Laura Ullrich of the Richmond Fed
The American workforce is in the midst of unprecedented changes resulting from the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, Baby Boomer retirements, and adjustments to the ways people work. Underlying these dynamics is the ever-evolving need to have a workforce with the training and skills that the economy demands. Since the pandemic, strong employment growth coupled with a labor shortage has left many companies struggling to build a workforce that meets customer demand. The need for skilled workers is growing, many of whom can be trained at community colleges, and current educational enrollment patterns are not promising. In fact, enrollment at Virginia community colleges declined 12.5 percent between spring 2019 and spring 2023.
The Richmond Fed is dedicated to addressing our maximum employment mandate in part by understanding how models of workforce development can maximize the potential of individuals, organizations and communities. Community colleges are a big part of this story, so as part of this work, we have been attempting to assess community college outcomes across the states we serve. Our desire was to observe community colleges both within and across our states. However, currently available higher education data that can be examined across states are flawed for community colleges. Discussions with community college leaders, researchers and non-profits exposed serious deficiencies in these data, which are used by practitioners, legislators, researchers, parents, counselors and many others to examine community college outcomes.
The issues range from the calculations themselves to the types of credential attainment that should count as success. The biggest issue of all is that community college success is currently measured, at the federal level, in the same way that success is measured for four-year colleges and universities, even though these institutions are markedly different. Think about it: every student who enrolled this fall at Washington and Lee is there to obtain a bachelor’s degree. The same is true for nearly every freshman at Virginia Tech.
But think about your local community college. Why have students enrolled there? Many are there with dreams of transferring to a four-year college. Others would like to obtain an associate degree to enter the workforce as a nurse, automotive technician or early childhood teacher. Still others want to obtain a shorter-term credential, such as a certificate in welding or phlebotomy. Using associate degree completion as the primary measure of success for community colleges is problematic when a relatively low percentage of students actually have that as a stated goal at entry.
After several years of researching the topic, we decided to create our own survey and develop our own measure of success. In mid-November, we will publish the results from the extended pilot of the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond Survey of Community College Outcomes, which tries to address many of the issues we identified and includes previously unreported data on high school student enrollment at community colleges, wrap-around services and industry partnerships.
We have found that community colleges across our region, and certainly in Virginia, are serving their students better than currently calculated graduation rates indicate. Publicly available graduation rates published each year by IPEDS, the federal government’s education data system, indicate graduation rates at Virginia community colleges that range from 20 percent to 50 percent. The Richmond Fed Success Rate indicates success of the same schools that ranges from 50 percent to nearly 85 percent.
So what is different about our success rate?
There are three major differences between the IPEDS graduation rate and our Richmond Fed Success Rate. The first is the cohort of students we use to calculate the success rate. While the IPEDS graduation rate uses just full-time students and those who are first-time enrollees, our metric uses both full- and part-time students and students who have previously enrolled at other colleges and universities. This increases the cohort of students dramatically, increasing the total number of included students in Virginia from approximately 16,400 in IPEDS to 26,300 in our metric.
The second, and probably most significant difference, is what we count as a “success.” Instead of focusing just on associate degree completion, we broaden the metric to include the attainment of any associate degree or industry-recognized credential or certificate. We also include students who successfully transfer to a four-year college or university and those who remain enrolled and in good standing four years after initial enrollment.
The third is the time period we analyze. IPEDS observes whether students graduated within 150 percent time to completion, which is three years at a community college. For our calculations, we decided to look at outcomes after four years, giving students additional time to reach their goals, which is especially important since we include students who are attending part-time.
How do we think that this will improve workforce outcomes? First, it could give students a better idea of their likelihood of success in a community college. Second, it could enable policymakers and the public to better understand the opportunities (or challenges) that community colleges face in meeting their objectives. Third, it could enable a better alignment of incentives between the community colleges and community workforce needs. For example, using graduation rates as the primary measure of success might encourage community colleges to focus primarily on associate degree attainment, when that does not have to be the only measure of success and may not align well with students’ intentions. Employers often tell us that they are more interested in skills attainment than degree attainment; measuring success through graduation rates could create a mismatch between employer needs and the focus of community colleges.
Our goal is to provide a more accurate measure of community college success in order to better understand the role that they play in workforce development. Our mantra through this work is “what gets measured gets managed.” Improving success measurement at community colleges will improve the ability of those schools to manage the workforce goals of their students and will hopefully result in greater attainment of a range of credentials, degrees and skills over time. Ultimately, we all seek a more holistic and incentive-aligned post-secondary approach to workforce development. We need it for our future.
Visit our website to learn more about the Richmond Fed’s Survey of Community College Outcomes and register to attend our ‘go live’ event on November 15..
Laura Ullrich of the Richmond Fed
The American workforce is in the midst of unprecedented changes resulting from the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, Baby Boomer retirements, and adjustments to the ways people work. Underlying these dynamics is the ever-evolving need to have a workforce with the training and skills that the economy demands. Since the pandemic, strong employment growth coupled with a labor shortage has left many companies struggling to build a workforce that meets customer demand. The need for skilled workers is growing, many of whom can be trained at community colleges, and current educational enrollment patterns are not promising. In fact, enrollment at Virginia community colleges declined 12.5 percent between spring 2019 and spring 2023.
The Richmond Fed is dedicated to addressing our maximum employment mandate in part by understanding how models of workforce development can maximize the potential of individuals, organizations and communities. Community colleges are a big part of this story, so as part of this work, we have been attempting to assess community college outcomes across the states we serve. Our desire was to observe community colleges both within and across our states. However, currently available higher education data that can be examined across states are flawed for community colleges. Discussions with community college leaders, researchers and non-profits exposed serious deficiencies in these data, which are used by practitioners, legislators, researchers, parents, counselors and many others to examine community college outcomes.
The issues range from the calculations themselves to the types of credential attainment that should count as success. The biggest issue of all is that community college success is currently measured, at the federal level, in the same way that success is measured for four-year colleges and universities, even though these institutions are markedly different. Think about it: every student who enrolled this fall at Washington and Lee is there to obtain a bachelor’s degree. The same is true for nearly every freshman at Virginia Tech.
But think about your local community college. Why have students enrolled there? Many are there with dreams of transferring to a four-year college. Others would like to obtain an associate degree to enter the workforce as a nurse, automotive technician or early childhood teacher. Still others want to obtain a shorter-term credential, such as a certificate in welding or phlebotomy. Using associate degree completion as the primary measure of success for community colleges is problematic when a relatively low percentage of students actually have that as a stated goal at entry.
After several years of researching the topic, we decided to create our own survey and develop our own measure of success. In mid-November, we will publish the results from the extended pilot of the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond Survey of Community College Outcomes, which tries to address many of the issues we identified and includes previously unreported data on high school student enrollment at community colleges, wrap-around services and industry partnerships.
We have found that community colleges across our region, and certainly in Virginia, are serving their students better than currently calculated graduation rates indicate. Publicly available graduation rates published each year by IPEDS, the federal government’s education data system, indicate graduation rates at Virginia community colleges that range from 20 percent to 50 percent. The Richmond Fed Success Rate indicates success of the same schools that ranges from 50 percent to nearly 85 percent.
So what is different about our success rate?
There are three major differences between the IPEDS graduation rate and our Richmond Fed Success Rate. The first is the cohort of students we use to calculate the success rate. While the IPEDS graduation rate uses just full-time students and those who are first-time enrollees, our metric uses both full- and part-time students and students who have previously enrolled at other colleges and universities. This increases the cohort of students dramatically, increasing the total number of included students in Virginia from approximately 16,400 in IPEDS to 26,300 in our metric.
The second, and probably most significant difference, is what we count as a “success.” Instead of focusing just on associate degree completion, we broaden the metric to include the attainment of any associate degree or industry-recognized credential or certificate. We also include students who successfully transfer to a four-year college or university and those who remain enrolled and in good standing four years after initial enrollment.
The third is the time period we analyze. IPEDS observes whether students graduated within 150 percent time to completion, which is three years at a community college. For our calculations, we decided to look at outcomes after four years, giving students additional time to reach their goals, which is especially important since we include students who are attending part-time.
How do we think that this will improve workforce outcomes? First, it could give students a better idea of their likelihood of success in a community college. Second, it could enable policymakers and the public to better understand the opportunities (or challenges) that community colleges face in meeting their objectives. Third, it could enable a better alignment of incentives between the community colleges and community workforce needs. For example, using graduation rates as the primary measure of success might encourage community colleges to focus primarily on associate degree attainment, when that does not have to be the only measure of success and may not align well with students’ intentions. Employers often tell us that they are more interested in skills attainment than degree attainment; measuring success through graduation rates could create a mismatch between employer needs and the focus of community colleges.
Our goal is to provide a more accurate measure of community college success in order to better understand the role that they play in workforce development. Our mantra through this work is “what gets measured gets managed.” Improving success measurement at community colleges will improve the ability of those schools to manage the workforce goals of their students and will hopefully result in greater attainment of a range of credentials, degrees and skills over time. Ultimately, we all seek a more holistic and incentive-aligned post-secondary approach to workforce development. We need it for our future.
Visit our website to learn more about the Richmond Fed’s Survey of Community College Outcomes and register to attend our ‘go live’ event on November 15..
Spot on. The value proposition of 4-year colleges has gone off a cliff as tuition has soared and learning on Youtube remains the same price – free. Unfortunately higher education doesn’t have much interest in educating youth that they shouldn’t be dropping $50K/year on a college degree. We need more statistics that show how long it takes graduates to pay off debt, what their starting salary is (compared to someone who didn’t get a degree), etc. so people can make actual informed decisions. My guess is that no one has any interest in gathering that data because it doesn’t paint… Read more »
There’s gonna be a point where 4 year schools are going to majorly correct and many are gonna plunge because they still don’t see what is coming. The way your able to learn things online so easily now plus with businesses struggling to find people is causing the market to go back the other way to where you’re able to go into these jobs without college experience which is actually good for everybody.
Jobs are important. However an education including the arts and humanities is beneficial also, in promoting an electorate able to distinguish the wheat from the chaff. There’s too much of the latter and too little appreciation for the truth lately.