses at more convenient times and locations. The traditional 16-week semester can

be a significant stumbling block for adults who cannot commit that much time to their

education. FutureWorks research has found that working adults prefer fewer and more

intensive classes (Bosworth and Choitz 2002). To address this need, colleges have

experimented with courses that allow adults to progress at their own pace and to exit

and re-enter the program as their schedule allows. Some have broken down traditionallength courses into smaller units that might be more manageable for students with

limited time and energy.
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 13

Open-Entry/Open-Exit Courses

In open entry-open exit courses, students have maximum flexibility to enter, exit, and reenter courses as their schedules and learning needs demand. This approach includes

courses that are completely self-paced, in which students progress through the material

as quickly or slowly as they like (usually requiring competency-based assessments since

“seat time” rules are irrelevant in these courses). This flexibility can be valuable for

students whose schedules are so limited that they can only gradually pick away at a

course. The format appears to be most potentially useful for students who are reentering college after a long lapse or are entering for the first time and could benefit from

a more gradual start.

There is no national data on the extent of this delivery strategy, and interviews for this

report suggest that it is not common. Although it allows tremendous flexibility for

students, it is fair to say that it could be logistically difficult for providers.

An innovative example is an open-entry/open-exit, competency-based developmental

education program under development at Housatonic Community College in Bridgeport,

Connecticut. See profile in next section on page 29.

Modularized Courses

In modularization, traditional-length courses are subdivided into smaller increments,

such as one 3-credit-hour course divided into three separate 1-credit-hour courses. This

approach is designed for students who want shorter courses, but cannot enroll for an

entire 16-week semester and cannot keep up in an accelerated course or do not have

access to accelerated courses. Support for this approach is divided among researchers

and practitioners. Some consider it a disservice to adult students because it can slow

down their pace of attaining college credits. However, others see it as an effective way

to provide academically at-risk adult students with manageable amounts of college work

with maximum flexibility in scheduling.

As with many of these innovations, there is little or no national data on the prevalence of

the practice. However, one example can be found at Jefferson Community and

Technical College in Kentucky that offers a modularized Team Leadership Certificate (of

18 credit hours) in the Business Studies program. Each course is condensed to 0.6

credit hours and 9 contact hours (in contrast to the traditional 3-credit-hour course

consisting of 48 contact hours). The core curriculum consists of 25 of the condensed

courses, plus 3 credit hours the student chooses from 15 electives (each also 0.6 credit

hours). The state review process has approved this program and any community or

technical college in Kentucky may offer it.

Program Design 

While it is useful to provide more flexible and convenient courses for working adult

students, the crux of the nation’s workforce challenge is to ensure that more adults earn

postsecondary credentials. To this end, colleges and universities need to review and

redesign entire programs of study to increase both working adults’ access to

postsecondary education as well as their completion of degrees. Creative approaches to
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 14

program redesign include modularized programs, accelerated programs, “bridge”

programs, and career pathway programs.

Modularized Programs

In this approach, credential programs are subdivided into segments, and courses are

combined in new ways to offer program "modules." The programs can be designed so

students earn interim credentials after passing certain modules, such as an associate’s

degree program divided into two complementary certificate programs. This approach is

also referred to as “chunking” courses within a program.

Developing career pathways is a related approach, but with one significant difference.

The scope of a modularized program is a single credentialed program, such as an

associate's or bachelor's degree. The scope of a career pathway program usually

involves a series of education and training opportunities that include but are not limited

to credentialed postsecondary education. As the description below indicates, career

pathway programs usually are quite elaborate and sophisticated.

An example of a modularized approach initiated a few years ago is Macomb Community

College’s “3+1 Sequence.” In a partnership with Ferris State University, employees in

TACOM, the US Army Tank-automotive and Armaments Command, a research and

support organization for the U.S. Army, can move through a set of clearly-identified

credit and skill “milestones” that are recognized through the award of appropriate interim

credentials. The curriculum builds upon a basic foundation and adds breadth as well as

depth as the student continues. The “chunked” curriculum is part of a larger career

pathway that includes remedial coursework if necessary; academic, career, and financial

advising; occupational and career roadmaps; and conveniently scheduled classes (Park

2004). The partners are trying to expand this effort by getting the authority from the state

to grant an applied baccalaureate degree that rolls up from earned modular credentials.

Accelerated Programs

Accelerated programs allow students to take specially designed, compressed courses

and earn a credential much more quickly than in a traditional program. For example,

courses might last eight weeks instead of the traditional 16 weeks and require six classhours per week instead of three. These programs can be designed for full- or part-time

students. The research in this paper focused on accelerated programs that allow parttime students to complete credential programs more quickly than they would have in a

traditional part-time program. Research for this report revealed two distinct types of

accelerated postsecondary programs, accelerated developmental educationoccupational credential programs and accelerated degree programs.

Accelerated Developmental-Occupational Programs

These programs target adult students who require at least some remedial education

before entering a credential program. They merge developmental education into

occupational or academic courses. Approximately 40 percent of all community college

students are required to take at least one remedial education course, and this figure is

even higher among working adult students with limited education and/or who have been

out of school for a number of years (Kazis and Liebowitz 2003). A common problem with

developmental courses is that they are prerequisites for college-level work, and students
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 15

often get bogged down in them, never making it to courses that count toward a

credential.

Merging developmental education with credentialed certificate programs is a relatively

new practice; therefore there is little data on how widespread or effective it is. One

example of the approach is the Integrated Basic Education and Skills Training (I-BEST)

program in Washington State. I-BEST pairs adult basic education and/or English-as-aSecond Language instructors with professional-technical instructors in the classroom to

help students work on both types of skills simultaneously. Courses are in programs that

build toward degrees and/or certificates and prepare students for employment

(Washington State Board for Community and Technical Colleges 2005). I-BEST began

as a demonstration program in the spring of 2004 and is now fully integrated into the

community and technical college system program offerings. See profile on page 35.

Accelerated Degree Programs

More common are accelerated programs designed for college-ready students seeking

associate's or bachelor's degrees. The premise is to aid students in earning a degree

faster than the traditional completion schedule. Program designs vary considerably, but

the basic components include compressed courses that are shorter than the traditional

16-week semester with three hours of classroom contact per week (48 classroom hours

total). For example, classes might meet for eight weeks, with one classroom session per

week of four to six hours each. In accelerated degree programs, classroom hours do not

have to add to 48.

Accelerated programs often integrate evening and/or weekend courses, as well as

distance learning. The programs most responsive to working adult students offer

courses on a rolling basis, cutting across the traditional fall, spring, and summer

semester schedule. The most flexible allow students to drop out when they need to and

re-enter as their schedule permits without losing credits already earned.

The percentage of institutions offering accelerated programs has grown over the last

several years, with just over 28 percent of all institutions (1,347) offering this type of

programming in 2004-2005. See Figure 2. However, public 4-year institutions offer this

approach significantly more than other institutions. In 2004-2005, some 46 percent of

public 4-year institutions (294) indicated that they offered accelerated programs. It is

interesting to note that while public 2-year colleges frequently offer weekend colleges

and distance programs, they fall below the average percentage of institutions offering

accelerated learning. This is due to the fact that much of the accelerated programming

has been in undergraduate and graduate business management programs, which is

relatively simple to break down into standardized modules and for which there is a large

adult student market (Building Blocks for Building Skills 2006).
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 16

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Integrated Postsecondary

Education Data System (IPEDS), Fall 2001, 2002, 2003, and 2004

The NCES data in Figure 2 does not distinguish between accelerated programs for fulltime traditional students and those for part-time adult students; therefore, it is impossible

to know how many of these accelerated programs are designed for and available to

working adults. A more realistic estimate of the number of accelerated programs for parttime working adult students may be found through the Commission for Accelerated

Programs. CAP is a special interest group within the Council for Adult and Experiential

Learning (CAEL) whose members focus on providing effective accelerated learning

environments for nontraditional and adult students.

4

CAP maintains a database of accelerated learning programs focused on nontraditional

and adult students that meet three specific criteria: 1) program courses are creditbearing; 2) they require 32 or fewer contact hours; and 3) they are 8 weeks or less in

duration. CAP estimates that there are approximately 350 programs that meet these

specific criteria, which is about one-quarter the number of institutions that self-report to

the U.S. Department of Education that they offer accelerated programs (that do not meet

any specific criteria). Many of these programs integrate additional alternative delivery

approaches into their accelerated programs, including weekend and evening

programming and distance learning. CAP also estimates that about 20 percent of all

adult college students—1.5 million—are enrolled in accelerated programs.

5 Research by

the Center for the Study of Accelerated Learning (CSAL) in the School of Professional

Studies at Regis University suggests that accelerated courses are high quality and that

adult students appreciate their efficiency and effectiveness (Wlodkowski, Gonzales, and

Mauldin 2002).

Although little research has been conducted to date to measure the relative

effectiveness of accelerated courses as compared to traditional courses (as measured in

student learning, persistence, and completion), the CSAL has reported modest evidence

that adult learners in accelerated programs “learn satisfactorily and in a manner that

meets the challenges of college coursework” (Wlodkowski, Gonzales, and Mauldin

2002).

One sector in which accelerated programming has boomed is nursing. In an effort to

meet the looming shortage of one million new and replacement registered nurses by

2012, nursing schools across the country have developed accelerated baccalaureate

(Bachelor’s of Science in Nursing (BSN) and master’s (Master of Science in Nursing

MSN)) programs. According to the American Association of Colleges of Nursing (AACN),

there were just 31 accelerated BSN programs in 1990, but that figure grew to 90 by
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 17

2002, and 173 as of July 2006. Accelerated MSN programs have grown just as rapidly;

there were 12 in 1990, 27 in 2002, and 46 as of July 2006. AACN projects that an

additional 40 new accelerated BSN programs and 17 new MSN programs are under

development. Today, accelerated nursing programs are available in 43 states plus the

District of Columbia and Guam.

6 In addition, since 2006, there are 37 new accelerated

BSN and 10 new accelerated MSN programs under development.

7 (See profile of

Madisonville Community College in next section.)

Oklahoma has used the accelerated approach to design a program specifically to help

many of the 69,000 adults in the state who started but never finished a college degree.

Northeastern State University in Tahlequah, Oklahoma, has led a collaboration of 7

other regional state universities to develop an accelerated baccalaureate degreecompletion program for adults who have earned at least 77 credit hours. The program is

called ReachHigher: Oklahoma’s Degree Completion Program. Students will earn a

Bachelor of Science in Organizational Leadership degree after completing a core of ten

courses, a set of courses developed by each of the regional universities in an area of

focus specific to business needs in the local community, and a capstone course. The

core consists of courses in the areas of organizational leadership, professional

communications, data analysis, fiscal management, ethics, management, and

marketing. All courses are eight weeks long and will be offered in both face-to-face and

online formats. Additionally, most all admission, enrollment, and payment processes are

available online. Tuition costs are comparable to other online courses at the state

universities.

The program’s success is measured along two data points: the number of inquiries and

applications and program enrollment. Both have increased since the program’s

implementation in March 2007. The number of inquires grew from 176 in March 2007 to

952 one year later; the number of applications grew from 81 to 514 in the same period.

The number of enrollments have grown from 36 in March 2007 to 185 one year later.

“Bridge” Programs

“Bridge” programs prepare adults who lack basic academic skills to enter postsecondary

education and training and to access and advance in promising careers (Women

Employed 2005). They serve as a bridge from reading and math skills below a ninth

grade level to college-level learning. Although these programs prepare adults for entry

into postsecondary credential programs, they do not by themselves result in a

postsecondary credential. The challenge for these innovations is to make sure that

students who start in the pre-collegiate program not only accelerate to collegereadiness, but also make the transition into a college program that yields a credential.

This is not easy and requires careful planning, intensive supports and advising; but

without it, adult learners are likely to fall short of their goal.

Key features of “bridge” programs are listed below. They are relatively new and as such,

there is little evaluation research on their effectiveness. However, there are many

promising models that can serve as a foundation for future program development, i.e.,

connection to a credential or credential program, and research and evaluation efforts.
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 18

Key Features of Bridge Programs

• Curriculum is defined in terms of competencies

• Programs are focused on basic skills taught in the context of the workplace and

the postsecondary classroom

• Instruction emphasizes “learning by doing”

• Programs focus on significant sectors in the local economy

• Programs are offered at convenient times and locations and use adult learning

methodologies

• Programs are compressed

• Programs include support services and assistance and follow-up with job and

college placement

From: Bridges to Careers for Low-Skilled Adults: A Program Development Guide by Women

Employed, 2005.

One example is Instituto del Progreso Latino’s Manufacturing Technology Bridge

program. It is designed for Latinos in the Pilsen neighborhood of Chicago who have

been laid off from low-skilled manufacturing jobs or are stuck in low-wage service jobs

and want to advance into entry-level skilled manufacturing jobs and advanced

manufacturing certificate programs at West Side Technical College. The curriculum

includes technically-focused basic skills and occupational modules in applied

mathematics, computer applications, workplace communication, blueprint reading, and

machining. Participants receive training and support with job preparation and placement

assistance. Graduates are strongly encouraged to continue their education in West Side

Tech’s advanced certificate programs in precision metalworking or industrial

maintenance (Women Employed 2005).

One significant barrier to the development of bridge programs is the lack of funding to

support their continuation and growth. These programs are more costly than traditional

adult basic education and college developmental programs, as they are significantly

more sophisticated in their design and implementation. Finding a funding stream to

sustain these types of programs is a significant challenge (Kazis and Liebowitz 2003).

Career Pathway Programs

Career pathway programs offer a “series of connected education and training programs

and support services that enable individuals to secure employment within a specific

industry or occupational sector, and to advance over time to successively higher levels

of education and employment in that sector” (Jenkins 2006). They provide “a long-term

and focused combination of preparation, training, work experience and upgrade training

that helps individuals enter and advance in the workplace” (Alssid, et al 2002). Ideally,

they integrate three distinct levels of education -- basic skills training, entry-level training,

and job upgrade training and education—and include extensive employment support

services. Like bridge programs, career pathway programs target significant sectors in

the local economy and are sophisticated and expensive. Also like bridge programs, they

are fairly new approaches and are still under development. As such, they have not been

rigorously evaluated for effectiveness.
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 19

Certain career pathways models do not really change the basic structure or format of

postsecondary course or program delivery. A common pathways model focuses on

making the steps along the way to an occupational credential more transparent and

mapping a recommended sequence of courses or credentials. This is an important

contribution, given the general lack of such ease of navigation. However, from the

perspective of adults looking to speed up their time to credential, the most appealing

career pathways programs are those that provide robust connections between the steps

along the career pathways, transparent linkages, and interwoven support mechanisms.

Even more appealing are well-integrated pathways that are designed to eliminate

duplication and combine courses in ways that accelerate time to credential for adult

students.

One example of a career pathway program for low-income adults with low-skills is the

Job Ladder Partnership, a consortium of Shoreline Community College and five other

Seattle-area community colleges. Participants begin with a short-term, pre-employment,

developmental, or ESL basic skills program and advance to credentialed certificates and

degrees. The program is designed to help students quickly acquire basic academic and

workplace skills necessary for initial employment and enter pathways to advancement

that combine work and learning. At every level, there is a clear link between

education/training and career advancement.

The 12-week pre-employment program is designed to help students develop workplace

and life skills at night or on weekends. Learning is focused around three high-demand

career pathways—manufacturing assembly, office occupations (information technology),

and health services—that offer relatively high entry-level wages and opportunities for

career advancement.

The competency-based curriculum is designed to meet skill requirements identified by

employer partners. Students who demonstrate 70 percent proficiency in all classes

receive a certificate. They also are placed in jobs based on their performance and

receive retention services and career counseling to help them chart a course to career

advancement through credentialed education and training. The program provides an

entry point to credentialed modular pathways to advancement.

The Job Ladder Partnership provides modular pathways to advancement that combine

work and learning in manufacturing, customer relations, health services, and information

technology. Advancement reflects skills acquired in the workplace as well as the

classroom. There are multiple points of entry, beginning with students who lack the basic

skills necessary for credit-level programs and have little or no employment history.

Strong partnerships with employers identify skills and education or training necessary for

career advancement at a broad range of levels. Students can take courses, which build

on their own particular partnerships with employers, at any of six community colleges.

Each college provides staffing to build and maintain partnerships and provide ongoing

career counseling, job placement, and retention services. Career Pathway Passports,

which are computerized career planning tools, help students develop career

advancement goals and navigate work and learning to progress toward their goals. Each

passport lists career opportunities and training programs in each of the pathways so

students can see how far they have come toward their goals and chart next steps.

8

A handful of states including Kentucky, Oregon, and Washington, have created

statewide career pathway initiatives, spurred by foundation investments and creative
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 20

combinations of private and public resources. Examples of programs in these states are

profiled or noted throughout this report.

Distance Learning

Distance learning can be used in all three types of flexible delivery approaches

described in the framework above. It offers opportunities for nontraditional course times

and locations, as well as changing the design of single courses or entire programs. The

range of distance learning methods includes “old fashioned” distance learning such as

correspondence, broadcast television, and videotaped courses, as well as newer

approaches that use two-way interactive video and computer-mediated and internetbased approaches (e.g., synchronous and asynchronous computer courses and hybrid

models that combine distance learning and classroom instruction). It also includes hybrid

courses that blend classroom and distance learning. One can imagine a spectrum of

possibilities: on the left are courses that are almost 100 percent classroom-based

learning with some distance learning opportunities built in, e.g. a classroom-based

course in which students must post on a online bulletin board reactions to assigned

readings prior to class meetings. At the right end of this spectrum are 100 percent

distance learning courses with no classroom component. Many colleges are most

interested in developing courses that fall between the two ends and that combine some

classroom learning with some distance learning.

Distance learning has grown tremendously over the past decade. One of the first

national surveys of postsecondary education institutions on distance learning was

conducted in 1995 by the Department of Education’s National Center for Education

Statistics (under the Postsecondary Education Quick Information System or PEQIS). It

found that 33 percent of all institutions were offering distance education, and 25 percent

were planning to do so in the next three years. (See Figure 3.) Remarkably, 42 percent

of all institutions had no plans to offer distance education in the next three years. Then,

as now, 2- and 4-year public institutions were in the lead.

Source: U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. Postsecondary Education

Quick Information System. Survey on Distance Education Courses Offered by Higher Education Institutions.

1995.

In more recent years, the Department of Education has included questions on distance

education in annual surveys of postsecondary education institutions. (Today the system is

called the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System, or IPEDS). Significantly more

institutions now offer distance learning opportunities—just over 54 percent, or 2,573

institutions, in 2004-2005—and public institutions continue to dominate. (See Figure 4.)
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 21

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Integrated Postsecondary

Education Data System (IPEDS), Fall 2001, 2002, 2003, and 2004.

According to research by Eduventures (2006), in 2004, more than 2.35 million students

—almost 14 percent of all higher education students—were enrolled in an online course.

In 2005, 1.2 million higher education students—7 percent of all higher education

students—were enrolled in fully-online certificate or degree programs (not simply

courses). While fewer than 4 percent of prospective adult students have enrolled in a

fully online program, more than 77 percent report that they would consider enrolling in

such a program.

The pervasiveness of distance learning has spurred numerous studies; however, there is

no conclusive evidence that distance education works any better or any worse than the

traditional classroom approach.

9 Many studies point to student success in distance

education, including good program completion rates, acceptable course grades and test

scores, and high student satisfaction. However, research to date has left unanswered

the question, “Is distance education more effective than traditional classroom teaching?”

Two significant challenges with the research are the vast and varying methods of

distance learning as described above and the limitations of the research designs.

Research and evaluation efforts in the future should be carefully designed to distinguish

between specific types of distance learning. They also should pay attention to which

distance learning approaches work best for which students, i.e., part-time versus fulltime, traditional versus nontraditional, by age, by gender, by employment status, etc.

In addition to individual colleges offering distance learning courses and programs, there

are models of distance learning-only colleges and “virtual colleges.” Colleges that only

offer distance-learning programs include the private, for-profit University of Phoenix, the

non-profit Western Governors University, and Rio Salada College, a public, two-year

college within Arizona’s Maricopa Community College System. Rio Salada offers an

impressive 220 courses via the Internet, leading to 12 Associate's degrees, 21 certificate

programs, and two post-baccalaureate pathways. The college gives students the choice

of frequent starting dates to meet needs more quickly (Gatta 2006).

The University of Phoenix was developed as a for-profit institution “to foster a spirit of

innovation that focuses on providing academic quality, service, excellence, and

convenience to the working adult.” The Western Governors University is a non-profit

university founded and supported by 19 state governors (and supported by major

national corporations and foundations) to provide access to education to rural

populations. Some states also have created “virtual colleges,” which are collections of

distance learning offerings across a variety of public institutions in the state. Models vary

considerably, but include Nebraska, Texas, Georgia, and Oklahoma.
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 22

IV. Profiles of Innovative Alternative Delivery Designs

The previous section presented a conceptual framework for thinking about course and

program redesign options that can increase flexibility and accelerate student progress.

But in the real world of institutions and programs of study, these discrete approaches are

combined in a myriad of creative ways to meet student needs.

The following profiles of innovation highlight some very exciting examples of flexible and

accelerated program designs. The profiles describe the program of study and provide

information on outcomes, financing (where available), and lessons for policy and

practice that derive from implementation challenges and successes.

The five profiles fall into two distinct groups. The first, focused on institutional practice in

three different community colleges—the Community College of Denver, Madisonville

Community College in Kentucky, and Housatonic Community College in Connecticut—

describe how individual colleges organize to meet adult learner needs, in health

occupational programs and, in the case of Housatonic, in the delivery of developmental

education that less academically prepared students need if they are to succeed in a

college degree program. Madisonville stands out in this group as an example of how a

state-funded training initiative was put to good use in service of adult learner demand for

easier access to postsecondary education and credential programs. It is also an

example of how blending state and federal funds creatively can dramatically accelerate

advancement along education and career pathways for adult learners.

The second set of profiles highlight statewide initiatives that built upon local innovation

and success to move flexible design delivery strategies to a significant scale. Both the

Oregon modular delivery effort and the Washington State I-BEST program emphasize

acceleration of progress to interim credentials and creative approaches to financing and

delivery. Each began with pilot programs and has been expanded based on the interest

and outcomes that those pilots demonstrated.

Community College of Denver CNA to LPN Program

Flexible Delivery Approaches:

• Weekend and evening courses

• On-site at workplace

• Accelerated learning

• Modular program

• Career pathways

Overview10

In 2004, the Community College of Denver (CCD), in partnership with the City of

Denver’s Division of Workforce Development, The Colorado Trust, and local health care

employers, developed a par

11

t-time, evening and weekend worksite program to prepare

Certified Nursing Assistants and other entry-level workers to become Licensed Practical

Nurses (LPN). This program will end in May 2008, when the last cohort graduates. The

primary reason is a lack of clinical placements for students. The competition for clinical
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 23

placement sites and clinical nursing faculty members continues to be a challenge for the

program.

The program begins with a nine-hour Nursing Success Course in which students receive

counseling on life skills, time management, and study skills. The first main phase of the

program is skills remediation. Customized to meet the needs of each student, this phase

was originally offered in a self-paced learning lab format using Plato computer software

to help students upgrade their math, reading, and writing skills to prepare them for

college-level course work. However, when it became clear that the self-paced lab was

not adequately preparing all students for the rigor of the nursing prerequisite courses,

program administrators added a more structured approach. Starting in Spring 2007, the

remedial coursework was delivered in two formats: (1) in self-paced learning labs and (2)

in accelerated remediation classrooms.

The accelerated remedial instruction in the Learning Lab was delivered in three tenweek modules and was designed to take students with as low as a third- to fifth-grade

math and seventh-grade English or reading level up to the eleventh/twelfth grade level

required for entry into the LPN program. Tutoring also was provided. Once students

completed the remediation phase, they took all prerequisite courses required for entry

into the LPN program, including nutrition, medical terminology, English composition, and

anatomy and physiology.

After completing the prerequisite courses, students move into the nursing classes

required for licensure. Most of the courses have been delivered at the worksites of

participating employers, who provide classroom space and coordinate work schedules

for employees. Courses meet two evenings per week and have been offered

consecutively, so students are only enrolled in one class at a time. In addition, students

complete five clinical rotations over fifty-five weeks, with rotations taking place one to

two days a week, depending on the specialty. To the extent possible, clinical rotations

are scheduled for the weekends, and the first rotation is done at the employee’s

worksite. The entire program takes about two and a half years to complete:

Learning Lab/remediation course 30 Weeks

Prerequisite Courses 23 Weeks

Nursing Courses 74 Weeks

127 Weeks

This worksite LPN training program is designed to meet employer needs for skilled

nurses while providing a career advancement ladder for dedicated, frontline caregivers.

As such, it relies upon employer support for its success. Employers adjust work

schedules of participating employees to accommodate program demands. In addition,

most employers provide funding to help pay for tuition and fees; some provide paid

release time.

Program Design

Accelerated and Modular Remediation Program

The original Learning Lab model was designed as a modular remediation program that

would accelerate basic skill acquisition. As described above, the program model was

changed in Spring 2007 to a classroom approach because students needed more
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 24

intensive remediation instruction in order to meet the skill levels necessary for enrollment

in the nursing program.

Support Services

In addition to offering classes at the worksite, the program provides several layers of

support to adult students. Mentorship and case-management support, provided by

employers and the Community College of Denver respectively, help students balance

work and family with the requirements of intensive training. CNA and LPN students

receive support throughout the program from a college case manager assigned to assist

with any barriers the students may encounter. Depending on each person’s needs, the

case managers may coordinate on-site tutoring services throughout the program, assist

in accessing the college’s financial aid services, and help complete all of the necessary

paperwork.

Participating employers pair student CNAs with peer mentors who encourage them and

address cultural and language issues. CNA mentors receive bonus pay when their

students pass the state skills test, another bonus if the student stays on the job for six

months, and then a third if the student stays for one year. Students also have access to

all Community College of Denver support services.

Career Pathways: Entry into LPN Program

Employees who complete the remediation phase of the program move on to take four

college courses required for entry into the LPN nursing courses. These prerequisites

include medical terminology (1 credit), nutrition (1 credit), English composition (3

credits), and anatomy and physiology (4 credits). Once employees pass these courses,

they can enroll in the nursing courses. Participants can bypass the general waiting list

for entry into the college’s LPN program because this part-time, employer-supported

program is specially designed and funded to serve employees of participating facilities.

Description of Participating Students and Employers

Since 2002, when the city’s Division of Workforce Development asked the Community

College of Denver to develop a nursing career ladder program for entry-level health care

workers, the program has partnered with 10 health care organizations, most with

multiple facilities, to serve 230 workers at 26 nursing homes, hospitals, and outpatient

facilities. Most employers support the financing of the program several ways, including

providing classroom space, computers, release time for classes, and tuition

reimbursement. Participants are low-income employees working as Certified Nursing

Assistants and clerical, dietary, laundry, and housekeeping staff.

The program provides tangible benefits to employers. In addition to helping to fill critical

nursing positions with staff who understand the culture of the institution and have

previously demonstrated their abilities as caregivers, the program also helps employers

to retain these proven employees. Employers are virtually guaranteed that program

participants will stay in their employment for the duration of the program. Also,

participants are typically high-caliber employees who are happy with their jobs and see

the program as a job-related benefit.
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 25

From the student’s point of view, the “cohort” model, in which employees from the same

facility are grouped together for classes, provides important peer support. Additionally,

they appreciate their employer’s tangible support and encouragement. Both sides wish

to see the students continue in their employment as LPNs after they complete the

program and pass the licensure exam. However, it is also acknowledged that employers

may not be able to absorb all LPNs at one time.

Outcomes

Since its inception, this program has served 13 cohorts of students. Seven of these

cohorts started in the developmental education phase (either a Learning Lab or

Developmental Education coursework), and five started immediately in the prerequisite

course phase. Of the 177 students who started the LPN program, 151 have completed,

for an 85 percent completion rate.

12 Average grade point averages of the cohorts ranged

from 2.99 to 3.45 (on a 4.0 scale). The 14th and final cohort will graduate in May 2008.

Funding

The cost of the preparatory or Learning Lab portion of the program varied by the number

of modules that a student was required to take based on his or her entering assessment

scores in ACCUPLACER13 math, reading, and writing. The cost for a student who places

at the lowest level on the test, and therefore requires the full 30 weeks of preparatory

coursework, was $3,044. Students who place at the highest level (ninth and tenth grade)

only need to take the final 10-week module; the cost for them was $1,500 each. The cost

for students who require 20 weeks of instruction was $2,226. These cost figures all

include tuition, fees, supplemental instruction (tutors), and textbooks.

The total cost of the LPN program for a student requiring the full 30-week of Learning

Lab courses was $8,252. This included the costs of Learning Lab, prerequisite, and

nursing courses and all other costs, except for required immunizations and background

checks.

U.S. Department of Labor grant funds secured by the Denver Division of Workforce

Development (DWD), along with general city funds and Workforce Investment Act (WIA)

funds, helped finance the program during its first two years. Typically, DWD grants

covered half of the costs of delivering the worksite LPN program, with employers

providing the other half in cash and in-kind contributions. Employees using DWD or WIA

funds had no obligation to continue working for the employer after completion of the

program. However, the employer did have the right to terminate funding contributions

should the employee leave the facility during the course of the program. If a student

qualified for a Pell Grant, then the student was expected to use that as a “first source” of

payment, with DWD/WIA paying the remainder. Typically only a small portion (15 to 20

percent) of students qualified for Pell Grants as most were gainfully employed within the

facility.

Challenges/Lessons Learned

Adjustments to Model Needed to Reduce Early Attrition

Over the course of the program, administrators realized that students needed intense

remediation. The very first Learning Lab design was twenty-four weeks or three eightweek modules. This proved to be too fast-paced for students who entered with serious
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 26

academic deficiencies. As a result, the program extended the modules to ten weeks

each, or thirty weeks total. By Spring 2007, the model evolved into a regular classroom

approach to delivery.

Additional Resources Required for Model Expansion

The Community College of Denver has expanded its personnel to accommodate the

site-based LPN programs. Several full-time employees have been involved in the

program. A full-time program manager, the nursing program director, and a part-time

case manager were assigned to the project. Funding for the program positions has been

provided by the college’s general budget; it is not included in the tuition costs charged to

employers and employees. Program faculty has included both full-time and part-time

faculty members who were added as needed. However, diminishing resources has been

a significant challenge for this program and is the primary reason it will be terminated

after the May 2008 graduating cohort.

Student Financial Aid a Challenge, But Can be Secured for Most

With the end of the federal grant in 2004, the tuition burden shifted to the students and

their employers. Arrangements vary with these newer cohorts. In some cases,

employers are providing tuition reimbursement; in other cases, it is the employee’s

responsibility. A small portion of employees can secure Pell Grants to finance their

education; those who are not eligible for Pell Grants are often eligible for low-interest

student loans and other forms of financial assistance from the Community College of

Denver.

Madisonville Community College

Accelerated Weekend Nurse Programs

Flexible Delivery Approaches:

• Weekend and evening courses

• Accelerated courses and programs

• Career pathway

• Distance learning

Overview14

In response to the significant and growing demand for nurses in Western Kentucky,

Madisonville Community College’s (MCC) Nursing Department began offering a

weekend Registered Nurse program in fall 2001. Since then, the program has expanded

to include a full career pathway from Certified Nurse Aid to Registered Nurse with all

courses offered at night, on the weekend, and/or online. MCC enrolls almost 50 students

in these programs in addition to the more than 250 students in the daytime nursing

programs.
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 27

Program Design

Certified Nurse Aid Evening Program

MCC’s Certified Nurse Aid program is offered every semester. Students take classes

Monday, Tuesday, and Thursday evenings from 4:00-9:00 P.M. for eight weeks. The

Nursing Department recruits low-income individuals in the general population into the

program as well as current CNAs at long-term care facilities and hospitals into the

accelerated weekend Licensed Practical Nurse program.

Accelerated Weekend LPN Program

The accelerated weekend LPN program was first offered in January 2004 and is geared

toward CNAs seeking career mobility. The traditional daytime LPN program takes 3

semesters to complete or about 1.5 years (fall—spring—fall semesters) and includes 9

to 10 hours of lecture and 18 clinical hours each week. Conversely, the accelerated

weekend program takes just over one calendar year to complete (January to the next

February) because it is delivered year-round and the courses are compressed. All

courses are on Friday evenings and all-day Saturday. Each course lasts for 8 - 10

weeks, and students are in six to seven lecture hours and 12 clinical hours each week.

Students go through the program in cohorts; however, the college recognizes that some

students might find that they have to “stop out” at some point due to work or family

constraints (students who “stop out” return a few semesters later, versus “drop outs” who

never return or return to school significantly later). When these students are ready to

return to the program, they can join the daytime program or the next cohort of weekend

students without losing any credits they have earned.

Accelerated Weekend RN Program

MCC also offers an accelerated weekend and online Associate Degree Registered

Nurse (ADN) program for students who have earned the Practical Nurse (PN) degree.

Students who are applying for the Weekend RN program who are graduates of the PN

program are accepted conditionally with the understanding that they must pass the

National Council Licensure Examination for Practical Nurses (NCLEX-PN) before

finishing the Bridge course. This allows the graduate of the PN program to begin

coursework in the RN weekend program and complete the requirements for licensure

established by the Kentucky Board of Nursing.

Students must take a 5-credit hour pre-requisite “bridge” course to review information

taught in the PN program and the first two semesters of the RN program. This course

lasts 6 to 8 weeks (depending on the semester, i.e., if there is a school vacation week to

work around) and includes 45 clinical hours. Delivery methods include online and faceto-face, and all face-to-face meetings on held are Friday nights and Saturdays. Students

who pass this course earn advanced standing in the RN program.

Students then move into course work that is typical in the third semester of the nursing

program. These courses are 15 weeks long and taught online and on the weekends. The

same is true for the fourth semester. In total, the program takes no more than 45 weeks,

and the school markets it as a program that goes from May of one year to May of the

next. With the weekend online lecture format the student can complete the 120-hour

post-graduate requirement during the week and be part of the weekend format.
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 28

Academic Supports and Student Financial Aid

MCC provides academic support and tutoring to students in all three programs through a

“facilitator tutor.” This person is a nurse who works full-time providing one-on-one and

small group tutoring and is a “critical piece” of the program. The Trover

Foundation/Regional Medical Center offers weekend and evening tutoring space in its

library. The LPN and RN programs are eligible for federal student financial aid, and MCC

earns the regular full time equivalency reimbursement from the state of Kentucky for

students enrolled in these courses. The college also leverages financial assistance from

the West Kentucky Workforce Investment Board for students in the CNA program

Outcomes

MCC is careful to track participant outcomes. It enrolls 24 students per cohort in the LPN

program and runs one cohort at a time. The first cohort had a graduation rate of 65

percent, and the second 55 percent. The second group of students included more who

were working full-time and who had slightly lower academic skills. A full 96 percent of

graduates from both cohorts are working as LPNs, and 21 percent have enrolled in the

RN program.

As with the LPN program, a maximum of 24 students are enrolled per cohort in the RN

program. There have been just two dropouts out of six cohorts since 2001 (144

students). While an average of 15 to 18 students graduate from their own cohort (a rate

of 63-75 percent), the others tend to join another cohort or enter the daytime program

after they have stopped out.

Funding

MCC has creatively combined several sources of funding to support development and

implementation of these programs. Curriculum development and a full-time coordinator

for the accelerated weekend LPN program was funded by a $500,000 Health Resources

and Services Association (HRSA) grant through the U.S. Department of Health and

Human Services. This grant also supported the development of the Nurse Mobility

Program. A $250,000 grant from the Kentucky Community and Technical College

System under its Career Pathways Initiative supported curriculum development and

funds the full-time “facilitator-tutor” position. In order to encourage full-time working

students to reduce their work load and concentrate on their studies, the college has

leveraged a grant from the U.S. Department of Labor to fund scholarships for students

who agree to reduce their work load from 40 hours per week to 30. So far, six students

have received $1,500 each.

Challenges and Lessons Learned

Program Development Requires Additional Funding (Either External or Internal)

The accelerated weekend LPN program took nearly a year to develop. Faculty in the

Department of Nursing were agreeable to the program; however, it still required a fulltime coordinator (funded by the HRSA grant) to work with faculty to develop it, to

shepherd it through the program approval processes, and to prioritize it. On the other

hand, the accelerated weekend RN program was funded using a small amount of

internal college funds, and a small group of faculty developed the program. Since it drew
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 29

heavily on the daytime program, it took just 3 months to develop and considerably fewer

resources.

Program Development Requires Both Creativity and Familiarity with the Content

By definition, nontraditional program delivery approaches such as compressed weekend

and evening courses and distance learning are outside the scope of most faculty

members’ program development experience. Most are never explicitly taught how to

design traditional courses and programs, much less nontraditional ones. Therefore the

process of developing alternatively delivered programs requires much creativity and

willingness to experiment, all the while staying true to the content. It is quite a balancing

act that faculty members across Kentucky and the country are trying to figure out.

Programs Are Never Stagnant

Course scheduling is flexible to meet the needs of both students and faculty. For

example, when faculty grew tired of teaching every Friday night in the RN program, they

decided to transition that part of the program to online. This has worked well for students

who are inclined to enroll in the weekend program; however, any daytime students

taking the online course are not as happy with online learning.

Also faculty and staff have taken a closer look at the programs as a whole and

determined that it is redundant to have both an LPN program and an RN program—after

all, according to the Program Advisor for the RN program, “they both enroll nursing

students.” By fall 2010, MCC hopes to roll out a new, integrated accelerated weekend

nursing program. It is still early in the development; however, given their experience with

developing similar programs, it is likely a “go.”

Housatonic Community College

Open-Entry/Open-Exit Remedial Math Courses 

Flexible Delivery Approaches:

• Open-entry/open-exit

• Accelerated courses

• Distance learning

Overview15

In an average year, 80 percent of new students test into one of two levels of remedial

math at Housatonic Community College in Bridgeport, Connecticut. From this starting

point, students—and in particular the adult students who make up over 70 percent of

Housatonic’s student population—have had a difficult time moving into mainstream

academic courses and on to achieving credentials or degrees. This has long concerned

administrators and instructors at the college, but recent declines in the success rates for

those students—from 50 percent to 39 percent in recent years—has led to the

development of an innovative, open-entry/open-exit program for remedial math students.

Depending on a student’s demonstration of competency, the primary two remedial math

courses, which should take a year to complete but often take much longer, can be

completed in a single, five-week semester. The program was launched in the Spring
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 30

2007 semester with an initial cohort of 44 students. In Fall 2007, 111 students were

enrolled. Thus far in Spring 2008, 160 students are enrolled.

Program Design

Persistently low and continuously decreasing percentages of students at Housatonic

Community College have passed their first year math courses. School administrators

and instructors found that the low passing rates in the gatekeeper math courses

suggested that successful completion of remedial math courses does not necessarily

provide sufficient knowledge and skill to succeed in higher level math courses. Annual

student surveys found that students who placed directly into first year math courses had

between a 22 percent and 29 percent higher success rate than those students who had

first completed a remedial math course.

The same data survey found that most students in the lowest level developmental

courses did not register the next semester to retake the course if they did not pass it,

and those students who elected to repeat the course used up much of their financial aid,

dramatically limiting their ability to pursue degrees or credentials.

Open-entry/Competency-based Exit

Housatonic’s open-entry/competency-based exit remedial math program was created

specifically to address both the low success rate and the high drop-out rate of remedial

math students. Administrators and instructors at Housatonic found that their students too

often view math as a series of unrelated rules and formulas. However, success in math

depends upon students progressively building math knowledge and skill. The rate at

which this learning occurs is very individualized, tending to make the regimented

presentation of math concepts to whole classes cause quick learners to lose interest,

and slower learners to become frustrated. The open-entry/open-exit format is addressing

this dilemma by permitting individualized, self-paced instruction so that students may

progress at their own rate as math concepts are mastered. Students can register for

open-entry/open-exit courses anytime during the semester if seats are available.

Students in the initial cohort self-selected into the course, but administrators anticipate

recommending students for later cohorts, once instructors get a better sense of the type

of student who will benefit most from this format.

Computer-based Instruction

The computer-based program was first introduced in Housatonic’s two remedial math

sections, MAT*075 (Pre-algebra) and MAT*095 (Elementary Algebra Foundations). With

an instructor and tutor present at all times, students progress through the computerized

PLATO software, an instructional software designed to remediate secondary and postsecondary students on basic math skills. This allows students to complete the course at

their own pace, with some students finishing in less than one semester, and others

taking longer. Students who do not finish within the semester pick up where they left off

in the program the next semester. They are required to sign a contract indicating that

they will re-enroll in and complete the course and are allowed a total of three semesters

to do so. Classes are offered two days per week and one evening per week to

accommodate working adults’ schedules.
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 31

Accelerated Progress to College Readiness

Since course completion is determined by competency instead of “seat time,” students

can complete both sections of remedial math, typically offered over two semesters, in as

few as five weeks. However, students are limited to three attempts to pass each of the

two sections of the course.

Outcome Measurement

Housatonic is developing several measures for assessing the outcomes of its openentry/open-exit remedial math courses. Among them are:

• Increasing the percentage of students who successfully complete MAT*075 with

a grade of “C” or higher by 15 percent by the end of the fourth year of

implementation;

• Increasing the percentage of students who successfully complete MAT*095 with

a grade of “C” or higher by 10 percent by the fourth year of implementation; and

• By the end of the fourth year, increasing the percentage of students by 20

percent who have completed MAT*095 and then have gone on to successfully

complete the first year math gatekeeper course with a grade of “C” or higher.

In Fall 2007, students in the open-entry/open-exit MAT*075 course outperformed

students in the traditional developmental math course, with higher percentages earning

A’s and B+’s. Also, a student survey revealed satisfaction with the open-entry/open-exit

design. More data on grades, retention, and student satisfaction will be collected as the

program continues.

Funding

Housatonic’s open-entry/open-exit remedial math course is funded primarily through a

grant from the Lumina Foundation, as part of its Achieving the Dream initiative (see

www.achievingthedream.org). The Connecticut Community College System’s

participation in this five-year long program will permit Housatonic to implement and

expand this approach, as well as eventually institutionalize it within the college.

Challenges/Lessons Learned

Resources Needed for Program Research and Development

Challenges for Houstonic to this point have been largely logistical. Researching the

types of software that would be best suited to Housatonic’s adult learner population,

creating and finding space for the math labs, and providing release time for faculty to

design the open-entry/open-exit courses were some of the initial challenges. Designing

and scheduling the courses, lining up faculty and hiring tutors, and training instructors in

the use of the PLATO software have taken a significant amount of faculty and staff time

in recent months. However, the response from the mathematics faculty at Housatonic

has been decidedly positive.
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 32

Program Design Must Be Worked Out with Faculty, Administrators

Other challenges have been more programmatic in nature. Administrators and

instructors have had to address a number of questions that relate to course design. For

example, will counseling be provided to students in the course, and how much flexibility

will there be in moving students from traditional math courses into the open-entry, openexit remedial course?

Financial Aid Deadlines Can Clash with Open- Entry Delivery

The biggest challenge to date has been aligning financial aid application deadlines with

the open-entry model, since students who enroll later in the semester run the risk of

missing financial aid application deadlines. Full-time students can add an openentry/open-exit course to their course load, and it will be covered by the student aid

package. However, part-time students’ aid packages do not automatically add additional

funds for the additional course(s). Administrators are exploring with the college

Foundation the possibility of special scholarships for students in the open-entry/openexit courses.

Oregon’s Pathways to Advancement Initiative

Portland and Mt. Hood Community Colleges

Flexible Delivery Approaches:

• Weekend and evening courses

• Modular program

• Accelerated program

• Career pathways

Overview16

Oregon’s Pathways to Advancement Initiative is one of two statewide efforts profiled

here (the other being Washington state’s I-BEST program profiled on pages 35-39.

These statewide initiatives are significant for the potential they have to reduce

developmental costs through coordination and economies of scale—and to promote

expansion, diffusion, and scale that is so difficult for individual institutions to accomplish.

Oregon’s seventeen community colleges have implemented the state-supported

Pathways to Advancement Initiative, designed to accelerate the rate of certificate and

degree attainment for adult learners by establishing an innovative program approval

system. Twenty-nine different professional technical career pathways have been

restructured in Oregon’s community college system to provide occupational training that

prepares low-literacy adults for jobs or entry into mainstream postsecondary education.

Community colleges can package and align credit-bearing, academic and career college

courses into smaller modules and credentials as part of their degree programs. This

permits the adult learner the flexibility to earn credits toward degrees or credentials, and

to exit and re-enter the programs without jeopardizing credits already earned. Two

colleges that have led the way are Portland (PCC) and Mt. Hood Community Colleges,

(MHCC) from which many of the challenges and lessons highlighted here are drawn.
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 33

Program Design

Modular Career Pathways Programming

The Pathways initiative integrates a broad range of programs and funding streams to

create modularized career pathways that help accelerate students’ advancement from

adult education and workforce development programs through credit-level

occupational/technical degree programs. Modularized career pathways break degree

programs into manageable “chunks” of courses that are driven by employer skill needs.

These pathways meet the needs of working adult students who may only be able to

attend for short periods of time and often have to “stop out” for work or family-related

reasons. They provide multiple entry, exit, and reentry points into and through a broad

range of programs that are directly linked to jobs and specific employment outcomes. By

focusing programs on discrete, occupation-specific courses, Oregon’s Pathways

programs are designed to accelerate the pace at which students achieve skill proficiency

in a given occupation

Students proceed through a series of 1-2.5 credit hour courses that can be taken in one

to two academic terms, preparing students for discrete jobs linked to career and

education goals. The majority of the Pathways programs offer courses on the weekends

and in the evenings to accommodate the work schedules of the adult learner.

Credentials (including degrees, interim certificates, and industry certifications) are

awarded upon completion of the appropriate sequence of courses. These credentials not

only count as credits toward a degree, but also signal to employers that students have

achieved a certain level of occupational skill proficiency.

The development of career pathways in Oregon has been built upon strong relationships

with employers and recognition that higher education is typically a start-and-stop affair

for working adults with little time and many responsibilities. The modular structure has

advantages in terms of incremental progress tied to valued credentials. However, this

structure runs the risk of losing many students who achieve certificates that better their

job situation and then decide not to return to continue toward a degree. To maximize the

re-engagement of students who complete initial modules, institutions like PCC and

MHCC are developing an internet-based system of access to the college through which

students will be able to post their personal academic plans and goals, see their

progress, and decide on next steps. The colleges plan to use the system to stay more

connected to students who have stopped out and to send customized emails to targeted

groups of students, such as developmental students who completed a course

successfully, but then chose not to continue their studies.

The Pathway program recruits students from One-Stop Career Centers, Temporary

Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) programs, General Educational Development

(GED) classes, and English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) classes. This

multiple pipeline design is supported by Oregon’s governance structure, which houses

workforce development, adult basic skills (ABE/GED/ESOL), and community colleges in

one state agency. Cohorts of participants enter through a one-term or two-term career

pathways training, with internships provided for most trainings. Staffing and

infrastructure are funded through WIA by the local Workforce Investment Board.
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 34

Support Services

Pathways training teams in each college serve as brokers with academic departments

and coordinators to the training cohorts. They also work with other departments to

develop new trainings, and to provide career planning, curriculum, internship

coordination, and job development and placement services. In addition, students receive

mentoring, coaching, tutoring and assistance with accessing childcare and

transportation.

Outcomes

Participating community colleges have identified several transition points across the

education continuum in which to implement Pathways, including secondary to

postsecondary transitions and adult basic education to postsecondary transitions, but

with particular attention given to providing postsecondary education and skill

development to adult learners.

Since its adoption and implementation in 2003, the Pathways project statewide has

accomplished a great deal, including the development, in conjunction with employer

advisory committees, of 29 career pathway “roadmaps” offered in the seventeen

participating community colleges. The more well-developed initiative at PCC and MHCC

offer all 29 career pathways trainings to 225 to 250 people annually, and approximately

200 students enter internships with participating employers each year. Other Oregon

community colleges offer instruction in fewer pathways.

Funding

The state legislature supports the Pathways project by funding a full-time project

coordinator position by combining Perkins, Workforce Investment Act, and state general

funds. In addition to resource development and communications responsibilities, this

coordinator oversees the Pathways project implementation in the five participating

colleges, as well as directs plans for expanding the project to all seventeen community

colleges.

The development of Oregon’s Pathways project has also been aided by the state’s

practice of providing FTE reimbursement for students in all community college programs,

including adult education, ESOL, workforce development, and developmental education,

based on the number of hours they attend. It helps that Oregon community colleges, by

statute, are the primary provider of adult education and workforce development,

indicating the importance the state places on that role. This makes it possible for

community colleges to use a combination of state and federal Title II adult education

funds and general FTE reimbursement to fund adult basic education and ESOL

programs. They can also use workforce development and FTE reimbursement to fund

workforce development programs.

Under Oregon’s funding statute, colleges tally the aggregate amount of time that

students spend at the college, with 510 hours translating as one FTE, regardless of the

type of course or the number of hours in a course. The “510 hours divisor,” as it is called,

acts as a great leveler, giving the system an incentive to expand its adult basic and parttime offerings. Costs for programs that are more expensive, such as technical courses
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 35

with lab work, are offset by the greater number of hours that can be billed for such

courses.

Students enrolled in the professional technical career pathways trainings can use

financial aid to complete other modules because the modules are part of existing college

certificate and degree programs.

Challenges/Lessons Learned

While career pathways have been introduced in all seventeen of Oregon’s community

colleges, the initiative is most fully developed at PCC and MHCC. These institutions

provide significant insight on challenges and lessons learned from implementation and

expansion of this model. For this reason, the challenges and lessons that follow are

drawn largely from the experience of PCC and MHCC.

Administrative Commitment Needs are Significant

The development of integrated pathways is supported by a core of creative leaders,

many of who have been at PCC for many years and have worked in a broad range of

adult education, workforce, non-credit, and developmental programs. They share a

strong commitment to integrating these programs with one another and with the

college’s credit-level side. Several who began as program leaders now serve in key

positions at PCC and are mentoring a new generation of programmatic leadership.

Faculty Resistance Can be a Significant Barrier to Expansion

The college faces several barriers to extending modularized career pathways to other

occupations and sectors. The development of pathways began with faculty who were

most interested in moving to a competency-based modularized approach, and new

pathways are still being developed by faculty who want to do it. Getting faculty who are

not supportive, however, to adopt a modularized pathways approach presents new

obstacles. In some cases, faculty have been resistant to changing tried and true

curricula. In other cases, administrators have had difficulty in recruiting faculty to teach

at non-traditional hours. In addition, while the community colleges operating the

Pathways Initiatives are working to institutionalize their programs, the Pathways Initiative

is highly dependent on inconsistent state funding

Staying Demand-driven an Ongoing Challenge

One additional concern expressed by Pathways project administrators in the

participating colleges has been the need to remain up-to-date on labor market

information in their regions in order to ensure that their projects are meeting local

workforce development needs. Colleges have noted that their capacity to conduct this

sort of research on an ongoing basis is limited.
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 36

Washington State

Integrated Basic Education and Skills Training (I-BEST)

Flexible Delivery Approaches

• Weekend and evening courses

• Accelerated program

• Career pathways

Overview17

In the Spring of 2004, the state of Washington began implementing an innovative

program designed to address the low basic skill levels of many of the adult students

turning to the state’s two year colleges for education or skill development. Low basic

education and poor English proficiency frequently slows, and sometimes stops,

advancement by adult learners into core academic or credentialed training programs.

The Integrated Basic Education and Skills Training (I-BEST) program partners English

as a second language (ESL) or adult basic education (ABE) instructors with

professional-technical instructors in the classroom to concurrently provide students with

literacy education and workforce skills linked to an explicit career path in high-demand

industries. Initial findings demonstrate that I-BEST results in dramatically improved rates

of college credit attainment and workforce training program completion.

Program Design

ABE in Washington state is administered by the State Board of Community and

Technical Colleges (SBCTC) and delivered primarily through the state’s two-year

colleges, giving administrators considerable insight into the dynamics effecting lowskilled adult learners. Analysis of statewide performance data by administrators and

researchers at the SBCTC found that the longer it took adult learners to achieve basic

skills competency, the less likely they were to advance into and through postsecondary

academic and training programs. Accelerating the rate at which basic skills were

developed became a priority if the state were to increase the competitiveness of its

workforce, as well as improve the capacity for adult learners to acquire family-sustaining

occupations.

For many adult learners, the pathway between ABE/ESL and workforce training or

academic programs is too long and complex. In Washington as in most other states,

basic skills and workforce instruction have been traditionally offered separately and

sequentially, with few clearly delineated transition points. Only one out of ten ESL

students in Washington makes the transition from ABE/ESL into postsecondary

programs within three years, and just two in every 100 students starting in ESL go on to

earn certificates or degrees within five years. The statistics are not much better for

students who begin in ABE programs, with fewer than two in ten making the transition to

postsecondary education.

Based on the state’s research findings that adults with at least one year of

postsecondary credits, coupled with a credential, have a real earnings bump compared

to those who earn fewer credits and do not earn a credential. The community and

technical colleges in Washington were given an opportunity to volunteer for funding to

create demonstration projects testing ways to accelerate adult progress through ABE
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 37

and ESL and into occupational credential programs. The demonstration was funded with

federal ABE and Perkins funds. Nine of these projects are contextualized ESL courses,

and one is a contextualized ABE course. The success of these demonstrations

prompted and enabled the state to go to the legislature for additional resources and

made it possible for the State Board to revamp its funding formula for I-BEST model

programs (see Funding section below).

I-BEST challenges the traditional notion that basic education must precede training.

Instead, ABE and ESL instruction are provided within the context of skills training by two

instructors in the classroom, permitting the adult student to learn both simultaneously.

Instructors are responsible for jointly evaluating their students, and for working with

employers to develop curricula. To help ensure that students remain enrolled in their

courses, instructors are also responsible for working with adult education and

professional-technical administrators to connect I-BEST students with support services,

including mentoring, career counseling and tutoring, as well as external support services

such as transportation and child care assistance. Colleges that deliver I-BEST programs

are required to identify which ABE/ESL/Developmental components are needed for

subsequent levels of training, including ESL for students who test out of ABE/ESL

federal level of support.

Professional and Technical Instruction

Each I-BEST program must go through a specific SBCTC integrated program approval

process, which includes sign-off at the college level by both workforce and basic skills

administrators. In order to be approved, I-BEST programs must be included among the

college’s workforce program inventory, and must also meet at least one of the following

criteria for approval by the SBCTC:

• The program must be contained within a currently-approved professionaltechnical program of at least one year in length or an approved professionaltechnical associate degree program; and/or

• It must result in high wage employment with jobs available for program graduates

at a minimum of $14.00 per hour in King County and $12.00 per hour in the rest

of the state; and/or

• It must articulate with an approved program (i.e., certified nursing assistant to

licensed practical nurse) where completers are given preferential status.

(Washington SBCTC, Integrated Basic Education and Skills Training: Program

Guidelines and Planning Process. December 2005. Olympia.)

Basic Skills Instruction

All I-BEST students must qualify for federally supported levels of basic skills education.

Students must be pre-tested using either the CASAS ECS18 or Life and Work series at

the start of the I-BEST program and must be post-tested upon program completion, or at

the end of the academic year, whichever occurs first. A plan for continued gains and

reaching English language proficiency must be developed for students who transition

into professional-technical programs but have not yet reached language proficiency. The

SBCTC recommends that these plans take into account ABE/ESL classes above the

federally supported levels.
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 38

Outcomes

An initial study of I-BEST outcomes found that I-BEST students earned five times more

college credits on average and were 15 times more likely to complete workforce training

than were traditional ABE/ESL students during the same amount of time. I-BEST

students earned an average of 12 workforce and 10 college level credits. This compared

to two workforce credits and three college-level credits earned by comparison students

when they were enrolled in workforce training. The study also found that I-BEST

programs increased the access to workforce training for ABE/ESL students.

Funding

As noted above, federal Perkins and ABE funds were used to create the I-BEST

demonstration projects. The state legislature awarded an additional $4 million in 2005 to

support a second round of I-BEST funding in order to expand the program to additional

colleges.

A key innovation in I-BEST, however, is the enhanced FTE model developed and

implemented by the SBCTC. The enhanced FTE model of 1.75 (as compared to 1.0)

applies to classes in programs meeting the criteria specified above, and was developed

to remove the cost disincentive of providing two instructors to deliver the basic skills and

professional/technical curriculum. In addition to providing funds for a minimum 50

percent joint instruction time and curriculum development, it offsets the costs of efforts

around coordination and support services. There is no new FTE funding for colleges

using the I-BEST model. The model allows colleges to generate 1.75 FTE for I-BEST

classes within the college’s current state FTE allocation.

Challenges and Lessons Learned

Resources Needed for Pilot Research and Development

Implementing I-BEST in the ten participating colleges has taken considerable planning

between workforce training administrators and basic skills administrators. Applicants for

I-BEST programs must not only demonstrate how they will guide their adult students into

successful career options after completing the program, but they must also demonstrate

how I-BEST instruction puts students on an educational path up to and including a four

year degree. In addition, proposals for I-BEST programs must account for how the

program administrators will coordinate with local support service providers in order to

meet the needs of students.

Faculty Coordination Between ESL/ABE and Vocational Instructors Challenging

Implementing the instructional model has been identified as a challenge by some of the

early I-BEST demonstrations. The instruction component is based on the presence of

two faculty members in the classroom, requiring continuous coordination between the

two instructors around periodic student assessments and curriculum evaluation.

According to SBCTC administrators, there has been reluctance on the part of some

vocational instructors to the curriculum changes required by I-BEST, but this is rare.

Moreover, administrators note that the pairing of ABE/ESL instructors with vocational

instructors has led, in several cases, to improvements in the quality of instruction. In

some of the participating colleges, basic skills instructors are holding professional

development forums for vocational instructors.
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 39

Integrating ABE with Vocational Instruction Takes Time

Integrating ABE with vocational instruction has proven to be more of a challenge than

anticipated. As made evident by the preponderance of ESL-based programs, college

administrators have found that English language instruction lends itself more easily to

integrated instruction. However, increasing the number of ABE based programs is a goal

for SBCTC administrators for the coming round of I-BEST grants.

State Reimbursement Policies Do Not Match Traditional Programs

Perhaps the biggest challenge facing I-BEST is related primarily to state funding, but

also to demographics. Washington State funds 72 percent of the cost of each FTE,

leaving the colleges to pick up the remainder, which comes largely through tuition. While

the state reimburses non-credit and for-credit courses at the same rate, the state

charges a flat $25 fee for basic skills instruction, such as that offered through I-BEST.

This funding formula can serve as a disincentive to expand enrollment in basic skills, in

favor of expanding enrollment of traditional, tuition-paying students. At present, with

postsecondary enrollment flat across the state, this is not a significant concern.

However, according to SBCTC administrators, plans to take I-BEST to a larger scale

must address the looming demographic changes faced by Washington colleges.

Beginning in 2008-2009, enrollments will begin to turn upward as the much larger

population of current high school sophomores begins to graduate, creating pressure on

postsecondary institutions to maximize the number of traditional students.
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 40

V. Barriers and Strategies

Overview of Barriers to Developing and 

Implementing Alternative Delivery Approaches

Interviews with practitioners and researchers conducted for this study identified a

number of significant barriers to the development, implementation, and expansion of

innovative flexible and accelerated program design and delivery options in public

postsecondary institutions. Overall, the most significant barriers included:

• Lack of research and development resources to develop new program models;

• Lack of faculty and/or faculty hesitancy to teach in non-traditional courses and

programs;

• Student financial aid program regulations that do not align well with alternative

delivery approaches; and

• State policies for program approval and reimbursement for student enrollment

that do not align well with creation and diffusion of these approaches.

These barriers were evident in the discussions we had with leaders of the programs and

institutions profiles in the previous section. Most institutions lacked program research

and development dollars to research labor market needs and design the programs. They

cobbled together federal, state, and philanthropic funding for this purpose (with

Washington, Oregon, and Kentucky making important state investments), but a lack of

adequate developmental funds has clearly constrained program development and

expansion. Some institutions we interviewed have had to address faculty skepticism and

concerns about non-traditional courses and their pedagogical and scheduling demands.

Student financial aid regulations presented myriad barriers. In some cases, there was

lack of clarity about whether programs were “eligible programs” under the federal

student aid program, which led to much confusion by program practitioners and state

administrators. In others, students were eligible for little or no aid because they attended

less than half time (making them ineligible for student loans) and/or because even their

modest income was too high for need-based aid. In addition, the rigid delivery schedule

of student aid at the beginning of traditional fall, spring, and summer semesters has

often clashed with the sequencing of flexible programs offered on a rolling basis or in an

open-entry/open-exit format.

In a few cases, state policies on program approval or reimbursement to institutions for

student enrollments undermined the development and implementation of flexible and

accelerated program models. Strategies for addressing these barriers must be initiated

at the state level, since rules and procedures vary greatly from one state to the next.
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 41

Online Surveys Reinforce Findings on Barriers

To get a different perspective on the relative importance of particular barriers to

expansion of more flexible delivery models that meet adult learners’ needs—and to

solicit strategies to minimize these barriers, FutureWorks and Jobs for the Future

conducted two online surveys of state level experts on higher education policy and

practice.

The primary survey was of the State Higher Education Executive Officers (SHEEO)

association members conducted in late July and early August 2006. Fifty-four SHEEO

members were sent an online survey with questions on examples of alternative delivery

approaches designed especially to improve access and success for working adult

students, barriers to developing and implementing these approaches, strategies for

overcoming the barriers, and federal and state policy incentives to increase adult student

enrollment and completion (See survey protocol in Appendix A). We received eight

complete responses, for a response rate of 15 percent.

In addition to the SHEEO survey, we worked with the National Association of State

Student Grant and Aid Programs (NASSGAP) to conduct a short online poll of its

members to learn more about this issue from a student aid perspective. The responses

we received from this survey, though limited in number, validated the findings from the

SHEEO survey.

These surveys should not be seen as definitive assessments, but more as additional

input and confirmation of findings from the literature review and the program-related

interviews. A full understanding of the scope and depth of the challenges facing the

development, implementation, and expansion of flexible and accelerated postsecondary

programs to benefit working adult students will require a more in-depth research

methodology, including input from state-level executive officers (distinguishing between

two- and four-year institutions), college presidents, college academic deans, and faculty.

Moreover, a fuller research agenda would also explore developments and trends in

private postsecondary institutions.

Of the eight possible barriers probed in the SHEEO survey, consensus appeared to

target three as the most significant:

• Lack of financing to redesign and/or develop new program models;

• Faculty hesitancy to designing and/or teaching non-traditional courses and

programs; and

• Lack of faculty capacity for teaching in non-traditional programs, especially those

with non-traditional schedules, i.e., weekend colleges

As shown in the following table, the relatively high average or mean scores are weighted

down by a few low scores in the top two barriers. The middle score (median) for the “lack

of financing” barrier was a 4 (out of 5, with 5 indicating a “significant barrier”) and the

most frequent score (mode) was a 5. Similarly, the mode on the “faculty resistance”

barrier was a 3.5 and the mode was a 5. Clearly, there is a clear perception among
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 42

respondents that these two barriers are significant, given that the most frequent score on

both was at the top of the scale.

19

Barriers to Developing and Implementing

Alternative Delivery Approaches for Working Adult Students

mean median mode

Lack of financing to redesign and/or develop new

program models 3.7 4 5

Faculty resistance to designing and/or teaching nontraditional courses and programs 3.3 3.5 5

Schools may not have faculty available to teach in

non-traditional programs, especially those with nontraditional schedules, i.e., weekend colleges 3.3 3 3

Programs do not qualify for state reimbursement and/or

the state reimbursement is not enough to cover the higher

cost of the program 2.3 1.5 1

Programs do not qualify for student financial aid 2 1 1

Redesigned programs may not support student transfer

between two- and four-year institutions 2 2.5 0

It can be difficult to get approval from accreditation bodies

for non-traditional programs 1.6 1.5 2

It can be difficult to get state approval of non-traditional

courses or programs 1.1 1 0

Strategies for Overcoming Barriers

In the course of our research, we identified a number of strategies for addressing the

most commonly perceived barriers to implementation and expansion of more flexible and

accelerated approaches to delivering credential programs in public postsecondary

institutions. In this section, we suggest strategies in policy and practice for overcoming

or minimizing each significant barrier identified above. These possible responses to

identified barriers are summarized in the table that concludes this section.

Barrier: Lack of research and development resources for new program models

Possible Responses:

• Develop a new Alternative Delivery Innovation Fund that would provide training, technical

assistance, and resources to institutions that develop and deliver alternative approaches

• Integrate training, technical assistance, and resources for alternative delivery approaches into

existing national initiatives

• Leverage the Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education (FIPSE) to provide

training, technical assistance, and resources for this work

Researching and developing new programs with flexible and accelerated formats takes

time and requires new ways of thinking about curriculum development. Although

curriculum design is a regular part of faculty duties, the more demanding research and

development efforts that must go into many of the models presented in this paper are

not. For example, to be effective and to meet demand, program development includes a

great deal of labor market research that is not regularly a part of traditional curriculum
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 43

design. These models frequently require curricular and pedagogical redesign. This takes

both time and resources to accomplish. A clear example is distance learning, which

involves both a significantly different teaching format and an infusion of new technology.

Another example is instruction delivered at the worksite, in close cooperation with

employers.

In Adult Learners in Higher Education, Jobs for the Future, Eduventures, and

FutureWorks recommended creation of new “alternative delivery innovation funds” at the

state and/or federal levels that would give education institutions a chance to compete for

development and start-up funding for new models for serving adult learners. Such a fund

could support training programs, “academies,” or mentor programs to help faculty

develop effective, quality new models. Examples can be found in both Kentucky and

Oregon. As part of the career pathway initiatives in these states, the state community

and technical college organizations provide annual and as-needed training to faculty in

how to develop career pathways programs. Similar training and technical assistance

sessions could be developed for other alternative delivery approaches and offered

statewide or even nationally. Training could be organized as conferences in which

individuals attend as their schedules permit. Alternatively, they could be offered as

“academies,” in which cohorts of individuals attend a short series of training sessions

together and provide peer support as they develop and implement the programs.

Another model for supporting innovation in program design and delivery includes setting

up a mentor-protégé program that pairs experienced faculty with less experienced

faculty to help the latter develop alternative delivery approaches. Again, this could be

implemented at a state or federal level. Training and professional development

opportunities—in addition to fair compensation for course and program development—

may encourage more faculty participation and innovation. By making funding

competitive, incentives drive both institutions and individuals to invest time and be

creative.

Training, technical assistance, and resources can also be integrated into existing

initiatives that focus on increasing adult workers’ access to and success in attaining

postsecondary credentials. Alternatively, this strategy could be implemented through the

Fund for Improvement of Postsecondary Education (FIPSE) program administered by

the Office of Postsecondary Education in the U.S. Department of Education. FIPSE has

more than 30 years of experience managing competitive distribution of funds for

improvement of postsecondary education. Revitalization and increased funding of FIPSE

also was part of draft recommendations of the Secretary’s Commission on the Future of

Higher Education.

This kind of one-time start-up and development investment can have a powerful impact

on practice in states and nationally. Newly developed courses and models can be made

available to other institutions in a state or to national consortia of innovative institutions.

This strategy should require or strongly encourage course-sharing across postsecondary

education institutions and systems in order to leverage resources even further. Funding

requirements could stipulate that funding be restricted to the development of courses

that result in college credit, in order to make it easier for adults to work their way up a

educational pathway to a credential.
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 44

Barrier: Lack of faculty and/or faculty hesitancy to teaching non-traditional

courses and programs

Possible Responses:

• Colleges pay faculty more for teaching in nontraditional courses and programs

• State governments reimburse colleges more for enrollments in these courses

• Colleges hire faculty willing to design and implement alternative delivery approaches

At some institutions, there may not be enough faculty to teach in non-traditional

programs or faculty may be skeptical of the changes required to teach in alternative

format classes. Our research found that maintaining faculty loyalty plays a large role in

institutional decisions to develop or expand courses for “non-traditional” students. Some

institutions noted reluctance on the part of some faculty members to programs that may

detract from an institution’s transfer mission. Others noted resistance to teaching at

times that suited adult learners but were inconvenient for instructors: recruiting faculty to

teach in the evenings and on weekends is typically more difficult. Other obstacles

include the requirements by accreditation agencies that instructors have Master’s

degrees in their fields and the cost of providing security and electricity to schools in

evenings and on weekends.

Strategies for overcoming this set of barriers are primarily institutional in nature.

However, state governments might provide some help. State governments could provide

support and incentives for innovation by reimbursing colleges at a higher rate for

students enrolled in flexible and accelerated programs, particularly those that

demonstrated strong retention and completion results. (We recommend similar

incentives for programs targeting high demand occupations as well).

Several states already have differential reimbursement rates for different program

offerings. For example, the state of Washington reimburses colleges for I-BEST

enrollments at a rate 75 percent higher than other enrollments (a 1.75 full-time

equivalent student rate compared to a 1.0 FTE rate). The State of Pennsylvania offers

higher reimbursement rates for enrollments in courses focuses on high demand

occupations as defined by the state.

In some situations, faculty shortages or skepticism may be so acute that colleges will

have to hire more faculty, frequently part-time and adjunct faculty with recent industry

experience and flexible schedules. This can present trade-offs in terms of instructional

rigor. Each college will have to tackle this issue on its own terms and within its own

context. Federal and state governments, however, should be aware of these institutional

dynamics and factor it in when considering strategies for developing such programs.
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 45

Barrier: Programs do not qualify for student financial aid and the complex

regulations confuse practitioners in determining program eligibility.

Possible Responses:

• The student financial aid regulations regarding nontraditional courses and programs should

be clarified and more transparent.

• The statutory and regulatory rules concerning eligible programs for federal student financial

aid should be further refined, streamlined and simplified in order to allow and encourage

more alternative delivery approaches

• States can design new forms of student aid aimed specifically at working adults enrolled in

nontraditionally delivered courses and programs, helping to expand the market for these

strategies.

Over the last several years, advocates, practitioners, policymakers, and researchers

have noted the complexity and confusing nature of the student financial aid system from

the student user perspective. Complexity also affects institutional decisions, particularly

vis a vis innovation in program design and delivery. As nontraditional students and their

demand for nontraditional courses and programs continues to grow, student aid rules

defining program eligible for student aid need to become more transparent and easily

understandable. (A quick primer on “eligible programs” in the federal Title IV student

financial aid system is provided in Appendix B.)

There are real regulatory barriers in the federal student aid system to postsecondary

education institutions developing and offering certain types of programs. For example,

strict program eligibility requirements for programs less than one-year could stifle the

development of modularized programs. Institutions have little incentive to change the

way courses have always been delivered and delve into the morass of student aid

regulations to figure out which program formats are eligible for aid and which are not.

The frequent revision of rules regarding program eligibility for aid is a disincentive to

many institutions to pursue innovative program delivery models. Significant statutory and

regulatory rules have changed in the last few years. For example, in the fall of 2002, the

U.S. Department of Education eliminated the “12-hour rule,” a regulation that required

educational programs not operating on a traditional calendar—semester, trimester, or

quarter system—to provide at least 12 hours of in-class instruction each instructional

week in order to be eligible for student aid. Today, nonstandard programs are treated the

same as standard programs, and “an ‘instructional week” is any week in which one day

of regularly scheduled instruction, examination, or examination preparation occurs,

regardless of whether that activity occurs face-to-face with a faculty member or at a

distance” (Wolanin 2003). After the policy change, there has been a lag in institutions

understanding and adjusting to the change. Additionally, there is ambiguity about what

needs to occur on the minimum one day in order to “count” toward an instructional week.

A similar dynamic has accompanied the repeal of the “50 percent rule,” which made

institutions that enrolled more than half their students or offered more than half their

courses in distance education ineligible for federal student aid programs.

While these rule changes are welcome and add opportunities for flexibility, it takes a

while for these changes to diffuse beyond financial aid officers and to be understood by

academic officers and new program developers and designers.

The following two steps could be taken to address these challenges:
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 46

1. The current regulations governing student financial aid for courses and programs

should be more transparent and explicitly address what types of alternative

delivery approaches do and do not qualify for federal student aid; and

2. The statutory and regulatory rules concerning eligible programs for student

financial aid should be further refined, streamlined, and simplified in order to

allow and encourage more alternative delivery approaches.

In order to encourage postsecondary institutions to experiment more with alternative

delivery strategies, administrators, practitioners, and technical assistance advisors must

have the same understanding of eligible programs as student aid officers and program

administrators. Program guides, toolkits, and training sessions explicitly focused on this

set of issues would be helpful.

In addition, a policy analysis of which statutory and regulatory rules governing student

aid impact alternative delivery strategies, and in what ways, would help to target those

that should be amended in order to encourage more nontraditional delivery. Such

analysis was conducted by several parties on distance learning as it started to

proliferate, which brought to light the challenges caused by the “50 percent rule” and the

“12 hour rule.” The same kind of policy analysis should be undertaken for other flexible

program delivery approaches highlighted here.

At the state level, new forms of student aid could be offered that students could use to

pay for nontraditional programs that do not qualify for federal aid. For example, the

Georgia HOPE Grant program (not to be confused with the separate Georgia HOPE

Scholarship program) provides full tuition, approved mandatory fees, and a $300 per

academic year allowance to students enrolled in certificate or diploma programs

approved by the Georgia Department of Technical and Adult Education (up to 63

semester or 95 quarter hours of study). This program aids a broader range of students

and programs than does the federal student aid program and can serve as a model for a

“work around” solution to federal student aid constraints.

Similarly, the Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency (PHEAA) launched a

special program in 2005-2006 specifically for adult students. The Workforce

Advancement Grant for Education (WAGE) Program is designed to provide aid to fill in

the gaps left by federal and state aid programs. It provides a block grant to

postsecondary institutions that have applied and been determined eligible to participate.

Institutions establish and award grants to adult students who meet both PHEAA and

institutional student eligibility guidelines. The guidelines are less restrictive than the

federal aid programs and therefore, make it easier to support students in alternatively

delivered programs.
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 47

Barrier: State policies for program approval and reimbursement to colleges for

student enrollment undermine alternative delivery approaches.

Possible Responses:

• States can reassess their program approval processes to ease approval of flexible and

accelerated programs

• States can reassess their reimbursement policies to colleges for student enrollment to

provide for more sufficient and consistent funding

Since there are fifty different sets of policies around these two regulatory areas, barriers

related to state program approval and reimbursement were identified as a problem only

in certain states. For this reason, solution sets should be targeted to the state level, not

the federal level.

Regarding program approval, stumbling blocks in a few states centered mostly on the

long timeframe required for securing program approval, particularly for completely new

programs. However, in one case studied, the college successfully worked within the

program parameters already approved by the state and simply reworked the program

format to accelerate progress and completion.

When state reimbursement policies surfaced as a barrier, two issues dominated: 1)

insufficient reimbursement for more expensive courses; and 2) inconsistent funding from

one state budget cycle to the next in reimbursement appropriations. Institutions seem to

face both of these challenges with their traditional programs as well as their nontraditional programs, especially given the funding cuts that have affected higher

education in most states in the past five years.

These challenges create difficult choices for institutions that, when funding dips, are

forced to cut back on relatively expensive programs that working adults enroll in most,

such as allied health programs. Compounding the problem are corresponding increases

in tuition required to offset cuts in appropriation, which raise yet another barrier for the

adult learner.

States have pursued various strategies to address the state reimbursement challenge,

focusing on the funding formula that drives reimbursement. States could follow the

model in Washington in which enrollments in I-BEST courses are reimbursed at a higher

rate than other course (1.75 reimbursement rate compared to 1.0). In Pennsylvania,

community colleges are reimbursed a higher FTE for courses that cost more to deliver

and that are in high-demand occupations as determined by the state. This encourages

colleges to secure faculty who can teach these courses. In South Dakota, postsecondary

education intuitions can charge a “self-support tuition rate” (approved by the Board of

Regents) that is higher than the regular state-set tuition for courses that are offered offcampus, i.e., distance learning courses or courses that are taught at one of three

education centers in the state (courses must be for-credit).

States might explore a more radical strategy—considering the value of reimbursing

colleges for outcomes as opposed to enrollments. A reimbursement policy based on

enrollments in the front end does little to encourage completions on the back end, which,

as stressed throughout this paper, is the ultimate measure of success. Reimbursing

colleges for completions would provide incentives not only to get students in the door,

but also to get them out successfully.
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 48

Summary of Strategies to Expand Alternatively

Delivered Postsecondary Education

Barrier

Recommendations for Federal

Government

Recommendations for State

Governments

Lack of research and

development resources to

develop new program models

Develop a new Alternative

Delivery Innovation Fund that

would provide training, technical

assistance, and resources to

institutions that develop and

deliver alternative approaches; or

Integrate training, technical

assistance, and resources for

alternative delivery approaches

into existing national initiatives; or

Leverage the Fund for the

Improvement of Postsecondary

Education (FIPSE) to provide

training, technical assistance, and

resources for this work.

Establish a state-based

“alternative delivery innovation

fund”

Lack of faculty and/or faculty

resistance to teaching nontraditional courses and programs

Colleges pay faculty more for

teaching in nontraditional courses

and programs; state governments

reimburse colleges more for

enrollments in these courses.

Programs do not qualify for

student financial aid and the

complex regulations confuse

practitioners in determining

program eligibility.

Clarify and make transparent the

student financial aid regulations

regarding nontraditional courses

and programs; and

Refine, streamline, and simplify

the statutory and regulatory rules

concerning eligible programs for

student aid in order to allow and

encourage more alternative

delivery approaches.

States can design new forms of

student aid aimed specifically at

working adults enrolled in

nontraditionally delivered courses

and programs (create a market for

these strategies).

State policies for program

approval and reimbursement to

colleges for student enrollment

undermine alternative delivery

approaches.

States can reassess their program

approval processes to ease

approval of flexible and

accelerated programs.

States can reassess their

reimbursement policies to colleges

for student enrollment to provide

for more sufficient and consistent

funding.
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 49

VI. Conclusion

This is an exciting and dynamic time in the fields of education and training. Demand for

postsecondary education and credentials is surging, and interesting and innovative

models are emerging. As this and the other papers in this series on adult learners has

demonstrated, there is much to build on, but there is also much that remains to be done

to support a higher education system that can be more responsive to and more

successful for adult learners.

This study did not focus on traditional four year institutions, but rather the community

colleges or two year programs. Undoubtedly, there is work to be done, encompassing

the more traditional four year institutions. Important barriers to change across types of

institutions include how postsecondary education institutions are structured, how they

are financed (their business models), and how they structure their offerings. On the last

one, there is a need to take to scale many of the promising practices discussed this in

paper – providing more competency-based models, opportunities to earn more income

while learning, dual enrollment, modularized credentials, etc.

Postsecondary institutions that are engaged in developing and growing these innovative

models can benefit from contact and exchange with others working toward similar goals.

In addition, as this paper indicates, these innovators can often use additional support in

terms of ideas, contacts and resources that can help them cover research and

development costs and accelerate their progress.

Finally, employers in many industries are looking for efficient and effective ways to help

their incumbent workers improve their skills and earn valuable credentials. Yet, it is not

always easy for employers to get information about these opportunities in ways they can

make use of. There is reason to believe, though, that some of the models that are

emerging would be of great interest to employers in health, construction, manufacturing,

etc., and to their associations, if the information could be disseminated effectively.
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 50

Bibliography

Alssid, Julian, David Gruber, Davis Jenkins, Christopher Mazzeo, Brandon Roberts, and

Regina Stanback-Stroud. 2002. Building a Career Pathways System: Promising

Practices in Community-College Centered Workforce Development. New York:

Workforce Strategy Center.

Berker, Ali, Laura Horn, and C. Dennis Carroll. 2003. Work First, Study Second: Adult

Undergraduates Who Combine Employment and Postsecondary Enrollment.

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences.

Bosworth, Brian and Victoria Choitz. 2002. Held Back: How Student Aid Programs Fail

Working Adults. Arlington, Massachusetts: FutureWorks, LLC.

Building Blocks for Building Skills: An Inventory of Adult Learning Models and

Innovations. 2006. Chicago: the Council for Adult and Experiential Learning.

Choy, Susan. 2002. Nontraditional Undergraduates. Washington, DC: U.S. Department

of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.

Day, Jennifer Cheesman and Eric C. Newburger. 2002. The Big Payoff: Educational

Attainment and Synthetic Estimates of Work-Life Earnings. Washington, DC:

U.S. Census Bureau.

Eduventures. 2006. Hidden in Plain Sight: Adult Learners Forge a New Tradition in

Higher Education. An Issue Paper for the Commission on the Future of Higher

Education. Boston: Eduventures.

Employment Policy Foundation. 2004. Ninth-Annual Workplace Report: The American

Workplace 2004. Washington, DC: Employment Policy Foundation.

Gallagher, Sean with Basar Poroy. 2005. Online Distance Education Market Update

2005: Growth in the Age of Competition. Boston: Eduventures.

Gatta, Mary. 2006. Online Programming for Sub-baccalaureate Credentials: Approaches

that Can Increase Success for Lower-Skill Adults. Boston: Jobs for the Future.

Jenkins, Davis. 2006. Career Pathways: Aligning Public Resources to Support Individual

and Regional Economic Advancement in the Knowledge Economy. New York:

Workforce Strategy Center.

Jobs for the Future, Eduventures, and FutureWorks. 2006. Adult Learners in Higher

Education: Barriers to Success and Strategies to Improve Results. A Report to

the U.S. Department of Labor. Boston: Jobs for the Future

Kazis, Richard and Marty Leibowitz. 2003. Changing Courses: Instructional Innovations

That Help Low-Income Students Succeed in Community College. New York:

MDRC.

Mabry, Theo N. 1988. Alternative Scheduling. ERIC Digest. Los Angeles, CA: ERIC

Clearinghouse for Junior Colleges. ED296766.
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 51

Park, Laura. 2004. Completion Work Group: Research Brief. Prepared for the Michigan

Lieutenant Governor’s Commission on Higher Education and Economic Growth.

Ann Arbor, Michigan: University of Michigan.

O’Donnell, K. 2006. Adult Education Participation in 2004-05 (NCES 2006-077). U.S.

Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education

Statistics.

Snyder, T.D., Dillow, S.A., and Hoffman, C.M. 2007. Digest of Education Statistics 2006

(NCES 2007-017). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education

Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: U.S. Government

Printing Office.

U.S. Department of Education. 2006. A Test of Leadership: Charting the Future of U.S

Higher Education. Washington: U.S. Department of Education.

Washington State Board for Community and Technical Colleges. 2005. Integrated Basic

Education and Skills Training: I-BEST Program Guidelines and Planning

Process. Olympia, Washington: Author.

Wlodkowski, Raymond J., Jeffery R. Gonzales and Jennifer E. Mauldin. 2002. Report on

Accelerated Learning Research Project Phase 5. Denver, Colorado: Regis

University School for Professional Studies.

Wolanin, Thomas R. 2003. Reauthorizing the Higher Education Act: Issues and Options.

Washington, D.C.: The Institute for Higher Education Policy.
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 52

Appendix A:

SHEEO Survey Protocol

Introduction

Thank you for taking the time to complete this short survey about models of flexible,

modularized, compressed, and accelerated credential programs and courses at

postsecondary educational institutions in your state. This survey is part of a research

project conducted by Jobs for the Future (JFF) and FutureWorks. The focus of this

research is public two- and four-year institutions serving working adult students who are

pursuing their first postsecondary credential.

The purpose of this research is to explore innovative curricular and credential program

designs that help adult students persist in and complete certificate and degree

programs. Examples of these designs are provided below. Research indicates that

traditional models simply do not work for working adult students because they are based

on daytime schedules, elongated and inflexible designs, and long timeframes for

completion (relative to part-time adult students’ timeframes). Therefore, JFF and

FutureWorks are interested in models that include but are not limited to:

COURSE SCHEDULING—innovative scheduling of all courses in a credential program

that quicken the pace to completion, including:

• Weekend colleges in which an entire credential can be earned attending courses

primarily or exclusively on the weekend; and

• Evening programs in which an entire credential can be earned attending courses

primarily or exclusively in the evenings.

COURSE DESIGN—innovative curricular designs within credential programs, including:

• Compressed courses that are shorter and more intense than the traditional 16-

week, 3 classroom hours/week model;

• Open entry-open exit courses, i.e., courses that are competency-based and

students move through at their own pace;

• Hybrid courses combining classroom and distance learning;

• Distance learning; and

• Modularized courses, i.e., a three-credit course broken into 3 one-credit courses.

PROGRAM DESIGN—innovative designs for whole credential programs, including:

• Modularized programs that are broken into program segments taken by cohorts

of students and that may grant interim credentials within the program; and
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 53

• Accelerated programs composed of a series of compressed courses and other

innovative curricular offerings with completion in less time than average.

(You may want to print this Introduction and outline for reference while you take the

survey.)

The questions in this survey ask about any creative, successful, and replicable models in

your state; barriers institutions may face to developing and offering these types of

models; and any policy levers and incentives that allow and encourage development and

implementation of these models. Any information you provide is appreciated. We will

share the results of our research with SHEEO.
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 54

Questions

1. Please share examples of credential programs in your state designed especially to improve access and

success for working adult students (especially any at two-year institutions or other institutions

specifically focused on serving adult students). Examples may include but should not be limited to those

provided in the Introduction. Please provide a short description of any programs along with contact

names and information for individuals we could contact for more detailed information.

2. Institutions can face barriers to redesigning programs or creating new ones to better serve the adult

learner. Listed below are some common barriers that could limit the development of these programs.

Please indicate the significance of each barrier using the ranking scale (0=not a barrier; 5=significant

barrier). There is room below for comments on any of the barriers.

0 (not

a

barrier) 1 2 3 4

5

(significant

barrier)

a. Lack of financing to redesign and/or develop new

program models, i.e., no available staff time

b. Programs do not qualify for student financial aid

c. Programs do not qualify for state reimbursement

and/or the state reimbursement is not enough to

cover the higher cost of the program

d. Faculty resistance to designing and/or teaching

non-traditional courses and programs

e. Schools may not have faculty available to teach

in non-traditional programs, especially those with

non-traditional schedules, i.e., weekend colleges

f. Redesigned programs may not support student

transfer between two- and four-year institutions

g. It can be difficult to get state approval of nontraditional courses or programs

h. It can be difficult to get approval from

accreditation bodies for non-traditional programs

i. There are campus or state perceptions that these

are not "real" courses or "real" programs

j. Other (use comment box below to explain)

Comments regarding barriers to "adult friendly" credential programs and courses:
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 55

3. We are interested in strategies for overcoming these barriers. If your state has implemented

strategies for overcoming one or more of the barriers listed above and/or if you have ideas on how to

overcome any of them, please share the information next to the topic listed below.

a. Lack of financing to redesign and/or develop new program models, i.e., no available staff time

b. Programs do not qualify for student financial aid

c. Programs do not qualify for state reimbursement and/or the state reimbursement is not enough to

cover the higher cost of the program

d. Faculty resistance to designing and teaching non-traditional courses and programs

e. Schools may not have faculty available to teach in non-traditional programs, especially those with

non-traditional schedules

f. Programs may not support student transfer between two- and four-year institutions if they are

redesigned
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 56

g. It can be difficult to get state approval to offer non-traditional programs

h. It can be difficult to get approval from accreditation bodies for non-traditional programs

i. There are campus or state perceptions that these are not “real courses” or “real programs"

j. Other
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 57

4. The ultimate goal of this research is to propose federal and state policy incentives to increase adult

student enrollment and completion and to foster curricular and institutional innovations that support this

goal. Below, we propose three hypothetical objectives toward this end to provide concrete examples. For

each hypothetical objective, please indicate promising policy incentives at both the federal and state

levels that could help to achieve the objective. Include both changes to existing policies as well as new

policies.

a. Objective: increase enrollment and completion of working adult students (who currently lack a

postsecondary credential) in certificate and degree programs by 25% over the next 5 years (especially

sub-baccalaureate programs).

b. Objective: Increase the percentage of “working adult friendly” (flexible, compressed, modularized,

accelerated) courses and credential programs by 50% over the next five years.

c. Objective: Increase the number of postsecondary education institutions working as “workforce

intermediaries” to improve education and career opportunities for (low-income, under-educated)

workers, improve operations and competitiveness for companies, AND improve the economic outlook for

local and regional communities.

5. We may want to follow-up with you regarding your responses. If you are willing to participate in a

short follow-up telephone interview and/or would like to receive a copy of the final research report,

please provide your contact information below, including name, title, organization, mailing address, email address, and telephone number.
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 58

Appendix B:

Primer on Federal Title IV

Student Financial Aid “Eligible Programs”

In general, there are two levels of eligibility from an institutional perspective to

participating in the federal student aid program: 1) institutional eligibility and 2) program

eligibility. There are three types of eligible institutions:

1. Institution of higher education – a public or private nonprofit educational

institution located in a state;

2. Proprietary institution of higher education – a private, for-profit educational

institution located in a state; and

3. Postsecondary vocational institution – a public or private nonprofit educational

institution located in a state.

20

All three institutional types must meet the following minimum requirements:

• Must be legally authorized by the state where the institution offers postsecondary

education to provide a postsecondary education program;

• Must be accredited by a nationally recognized accrediting agency or have met

the alternative requirements, if applicable; and

• Must admit as a regular student only individuals with a high school diploma or its

recognized equivalent, or individuals beyond the age of compulsory school

attendance in the state where the institution is located.

In addition, to qualify as an eligible institution, a school must offer at least one eligible

program based on its institutional type:

• Institutions of higher education:

o Associate, bachelor’s, graduate, or professional degree, or

o At least a two-year program that is acceptable for full credit toward a

bachelor’s degree, or

o A program that is at least one year in duration that leads to a degree or

certificate (or other recognized educational credential) and prepares students

for gainful employment in a recognized occupation.

• Proprietary institutions of higher education—Programs offered must provide

training for gainful employment in a recognized occupation and must meet the

criteria of at least one category below:

o Provides at least a 15-week (instructional time) undergraduate program of

600 clock hours, 16 semester or trimester hours, or 24 quarter hours. May

admit students without an associate degree or equivalent, or

o Provides at least a 10-week (instructional time) program of 300 clock hours, 8

semester or trimester hours, or 12 quarter hours. Must be a

graduate/professional program, or must admit only students with an associate

degree or equivalent, or

o Provides at least a 10-week (instructional time) undergraduate program of

300-599 clock hours. Must admit at least some students who do not have an

associate degree or equivalent and must meet specific qualitative standards.

(Note: these programs are eligible only for federal loan participation; they are

not eligible for Pell grant distribution.)

• Postsecondary vocational institutions—same as proprietary institutions above.
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 59

The basic distinction between eligible program types is whether the program is less than

one year or is at least one year and results in a recognized credential (both must

prepare students for gainful employment in a “recognized occupation”). Less than oneyear programs face the very strict eligibility requirements listed above.

21 However,

programs, which are at least one year in length, do not seem to face such strict

requirements. The regulations state that there are “no minimum program length

requirements” for associate, bachelor’s, professional, or graduate degree programs;

however, they are not clear on minimum program length requirements for one year

programs.

These definitions of eligible programs are not mutually exclusive, and a public or private

non-profit institution may meet the definition of more than one type of institution. For

example, a community college may offer programs as an institution of higher education,

i.e., associate degrees and one-year certificates, and as a postsecondary vocational

institution, i.e., four-month certificate programs.
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 60

 

Endnotes

1 Risk factors include being financing independent, attending part-time, delaying college enrollment after

high school graduation, working full-time, having dependents, being a single parent, and lacking a high

school diploma.

2 For a review of innovative program designs in shorter duration education and training programs that do not

necessarily lead to postsecondary degrees, the authors recommend the report titled, Building Blocks for

Building Skills: An Inventory of Adult Learning Models and Innovations, prepared by the Council for Adult

and Experiential Learning (2006).

3 Personal interview with Glen Lum, Director of Institutional Research and Asssessment, September 2004.

4 For more information on CAP, see http://www.capnetwork.org/index.php

5 See the posting, “From the Executive Director’s Chair: Looking Forward to CAP’s Future—A Commitment

to Accessibility and Equity” by Raymond Wlodkowski, April 28, 2006 at

http://www.capnetwork.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=27&mode=thread&ord

er=0&thold=0

6 See http://www.searchforclasses.com/articles/accelerated_learning/article-accelerated-nursingprograms.aspx and http://www.aacn.nche.edu/Media/FactSheets/AcceleratedProg.htm

7 See http://www.aacn.nche.edu/Media/FactSheets/AcceleratedProg.htm

8 See Changing Courses: Instructional Innovations That Help Low-Income Students Succeed in Community

College, Jobs for the Future and MDRC. 2003.

9 For more information, see: Phipps, Ronald and Jamie Merisotis. 1999. What’s the Difference: A Review of

Contemporary Research on the Effectiveness of Distance Learning in Higher Education. The Institute for

Higher Education Policy: Washington, D.C. Prepared for the American Federation of Teachers and the

National Education Association. April; Postsecondary Distance Education: Issues of Student Outcomes,

Access, Cost, and Quality Assurance. Research Report No. 01-02 prepared by the Office of Institutional

Research, Northern Virginia Community College. January 2002.; Joy, Ernest H. and Federico E. Garcia.

“Measuring Learning Effectiveness: A New Look at No-Significant Difference Findings”. 2000. Journal of

Asynchronous Learning Networks, Vol. 4, Issue 1. June.

10 Sources: Heath Prince (2006). Creating Careers, Improving Care. Jobs for the Future; Sue Goldberger

(2005), From the Entry Level to Licensed Practical Nurse: Four Case Studies of Career Ladders in Health

Care. Jobs for the Future.;.

11

12 The 177 includes only students who began taking nursing courses (Nursing 101). It does not include those

who started in the earlier phases of the program, i.e., Learning Lab, remediation course, or prerequisites.

13 A placement test, developed by the College Board, that is used by colleges, universities, and technical

schools as an aid to determine the course placement of incoming college students.

14 Sources: Personal interview with Shauna King-Simms, Director of Adult Education, Partnerships and

Transitions, Kentucky Community and Technical College System, July 21, 2006; personal interview with

Linda Thomas, Program Advisor for the Registered Nurse Program, Department of Nursing, Madisonville

Community College, August 2, 2006; e-mail communication with Linda Thomas on March 26, 2008; Women

Employed (2005). Bridges to Careers for Low-Skilled Adults: A Program Development Guide. Chicago:

Women Employed.

15 Sources: Interviews with Dr. Jackie Belcher; also Sheila Anderson, Developmental Studies Chair at

Housatonic Community College; both September 25th, 2006. Also, e-mail communication with Shelia

Anderson on March 31, 2008.

16 Sources: Personal interview with Mimi Maduro, State Director of Oregon Pathways Initiative, August 25th,

2006; Marty Liebowitz and Judity Combes Taylor (2004). Breaking Through: Helping Low-Skilled Adults

Enter and Succeed in College and Careers. Jobs for the Future; Richard Kazis and Marty Liebowitz. (2003).

Changing Courses: Instructional Innovations That Help Low-Income Students Succeed in Community

College, Jobs for the Future and MDRC; www.oregon.gov/WORKSOURCE/PATHWAYS/index.shtml,

accessed on September 26, 2006.
Flexible Learning Options for Adult Students 61

 17 Sources: Personal interviews with Tina Bloomer, Director of Student Achievement Project, and Jan

Yoshihara, Director of Education Services Division of the Washington State Board of Community and

Technical Colleges, August 9th, 2006; Washington State Board for Community and Technical College

(2005). I-BEST: A Program Integrating Adult Basic Education and Workforce Training; Washington State

Board for Community and Technical Colleges (2005) Integrated Basic Education and Skills Training:

Program Guidelines and Planning Process.

18 The Comprehensive Adult Student Assessment Systems (CASAS) Employability Competency System

(ECS). CASAS is a widely used system for assessing adult basic reading, math, listening, writing, and

speaking skills within a functional context. The ECS evaluates an individual's strengths and weaknesses as

they relate to employability competencies. For more information, see www.casas.org.

19 The survey also included a field for “other” barriers; however, none of the respondents used this field to

submit additional information.

20 See the Student Financial Aid Officers Handbook, Vol. 2—School Eligibility and Operations, 2005-2006

(insert URL)

21 Strict regulations on less-than-one-year programs were established after questionable schools were

caught offering fraudulent programs.