asap students in stem majors...3 asap students in stem majors: results from the fall 2015 cohort...

ASAP STUDENTS IN STEM MAJORS: RESULTS FROM THE FALL 2015 COHORT

Authors: Zineta Kolenovic and Diana Strumbos

2 ASAP Students in STEM Majors: Results from the Fall 2015 Cohort

In 2015, with increased funding from the City of New York, Accelerated Study in Associate Programs (ASAP) embarked on an ambitious expansion. In addition to serving far more students than ever before, the ASAP expansion included a focus on students in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) majors, with the goal to enroll, retain and graduate more STEM students. This report introduces the students who entered ASAP in STEM majors in fall 2015, and presents their short and long-term academic outcomes.

This report, the first on ASAP STEM majors, presents demographic and academic outcomes data for fall 2015 ASAP STEM students and propensity score matched STEM comparison group students. Overall the results show that ASAP students in STEM majors do better on every measure than non-ASAP students. ASAP STEM students outperformed non-ASAP students in terms of retention, credit accumulation, GPA, and re-enrollment in STEM majors. ASAP STEM students also enrolled in math gateway courses at higher rates, as well as had higher pass rates. Finally, ASAP students graduated at a significantly higher rate at both the two and three-year mark.

The following specific findings are detailed below:

INTRODUCTION & SUMMARY

ASAP had significant and positive effects on STEM students’ early academic outcomes, including retention, credit accumulation, and GPA.

FINDING 1

ASAP had a significant effect on STEM students’ re-enrollment in STEM majors through the fourth semester.

FINDING 2

ASAP had a large and significant effect of STEM students’ two and three-year graduation rate, as well as a significant effect of graduating with a STEM degree.

FINDING 4

ASAP had a significant effect on STEM students’ first-year enrollment and pass rate in math gateway courses.

FINDING 3


STEM-related jobs have been growing over the years at an increasing rate both in the United States and globally. Data show that between 2000 and 2010, STEM-related jobs in the US have increased at three times the rate of non-STEM jobs (Langdon, McKittrick, Beede, Khan, & Doms, 2011). With that, there is a greater demand for a STEM skilled workforce. However, data indicate that there is not a large enough pool of STEM graduates to fill all of the available jobs. Economists estimate that the US will need one million additional STEM graduates by the end of this decade than has initially been forecast, and policymakers have turned to increasing college retention for STEM students as one possible promising solution to producing more STEM graduates and meeting the national need (PCAST, 2012).

The importance of producing more STEM graduates is to not only benefit the nation and fill this large existing need, but also to benefit the individual students who can gain more resources by completing a STEM degree. Data show that employees in STEM occupations earn 26% more than employees in non-STEM occupations, and that STEM graduates, regardless of future STEM or non-STEM employment, earn more than non-STEM graduates (Langdon et al., 2011). However, not enough students are entering and staying in STEM majors. Carnevale et al. (2011) report that 75% of high school students with strong math skills will not enter a STEM major, and of those who do, 50% will leave their STEM major. There is more work to be done focused on attracting, retaining, and ultimately graduating more STEM students.

It is estimated that the US will need one million additional STEM graduates by the end of this decade.

BACKGROUND

3x STEM-related jobs in the US have increased at three times the rate of non-STEM jobs.

26% Employees in STEM occupations earn 26% more than employees in non-STEM occupations.

75% of high school students with strong math skills will not enter a STEM major.

50% of students who begin in a STEM major end up leaving it.


Earning a STEM degree yields higher earnings regardless of whether the students end up in a STEM or non-STEM occupation (Langdon et al., 2011). Although STEM majors are not necessarily the right fit for everyone, it is important that those who choose to go into a STEM major receive the proper support and resources to help them stay enrolled and ultimately graduate.

The City University of New York (CUNY) Accelerated Study in Associate Program (ASAP) was developed and launched in 2007 with the goal of increasing the retention and graduation rate of community college students, and ultimately graduating 50% of its students. The program was designed to address the many difficulties community college students face, such as financial barriers, increasing students’ academic momentum, creating a sense of belonging, and providing timely and relevant support service (Adelman, 1999; Adelman, 2006; Bailey & Alfonso, 2005; Kolenovic, Linderman, & Karp, 2013; Kuh, Kinzie, Buckley, Bridges, & Hayek, 2007; Strumbos, Linderman, & Hicks, 2018; Tinto, 1993). The program provides personalized advisement, financial assistance for tuition, books and transportation, academic support interventions, and structured degree pathways (Linderman & Kolenovic, 2009).

ASAP has been rigorously evaluated over the years, and both internal and external evaluations show that ASAP has a large effect on three-year associate degree completion rates. The internal ASAP evaluation has found a 25.6 percentage point difference in three-year graduation rates between ASAP and propensity score matched comparison group students - 52.4% vs. 26.8% respectively (Strumbos, Kolenovic, & Tavares, 2016; Linderman & Kolenovic, 2012). An external random assignment study conducted by MDRC has found that ASAP students graduated at nearly double the rate of control group students within three years (Scrivener, Weiss, Ratledge, Sommo, & Fresques, 2015).

MOTIVATION AND RESEARCH QUESTION

With increased funding from the City of New York, ASAP is recruiting and serving more STEM students. ASAP already offers a comprehensive set of services for all of its students, and has implemented specific initiatives to support the success of STEM students. Specific supports for STEM students include group tutoring and/or Supplemental Instruction (SI) support for high-failure rate STEM courses, winter and summer intersession math and science course taking with the support of STEM waivers, funding to faculty teams to redesign gateway STEM courses using evidence-based strategies, and increasing engagement of STEM departments to provide opportunities for students to engage with faculty outside of class. The ASAP STEM work is a cohesive and multifaceted strategy to increase students’ interest, engagement and success in STEM. Given ASAP’s successful results to date, it is important to consider whether ASAP will have the same impact on STEM students.

This brief focuses on academic outcomes of ASAP STEM students and seeks to answer the following questions: (1) Is there a significant ASAP effect for STEM students on retention, credit accumulation and GPA?; (2) Is there an ASAP effect on STEM major re-enrollment in subsequent semesters?; (3) Is there an ASAP effect on first-year math gateway course enrollment and pass rate?; and (4) Is there an ASAP effect on two and three-year graduation rates and earning a degree in a STEM major?

The ASAP expansion includes a focus on students in STEM majors – with the goal to enroll, retain and graduate more STEM students.

1Expand and strengthen the STEM pipeline into ASAP, and upon graduation from ASAP, into STEM bachelor degree programs.

2Expand and leverage existing tutoring and academic support services for STEM.

3Increase engagement of STEM faculty/departments and provide opportunities for students to engage with faculty outside of class.

4

Connect students with opportunities that will provide them with the knowledge and skills to become competitive members of the global marketplace.

A FOUR-PRONG APPROACH DRIVES THE STEM WORK:


Fall 2015 ASAP Cohort and STEM Students

This study looks at ASAP fall 2015 students, the first cohort of the expansion, particularly focusing on students who began in STEM majors (N =1,121).

In fall 2015, 3,996 students entered ASAP at nine CUNY colleges: Borough of Manhattan, Bronx, Hostos, Kingsborough, LaGuardia, Medgar Evers, New York City College of Technology, Queensborough, and the College of Staten Island. Of the fall 2015 cohort, 28.1% entered ASAP in a STEM major. Table 1 provides a profile of the entire fall 2015 ASAP cohort as well as a separate profile for ASAP STEM students. The data show that the STEM group has a larger percentage of male students than the overall ASAP group (62.1% vs 43.8%), a larger percentage of Asian students (17.8% vs 13.6%), and a smaller percentage of Hispanic students (36.8% vs 40.5%). In terms of academic preparation, ASAP STEM students, compared to the entire fall 2015 ASAP cohort, entered ASAP fully proficient at a higher rate (77.5% vs 63.8%), had on average a higher test score on CUNY’s elementary algebra math entrance exam, (38.7 vs 33.1), entered ASAP with an exemption from taking CUNY’s Math Assessment Test at a higher rate (26.7% vs 16.7%) as well as with an exemption from taking CUNY’s reading and writing entrance exams (55.8% vs 52.0%). This suggests that students who entered ASAP in STEM majors performed better in math in high school and were generally better prepared academically for college than students who entered in other majors.

STUDY & DATA Table 1: Profile of Fall 2015 ASAP Students

All Students

(N=3,996)

STEM Students (N=1,121)

Gender

Female % 56.2 37.9

Male % 43.8 62.1

Age mean 21.0 20.7

Race

American Indian/Native Alaskan % 0.30 0.40

Asian/Pacific Islander % 13.6 17.8

Black % 35.4 34.0

Hispanic % 40.5 36.8

White % 10.1 10.9

Admission Type

First-Time Freshmen % 66.6 70.5

Transfer Students % 5.7 4.6

Continuing Students % 27.6 24.9

Fully Proficient at Time of Entry % 63.8 77.5

Earned Credits at Time of Entry mean 3.4 3.3

GED Recipient % 6.5 5.3

CUNY Assessment Test

Reading mean 75.0 75.0

Writing mean 56.8 56.7

Math mean 33.1 38.7

College Admissions Average mean 75.3 77.0

Exemption from CUNY’s Assessment Test

Reading % 52.0 55.8

Writing % 51.9 55.8

Math % 16.7 26.7

STEM % 28.1 100.0


With increased funding from the City of New York, ASAP is recruiting and serving more STEM students.

ASAP STEM Students by Gender

Male 62%

Female 38%

Hispanic 36.8%

Black 34.0%

Asian 17.8%

White 10.9%

Native American 0.4%

ASAP STEM Students by Race/Ethnicity


Methods

The effectiveness of ASAP is evaluated using a quasi-experimental design, in which ASAP students are compared to a group of similar students who are enrolled at the same colleges but not in ASAP. The pool of students to draw a comparison group consists of all students at each ASAP college who met the same criteria as ASAP students, but who did not enroll in ASAP1. The STEM comparison group pool was identified using CUNY’s administrative student data and included 3,441 STEM students2. Table 2 shows the demographic characteristics of ASAP STEM students and non-ASAP STEM students who met ASAP eligibility criteria.

The data indicate that the demographic characteristics were fairly different. There was a slightly larger percentage of female students in ASAP (37.9% vs 32.1%) as well as a larger percentage of black and Hispanic students, and a smaller percentage of white and Asian students. The largest difference was found in the students’ admission type: a much larger percentage of ASAP students entered ASAP as first-time freshmen (70.5% vs. 56.0%), and a much smaller percentage entered ASAP as transfer students (4.6% vs. 18.9%). In terms of academic performance, a greater percentage of ASAP students entered the program fully proficient (77.5% vs. 61.4%), and a slightly smaller percentage of ASAP students were exempt from taking the CUNY Assessment Tests in math, reading and writing.

In order to compare outcomes for ASAP students to non-ASAP students at the same college who were similar across these characteristics, one-to-one propensity score matching was used3. Propensity score matching is a technique in which an attempt is made to match each ASAP student to a similar comparison group student to better isolate the estimated effects of ASAP and to reduce the pre-existing differences between the groups.

ANALYSIS OF FALL 2015 ASAP STEM STUDENTS

Demographic and Academic Characteristics of ASAP and non-ASAP Students

Using one-to-one propensity score matching, we were able to match 1,068 ASAP STEM students out of a total of 1,121 ASAP STEM students, a sample loss of 4.7%. Table 2 presents a profile of the ASAP and non-ASAP STEM students before and after matching. The data show that the students were much more similar after the match than they were before the match. The largest group difference found in the matched sample was a 2.2 percentage point difference in the percentage of students who entered the program as first-time freshmen (71.4% of ASAP students vs. 69.3% of non-ASAP students), accompanied by a 2.1 percentage point difference in the percentage of students who entered as continuing students. The match worked well, giving us the ability to confidently compare outcomes of the two groups to assess the effectiveness of the ASAP program for STEM students. Table A1 in the appendix provides a list of STEM majors for each student group before and after matching.

The ASAP STEM group has a larger percentage of male students than the overall ASAP group – 62.1% vs 43.8%.1 ASAP criteria used for the comparison pool included: full-time enrollment, STEM major accepted

by ASAP, New York City residency and not enrolled in CUNY College Discovery.2 Student data come from the CUNY Institutional Research Database (IRDB) and CUNY’s Administrative

Data Warehouse (ADW).3 Propensity score analysis, employing one-to-one greedy matching with caliper, was conducted for

each ASAP college separately. Students were matched on the following variables: age; race/ethnicity; gender; admission type; Pell status; whether student is GED recipient; college admissions average; skills proficiency test scores in reading, writing and math; whether student was exempt from testing in reading, writing, and/or math based on a prior indicator of skill proficiency; number of earned college credits students entered with; and whether students entered with a developmental education need. Matching was successful with balance achieved across all variables. The overall treatment sample loss was 4.7 percent (53 students).


Table 2. Demographic and Background Characteristics: Before and After Propensity Score Matching

BEFORE PROPENSITY SCORE MATCHING

AFTER PROPENSITY SCORE MATCHING

ASAP Students

Non-ASAP Students Difference ASAP

StudentsNon-ASAP Students Difference

Gender

Female % 37.9 32.1 +5.8 36.7 34.8 +1.9

Male % 62.1 67.9 -5.8 63.3 65.2 -1.9

Age mean 20.7 20.9 -0.2 20.5 20.4 +0.1

Race

American Indian/Native Alaskan % 0.4 0.7 -0.3 0.4 0.7 -0.3

Asian/Pacific Islander % 17.8 21.3 -3.5 18.1 19.9 -1.9

Black % 34.0 27.1 +6.9 33.3 31.6 +1.7

Hispanic % 36.8 34.2 +2.6 37.3 37.3 +0.0

White % 10.9 16.7 -5.8 11.0 10.5 +0.5

Admission Type

First-Time Freshmen % 70.5 56.0 +14.4 71.4 69.3 +2.2

Transfer Students % 4.6 18.9 -14.3 4.7 4.8 -0.1

Continuing Students % 24.9 25.0 -0.1 23.9 25.9 -2.1

Fully Proficient at Time of Entry % 77.5 61.4 +16.1 77.0 77.2 -0.2

Earned Credits at Time of Entry mean 3.3 2.8 +0.5 3.1 3.1 +0.0

GED Recipient % 5.3 4.9 +0.4 5.2 5.1 +0.2

CUNY Assessment Test

Reading Test mean 75.0 74.6 +0.3 74.8 74.8 -0.0

Writing Test mean 56.7 56.2 +0.5 56.7 56.7 +0.0

Math Test mean 38.7 36.6 +2.1 38.8 39.0 -0.2

College Admissions Averagea mean 77.0 74.9 +2.1 77.0 76.3 +0.7

Exemption from CUNY’s Assessment Testb

Reading Test % 55.8 58.5 -2.7 57.4 57.4 +0.0

Writing Test % 55.8 58.4 -2.7 57.4 57.4 +0.0

Math Test % 26.7 29.6 -2.9 27.9 28.7 -0.7

Pell Receipt % 81.2 75.1 +6.1 81.6 81.4 +0.2

Sample Size N 1,121 3,441 1,068 1,068

Source: Authors’ calculations using data from the CUNY Institutional Research Database (IRDB).a Missing scores were imputed using mean imputation. A maximum of 2% of assessment test scores were imputed, and 10% of the college admissions average scores. b Students who were exempt from the CUNY assessment tests or who passed the CUNY assessment test prior to their first semester at CUNY. Students are exempt from taking the CUNY Assessment Test if they

demonstrate that they meet the University’s skills proficiency requirements based on their SAT, ACT, or NY State Regents test scores.


Second Semester Retention

ASAP Non-ASAP

***=p<.001

OUTCOMES OF FALL 2015 ASAP STEM STUDENTS

Retention

One major indicator that ASAP focuses on is retention, a step towards the program goal of graduation. Retention is measured as the percentage of students who re-enroll at the college of entry, regardless of major. Figure 1 presents second, third and fourth semester retention rates for matched ASAP and comparison group students and shows that ASAP students had statistically significantly higher retention rates than matched comparison group students. Specifically, 93.0% of ASAP students were retained in the second semester, compared to 83.6% of comparison group students, and 78.7% of ASAP students remained enrolled at the college of entry in the third semester, compared to 63.4% of comparison group students. In the fourth semester, 69.3% of ASAP STEM students were still enrolled at the college of entry, while only 53.8% of comparison group students were. These retention rates are consistent with the averages rates of ASAP students in all majors for past cohorts. Furthermore, these differences in retention rates grow over time from a second semester retention rate difference of 9.4 percentage points to third and fourth semester retention rate differences of 15 percentage points.

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

Third Semester Retention Fourth Semester Retention

Figure 1: Semester Retention

***

******

93.0%

83.6%

78.7%

63.4%

69.3%

53.8%


0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

Academic Performance

A second set of indicators that ASAP tracks focus on academic performance, including how many credits and hours (used for non-credit bearing developmental courses) students have attempted and earned, as well as their grade point average (GPA). This section focuses on first and second semester academic outcomes.

First Semester Outcomes Figure 2 displays average first semester credits attempted and earned, as well as the average number of cumulative credits earned after the first semester. The data show that ASAP STEM students statistically significantly outperformed comparison group students on all three measures. ASAP students attempted 0.7 more credits in their first semester than comparison group students (14.8 vs. 14.1), and earned 1.4 more credits at the end of the semester (11.7 vs. 10.3). ASAP students also had a greater number of cumulative credits at the end of the first semester (14.1 vs. 13.4).

In addition to attempting and earning more credits, ASAP STEM students had statistically significantly higher semester and cumulative GPAs. As presented in table 3, ASAP students had a 2.55 semester GPA and a 2.61 cumulative GPA compared to a 2.33 semester GPA and a 2.40 cumulative GPA for comparison group students.

ASAP Non-ASAP

***=p<.001

Figure 2: First Semester and Cumulative Credits

Credits Attempted Credits Earned Cumulative Credits Earned

14.814.1

11.7

10.3

14.113.4

***

***

***

12 ASAP STEM Majors: Results from the Fall 2015 Cohort

Table 3: First Semester and Cumulative GPA

ASAP Students

Non-ASAP Students Difference

Semester GPA 2.55 2.33 0.22***

Cumulative GPA 2.61 2.40 0.21***

***=p<.001


Second Semester Outcomes Figure 3 presents second semester credit outcomes. Just like in the first semester, ASAP STEM students significantly outperformed comparison group students on all three credit measures. ASAP STEM students attempted 1.2 more credits (14.5 vs. 13.3) and earned 1.2 more credits (10.7 vs. 9.5) than comparison group students earned. Additionally, at the end of the second semester, ASAP STEM students had earned a total of 1.8 more cumulative credits (25.2 vs. 23.4).

In the second semester, the semester GPA of ASAP STEM and comparison group students was similar (2.42 vs. 2.36), while the cumulative GPA remained statistically significantly higher for the ASAP STEM students (2.61 vs. 2.50). Table 4 summarizes second semester GPA outcomes.

ASAP Non-ASAP

***=p<.001

Figure 3: Second Semester and Cumulative Credits

Credits Attempted Credits Earned Cumulative Credits Earned0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

14.513.3

10.79.5

25.2

23.4

***

***

***

14 ASAP STEM Majors: Results from the Fall 2015 Cohort

Table 4: Second Semester and Cumulative GPA

ASAP Students

Non-ASAP Students Difference

Semester GPA 2.42 2.36 0.06

Cumulative GPA 2.61 2.50 0.11**

*** = p<.001, **=p<.01


Re-enrollment in STEM Majors

In addition to retention at the college, we looked at re-enrollment in STEM majors in subsequent semesters. This analysis examines the percentage of students who re-enrolled in any STEM major of the entire starting cohort. Figure 4 summarizes the findings. We found significant differences between ASAP and non-ASAP students’ re-enrollment in a STEM major in the second, third, and fourth semester. Of all ASAP STEM students, 85.4% were still enrolled in a STEM major in the second semester, compared to 74.8% of non-ASAP students. In the third semester, 67.4% of all ASAP students were still enrolled in a STEM major compared to 54.3% of non-ASAP students. Lastly, in the fourth semester, 54.5% of all ASAP students were still enrolled in a STEM major compared to 43.3% of non-ASAP students.

ASAP Non-ASAP

***=p<.001

Figure 4: Re-enrollment in STEM Major

2nd Semester: Re-enrolled in STEM Major

3rd Semester: Re-enrolled in STEM Major

4th Semester: Re-enrolled in STEM Major

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

85.4%

74.8%

67.4%

54.3% 54.5%

43.3%

***

***

***


0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

Enrollment and Pass Rates in Math Gateway Courses

The majority of STEM majors require students to complete higher level math courses. Because many STEM majors have long math sequences, it is critical to enroll in math courses early. Gateway math courses are those that satisfy the Mathematical and Quantitative Reasoning requirement of the CUNY pathways common core. Performance in gateway math courses can be an early indicator of success in later math courses and STEM majors overall.

This analysis focused on students’ first-year enrollment and pass rate in math gateway courses4 to provide insight into whether ASAP students enroll in gateway courses at higher rates than non-ASAP students, and how well they do in such courses. As presented in figure 5 below, the data show that ASAP students enrolled in a math gateway course in their first year at significantly higher rates than non-ASAP students (78.9% vs. 68.4%). Of those who enrolled in a math gateway course, a similar percentage of both groups passed the course (80.6% vs. 76.2%), but because ASAP students enrolled at a higher rate, this resulted in more students from the cohort successfully passing a course in their first year. For ASAP STEM students, 63.6% has passed a math gateway course by the end of the first year compared to a 52.1% of non-ASAP students.

ASAP Non-ASAP

***=p<.0014 First year courses includes courses taken during the summer prior to program enrollment, first fall and spring semester, and courses taken during the summer following the first year. Some examples of the math

gateway courses used in this analysis include Calculus, College Algebra, Pre-calculus, Quantitative Reasoning, and Statistics.

Figure 5: First-Year Math Gateway Course Enrollment and Pass Rates

Enrolled in Gateway Math Passed Gateway Math

78.9%

68.4%

63.6%

52.1%

***

***


0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

Two and Three-Year Graduation

The last set of outcomes we looked at was two and three-year graduation rates. This analysis looks at the graduation rates, as well as the percentage of students who had obtained a degree in a STEM major at both the two-year and the three-year mark.

Figure 6 below presents two-year graduation outcomes. The data show that ASAP STEM students graduated at four times the rate of non-ASAP students (24.3% vs. 6.3%), as well as earned a degree in a STEM major at four times the rate of non-ASAP students (19.4 vs. 4.7%).

ASAP Non-ASAP

***=p<.001

Figure 6: Two-Year Associate Degree Attainment

2-Year Associate Degree Attainment Graduated with a STEM Major

24.3%

6.3%

19.4%

4.7%

******


At the three-year mark, ASAP STEM students continued to graduate at a statistically significantly higher rate. At this point, ASAP STEM students graduated at two and a half times the rate of comparison group students (47.9% vs. 18.4%), and earned a degree in a STEM major at nearly three times the rate of non-ASAP students (37.2% vs. 13.1%). Data shows that both groups were more likely to graduate in the specific STEM major in which they started (29% for ASAP and 11% for non-ASAP students), versus switching and graduating in a different STEM major (8.1% for ASAP and 2.1% for non-ASAP students). Table A2 in the appendix provides a list of STEM degree majors for ASAP and non-ASAP students5.

When looking at three-year graduation data by subgroups, we find that female students graduated at higher rates than males in both the ASAP and non-ASAP group (52.3% vs. 45.4% for ASAP and 21.8% vs. 16.7% for non-ASAP). However, when looking at STEM degrees only, we find that this large difference disappears. Male ASAP students obtained STEM degrees at slightly higher rates than female ASAP students (37.9% vs. 36.0%), whereas in the non-ASAP group female students continued to have higher graduation rates, but only very slightly (13.4% vs. 12.9%). Table A3 in the appendix summarizes three-year graduation data by gender and race/ethnicity.

ASAP Non-ASAP

Figure 7: Three-Year Associate Degree Attainment

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

3-Year Associate Degree Attainment Graduated with a STEM Major

***=p<.0015 In addition, a very small percentage of students who began in non-STEM majors transferred into and graduated with a STEM degree. Of 2,875 ASAP students who began in non-STEM majors, 3.4% obtained a STEM

degree within three years.

47.9%

18.4%

37.2%

13.1%

***

***


As ASAP has expanded over four years to serve 25,000 students per year, one of the main goals is to serve more students in more STEM majors. In fall 2015, 28.1% of the ASAP cohort entered in a STEM major. Looking at the STEM students’ outcomes of retention, academic performance and graduation, the results demonstrate that ASAP STEM students are performing better than similar non-ASAP students in STEM majors, and the outcomes are on par with the positive results ASAP has achieved for prior cohorts. However, the STEM specific outcomes, such as re-enrollment in STEM majors and pass rates in gateway math courses, are a new area of inquiry that has not been studied systematically before in ASAP.

This analysis shows that ASAP STEM students re-enrolled at higher rates through the fourth semester, attempted and earned more credits in their first two semesters, and completed their first semester with higher semester and cumulative GPA than matched STEM non-ASAP students. Furthermore, the same trend was found for STEM specific outcomes; ASAP STEM students enrolled at higher rates in STEM majors through the fourth semester, enrolled at higher rates in math gateway course in the first year, and passed those math gateway courses at higher rates than matched STEM non-ASAP students. All of these differences were statistically significant. As far as graduation, ASAP STEM students graduated at a significantly higher rate at both the two and three-year mark as well as earned STEM degrees at a significantly higher rate than non-ASAP students. This report highlights and confirms that outcomes for STEM students in ASAP are strong and encouraging.

This report highlights and confirms that outcomes for STEM students in ASAP are strong and encouraging.

CONCLUSION

Outcome ASAP Students*

Non-ASAP Students*

2nd Semester Retention 93.0% 83.6%

2nd Semester Credits Attempted 14.5 13.3

2nd Semester Re-enrollment in STEM Major 85.4% 74.8%

1st Year Math Gateway Course Enrollment 78.9% 68.4%

3-Year Graduation Rate 47.9% 18.4%

3-Year STEM Degree Graduation Rate 37.2% 13.1%

* All differences are significant.


APPENDIX

Table A1. Students’ Majors Before and After Propensity Score Matching

BEFORE PROPENSITY SCORE MATCHING

AFTER PROPENSITY SCORE MATCHING

ASAP Students

Non-ASAP Students Difference ASAP

StudentsNon-ASAP Students Difference

Major Category

Architecture and Environmental Design % 1.3 0.7 +0.6 1.3 1.8 -0.5

Arts and Science or General Programs % 47.5 50.9 -3.4 46.6 46.0 +0.6

Business and Commerce Technologies % 8.1 9.2 -1.2 8.0 8.9 -0.9

Communications % 0.7 1.1 -0.3 0.8 0.8 +0.0

Computer and Information Sciences % 2.1 1.8 +0.3 2.2 3.5 -1.3

Data Processing Technologies % 21.1 24.3 -3.2 21.8 21.1 +0.7

Engineering % 4.2 3.6 +0.7 4.3 7.6 -3.3

Health Services Technologies % 0.5 0.0 +0.5 0.4 0.0 +0.4

Mechanical and Engineering Technologies % 11.6 6.3 +5.4 12.1 7.8 +4.3

Natural Science Technologies % 1.2 1.1 +0.1 0.8 1.4 -0.7

Physical Sciences % 1.4 1.0 +0.5 1.4 0.9 +0.5

Public Service Related Technologies % 0.5 0.3 +0.2 0.5 0.4 +0.1

Sample Size N 1,121 3,441 1,068 1,068

Source: Authors’ calculations using data from the CUNY Institutional Research Database (IRDB).


Table A2. Students’ STEM Degree Majors

Major TitleASAP STEM

Students

Non-ASAP STEM

Students

Animation And Motion Graphics % 1.2 3.3

Architectural Technology % 3.0 2.0

Art And Advertising Design % 6.4 2.0

Automotive Technology % 0.5 1.3

Biology % 5.4 5.2

Biotechnology % 0.7 0.7

Chemical Engineering Science % 0.0 0.7

Chemistry % 0.5 0.7

Civil Engineering Science % 1.5 0.7

Civil Engineering Technology % 0.7 0.0

Computer Data Processing % 1.0 0.7

Computer Engineering Technology % 0.7 1.3

Computer Information Systems % 7.6 0.7

Computer Operations % 4.2 3.3

Computer Programming % 1.5 5.9

Computer Science % 8.4 9.8

Computer Technology % 0.2 0.7

Construction Technology % 0.5 0.0

Corporate And Cable Communications % 3.4 3.9

Design Drafting And Computer Graphics % 0.5 0.0

Dietetics And Nutrition Science % 0.5 2.0

Digital Design And Animation % 2.2 4.6

Digital Music % 0.7 0.0

Electrical Engineering Science % 1.2 1.3

Electrical Engineering Technology % 1.7 0.7

Electrical Technology % 0.5 0.0

Electromechanical Engineering Technology % 4.4 3.3

Electronic Engineering Technology % 0.5 0.0

Engineering Science % 3.7 5.2

Environmental Science % 0.2 0.0

Game Design % 1.7 3.3

Liberal Arts and Sciences % 4.7 2.7

Liberal Arts and Sciences – Math & Science % 9.7 7.9

Mathematics % 2.2 1.3

Mechanical Engineering Science % 0.0 4.6

Mechanical Engineering Technology % 4.9 0.7

Multimedia Programming And Design % 2.5 7.8

New Media Technology % 0.5 2.6

Ornamental Horticulture % 0.2 0.0

Physical Science Pre-Ba Liberal Arts % 0.7 2.0

Physics % 0.2 0.0

Science % 8.6 7.8

Science For Health Professions % 0.2 0.0

Sample Size N 406 153


Table A3. 3-Year Graduation Rates by Gender and Race/Ethnicity for Propensity Score Matched Students

ASAP STUDENTS NON-ASAP STUDENTS

Total 3-Yr Graduates

3-Yr STEM Graduates Total 3-Yr

Graduates3-Yr STEM Graduates

N % % N % %

Gender

Female 392 52.3 36.0 372 21.8 13.4

Male 676 45.4 37.9 696 16.7 12.9

Race/Ethnicity1

Asian 193 62.7 55.4 213 21.1 16.9

Black 356 46.6 34.8 338 14.5 9.8

Hispanic 398 42.0 31.4 398 20.4 13.8

White 117 48.7 35.0 112 19.6 14.3

TOTAL 1,068 47.9 37.2 1,068 18.4 13.1

1 Excludes American Indian and Native Alaskan category as it contains only 11 students. Source: Authors’ calculations using data from the CUNY Institutional Research Database (IRDB).

WHAT IS ASAP?

Accelerated Study in Associate Programs (ASAP) is a comprehensive program for students pursuing their associate degrees at the City University of New York (CUNY). ASAP is designed to help participating students earn their associate degrees as quickly as possible, with the goal of graduating at least 50 percent of students within three years. The program is able to reach this goal by providing its students with structured and wide-ranging supports, including financial resources (tuition waivers for students in receipt of financial aid with a gap need, textbook assistance, and New York City Transit Metro-Cards), structured pathways to support academic momentum (full-time enrollment, block scheduled first-year courses, immediate and continuous enrollment in developmental education, winter and summer course-taking), and support services such as comprehensive and personalized advisement, tutoring, career development services, and early engagement opportunities to build a connected community.

For more information, please visit: www.cuny.edu/asap

WHERE IS ASAP?

CUNY community colleges: Borough of Manhattan, Bronx, Hostos, Kingsborough, LaGuardia and Queensborough (launched fall 2007)

CUNY senior colleges: Medgar Evers College (launched fall 2014), College of Staten Island and New York City College of Technology (launched fall 2015)

WHO IS ELIGIBLE?

Full-time, associate degree seeking students with up to two developmental course needs are eligible for ASAP.

In addition, ASAP students must be New York City residents or eligible for in-state tuition, and must enroll in an ASAP-approved major (most majors are supported). ASAP students can enter as first-time freshmen or as continuing or transfer students with up to 15 credits.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors wish to thank Theresa Williams, Alex Tavares, and Shaun Rasmussen for reviewing an earlier draft of this brief and providing valuable feedback.

http://www.cuny.edu/asap


Adelman, C. (1999). Answers in the tool box: Academic intensity, attendance patterns, and bachelor’s degree attainment. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

Adelman, C. (2006). The tool box revisited: Paths to completion from high school to college. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

Bailey, T. R., & Alfonso, M. (2005). Paths to Persistence: An Analysis of Research on Program Effectiveness at Community Colleges. New Agenda Series, 6(1).

Carnevale, A. P., Smith, N., Stone, J. R. III, Kotamraju, P., Steuernagel, B., & Green, K. (2011). Career clusters: Forecasting demand for high school through college jobs, 2008-2018. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce.

Kolenovic, Z., Linderman, D., & Karp, M. M. (2013). Improving Student Outcomes via Comprehensive Supports: Three-Year Outcomes from CUNY’s Accelerated Study in Associate Programs (ASAP). Community College Review, v41 n4 , 271-291.

Kuh, G. D., Kinzie, J., Buckley, J. A., Bridges, B. K., & Hayek, J. C. (2007). Piecing Together the Student Success Puzzle: Research, Propositions, and Recommendations. ASHE Higher Education Report,. 32. Hoboken: Jossey Bass.

Langdon, D., McKittrick, G., Beede, D., Khan, B., & Doms, M. (2011). STEM: Good Jobs Now and for the Future. U.S. Department of Commerce.

Linderman, D., & Kolenovic, Z. (2009). Early Outcomes Report for City University of New York (CUNY) Accelerated Study in Associate Programs (ASAP). New York, NY: The City University of New York.

Linderman, D., & Kolenovic, Z. (2012). Results thus far and the road ahead: A follow-up report on CUNY Accelerated Study in Associate Programs (ASAP). New York: The City University of New York.

President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST). (2012). Engage to Excel: Producing One Million Additional College Graduates With Degrees in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. Washington, DC: Author.

Scrivener, S., Weiss, M. J., Ratledge, A., Rudd, T., Sommo, C., & Fresques, H. (2015). Doubling graduation rates: Three-year effects of CUNY’s Accelerated Study in Associate Programs (ASAP) for developmental education students. New York: MDRC.

Strumbos, D., Kolenovic, Z., & Tavares, A. (2016). CUNY Accelerated Study in Associate Programs (ASAP): Evidence from Six Cohorts and Lessons for Expansion. In S. Whalen (Ed.), Proceedings of the 12th Annual National Symposium on Student Retention, Norfolk, Virginia (pp. 130-142). Norman, OK: The University of Oklahoma.

Strumbos, D., Linderman, D., & Hicks, C. (2018). Postsecondary pathways out of poverty: City University of New York Accelerated Study in Associate Programs and the case for National Policy. Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences, 4(3), 100-117.

Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

REFERENCES

www.cuny.edu/asap

The City University of New York (CUNY) Office of Academic Affairs March 2020

Copyright© 2020 by Office of Academic Affairs, The City University of New York. All rights reserved.

ASAP® is a registered trademark of The City University of New York.

asap students in stem majors...3 asap students in stem majors: results from the fall 2015 cohort...

Documents