University of California Transcript Evaluation Insights
This presentation explores the outcomes of the University of California Transcript Evaluation Service in 2014, emphasizing the significance of transcript data for college readiness. It discusses the impact of completing college preparatory courses early in high school and the importance of providing accurate information to students, parents, and educators to improve access to college.
Download Presentation
Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.
You are allowed to download the files provided on this website for personal or commercial use, subject to the condition that they are used lawfully. All files are the property of their respective owners.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.
E N D
Presentation Transcript
College Access and Readiness Outcomes of the University of California Transcript Evaluation Service 2014 NCES STATS-DC Data Conference July 31, 2014 TRANSCRIPT EVALUATION SERVICE (NOTE: Stock photo. Release for web use is on file.)
2 Agenda Why transcript data matter TES overview TES outcomes analysis Characteristics of participating schools Comparison to baseline Comparison to non-participants TRANSCRIPT EVALUATION SERVICE (NOTE: Stock photo. Release for web use is on file.)
3 Transcript Evaluation Service (TES) College Preparation Trajectories An early and complete sequence of courses matters Students who complete 9th grade college preparatory courses begin a clear trajectory that continues through high school Students who fall off the college preparatory track early in high school tend to move even further from a complete college preparatory program as they move through high school Students who do not get on a college preparatory track never get on (REL WestEd Policy Brief, 2008) TRANSCRIPT EVALUATION SERVICE 3
4 a-g Subject Area Benchmarks TRANSCRIPT EVALUATION SERVICE
5 TES Overview Educational partnership tool used to improve access to college Provides programs, schools, and districts with an accurate depiction of course completion patterns to facilitate school improvement and course planning efforts Provides policymakers and researchers with quality information about student achievement measured against college-going benchmarks TRANSCRIPT EVALUATION SERVICE
6 TES Vision By providing students, parents, and those who support them with the right data: Students (and their counselors) will choose the right courses at the right time, preparing them for college High schools will be better able to offer the courses that students need to become college eligible TRANSCRIPT EVALUATION SERVICE
7 Features Courses completed and needed to meet college preparatory benchmarks for every student grades 9-12 Individualized transcript evaluations a-g course enrollment patterns for students at every grade level to aid school planning Rosters and reports Help for schools to make the most of TES as an advising tool and to develop action plans for access Training and support TRANSCRIPT EVALUATION SERVICE 7
8 TES Benefits A plan for life after high school from an accurate, authoritative source For students and families Increased advising efficiency and capacity For counselors For administrators and policymakers Optimized school action planning around access and curricular rigor TRANSCRIPT EVALUATION SERVICE 8
9 TES Process TRANSCRIPT EVALUATION SERVICE
10 Outcomes analysis overview Who participated? 152 California public high schools Generally (not exclusively): more disadvantaged (FRL), more ELL, more minority, lower academic performance (API) TES effect on CSU and UC eligibility? Eligibility rates improved substantially (up to 30%) More improvement where better implemented (over 50%) Some change in total college prep (a-g) courses taken TES effect on UC applications and admissions? 10-30% increase over 2-4 years Possibly more over longer horizons TRANSCRIPT EVALUATION SERVICE
11 Data used in the outcomes analysis TES program data Participation: Transcript uploads, which schools & when? Evaluation: Courses, GPA (for graduates) Dosage: Intensity of TES use; effective TES users Additional data CBEDS: Enrollment and graduates API: School decile, FRSL, ELL UCOP: applicants and admits from each CA high school TRANSCRIPT EVALUATION SERVICE
12 Number of high schools participating in TES, by submission cycle Number of high schools 77 75 80 68 60 50 45 40 40 31 20 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 2004-05 (12/10-9/16) 2005-06 (12/1-11/8) 2006-07 (2/6-11/1) 2007-08 (4/4-11/3) 2008-09 (1/30-5/14) 2009-10 (8/24-6/2) 2010-11 (9/2-7/20) TES Cycle TRANSCRIPT EVALUATION SERVICE 12
13 Number and percentage of TES schools that downloaded TES results 77 77 75 75 80 Number of High Schools 68 55 60 50 45 41 41 40 39 40 31 20 20 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 TES Cycle Number of Schools Participating Number Schools Downloaded 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Percent of TES Schools whose data were downloaded 65% 81% 82% 98% 91% 100% 100% TRANSCRIPT EVALUATION SERVICE 13
14 Total enrollment in participating high schools, by TES cycle Enrollment 200,000 170,921 139,857 150,000 130,849 122,410 101,601 100,000 85,763 64,731 50,000 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 TES Cycle Source: CBEDS TRANSCRIPT EVALUATION SERVICE 14
15 Number of schools participating in TES according to the number of cycles Number of schools 100 80 60 48 43 34 40 20 13 11 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Number of TES Cycles in Which School Participated TRANSCRIPT EVALUATION SERVICE 15
16 Selected student characteristics in participating TES high schools, by cycle Percent 100 76 80 67 58 56 60 51 40 30 27 20 10 0 Economically Disadvantaged English Language Learners Latino and Black Academic Performance: Bottom 30% TES (All 7 Cycles) CA Public 2010-11 TRANSCRIPT EVALUATION SERVICE 16
17 Among the 80 TES schools that participated for at least twoconsecutive cycles Year of TES Participation Year 1 to Year 2 Percent Change 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Change Percent of Grads Eligible for CSU 23.8 25.7 1.9 8.0 Percent of Grads Eligible for UC 18.6 20.2 1.6 8.6 Percent of Grads Completing UC Courses 21.9 23.6 1.7 7.8 Mean Number of UC a-g Courses Completed 14.3 14.4 0.1 0.7 Number of Transcripts -- -- 28,302 29,576 TRANSCRIPT EVALUATION SERVICE 17
18 Among the 37 TES schools that participated for at least threeconsecutive cycles Year of TES Participation Year 1 to Year 3 Percent Change 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Change Percent of Grads Eligible for CSU 21.6 23.6 26.1 4.5 20.8 Percent of Grads Eligible for UC 16.8 18.4 19.4 2.6 15.5 Percent of Grads Completing UC Courses 19.9 21.7 23.9 4.0 20.1 Mean Number of UC a-g Courses Completed 13.9 14.0 14.2 0.3 2.2 Number of Transcripts -- -- 14,902 15,461 15,175 TRANSCRIPT EVALUATION SERVICE 18
19 Among the 10 TES schools that participated for at least fourconsecutive cycles Year of TES Participation Year 1 to Year 4 Percent Change 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Change Percent of Grads Eligible for CSU 16.8 14.4 18.0 22.2 5.4 32.1 Percent of Grads Eligible for UC 13.1 12.5 14.0 15.8 2.7 20.6 Percent of Grads Completing UC Courses 15.4 13.8 16.8 20.9 5.5 35.7 Mean Number of UC a-g Courses Completed 12.9 12.6 12.8 13.7 0.8 6.2 Number of Transcripts -- -- 3,236 3,664 3,580 3,362 TRANSCRIPT EVALUATION SERVICE 19
20 Among intensive TES participants (3 schools) participated for at least fourconsecutive cycles Year of TES Participation Year 1 to Year 4 Percent Change 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Change Percent of Grads Eligible for CSU 13.0 14.8 20.4 19.4 6.4 49.2 Percent of Grads Eligible for UC 8.4 13.5 15.8 13.9 5.5 65.5 Percent of Grads Completing UC Courses 11.2 14.4 18.7 17.6 6.4 57.1 Mean Number of UC a-g Courses Completed 12.5 12.7 13.9 14.4 1.9 15.2 Number of Transcripts 884 867 702 762 -- -- TRANSCRIPT EVALUATION SERVICE 20
21 For effective implementer district (6 of 8 schools participating for 3 consecutive years) Year of TES Participation Year 1 to Year 4 Percent Change 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Change Percent of Grads Eligible for CSU 20.8 31.4 37.1 16.3 78.4 Percent of Grads Eligible for UC 16.4 24.0 26.9 10.5 64.0 Percent of Grads Completing UC Courses 19.1 28.8 35.0 15.9 83.2 Mean Number of UC a-g Courses Completed 14.7 15.2 15.7 1.0 6.8 Number of Transcripts -- -- 2,635 2,591 2,633 TRANSCRIPT EVALUATION SERVICE 21
22 Summary: Percent of Grads Eligible for CSU 40 35 Two consecutive cycles (80) Three consecutive cycles (37) Four consecutive cycles (10) Intensive participants (3) Effective implementer (6) 30 25 20 15 10 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 TRANSCRIPT EVALUATION SERVICE 22
23 Among the 37 TES schools that participated for at least threeconsecutive cycles Year of TES Participation Year 1 to Year 3 Percent Change 1st 2nd 3rd Change a. History/Social Science 2.13 2.13 2.15 0.02 0.9 b. English 3.21 3.19 3.22 0.01 0.3 c. Math 2.57 2.63 2.70 0.13 5.1 d. Laboratory Science 1.74 1.77 1.78 0.04 2.3 e. Language Other Than English 1.95 1.96 2.02 0.07 3.6 f. Visual and Performing Arts 1.32 1.37 1.36 0.04 3.0 g. College-Preparatory Elective 1.02 0.97 1.00 -0.02 -2.0 TRANSCRIPT EVALUATION SERVICE 23
24 Applications to UC: TES vs. Comparable Non-TES Schools Year of TES Evaluation 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th Number of Schools 74 37 10 5 3 2 Number of Graduates 26,371 13,749 3,464 1,816 1,031 697 UC Application Percent for TES Schools, in Participation Year 15.4 16.6 11.7 11.9 12.7 17.4 UC Application Percent for TES Schools, at Baseline (1st Year) 13.9 13.1 8.2 8.3 7.0 6.9 Growth in UC Application Percent for TES Schools (relative to base year) 1.5 3.5 3.5 3.6 5.7 10.5 Growth in UC Application Percent for Non-TES Schools (relative to base year) 1.3 1.6 2.6 3.0 3.7 5.3 Net Growth in UC Application Percent (relative to non-TES Schools) 0.2 1.9 0.9 0.6 2.0 5.2 Net Growth, as Percent of Baseline 1.5 14.2 10.4 6.6 29.1 76.9 TRANSCRIPT EVALUATION SERVICE 24
25 Percent of Graduates Applying to UC: Net Growth, TES vs. Comparable Non-TES Schools Year of TES Evaluation Net Growth in Applicants, as Percent of Baseline 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th All Schools 1.5 14.2 10.4 6.6 29.1 76.9 Intensive TES Participants 0.8 22.2 6.8 17.1 40.0 155.7 Effective TES Implementer 25.4 30.2 -- -- -- -- Schools with TES Partners (cycles 5-7) 4.1 20.3 -- -- -- -- TRANSCRIPT EVALUATION SERVICE 25
26 Percent of Graduates Applying to UC: Net Growth, TES vs. Comparable Non-TES Schools 80 Net Growth in Applicants, as Percent of Baseline 70 60 All TES Schools 50 Intensive TES Participants 40 Effective TES Implementers 30 Schools with TES Partners 20 10 0 2 3 4 5 6 7 Year of TES Evaluation TRANSCRIPT EVALUATION SERVICE 26
27 Percent of Graduates Admitted to UC: Net Growth, TES vs. Comparable Non-TES Schools 80 Net Growth in Admits, as Percent of Baseline 70 60 All TES Schools 50 Intensive TES Participants 40 30 Effective TES Implementers 20 Schools with TES Partners 10 0 2 3 4 5 6 7 -10 Year of TES Evaluation TRANSCRIPT EVALUATION SERVICE 27
28 Summary TES and CSU/UC eligibility: Eligibility rates improved substantially (up to 30%) More improvement where better implemented (more than 50%) Some change on college prep course-taking TES and UC applications and admits: 10-30% increase over 2-4 years Possibly more over longer horizons TRANSCRIPT EVALUATION SERVICE
29 Transcript Evaluation Service Redesigned and Redefined Broader availability: Available to more schools/districts Faster data connections: Pulling in data directly from supported Student Information Systems (SIS) More user friendly: Redesign of TES results site and reports More support: Additional resources for how and when to use TES Ripple effects: More information about SIS data quality and opportunities to improve (NOTE: Stock photo. Release for web use is on file.)
30 For more information about TES Reginald Hillmon reginald.hillmon@ucop.edu www.transcriptevaluationservice.com TES Outcomes Analysis Roger Studley rstudley@rti.org (Photographs by Elena Zhukova, photographer, 415. 852. 8384, www.elenazhukova.com) (NOTE: Stock photo. Release for web use is on file.)
