1. Guided Pathways Metrics for Accountability
Regional Data Labs
November 2018
Darby Kaikkonen, Policy Research Director

2. Progress metrics for Guided Pathways
Stakeholders
Metric(s)
College Spark
Math and English in the 1st year; meta-major selection, credits earned in a program of study
State Board
Math in the first year; first 15 and 30 credit attainment; retention to a second year; completion of degree or certificate in four years
State Legislature
Math attainment in the first year; completion of degree or certificate in four years

3. Specifics:
Number and percent of award-seeking students who earn 15 college-level credits in first year
Number and percent of award-seeking students who earn 30 college-level credits in first year
Number and percent of award-seeking students returning for a second year
Number and percent of transfer award-seeking students who complete college-level math in their first year
Number and percent of award-seeking students who complete a credential by the fourth year

4. New award-seeking students completing first 15 credits
HU-SOC
Asian or White
Completed 15 credits
5,354
13,564
Did not complete 15 credits
4,288
8,860
Total
9,642
22,424
HU students of color are about 30% of new award-seeking students and are slightly less likely to reach 15 credits in their first year.
SA Progress Metrics dashboard, 'Outcome Trend', 2016 cohort, prof/tech and transfer, disaggregate by HU-SOC

5. Attainment has increased over time for historically underrepresented students of color, but still lags behind.
SA progress metrics dashboard ‘Outcome Trend’

6. New award-seeking students completing first 30 credits
HU-SOC
Asian or White
Completed 30 credits
3,048
8,861
Did not complete 30 credits
6,594
13,563
Total
9,642
22,424
The percent of HU students of color reaching 30 credits within their first year is significantly lower than white and Asian students.
SA Progress Metrics dashboard, 'Outcome Trend', 2016 cohort, prof/tech and transfer, disaggregate by HU-SOC

7. Attainment has increased over time for both groups; historically underrepresented students of color lag further behind in this metric.
SA progress metrics dashboard ‘Outcome Trend’

8. New award-seeking students return for second year
HU-SOC
Asian or White
Returned for second year
4,109
11,240
Did not return second year
5,168
12,498
Total
9,277
23,738
Just under half of first-time students return for a second year, and the rate is lower for HU students of color.
SA Progress Metrics dashboard, 'Outcome Trend', 2015 cohort, prof/tech and transfer, disaggregate by HU-SOC

9. Attainment has not changed over time for both groups.
SA progress metrics dashboard ‘Outcome Trend’

10. Complete college-level math in first year
HU-SOC
Asian or White
Completed math first year
1,390
4,151
Did not complete math first year
4,832
9,914
Total
6,222
14,065
Less than one-third of students in an academic transfer pathway complete college-level math in their first year. The rate is lower for HU students of color.
SA Progress Metrics dashboard, 'Outcome Trend', 2016 cohort, transfer, disaggregate by HU-SOC

11. Attainment has increased significantly over time for both groups; there is an 8% difference in attainment for historically underrepresented students of color.
SA progress metrics dashboard ‘Outcome Trend’

12. New award-seeking students math attainment first year Legislator data
*Shared with legislator

13. Students exiting with degree or certificate
HU-SOC
Asian or White
Transfer degree
2,904
8,014
Workforce degree
2,390
4,573
Workforce certificate
1,198
4,537
Total
6,492
17,124
Just over one-fifth of first-time students exit college with a credential four years after start. HU students of color are more likely to earn a certificate.
Guided pathways dashboard, Cohort years transfer and workforce cohort, 200% time by HU-SOC

14. Students exiting with degree or certificate Legislator Data
*Shared with legislator- SA cohorts

15. So…what do you think?
If you were to capture where you are right now today in guided pathways implementation, how would you describe your progress?
What ideas do you have to measure your institutional progress in implementing guided pathways?
Are there other ways to measure the impact of this institutional change on students?
What kinds of inquiry are you engaging in/research questions are you grappling with locally?