University System of Georgia Campus Plan Update 2016

CCG Goal 1

Increase the number of degrees that are earned “on time” (associate degrees in 2 years, bachelor’s degrees in 4 years).

High-impact strategy

Credit Intensity campaigns (15-to-Finish, 4 for , Full Time is 15)

Demonstration of Priority and/or Impact

For students in higher education, more so than perhaps any other group, time is truly money. Financial aid policies have established 12 hours as a full time course load at the undergraduate level, even though a student taking that many credits a semester will require at least an extra term to complete an associate degree and an additional year for a bachelor’s degree.   By emphasizing 15 credits as full time, credit intensity programs help students get on track to graduate on time.  In so doing, students save the costs associated with the additional time in school and can get into the workforce and begin earning money sooner.  Additionally, evidence from Georgia and elsewhere indicates that students who attempt more credits in a term experience greater success, findings that are not isolated to the most prepared students.  

Primary Point of Contact

Jonathan Hull, Assistant Director for Policy and Partnership Development; Barbara Brown, AVC General and Transitional Education

Summary of Activities

Adoption of credit intensity programs across the System expanded in 2015-2016, with more institutions reporting some work on this activity, and institutions where this is an established effort making adjustments. 

Measures of Progress and Success

Measure, metric, or data element

Percentage of students enrolling in 15 or more credits per semester.

Baseline measures

In 2011-2012, 26.1 percent of all degree-seeking students in USG institutions enrolled in 15 or more credits in the fall semester (26.6 percent did so in the spring). In the same year, 48.8 percent  of students enrolled in between 12 and 14 credits in the fall semester (46.2 percent did so in the spring)

There is wide variation among and within sectors on this measure. 

Interim Measures of Progress

The percentage of students enrolling in 15 or more has increased nearly 4 percentage points since 2012 (to 30 percent), with an almost equal decrease in the percentage of students enrolling in 12-14 credits.

Measures of Success

By 2025, the percentage of students taking 15 or more credits a semester will increase to 40 percent.

Lessons Learned

There remains some resistance among faculty and staff regarding the merits of this effort.  Specifically, concerns continue to be raised as to the ability of some students to pursue 15 credits of coursework, most especially those students who are also working outside of school.  Evidence on student success at higher levels of credit-taking is compelling, but to date has not been analyzed while controlling for academic preparedness and employment patterns. 

This effort is linked to program maps and block schedules (which should include a minimum of 15 credits a semester as a default).  To date, institutions have taken one of two approaches to the strategy: informational and/or structural.  Most informational programs include extensive marketing to students and parents, including videos, handouts, emails, and presentations at orientation.  Structural approaches default students into 15 credit blocks at freshmen orientation, which they must affirmatively act upon to bypass. The latter approach tends to have greater benefit in terms of overall participation, even beyond the point at which the students are no longer blocked into 15 credits.  Most institutions adopting structural approaches also conduct extensive informational campaigns as well.

CCG Goal 2

Decrease excess credits earned on the path to getting a degree.

High-impact strategy

Guided Pathways to Success [Program Maps, Academic Focus Areas, block, and default schedules]

Demonstration of Priority and/or Impact

College affordability has emerged as a persistent concern for students, parents, and policymakers.  Among the factors that can contribute to higher college costs are students taking courses that do not apply to their course of study.  This can happen for a variety of reasons, including students who are uncertain what program to pursue, what courses to take within their program, or who change their programs.  To reduce the number of credits students accrue on their way to degrees, institutions have adopted academic focus areas to assist students in discerning the best fit program for their interests and skills, program maps that constrain choice and promote clear degree progression, and comprehensive systems of advising, maps, analytics and scheduling to align campus resources toward completion and efficiency.

Primary Point of Contact

Jonathan Hull, Assistant Director for Policy and Partnership Development; Robert Todd, Director for Policy and Partnership Development

Summary of Activities

USG institutions continued to implement their Guided Pathways strategies; USG System Office promoted program maps and advising infrastructure.  A survey of progress on GPS strategies conducted in 2015 indicated that most institutions had established appropriate math pathways and implemented new models of remediation, with some progress on establishing program maps for degree programs and academic focus areas.  Less progress has been evident in implementing predictive analytics and early alerts, and most campuses are struggling to implement predictable schedules.  The credit intensity (15 to Finish) element of the Guided Pathways approach has also been slow to take off for campuses. In general, success in 15 to Finish appears to be linked to implementation of block scheduling, but at this stage no institutions has implemented multi-year block schedules, and many institutions do not indicate any intention of pursuing this strategy beyond the first semester. 

In 2015, the Guided Pathways initiative at the USG focused on investigating opportunities to link program selection and student career preferences.  Considerable research and communication among partners to identify appropriate mechanisms for linking student’s stated interests with institutional programs were undertaken, although changes within the Georgia Career Information System as well as administrative shifts with a key philanthropic partner resulted in a decision to de-emphasize this aspect of the Pathways project.

Measures of Progress and Success

Measure, metric, or data element

Credits earned at Graduation

Baseline measures

In 2011, students awarded associate degrees earned an average 82 credits at conferral; for bachelor’s degrees, this figure is 138 credits.  Most associate degree programs require fewer than 65 credit hours to complete.  Most bachelor’s programs require 120 credit hours

Interim Measures of Progress

By 2015 students earning an associate degree earned an average or 84 credit hours; students earning bachelor’s degrees earned an average of 139 credits.

Measures of Success

By 2025, students earning an associate degree will earn an average or 70 credit hours; students earning bachelor’s degrees will earn an average of 128 credits.

Lessons Learned

The Guided Pathways project is an effort at coordinating and consolidating a number of discrete strategic efforts.  The complexity of this effort, with multiple activities required simultaneously, poses a significant challenge for many institutions.  Most campuses have adopted those elements that either reflect changes in system policy and guidance (most especially math pathways and remediation), but have been challenged by those that require significant logistical and technical implementation (including block scheduling beyond the first semester and predictive analytics).  The Guided Pathways initiative was ambitious in scope, demanding significant changes at institutions with very different contexts.

At this stage, this project appears to be off track, although this assessment does not reflect the significant amount of changes institutions have already committed to that support the project. 

In 2015-2016, institutions were surveyed about their interests for training and technical assistance on their Guided Pathways work, which revealed highly varied degrees of implementation, capacity, and engagement, as well as a lack of convergence on priorities for further work.  This is not surprising, given the breadth and ambition of the initiative, and points to a need to provide support on discrete components of this work in the context of a comprehensive system of success.  In 2016-2017, CCG plans to offer a “menu” of training opportunities to fill in some of the gaps institutions have with respect to their work in this area.

CCG Goal 3

Provide proactive advising to keep students on track to graduate.

High-impact strategy

Proactive Advising; Predictive Analytics

Demonstration of Priority and/or Impact

Many students need help to identify an appropriate degree program and remain on track to complete their post-secondary credential.  Proactive advising and predictive analytics provide meaningful, credible, timely support to students on selecting a program that will meet a student’s academic and career goals and identify when they become off track in their program.  The role of advising with relation to student success cannot be underemphasized.

Primary Point of Contact

Heather Collins, Policy Analyst

Summary of Activities

In partnership with the Regents Advisory Committee on Academic Advising, the CCG review of academic advising has worked to engage with faculty, professional advisors, Information Technology professionals, Institutional Research professionals, System Office staff, and others to update policy, provide guidance on best practices, and develop tools to strengthen advising at USG institutions. The review was organized into four main areas of work:

• Policy Review
• Technology Review
• Advising Practices Review
• Resource Development

As part of these efforts, 47 representatives from USG institutions and the System Office participated in working groups to identify solutions. These efforts have resulted in recommended BOR policy revisions that provide more clarity on the definition of academic advising, the development of a community of advisors and related institutional personnel that can learn from each other, and produce outcomes that directly support the goals of CCG.

In addition, CCG provided Collaborative Capacity Grants for institutions to convene advisors and other institution representatives to discuss issues affecting advising. Challenges highlighted during resulting symposia include predictive analytics, advising learning outcomes, second-year student retention, and child care solutions for students.

In the coming months, we anticipate the policy revisions will be reviewed by BOR in spring 2017. To complement these policy changes, CCG will convene advisors and others in sessions focused on challenges highlighted throughout the review, including data analysis in advising.

Measures of Progress and Success

Measure, metric, or data element

Baseline measures

Credit intensity; degrees at graduation

Interim Measures of Progress

Establishment of “academic advising framework,” including evaluation plans and institutional metrics (from new policy)

Measures of Success

Decrease in the average number of degree program changes

Decrease in the average number of credits that do not count toward a degree program.

Lessons Learned

Advising is the critical point of contact between students and the institution.  Robust advising systems can take many forms, including “all professional,” “all faculty,” and “blended advising.”  Advisors connect students with the often complex structure and policies of higher education, and are especially critical for the success of first generation, low income, and adult learners for whom college poses special challenges. 

There exists across institutional sectors a renewed focus on training and professional development for advisors to improve their skills and facilitate better interactions with students.  Also, as technology has advanced and the benefits of business intelligence and customer relationship management tools have been adapted for higher education, many institutions have become interested in adopting these tools.  There remain, however, significant inconsistencies across institutions in the degree to which advisors are able to access, analyze and harness the data that is generated by students on their campuses about their learning and progression. In the year ahead, meeting this challenge will be a major focus. 

A second critical advance this year was the reinvigoration of the Regents Advisory Committee on Academic Advising, which has proven vital in establishing a broader understanding of the condition of advising across the system and for sharing practices (and practice gaps) among institutions.  The presence of strong, engaged partners to support and advance competencies in the field helps to facilitate the rapid dissemination of information and a diverse set of perspectives on emerging challenges.

CCG Goal 4

Award degrees to students who may have already met requirements for associate degrees via courses taken at one or more institutions.

High-impact strategy

Associate Degree you Deserve (ADD)

Demonstration of Priority and/or Impact

Each year, thousands of Georgia students transfer from public two-year to four-year institutions to further their academic goals, often without receiving their associate degree. As these students continue in their studies, they often complete the requirements for their associate degree along the way.  The Associate Degree you Deserve (ADD) initiative secures credentials for students who have earned them to protect against the possibility that they will stop out and have no recognized credential for their investment in higher education. ADD also provides a milestone of progress for students as they continue their work toward a bachelor’s degree.  The ADD initiative supports the state’s need for more individuals with college credentials as well, targeting the segment of the population who would otherwise be identified as having “some college, no degree.”

Primary Point of Contact

Barbara Brown, Assistant Vice Chancellor, General and Transitional Education

Summary of Activities

An initial pilot of a reverse transfer programs was underway in 2015 involving Georgia Southern University, Augusta University and East Georgia State College.  The USG worked with the institutions to develop the criteria to identify students.  Among other factors, students needed to have enrolled at an associate degree granting institution for a minimum of 15 credit hours, transferred to another USG institution as bachelor’s degree students, be currently enrolled and have earned a cumulative minimum of 60 credits.  A list of students who met these criteria was pulled from the Academic Data Warehouse by the USG Research and Policy Analysis office in fall 2015 and spring 2016 and sent to host institutions.  These institutions subsequently emailed students about their eligibility and directed them to specific Parchment (digital credential service) portals for their institutions.  The System Office through a contract with Parchment established “storefronts” for each USG institution to serve as portals for students to apply for the associate degree and provide approval for the transfer of student information.

In the pilot, 459 students were identified as potentially eligible, with 66 associate degrees awarded in fall 2015 or spring 2016, and 29 in the summer of 2016. An additional 6 degrees were expected to be awarded in fall 2016. Other institutions outside the pilot awarded 43 associate degrees in 2015-2016 through reverse transfer of credit. 

In spring 2016, 12,618 students appeared to be eligible for reverse transfer.  Not all institutions notified students, however, and working with a smaller pool, 350 requested degrees through reverse transfer.

In order to support monitoring and analysis of this strategy, a new award delivery code was established within Banner (enterprise resource system for USG) to indicate if a degree was awarded through the reverse transfer of credit.  While some degrees have been awarded through the process prior to the implementation of this code, they are few. It is anticipated that the bulk of the degrees so conferred will be evident within the data warehouse.

Measures of Progress and Success

Measure, metric, or data element

Number of requests for degrees conferred through the reverse transfer of credit and number of degrees awarded

Baseline measures

Prior to the implementation year, fewer than 25 degrees were likely awarded through this process, although the precise figure is not known. Some activity in this regard was underway at Georgia Highlands College through a very labor-intensive process.

Interim Measures of Progress

In 2015-2016, 101 degrees were awarded in the pilot program; other institutions awarded an additional 43 degrees.  At least 350 additional students indicated an interest in being evaluated for the award of a degree by reverse transfer in spring through summer 2016.

Measures of Success

While it is early, it is possible that by 2020 institutions across the University System will award more than 1,000 associate degrees annually by way of reverse transfer.

Lessons Learned

Initial expectations were that response rates to emails about eligibility would not yield significant results but this does not seem to be the case.  The process remains fairly labor intensive on the sending and receiving institutions, with transcript transfer still a manual process.  Moreover, requirement for FERPA authorization for the exchange of data between institutions for review and awarding degrees remains a hurdle.  There exist some advising and financial aid considerations for students related to this project as well, as financial aid can end once a student earns the degree, even if they are intending to continue beyond.  Other emerging questions exist around how shifts in the process cost structure (transcript transfer is currently subsidized by a the USG through a grant) will affect student willingness to participate. 

CCG Goal 5

Shorten time to degree completion through programs that allow students to earn college credit while still in high school and by awarding credit for prior learning that is verified by appropriate assessment.

High-impact strategy

Move On When Ready, AP/IB, Credit for Prior Learning

Demonstration of Priority and/or Impact

Shortening time to degree for students who have earned college credit or can demonstrate mastery of collegiate level work significantly reduces their costs, provides momentum toward a degree, and improves the efficiency of the courses offered by the college. The growing popularity among students for dual enrollment courses offered through USG institutions, the continuing high demand for AP/IB courses and rising interest in credit for prior learning combine to indicate that these programs fill areas of need or interest among the students served by the USG.

Primary Point of Contact

Jonathan Hull, Assistant Director for Policy and Partnership Development; Sarah Wenham, Director of Retention and Progress

Summary of Activities

Institutions across the USG report increases in the number of dual enrollment students they serve.  Between 2012 and 2015 the System has seen an 83 percent increase in dual enrollment students in fall semester. Enrollment gains are even greater for spring term – nearly 92 percent. This growth has been generally well distributed across institutional sectors, with state colleges serving the greatest number of dual enrollment students (3,823 in fall 2015).  Georgia Perimeter College has had the single largest dual enrollment population of any institution in the System at 1,265 for fall 2015, greater than the freshmen enrollments of seven other institutions.

The Georgia General Assembly passed legislation in 2015 streamlining the state’s existing dual enrollment programs to increase participation and access. Many institutions have embraced the opportunity to extend their enrollment and encourage college participation in general.  Additionally, institutions have partnered with local education agencies to coordinate the delivery of college courses either on their campuses or at the designated high school, including providing training for local staff and certifying them as faculty of record for these courses.

Measures of Progress and Success

Measure, metric, or data element

Dual enrollment; Credits earned by dual enrolled students; time to degree

Baseline measures

Dual enrollment students (Fall Headcount 2011): 3,675

Interim Measures of Progress

Dual Enrollment students (2012-2016):

Measures of Success

Dual Enrollment by 2025 will reach 10,000 students annually; credits conferred through dual enrollment will exceed 216,000.

Lessons Learned

For some campuses, the changes in funding have been welcome, allowing them to enroll a greater number of students, although books and uncompensated fees remain a concern.  Additionally, institutions report limited success in matriculating Move On When Ready students into programs at their institutions. Furthermore, as the number of students interested in the program increases, there are emerging capacity concerns, most especially about identifying qualified instructional staff to provide these courses, as well as about the needs to provide advising and guidance to this student population.

CCG Goal 6

Increase the likelihood of degree completion by transforming the way that remediation is accomplished.

High-impact strategy

Transforming Remediation

Demonstration of Priority and/or Impact

Each year, about 20 percent of students are admitted to USG institutions with deficiencies in English language and mathematics that require remediation/learning support in order for them to be successful at the collegiate level.  Traditionally, entering students complete an assessment for readiness after admission, with those requiring remediation placed in basic skills or developmental course(s) that do not earn collegiate credit, but for which the student paid tuition. The great majority of these students did not persist to graduate from college; indeed, most did not complete the remedial course(s) required of them and left college without degrees.  Remediation, for one fifth of the student population, was more an off-ramp than on-ramp to post-secondary success. For the cohort of students admitted in 2011 needing remediation in math, only 26 percent had completed the gateway course two years after enrollment; for English the percentage is slightly higher, 36 percent, but for those requiring both, the percentage who successfully completed both gateway courses within two years was only 16 percent.

Following a careful review of existing policy and practice with respect to remediation and a review of evidence, research and input from other institutions, the USG adopted new policies and procedures to transform remediation from placement through delivery and eventual measures of success.

In the 2014-2015 academic year, five USG Institutions were “at scale” with corequisite remediation (Albany State University, Bainbridge State College, College of Coastal Georgia, Georgia Highlands College, and Gordon State College). The reconstructed model includes:

• Revision of USG policies and procedures for Learning Support
• Redefining the focus of remediation from trying to compensate for what students did not learn in K-12 to focus on providing students with appropriate support for completion of credit-bearing collegiate courses that serve as the gateway to the college curriculum for all students.  Remediation efforts in the USG have been referred to as Learning Support for many years.  Efforts to transform remediation have focused on putting the “Support” back into Learning Support efforts
• Requiring most Learning Support to be delivered in a corequisite model beginning by fall of 2015. Using the corequisite strategy, students take a 1 or 2 credit remedial course WHILE taking the related credit-bearing collegiate course (English 1101 or a collegiate math course), decreasing the time, credit, and cost required to complete remediation and begin earning collegiate credit
• Combining reading and writing into a single English remediation course
• Eliminating the COMPASS test as an exit exam
• Using completion of the gateway collegiate course as the criterion for exiting Learning Support
• Reconfiguring the criteria used to evaluate the need for Learning Support (modeled on historical performance data) so that placement in or exemption from Learning Support is no longer dependent on the score of a single high-stakes test
• Adoption of new indices for placing students in Learning Support

Primary Point of Contact

Barbara Brown, Associate Vice Chancellor, General and Transitional Education

Summary of Activities

In 2015, the University System went to scale at all institutions with corequisite remediation as the primary mode of delivery for Learning Support.  The systemwide implementation has resulted in a mixture of delivery and placement models for Learning Support, in effect creating experimental models investigating what works in different settings and with different audiences.  Institutions are expected to implement new curricula at both the corequisite and prerequisite (or Foundations) levels that are aligned with the skills and knowledge required by the gateway courses.

Eight institutions have already implemented “multiple measures” for placement into Learning Support. With multiple measures, students are assessed for placement in Learning Support based upon a range of factors, including their high school GPA, college entrance exam scores, and college placement assessments, with an index calculated that determines exemption from or placement in Learning Support.  The cut scores for the indices were established by historical success of similar students at USG institutions to provide a risk-informed placement for students. 

Measures of Progress and Success

Measure, metric, or data element

Percentage of students who exit Learning Support within 1, 2, or 3 semesters

Percentage of students in corequisite Learning Support who successfully complete the gateway collegiate course compared to students in gateway courses who exempted Learning Support requirements

Ultimately, the percentage of students who start in Learning Support who complete degrees on time and within 150% time

Baseline measures

As noted, only 26 percent of students with math remediation placements, 36 percent of those with English placements, and 16 percent of those with placements in both completed the gateway course within 2 years of matriculation.

Interim Measures of Progress

In 2015, for students in Foundations remediation courses, 64 percent completed their remediation course(s) and were eligible to continue on to pursue the gateway course.  For students placed in corequisite remediation, 70 percent completed their gateway course(s) in their first semester.  Indeed, students in corequisite remediation succeeded in the gateway collegiate course at roughly the same rate as students without learning support placements.  The table below underscores the results. 

University System of Georgia

Learning Support Enrollment, Course Completion, & Gateway Course Completion by Learning Support (LS) Course Type

First-time Freshmen (IPEDS definition) 2015-2016

Measures of Success

Corequisite students will succeed in gateway courses at rates equivalent to those of students without learning support placements. 

Lessons Learned

Not surprisingly, with the significant changes that remediation has undergone, there have been challenges in the implementation and scaling up of the corequisite approach to remediation. USG policy stipulates that institutions will place a majority of their students requiring remediation in corequisite Learning Support. In 2015-2016, 24 percent of first-time freshmen enrolling at USG institutions required some form of remediation. A slim majority (57.3 percent) of these all students with remediation requirements pursued their learning support in corequisite classes.  Their success rates have been impressive:  overall 73 percent of students in corequisite learning support complete their gateway course in their first year (74 percent of students with math placements and 73 percent of those with English placements).  Impressively, for students placed in learning support in both English and math, 71 percent completed both gateway courses in their first year. 

While the overall placement for corequisite remediation across the System is above 50 percent, the percentage of students requiring remediation that are placed in corequisite support varies considerably, from below 45 percent at three institutions to greater than 80 percent at five institutions. Three institutions—Georgia Tech, Georgia State, and Georgia Southwestern—only place Learning Support students in corequisite models and one, Georgia Southern, almost meets that mark. The table below provides information on corequisite and Foundations level placements at USG institutions.

Placement into remediation is more complicated than under previous approaches, with the use of placement tests now a potentially optional element for determining student’s need for remediation. It is hoped that the placement process can be automated within Banner to simplify the process for campuses and to promote more consistency on placement into corequisite classes. The multiple measure placement tool should be fully implemented across the system in spring 2017. 

At the institution level, there exist a wide diversity of approaches and models, which will naturally have different degrees of success.  Course timing, instructional methods, delivery mode, and staffing are among the variables that are at play with this new model. As institutions develop successful models and structures for delivering learning support, the USG will help to share these best practices and assess opportunities for replication. 

Most significantly, corequisite remediation has already proven to be a success.  As noted in the table above, overall 73 percent of students in corequisite learning support complete their gateway course in their first year (74 percent of students with math placements and 73 percent of those with English placements).  Impressively, for students placed in learning support in both English and math, 71 percent completed both gateway courses in their first year. 

To put this in perspective, if this same group of students had entered under the previous non-corequisite model of remediation, only 834 students would have passed, with 1,387 students essentially sidelined by math remediation. In the new, corequisite model, 2,221 students  passed the math course.  For English, only 491 would have completed the course by the second year, with 511 students exiting higher education at the USG with no degree and no path forward. In the new corequisite model, 1,002 passing the gateway courses in their first year. For students needing remediation in both courses, under previous approaches, only 57 would have passed the gateway courses in 2 years, compared to the 225 who succeed in their first year under corequisite remediation. 

CCG Goal 7

Restructure instructional delivery to support educational excellence and student success.

High-impact strategy

eCore and eMajor

Demonstration of Priority and/or Impact

Students are increasingly turning to online and hybrid learning models to advance and accelerate progress toward their degrees.  Institutions across the System have a variety of strategies related to this work, some directed independently, others in coordination with eCore, the University System’s collaborative online learning environment. As a statewide initiative, eCore is instrumental in taking important steps toward identifying and serving targeted populations and partnering with other collaboratives to create seamless pathways by increasing the array of online options.

The eCore program has an important role in the Complete College Georgia plan to accelerate the number of college graduates in the upcoming years. As a USG collaborative, eCore is dedicated to acknowledging and addressing economic realities while focusing on the creation of a student culture of connection and quality. eCore provides accessible, flexible, and affordable higher education course options that support CCG initiatives.

Finally, eCore relieves class-scheduling conflicts by increasing institutional core course capacity. eCore offers adult learners, with family and job responsibilities, flexible options for higher education attainment.

Primary Point of Contact

Jon Sizemore, Assistant Vice Chancellor for Distance Education

Summary of Activities

eCore

By Spring 2016, eCore courses were offered for credit by 21 affiliate USG institutions (see www.ecore.usg.edu/about/institutions/ for details). Ten institutions joined as affiliated in 2015-2016, the largest single year expansion in the initiative’s history. eCore has also remained extremely affordable, maintaining a lowered tuition rate from 2014 (saving students over $2M in tuition) and implementing open educational resources, further reducing student costs by $3M.  eCore’s centralized support services have continued to expand and improve to serve students at every stage of their program, from inquiry through graduation.  At the same time, eCore’s commitment to academic quality has been enhanced through continued investments in robust faculty development, rigorous course design standards, and careful attention to the specific context of online learning. In 2015-2016, eCore offered 26 courses, providing 69,295 credits to 22,541 students. 

eCampus

Developed in the Spring of 2016 through the consolidation of eCore and eMajor operations, eCampus is a distance education service unit of the USG. eCampus partners with USG institutions to provide quality, affordable, high demand, post-secondary online degrees and credentials that address the workplace needs of Georgia and beyond. Program development is still being identified across the state, but the degrees are ideal for traditional students and non-traditional students, such as working professionals, military members, and anyone looking to continue their education for a competitive advantage in today’s job market. Another important feature regarding programs within eCampus is their ability to be delivered in 8-week sessions in order to shorten time to degree completion.

Measures of Progress and Success

Measure, metric, or data element

Online enrollment; credits earned; number of degrees earned entirely online

Baseline measures

In 2007, eCore enrolled 4,548 students who took a total of 13988 credits.

Interim Measures of Progress

Credit Hours and Enrollment , eCore 2011-2016

Measures of Success

eCore is most successful as an enterprise-level deployment on online course opportunities for students across the USG. With a 348 percent increase in credit hours earned through eCore, clearly more access to eCore’s online courses is serving students well. At the same time, through improvements in student support services eCore has increased the percent of students successfully completing courses and earning credit toward degree completion.    

Lessons Learned

Since its inception, eCore has reflected upon the success of its students to adapt and adjust its work. In recent years this has included the addition of problem-based learning into a host of courses, the redesign of assessments, assignments, and projects to better measure and support students’ learning, and adjustments of course pace and structure.  Tutoring and support for eCore students have also been areas of expanded activity for the program. To this end, eCore has integrated with Smartthinking, a tutoring service, and other tutoring resources to support students within their courses. 

Faculty development and instructional design are also at the center of eCore’s success.  Instructors are required to complete training specific to the eCore. Courses and faculty are assessed on a range of measures by students, the results of which are used to improve courses. The overall satisfaction of students with their eCore courses remains consistently high across all domains and years.

CCG Goal 8

Improve access for underserved and/or priority communities.

High-impact strategy

Hispanic/Latino Outreach; Go Back Move Ahead; African American Male Initiative

Demonstration of Priority and/or Impact

To achieve the CCG goal of producing an additional 250,000 graduates by 2025 requires the full participation of Latino students. In 2016, Latinos comprised 8.3% of Georgia’s population, with 53% of these Georgia Latinos born in the United States and 61% of Mexican/American origin. In 2013, the USG launched an initiative to increase Latino College Completion with funding from the Goizueta Foundation. Georgia is developing a model for Latino college access, enrollment and success—a model for other state systems with emerging Latino populations to emulate. 

Primary Point of Contact

Isabel Perez, ‎Project Director for Hispanic/Latino College Completion; Rosalind Barnes Fowler, Director of Public Awareness & Outreach; Arlethia Perry-Johnson, Vice President, Strategic Communications & Marketing Kennesaw State University; and Project Director, USG African-American Male Initiative

Summary of Activities

Three institutions, the College of Coastal Georgia (CCGA), Dalton State College (DSC), and Georgia Gwinnett College (GGC) developed and implemented “Promising Programs” designed to address the unique needs of Latinos at their respective institutions. CCGA has a community based mentoring program, DSC has a student-led program and GGC has a student organization/family engagement program.

The USG Principal Investigator and Project Director has led initiatives and committees to establish and promote completion by Latino students, such as the National Leadership Committee for Latino College Completion, USG Leadership Committee, Regents Advisory Committee-Latino College Completion, Regents Advisory Committee-Latino College Completion Policy, and the Latino Executive Institutional Leadership.

Measures of Progress and Success

Measure, metric, or data element

Two templates were created for the Promising Programs; a comprehensive comparative student database and a longitudinal tracking system with baseline metrics, i.e., recruitment, enrollment, academic progression, retention and graduation rate and budget template. In addition, Promising Programs also provides a semester and annual report that include a SWOT analysis. Promising Programs Principal Investigators also use institutional and external assessments to guide them.

Baseline measures

Hispanic/Latino Enrollment and Degrees awarded 2011:

Interim Measures of Progress

Fall Hispanic/Latino Enrollment, 2012-2015

Degrees Awarded to Hispanic/Latino students 2012-2015

Measures of Success

By 2025, Hispanic/Latino college participation numbers will be above 30,000 and the total number of degrees awarded to Hispanic/Latino students by USG institutions will exceed 4,500.

Lessons Learned

Early findings revealed some best practices that work for Latino students and their families, such as student/parent led cohort-models, parent engagement, bilingual English-Spanish marketing materials, and the use of student/parent feedback (surveys) to strengthen the program. The results support the findings of current and previous published research on Hispanics/Latinos, which requires taking a holistic approach by engaging families at all levels.

CCG is in the process of establishing a collaborative effort with the remaining 26 institutions to provide multiple training modules each year and to share lessons learned on increasing Latino enrollment, progression, and retentions to graduation. These modules will be data driven and have maximum impact across the USG. The goal is to create a scalable model for institutional learning.

Two renowned organizations, The Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities (HACU) and  in Education identified the USG as “the only system-wide approach in the United States designed explicitly and intentionally to increase and assure Latino college completion.”

High-impact strategy

Improve access for underserved and/or priority communities

Related Goal

Go Back. Move Ahead

Demonstration of Priority and/or Impact

The “Go Back. Move Ahead. (GBMA) initiative,” as part of the state’s adult college completion effort, was designed to ultimately bring awareness of the various post-secondary options available through the 53 universities and colleges of the USG and Technical College System of Georgia institutions.

Primary Point of Contact

Rosalind Barnes Fowler, Director of Public Awareness & Outreach

Summary of Activities

GBMA helped to begin the difficult task of identifying those adult learners who had dropped out or stopped out of college in Georgia to encourage them to return to college and finish their degrees.

Throughout the 2015-16 Fiscal Year, the GBMA initiative was an outreach campaign that included outdoor media, internal and external public relations, broadcast/TV placement, radio ads (traditional and non-traditional channels such as Pandora), on and off campus recruitment efforts, back to college open houses, social media campaigns (through Facebook, Twitter and YouTube), and internal campus activities for faculty and staff tasked with implementation responsibilities across both the USG and Technical College System of Georgia.

The GBMA effort was born out of an effort developed through the College Access Challenge Grant that supported a similar effort, the Discover Your Goal outreach campaign. This effort focused primarily on 10 markets within the state versus the all-state effort attempted by the GBMA initiative.

Measures of Progress and Success

Measure, metric, or data element

The number of impressions and hits received through various outreach initiatives; the number of newly accepted and enrolled adult students.

Baseline measures

First-time Freshmen age 25 or older matriculating at USG institutions:

Fall 2014: 1,252

Interim Measures of Progress

Within two years, the GBMA initiative garnered over 5,500 potential adult students, who had expressed interest in returning to one of the 53 public colleges or universities.  By the end of the second year, GBMA could confirm over 200 students had returned to college.

Measures of Success

Increases in adult participation and degrees conferred to adult/non-traditional students.

Lessons Learned

Although the media portion of the GBMA initiative has ended, efforts to showcase the available matriculation opportunities to adult learners continue.  During the 2016-17 fiscal year, the GBMA eCampus team is working to reach the database of potential students to assess their current enrollment status and introduce them to educational opportunities available throughout the state.  The target goal is to see at least one-third of contacts re-enrolled in one of the state’s public colleges or universities.

The success of any outreach to Adult Learners is theoretically tied to the readiness of campuses for potential students.  The stronger the programmatic offerings at the various campuses, the stronger will be the student affairs efforts and outreach efforts. The success of any outreach program is correlated to the readiness a campus exhibits in assisting students with the various components to return to college.

In sum, any future outreach initiative must occur after efforts have been made to ensure campuses have processes, procedures and policies are in place that address the needs of adult learners.