The Impact of Corequisite Math on Community College Student Outcomes: Evidence from Texas

Developmental education (dev-ed) aims to help students acquire knowledge and skills necessary to succeed in college-level coursework. The traditional prerequisite approach to postsecondary dev-ed—where students take remedial courses that do not count toward a credential—appears to stymie progress toward a degree. At community colleges across the country, most students require remediation in math, creating a barrier to college-level credits under the traditional approach. Corequisite coursework is a structural reform that places students directly into a college-level course in the same term they receive dev-ed support. Using administrative data from Texas community colleges and a regression discontinuity design, we examine whether corequisite math improves student success compared with traditional prerequisite dev-ed. We find that corequisite math quickly improves student completion of math requirements without any obvious drawbacks, but students in corequisite math were not substantially closer to degree completion than their peers in traditional dev-ed after 3 years.

Do Professor–Student Rapport and Mattering Predict College Student Outcomes?

Background: Professor–student rapport and a sense of mattering to others are associated with several college student outcomes, but no study has examined the relation between these two variables. Objective: This study sought to examine associations between professor–student rapport, mattering, and college student outcomes including grade data and students’ ratings of a course and an instructor. Method: 149 college students completed the Professor–Student Rapport Scale (PSRS), the General Mattering Index, and the Interpersonal Mattering Scale. Students’ ratings of the course and the instructor were collected as well as institutionally-reported GPA. Results: Professor–student rapport was related to mattering to the psychology instructor. Professor–student rapport was predictive of students’ ratings of the course and the instructor but was not associated with grades. Measures of mattering were not related to student outcomes. The brief version of the PSRS was not more predictive of student outcomes as compared to the full PSRS. Conclusion: Professor–student rapport and mattering are related, but only rapport is associated with some student academic outcomes. Studies that go beyond students’ perceptions and focus on more objective student outcomes are needed in this area. Additionally, experimental studies that examine methods of fostering rapport are warranted to more fully understand the influence of faculty behaviors and qualities on students.

Happy Together? The Peer Effects of Dual Enrollment Students on Community College Student Outcomes

Nationally, 15% of first-time community college students were high school dual enrollment (DE) students, which raises concerns about how high school peers might influence college enrollees. Using administrative data from a large state community college system, we examine whether being exposed to a higher percentage of DE peers in entry-level (gateway) math and English courses influences non-DE enrollees’ performance. Using a two-way fixed effects model, our results indicate that college enrollees exposed to a higher proportion of DE peers had lower pass rates and grades in gateway courses, and higher course repetition rates. Supplemental student-level analysis suggests that greater exposure to DE peers during a student's initial semester in college reduces next-term college persistence.

Measuring Noncognitive Factors Related to College Student Outcomes: Development and Initial Construct Validation of the Student Strengths Inventory

This study describes the development and initial construct validation of the Student Strengths Inventory (SSI), a brief measure of noncognitive variables previously found to be related to college student outcomes. A sample of 760 first-year college students completed an initial item pool in addition to a lengthier, established noncognitive assessment tool with similar constructs. Results support a 48-item, six-factor measure with the following scales: Academic Self-efficacy, Academic Engagement, Campus Engagement, Resiliency, Social Comfort, and Educational Commitment. The SSI demonstrates good internal consistency reliability and construct validity. Future research is needed to examine the predictive validity of the SSI subscales with respect to academic performance and persistence. Practice implications include providing individualized feedback to students on their noncognitive strengths and weaknesses and helping them set goals for their academic success. Moreover, the results of the SSI can inform interventions at the individual, group, and institutional level.