implementation findings from the first year of accelerating opportunity part ii

17
URBAN INSTITUTE Theresa Anderson Lauren Eyster Robert I. Lerman The Urban Institute Maureen Conway Marcela Montes The Aspen Institute Carol Clymer Penn State University

Upload: levi

Post on 14-Jan-2016

26 views

Category:

Documents


1 download

DESCRIPTION

Implementation Findings from the First Year of Accelerating Opportunity Part II. Theresa Anderson Lauren Eyster Robert I. Lerman The Urban Institute Maureen Conway Marcela Montes The Aspen Institute Carol Clymer Penn State University. How Much Does AO Cost?. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Implementation Findings from the First Year of Accelerating  Opportunity Part  II

URBAN INSTITUTE

Theresa AndersonLauren Eyster

Robert I. Lerman

The Urban Institute

Maureen ConwayMarcela Montes

The Aspen Institute

Carol Clymer

Penn State University

Page 2: Implementation Findings from the First Year of Accelerating  Opportunity Part  II

URBAN INSTITUTE2

Page 3: Implementation Findings from the First Year of Accelerating  Opportunity Part  II

URBAN INSTITUTE

Across 30 colleges (3 excluded):

The distribution:

3

TOTAL Average per College Median per College

$9,115,032 $303,834 $277,577

Personnel Consultants CoursesSupport Services

Tuition/ Scholar-

shipsAdvertising Other

72.4% 0.1% 23.3% 0.4% 1.6% 0.7% 0.6%

Page 4: Implementation Findings from the First Year of Accelerating  Opportunity Part  II

URBAN INSTITUTE4

Note: The average cost per student was misreported in the original webinar. The number presented here is correct.

Page 5: Implementation Findings from the First Year of Accelerating  Opportunity Part  II

URBAN INSTITUTE

Much of the first year was devoted to start-up activities

AO seems to be serving the target population, but many students have secondary school credentials

The change in Pell rules affected recruitment strategies

Pathways were primarily concentrated in manufacturing and healthcare

5

Page 6: Implementation Findings from the First Year of Accelerating  Opportunity Part  II

URBAN INSTITUTE

Many students in AO expressed satisfaction with

the program and tried to recruit others to join

Some colleges IL and NC used bridge programs

for AO-eligible students in the 6th to 8th grade

adult education levels

Team teaching approaches ranged from a high level of integration to the adult education instructor acting as a teacher’s aide

6

Page 7: Implementation Findings from the First Year of Accelerating  Opportunity Part  II

URBAN INSTITUTE

Team teaching presented a financing challenge to

states and colleges

Many support services were provided, but

differentiation for AO was moderate

Almost all colleges had connections with

workforce agencies, but information about

employer engagement was mixed

7

Page 8: Implementation Findings from the First Year of Accelerating  Opportunity Part  II

URBAN INSTITUTE

Personnel was the most expensive aspect of AO

programs

The cost per student is approximately $4,546, and

the cost per credit is likely somewhere between

$226 and $565

The cost data are still being developed and will

improve throughout the evaluation

8

Note: The average cost per student was misreported in the original webinar. The number presented here is correct.

Page 9: Implementation Findings from the First Year of Accelerating  Opportunity Part  II

URBAN INSTITUTE

What were student outcomes? How many completed pathways, obtained credentials, became employed in their area of training, and experienced wage increases?

How did AO impact the student outcomes relative to what they would have achieved otherwise?

Did cultural change occurred as a result of AO, on either the state or college level? Did AO result in policy changes?

Did AO achieve scale? Which aspects of AO were seen as most sustainable?

9

Page 10: Implementation Findings from the First Year of Accelerating  Opportunity Part  II

URBAN INSTITUTE

Theresa AndersonAO Project ManagerThe Urban Institute

[email protected](202) 261-5847

10

Page 11: Implementation Findings from the First Year of Accelerating  Opportunity Part  II

URBAN INSTITUTE11

Page 12: Implementation Findings from the First Year of Accelerating  Opportunity Part  II

URBAN INSTITUTE12

Page 13: Implementation Findings from the First Year of Accelerating  Opportunity Part  II

URBAN INSTITUTE13

Page 14: Implementation Findings from the First Year of Accelerating  Opportunity Part  II

URBAN INSTITUTE14

Excluded: 0100%: 30%: 1

Excluded: 3100%: 10%: 2

Excluded: 4100%: 00%: 0

Excluded: 7100%: 00%: 7

Excluded: 14100%: 40%: 10

Page 15: Implementation Findings from the First Year of Accelerating  Opportunity Part  II

URBAN INSTITUTE

82% of colleges used Complementary-Supportive Teaching

70% of colleges used Monitoring Teacher

55% used Traditional Team Teaching

4 colleges reported that there was no team teaching in Year 1, all in NC

15

Page 16: Implementation Findings from the First Year of Accelerating  Opportunity Part  II

URBAN INSTITUTE16

Page 17: Implementation Findings from the First Year of Accelerating  Opportunity Part  II

URBAN INSTITUTE17