Essential Questions for Postsecondary Enrollment: Networks that Build Social Capital

Parental Press for Academic Achievement: The extent to which parents pushed student to do well in school. Students were asked the extent to which their parents/guardians: (1) encourage me to work hard in school; (2) talk to me about how I am doing in my classes; (3) encourage me to continue my education after high school; (4) talk to me about what I am studying in class; (5) talk to me about my homework assignments; (6) help me select courses that will prepare me for college or work; and (7) push me to take the steps I need to make my plans happen. The measure is constructed using Rasch rating scale analysis (Roderick, M. From high school to the Future). 

Parent/Guardian Structured Support: The extent to which parents helped student in the college search and application process. Students reported the extent to which their parents/guardians: (1) encourage the student to apply to several different schools; (2) talk to the student about what college would be like; (3) help the student fill out applications for colleges or vocational/technical schools; (4) help the student find scholarships to apply for; (5) help the student decide which school to attend; (6) discuss with the student how much tuition she can afford; and (7) help the student with college application essays or personal statements. The measure is constructed using Rasch rating scale analysis (Roderick, M. From high school to the Future). 

Peer Support for Academic Achievement: The extent to which peers provided support for academic success. Students were asked the extent to which their friends: (1) try hard in school; (2) discuss class activities; (3) help each other prepare for tests; (4) think it is important to do well in school; (5) help each other with homework assignments; and (6) think it is important to attend every class. The measure is constructed using Rasch rating scale analysis (Roderick, M. From high school to the Future). 

First-generation status of college applicant. The IHEP Toward Convergence framework recommends defining first-generation students as students whose parents’ highest education level was some college but no degree, or below (e.g., some college, no degree; vocational/technical training; high school diploma or equivalent; did not complete high school). According to the Beginning Postsecondary Students (BPS) Longitudinal Study, degree completion rates increase from 35% for students whose parents have no education beyond high school, to 56% for students whose parents have bachelor’s degrees or higher. While there is a linear increase in students’ completion rates as their parents’ education level increases from high school to some college, to associate’s degree, to bachelor’s degree, to professional degree, there is a sizable difference between students whose parents have less than an associate’s degree (43%) and those whose parents have an associate’s degree or higher (59%) (IHEP, Toward Convergence).

Train youth serving adults in the developmental relationship framework. Search Institute created the Developmental Relationships Framework, five elements — expressed in 20 specific actions — that are proven to catalyze young people’s lives: express care, challenge growth, provide support, expand possibilities and share power (Developmental Relationships).

Young people develop resilience when they have at least one well-rounded, strong, and sustained relationship in their lives. And they thrive when they experience a broader web of relationships in their homes, schools, programs and communities (Developmental Relationships).

PACE is a college-readiness program that aims to boost high school graduation and college enrollment rates among low-income and first-generation students by offering comprehensive support. Established in 2011 in one high school with just seven students, PACE now operates in six Salt Lake County high schools, with plans for further expansion. PACE equips students with critical study and time-management skills, career exploration guidance, and mentorship in overcoming challenges. Graduates of the program earn up to six-semesters of scholarship support to SLCC, empowering them to pursue higher education and contribute to Utah’s future. Through ongoing community investment and donor contributions, SLCC is committed to expanding PACE to serve even more students across Salt Lake County, building a brighter future for all. (PACE Scholarship Program).

The Posse Foundation’s model works for both students and college campuses and is rooted in the belief that a small, diverse group of talented students — a Posse — carefully selected and trained, can serve as a catalyst for individual and community development. For more than 35 years, Posse has identified and trained young people with extraordinary potential who might be missed by elite schools. Their program places Scholars in supportive, multicultural groups of 10 students — Posses. With mentoring and full-tuition leadership scholarships from partner colleges, Posse Scholars graduate at a rate of 90%. As alumni, they are well prepared and positioned for success. (Posse Foundation).

EdRedesign’s Institute for Success Planning is building a movement toward a broader conception of education and youth development to ensure every child has the opportunity to succeed, irrespective of race, place, and income. Success Planning is a relationship-based approach that connects each child or youth to an adult Navigator who co-creates a personalized plan for action in partnership with their families and other caring adults. The plan highlights the child’s needs and strengths and identifies supports, enrichments, and other resources to remove barriers, help them thrive, and support their goals. Through a whole-child approach, Success Planning provides a mechanism to ensure every child is known, seen, and heard, has a positive connection to a caring adult, and has agency over their pathway to success. (EdRedesign, Institute for Success Planning).

Surround students with adults and peers who build and support their college-going aspirations. High schools should build and support students’ aspirations by developing social networks that encourage college attendance and assist students in preparing for college. College students and college-educated adults can serve as mentors for students, providing guidance and support throughout the college preparation process. Extracurricular activities and college access programs can encourage the formation of college-going peer groups that share an interest in pursuing college. High schools can use career exploration activities to develop students’ career interests and link those interests to postsecondary plans. (What Works Clearinghouse, Helping Students Navigate the Path to College).

Provide mentoring for students by recent high school graduates who enrolled in college or other college-educated adults. Link students to adults who can serve as college-going role models and build students’ interest in college. High schools can recruit college-educated professionals to serve as volunteer mentors by reaching out to local businesses interested in partnering with schools in the community. High schools also can identify volunteer mentors by recruiting local college students — particularly graduates of the high school — or partnering with a college that has service-learning opportunities for college students willing to work with high school students. Individuals who share the same background as students, such as high school alumni or professionals from the local community, may understand the types of challenges students face in reaching college (What Works Clearinghouse, Helping Students Navigate the Path to College).

Facilitate student relationships with peers who plan to attend college through a structured program of extracurricular activities. College access programs can bring a group of students together on a regular basis throughout the school year to focus on preparing for college. These programs develop college-going peer groups by providing opportunities for students to work together toward a common goal of reaching college. Activities that encourage students to interact and collaborate can encourage new relationships, and these programs can be used to promote a college-going identity. For example, a program might create visible markers of group participation, such as designating a group name and meeting space or developing a group newsletter. (What Works Clearinghouse, Helping Students Navigate the Path to College).

High schools also can develop student groups that encourage academically oriented friendships, such as a debate club or an honor society. Schools can infuse these extracurricular activities with a college-going message. For example, a debate club might visit a college to meet with the college debate team, or a community service club might collaborate with a student organization from a local college. (What Works Clearinghouse, Helping Students Navigate the Path to College).

Provide hands-on opportunities for students to explore different careers, and assist them in aligning postsecondary plans with their career aspirations. A high school can design a sequence of career exploration activities that identify students’ career interests and provide a variety of activities that inform and build on these interests. For example, career or interest inventories can be used to help students identify the type of work or career that interests them. High schools can use this information to invite local professionals from these career fields to speak about their education and career paths. Students can then be matched to job-shadowing opportunities that allow them to follow an adult throughout the day and experience the day-to-day work of a profession that matches their area of interest. By developing relationships with local employers, high schools can link students to job-shadowing activities and help interested students obtain short-term internships. (What Works Clearinghouse, Helping Students Navigate the Path to College).

Serve as college-going role models. Mentors can serve as examples of college-going adults from the community and share their experiences in preparing for college, completing a college degree, and pursuing a career. (What Works Clearinghouse, Helping Students Navigate the Path to College).

Assist with the college entry process. The one-on-one relationship mentors have with students allows them to provide individualized assistance with the college application and selection process for students interested in pursuing a four-year degree. This might include helping with a college application, reading an application essay, assisting with a financial aid application or researching college options. (What Works Clearinghouse, Helping Students Navigate the Path to College).

Monitor academic progress. Mentors can monitor students’ academic progress by reviewing report cards and discussing students’ high school coursework. Mentors can advocate for students who are struggling academically to receive tutoring or additional help. (What Works Clearinghouse, Helping Students Navigate the Path to College).

Listen and advise. A mentor can simply serve as a caring adult who listens to the student, discusses his or her issues or concerns, and offers advice as needed. (What Works Clearinghouse, Helping Students Navigate the Path to College).

Student Leadership Network’s college access program addresses roadblocks on the road to college. The network creates college-bound cultures in under-resourced schools to increase college enrollment and completion. Dedicated, full-time, school-based counselors provide hands-on support to build early college and career awareness. (Student Leadership Network).

Coaching models: In coaching models, staff work collaboratively with participants in a nondirective way to identify their goals and support their progress toward goal achievement. Unlike many case management approaches where staff set goals for participants and define what actions need to be taken to meet those goals, coaches act as a partner to support and motivate participants. Coaching models have been used in a few Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) programs and increasingly to engage with and support Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program participants to improve employment and earnings outcomes, which makes these models especially applicable for expanded use with WIOA programs and services (The Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act Research Portfolio).

Intrusive advising: Often applied in an academic setting, intrusive advising involves advisors proactively engaging with students and encouraging them to be participants in the advising process, as opposed to being reactive and responding only to students’ requests for assistance. This model sometimes requires students to maintain attendance in advising sessions as a condition of enrollment in their academic program (Rajecki and Lauer 2007; Donaldson et al. 2016). In a workforce setting, a similar approach could include proactive outreach by case managers to provide career services to job seekers. In instances where a WIOA participant is also enrolled in a training program or where the AJC is co-located with a community college, for example, intrusive advising could be combined with services offered under WIOA (The Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act Research Portfolio).

Navigator models: A career navigator provides guidance in assessing career interests, understanding various steps to pursue a selected career, developing training plans, and guiding participants toward appropriate services offered by partner and other programs (The Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act Research Portfolio).

Strengths-based models: Strengths-based models, used in many settings including when working with individuals with significant challenges to employment, focus on the overall strengths of individual program participants and encourage self-efficacy in receipt of services. Prior studies of the effectiveness of this model for individuals with serious mental health challenges have found positive effects in multiple areas, including employment, independent living, and reduced hospitalizations (The Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act Research Portfolio).

Coaching model example: Goal4 It!™ This model focuses on moving from compliance-driven interactions to engaging, meaningful exchanges with participants to support and motivate them toward change. The model uses four steps — Goal, Plan, Do, Review/Revise — aimed at improving outcomes for children and families. It uses three main strategies: (1) reducing sources of stress, (2) strengthening life skills, and (3) forming relationships within and beyond the program. This model is currently included in the Evaluation of Employment Coaching for TANF and Related Populations (The Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act Research Portfolio).

Coaching model example: MyGoals for Employment Success (MyGoals). The MyGoals model is built on a sustained, three-year relationship between staff and the participant, focusing on helping participants achieve their goals by addressing challenges in executive functioning skills — the mental skills needed to complete tasks such as emotional control, stress tolerance, and time management (Riccio and Castells 2020). This model is currently included in the Evaluation of Employment Coaching for TANF and Related Populations (The Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act Research Portfolio).

Coaching model example: Family-centered coaching. The objective of this model is to support families holistically as they move toward goal achievement and economic prosperity. This includes a family-led and strengths-based approach with seven areas of focus: (1) child well-being and parenting; (2) employment, education, and career; (3) legal assistance; (4) financial assistance; (5) health and well-being; (6) family, friends, and relationships; and (7) basic needs — food, housing, transportation, and safety (Derr and Joyce 2020) (The Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act Research Portfolio).

Coaching model example: Human services coaching. This model focuses on helping participants identify goals and drive motivation. Specifically, staff assist participants to direct, own, and experience the changes they want to see in their lives. Its core principles are to be person-centered, relationship-based, and goal-driven. Two additional coaching models are also included in the ongoing Evaluation of Employment Coaching for TANF and Related Populations (The Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act Research Portfolio).

Coaching model example: Family Development and Self-Sufficiency (FaDSS). Administered by the Iowa Department of Human Rights, FaDSS focuses on assisting families at risk of long-term welfare receipt. This approach includes goal setting and ongoing support from a coach, all through a home visiting approach. Coaches conduct at least two home visits during the first three months of participation, followed by visits as needed with a minimum of one visit per month (Moore et al. 2019) (The Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act Research Portfolio).

Coaching model example: LIFT. Based in New York City, Chicago, and Los Angeles, LIFT focuses on long-term financial goals of participants, such as a home purchase or college savings for a child. Coaches work with participants to set shortand long-term goals and identify milestones toward achieving those goals. As they move forward with their goals and complete a “three-month goal cycle,” participants can receive financial payments in the amount of $150, totaling up to $1,000 over a two-year period (Moore et al. 2019) (The Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act Research Portfolio).

The number of developmental relationships each young person experiences (The Developmental Relationships Framework).

The number/percentage of mentors representing the student population served (for youth-serving organizations providing mentors).

Programs like iMentor that match 11th and 12th grade students with a committed mentor (iMentor).

My Brother’s Keeper Alliance, a cross-sector collaborative action effort focused on improved life outcomes for boys and young men of color (My Brother’s Keeper Alliance).

Peer mentoring platforms that help mentors track key indicators and monitor progress towards postsecondary enrollment of mentees (The Mentor Collaborative).

Share choosing to re-enroll in the same school (in school choice settings) (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Measures of student engagement/enthusiasm/ academic aspirations (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Student-Teacher Connections: The average of graduates’ reports on the 2005 CCSR senior survey of the extent to which they know at least one teacher who: (1) would be willing to give me extra help with my schoolwork if I need it; (2) would be willing to help me with a personal problem; (3) really cares about how I am doing in school; (4) knows who my friends are; (5) I could ask to write me a recommendation for a job, program, or college; (6) knows what I will be doing next year; and (7) would be willing to help me even after I graduate. The measure is constructed using Rasch rating scale analysis. The student-level version of this variable is also used in some analyses. (Roderick, M. From high school to the Future). 

Student-Teacher Connections: The extent to which a student had a teacher she felt personally and academically connected to. Student reports of the extent to which they know at least one teacher who: (1) would be willing to give me extra help with my school work if I need it; (2) would be willing to help me with a personal problem; (3) really cares about how I am doing in school; (4) knows who my friends are; (5) I could ask to write me a recommendation for a job, program or college; (6) knows what I will be doing next year; and (7) would be willing to help me even after I graduate. The measure is constructed using Rasch rating scale analysis. The school average of this variable is also used in some analyses. (Roderick, M. From high school to the Future). 

Counselor Press for Academic Achievement: The extent to which student said her counselor: (1) helped select courses needed for work or admission to college; (2) encouraged taking AP/honors courses; (3) encouraged continuing education after high school; and (4) talked about college/schools that were suited to the student’s interests and abilities. The measure is constructed using Rasch rating scale analysis. The school average of this variable is also used in some analyses. (Roderick, M. From high school to the Future). 

Teacher Press for Academic Achievement: The extent to which student said her teachers: (1) helped select courses needed for work or admission to college; (2) encouraged taking AP/honors courses; (3) encouraged continuing education after high school; and (4) talked about college/schools that were suited to the student’s interests and abilities. The measure is constructed using Rasch rating scale analysis. (Roderick, M. From high school to the Future). 

Teacher/Counselor Structured Support: The extent to which teachers or counselors helped a student with her college search and application process. Student reports of the extent to which a teacher or counselor has: (1) encouraged the student to apply to several different schools; (2) talked to the student about what college would be like; (3) helped the student fill out applications for colleges or vocational/technical schools; (4) helped the student find scholarships to apply for; (5) helped the student decide which school to attend; (6) helped the student plan how to pay for tuition and other expenses; and (7) helped the student with college application essays or personal statements. The measure is constructed using Rasch rating scale analysis. The school average of this variable is also used in some analyses. (Roderick, M. From high school to the Future). 

Discussions on College Planning: Student reports of the extent to which she received information on postsecondary education from someone at school. Students were asked the extent to which someone at school has discussed: (1) different admissions requirements of community colleges vs. four-year colleges; (2) different admissions requirements among four-year colleges; (3) how to decide which college to attend; (4) the likelihood of being accepted at different types of schools; (5) ACT/SAT scores needed to get into colleges; (6) opportunities to attend out-of-state schools; (7) readiness for college-level coursework; (8) the kind of study skills needed in college or vocational/technical school; and (9) how to pay for college. The measure is constructed using Rasch rating scale analysis. (Roderick, M. From high school to the Future). 

Importance of high school for the Future: The extent to which student felt her high school academic experience is important for her future. Students were asked the extent to which they agree that: (1) my classes give me useful preparation for what I plan to do in life; (2) high school teaches me valuable skills; (3) working hard in high school matters for success in the work force; (4) what we learn in class is necessary for success in the future; and (5) I’m getting a good education at my school. The measure is constructed using Rasch rating scale analysis. (Roderick, M. From high school to the Future).

Relationship quality between student and teacher as measured through closeness, commitment, and complementarity (Jowett, S. et al., Teacher-Student relationship quality as a barometer of teaching and learning effectiveness).

The Student–Teacher Relationship Scale (STRS, Pianta, 1994, 2001; see also Koomen et al., 2012; Koomen & Jellesma, 2015) is the most often used assessment tool that has been specifically developed to examine teachers’ perceptions of relationships with their students through three relational dimensions: closeness (interactions and communications are warm and open), conflict (the degree of friction and discordant between the teacher and student), and dependency (the degree to which the student is overly dependent on the teacher). Its conceptual basis is derived from parent–child attachments. Bowlby’s (1973) attachment theory describes these attachments as either warm or secure, angry or dependent, and anxious or insecure (Jowett, S. et al., Teacher-Student relationship quality as a barometer of teaching and learning effectiveness).

Provide training for teachers on the Developmental Relationship Framework (Developmental Relationship Framework).

The National Dropout Prevention Center/Network’s 15 Effective Strategies for Dropout Prevention: Mentoring/Tutoring — Mentoring is typically a one-to-one caring, supportive relationship between a mentor and a mentee that is based on trust. Mentoring offers a significant support structure for high-risk students. Tutoring, also typically a one-to-one activity, focuses on academic support and is an effective practice when addressing specific needs in collaboration with the student’s base teacher (The National Dropout Prevention Center/Network, 15 Effective Strategies for Dropout Prevention).

Students whose relationships with their teachers are characterized by high levels of support and low levels of conflict obtain higher scores on measures of academics, and behavioral adjustment than do students whose relationships with teachers are less positive. Prospective studies find that a more positive teacher-student relationship is associated with a greater sense of school belonging, lower levels of externalizing behaviors, improved peer relationships, and higher achievement. Longitudinal mediational analyses find that the effect of a supportive teacher-student relationship on achievement is due to the direct effect of teacher-student relationship quality on students’ engagement in the classroom (Wu, J. et al. Teacher student relationship quality type in elementary grades).

The % of college educated mothers at high schools. Recent evidence suggests that the composition of one’s high school classmates can also influence college enrollment. Bifulco, Fletcher, and Ross (2011) finds that students whose school cohorts have higher percentages of students with college educated mothers are more likely to attend college (Do high school Peers Have Persistent Effects on College Attainment and Other Life Outcomes?).

The frequency of conversations between high school graduates preparing to attend college in the fall with near-peer mentors. 1-3 conversations with a peer mentor throughout the duration of the program reduces summer melt significantly for historically underserved racial and ethnic groups and first-generation students (The Mentor Collective).

Encourage student-athletes to network with college-accepted student-athletes to understand how they got into their top-choice college (Student Athlete Scholars).

Encourage collegiate athletes to mentor student-athletes applying to college (Student Athlete Scholars).

In 2016-17, 10 Idaho high schools hired near-peer mentors — recent college graduates who help seniors apply for colleges, scholarships and federal financial aid. high schools with near-peer programs had a higher college enrollment rate than other comparable high schools, according to the study (Near-peer Mentoring Programs Show Promise).

The College Advising Corps partners with universities across the country to place recent college graduates in under-resourced high schools where they serve as near-peer advisers (The College Advising Corps).

Required peer cooperative learning in STEM courses has been shown to improve retention in STEM majors (International Journal of STEM Education).

AdviseMI places college graduates in selected high schools across Michigan, particularly high schools that are located in communities with low college-going rates, to serve as college advisers. Serving alongside high school counselors and other school professionals, advisers support students as they explore their postsecondary options and complete college-going steps.  Advisers make a difference in the lives of Michigan students, families, and communities (MCAN).

The state of Idaho spent $9 million (2018) on college and career advising programs — all designed to help high school students chart their future, and improve Idaho’s stubbornly low postsecondary completion rates. School districts and charter schools can choose from several advising approaches, including near-peer mentoring (Near-peer Mentoring Programs Show Promise).

The extent to which students have quality, positive attachment peer relationships. Researchers studying emerging adults have described a significant link between the quality of college students’ peer relationships and their adjustment to college  (Project Muse). Assessments of relationship quality include the use of friendship quality measures, which assess variables such as the extent of intimacy, validation, or conflict resolution and measures of attachment style between partners in the relationship. 

The degree to which students become interested, engaged, comfortable and successful in the school environment (Project Muse).

The extent to which high school students have positive attachments to their caregivers during times of stress. Researchers found that attachment to one’s parents, but not to one’s peers, was beneficial to high school students’ well-being–being following a stressful life event (Project Muse).

The extent to which college students have positive peer relationships during college. Researchers studying emerging adults have described a significant link between the quality of college students’ peer relationships and their adjustment to college. In contrast, poor attachment was associated with better social adjustments (Project Muse).

The extent to which students have strong social support over the first two semesters of college. Researchers reported that increased social support over the first two semesters of college predicted improved social and emotional/personal adjustment (Project Muse).

The extent to which students develop new, positive friendships at their new institution. The quality of students’ relationships with their “old” high school best friend and their best new college friend determined how students adjusted socially to their new environment. Bean (1985) described that if students have greater attachments to “outsiders” then they are not likely to be as successfully socialized to the new institution, thus suggesting the importance of making friends in the new school environment (Project Muse).

Assessment of relationship quality to identify at-risk students who have the potential to be lost from the system (Project Muse).

Providing opportunities for peer interaction and friendship formation is crucial to helping students adjust to their new environment (Project Muse).

Counselors could help new students learn how to balance time with “old” friends back home and time with new peers in the new college setting (Project Muse).

Institutions should establish cohorts of students, as research indicates that students perform the best through sustained interaction with a group of peers. By gathering college-bound students together, they create a peer group in which students can support one another and motivate each other to succeed. (Center of Higher Education Policy, University of Southern California).

Make program identity visible–by giving students T-shirts, backpacks, folders, etc., emblazoned with the program name and logo so they can be identified as members of a discrete peer group (Center of Higher Education Policy, University of Southern California).

Student academic growth measured by standardized assessments in math and literacy. (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Teacher absences (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Teacher engagement with professional development  (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Opportunities for teacher leadership (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Teacher retention/turnover (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

percentage of instructors demonstrating above average contributions to student learning, as measured by student growth on state standardized tests or other outcomes (for example, using value-added models or student growth percentiles) (Education-to-Workforce).

Teachers demonstrate instructional expertise. They demonstrate strong knowledge of content and pedagogy, display mastery of content knowledge and instructional strategies, convey ideas and information clearly, and are able to differentiate learning (TNTP, Competency-Aligned Educator Interview Questions and Activities).

Teachers demonstrate strong communication skills. They demonstrate effective written and oral communication skills, display mastery of written grammar, usage and organization, and speak clearly and precisely (TNTP, Competency-Aligned Educator Interview Questions and Activities).

Teachers apply feedback to improve practice. They are open to feedback and are able and willing to incorporate it to develop as a professional. They are committed to becoming an excellent teacher, seek and incorporate feedback from others with humility, and draw lessons from prior experience and apply to future endeavors (TNTP, Competency-Aligned Educator Interview Questions and Activities).

Teachers demonstrate critical thinking. They analyze situations thoroughly and generates effective strategies, identify key issues, generate effective/creative strategies or responses to situations and develop logical responses to address challenges (TNTP, Competency-Aligned Educator Interview Questions and Activities).

Teachers demonstrate strong teamwork and relational skills. They are respectful of students and others in all situations, are aware of how one’s own background and assumptions can influence one’s perspective and interactions with others, strive to understand the opinions and experiences of others, and demonstrate the ability to effectively and appropriately interact with students and others in the school community (TNTP, Competency-Aligned Educator Interview Questions and Activities).

School leaders’ decision making processes (collaborative, hierarchical). (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

School leaders’ hiring (if given authority). (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

School leaders’ fund allocation and budget (if given authority). (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

School leaders’ mission. (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

School leaders’ disciplinary policy. (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

School leaders’ expectations for staff and students. (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

School leaders’ ability to keep order. (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

School leaders’ communication style. (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

School leaders’ consistency. (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

School leaders’ use of data/setting a data culture. (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

School leaders’ ability to raise additional resources. (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

School leaders’ flexibility and adaptivity. (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Teaching and learning practice: Instructional practice (including customization/ personalization of instruction) (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Teaching and learning practice: Intervention models (including strategies for student engagement, formative assessment). (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Teaching and learning practice: Progress monitoring (including use of data). (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Teaching and learning practice: Time on task. (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Teaching and learning practice: Expectations and rigor. (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Teaching and learning practice: Development of student identity as learners. (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

Rate of enrollment of English learners in college, disaggregated by 2-year colleges and 4-year colleges (ESL programs at U.S. community colleges).

English language learner redesignation/reclassification (Urban Institute, Robust and Equitable Measures to Identify Quality Schools).

% of [English Language Learner] students participating in college orientation programs (NCAN, Common Measures for Success).

% of students participating in summer bridge programs (NCAN, Common Measures for Success).

% of students who enroll within 6 months of high school graduation (NCAN, Common Measures for Success).

Student enrollment by institution type and status (full time vs. part time) (NCAN, Common Measures for Success).

Percentage of students who enroll within 12 months of high school graduation (NCAN, Common Measures for Success).

Percentage of students placed into remedial courses (English/Math) (NCAN, Common Measures for Success).

Percentage of students completing remedial coursework within one academic year (NCAN, Common Measures for Success).

Percentage of students completing college level math course (NCAN, Common Measures for Success).

Percentage of courses attempted to courses successfully completed (NCAN, Common Measures for Success).

Percentage of students completing more than 20 credits in the first academic year (NCAN, Common Measures for Success).

Average college GPA (NCAN, Common Measures for Success).

Percentage of students who complete and submit renewal FAFSA form (NCAN, Common Measures for Success).

Percentage of students awarded financial aid (NCAN, Common Measures for Success).

Colleges report offering support to English learners and/or ESL-specific coursework (ESL programs at U.S. community colleges).

Length (e.g., in semesters) of ESL course sequences (ESL programs at U.S. community colleges).

Colleges who have valid placement procedures for English learners (ESL programs at U.S. community colleges).

Colleges who award college credit for ESL coursework (ESL programs at U.S. community colleges).

Assessment: Single assessments may not fully measure the depth and breadth of ELLs’ knowledge, skills, and abilities. Using multiple measures, adaptive tools, and ongoing assessments will lead to both a better understanding of ELLs’ language abilities and academic growth (American Institutes for Research, Serving English Language Learners in Higher Education).

Improving Remedial Course Taking: The burden of time and money for remedial ESL or reading/writing coursework prevents many ELLs from finishing their degrees (Bailey et al., 2010). Offering ELLs flexibility in when and how they improve their English may facilitate a more efficient path toward degree completion (Edgecombe, 2011; Hern & Snell, 2010). When students do not demonstrate adequate English language proficiency according to college and university placement tests, they must enroll in additional coursework for language and literacy development. Enrollment in remedial coursework poses two major challenges. First, it is difficult for colleges and universities to meet the wide array of linguistic and educational needs of ELL students, and thus students are often placed into courses that are not an appropriate match for their individual needs. Second, requiring students to complete additional classes extends the amount of time in which they must be enrolled, which takes a toll on the resources (both time and money) for students (Bunch et al., 2011). Flexibility in when and how students are able to complete core requirements addresses several challenges often faced by ELLs in IHEs. First, in making classwork available outside of typical class hours, colleges and universities acknowledge and allow ELLs to work around competing priorities and move at their own pace. In addition, remedial coursework should be streamlined and aligned to the skills needed for future academic success. Finally, providing flexibility — as with adaptive learning technology — also allows students to move forward to new content or repeat material as needed, creating a more personalized learning environment that has been shown to lead to greater retention within courses (Boersma, 2013; Fishman, Ludgate, & Tutak, 2017) (American Institutes for Research, Serving English Language Learners in Higher Education). 

Highly Qualified Instructors: Because high-quality, highly qualified teachers design their instruction to draw on students’ strengths and target the areas in which students need support, their effective teaching helps students meet their needs and goals (Mishkind, 2016). These teachers understand the importance of supporting their students’ oral language development, explicitly teaching academic English, valuing cultural diversity, and integrating these areas into their practice (Samson & Collins, 2012). They also are able to help ELLs make stronger connections between what is learned in the classroom and the students’ everyday lives, helping to develop a deeper understanding of the skills and concepts (Mishkind, 2016) (American Institutes for Research, Serving English Language Learners in Higher Education).

Differentiating to meet ELL’s diverse needs: Allowing educators to more easily differentiate instruction based on assessment of students’ skills, needs, and goals will result in more personalized learning for ELLs. Teachers working with ELLs must address a wide range of backgrounds and needs within their class context. Technology offers a way to address the diversity of student needs within one class by allowing teachers to customize instruction in online platforms, often with little to no burden on the teacher (ASCD, 2011). For example, technology can simultaneously assess student learning and provide additional scaffolding in ways that are much faster than human responses. Adaptive materials that reinforce areas of challenge or build on areas of strength can be seamlessly woven into high-quality online instructional materials and platforms. By personalizing instruction, ELLs can receive instruction that is tailored to their individual skills and interests (American Institutes for Research, Serving English Language Learners in Higher Education).

Integrating Language and Content for Personalized Instruction: ELLs need language beyond everyday communication if they are to meet their career and academic goals. However, because teachers have a limited amount of time with their students, they may not always teach all of the language skills and knowledge their students need to learn. For example, Peyton and Schaetzel (2016) found that many ESL teachers do not tend to teach academic writing despite the necessity of learning how to write for academic or professional audiences. Moreover, teaching writing skills in isolation does not sufficiently prepare students for academic or professional writing (Grubb et al., 2011). Integrating language with disciplinary content prepares students for the various types of texts and academic skills they will encounter both as part of their postsecondary education and throughout their careers (Parrish, 2015). Using authentic and relevant materials in the ESL classroom facilitates effective language learning by providing ELLs with the opportunity to develop language skills in contexts similar to what they will encounter outside the classroom, but with structured opportunities for practice and support from the teacher. The use of authentic materials also helps students recognize the connection between what they are learning in the classroom and their everyday lives (Mishkind, 2016). Teachers can support students in learning how to understand academic text rather than leaving students to figure out how to transfer the skills that they learned in the classroom so that they apply to the new context (Huang, Tidwell, & Nisbet, 2011) (American Institutes for Research, Serving English Language Learners in Higher Education).

Technology can help support the integration of language and content. In higher education, adult ELLs have varied educational and career aspirations (Slaouti et al., 2013), and technology can make English language instruction more meaningful and pertinent by providing teachers with a way to integrate authentic materials on content that is relevant to students based on their interests and needs (Jobs for the Future, 2013). Teachers can use online or software-based training modules to help students gain very specific academic or technical skills (Wrigley, 2015). Technology allows students to conduct research using culturally rich materials that are authentic and current (Shrum & Glisan, 2005), gather information through reading or discussion, and present their findings (Vinogradov, 2016). Students in a single class can learn more about nursing or hotel management, for example, without the instructor needing to be an expert in both topics. Students can practice reading and writing (Motteram, 2013) through online communication such as blogs, forums, peer reviews, and digital storytelling activities (Mansbach, 2015). By sharing their ideas with others around the world, their language learning becomes even more meaningful than what the traditional classroom allows (Motteram, 2013) (American Institutes for Research, Serving English Language Learners in Higher Education). 

Address the diverse needs of the three different ELL profiles. An important starting point for IHE administrators is to consider the differing needs of international, immigrant, and Generation 1.5 students. Technology can be used to identify, assess, place, monitor, and instruct students from each of these groups. Finally, rather than aggregating international students, recent immigrants, and Generation 1.5 students into a single ELL group, acknowledging and addressing the differences between them will allow colleges and universities to better plan how to draw on each group’s strengths to meet its needs (American Institutes for Research, Serving English Language Learners in Higher Education). 

Ensure that learning is individualized, relevant, and meaningful for students. Despite general similarities among students within a single profile, recognizing and addressing individual differences among learners can increase students’ engagement in their learning, which will increase retention and improve outcomes. Although many teachers at colleges and universities already provide some tailored, authentic content to their learners, technology provides access to even more tailored and authentic content that meets individual student interests and goals. Technology can help teachers personalize instruction to ELLs’ proficiency levels and learning goals. In that same vein, it allows for self-paced, flexible learning that can adapt to students’ demanding schedules and help move them forward toward course and degree completion (American Institutes for Research, Serving English Language Learners in Higher Education). 

Link qualified educators with learners. IHEs increasingly use online vehicles for instructing, tutoring, and advising for students who are not able to attend face-to-face classes. Technology provides a means of connecting students to the high-quality academic supports they need for success without excessive burden (e.g., traveling long distances to class, sacrificing work or family responsibilities to attend class). In regions or colleges with limited resources, technology can provide students with access to high-quality instructional support that may not be available in their communities (American Institutes for Research, Serving English Language Learners in Higher Education).

Assess students and collect data about outcomes. Many colleges and universities already collect data for the purpose of evaluation and reporting, but technology can both simplify the process and provide a more rigorous means for accomplishing this. When instruction is delivered through a technological platform, colleges and universities can quickly obtain data about student participation and usage and assess progress and learning outcomes that can inform instruction. Moreover, technology-based data collection can standardize which data are collected and how, allowing programs to analyze their success and challenges and make adjustments as needed to better meet students’ needs. Technology also allows programs to easily share the results of their efforts with other institutions, facilitating a dialogue about best practices for instructing ELLs (American Institutes for Research, Serving English Language Learners in Higher Education).