Table Of Content

The Reality of College Readiness l 2012 South Carolina South Carolina The Reality of College Readiness l 2012 Annually, ACT provides each state with The Condition of College & Career is shortsighted to believe that institutional effectiveness is rooted solely in the Readiness, a report that details the college readiness of students who took the notion that students should enroll, persist, and graduate in a reasonable time ACT® test. Based on extensive empirical research, ACT has defined “college frame from the institution where they first enrolled. and career readiness” as the acquisition of knowledge and skills a student This report is intended to raise awareness of the fact that the path to college needs to enroll and succeed in credit-bearing first-year college courses at a success is not a linear one for many students. There are significant numbers of postsecondary institution without the need for remediation. This definition has qualified students who move through (or in and out of) multiple postsecondary been adopted by the Common Core State Standards Initiative. experiences as they pursue their educational goals. Consider for a moment the following characteristics of undergraduate students: This Report • 11% of students simultaneously enrolled in more than one institution This report is a companion to The Condition of College & Career Readiness. • 41% of graduates attended more than one institution The report traces the college enrollment, retention, re-enrollment, and migration patterns of the 2010 ACT-tested high school graduates in your state. It also • 38% enrolled part time provides a snapshot of the impact that benchmark-meeting behavior has on • More than 2 million students brought college credit with them at the time of those patterns and, ultimately, on success in college. first full-time enrollment (dual credit, AP, online, or CLEP) • 30% delayed enrollment a year or more Why Is This Report Important? • 25% of undergraduates are over age 25 Since the middle of the 20th century, attention has been focused on institutional • 30% of undergraduates enrolled in an online course retention and persistence-to-degree rates. Yet, in spite of significant institutional • 29% of community college students transfer to four-year colleges efforts, those rates remain disappointingly stagnant. • 14% transfer from four-year to two-year colleges Since 1983, ACT has been collecting and reporting on institutional retention and persistence-to-degree rates. Annual reports include data from more than 2,500 Many of these students fail to reach their goals because transitions between and colleges and universities. Over that period, first-to-second-year retention rates for among institutions are fraught with complexities and are far from transparent. four-year colleges have ranged from 72.3% (2008) to 74.9% (1991) and five-year In that respect, the discussion must shift to students’ achievement of individual persistence-to-degree rates have ranged from 50.9% (2001) to 55.1% (1989). postsecondary goals regardless of where they enroll, where they re-enroll, the Narrow and stagnant ranges also characterize statistics for two-year public length of time it takes, and where they ultimately complete their goals. colleges. Retention rates range from 51.3% (2004) to 55.7% (2010), and While we provide information on institutional retention, we hope that reader three-year persistence-to-degree rates range from 25.5% (2010) to 38.8% (1989). attention will be directed to the significant numbers and the academic capabilities In spite of significant efforts to increase student success, rates remain virtually of other groups of students: those who never enroll, those who do not re-enroll, unchanged. and those who change institutions. Focusing on state, system, and institutional Unfortunately, retention and persistence-to-degree rates have been used as policies and practices that facilitate the success of these groups is key to proxies for institutional effectiveness, and accountability models are built on increasing the educational attainment level of the American people. factors over which the institution exhibits only limited control. Our opinion is that it © 2012 by ACT, Inc. All rights reserved. The ACT® is a registered trademark of ACT, Inc., in the U.S.A. and other countries. 2 South Carolina The Reality of College Readiness l 2012 Attainment of ACT’s College Percent of 2010 ACT-Tested South Carolina High School Graduates Meeting College Readiness Benchmarks by Subject Readiness Benchmarks South Carolina! Nation! ACT’s research on the knowledge and skills necessary for 100! success in college courses resulted in the establishment of ACT’s College Readiness Benchmarks. These benchmarks are ACT 80! subject area scores that represent the level of achievement 66! required for students to have a 50% chance of obtaining a B or 58! higher or about a 75% chance of earning a C or higher in ent! 60! 52! c corresponding credit-bearing first-year college courses. College er 43! 43! P 40! 37! courses, corresponding subject area tests, and benchmark scores 29! 24! are depicted below. 22! 18! 20! ACT ACT College Course Subject Test Benchmark Score 0! English Composition English 18 All Four ! College English! College! College Social! College! Introductory Social Science Reading 21 Benchmarks! Composition! Algebra! Sciences! Biology! College Algebra Mathematics 22 Biology Science 24 Percent of 2010 ACT-Tested South Carolina High School Graduates by Number of ACT College Readiness Benchmarks Attained The charts to the right provide information on 2010 ACT-tested high school graduates in your state. The top chart compares the national and state percentages of students meeting each of the Met 1 benchmarks. The pie chart (bottom right) depicts the percentage Benchmark! of high school graduates by number of readiness benchmarks 15%! met. ACT research consistently shows there is a direct relationship Met No between the number of benchmarks met and retention to the Benchmarks! Met 2 36%! second year, progress to degree, grade point average and Benchmarks! 17%! ultimately, degree completion. Met 3 Benchmarks! Met All 4 14%! Benchmarks! 18%! 3 South Carolina The Reality of College Readiness l 2012 The table below describes the fall 2010 and fall 2011 enrollment status of all 2010 Weighted averages of 2011 re-enrollment percentages for all 2010 ACT-tested ACT-tested high school graduates in your state. Re-enrollment status represents high school graduates are reported below. These averages are based on any two-year or four-year institution. The table also reports the ACT Composite 16 states with 20–59% ACT-tested high school graduates in 2010 (AK, AZ, CA, average and the percentage of students meeting the ACT benchmarks for each CT, GA, HI, IN, MA, MT, NV, NY, OR, SC, TX, VA, and VT). The weighted average subgroup. Data are derived from matched files of ACT graduates and National is the percentage of ACT-tested high school graduates from all states in this Student Clearinghouse (NSC) enrollment data. group who fall into each cell in the table. Enrollment and Retention Status for South Carolina 2010 ACT-Tested Graduates College Readiness Benchmark Percentages in Your State Weighted State State Average Fall 2010 Status Fall 2011 Status Averages Percentage Composite English Reading Mathematics Science All 4 Enrolled In State Retained In State 84 84 20.9 67 50 45 27 21 Re-Enrolled Out of State 2 1 20.2 64 45 36 19 15 N = 14,167 Not Enrolled/Unknown* 15 15 18.1 43 30 21 12 8 All In-State Enrollees 100 100 20.4 63 47 41 24 19 Enrolled Out of State Re-Enrolled In State 9 13 19.3 58 38 29 20 13 Re-Enrolled Out of State 80 72 22.7 74 61 54 38 33 N = 1,810 Not Enrolled/Unknown* 10 15 18.8 48 38 28 16 15 All Out-of-State Enrollees 100 100 21.7 68 54 47 33 28 Not Enrolled Enrolled In State 18 21 17.6 38 27 18 10 6 Enrolled Out of State 6 5 18.2 48 29 19 13 8 N = 4,081 Not Enrolled/Unknown* 75 74 17.5 36 26 18 11 8 All Non-Enrollees 100 100 17.5 37 26 18 11 8 All 2010 Graduates Re-Enrolled In State 55 65 20.6 65 48 43 25 20 Re-Enrolled Out of State 19 8 21.9 70 56 49 34 29 N = 20,058 Not Enrolled/Unknown* 26 27 17.8 39 28 20 12 8 All Students 100 100 20.0 58 43 37 22 18 * NSC data include 93.4% of all students enrolled in U.S. colleges. This percentage includes a small number of students for whom no match could be found. Note: Totals may not sum to 100% due to rounding. • Students who first enrolled out of state and • Students who first enrolled in state and • 27% of ACT-tested students either never enrolled re-enrolled out of state had the highest ACT re-enrolled in state had the second-highest ACT in 2010 or were not re-enrolled in 2011. Those Composite average and the greatest percentage Composite average and the second-greatest students had an ACT Composite average of 17.8, of students meeting all four benchmarks. percentage of students meeting all four and 8% met all four benchmarks. benchmarks. 4 South Carolina The Reality of College Readiness l 2012 The table below describes the fall 2011 status of 2010 ACT-tested high school Weighted averages of 2011 re-enrollment percentages for all 2010 ACT-tested graduates in your state who initially enrolled in a two-year college in fall 2010. high school graduates who entered two-year colleges are reported below. These Re-enrollment status represents any two-year or four-year institution. The table averages are based on 16 states with 20–59% ACT-tested high school graduates also reports the ACT Composite average and the percentage of students in 2010 (AK*, AZ, CA, CT, GA, HI, IN, MA, MT, NV, NY, OR, SC, TX, VA, and VT). meeting the ACT benchmarks for each subgroup. The table is based on The weighted average is the percentage of ACT-tested high school graduates matched files of ACT graduates and National Student Clearinghouse (NSC) from all states in this group who fall into each cell in the table. enrollment data. * Not included due to low N count. Enrollment and Retention Status for South Carolina 2010 ACT-Tested Graduates for Two-Year Enrollees College Readiness Benchmark Percentages in Your State Weighted State State Average Fall 2010 Status Fall 2011 Status Averages Percentage Composite English Reading Mathematics Science All 4 Enrolled In State Retained In State 73 71 18.0 45 28 22 10 6 Re-Enrolled Out of State 3 2 18.9 59 31 25 12 9 N = 4,405 Not Enrolled/Unknown** 24 27 17.0 33 23 14 6 4 All In-State Enrollees 100 100 17.8 42 27 20 9 5 Enrolled Out of State Re-Enrolled In State 14 18 15.9 25 14 14 6 6 Re-Enrolled Out of State 59 53 18.0 43 32 24 13 10 N = 200 Not Enrolled/Unknown** 27 30 16.8 32 22 14 8 5 All Out-of-State Enrollees 100 100 17.3 37 26 19 11 8 All 2010 Graduates Re-Enrolled In State 70 69 18.0 45 28 22 10 6 Re-Enrolled Out of State 6 4 18.4 49 32 24 13 10 N = 4,605 Not Enrolled/Unknown** 24 27 17.0 33 23 14 7 4 All Students 100 100 17.7 42 27 20 9 6 ** NSC data include 97.1% of all students enrolled in two-year colleges. This percentage includes a small number of students for whom no match could be found. Note: Totals may not sum to 100% due to rounding. • Students who first enrolled in state and • Students who first enrolled out of state and • 27% of ACT-tested students either never enrolled re-enrolled out of state had the highest ACT re-enrolled out of state had the second-highest in 2010 or were not re-enrolled in 2011. Those Composite average and the second-greatest ACT Composite average and the greatest students had an ACT Composite average of 17.0, percentage of students meeting all four percentage of students meeting all four and 4% met all four benchmarks. benchmarks. benchmarks. 5 South Carolina The Reality of College Readiness l 2012 The table below describes the fall 2011 status of 2010 ACT-tested high school Weighted averages of 2011 re-enrollment percentages for all 2010 ACT-tested graduates in your state who initially enrolled in a four-year public college in fall high school graduates who entered four-year public colleges are reported below. 2010. Re-enrollment status represents any two-year or four-year institution. The These averages are based on 16 states with 20–59% ACT-tested high school table also reports the ACT Composite average and the percentage of students graduates in 2010 (AK, AZ, CA, CT, GA, HI, IN, MA, MT, NV, NY, OR, SC, TX, VA, meeting the ACT benchmarks for each subgroup. The table is based on and VT). The weighted average is the percentage of ACT-tested high school matched files of ACT graduates and National Student Clearinghouse (NSC) graduates from all states in this group who fall into each cell in the table. enrollment data. Enrollment and Retention Status for South Carolina 2010 ACT-Tested Graduates for Four-Year Public Enrollees College Readiness Benchmark Percentages in Your State Weighted State State Average Fall 2010 Status Fall 2011 Status Averages Percentage Composite English Reading Mathematics Science All 4 Enrolled In State Retained In State 86 90 22.3 78 61 57 35 29 Re-Enrolled Out of State 1 1 22.0 71 58 54 29 21 N = 7,169 Not Enrolled/Unknown* 12 9 20.3 65 45 34 21 16 All In-State Enrollees 100 100 22.1 77 59 55 33 28 Enrolled Out of State Re-Enrolled In State 9 11 21.9 86 58 45 31 16 Re-Enrolled Out of State 82 78 23.2 80 65 59 41 35 N = 663 Not Enrolled/Unknown* 9 11 20.8 61 58 42 19 18 All Out-of-State Enrollees 100 100 22.8 79 64 55 37 31 All 2010 Graduates Re-Enrolled In State 72 83 22.3 78 61 57 35 29 Re-Enrolled Out of State 16 7 23.1 80 65 58 40 33 N = 7,832 Not Enrolled/Unknown* 12 9 20.3 64 46 35 21 16 All Students 100 100 22.2 77 60 55 34 28 * NSC data include 98.8% of all students enrolled in four-year public colleges. This percentage includes a small number of students for whom no match could be found. Note: Totals may not sum to 100% due to rounding. • Students who first enrolled out of state and • Students who first enrolled in state and • 9% of ACT-tested students either never enrolled re-enrolled out of state had the highest ACT re-enrolled in state had the second-highest ACT in 2010 or were not re-enrolled in 2011. Those Composite average and the greatest percentage Composite average and the second-greatest students had an ACT Composite average of 20.3, of students meeting all four benchmarks. percentage of students meeting all four and 16% met all four benchmarks. benchmarks. 6 South Carolina The Reality of College Readiness l 2012 The table below describes the fall 2011 status of 2010 ACT-tested high school Weighted averages of 2011 re-enrollment percentages for all 2010 ACT-tested graduates in your state who initially enrolled in a four-year non-public college in high school graduates who entered four-year non-public colleges are reported fall 2010. Re-enrollment status represents any two-year or four-year institution. below. These averages are based on 16 states with 20–59% ACT-tested high The table also reports the ACT Composite average and the percentage of school graduates in 2010 (AK, AZ, CA, CT, GA, HI, IN, MA, MT, NV*, NY, OR, SC, students meeting the ACT benchmarks for each subgroup. The table is based TX, VA, and VT). The weighted average is the percentage of ACT-tested high on matched files of ACT graduates and National Student Clearinghouse (NSC) school graduates from all states in this group who fall into each cell in the table. enrollment data. * Not included due to low N count. Enrollment and Retention Status for South Carolina 2010 ACT-Tested Graduates for Four-Year Non-Public Enrollees College Readiness Benchmark Percentages in Your State Weighted State State Average Fall 2010 Status Fall 2011 Status Averages Percentage Composite English Reading Mathematics Science All 4 Enrolled In State Retained In State 90 87 20.7 65 49 42 26 21 Re-Enrolled Out of State 2 1 20.6 67 63 33 21 21 N = 2,593 Not Enrolled/Unknown** 8 12 17.7 36 26 18 12 8 All In-State Enrollees 100 100 20.3 61 46 39 24 19 Enrolled Out of State Re-Enrolled In State 7 13 19.3 54 35 27 18 16 Re-Enrolled Out of State 84 75 23.4 77 65 58 42 37 N = 871 Not Enrolled/Unknown** 9 13 19.5 55 41 32 23 21 All Out-of-State Enrollees 100 100 22.4 71 58 51 37 32 All 2010 Graduates Re-Enrolled In State 47 68 20.6 64 48 41 26 21 Re-Enrolled Out of State 44 19 23.3 76 64 57 41 37 N = 3,464 Not Enrolled/Unknown** 9 12 18.2 41 30 21 15 11 All Students 100 100 20.8 64 49 42 27 23 ** NSC data include 92% of all students enrolled in four-year non-public colleges. This percentage includes a small number of students for whom no match could be found. Note: Totals may not sum to 100% due to rounding. • Students who first enrolled out of state and • Students who first enrolled in state and • 12% of ACT-tested students either never enrolled re-enrolled out of state had the highest ACT re-enrolled in state had the second-highest ACT in 2010 or were not re-enrolled in 2011. Those Composite average and the greatest percentage Composite average and the second-greatest students had an ACT Composite average of 18.2, of students meeting all four benchmarks. percentage of students meeting all four and 11% met all four benchmarks. benchmarks. 7 South Carolina The Reality of College Readiness l 2012 The data presented on this page are also based on matched files Percent of All Enrollees Meeting Benchmarks by Institutional Type of ACT-tested high school graduates and National Student Clearinghouse (NSC) enrollment files. But unlike the previous 2-Year! Four! 5! 74! 21! tables and charts, these data include all first-time enrollees in your 4-Year Public! state regardless of state of residence at the time of ACT testing. 4-Year Non-Public! Three! 12! 68! 20! The chart to the right documents the percentage of enrolled Note: Totals may not sum to 100% students meeting benchmarks by institutional type. For example, because first-year enrollment status is unknown for some students. of those enrolled students meeting all four benchmarks, 5% were Two! 22! 56! 22! enrolled in two-year colleges, 74% were enrolled in four-year public colleges, and 21% were enrolled in four-year non-public colleges. One! 32! 48! 20! The findings depicted here are intuitive: as the number of benchmarks met increases, the likelihood of enrolling in a four-year Zero! 46! 30! 24! institution also increases. 0! 20! 40! 60! 80! 100! PPeerrcceenntt WWiitthhiinn FFiirrsstt -YYeeaarr- EEnnrroolllleedd CCoolllleeggee TTyyppee! Percent of First-Year Enrollees by Re-Enrollment Status for South Carolina and National 2010 ACT-Tested Graduates* Total Total 2-Year 2-Year 4-Year 4-Year 4-Year Non- 4-Year Non- State National State National Public State Public National Public State Public National Retained Within Institution 71 72 66 72 84 88 92 92 Retained In State, Different Institution 12 9 28 21 11 8 3 4 Re-Enrolled Out of State 4 4 6 6 4 3 5 4 * NSC data include 93.4% of all students enrolled in U.S. colleges. This percentage includes a small number of students for whom no match could be found. Note: Totals may not sum to 100% due to rounding. The table above tracks the retention/migration • Data from a variety of sources tell us that 34% of • When coupled with data from the tables patterns of students who first enrolled in 2010 and college students attended two or more colleges, presented on pages 4–7, it becomes clear that continued their enrollment in 2011. 11% simultaneously enrolled in more than one student movement between and among • Institutions within the state do a reasonably good college, and 23% took one or more online institutions calls for policies that focus on a job of retaining students. courses. seamless transition process. • Significant percentages of enrolled students re-enroll out of state or at another institution within the state. 8 South Carolina The Reality of College Readiness l 2012 The chart on this page includes all enrolled students regardless of Retention Rates by Institution Type of First College Choice and state of residence in which the student took the ACT. Interest-Major Fit*: South Carolina vs. National Interests and College Success South Carolina! Nation! 100! Research indicates that if students’ interests are similar to the imntoerree slitkse loyf tpoe:ople in their chosen college majors, they will be 80! 79! 77! 77! 74! 75! 80! 72! 75! • Persist in college (Tracey & Robbins, 20061; Allen & Robbins, 20082) nt! 60! 50! 58! 53! 56! e c • Remain in their major (Allen & Robbins, 20082) Per 40! • Complete their degree in a timely manner (Allen & Robbins, 20103) 20! • Earn high GPAs (Tracey, Allen, & Robbins, 20124) The research is based on a calculation called interest-major fit: the 0! High Fit! Low Fit! High Fit! Low Fit! High Fit! Low Fit! relationship between student choice of major and career-related 2-Year! 4-Year Public! 4-Year Non-Public! interests. The ACT Interest Inventory is a 72-item survey completed by students who take the ACT. Results identify the **Fit reflects the correlation between student Interest Inventory scores and intended college major. career areas and programs of study that are closely aligned with student interest patterns. Fit, then, is based on the similarity (or lack thereof) between Inventory results and a student’s first choice Observations of college program. High fit indicates that student interests are Addressing the differences in retention rates for high-fit and low-fit students leads to several most similar to students enrolled in a program of study. Low fit interventions touted by the What Works in Student Retention survey. Use of the ACT suggests that interests are dissimilar. Interest Inventory in advising, first-year seminars, and career development workshops could increase the number of students who enroll in programs more consistent with their Interest The Chart Inventory scores. The chart reports institutional retention rates by level of fit. It supports the contention that there is a relationship between retention to the second year and interest-major fit. Those with 1 Tracey, T. J. G., & Robbins, S. B. (2006). The interest major congruence and college success relation: A longitudinal study. higher fit are retained at a higher rate. At first, the percentage Journal of Vocational Behavior, 69, 64–89. 2 Allen, J., & Robbins, S. (2008). Prediction of college major persistence based on vocational interests, academic preparation, differences may seem small, but even a small increase in the and first-year academic performance. Research in Higher Education, 49, 62–79. percentage of students retained can have a significant impact on 3 Allen, J., & Robbins, S. (2010). Effects of interest-major congruence, motivation, and academic performance on timely degree attainment. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 57, 23–35. the institution. 4 Tracey, T. G., Allen, J., & Robbins, S. B. (2012). Moderation of the relation between person–environment congruence and academic success: Environmental constraint, personal flexibility and method. Journal Of Vocational Behavior, 80(1), 38–49. 9 South Carolina The Reality of College Readiness l 2012 Retention Practices Recommendations for Policymakers Retention Recommendations for Institutional Practice 1. Actively pursue P–20 collaborations to develop integrated education systems. 1. Initiate collaboration and dialogue with K–12 teachers. 2. Expand the current retention definition to focus on individual student 2. Explore the redesign of teacher preparation programs. success—the achievement of student educational goals rather than the 3. Validate and refine course placement practices. completion of a degree at a specific institution within a specific time frame. 4. Provide advising that supports transition to other institutions. 3. Measure and reward individual student success across the postsecondary 5. Review and revise policies that impede transparent movement of students system. Success should not be measured solely by retention and graduation both to and from other institutions. rates within an institution. 6. Participate in the Voluntary System of Accountability (VSA) or the Voluntary 4. Review and revise policies and agreements that increase the transparent Framework of Accountability (VFA). movement of students from one educational experience to another. • Common course numbering system • System or statewide degree audit • Expanded articulation agreements 5. Establish a clearinghouse that serves as a repository for a student-owned educational portfolio used to facilitate institution-to-institution transitions. Two-Year College Retention Interventions Cited in What Works in Student Retention* Practices Which Differentiate Campuses with Highest-Rated Retention Practices High Retention Rates from Those with Low Retention Rates Reading center/lab Reading center/lab Comprehensive learning assistance center Comprehensive learning assistance center Tutoring Increased number of academic advisors Mandated course placement of students based on test scores Required remedial/developmental coursework Required remedial/development coursework Pre-enrollment financial aid advising Increased number of academic advisors Diagnostic academic skills assessment Writing center/lab Integration of advising with career/life planning Math center/lab Staff mentoring Program for first-generation students * Complete reports can be found at: www.act.org/research/policymakers/reports/retain.html 10