Donate
Independent, objective, nonpartisan research

English as a Second Language in Californias Community Colleges, Technical Appendix

Database

This is the content currently stored in the post and postmeta tables.

View live version

object(Timber\Post)#3742 (44) { ["ImageClass"]=> string(12) "Timber\Image" ["PostClass"]=> string(11) "Timber\Post" ["TermClass"]=> string(11) "Timber\Term" ["object_type"]=> string(4) "post" ["custom"]=> array(5) { ["_wp_attached_file"]=> string(20) "0419orr-appendix.pdf" ["wpmf_size"]=> string(7) "1935962" ["wpmf_filetype"]=> string(3) "pdf" ["wpmf_order"]=> string(1) "0" ["searchwp_content"]=> string(80093) "English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges Technical Appendices CONTENTS Appendix A. Key Terms, Data and Methods Appendix B. Figures and Tables Olga Rodriguez, Sarah Bohn, Laura Hill, and Bonnie Brooks with research support from Sergio Sanchez and Stephanie Pulles Supported with funding from Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the College Futures Foundation, and the Sutton Family Fund PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California ’s Community Colleges 2 Appendix A. Key Terms, Data , and Methods Glossary Sequence course: ESL course that is required as part of the ESL sequence in order to access transfer -level English (i.e. ESL pre -requisite to transfer -level English). Non -sequence course: ESL course that is not required in order to access transfer -level English courses (i.e. advisory or elective ESL courses). Credit ESL: ESL courses offered to CCC students for credit and for whi ch students pay tuition. Many of these courses confer non -degree applicable credit, but some do confer degree applicable or transferrable credit (see Appendix Table B1 for more details). AB 705 only applies to credit ESL. Non -Credit ESL : ESL courses offered to CCC students at no cost. These courses are typically open entry/open exit and final grades are not recorded on student transcripts. AB 705 does not apply to non -credit ESL. Degree/transfer -seeking ESL students: a student who (1) was ever enrolled in a n ESL sequence course in their community college career , AND 2) ever took at least one degree- applicable course outside of ESL and transfer- level English in their community college career and/or at least one develo pmental English/math course. Throughout t he report we use the terms degree/transfer seeking, degree- seeking and degree-intending interchangeably. Sequence length: number of levels that a n ESL student needs to take before being able to enroll in transfer-level English (e.g. levels below transfer -level English). Sequence length includes ESL course levels and any developmental English levels and/or non -credit ESL levels, if they are listed as pre -requisites in a sequence leading to transfer -level English. Sequence end point: an ESL sequence can eith er lead directly to transfer-level English or to developmental English. Transfer -level English: In this report, when we talk about transfer- level English (TLE) courses we are referring to the lowest -level English courses that are transferable to the University of California (UC) and/or to the California State University (CSU) systems on the basis of articulation agreements. These courses are also known as gateway courses. For English the first transfer- level composition course (C-ID ENGL 100) qualifies as t he gateway course. We also include ESL versions of freshman composition if the course fulfills the TLE requirements —these courses were offered at 5 colleges and 7% of successful TLE completions within 6 -years were done via the ESL version of freshman compo sition. Traditional sequence : Curriculum that separates instruction into discrete language skills (i.e. writing, reading, grammar, and/or listening/speaking). A sequence at a given college is coded as traditional if 75 percent or more of the courses being offered in the sequence use a traditional approach. Integrated sequence: Combines instruction of two or more skills into a single course (i.e. reading and writing). Integration is also known as horizontal compression. A sequence at a given college is code d as integrated if 75 percent or more of courses being offered in the sequence use an integrated approach. Mixed sequence: Defined as sequences requiring both integrated and traditional courses within a single ESL sequence. Accordion sequence: Defined as a sequence that allows students to skip levels based on demonstrated proficiency. Compressed sequence: Defined as a sequence that combines two levels of ESL into a single level. This is also known as vertical compression. PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California ’s Community Colleges 3 Data Our analysis utilizes both quantitative and qualitative data to both descriptively illustrate the ESL landscape of the California community college system and evaluate the effect of primary structural features of ESL programs on various indica tors of student success. Below we detail our quantitative and qualitative approaches . ESL Course Scan An important component of our qualitative approach is a comprehensive scan of ESL course information collected from official college documents, namely col lege websites and course catalogs, to accurately capture the sequence of courses English learners would need to take in order to access transfer -level English , by college. Our scan was informed by conversations with members of the California Association of Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages (CATESOL), the California Community College Chancellor’s Office (CCCCO) and the California Community College Academic Senate . Through these conversations we learned of the importance of appropriately re -coding the levels below transfer -level English (CB 21) data element in the Chancellor’s Office MIS student database. The fact that some ESL courses transfer had resulted in colleges coding this variable using the same strategy that is used to code transfer -level English. Additionally, through the conversations we learned that an analysis of ESL would need to accurately capture the credit and transferability status of the courses, which could also be inaccurately captured in the data. These coding issues have implications for published outcome rates across the system, and highlight the importance of a thorough scan of course catalogs to ensure that course information is accurately captured. To begin, we used the California Community College Chancellor’s Offi ce Management Information System (CO MIS) database to obtain a list of all ESL courses offered in the CCC between 2009 and 2017. We used catalogs from the most recent academic year of college catalogs f or all 114 colleges (2017- 2018) to obtain and update the necessary course information (see below). If there were courses in the list that were not in the most recent catalog, we also reviewed earlier catalogs to ensure we accurately captured changes in the ESL sequence. We employ a “backwards mapping” approach in our course scan methodology: at each college in our study, we identify the transfer-level English course offered. From there, we trace out the sequence of courses to transfer- level English by identifying the required courses that precede the transfer-level English course, until we identify the last required course that a student needs to take in order to reach transfer -level English (i.e. the required course that has no prerequisites). Once we ident ify the sequence of courses, we assign the level below the transfer-level English course by counting how many courses proceed a given course in the sequence in order for a student to take transfer -level English , and update our database of courses with the new coding. For example, a “1” code means the course is the only course needed before taking transfer -level English , “2” means there are two courses needed before taking transfer-level English , “3” means there are three courses, and so on. We also updated the course data relating to a course’s credit -bearing status, transferability status, and number of credits offered where relevant. In the event that ESL sequence information at a given college was not readily available or comprehendible from college docum ents, we reached out to ESL department members at the college via email and phone to gain more clarity. Tables 1 and 2 illustrate details of the coding changes w e made through our scan. Our study includes a total of 105 colleges. The seven colleges not inc luded in our study (Cerro Coso, Copper Mountain, College of the Desert, Lassen, College of the Siskiyous, Clovis, Victor Valley) did not have readily available or comprehendible information about their respective ESL sequences, and/or could not be reached for more information. These colleges collectively enrolled about 3% of students in our sample. PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 4 TABLE A m Number of coding changes made for courses part of an ESL sequence to transfer-level English, by type of code change Total Credit Status Transfer Status Units Maximum Levels Below Transfer-level English # Courses 823 218 232 378 636 % 72 19 20 33 55 NOTES: Categories do not add up to total because courses can have more than one category recoded TABLE A n Difference in the number of levels in the ESL sequence after course scan Change in Number of Levels in ESL Sequence Number of Colleges % of All Colleges Increase 38 36 Decrease 10 9 Same 57 54 SOURCE: Authors’ calculations based on MIS data and college catalog scan. Student Longitudinal Data Our quantitative approach utilizes student-level longitudinal data from the California Community College Chancellor’s Office Management Information System (COMIS). Students in the dataset are enrolled across the 114 community colleges that comprise the California Community College system, and includes information on student demographics, course-taking behavior, course elements (e.g. title of course, basic skills status, minimum/maximum number of credits, etc.), and student outcomes (grades, credits earned, degree attainment, transfer, etc.). The timeframe covered by the data spans the 2009-10 academic year through the 2016-17 academic year. Appendix B Table B10 lists the variables from the COMIS data that we use in our analyses. ESL Faculty/Staff Interviews To inform our quantitative results, we interviewed ESL faculty and administrators from various California community colleges. We selected interviewees from colleges that 1) demonstrated throughput rates that were both above and below the state average, 2) were representative of different ESL pathways we studied: traditional pathways, integrated pathways, mixed pathways, accordion model pathways, pathways that fed into developmental English coursework, pathways that fed directly into transfer-level English, pathways with parallel credit and non- credit sequences, and pathways with transferable ESL coursework, and 3) offered pathways at scale. We invited a total of 24 individuals from 20 community colleges and one adult school partner for an interview. They included a mix ESL faculty, department chairs, division deans and one adult school administrator. A total of 14 interviews were conducted in November and December 2018—including one group interview—across 13 community colleges. The final interview sample included 15 ESL department chairs and/or ESL faculty and 2 division deans. We spoke with each interviewee for about one hour over the phone. Interviewees were asked a variety of questions pertaining to their background in ESL; ESL sequence offerings, assessment, placement, and enrollment in ESL; ESL sequence experience; ESL students; ESL outcomes; professional development; and the role of AB705 in ESL. The data collection and data analysis were carried out simultaneously to avoid the collection of repetitive and unfocused data (Merriam 1998). Particularly, after each interview was conducted, researchers debriefed, reviewed detailed data notes and audio recordings, and kept notes to capture reflections, emerging themes, and points that needed to be pursued further. This process of review and reflection informed all subsequent interviews. PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 5 In this manner, data collected from each interview was continuously assessed and informed future interviews until data collection was complete. The data was organized and coded on a secure Excel database. This approach was used to come up with a number of patterns and themes. Empirical Strategy for Estimating the Overall Effect of ESL Pathways on Student Course Success Sample Construction To estimate how ESL pathways affect student course success, our analysis is focused on students who first enrolled in the CCC between 2009-10 and 2014-15 academic years. We define a cohort as the first year of enrollment in any course in the California community college system. Students are tracked for either 3 or 6 years depending on when they entered. Namely, students entering between 2009-10 and 2011-12 are tracked for six years and students entering between 2009-10 and 2014-15 are tracked for three years. Our cohort definition and resulting statistics differ from the Chancellor’s Office Student Success Scorecard in that the Scorecard defines cohorts based on when the student first attempted their first ESL course, we define a cohort based on when the student first enrolled at the college. Additionally, the Scorecard only includes credit-ESL enrollments while our data restricts to all students who took ESL courses that were part of a sequence leading to transfer-level English, this includes both credit and non-credit ESL courses. Within our timeframe, 13-20 colleges offer non-credit coursework as part of the ESL sequence, and 3% of our sample population take these non-credit courses. The ESL population is notably different than the populations we focus on in our previous work in developmental math and English. Most notably, we include students with both valid and invalid SSNs in our study. Given the nature of our population of study and the proportion of invalid SSN holders in our sample (50% of our general ESL population; 30% of our degree-seeking population), we decide that including invalid SSN holders is paramount to accurately reflecting the true composition of ESL students in our study. However, by including invalid SSN holders in our sample, our unit of observation is at the college-student ID level instead of the SSN level. The main drawback of this approach is that we cannot observe students who may transition to different colleges within the community college system by using the college-student ID, so we may be double-counting students. However, given that the rate at which students transition to different community colleges within our valid SSN population is low (7%), we are confident that the results we present are robust. We restrict our analysis sample to 1) students with valid enrollments (students that received valid grades), 2) first- time students aged 15-64 at time of entry into the California community college system who 3) are sequence students (a student that took an ESL course that is required in order to access to transfer-level English) and 4) are degree-intending students (a student that takes at least one degree-applicable course outside of ESL or transfer- level English and/or developmental math/English course). Our definition of valid enrollments is expanded to include grades students would receive in non-credit coursework (e.g. “UG” ungraded, “UD” ungraded dependent). We exclude students who hold bachelor’s or associate’s degrees at time of entry; students enrolled in only summer or winter terms; students enrolled in adult schools; and dual enrollment students. After implementing these restrictions, our sample of interest includes 120,365 first-time students in the CCC system across the 2010-15 cohorts. Tables 3 and 4 details a breakdown of the sample by cohort and ESL sequence type, respectively. PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 6 TABLE A o Number of students, by cohort (year first enrolled in CCC system) Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 All 356,209 75,274 63,229 55,560 52,543 54,229 55,374 Our Sample 120,365 21,609 22,502 20,416 18,674 18,783 18,381 % 34 29 36 37 36 35 33 NOTES: Author calculations from Chancellor’s Office MIS data. Cohort year is defined as nllu -nlml academic year = nlml , nlml -nlmm academic year= nlmm , and so on. Our definition of a degree-intending student is of particular importance, and is distinct from that of the CCCCO and other stakeholders. The CCCCO defines degree-intending students as a function of a student’s informed or informal educational goal. However, the variables used to capture educational goals are not complete for years prior to 2015, which directly impacts students within our timeframe of analysis. Instead, our definition is based on course-taking behavior in at least one developmental math/English or degree-applicable courses. We employ a list of robustness checks to ensure that our degree intention flag does accurately capture students that are degree- intending, one of which is to compare the educational goals of our definition of degree-intending students to non- degree-intending students for cohorts 2015 forward. We find a high percentage of the degree-intending students in our sample with student goals relating to earning a degree and/or transferring, with about 63% of students indicating such, compared to 15% of students that never took a required course in the ESL sequence that leads to transfer-level English (e.g. non-sequence students). We also find that most sequence students, the population of students we presume are degree-intending, indicate degree-seeking behavior by our definition (about 70% of sequence students). TABLE A p Number of colleges/students in ESL sequences with various features All Structure Type Sequence Type Total Feed Directly into TLE Feed into Developmental English Traditional Integrated Mixed Accordion Compression Colleges 101 61 40 29 44 20 4 3 % * 60 40 29 44 20 4 3 Students 120,365 77,267 43,091 41,486 40,592 34,683 2,938 659 % * 64 36 34 34 29 2 1 NOTES: In the timeframe of our analytical sample, the total number of colleges in each category fluctuates, as some colleges established ESL programs in different years (e.g. Foothill in nlmm and Chaffey in nlmq ), and colleges have changed their structure and sequence types between nlml and nlms . PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California ’s Community Colleges 7 TABLE A5 N umber of colleges/students in ESL sequences with various features , by sequence type and structure type Sequence Type Structure Type Feed Directly into TLE Feed into Developmental English Transferable ESL % (Colleges) % (Students) % (Colleges) % (Students) % (Colleges) % (Students) Traditional 55.2 71.8 44.8 28.3 69.0 59.9 Integrated 54.6 41.4 45.5 58.6 54.6 52.4 Mixed 70.0 81.3 30.0 18.7 55.0 42.6 Accordion 80.0 64.3 20.0 35.7 60.0 33.9 Compression 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 33.3 58.1 NOTES: College counts/percentages are for the most recent academic year (2016/17), while student counts/percentages reflect s tudents enrolled for the first time in the CCC system between the 2009/10 and 2014/15 academic years. In the timeframe of our analytical sample, the total number of colleges in each category fluctuates, as some colleges established ESL programs in different years (e.g. Foothill in 2011 and Chaffey in 2015), and colleges have changed their s tructure and sequence types between 2010 and 2017. Missing students do not have ESL sequence type/structure information due to being first enrolled at a college in a year when ESL sequence type/structure i nformation was not available. Refer to Table 4 for row totals. TABLE A6 T hroughput rates (3 -year & 6 -year) in ESL sequences with various features All Structure Type Sequence Type Total Feed Directly into TLE Feed into Developmental English Traditional Integrated Mixed Accordion Three-Year # 120,365 77,267 43,091 41,486 40,592 34,683 2,938 % 26 30 18 28 22 29 16 Six-Year # 64,527 40,066 24,457 22,573 20,926 20,509 515 % 34 39 26 33 31 38 15 NOTES: Throughput rates (%) indicate students that have completed transfer-level English as a share of the total number of students enrolled at colleges within each structure/sequence type (#). We cannot track 6-year outcomes for students enrolled in colleges offering accordion model sequences at this time due to small sample sizes limited tim eframe for follow -up (e.g. t he earliest implementation of accordion model reform is in academic year 2012 -2013 ). M issing students from row totals: when assigning a student a college -level ESL sequence and structure type we used the model what was in place when the student first enrolled at the college; if a student first entered a college in years where there was no ESL sequence in place that led a student to transfer-level English they will have a missing college -level ESL sequence/structure type. Three -year throughput rates include the 2010 -2015 cohorts, and six -year throughput rates include the 2010 - 2012 cohorts. Regression Methods Our treatment and control groups are as follows: our treatment group includes students that either enrolled in integrated coursework, in transferable ESL coursework, or a college that offered a sequence that feeds directly into transfer -level English , with the potential to be in more than one category. Our control groups in comparison to each of the former treatment grou ps include students that either enrolled in traditional coursework, in no transferable ESL coursework, or a college that offered a sequence that feeds into developmental English coursework, respectively, with the potential to be in more than one category. Our study focuses on several key outcomes: completion of transfer-level English , transferable credits earned, transfer to a four -year college, and degree attainment. Completion is measured as the share of students within a cohort that successfully complete s a PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California ’s Community Colleges 8 transfer -level composition course within a given timeframe, also known as throughput . Credits earned is measured as units earned as a share of units attempted, each by total units and total transferable units. We utilize various regression techniques t o estimate the effect of ESL pathway features on student success, primarily naïve ordinary least squares (OLS) regressions. Our regression models take on the following form: ���� ���������������� = ���� PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California ’s Community Colleges 9 starting in an ESL sequence versus the devel opmental writing sequence. Several of Hodara’s primary findings are in line with ours, namely that longer ESL sequences negatively impact ESL students’ progression through college and degree attainment. In addition, transfer-level analyses conducted by cam pus institutional researchers point to some of the trends we observe in our study. For example, Solano College found that 27% of students who started in ESL completed transfer-level English in an average time of under a year and a half after offering a thr ee-level integrated sequence in fall 2015, a three -fold increase from the 2012 completion rate (California Acceleration Project, 2018). Another study by Elizabeth Park ( forthcoming) investigates community college students’ progression through the credit ES L sequence in the Los Angeles Community College District (LACCD), with a special focus on generation 1.5/2.0 students. Park’s findings mirror some of our own, most especially where students start in the sequence, 3 levels below transfer-level English or lower, which is comparable to our student population for the 2016- 2017 academic year (see Figure 3 in the report). Caveats While our analy sis employs statistical analysis and includes a substantial number of controls, we are unable to attribute causality to the findings and there are considerations to account for with regard to the data we use and our methods . Our data does not contain information pertaining to student assessment scores, placement recommendation, or high school GPA, all of which would most ac curately control for student academic record prior to enrolling in ESL . We use a student’s first course in the E SL sequence as a proxy for placement recommendation. Our sample of interest is the 2010 -2015 student cohorts, and we track student outcomes for these cohorts over three academic years (for the 2010 -2015 cohorts), as well as six academic years (for the 2010 -2012 cohorts). Given that there has been considerable change in the ESL landscape in our timeframe of interest, especially in more recent years, three years is still a relatively short amount of time to evaluate the effect of newly -reformed ESL pathways on longer -term outcomes such as transfer and degree completion. Time will generate larger sample sizes and allow for a more thorough evaluation of longer -term outcomes for accordion and compression strategies. Our analys is focuses on enrollment in ESL sequences in relation to student outcomes. However, other types of reforms may have also been implemented within our timeframe of interest that may a lso contribute to our results. However, per our conversations with faculty we learned that most of the changes to assessment and placement and some curricular reforms, have happened more recently, partly in response to AB 705. Some of the changes that may have occurred during our timeframe, including changes to the sequence endpoint, length of sequence, transferability of courses, or to assessment and placement can be partly addressed by i ncluding college fixed- effects in our model aims to account for these other reforms implemented at the college level . PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California ’s Community Colleges 10 Appendix B. Figures a nd Tables TABLE B1 C haracteristics of d egree-seeking ESL students , by race/ethnicity (Figure s 4 and 5 in report) Overall Latino Asian Black White Start in Sequence (Median) Educational attainment Less than HS 5.6 8.8 5.2 6.5 3.4 4 Adult school 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.1 2.2 4 High school diploma 32.8 53.2 28.6 30.7 25 3 GED / HS equivalency/ CA HS proficiency certificate 5.3 8.8 4.6 8.7 4.1 3 Foreign secondary school diploma 41.1 18 44.3 41.7 54.5 4 Unknown 13.5 9.6 15.9 11.3 10.9 4 Citizenship status U.S. Citizen 22.6 49.8 14.8 31.2 13.6 3 Permanent resident 38.1 29.2 40.9 39.6 52.1 4 Temporal resident 2.1 2.9 1.9 5.8 1.6 4 Refugee/Asylee 6.1 0.8 2.9 8.9 20.6 4 Student Visa holder (F1 or M1) 24.5 3.5 34.2 12.1 9.4 3 Other/Unknown 6.6 13.8 5.3 2.4 2.8 3 Gender Female 56.2 62.1 53.3 53 59.9 4 Male 42.9 37.1 46 46.3 39.1 3 Other characteristics Traditional-age college student 62.4 62.9 71.5 44.5 36.6 3 Financial aid recipient 55.9 69.6 48.2 72.1 71.1 4 EOPS recipient 19.5 18.4 17.4 18.6 30.9 4 Start in Sequence (Median) 3 3 3 4 4 Number of Students 120,365 27,301 55,982 2,587 22,755 SOURCES: Authors’ calculation based on MIS data. NOTES: Sample includes students first enrolled in ESL in the CCC system between the 2009-2010 and 2 014-2015 academic years. PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California ’s Community Colleges 11 TABLE B2 C haracteristics of d egree-seeking ESL students , by education status at first term of enrollment Overall Less Than HS Ad ult School US HS Diploma GED or Equivalent Foreign Secondary School Diploma Unknown Race/Ethnicity Latino 22.7 35.9 22.9 36.8 37.5 9.9 16 Asian 46.5 43.3 44.7 40.5 40.1 50 54.5 Black 2.1 2.5 1.5 2 3.5 2.2 1.8 White 18.9 11.7 26.4 14.4 14.4 25 15.2 Citizenship status U.S. Citizen 22.6 29.7 19.2 37 35.2 11.1 14.8 Permanent resident 38.1 46 56.9 37.2 41.2 38.9 31.2 Temporal resident 2.1 5.4 2.8 1.7 2.5 2.1 1.3 Refugee/Asylee 6.1 4.6 11.9 4 3.8 7.9 6.7 Student Visa holder (F1 or M1) 24.5 7.2 2.5 10 8.7 36.3 40.1 Other/Unknown 6.6 7.1 6.7 10.1 8.7 3.8 5.9 Gender Female 56.2 56.8 65.4 54.9 57.6 56.9 55.5 Male 42.9 41.7 33.2 44.3 41.6 42.4 43.2 Other characteristics Traditional -age college student 62.4 54 46.5 76.1 52.9 56.5 56.2 Financial aid recipient 55.9 67.8 75.4 67.9 67 46.4 44.5 EOPS recipient 19.5 20 25.3 21.8 20.7 19.2 13.4 Start in Sequence (Median) 3 4 4 3 3 4 4 Number of Students 120,365 6,706 1,908 39,526 6,432 49,507 16,286 SOURCES: Authors’ calculation based on MIS data. NOTES: Sample includes students first enrolled in ESL in the CCC system between the 2009-2010 and 2 014-2015 academic years. PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California ’s Community Colleges 12 FIGURE B1 Accordion models and compressed courses are two reforms ESL programs have adopted SOURCE: Author’s chart based on PPIC E SL program database. TABLE B3 Basic characteristics of ESL courses Sequence courses Non-sequence courses Non -credit 11% 25% Credit, non- degree applicable 66% 64% Credit, degree- applicable, including transferable 23% 12% Credit, transferable to CSU only 6% 3% Credit, transferable to CSU or UC 10% 1% Reading (traditional or integrated) 54% NA Writing (traditional or integrated) 80% NA Listening/speaking (traditional or integrated) 17% NA Grammar (traditional or integrated) 30% NA SOURCE: Author calculations from Chancellor ’s Office MIS data and PPIC ESL program database. NOTE: Based on ESL courses offered between the 2009 -10 and 2014 -15 academic years. Program database only includes skills codes (reading, writing, listening/speaking, grammar) for courses that are part of a sequence that leads to transfer- level English. PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California ’s Community Colleges 13 TA BLE B4 N umber of students and college by start in the sequence, 2009 -2010 to 2014 -2015 cohorts (Figure 2 in report) Number of Levels in Sequence Colleges % Students % 9+ 6 6 1,532 1 8 8 8 2,648 2 7 14 14 5,014 4 6 25 25 12,241 10 5 17 17 15,652 13 4 16 16 22,908 19 3 11 11 24,808 21 2 2 2 25,542 21 1 2 2 9,863 8 Total 101 100 120,208 100 NOTES: Sample includes degree- seeking students who first enrolled in ESL at a California Community College between the 2009- 2010 to 2014 -2015 academic years. College counts are from the 2016- 17 academic year, most recent year we have data for. We exclude students who first enroll in versions of transfer- level English for ESL students. PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California ’s Community Colleges 14 TABLE B5 P rogression of students through the ESL sequence by start level, 6 -year, 2010 -2012 cohorts (Figure 6 in report) Progression Levels Below Transfer Nine+ % Eight % Seven % Six % Five % Four % Three % Two % One % Enroll 9+ LBT 831 Complete 9+ LBT 234 28 Enroll 8 LBT 287 33 1,361 Complete 8 LBT 159 19 1,073 79 Enroll 7 LBT 177 21 947 70 2,950 100 Complete 7 LBT 129 16 814 60 2,599 88 Enroll 6 LBT 183 20 815 60 2,099 71 6,981 100 Complete 6 LBT 109 13 666 49 1,899 64 6,073 87 Enroll 5 LBT 135 15 568 41 1,611 55 4,924 71 8,509 100 Complete 5 LBT 78 9 463 34 1,437 49 4,358 62 7,210 85 Enroll 4 LBT 263 32 406 30 1,249 42 3,954 57 5,867 69 12,702 100 Complete 4 LBT 238 29 323 24 1,060 36 3,324 48 5,102 60 10,954 86 Enroll 3 LBT 156 19 253 19 938 32 2,813 40 4,571 54 8,584 68 12,793 100 Complete 3 LBT 129 16 217 16 805 27 2,412 35 3,953 46 7,668 60 10,924 85 Enroll 2 LBT 141 17 229 17 661 22 2,033 29 3,473 41 5,902 46 7,602 59 13,212 100 Complete 2 LBT 124 15 197 14 502 17 1,642 24 2,958 35 5,155 41 6,733 53 11,317 86 Enroll 1 LBT 103 12 180 13 473 16 1,466 21 2,749 32 5,513 43 6,383 50 8,219 62 5,122 100 Complete 1 LBT 84 10 156 11 396 13 1,252 18 2,385 28 4,842 38 5,683 44 7,352 56 4,287 84 Took TLE 119 14 144 11 365 12 1,056 15 1,943 23 4,399 35 5,670 44 7,450 56 3,253 64 Complete TLE 105 13 128 9 328 11 935 13 1,724 20 3,993 31 5,093 40 6,747 51 2,867 56 NOTES: Numbers represent students, Percent (%) represent the number of students at each stage out of the total number of stud ents that start in a given level of the ESL sequence. Sample includes degree- seeking students who first enrolled in ESL at a Califo rnia Community College between the 2009-10 and 2011 -12 academic years and are tracked for 6 years through the 2016 - 17 academic year. PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 15 TABLE B r Six-year throughput rates, by racial/ethnic group and start in the sequence (Figure s in report) Overall Levels Below Transfer (Six-Year) Three-Year Six-Year One Two Three Four Five Six Latino 27,301 15,478 1,569 3,196 3,476 2,654 1,986 1,619 % 17 23 44 33 24 19 14 10 Asian 55,676 30,069 2,355 6,906 6,147 5,830 3,716 2,752 % 34 42 62 62 49 38 27 17 Black 2,587 1,434 117 236 294 291 231 165 % 19 25 48 42 30 21 17 9 Two or More 1,317 656 32 88 106 143 95 116 % 16 26 50 36 37 31 15 8 White 3,936 12,017 687 1,606 1,767 2,816 1,868 1,899 % 17 28 63 45 40 30 15 12 NOTES: Sample includes degree-seeking students who first enrolled in ESL at a California Community College between the nllu -ml and nlmm -mn academic years and are tracked for r years through the nlmr -ms academic year. TABLE B s Enrollment in ESL sequence courses that lead to transfer-level English, by year (Figure t in report) 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Traditional 30,999 31,100 28,888 25,965 24,695 24,088 24,005 22,381 Integrated 31,898 33,975 32,405 31,755 32,533 32,064 32,169 32,568 Total 62,897 65,075 61,293 57,720 57,228 56,152 56,174 54,949 NOTES: Enrollment for all ESL students over time where nlml refers to nllu –ml , and so on. Students are counted a single time in a given academic year, according to the type of ESL course(s) he or she enrolled in. If the student enrolled in both traditional and integrated coursework in a given academic year, they are counted in both rows. Otherwise students are unduplicated within college but may be duplicated across colleges if students enrolled in multiple colleges at any point in their college career. Enrollments are for all ESL students. PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 16 FIGURE B n Rates of successful completion of transfer-level English, by starting level and prior education SOURCES: Author calculations from Chancellor’s Office MIS data and PPIC ESL program database. NOTES: Sample includes degree- seeking students who first enrolled in ESL at a California Community College between the nllu -ml and nlmm -mn academic years and are tracked for r years through the nlmr -ms academic year. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Non HS Grad Adult School US HS Grad GED or Equivalent Foreign HS Grad Unknown % completeing TLE by where started in sequence 1 LBT 2 LBT 3 LBT 4 LBT 5 LBT 6 LBT PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 17 TABLE B t Six-year throughput rates, by education status and start in the sequence (Figure Bn) Overall Levels Below Transfer (Six-Year) Three-Year Six-Year One Two Three Four Five Six Non-HS Grad 6,706 3,937 179 387 744 806 739 569 % 13 19 42 37 27 22 11 5 Adult School 1,908 1,234 61 97 232 426 191 129 % 14 29 70 51 42 30 14 9 US HS Grad 39,526 23,564 2,832 5,443 5,005 3,847 2,634 2,107 % 26 34 53 46 36 30 20 16 GED or Equivalent 6,432 2,939 259 540 640 544 381 325 % 23 30 55 45 32 25 22 14 Foreign HS Grad 49,507 23,529 1,302 5,302 4,125 5,093 3,225 2,436 % 29 39 64 59 46 36 23 17 Unknown 16,286 9,324 489 1,443 2,047 1,986 1,339 1,415 % 26 31 55 49 43 30 19 8 NOTES: Sample includes degree-seeking students who first enrolled in ESL at a California Community College between the nllu -ml and nlmm -mn academic years and are tracked for r years th rough the nlmr -ms academic year. PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 18 TABLE B u Variable Definitions Variable Description Student Outcomes Throughput (3 year & 6 year) This variable is 1 if a student successfully completed freshman composition, conditional on when a student started in the community college system. Observed within 3, 6, and all years of first year of enrollment Earn a Degree This variable is 1 if a student ever earned a degree or certificate. Observed within 3, 6, and all years of the first year of enrollment. Transfer to a 4-Year Institution This variable is 1 if a student ever transferred to a 4-year university. Observed within 3, 6, and all years of the first year of enrollment Proportion of Units Completed vs. Attempted (Transferable) Proportion of the number of units a student completes divided by the total number of units a student attempts. Generated for all courses and by degree-applicable courses, within 3, 6, and all years of the first year of enrollment Student demographic attributes Gender Categorical variables for female and unknown sex, with male as the reference category Race/ethnicity Categorical variables for Latino, African American, Asian, other race (includes two or more races, Native American), and unknown race. White is the reference category. Citizenship status Categorical variable for non-citizen (permanent resident, temporary resident, refugee/asylee, F-1 or M-1 student visa, other status) and unknown citizenship. US citizen is the reference category. Traditional College-age Student Categorical variable for a student is age 24 years or younger at first term of enrollment Student academic preparedness proxies Highest level of education at first term Categorical variable for not a high school graduate, adult education, GED or equivalent, graduate from a foreign high school, and unknown education. High school graduate is the reference category Disability status This variable is 1 if a student was ever reported with at least one primary disability (SD01) Limited English Proficiency (LEP) status This variable is 1 if a student was ever enrolled in a course with a TOP Code equal to 493084, 49085, 49086, 493087, or 493100 (English as a Second Language – Writing, Reading, Speaking/Listening, Integrated; Vocational English as a Second Language, respectively) or if the student was identified as ever needing English as a second language services during the matriculation process (SM03) Full-Time Enrollment status This variable is 1 if the student attempted 12 or more units in a term (SX03) Extended Opportunity Programs and Services (EOPS) recipient This variable is 1 if a student every received support from EOPS Starting level in the ESL sequence Categorical variable for one to two levels, three to four levels, and five or more levels below transfer-level English Prior dual enrollment This variable is 1 if the student was previously enrolled as a special admit student (i.e., simultaneously enrolled in K-12) Prior non success This variable is 1 if a student attempted to complete a course more than once Ever enrolled in English or Math (developmental or transfer-level) This variable is 1 if a student ever enrolled in at least one developmental or transfer- level math or English course ESL Characteristics (Student-Level) Traditional Student This variable is 1 if a student ever enrolled in a course flagged as traditional at any point in their community college career Integrated Student This variable is 1 if a student ever enrolled in a course flagged as integrated at any point in their community college career Mixed Student This variable is 1 if a student ever enrolled in either a traditional or integrated course in a college flagged as having a mixed sequence structure in any given year Accordion Student This variable is 1 if a student ever enrolled in a course flagged as an accordion course at any point in their community college career Sequence/Non-Sequence Student This variable is 1 if a student ever enrolled in a course that was part of a sequence of courses that lead a student to freshman composition (sequence student). This variable is 0 if a student never enrolled in such a course (non-sequence student) Degree-Intending Student This variable is 1 if a student: 1) ever took at least one degree-applicable course outside of ESL and freshman composition in their community college career and/or at least one developmental English/math course, AND 2) was ever enrolled in a sequence course in their community college career PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 19 Variable Description ESL Characteristics (College-level) Traditional Sequence Structure By year. This variable is 1 if a college was flagged as having a traditional ESL sequence structure (defined as 75% or more of courses being offered in the sequence requiring separate reading and writing courses that students must take to reach transfer-level English) Integrated Sequence Structure By year. This variable is 1 if a college was flagged as having an integrated ESL sequence structure (defined as 75% or more of courses being offered in the sequence requiring courses that embed both reading and writing skills into a single course that students must take to reach transfer-level English). Mixed Sequence Structure By year. This variable is 1 if a college was flagged as having a mixed ESL sequence structure (defined as requiring both courses that integrate reading and writing skills into a single course and courses that separate reading and writing skills into separate courses within a single ESL sequence that students must take to reach transfer-level English). Accordion Sequence Structure By year. This variable is 1 if a college was flagged as having an “accordion” style ESL sequence structure (defined as A/B courses that allow students to skip levels based on demonstrated proficiency to reach transfer-level English) Structure Feeds into Developmental English Coursework By year. This variable is 1 if a college was flagged as requiring coursework in developmental English at the highest level(s) in order to reach transfer-level English Structure Feeds Directly into Freshman Composition By year. This variable is 1 if a college was flagged as having an ESL structure that did not require developmental English coursework at the highest level(s); students segue into transfer-level English upon completion of ESL sequence Change in ESL Sequence This variable is 1 if a college had ever experienced a change in any of the above transfer-level ESL characteristics between 2010 and 2015. Number of Levels in ESL Sequence Continuous variable that captures the number of levels in the ESL sequence at a given college in a given year, between 2010 and 2015 Student socioeconomic proxies Board of Governors Enrollment Waiver (BOGW)/Pell recipient This variable is 1 if a student ever received a Board of Governor’s waiver or Pell grant (SF21) NOTES: The CCCCO MIS data element dictionary provides a more detailed description of each variable used in our study (CCCCO undated). PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 20 TABLE B ml Student characteristics, by type of ESL student Full Sample Non-Sequence Students Sequence Students Degree-Intending Students Student Count % Student Count % Student Count % Student Count % Total 356,209 * 190,327 53 165,882 47 120,365 34 Traditional age student at entry (Age 24 or less) 0 217,836 61 138,673 73 79,163 48 45,244 38 1 138,373 39 51,654 27 86,719 52 75,121 62 Gender Female 203,807 57 109,179 57 94,628 57 67,661 56 Male 147,539 41 78,274 41 69,265 42 51,626 43 Unknown 4,863 1 2,874 2 1,989 1 1,078 1 Race/ethnicity White 43,169 12 14,246 7 28,923 17 22,755 19 Latino 174,634 49 124,891 66 49,743 30 27,301 23 Asian 97,148 27 29,100 15 68,048 41 55,982 47 Black 5,639 2 2,299 1 3,340 2 2,587 2 Other Race 253 0 128 0 125 0 95 0 Two or more races 2,133 1 570 0 1,563 1 1,317 1 Unknown race 33,233 9 19,093 10 14,140 9 10,328 9 Citizenship status U.S. Citizen 92,605 26 53,507 28 39,098 24 27,173 23 Permanent Resident 105,628 30 41,031 22 64,597 39 45,873 38 Temporal Resident 7,272 2 3,683 2 3,589 2 2,470 2 Refugee/Asylee 17,523 5 8,340 4 9,183 6 7,342 6 Visa (F-1 or M-1 visa) 37,858 11 7,119 4 30,739 19 29,544 25 Other Status 67,874 19 55,916 29 11,958 7 5,519 5 Unknown (X) 27,449 8 20,731 11 6,718 4 2,444 2 Highest level of education Not a graduate or no longer enrolled in high school 42,045 12 25,114 13 16,931 10 6,706 6 Currently enrolled in adult school 15,278 4 11,744 6 3,534 2 1,908 2 High school diploma 71,710 20 24,017 13 47,693 29 39,526 33 GED or Equivalent 12,270 3 3,683 2 8,587 5 6,432 5 Foreign Secondary School Diploma/Certificate of Graduation 93,949 26 29,905 16 64,044 39 49,507 41 Unknown 120,957 34 95,864 50 25,093 15 16,286 14 Previous dual enrollment 0 352,932 99 189,112 99 163,820 99 118,458 98 1 3,277 1 1,215 1 2,062 1 1,907 2 PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 21 Full Sample Non-Sequence Students Sequence Students Degree-Intending Students Student Count % Student Count % Student Count % Student Count % BOGW or Pell Grant recipient (anytime during his/her college career) 0 249,109 70 165,859 87 83,250 50 53,024 44 1 107,100 30 24,468 13 82,632 50 67,341 56 Starting level in ESL Sequence One to two levels below 38,132 23 * * 38,132 23 35,405 29 Three to four levels below 59,705 36 * * 59,705 36 47,716 40 Five or more levels below 67,344 41 * * 67,344 41 37,040 31 Ever enrolled in developmental English 0 300,095 84 175,486 92 124,609 75 79,092 66 1 56,114 16 14,841 8 41,273 25 41,273 34 Ever enrolled in developmental math 0 283,975 80 175,641 92 108,334 65 62,817 52 1 72,234 20 14,686 8 57,548 35 57,548 48 Ever enrolled in any math or English 0 237,861 67 167,273 88 70,588 43 25,439 21 1 118,348 33 23,054 12 95,294 57 94,926 79 Proportion of Transfer Credits Earned (percent) Three-Year 73.21 65.15 75.29 75.90 Six-Year 71.46 63.50 73.68 74.28 Earned a degree/certificate Three-Year 0 333,588 94 180,977 95 152,611 92 109,235 91 1 22,621 6 9,350 5 13,271 8 11,130 9 Six-Year 0 173,096 89 98,123 93 74,973 85 52,488 81 1 20,967 11 7,834 7 13,133 15 12,039 19 Transfer to a four-year college Three-Year 0 352,944 99 188,915 99 164,029 99 118,866 99 1 3,265 1 1,412 1 1,853 1 1,499 1 Six-Year 0 185,081 95 103,538 98 81,543 93 58,386 90 1 8,982 5 2,419 2 6,563 7 6,141 10 Complete transfer-level English Three-Year 0 317,112 89 182,577 96 134535 81 89163 74 1 39,097 11 7,750 4 31,347 19 31,202 26 Six-Year 0 166,859 86 100,799 95 66,060 75 42,556 66 1 27,204 14 5,158 5 22,046 25 21,971 34 PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 22 Full Sample Non-Sequence Students Sequence Students Degree-Intending Students Student Count % Student Count % Student Count % Student Count % Full-time student 0 323,801 91 186,000 98 137,801 83 96,080 80 1 32,408 9 4,327 2 28,081 17 24,285 20 Extended Opportunity Programs and Services (EOPS) participant 0 327,880 92 186,501 98 141,379 85 96,896 81 1 28,329 8 3,826 2 24,503 15 23,469 19 Student with limited English proficiency 0 54,622 15 15,379 8 39,243 24 35,345 29 1 301,587 85 174,948 92 126,639 76 85,020 71 Student with disabilities 0 349,146 98 188,241 99 160,905 97 115,755 96 1 7,063 2 2,086 1 4,977 3 4,610 4 Student educational goal at first term of enrollment Obtain an associate degree and transfer to a baccalaureate granting institution 35,452 23 5,346 8 30,106 33 28,257 37 Transfer to a baccalaureate granting institution without an associate degree 10,740 7 1,307 2 9,433 10 9,008 12 Obtain a two-year associate degree without transfer 15,070 10 3,108 5 11,962 13 10,537 14 Earn a career technical certificate without transfer 3,148 2 733 1 2,415 3 2,053 3 Discover/formulate career interests, plans, goals 1,443 1 837 1 606 1 464 1 Acquire job skills 5,182 3 3,240 5 1,942 2 1,334 2 Update job skills 2,225 1 1,227 2 998 1 589 1 Maintain certificate or license 696 0 290 0 406 0 329 0 Pursue educational development 9,105 6 6,780 10 2,325 3 1,225 2 Improve basic skills in Math/English 19,769 13 13,430 21 6,339 7 2,534 3 Complete credits for HS or GED 2,989 2 2,272 3 717 1 433 1 Undecided on goal 47,705 30 25,581 39 22,124 24 16,781 22 Move from noncredit coursework to credit 577 0 433 1 144 0 82 0 University/4-Year college students taking courses to meet university/4-year requirements 2,810 2 544 1 2,266 2 1,975 3 NOTES: ( m) Includes students ages mq to rp , (n) students first enrolled in the CCC system between nllu -nlml and nlmp -nlmq , and ( o) first - time college enrollees (i.e. students with no prior college credentials). First-term enrollment is defined as the first time a student appears in the CCCCO MIS enrollment file as a non- special admit student (Education Status SB mm not = mllll ). ( p) Includes students who have taken at least one ESL course. We exclude cells with n< ml . We include student educational goal (SM lm /SS lm ) for informational purposes; student educational goal is not a determinant in defining our degree-seeking population. PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 23 TABLE B mm M ain linear and fixed effects models of achieving throughput in an ESL sequence within o years ( nlml -nlmq cohorts) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Student Took an Integrated Course -0.041 0.029 0.024 0.031 0.118 (0.047) (0.028) (0.036) (0.035) (0.035)*** Sequence Feeds into TLE 0.076 -0.006 0.049 0.054 0.074 (0.060) (0.032) (0.052) (0.049) (0.042)* Student Took Transferable ESL Course 0.175 0.069 0.053 0.055 0.161 (0.028)*** (0.023)*** (0.034) (0.033) (0.039)*** Integrated Student x Feed Direct TLE 0.022 0.016 0.027 0.019 -0.035 (0.068) (0.034) (0.032) (0.031) (0.039) LBT 3 to 4 -0.188 -0.174 -0.163 -0.062 (0.013)*** (0.039)*** (0.037)*** (0.028)** LBT 5 to 12 -0.339 -0.242 -0.226 -0.075 (0.017)*** (0.041)*** (0.039)*** (0.032)** LBT 3 to 4 x Integrated Student 0.018 0.012 -0.052 (0.026) (0.024) (0.022)** LBT 5 to 12 x Integrated Student -0.044 -0.053 -0.138 (0.028) (0.027)* (0.029)*** LBT 3 to 4 x Direct TLE -0.085 -0.088 -0.082 (0.036)** (0.035)** (0.031)*** LBT 5 to 12 x Direct TLE -0.079 -0.083 -0.049 (0.036)** (0.034)** (0.035) LBT 3 to 4 x Transferable ESL 0.065 0.063 0.021 (0.027)** (0.027)** (0.027) LBT 5 to 12 x Transferable ESL -0.035 -0.036 -0.102 (0.032) (0.032) (0.031)*** Constant 0.138 0.304 0.265 0.257 0.157 (0.043)*** (0.036)*** (0.043)*** (0.043)*** (0.056)*** Observations 120,365 120,365 120,365 120,365 120,365 R-squared 0.057 0.210 0.214 0.221 0.249 Controls and Fixed Effects Student Characteristics X X X X ESL and Levels Below Interactions X X X Term & Year Fixed Effects X X College Fixed Effects X SOURCES: Authors calculations from COMIS data. NOTES: Reference categories: Asian, foreign HS, permanent resident, non-traditional student, one/two levels below transfer. *** p< l.lm , ** p< l.lq , * p< l.m. PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 24 TABLE B mn M ain linear and fixed effects models of achieving throughput in an ESL sequence within r years ( nlml -nlmn cohorts) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Student Took an Integrated Course 0.050 0.085 0.031 0.035 0.112 (0.040) (0.024)*** (0.036) (0.035) (0.046)** Sequence Feeds into TLE 0.113 0.018 0.089 0.092 0.115 (0.059)* (0.029) (0.044)** (0.042)** (0.030)*** Student Took Transferable ESL 0.228 0.137 0.079 0.079 0.204 (0.032)*** (0.024)*** (0.034)** (0.033)** (0.043)*** Integrated Student x Feed Direct TLE -0.017 -0.006 0.026 0.022 -0.027 (0.065) (0.034) (0.034) (0.033) (0.058) LBT 3 to 4 -0.161 -0.173 -0.167 -0.078 (0.015)*** (0.037)*** (0.036)*** (0.031)** LBT 5 to 12 -0.313 -0.263 -0.255 -0.101 (0.020)*** (0.043)*** (0.042)*** (0.038)*** LBT 3 to 4 x Integrated Student 0.064 0.060 -0.007 (0.027)** (0.026)** (0.025) LBT 5 to 12 x Integrated Student 0.020 0.016 -0.091 (0.031) (0.031) (0.031)*** LBT 3 to 4 x Direct TLE -0.109 -0.112 -0.079 (0.036)*** (0.036)*** (0.030)*** LBT 5 to 12 x Direct to TLE -0.122 -0.123 -0.076 (0.039)*** (0.038)*** (0.039)* LBT 3 to 4 x Transferable ESL 0.104 0.104 0.052 (0.025)*** (0.025)*** (0.029)* LBT 5 to 12 x Transferable ESL 0.045 0.045 -0.023 (0.035) (0.034) (0.039) Constant 0.128 0.231 0.227 0.218 0.125 (0.039)*** (0.034)*** (0.041)*** (0.041)*** (0.052)** Observations 64,527 64,527 64,527 64,527 64,527 R-squared 0.075 0.206 0.210 0.212 0.243 Controls & Fixed Effects Student Characteristics X X X X ESL and Levels Below Interactions X X X Term & Year Fixed Effects X X College Fixed Effects X SOURCES: Authors calculations from COMIS data. NOTES: Reference categories: Asian, foreign HS, permanent resident, non- traditional student, one/two levels below transfer. *** p< l.lm , ** p< l.lq , * p< l.m. PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 25 TABLE B mo M ain linear and fixed effects models of accumulating transfer credits within r years ( nlml -nlmn cohorts) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Student Took an Integrated Course 4.283 2.831 2.961 2.911 3.617 (1.053)*** (0.912)*** (1.453)** (1.459)** (1.944)* Sequence Feeds into TLE 0.357 -1.330 1.171 1.207 0.717 (1.851) (1.308) (1.447) (1.453) (1.702) Student Took Transferable ESL Course 10.864 8.188 4.721 4.746 8.854 (1.261)*** (1.108)*** (1.799)** (1.790)*** (2.219)*** Integrated Student x Feed Direct TLE -0.681 0.242 0.920 0.933 -1.091 (2.343) (1.491) (1.443) (1.437) (1.957) LBT 3 to 4 -2.828 -1.153 -1.119 -2.790 (1.169)** (1.855) (1.837) (1.431)* LBT 5 to 12 -4.624 -4.789 -4.732 -6.066 (1.063)*** (2.319)** (2.310)** (2.235)*** LBT 3 to 4 x Integrated Student -0.703 -0.700 0.851 (1.221) (1.240) (1.148) LBT 5 to 12 x Integrated Student -1.013 -1.010 0.610 (1.932) (1.933) (1.790) LBT 3 to 4 x Direct TLE -4.050 -4.093 -2.699 (1.876)** (1.859)** (1.519)* LBT 5 to 12 x Direct TLE -3.206 -3.292 -3.691 (1.964) (1.967)* (1.965)* LBT 3 to 4 x Transferable ESL 2.800 2.780 3.239 (1.644)* (1.647)* (1.146)*** LBT 5 to 12 x Transferable ESL 6.824 6.819 6.520 (1.942)*** (1.931)*** (1.991)*** Constant 65.923 72.526 72.766 71.721 67.080 (1.089)*** (1.703)*** (2.074)*** (2.005)*** (2.590)*** Observations 62,962 62,962 62,962 62,962 62,962 R-squared 0.040 0.095 0.098 0.098 0.128 Controls & Fixed Effects Student Characteristics X X X X ESL and Levels Below Interactions X X X Term & Year Fixed Effects X X College Fixed Effects X SOURCES: Authors calculations from COMIS data. NOTES: Reference categories: Asian, foreign HS, permanent resident, non- traditional student, one/two levels below transfer. *** p< l.lm , ** p< l.lq , * p< l.m. PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 26 TABLE B mp Main linear and fixed effects models of transferring to a four- year college within r years (nlml -nlmn cohorts) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Student Took an Integrated Course 0.013 0.008 0.004 0.007 0.003 (0.021) (0.014) (0.017) (0.017) (0.022) Sequence Feeds into TLE 0.016 -0.018 0.010 0.013 -0.013 (0.021) (0.014) (0.019) (0.018) (0.017) Student Took Transferable ESL Course 0.029 0.016 -0.008 -0.007 0.027 (0.014)** (0.010) (0.012) (0.011) (0.012)** Integrated Student x Feed Direct TLE 0.001 0.014 0.023 0.020 0.017 (0.027) (0.019) (0.018) (0.017) (0.020) LBT 3 to 4 -0.045 -0.026 -0.021 -0.009 (0.010)*** (0.018) (0.017) (0.019) LBT 5 to 12 -0.104 -0.090 -0.081 -0.064 (0.011)*** (0.021)*** (0.020)*** (0.024)** LBT 3 to 4 x Integrated Student -0.002 -0.005 -0.022 (0.015) (0.014) (0.015) LBT 5 to 12 x Integrated Student -0.005 -0.010 -0.031 (0.014) (0.014) (0.013)** LBT 3 to 4 x Direct TLE -0.041 -0.044 -0.037 (0.017)** (0.017)** (0.016)** LBT 5 to 12 x Direct TLE -0.042 -0.046 -0.027 (0.020)** (0.019)** (0.023) LBT 3 to 4 x Transferable ESL 0.023 0.021 0.010 (0.015) (0.015) (0.014) LBT 5 to 12 x Transferable ESL 0.042 0.042 0.005 (0.017)** (0.016)** (0.013) Constant 0.062 0.190 0.184 0.144 0.156 (0.018)*** (0.020)*** (0.023)*** (0.022)*** (0.026)*** Observations 64,527 64,527 64,527 64,527 64,527 R-squared 0.004 0.114 0.115 0.126 0.144 Controls & Fixed Effects Student Characteristics X X X X ESL and Levels Below Interactions X X X Term & Year Fixed Effects X X College Fixed Effects X SOURCES: Authors calculations from COMIS data. NOTES: Reference categories: Asian, foreign HS, permanent resident, non- traditional student, one/two levels below transfer. *** p< l.lm , ** p< l.lq , * p< l.m. PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 27 TABLE B mq Main linear and fixed effects models of e arning a degree or credential within r years ( nlml -nlmn cohorts) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Student Took an Integrated Course 0.046 0.042 0.007 0.009 0.021 (0.022)** (0.018)** (0.026) (0.026) (0.034) Sequence Feeds into TLE 0.038 0.009 0.005 0.007 -0.021 (0.033) (0.025) (0.036) (0.035) (0.033) Student Took Transferable ESL Course 0.120 0.081 0.072 0.072 0.127 (0.021)*** (0.015)*** (0.028)** (0.028)** (0.032)*** Integrated Student x Feed Direct TLE -0.012 -0.004 0.003 0.001 0.046 (0.042) (0.033) (0.029) (0.029) (0.043) LBT 3 to 4 -0.032 -0.066 -0.062 -0.017 (0.013)** (0.027)** (0.027)** (0.030) LBT 5 to 12 -0.087 -0.106 -0.102 -0.041 (0.015)*** (0.034)*** (0.034)*** (0.042) LBT 3 to 4 x Integrated Student 0.056 0.054 0.010 (0.021)*** (0.021)** (0.018) LBT 5 to 12 x Integrated Student 0.029 0.027 -0.033 (0.026) (0.026) (0.026) LBT 3 to 4 x Direct TLE -0.001 -0.003 0.022 (0.029) (0.028) (0.025) LBT 5 to 12 x Direct TLE 0.001 -0.001 0.011 (0.034) (0.034) (0.032) LBT 3 to 4 x Transferable ESL 0.008 0.008 -0.027 (0.033) (0.033) (0.036) LBT 5 to 12 x Transferable ESL 0.017 0.017 -0.033 (0.036) (0.036) (0.036) Constant 0.077 0.075 0.098 0.085 0.156 (0.020)*** (0.023)*** (0.028)*** (0.026)*** (0.030)*** Observations 64,527 64,527 64,527 64,527 64,527 R-squared 0.028 0.076 0.077 0.078 0.110 Controls & Fixed Effects Student Characteristics X X X X ESL and Levels Below Interactions X X X Term & Year Fixed Effects X X College Fixed Effects X SOURCES: Authors calculations from COMIS data. NOTES: Reference categories: Asian, foreign HS, permanent resident, non- traditional student, one/two levels below transfer. *** p< l.lm , ** p< l.lq , * p< l.m. PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 28 TABLE B mr Fixed effec ts models of ESL pathway features on achieving throughput, within o years —by race/ethnicity and education status Asian-PI Latino White Black Foreign HS HS Diploma GED or Equivalent Adult Ed Non HS graduate Student Took an Integrated Course 0.125 0.073 0.119 0.208 0.110 0.121 0.111 -0.146 0.091 (0.047)*** (0.025)*** (0.050)** (0.069)*** (0.043)** (0.034)*** (0.043)** (0.105) (0.042)** Sequence Feeds into TLE 0.079 0.151 0.071 0.320 0.073 0.147 0.165 -0.087 0.083 (0.069) (0.028)*** (0.043)* (0.047)*** (0.055) (0.054)*** (0.056)*** (0.122) (0.040)** Student Took Transferable ESL Course 0.163 0.127 0.188 0.031 0.196 0.137 0.218 0.161 0.136 (0.052)*** (0.028)*** (0.042)*** (0.049) (0.043)*** (0.034)*** (0.052)*** (0.100) (0.040)*** Integrated Student x Feed Direct TLE -0.077 -0.019 0.033 -0.045 -0.055 -0.056 -0.037 0.118 -0.057 (0.055) (0.027) (0.040) (0.072) (0.044) (0.034) (0.037) (0.077) (0.027)** LBT 3 to 4 -0.164 -0.018 0.046 0.034 -0.102 -0.037 -0.100 -0.105 -0.036 (0.030)*** (0.021) (0.050) (0.059) (0.034)*** (0.024) (0.047)** (0.113) (0.046) LBT 5 to 12 -0.197 -0.021 0.001 0.036 -0.132 -0.053 -0.125 -0.209 -0.062 (0.044)*** (0.028) (0.053) (0.064) (0.041)*** (0.029)* (0.047)*** (0.110)* (0.045) LBT 3 to 4 x Integrated Student -0.024 -0.037 -0.093 -0.089 -0.040 -0.051 -0.020 0.057 -0.048 (0.023) (0.021)* (0.045)** (0.044)** (0.024) (0.019)*** (0.037) (0.080) (0.047) LBT 5 to 12 x Integrated Student -0.119 -0.097 -0.143 -0.237 -0.100 -0.142 -0.114 0.054 -0.083 (0.037)*** (0.027)*** (0.048)*** (0.051)*** (0.031)*** (0.025)*** (0.042)*** (0.081) (0.042)** LBT 3 to 4 x Direct TLE -0.020 -0.087 -0.117 -0.225 -0.052 -0.102 -0.012 -0.182 -0.073 (0.032) (0.019)*** (0.045)** (0.057)*** (0.036) (0.024)*** (0.050) (0.075)** (0.040)* LBT 5 to 12 x Direct TLE 0.033 -0.084 -0.058 -0.150 0.012 -0.075 0.026 -0.080 -0.071 (0.045) (0.031)*** (0.046) (0.067)** (0.044) (0.031)** (0.050) (0.084) (0.035)** PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 29 Asian-PI Latino White Black Foreign HS HS Diploma GED or Equivalent Adult Ed Non HS graduate LBT 3 to 4 x Transferable ESL 0.052 -0.014 -0.073 0.084 0.024 0.026 -0.046 -0.053 0.011 (0.029)* (0.021) (0.037)** (0.053) (0.035) (0.025) (0.040) (0.089) (0.043) LBT 5 to 12 x Transferable ESL -0.078 -0.089 -0.175 0.047 -0.135 -0.082 -0.160 -0.095 -0.075 (0.034)** (0.028)*** (0.041)*** (0.054) (0.036)*** (0.029)*** (0.052)*** (0.094) (0.034)** Constant 0.201 0.033 0.096 0.101 0.123 0.150 0.012 0.351 0.156 (0.095)** (0.038) (0.052)* (0.064) (0.069)* (0.064)** (0.071) (0.152)** (0.062)** Obs 55,982 27,301 22,755 2,587 49,507 39,526 6,432 1,908 6,706 R-squared 0.273 0.162 0.246 0.271 0.275 0.226 0.242 0.265 0.219 SOURCES: Author calculations from COMIS data. NOTES: Each column is a separate regression on pathway features using the population indicated in the column. All models include gender, race/ethnicity/highest level of education, academic preparedness/and low-income covariates, as well as year, college, and term fixed effects. Reference categories: Asian, foreign HS, permanent resident, non-traditional student, one/two levels below transfe r. *** p< l.lm , ** p< l.lq , * p< l.m. Only main effects are shown here, but full results are available upon request. All models only include those students enrolled in ESL pathways in our catalog scan and enrolled in college for the first time between nlml and nlmq . PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 30 TABLE B ms Fixed effects models of ESL pathway features on achieving throughput, within r years —by race/ethnicity and education status Asian-PI Latino White Black Foreign HS HS Diploma GED or Equivalent Adult Ed Non HS graduate Student Took an Integrated Course 0.152 0.059 0.064 0.126 0.126 0.096 0.195 -0.038 0.109 (0.069)** (0.032)* (0.064) (0.104) (0.055)** (0.048)** (0.065)*** (0.159) (0.061)* Sequence Feeds into TLE 0.048 0.115 0.184 0.361 0.131 0.197 0.061 -0.325 0.117 (0.032) (0.032)*** (0.048)*** (0.087)*** (0.042)*** (0.043)*** (0.158) (0.150)** (0.084) Student Took Transferable ESL Course 0.205 0.168 0.249 0.131 0.222 0.191 0.195 0.206 0.188 (0.062)*** (0.037)*** (0.052)*** (0.086) (0.052)*** (0.046)*** (0.072)*** (0.112)* (0.048)*** Integrated Student x Feed Direct TLE -0.106 0.013 0.086 -0.111 -0.064 -0.051 -0.048 0.105 -0.039 (0.076) (0.037) (0.077) (0.104) (0.071) (0.052) (0.065) (0.125) (0.048) LBT 3 to 4 -0.154 -0.050 0.006 -0.036 -0.110 -0.062 -0.032 -0.292 -0.014 (0.032)*** (0.030) (0.059) (0.087) (0.041)*** (0.030)** (0.054) (0.141)** (0.063) LBT 5 to 12 -0.212 -0.021 -0.035 0.035 -0.167 -0.067 -0.167 -0.281 -0.001 (0.052)*** (0.034) (0.072) (0.090) (0.053)*** (0.035)* (0.065)** (0.159)* (0.069) LBT 3 to 4 x Integrated Student 0.011 -0.003 -0.012 0.037 -0.008 0.003 -0.128 0.111 0.001 (0.026) (0.028) (0.053) (0.069) (0.030) (0.023) (0.052)** (0.108) (0.060) LBT 5 to 12 x Integrated Student -0.072 -0.086 -0.066 -0.148 -0.062 -0.089 -0.132 -0.037 -0.107 (0.042)* (0.031)*** (0.063) (0.072)** (0.040) (0.027)*** (0.057)** (0.134) (0.057)* LBT 3 to 4 x Direct TLE -0.011 -0.100 -0.131 -0.165 -0.055 -0.109 -0.064 -0.029 -0.081 (0.028) (0.027)*** (0.049)*** (0.084)* (0.041) (0.027)*** (0.061) (0.091) (0.058) LBT 5 to 12 x Direct TLE 0.006 -0.099 -0.116 -0.237 -0.028 -0.123 0.015 0.022 -0.130 (0.052) (0.031)*** (0.051)** (0.084)*** (0.049) (0.036)*** (0.070) (0.106) (0.062)** PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 31 Asian-PI Latino White Black Foreign HS HS Diploma GED or Equivalent Adult Ed Non HS graduate LBT 3 to 4 x Transferable ESL 0.068 0.019 -0.018 0.105 0.068 0.061 0.025 0.002 0.019 (0.038)* (0.029) (0.049) (0.091) (0.039)* (0.029)** (0.064) (0.099) (0.048) LBT 5 to 12 x Transferable ESL 0.022 -0.055 -0.113 0.159 -0.017 -0.004 0.028 -0.123 -0.065 (0.053) (0.035) (0.057)* (0.095)* (0.050) (0.041) (0.070) (0.114) (0.048) Constant 0.224 0.001 -0.062 0.010 0.105 0.091 0.101 0.497 0.065 (0.074)*** (0.044) (0.066) (0.128) (0.057)* (0.065) (0.170) (0.193)** (0.099) Obs 30,069 15,478 12,017 1,434 23,529 23,564 2,939 1,234 3,937 R-squared 0.255 0.188 0.273 0.287 0.257 0.228 0.248 0.363 0.245 SOURCES: Author calculations from COMIS data. NOTES: Each column is a separate regression on pathway features using the population indicated in the column. All models include gender, race/ethnicity/highest level of education, academic preparedness/and low-income covariates, as well as year, college, and term fixed effects. Reference categories: Asian, foreign HS, permanent resident, non-traditional student, one/two levels below transfe r *** p< l.lm , ** p< l.lq , * p< l.m. Only main effects are shown here, but full results are available upon request. All models only include those students enrolled in ESL pathways in our catalog scan and enrolled in college for the first time between nlml and nlmn . PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 32 TABLE B mt Fixed effects models of ESL pathway features on accumulating transfer credits, within r years —by race/ethnicity and education status Asian-PI Latino White Black Foreign HS HS Diploma GED or Equivalent Adult Ed Non HS graduate Student Took an Integrated Course 3.623 2.232 2.112 4.193 3.088 1.510 12.256 5.308 11.316 (2.512) (2.144) (3.873) (6.801) (2.234) (2.817) (4.649)*** (10.101) (6.366)* Sequence Feeds into TLE -3.818 10.833 -2.114 10.841 -5.361 17.051 27.425 2.615 13.732 (1.141)*** (2.329)*** (3.406) (6.601) (2.196)** (3.574)*** (6.426)*** (18.043) (10.096) Student Took Transferable ESL Course 7.975 8.587 12.208 16.721 7.723 8.792 11.902 13.850 9.389 (2.650)*** (2.143)*** (3.255)*** (6.986)** (2.796)*** (2.604)*** (3.840)*** (10.638) (4.174)** Integrated Student x Feed Direct TLE -0.671 -0.316 -0.014 -6.724 -1.868 -0.817 -2.976 0.010 -4.285 (2.664) (2.384) (3.221) (6.678) (2.278) (2.883) (4.772) (8.278) (4.641) LBT 3 to 4 -5.124 -0.695 -2.366 7.717 -5.892 -0.151 2.196 -11.071 3.764 (1.343)*** (1.742) (4.321) (6.942) (2.091)*** (2.192) (4.856) (11.508) (5.726) LBT 5 to 12 -10.929 -4.206 -4.473 -1.106 -10.376 -5.391 0.875 -3.848 0.718 (2.501)*** (1.927)** (4.872) (7.961) (3.191)*** (2.702)** (6.752) (13.014) (6.668) LBT 3 to 4 x Integrated Student 0.283 0.717 2.629 -0.435 1.564 0.908 -6.176 1.040 -4.408 (1.125) (1.774) (1.832) (5.641) (1.037) (1.529) (3.042)** (6.789) (4.258) LBT 5 to 12 x Integrated Student 1.222 5.388 -1.213 3.488 0.425 2.151 -1.928 2.404 -2.447 (2.159) (2.075)** (3.011) (6.229) (2.395) (1.901) (4.971) (7.099) (4.611) LBT 3 to 4 x Direct TLE 0.870 -5.309 -2.809 -6.309 -0.615 -5.420 -1.528 8.839 -4.775 (1.176) (1.542)*** (3.742) (6.405) (1.831) (1.891)*** (4.017) (7.618) (4.393) LBT 5 to 12 x Direct TLE 0.560 -7.709 -2.460 -7.904 -0.375 -4.977 -4.825 1.554 -12.501 (1.750) (2.752)*** (4.261) (7.754) (2.474) (2.454)** (5.560) (9.086) (5.470)** PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 33 Asian-PI Latino White Black Foreign HS HS Diploma GED or Equivalent Adult Ed Non HS graduate LBT 3 to 4 x Transferable ESL 2.443 5.196 -0.211 0.670 3.930 3.380 2.053 2.366 1.895 (1.355)* (1.544)*** (2.838) (6.416) (1.502)** (1.288)** (3.901) (9.588) (4.260) LBT 5 to 12 x Transferable ESL 5.646 7.154 4.798 7.338 8.043 6.396 3.222 3.072 9.386 (2.267)** (2.402)*** (3.301) (7.422) (2.653)*** (2.332)*** (3.878) (10.405) (3.931)** Constant 72.884 55.723 63.909 41.321 73.197 51.103 39.236 54.144 35.756 (2.767)*** (2.937)*** (5.252)*** (9.969)*** (3.114)*** (4.448)*** (6.725)*** (21.024)** (11.426)*** Obs 29,525 14,915 11,729 1,367 23,088 23,066 2,851 1,178 3,739 R-squared 0.117 0.100 0.156 0.297 0.114 0.126 0.150 0.259 0.149 SOURCES: Author calculations from COMIS data. NOTES: All models include gender, race/ethnicity/highest level of education, academic preparedness/and low-income covariates, as well as year, college, and term fixed effects. Reference categories: Asian, foreign HS, permanent resident, non-traditional stu dent, one/two levels below transfer. *** p< l.lm , ** p< l.lq , * p< l.m. Only main effects are shown here, but full results are available upon request. All models only include those students enrolled in ESL pathways in our catalog scan and enrolled in college for the first time between nlml and nlmn . PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 34 TABLE B mu Fixed effects models of ESL pathway features on degree- attainment, within r years —by race/ethnicity and education status Asian-PI Latino White Black Foreign HS HS Diploma GED or Equivalent Adult Ed Non HS graduate Student Took an Integrated Course 0.013 0.043 -0.026 0.104 0.037 0.013 0.131 -0.073 -0.010 (0.050) (0.024)* (0.047) (0.054)* (0.038) (0.042) (0.049)*** (0.104) (0.046) Sequence Feeds into TLE -0.057 0.056 0.016 0.011 -0.010 0.079 0.072 -0.346 0.009 (0.048) (0.033)* (0.048) (0.048) (0.038) (0.050) (0.068) (0.130)*** (0.068) Student Took Transferable ESL Course 0.144 0.051 0.149 0.099 0.175 0.081 0.094 0.030 0.137 (0.047)*** (0.026)* (0.038)*** (0.054)* (0.035)*** (0.025)*** (0.050)* (0.113) (0.039)*** Integrated Student x Feed Direct TLE 0.076 0.028 0.039 0.018 0.020 0.038 -0.084 0.190 0.084 (0.065) (0.035) (0.043) (0.042) (0.044) (0.049) (0.057) (0.091)** (0.040)** LBT 3 to 4 -0.032 -0.026 0.012 0.067 0.014 -0.012 -0.135 -0.140 -0.002 (0.040) (0.030) (0.049) (0.055) (0.037) (0.028) (0.051)** (0.132) (0.054) LBT 5 to 12 -0.057 -0.025 -0.063 0.091 -0.018 -0.027 -0.213 -0.232 -0.005 (0.063) (0.030) (0.056) (0.053)* (0.049) (0.034) (0.061)*** (0.139)* (0.063) LBT 3 to 4 x Integrated Student 0.015 0.009 0.028 -0.085 -0.016 0.018 0.001 -0.102 0.018 (0.022) (0.023) (0.032) (0.050)* (0.019) (0.020) (0.038) (0.069) (0.040) LBT 5 to 12 x Integrated Student -0.045 -0.045 0.028 -0.114 -0.054 -0.031 -0.011 0.002 0.016 (0.036) (0.025)* (0.038) (0.051)** (0.033)* (0.024) (0.044) (0.072) (0.043) LBT 3 to 4 x Direct TLE 0.067 -0.035 -0.015 -0.068 0.023 -0.029 0.121 0.246 0.039 (0.034)* (0.022) (0.048) (0.050) (0.030) (0.023) (0.045)*** (0.079)*** (0.046) LBT 5 to 12 x Direct TLE 0.042 -0.019 0.016 -0.131 0.029 -0.040 0.164 0.167 -0.027 (0.047) (0.028) (0.054) (0.051)** (0.036) (0.026) (0.054)*** (0.086)* (0.054) PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 35 Asian-PI Latino White Black Foreign HS HS Diploma GED or Equivalent Adult Ed Non HS graduate LBT 3 to 4 x Transferable ESL -0.046 0.028 -0.052 0.024 -0.053 0.013 0.025 0.061 -0.058 (0.051) (0.034) (0.037) (0.058) (0.038) (0.030) (0.048) (0.113) (0.043) LBT 5 to 12 x Transferable ESL -0.020 0.005 -0.081 -0.004 -0.073 0.013 0.021 0.124 -0.051 (0.053) (0.029) (0.041)* (0.071) (0.040)* (0.031) (0.057) (0.116) (0.045) Constant 0.203 0.002 0.003 0.039 0.132 0.039 0.015 0.358 0.023 (0.046)*** (0.035) (0.055) (0.068) (0.042)*** (0.050) (0.084) (0.169)** (0.073) Obs 30,069 15,478 12,017 1,434 23,529 23,564 2,939 1,234 3,937 R-squared 0.127 0.093 0.096 0.180 0.122 0.102 0.143 0.167 0.139 SOURCES: Author calculations from COMIS data. NOTES: Each column is a separate regression on pathway features using the population indicated in the column. All models include gender, race/ethnicity/highest level of education, academic preparedness/and low-income covariates, as well as year, college, and term fixed effects. Reference categories: Asian, foreign HS, permanent resident, non-traditional student, one/two levels below transfer. *** p< l.lm , ** p< l.lq , * p< l.m. Only main effects are shown here, but full results are availab le upon request. All models only include those students enrolled in ESL pathways in our catalog scan and enrolled in college for the first time between nlml and nlmn . PPIC.ORGTechnical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 36 TABLE B nl Fixed effects models of ESL pathway features on transfer to a four-year co llege, within r years —by race/ethnicity and education status Asian-PI Latino White Black Foreign HS HS Diploma GED or Equivalent Adult Ed Non HS graduate Student Took an Integrated Course -0.012 -0.006 0.031 0.002 0.023 -0.004 0.064 -0.044 0.010 (0.030) (0.023) (0.046) (0.056) (0.023) (0.042) (0.065) (0.087) (0.042) Sequence Feeds into TLE -0.007 0.036 0.045 0.047 0.012 0.065 -0.010 0.031 0.107 (0.016) (0.023) (0.031) (0.136) (0.023) (0.020)*** (0.178) (0.070) (0.033)*** Student Took Transferable ESL Course -0.007 0.029 0.070 0.053 0.005 0.054 -0.040 -0.044 0.021 (0.021) (0.014)** (0.029)** (0.041) (0.018) (0.014)*** (0.036) (0.084) (0.031) Integrated Student x Feed Direct TLE 0.033 0.008 0.005 0.025 0.006 0.020 -0.046 0.037 -0.018 (0.029) (0.018) (0.037) (0.043) (0.025) (0.040) (0.061) (0.051) (0.028) LBT 3 to 4 -0.056 -0.002 0.039 0.023 -0.024 0.015 -0.030 -0.028 0.004 (0.020)*** (0.018) (0.048) (0.080) (0.025) (0.024) (0.050) (0.086) (0.043) LBT 5 to 12 -0.158 -0.025 0.000 -0.021 -0.107 -0.034 -0.062 -0.048 -0.044 (0.034)*** (0.019) (0.046) (0.077) (0.032)*** (0.027) (0.056) (0.084) (0.044) LBT 3 to 4 x Integrated Student -0.018 -0.005 -0.044 -0.085-0.037 -0.014 -0.041 0.002 -0.006 (0.017) (0.014) (0.024)* (0.055) (0.020)* (0.014) (0.040) (0.072) (0.043) LBT 5 to 12 x Integrated Student -0.014 -0.008 -0.050 -0.041-0.023 -0.040 -0.076 0.038 -0.003 (0.018) (0.017) (0.022)** (0.055) (0.018) (0.017)** (0.040)* (0.072) (0.042) LBT 3 to 4 x Direct TLE -0.027 -0.017 -0.056 -0.030-0.008 -0.069 -0.073 -0.071 -0.063 (0.017) (0.014) (0.039) (0.083) (0.019) (0.021)*** (0.044) (0.050) (0.036)* LBT 5 to 12 x Direct TLE -0.006 -0.006 -0.031 -0.0830.019 -0.050 -0.063 -0.139 -0.082 (0.032) (0.016) (0.035) (0.077) (0.028) (0.027)* (0.051) (0.056)** (0.034)** LBT 3 to 4 x Transferable ESL 0.061 -0.018 -0.056 0.014 0.028 -0.009 0.099 0.066 -0.000 (0.018)*** (0.013) (0.025)** (0.058) (0.016)* (0.019) (0.039)** (0.058) (0.040) LBT 5 to 12 x Transferable ESL 0.062 -0.013 -0.059 -0.0300.023 -0.022 0.063 0.108 0.017 (0.021)*** (0.015) (0.027)** (0.063) (0.019) (0.016) (0.040) (0.093) (0.036) Constant 0.196 0.070 0.078 -0.003 0.140 0.140 0.305 0.126 0.146 (0.031)*** (0.031)** (0.052) (0.144) (0.034)*** (0.029)*** (0.185) (0.109) (0.035)*** PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 37 Asian-PI Latino White Black Foreign HS HS Diploma GED or Equivalent Adult Ed Non HS graduate Obs 30,069 15,478 12,017 1,434 23,529 23,564 2,939 1,234 3,937 R-squared 0.178 0.049 0.133 0.168 0.155 0.147 0.162 0.170 0.146 SOURCES: Author calculations from COMIS data. NOTES: Each column is a separate regression on pathway features using the population indicated in the column. All models include gender, race/ethnicity/highest level of education, academic preparedness/and low-income covariates, as well as year, college, and term fixed effects. Reference categories: Asian, foreign HS, permanent resident, non- traditional student, one/two levels below transfer. *** p< l.lm , ** p< l.lq , * p< l.m. Only main effects are shown here, but full results are available upon request. All models only include those student s enrolled in ESL pathways in our catalog scan and enrolled in college for the first time between nlml and nlmn . PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 38 TABLE B nm Wald chi-square test across race/ethnic groups, by ESL pathway feature and outcome Throughput (3-Year) Throughput (6-Year) Proportion Transfer Credits Transfer to 4-Year Degree Attainment Integration Asian/Black (2.75) (0.0973)* White/Black (5.01) (0.0252)** Latino/Black (4.92) (0.0266)** Direct TLE Asian/Black (9.57) (0.0020)*** Asian/Latino (4.06) (0.0439)** Asian/Latino (37.17) (0.0000)*** Asian/White (3.01) (0.0826)* Asian/Latino (6.64) (0.0100)*** Latino/Black (14.35) (0.0002)*** Asian/Black (14.83) (0.0001)*** Asian/Black (5.41) (0.0201)** White/Black (12.95) (0.0003)*** Asian/White (8.59) (0.0034)*** Latino/White (9.01) (0.0027)*** Latino/Black (10.63) (0.0011)*** White/Black (4.30) (0.0381)** Transfer ESL Asian/Black (3.68) (0.0550)* Asian/Latino (3.18) (0.0747)* Asian/Latino (4.28) (0.0387)** Latino/Black (3.69) (0.0547)** Asian/White (6.97) (0.0083)*** Latino/White (4.81) (0.0283)** White/Black (7.70) (0.0055)*** NOTES: Each column represents an outcome, and each row header indicates the pathway feature within which we compare race/ethnic group coefficients. *** p< l.lm , ** p< l.lq , * p< l.m. Only statistically significant results are shown, but full results are available upon request. Throughput ( o-Year) includes those students enrolled in ESL pathways in our catalog scan and enrolled in college for the first time between nlml and nlmq ; all other outcomes are that between nlml and nlmn . PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 39 TABLE B nn Wald chi-square test across prior education groups, by ESL pathway feature and outcome Throughput (3-Year) Throughput (6-Year) Proportion Transfer Credits Transfer to 4-Year Degree Attainment Integration Foreign/AdultEd (6.29) (0.0122)** Foreign/GED (3.90) (0.0483)** Foreign/GED (2.89) (0.0892)* HS/AdultEd (7.32) (0.0068)*** HS/GED (7.40) (0.0065)*** HS/GED (6.10) (0.0135)** GED/AdultEd (6.33) (0.0119)** GED/AdultEd (4.79) (0.0286)** Adult Ed/Non HS Grad (4.79) (0.0285)** GED/NonHS Grad (6.48) (0.0109)** Direct TLE Foreign/HS (4.33) (0.0373)** Foreign/AdultEd (9.15) (0.0025)*** Foreign/HS (21.63) (0.0000)*** Foreign/HS (4.38) (0.0363)** Foreign/HS (2.98) (0.0845)* Foreign/GED (3.71) (0.0539)* HS/AdultEd (12.58) (0.0004)*** Foreign/GED (21.19) (0.0000)*** Foreign/NonHS (8.18) (0.0042)*** Foreign/AdultEd (6.80) (0.0091)*** HS/AdultEd (4.28) (0.0385)** AdultEd/NonHS (8.63) (0.0033)*** Foreign/NonHS (3.95) (0.0468)** HS/AdultEd (10.71) (0.0011)*** GED/AdultEd (4.43) (0.0354)** HS/GED (3.15) (0.0758)* GED/AdultEd (10.92) (0.0010)*** AdultEd/NonHS (9.21) (0.0024)*** Transfer ESL Foreign/HS (4.68) (0.0305)** Foreign/HS (5.94) (0.0148)** Foreign/HS (16.07) (0.0001)*** Foreign/NonHS (3.29) (0.0697)* HS/GED (7.97) (0.0047)*** Foreign/GED (3.53) (0.0602)* HS/GED (6.35) (0.0117)** Foreign/AdultEd (2.78) (0.0955)* GED/NonHS (3.40) (0.0650)* NOTES: Each column represents an outcome, and each row header indicates the pathway feature within which we compare race/ethnic group coefficients. *** p< l.lm , ** p< l.lq , * p< l.m. Only statistically significant results are shown, but full results are av ailable upon request. Throughput ( o-Year) includes those students enrolled in ESL pathways in our catalog scan and enrolled in college for the first time between nlml and nlmq ; all other outcomes are that between nlml and nlmn . The Public Policy Institute of California is dedicated to informing and improving public policy in California through independent, objective, nonpartisan research. Public Policy Institute of California 500 Washington Street, Suite 600 San Francisco, CA 94111 T: 415.291.440 0 F: 415.291.4401 PPIC.ORG P PIC Sacramento Center Senator Office Building 1121 L Street, Suite 801 Sacramento, CA 95814 T: 916.440.1120 F: 916.440.1121" } ["___content":protected]=> string(184) "

English as a Second Language in Californias Community Colleges, Technical Appendix

" ["_permalink":protected]=> string(113) "https://www.ppic.org/publication/english-as-a-second-language-in-californias-community-colleges/0419orr-appendix/" ["_next":protected]=> array(0) { } ["_prev":protected]=> array(0) { } ["_css_class":protected]=> NULL ["id"]=> int(19210) ["ID"]=> int(19210) ["post_author"]=> string(1) "4" ["post_content"]=> string(0) "" ["post_date"]=> string(19) "2019-04-29 10:57:11" ["post_excerpt"]=> string(0) "" ["post_parent"]=> int(19134) ["post_status"]=> string(7) "inherit" ["post_title"]=> string(82) "English as a Second Language in Californias Community Colleges, Technical Appendix" ["post_type"]=> string(10) "attachment" ["slug"]=> string(16) "0419orr-appendix" ["__type":protected]=> NULL ["_wp_attached_file"]=> string(20) "0419orr-appendix.pdf" ["wpmf_size"]=> string(7) "1935962" ["wpmf_filetype"]=> string(3) "pdf" ["wpmf_order"]=> string(1) "0" ["searchwp_content"]=> string(80093) "English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges Technical Appendices CONTENTS Appendix A. Key Terms, Data and Methods Appendix B. Figures and Tables Olga Rodriguez, Sarah Bohn, Laura Hill, and Bonnie Brooks with research support from Sergio Sanchez and Stephanie Pulles Supported with funding from Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the College Futures Foundation, and the Sutton Family Fund PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California ’s Community Colleges 2 Appendix A. Key Terms, Data , and Methods Glossary Sequence course: ESL course that is required as part of the ESL sequence in order to access transfer -level English (i.e. ESL pre -requisite to transfer -level English). Non -sequence course: ESL course that is not required in order to access transfer -level English courses (i.e. advisory or elective ESL courses). Credit ESL: ESL courses offered to CCC students for credit and for whi ch students pay tuition. Many of these courses confer non -degree applicable credit, but some do confer degree applicable or transferrable credit (see Appendix Table B1 for more details). AB 705 only applies to credit ESL. Non -Credit ESL : ESL courses offered to CCC students at no cost. These courses are typically open entry/open exit and final grades are not recorded on student transcripts. AB 705 does not apply to non -credit ESL. Degree/transfer -seeking ESL students: a student who (1) was ever enrolled in a n ESL sequence course in their community college career , AND 2) ever took at least one degree- applicable course outside of ESL and transfer- level English in their community college career and/or at least one develo pmental English/math course. Throughout t he report we use the terms degree/transfer seeking, degree- seeking and degree-intending interchangeably. Sequence length: number of levels that a n ESL student needs to take before being able to enroll in transfer-level English (e.g. levels below transfer -level English). Sequence length includes ESL course levels and any developmental English levels and/or non -credit ESL levels, if they are listed as pre -requisites in a sequence leading to transfer -level English. Sequence end point: an ESL sequence can eith er lead directly to transfer-level English or to developmental English. Transfer -level English: In this report, when we talk about transfer- level English (TLE) courses we are referring to the lowest -level English courses that are transferable to the University of California (UC) and/or to the California State University (CSU) systems on the basis of articulation agreements. These courses are also known as gateway courses. For English the first transfer- level composition course (C-ID ENGL 100) qualifies as t he gateway course. We also include ESL versions of freshman composition if the course fulfills the TLE requirements —these courses were offered at 5 colleges and 7% of successful TLE completions within 6 -years were done via the ESL version of freshman compo sition. Traditional sequence : Curriculum that separates instruction into discrete language skills (i.e. writing, reading, grammar, and/or listening/speaking). A sequence at a given college is coded as traditional if 75 percent or more of the courses being offered in the sequence use a traditional approach. Integrated sequence: Combines instruction of two or more skills into a single course (i.e. reading and writing). Integration is also known as horizontal compression. A sequence at a given college is code d as integrated if 75 percent or more of courses being offered in the sequence use an integrated approach. Mixed sequence: Defined as sequences requiring both integrated and traditional courses within a single ESL sequence. Accordion sequence: Defined as a sequence that allows students to skip levels based on demonstrated proficiency. Compressed sequence: Defined as a sequence that combines two levels of ESL into a single level. This is also known as vertical compression. PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California ’s Community Colleges 3 Data Our analysis utilizes both quantitative and qualitative data to both descriptively illustrate the ESL landscape of the California community college system and evaluate the effect of primary structural features of ESL programs on various indica tors of student success. Below we detail our quantitative and qualitative approaches . ESL Course Scan An important component of our qualitative approach is a comprehensive scan of ESL course information collected from official college documents, namely col lege websites and course catalogs, to accurately capture the sequence of courses English learners would need to take in order to access transfer -level English , by college. Our scan was informed by conversations with members of the California Association of Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages (CATESOL), the California Community College Chancellor’s Office (CCCCO) and the California Community College Academic Senate . Through these conversations we learned of the importance of appropriately re -coding the levels below transfer -level English (CB 21) data element in the Chancellor’s Office MIS student database. The fact that some ESL courses transfer had resulted in colleges coding this variable using the same strategy that is used to code transfer -level English. Additionally, through the conversations we learned that an analysis of ESL would need to accurately capture the credit and transferability status of the courses, which could also be inaccurately captured in the data. These coding issues have implications for published outcome rates across the system, and highlight the importance of a thorough scan of course catalogs to ensure that course information is accurately captured. To begin, we used the California Community College Chancellor’s Offi ce Management Information System (CO MIS) database to obtain a list of all ESL courses offered in the CCC between 2009 and 2017. We used catalogs from the most recent academic year of college catalogs f or all 114 colleges (2017- 2018) to obtain and update the necessary course information (see below). If there were courses in the list that were not in the most recent catalog, we also reviewed earlier catalogs to ensure we accurately captured changes in the ESL sequence. We employ a “backwards mapping” approach in our course scan methodology: at each college in our study, we identify the transfer-level English course offered. From there, we trace out the sequence of courses to transfer- level English by identifying the required courses that precede the transfer-level English course, until we identify the last required course that a student needs to take in order to reach transfer -level English (i.e. the required course that has no prerequisites). Once we ident ify the sequence of courses, we assign the level below the transfer-level English course by counting how many courses proceed a given course in the sequence in order for a student to take transfer -level English , and update our database of courses with the new coding. For example, a “1” code means the course is the only course needed before taking transfer -level English , “2” means there are two courses needed before taking transfer-level English , “3” means there are three courses, and so on. We also updated the course data relating to a course’s credit -bearing status, transferability status, and number of credits offered where relevant. In the event that ESL sequence information at a given college was not readily available or comprehendible from college docum ents, we reached out to ESL department members at the college via email and phone to gain more clarity. Tables 1 and 2 illustrate details of the coding changes w e made through our scan. Our study includes a total of 105 colleges. The seven colleges not inc luded in our study (Cerro Coso, Copper Mountain, College of the Desert, Lassen, College of the Siskiyous, Clovis, Victor Valley) did not have readily available or comprehendible information about their respective ESL sequences, and/or could not be reached for more information. These colleges collectively enrolled about 3% of students in our sample. PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 4 TABLE A m Number of coding changes made for courses part of an ESL sequence to transfer-level English, by type of code change Total Credit Status Transfer Status Units Maximum Levels Below Transfer-level English # Courses 823 218 232 378 636 % 72 19 20 33 55 NOTES: Categories do not add up to total because courses can have more than one category recoded TABLE A n Difference in the number of levels in the ESL sequence after course scan Change in Number of Levels in ESL Sequence Number of Colleges % of All Colleges Increase 38 36 Decrease 10 9 Same 57 54 SOURCE: Authors’ calculations based on MIS data and college catalog scan. Student Longitudinal Data Our quantitative approach utilizes student-level longitudinal data from the California Community College Chancellor’s Office Management Information System (COMIS). Students in the dataset are enrolled across the 114 community colleges that comprise the California Community College system, and includes information on student demographics, course-taking behavior, course elements (e.g. title of course, basic skills status, minimum/maximum number of credits, etc.), and student outcomes (grades, credits earned, degree attainment, transfer, etc.). The timeframe covered by the data spans the 2009-10 academic year through the 2016-17 academic year. Appendix B Table B10 lists the variables from the COMIS data that we use in our analyses. ESL Faculty/Staff Interviews To inform our quantitative results, we interviewed ESL faculty and administrators from various California community colleges. We selected interviewees from colleges that 1) demonstrated throughput rates that were both above and below the state average, 2) were representative of different ESL pathways we studied: traditional pathways, integrated pathways, mixed pathways, accordion model pathways, pathways that fed into developmental English coursework, pathways that fed directly into transfer-level English, pathways with parallel credit and non- credit sequences, and pathways with transferable ESL coursework, and 3) offered pathways at scale. We invited a total of 24 individuals from 20 community colleges and one adult school partner for an interview. They included a mix ESL faculty, department chairs, division deans and one adult school administrator. A total of 14 interviews were conducted in November and December 2018—including one group interview—across 13 community colleges. The final interview sample included 15 ESL department chairs and/or ESL faculty and 2 division deans. We spoke with each interviewee for about one hour over the phone. Interviewees were asked a variety of questions pertaining to their background in ESL; ESL sequence offerings, assessment, placement, and enrollment in ESL; ESL sequence experience; ESL students; ESL outcomes; professional development; and the role of AB705 in ESL. The data collection and data analysis were carried out simultaneously to avoid the collection of repetitive and unfocused data (Merriam 1998). Particularly, after each interview was conducted, researchers debriefed, reviewed detailed data notes and audio recordings, and kept notes to capture reflections, emerging themes, and points that needed to be pursued further. This process of review and reflection informed all subsequent interviews. PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 5 In this manner, data collected from each interview was continuously assessed and informed future interviews until data collection was complete. The data was organized and coded on a secure Excel database. This approach was used to come up with a number of patterns and themes. Empirical Strategy for Estimating the Overall Effect of ESL Pathways on Student Course Success Sample Construction To estimate how ESL pathways affect student course success, our analysis is focused on students who first enrolled in the CCC between 2009-10 and 2014-15 academic years. We define a cohort as the first year of enrollment in any course in the California community college system. Students are tracked for either 3 or 6 years depending on when they entered. Namely, students entering between 2009-10 and 2011-12 are tracked for six years and students entering between 2009-10 and 2014-15 are tracked for three years. Our cohort definition and resulting statistics differ from the Chancellor’s Office Student Success Scorecard in that the Scorecard defines cohorts based on when the student first attempted their first ESL course, we define a cohort based on when the student first enrolled at the college. Additionally, the Scorecard only includes credit-ESL enrollments while our data restricts to all students who took ESL courses that were part of a sequence leading to transfer-level English, this includes both credit and non-credit ESL courses. Within our timeframe, 13-20 colleges offer non-credit coursework as part of the ESL sequence, and 3% of our sample population take these non-credit courses. The ESL population is notably different than the populations we focus on in our previous work in developmental math and English. Most notably, we include students with both valid and invalid SSNs in our study. Given the nature of our population of study and the proportion of invalid SSN holders in our sample (50% of our general ESL population; 30% of our degree-seeking population), we decide that including invalid SSN holders is paramount to accurately reflecting the true composition of ESL students in our study. However, by including invalid SSN holders in our sample, our unit of observation is at the college-student ID level instead of the SSN level. The main drawback of this approach is that we cannot observe students who may transition to different colleges within the community college system by using the college-student ID, so we may be double-counting students. However, given that the rate at which students transition to different community colleges within our valid SSN population is low (7%), we are confident that the results we present are robust. We restrict our analysis sample to 1) students with valid enrollments (students that received valid grades), 2) first- time students aged 15-64 at time of entry into the California community college system who 3) are sequence students (a student that took an ESL course that is required in order to access to transfer-level English) and 4) are degree-intending students (a student that takes at least one degree-applicable course outside of ESL or transfer- level English and/or developmental math/English course). Our definition of valid enrollments is expanded to include grades students would receive in non-credit coursework (e.g. “UG” ungraded, “UD” ungraded dependent). We exclude students who hold bachelor’s or associate’s degrees at time of entry; students enrolled in only summer or winter terms; students enrolled in adult schools; and dual enrollment students. After implementing these restrictions, our sample of interest includes 120,365 first-time students in the CCC system across the 2010-15 cohorts. Tables 3 and 4 details a breakdown of the sample by cohort and ESL sequence type, respectively. PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 6 TABLE A o Number of students, by cohort (year first enrolled in CCC system) Total 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 All 356,209 75,274 63,229 55,560 52,543 54,229 55,374 Our Sample 120,365 21,609 22,502 20,416 18,674 18,783 18,381 % 34 29 36 37 36 35 33 NOTES: Author calculations from Chancellor’s Office MIS data. Cohort year is defined as nllu -nlml academic year = nlml , nlml -nlmm academic year= nlmm , and so on. Our definition of a degree-intending student is of particular importance, and is distinct from that of the CCCCO and other stakeholders. The CCCCO defines degree-intending students as a function of a student’s informed or informal educational goal. However, the variables used to capture educational goals are not complete for years prior to 2015, which directly impacts students within our timeframe of analysis. Instead, our definition is based on course-taking behavior in at least one developmental math/English or degree-applicable courses. We employ a list of robustness checks to ensure that our degree intention flag does accurately capture students that are degree- intending, one of which is to compare the educational goals of our definition of degree-intending students to non- degree-intending students for cohorts 2015 forward. We find a high percentage of the degree-intending students in our sample with student goals relating to earning a degree and/or transferring, with about 63% of students indicating such, compared to 15% of students that never took a required course in the ESL sequence that leads to transfer-level English (e.g. non-sequence students). We also find that most sequence students, the population of students we presume are degree-intending, indicate degree-seeking behavior by our definition (about 70% of sequence students). TABLE A p Number of colleges/students in ESL sequences with various features All Structure Type Sequence Type Total Feed Directly into TLE Feed into Developmental English Traditional Integrated Mixed Accordion Compression Colleges 101 61 40 29 44 20 4 3 % * 60 40 29 44 20 4 3 Students 120,365 77,267 43,091 41,486 40,592 34,683 2,938 659 % * 64 36 34 34 29 2 1 NOTES: In the timeframe of our analytical sample, the total number of colleges in each category fluctuates, as some colleges established ESL programs in different years (e.g. Foothill in nlmm and Chaffey in nlmq ), and colleges have changed their structure and sequence types between nlml and nlms . PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California ’s Community Colleges 7 TABLE A5 N umber of colleges/students in ESL sequences with various features , by sequence type and structure type Sequence Type Structure Type Feed Directly into TLE Feed into Developmental English Transferable ESL % (Colleges) % (Students) % (Colleges) % (Students) % (Colleges) % (Students) Traditional 55.2 71.8 44.8 28.3 69.0 59.9 Integrated 54.6 41.4 45.5 58.6 54.6 52.4 Mixed 70.0 81.3 30.0 18.7 55.0 42.6 Accordion 80.0 64.3 20.0 35.7 60.0 33.9 Compression 100.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 33.3 58.1 NOTES: College counts/percentages are for the most recent academic year (2016/17), while student counts/percentages reflect s tudents enrolled for the first time in the CCC system between the 2009/10 and 2014/15 academic years. In the timeframe of our analytical sample, the total number of colleges in each category fluctuates, as some colleges established ESL programs in different years (e.g. Foothill in 2011 and Chaffey in 2015), and colleges have changed their s tructure and sequence types between 2010 and 2017. Missing students do not have ESL sequence type/structure information due to being first enrolled at a college in a year when ESL sequence type/structure i nformation was not available. Refer to Table 4 for row totals. TABLE A6 T hroughput rates (3 -year & 6 -year) in ESL sequences with various features All Structure Type Sequence Type Total Feed Directly into TLE Feed into Developmental English Traditional Integrated Mixed Accordion Three-Year # 120,365 77,267 43,091 41,486 40,592 34,683 2,938 % 26 30 18 28 22 29 16 Six-Year # 64,527 40,066 24,457 22,573 20,926 20,509 515 % 34 39 26 33 31 38 15 NOTES: Throughput rates (%) indicate students that have completed transfer-level English as a share of the total number of students enrolled at colleges within each structure/sequence type (#). We cannot track 6-year outcomes for students enrolled in colleges offering accordion model sequences at this time due to small sample sizes limited tim eframe for follow -up (e.g. t he earliest implementation of accordion model reform is in academic year 2012 -2013 ). M issing students from row totals: when assigning a student a college -level ESL sequence and structure type we used the model what was in place when the student first enrolled at the college; if a student first entered a college in years where there was no ESL sequence in place that led a student to transfer-level English they will have a missing college -level ESL sequence/structure type. Three -year throughput rates include the 2010 -2015 cohorts, and six -year throughput rates include the 2010 - 2012 cohorts. Regression Methods Our treatment and control groups are as follows: our treatment group includes students that either enrolled in integrated coursework, in transferable ESL coursework, or a college that offered a sequence that feeds directly into transfer -level English , with the potential to be in more than one category. Our control groups in comparison to each of the former treatment grou ps include students that either enrolled in traditional coursework, in no transferable ESL coursework, or a college that offered a sequence that feeds into developmental English coursework, respectively, with the potential to be in more than one category. Our study focuses on several key outcomes: completion of transfer-level English , transferable credits earned, transfer to a four -year college, and degree attainment. Completion is measured as the share of students within a cohort that successfully complete s a PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California ’s Community Colleges 8 transfer -level composition course within a given timeframe, also known as throughput . Credits earned is measured as units earned as a share of units attempted, each by total units and total transferable units. We utilize various regression techniques t o estimate the effect of ESL pathway features on student success, primarily naïve ordinary least squares (OLS) regressions. Our regression models take on the following form: ���� ���������������� = ���� PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California ’s Community Colleges 9 starting in an ESL sequence versus the devel opmental writing sequence. Several of Hodara’s primary findings are in line with ours, namely that longer ESL sequences negatively impact ESL students’ progression through college and degree attainment. In addition, transfer-level analyses conducted by cam pus institutional researchers point to some of the trends we observe in our study. For example, Solano College found that 27% of students who started in ESL completed transfer-level English in an average time of under a year and a half after offering a thr ee-level integrated sequence in fall 2015, a three -fold increase from the 2012 completion rate (California Acceleration Project, 2018). Another study by Elizabeth Park ( forthcoming) investigates community college students’ progression through the credit ES L sequence in the Los Angeles Community College District (LACCD), with a special focus on generation 1.5/2.0 students. Park’s findings mirror some of our own, most especially where students start in the sequence, 3 levels below transfer-level English or lower, which is comparable to our student population for the 2016- 2017 academic year (see Figure 3 in the report). Caveats While our analy sis employs statistical analysis and includes a substantial number of controls, we are unable to attribute causality to the findings and there are considerations to account for with regard to the data we use and our methods . Our data does not contain information pertaining to student assessment scores, placement recommendation, or high school GPA, all of which would most ac curately control for student academic record prior to enrolling in ESL . We use a student’s first course in the E SL sequence as a proxy for placement recommendation. Our sample of interest is the 2010 -2015 student cohorts, and we track student outcomes for these cohorts over three academic years (for the 2010 -2015 cohorts), as well as six academic years (for the 2010 -2012 cohorts). Given that there has been considerable change in the ESL landscape in our timeframe of interest, especially in more recent years, three years is still a relatively short amount of time to evaluate the effect of newly -reformed ESL pathways on longer -term outcomes such as transfer and degree completion. Time will generate larger sample sizes and allow for a more thorough evaluation of longer -term outcomes for accordion and compression strategies. Our analys is focuses on enrollment in ESL sequences in relation to student outcomes. However, other types of reforms may have also been implemented within our timeframe of interest that may a lso contribute to our results. However, per our conversations with faculty we learned that most of the changes to assessment and placement and some curricular reforms, have happened more recently, partly in response to AB 705. Some of the changes that may have occurred during our timeframe, including changes to the sequence endpoint, length of sequence, transferability of courses, or to assessment and placement can be partly addressed by i ncluding college fixed- effects in our model aims to account for these other reforms implemented at the college level . PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California ’s Community Colleges 10 Appendix B. Figures a nd Tables TABLE B1 C haracteristics of d egree-seeking ESL students , by race/ethnicity (Figure s 4 and 5 in report) Overall Latino Asian Black White Start in Sequence (Median) Educational attainment Less than HS 5.6 8.8 5.2 6.5 3.4 4 Adult school 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.1 2.2 4 High school diploma 32.8 53.2 28.6 30.7 25 3 GED / HS equivalency/ CA HS proficiency certificate 5.3 8.8 4.6 8.7 4.1 3 Foreign secondary school diploma 41.1 18 44.3 41.7 54.5 4 Unknown 13.5 9.6 15.9 11.3 10.9 4 Citizenship status U.S. Citizen 22.6 49.8 14.8 31.2 13.6 3 Permanent resident 38.1 29.2 40.9 39.6 52.1 4 Temporal resident 2.1 2.9 1.9 5.8 1.6 4 Refugee/Asylee 6.1 0.8 2.9 8.9 20.6 4 Student Visa holder (F1 or M1) 24.5 3.5 34.2 12.1 9.4 3 Other/Unknown 6.6 13.8 5.3 2.4 2.8 3 Gender Female 56.2 62.1 53.3 53 59.9 4 Male 42.9 37.1 46 46.3 39.1 3 Other characteristics Traditional-age college student 62.4 62.9 71.5 44.5 36.6 3 Financial aid recipient 55.9 69.6 48.2 72.1 71.1 4 EOPS recipient 19.5 18.4 17.4 18.6 30.9 4 Start in Sequence (Median) 3 3 3 4 4 Number of Students 120,365 27,301 55,982 2,587 22,755 SOURCES: Authors’ calculation based on MIS data. NOTES: Sample includes students first enrolled in ESL in the CCC system between the 2009-2010 and 2 014-2015 academic years. PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California ’s Community Colleges 11 TABLE B2 C haracteristics of d egree-seeking ESL students , by education status at first term of enrollment Overall Less Than HS Ad ult School US HS Diploma GED or Equivalent Foreign Secondary School Diploma Unknown Race/Ethnicity Latino 22.7 35.9 22.9 36.8 37.5 9.9 16 Asian 46.5 43.3 44.7 40.5 40.1 50 54.5 Black 2.1 2.5 1.5 2 3.5 2.2 1.8 White 18.9 11.7 26.4 14.4 14.4 25 15.2 Citizenship status U.S. Citizen 22.6 29.7 19.2 37 35.2 11.1 14.8 Permanent resident 38.1 46 56.9 37.2 41.2 38.9 31.2 Temporal resident 2.1 5.4 2.8 1.7 2.5 2.1 1.3 Refugee/Asylee 6.1 4.6 11.9 4 3.8 7.9 6.7 Student Visa holder (F1 or M1) 24.5 7.2 2.5 10 8.7 36.3 40.1 Other/Unknown 6.6 7.1 6.7 10.1 8.7 3.8 5.9 Gender Female 56.2 56.8 65.4 54.9 57.6 56.9 55.5 Male 42.9 41.7 33.2 44.3 41.6 42.4 43.2 Other characteristics Traditional -age college student 62.4 54 46.5 76.1 52.9 56.5 56.2 Financial aid recipient 55.9 67.8 75.4 67.9 67 46.4 44.5 EOPS recipient 19.5 20 25.3 21.8 20.7 19.2 13.4 Start in Sequence (Median) 3 4 4 3 3 4 4 Number of Students 120,365 6,706 1,908 39,526 6,432 49,507 16,286 SOURCES: Authors’ calculation based on MIS data. NOTES: Sample includes students first enrolled in ESL in the CCC system between the 2009-2010 and 2 014-2015 academic years. PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California ’s Community Colleges 12 FIGURE B1 Accordion models and compressed courses are two reforms ESL programs have adopted SOURCE: Author’s chart based on PPIC E SL program database. TABLE B3 Basic characteristics of ESL courses Sequence courses Non-sequence courses Non -credit 11% 25% Credit, non- degree applicable 66% 64% Credit, degree- applicable, including transferable 23% 12% Credit, transferable to CSU only 6% 3% Credit, transferable to CSU or UC 10% 1% Reading (traditional or integrated) 54% NA Writing (traditional or integrated) 80% NA Listening/speaking (traditional or integrated) 17% NA Grammar (traditional or integrated) 30% NA SOURCE: Author calculations from Chancellor ’s Office MIS data and PPIC ESL program database. NOTE: Based on ESL courses offered between the 2009 -10 and 2014 -15 academic years. Program database only includes skills codes (reading, writing, listening/speaking, grammar) for courses that are part of a sequence that leads to transfer- level English. PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California ’s Community Colleges 13 TA BLE B4 N umber of students and college by start in the sequence, 2009 -2010 to 2014 -2015 cohorts (Figure 2 in report) Number of Levels in Sequence Colleges % Students % 9+ 6 6 1,532 1 8 8 8 2,648 2 7 14 14 5,014 4 6 25 25 12,241 10 5 17 17 15,652 13 4 16 16 22,908 19 3 11 11 24,808 21 2 2 2 25,542 21 1 2 2 9,863 8 Total 101 100 120,208 100 NOTES: Sample includes degree- seeking students who first enrolled in ESL at a California Community College between the 2009- 2010 to 2014 -2015 academic years. College counts are from the 2016- 17 academic year, most recent year we have data for. We exclude students who first enroll in versions of transfer- level English for ESL students. PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California ’s Community Colleges 14 TABLE B5 P rogression of students through the ESL sequence by start level, 6 -year, 2010 -2012 cohorts (Figure 6 in report) Progression Levels Below Transfer Nine+ % Eight % Seven % Six % Five % Four % Three % Two % One % Enroll 9+ LBT 831 Complete 9+ LBT 234 28 Enroll 8 LBT 287 33 1,361 Complete 8 LBT 159 19 1,073 79 Enroll 7 LBT 177 21 947 70 2,950 100 Complete 7 LBT 129 16 814 60 2,599 88 Enroll 6 LBT 183 20 815 60 2,099 71 6,981 100 Complete 6 LBT 109 13 666 49 1,899 64 6,073 87 Enroll 5 LBT 135 15 568 41 1,611 55 4,924 71 8,509 100 Complete 5 LBT 78 9 463 34 1,437 49 4,358 62 7,210 85 Enroll 4 LBT 263 32 406 30 1,249 42 3,954 57 5,867 69 12,702 100 Complete 4 LBT 238 29 323 24 1,060 36 3,324 48 5,102 60 10,954 86 Enroll 3 LBT 156 19 253 19 938 32 2,813 40 4,571 54 8,584 68 12,793 100 Complete 3 LBT 129 16 217 16 805 27 2,412 35 3,953 46 7,668 60 10,924 85 Enroll 2 LBT 141 17 229 17 661 22 2,033 29 3,473 41 5,902 46 7,602 59 13,212 100 Complete 2 LBT 124 15 197 14 502 17 1,642 24 2,958 35 5,155 41 6,733 53 11,317 86 Enroll 1 LBT 103 12 180 13 473 16 1,466 21 2,749 32 5,513 43 6,383 50 8,219 62 5,122 100 Complete 1 LBT 84 10 156 11 396 13 1,252 18 2,385 28 4,842 38 5,683 44 7,352 56 4,287 84 Took TLE 119 14 144 11 365 12 1,056 15 1,943 23 4,399 35 5,670 44 7,450 56 3,253 64 Complete TLE 105 13 128 9 328 11 935 13 1,724 20 3,993 31 5,093 40 6,747 51 2,867 56 NOTES: Numbers represent students, Percent (%) represent the number of students at each stage out of the total number of stud ents that start in a given level of the ESL sequence. Sample includes degree- seeking students who first enrolled in ESL at a Califo rnia Community College between the 2009-10 and 2011 -12 academic years and are tracked for 6 years through the 2016 - 17 academic year. PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 15 TABLE B r Six-year throughput rates, by racial/ethnic group and start in the sequence (Figure s in report) Overall Levels Below Transfer (Six-Year) Three-Year Six-Year One Two Three Four Five Six Latino 27,301 15,478 1,569 3,196 3,476 2,654 1,986 1,619 % 17 23 44 33 24 19 14 10 Asian 55,676 30,069 2,355 6,906 6,147 5,830 3,716 2,752 % 34 42 62 62 49 38 27 17 Black 2,587 1,434 117 236 294 291 231 165 % 19 25 48 42 30 21 17 9 Two or More 1,317 656 32 88 106 143 95 116 % 16 26 50 36 37 31 15 8 White 3,936 12,017 687 1,606 1,767 2,816 1,868 1,899 % 17 28 63 45 40 30 15 12 NOTES: Sample includes degree-seeking students who first enrolled in ESL at a California Community College between the nllu -ml and nlmm -mn academic years and are tracked for r years through the nlmr -ms academic year. TABLE B s Enrollment in ESL sequence courses that lead to transfer-level English, by year (Figure t in report) 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Traditional 30,999 31,100 28,888 25,965 24,695 24,088 24,005 22,381 Integrated 31,898 33,975 32,405 31,755 32,533 32,064 32,169 32,568 Total 62,897 65,075 61,293 57,720 57,228 56,152 56,174 54,949 NOTES: Enrollment for all ESL students over time where nlml refers to nllu –ml , and so on. Students are counted a single time in a given academic year, according to the type of ESL course(s) he or she enrolled in. If the student enrolled in both traditional and integrated coursework in a given academic year, they are counted in both rows. Otherwise students are unduplicated within college but may be duplicated across colleges if students enrolled in multiple colleges at any point in their college career. Enrollments are for all ESL students. PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 16 FIGURE B n Rates of successful completion of transfer-level English, by starting level and prior education SOURCES: Author calculations from Chancellor’s Office MIS data and PPIC ESL program database. NOTES: Sample includes degree- seeking students who first enrolled in ESL at a California Community College between the nllu -ml and nlmm -mn academic years and are tracked for r years through the nlmr -ms academic year. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Non HS Grad Adult School US HS Grad GED or Equivalent Foreign HS Grad Unknown % completeing TLE by where started in sequence 1 LBT 2 LBT 3 LBT 4 LBT 5 LBT 6 LBT PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 17 TABLE B t Six-year throughput rates, by education status and start in the sequence (Figure Bn) Overall Levels Below Transfer (Six-Year) Three-Year Six-Year One Two Three Four Five Six Non-HS Grad 6,706 3,937 179 387 744 806 739 569 % 13 19 42 37 27 22 11 5 Adult School 1,908 1,234 61 97 232 426 191 129 % 14 29 70 51 42 30 14 9 US HS Grad 39,526 23,564 2,832 5,443 5,005 3,847 2,634 2,107 % 26 34 53 46 36 30 20 16 GED or Equivalent 6,432 2,939 259 540 640 544 381 325 % 23 30 55 45 32 25 22 14 Foreign HS Grad 49,507 23,529 1,302 5,302 4,125 5,093 3,225 2,436 % 29 39 64 59 46 36 23 17 Unknown 16,286 9,324 489 1,443 2,047 1,986 1,339 1,415 % 26 31 55 49 43 30 19 8 NOTES: Sample includes degree-seeking students who first enrolled in ESL at a California Community College between the nllu -ml and nlmm -mn academic years and are tracked for r years th rough the nlmr -ms academic year. PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 18 TABLE B u Variable Definitions Variable Description Student Outcomes Throughput (3 year & 6 year) This variable is 1 if a student successfully completed freshman composition, conditional on when a student started in the community college system. Observed within 3, 6, and all years of first year of enrollment Earn a Degree This variable is 1 if a student ever earned a degree or certificate. Observed within 3, 6, and all years of the first year of enrollment. Transfer to a 4-Year Institution This variable is 1 if a student ever transferred to a 4-year university. Observed within 3, 6, and all years of the first year of enrollment Proportion of Units Completed vs. Attempted (Transferable) Proportion of the number of units a student completes divided by the total number of units a student attempts. Generated for all courses and by degree-applicable courses, within 3, 6, and all years of the first year of enrollment Student demographic attributes Gender Categorical variables for female and unknown sex, with male as the reference category Race/ethnicity Categorical variables for Latino, African American, Asian, other race (includes two or more races, Native American), and unknown race. White is the reference category. Citizenship status Categorical variable for non-citizen (permanent resident, temporary resident, refugee/asylee, F-1 or M-1 student visa, other status) and unknown citizenship. US citizen is the reference category. Traditional College-age Student Categorical variable for a student is age 24 years or younger at first term of enrollment Student academic preparedness proxies Highest level of education at first term Categorical variable for not a high school graduate, adult education, GED or equivalent, graduate from a foreign high school, and unknown education. High school graduate is the reference category Disability status This variable is 1 if a student was ever reported with at least one primary disability (SD01) Limited English Proficiency (LEP) status This variable is 1 if a student was ever enrolled in a course with a TOP Code equal to 493084, 49085, 49086, 493087, or 493100 (English as a Second Language – Writing, Reading, Speaking/Listening, Integrated; Vocational English as a Second Language, respectively) or if the student was identified as ever needing English as a second language services during the matriculation process (SM03) Full-Time Enrollment status This variable is 1 if the student attempted 12 or more units in a term (SX03) Extended Opportunity Programs and Services (EOPS) recipient This variable is 1 if a student every received support from EOPS Starting level in the ESL sequence Categorical variable for one to two levels, three to four levels, and five or more levels below transfer-level English Prior dual enrollment This variable is 1 if the student was previously enrolled as a special admit student (i.e., simultaneously enrolled in K-12) Prior non success This variable is 1 if a student attempted to complete a course more than once Ever enrolled in English or Math (developmental or transfer-level) This variable is 1 if a student ever enrolled in at least one developmental or transfer- level math or English course ESL Characteristics (Student-Level) Traditional Student This variable is 1 if a student ever enrolled in a course flagged as traditional at any point in their community college career Integrated Student This variable is 1 if a student ever enrolled in a course flagged as integrated at any point in their community college career Mixed Student This variable is 1 if a student ever enrolled in either a traditional or integrated course in a college flagged as having a mixed sequence structure in any given year Accordion Student This variable is 1 if a student ever enrolled in a course flagged as an accordion course at any point in their community college career Sequence/Non-Sequence Student This variable is 1 if a student ever enrolled in a course that was part of a sequence of courses that lead a student to freshman composition (sequence student). This variable is 0 if a student never enrolled in such a course (non-sequence student) Degree-Intending Student This variable is 1 if a student: 1) ever took at least one degree-applicable course outside of ESL and freshman composition in their community college career and/or at least one developmental English/math course, AND 2) was ever enrolled in a sequence course in their community college career PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 19 Variable Description ESL Characteristics (College-level) Traditional Sequence Structure By year. This variable is 1 if a college was flagged as having a traditional ESL sequence structure (defined as 75% or more of courses being offered in the sequence requiring separate reading and writing courses that students must take to reach transfer-level English) Integrated Sequence Structure By year. This variable is 1 if a college was flagged as having an integrated ESL sequence structure (defined as 75% or more of courses being offered in the sequence requiring courses that embed both reading and writing skills into a single course that students must take to reach transfer-level English). Mixed Sequence Structure By year. This variable is 1 if a college was flagged as having a mixed ESL sequence structure (defined as requiring both courses that integrate reading and writing skills into a single course and courses that separate reading and writing skills into separate courses within a single ESL sequence that students must take to reach transfer-level English). Accordion Sequence Structure By year. This variable is 1 if a college was flagged as having an “accordion” style ESL sequence structure (defined as A/B courses that allow students to skip levels based on demonstrated proficiency to reach transfer-level English) Structure Feeds into Developmental English Coursework By year. This variable is 1 if a college was flagged as requiring coursework in developmental English at the highest level(s) in order to reach transfer-level English Structure Feeds Directly into Freshman Composition By year. This variable is 1 if a college was flagged as having an ESL structure that did not require developmental English coursework at the highest level(s); students segue into transfer-level English upon completion of ESL sequence Change in ESL Sequence This variable is 1 if a college had ever experienced a change in any of the above transfer-level ESL characteristics between 2010 and 2015. Number of Levels in ESL Sequence Continuous variable that captures the number of levels in the ESL sequence at a given college in a given year, between 2010 and 2015 Student socioeconomic proxies Board of Governors Enrollment Waiver (BOGW)/Pell recipient This variable is 1 if a student ever received a Board of Governor’s waiver or Pell grant (SF21) NOTES: The CCCCO MIS data element dictionary provides a more detailed description of each variable used in our study (CCCCO undated). PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 20 TABLE B ml Student characteristics, by type of ESL student Full Sample Non-Sequence Students Sequence Students Degree-Intending Students Student Count % Student Count % Student Count % Student Count % Total 356,209 * 190,327 53 165,882 47 120,365 34 Traditional age student at entry (Age 24 or less) 0 217,836 61 138,673 73 79,163 48 45,244 38 1 138,373 39 51,654 27 86,719 52 75,121 62 Gender Female 203,807 57 109,179 57 94,628 57 67,661 56 Male 147,539 41 78,274 41 69,265 42 51,626 43 Unknown 4,863 1 2,874 2 1,989 1 1,078 1 Race/ethnicity White 43,169 12 14,246 7 28,923 17 22,755 19 Latino 174,634 49 124,891 66 49,743 30 27,301 23 Asian 97,148 27 29,100 15 68,048 41 55,982 47 Black 5,639 2 2,299 1 3,340 2 2,587 2 Other Race 253 0 128 0 125 0 95 0 Two or more races 2,133 1 570 0 1,563 1 1,317 1 Unknown race 33,233 9 19,093 10 14,140 9 10,328 9 Citizenship status U.S. Citizen 92,605 26 53,507 28 39,098 24 27,173 23 Permanent Resident 105,628 30 41,031 22 64,597 39 45,873 38 Temporal Resident 7,272 2 3,683 2 3,589 2 2,470 2 Refugee/Asylee 17,523 5 8,340 4 9,183 6 7,342 6 Visa (F-1 or M-1 visa) 37,858 11 7,119 4 30,739 19 29,544 25 Other Status 67,874 19 55,916 29 11,958 7 5,519 5 Unknown (X) 27,449 8 20,731 11 6,718 4 2,444 2 Highest level of education Not a graduate or no longer enrolled in high school 42,045 12 25,114 13 16,931 10 6,706 6 Currently enrolled in adult school 15,278 4 11,744 6 3,534 2 1,908 2 High school diploma 71,710 20 24,017 13 47,693 29 39,526 33 GED or Equivalent 12,270 3 3,683 2 8,587 5 6,432 5 Foreign Secondary School Diploma/Certificate of Graduation 93,949 26 29,905 16 64,044 39 49,507 41 Unknown 120,957 34 95,864 50 25,093 15 16,286 14 Previous dual enrollment 0 352,932 99 189,112 99 163,820 99 118,458 98 1 3,277 1 1,215 1 2,062 1 1,907 2 PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 21 Full Sample Non-Sequence Students Sequence Students Degree-Intending Students Student Count % Student Count % Student Count % Student Count % BOGW or Pell Grant recipient (anytime during his/her college career) 0 249,109 70 165,859 87 83,250 50 53,024 44 1 107,100 30 24,468 13 82,632 50 67,341 56 Starting level in ESL Sequence One to two levels below 38,132 23 * * 38,132 23 35,405 29 Three to four levels below 59,705 36 * * 59,705 36 47,716 40 Five or more levels below 67,344 41 * * 67,344 41 37,040 31 Ever enrolled in developmental English 0 300,095 84 175,486 92 124,609 75 79,092 66 1 56,114 16 14,841 8 41,273 25 41,273 34 Ever enrolled in developmental math 0 283,975 80 175,641 92 108,334 65 62,817 52 1 72,234 20 14,686 8 57,548 35 57,548 48 Ever enrolled in any math or English 0 237,861 67 167,273 88 70,588 43 25,439 21 1 118,348 33 23,054 12 95,294 57 94,926 79 Proportion of Transfer Credits Earned (percent) Three-Year 73.21 65.15 75.29 75.90 Six-Year 71.46 63.50 73.68 74.28 Earned a degree/certificate Three-Year 0 333,588 94 180,977 95 152,611 92 109,235 91 1 22,621 6 9,350 5 13,271 8 11,130 9 Six-Year 0 173,096 89 98,123 93 74,973 85 52,488 81 1 20,967 11 7,834 7 13,133 15 12,039 19 Transfer to a four-year college Three-Year 0 352,944 99 188,915 99 164,029 99 118,866 99 1 3,265 1 1,412 1 1,853 1 1,499 1 Six-Year 0 185,081 95 103,538 98 81,543 93 58,386 90 1 8,982 5 2,419 2 6,563 7 6,141 10 Complete transfer-level English Three-Year 0 317,112 89 182,577 96 134535 81 89163 74 1 39,097 11 7,750 4 31,347 19 31,202 26 Six-Year 0 166,859 86 100,799 95 66,060 75 42,556 66 1 27,204 14 5,158 5 22,046 25 21,971 34 PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 22 Full Sample Non-Sequence Students Sequence Students Degree-Intending Students Student Count % Student Count % Student Count % Student Count % Full-time student 0 323,801 91 186,000 98 137,801 83 96,080 80 1 32,408 9 4,327 2 28,081 17 24,285 20 Extended Opportunity Programs and Services (EOPS) participant 0 327,880 92 186,501 98 141,379 85 96,896 81 1 28,329 8 3,826 2 24,503 15 23,469 19 Student with limited English proficiency 0 54,622 15 15,379 8 39,243 24 35,345 29 1 301,587 85 174,948 92 126,639 76 85,020 71 Student with disabilities 0 349,146 98 188,241 99 160,905 97 115,755 96 1 7,063 2 2,086 1 4,977 3 4,610 4 Student educational goal at first term of enrollment Obtain an associate degree and transfer to a baccalaureate granting institution 35,452 23 5,346 8 30,106 33 28,257 37 Transfer to a baccalaureate granting institution without an associate degree 10,740 7 1,307 2 9,433 10 9,008 12 Obtain a two-year associate degree without transfer 15,070 10 3,108 5 11,962 13 10,537 14 Earn a career technical certificate without transfer 3,148 2 733 1 2,415 3 2,053 3 Discover/formulate career interests, plans, goals 1,443 1 837 1 606 1 464 1 Acquire job skills 5,182 3 3,240 5 1,942 2 1,334 2 Update job skills 2,225 1 1,227 2 998 1 589 1 Maintain certificate or license 696 0 290 0 406 0 329 0 Pursue educational development 9,105 6 6,780 10 2,325 3 1,225 2 Improve basic skills in Math/English 19,769 13 13,430 21 6,339 7 2,534 3 Complete credits for HS or GED 2,989 2 2,272 3 717 1 433 1 Undecided on goal 47,705 30 25,581 39 22,124 24 16,781 22 Move from noncredit coursework to credit 577 0 433 1 144 0 82 0 University/4-Year college students taking courses to meet university/4-year requirements 2,810 2 544 1 2,266 2 1,975 3 NOTES: ( m) Includes students ages mq to rp , (n) students first enrolled in the CCC system between nllu -nlml and nlmp -nlmq , and ( o) first - time college enrollees (i.e. students with no prior college credentials). First-term enrollment is defined as the first time a student appears in the CCCCO MIS enrollment file as a non- special admit student (Education Status SB mm not = mllll ). ( p) Includes students who have taken at least one ESL course. We exclude cells with n< ml . We include student educational goal (SM lm /SS lm ) for informational purposes; student educational goal is not a determinant in defining our degree-seeking population. PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 23 TABLE B mm M ain linear and fixed effects models of achieving throughput in an ESL sequence within o years ( nlml -nlmq cohorts) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Student Took an Integrated Course -0.041 0.029 0.024 0.031 0.118 (0.047) (0.028) (0.036) (0.035) (0.035)*** Sequence Feeds into TLE 0.076 -0.006 0.049 0.054 0.074 (0.060) (0.032) (0.052) (0.049) (0.042)* Student Took Transferable ESL Course 0.175 0.069 0.053 0.055 0.161 (0.028)*** (0.023)*** (0.034) (0.033) (0.039)*** Integrated Student x Feed Direct TLE 0.022 0.016 0.027 0.019 -0.035 (0.068) (0.034) (0.032) (0.031) (0.039) LBT 3 to 4 -0.188 -0.174 -0.163 -0.062 (0.013)*** (0.039)*** (0.037)*** (0.028)** LBT 5 to 12 -0.339 -0.242 -0.226 -0.075 (0.017)*** (0.041)*** (0.039)*** (0.032)** LBT 3 to 4 x Integrated Student 0.018 0.012 -0.052 (0.026) (0.024) (0.022)** LBT 5 to 12 x Integrated Student -0.044 -0.053 -0.138 (0.028) (0.027)* (0.029)*** LBT 3 to 4 x Direct TLE -0.085 -0.088 -0.082 (0.036)** (0.035)** (0.031)*** LBT 5 to 12 x Direct TLE -0.079 -0.083 -0.049 (0.036)** (0.034)** (0.035) LBT 3 to 4 x Transferable ESL 0.065 0.063 0.021 (0.027)** (0.027)** (0.027) LBT 5 to 12 x Transferable ESL -0.035 -0.036 -0.102 (0.032) (0.032) (0.031)*** Constant 0.138 0.304 0.265 0.257 0.157 (0.043)*** (0.036)*** (0.043)*** (0.043)*** (0.056)*** Observations 120,365 120,365 120,365 120,365 120,365 R-squared 0.057 0.210 0.214 0.221 0.249 Controls and Fixed Effects Student Characteristics X X X X ESL and Levels Below Interactions X X X Term & Year Fixed Effects X X College Fixed Effects X SOURCES: Authors calculations from COMIS data. NOTES: Reference categories: Asian, foreign HS, permanent resident, non-traditional student, one/two levels below transfer. *** p< l.lm , ** p< l.lq , * p< l.m. PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 24 TABLE B mn M ain linear and fixed effects models of achieving throughput in an ESL sequence within r years ( nlml -nlmn cohorts) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Student Took an Integrated Course 0.050 0.085 0.031 0.035 0.112 (0.040) (0.024)*** (0.036) (0.035) (0.046)** Sequence Feeds into TLE 0.113 0.018 0.089 0.092 0.115 (0.059)* (0.029) (0.044)** (0.042)** (0.030)*** Student Took Transferable ESL 0.228 0.137 0.079 0.079 0.204 (0.032)*** (0.024)*** (0.034)** (0.033)** (0.043)*** Integrated Student x Feed Direct TLE -0.017 -0.006 0.026 0.022 -0.027 (0.065) (0.034) (0.034) (0.033) (0.058) LBT 3 to 4 -0.161 -0.173 -0.167 -0.078 (0.015)*** (0.037)*** (0.036)*** (0.031)** LBT 5 to 12 -0.313 -0.263 -0.255 -0.101 (0.020)*** (0.043)*** (0.042)*** (0.038)*** LBT 3 to 4 x Integrated Student 0.064 0.060 -0.007 (0.027)** (0.026)** (0.025) LBT 5 to 12 x Integrated Student 0.020 0.016 -0.091 (0.031) (0.031) (0.031)*** LBT 3 to 4 x Direct TLE -0.109 -0.112 -0.079 (0.036)*** (0.036)*** (0.030)*** LBT 5 to 12 x Direct to TLE -0.122 -0.123 -0.076 (0.039)*** (0.038)*** (0.039)* LBT 3 to 4 x Transferable ESL 0.104 0.104 0.052 (0.025)*** (0.025)*** (0.029)* LBT 5 to 12 x Transferable ESL 0.045 0.045 -0.023 (0.035) (0.034) (0.039) Constant 0.128 0.231 0.227 0.218 0.125 (0.039)*** (0.034)*** (0.041)*** (0.041)*** (0.052)** Observations 64,527 64,527 64,527 64,527 64,527 R-squared 0.075 0.206 0.210 0.212 0.243 Controls & Fixed Effects Student Characteristics X X X X ESL and Levels Below Interactions X X X Term & Year Fixed Effects X X College Fixed Effects X SOURCES: Authors calculations from COMIS data. NOTES: Reference categories: Asian, foreign HS, permanent resident, non- traditional student, one/two levels below transfer. *** p< l.lm , ** p< l.lq , * p< l.m. PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 25 TABLE B mo M ain linear and fixed effects models of accumulating transfer credits within r years ( nlml -nlmn cohorts) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Student Took an Integrated Course 4.283 2.831 2.961 2.911 3.617 (1.053)*** (0.912)*** (1.453)** (1.459)** (1.944)* Sequence Feeds into TLE 0.357 -1.330 1.171 1.207 0.717 (1.851) (1.308) (1.447) (1.453) (1.702) Student Took Transferable ESL Course 10.864 8.188 4.721 4.746 8.854 (1.261)*** (1.108)*** (1.799)** (1.790)*** (2.219)*** Integrated Student x Feed Direct TLE -0.681 0.242 0.920 0.933 -1.091 (2.343) (1.491) (1.443) (1.437) (1.957) LBT 3 to 4 -2.828 -1.153 -1.119 -2.790 (1.169)** (1.855) (1.837) (1.431)* LBT 5 to 12 -4.624 -4.789 -4.732 -6.066 (1.063)*** (2.319)** (2.310)** (2.235)*** LBT 3 to 4 x Integrated Student -0.703 -0.700 0.851 (1.221) (1.240) (1.148) LBT 5 to 12 x Integrated Student -1.013 -1.010 0.610 (1.932) (1.933) (1.790) LBT 3 to 4 x Direct TLE -4.050 -4.093 -2.699 (1.876)** (1.859)** (1.519)* LBT 5 to 12 x Direct TLE -3.206 -3.292 -3.691 (1.964) (1.967)* (1.965)* LBT 3 to 4 x Transferable ESL 2.800 2.780 3.239 (1.644)* (1.647)* (1.146)*** LBT 5 to 12 x Transferable ESL 6.824 6.819 6.520 (1.942)*** (1.931)*** (1.991)*** Constant 65.923 72.526 72.766 71.721 67.080 (1.089)*** (1.703)*** (2.074)*** (2.005)*** (2.590)*** Observations 62,962 62,962 62,962 62,962 62,962 R-squared 0.040 0.095 0.098 0.098 0.128 Controls & Fixed Effects Student Characteristics X X X X ESL and Levels Below Interactions X X X Term & Year Fixed Effects X X College Fixed Effects X SOURCES: Authors calculations from COMIS data. NOTES: Reference categories: Asian, foreign HS, permanent resident, non- traditional student, one/two levels below transfer. *** p< l.lm , ** p< l.lq , * p< l.m. PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 26 TABLE B mp Main linear and fixed effects models of transferring to a four- year college within r years (nlml -nlmn cohorts) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Student Took an Integrated Course 0.013 0.008 0.004 0.007 0.003 (0.021) (0.014) (0.017) (0.017) (0.022) Sequence Feeds into TLE 0.016 -0.018 0.010 0.013 -0.013 (0.021) (0.014) (0.019) (0.018) (0.017) Student Took Transferable ESL Course 0.029 0.016 -0.008 -0.007 0.027 (0.014)** (0.010) (0.012) (0.011) (0.012)** Integrated Student x Feed Direct TLE 0.001 0.014 0.023 0.020 0.017 (0.027) (0.019) (0.018) (0.017) (0.020) LBT 3 to 4 -0.045 -0.026 -0.021 -0.009 (0.010)*** (0.018) (0.017) (0.019) LBT 5 to 12 -0.104 -0.090 -0.081 -0.064 (0.011)*** (0.021)*** (0.020)*** (0.024)** LBT 3 to 4 x Integrated Student -0.002 -0.005 -0.022 (0.015) (0.014) (0.015) LBT 5 to 12 x Integrated Student -0.005 -0.010 -0.031 (0.014) (0.014) (0.013)** LBT 3 to 4 x Direct TLE -0.041 -0.044 -0.037 (0.017)** (0.017)** (0.016)** LBT 5 to 12 x Direct TLE -0.042 -0.046 -0.027 (0.020)** (0.019)** (0.023) LBT 3 to 4 x Transferable ESL 0.023 0.021 0.010 (0.015) (0.015) (0.014) LBT 5 to 12 x Transferable ESL 0.042 0.042 0.005 (0.017)** (0.016)** (0.013) Constant 0.062 0.190 0.184 0.144 0.156 (0.018)*** (0.020)*** (0.023)*** (0.022)*** (0.026)*** Observations 64,527 64,527 64,527 64,527 64,527 R-squared 0.004 0.114 0.115 0.126 0.144 Controls & Fixed Effects Student Characteristics X X X X ESL and Levels Below Interactions X X X Term & Year Fixed Effects X X College Fixed Effects X SOURCES: Authors calculations from COMIS data. NOTES: Reference categories: Asian, foreign HS, permanent resident, non- traditional student, one/two levels below transfer. *** p< l.lm , ** p< l.lq , * p< l.m. PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 27 TABLE B mq Main linear and fixed effects models of e arning a degree or credential within r years ( nlml -nlmn cohorts) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Student Took an Integrated Course 0.046 0.042 0.007 0.009 0.021 (0.022)** (0.018)** (0.026) (0.026) (0.034) Sequence Feeds into TLE 0.038 0.009 0.005 0.007 -0.021 (0.033) (0.025) (0.036) (0.035) (0.033) Student Took Transferable ESL Course 0.120 0.081 0.072 0.072 0.127 (0.021)*** (0.015)*** (0.028)** (0.028)** (0.032)*** Integrated Student x Feed Direct TLE -0.012 -0.004 0.003 0.001 0.046 (0.042) (0.033) (0.029) (0.029) (0.043) LBT 3 to 4 -0.032 -0.066 -0.062 -0.017 (0.013)** (0.027)** (0.027)** (0.030) LBT 5 to 12 -0.087 -0.106 -0.102 -0.041 (0.015)*** (0.034)*** (0.034)*** (0.042) LBT 3 to 4 x Integrated Student 0.056 0.054 0.010 (0.021)*** (0.021)** (0.018) LBT 5 to 12 x Integrated Student 0.029 0.027 -0.033 (0.026) (0.026) (0.026) LBT 3 to 4 x Direct TLE -0.001 -0.003 0.022 (0.029) (0.028) (0.025) LBT 5 to 12 x Direct TLE 0.001 -0.001 0.011 (0.034) (0.034) (0.032) LBT 3 to 4 x Transferable ESL 0.008 0.008 -0.027 (0.033) (0.033) (0.036) LBT 5 to 12 x Transferable ESL 0.017 0.017 -0.033 (0.036) (0.036) (0.036) Constant 0.077 0.075 0.098 0.085 0.156 (0.020)*** (0.023)*** (0.028)*** (0.026)*** (0.030)*** Observations 64,527 64,527 64,527 64,527 64,527 R-squared 0.028 0.076 0.077 0.078 0.110 Controls & Fixed Effects Student Characteristics X X X X ESL and Levels Below Interactions X X X Term & Year Fixed Effects X X College Fixed Effects X SOURCES: Authors calculations from COMIS data. NOTES: Reference categories: Asian, foreign HS, permanent resident, non- traditional student, one/two levels below transfer. *** p< l.lm , ** p< l.lq , * p< l.m. PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 28 TABLE B mr Fixed effec ts models of ESL pathway features on achieving throughput, within o years —by race/ethnicity and education status Asian-PI Latino White Black Foreign HS HS Diploma GED or Equivalent Adult Ed Non HS graduate Student Took an Integrated Course 0.125 0.073 0.119 0.208 0.110 0.121 0.111 -0.146 0.091 (0.047)*** (0.025)*** (0.050)** (0.069)*** (0.043)** (0.034)*** (0.043)** (0.105) (0.042)** Sequence Feeds into TLE 0.079 0.151 0.071 0.320 0.073 0.147 0.165 -0.087 0.083 (0.069) (0.028)*** (0.043)* (0.047)*** (0.055) (0.054)*** (0.056)*** (0.122) (0.040)** Student Took Transferable ESL Course 0.163 0.127 0.188 0.031 0.196 0.137 0.218 0.161 0.136 (0.052)*** (0.028)*** (0.042)*** (0.049) (0.043)*** (0.034)*** (0.052)*** (0.100) (0.040)*** Integrated Student x Feed Direct TLE -0.077 -0.019 0.033 -0.045 -0.055 -0.056 -0.037 0.118 -0.057 (0.055) (0.027) (0.040) (0.072) (0.044) (0.034) (0.037) (0.077) (0.027)** LBT 3 to 4 -0.164 -0.018 0.046 0.034 -0.102 -0.037 -0.100 -0.105 -0.036 (0.030)*** (0.021) (0.050) (0.059) (0.034)*** (0.024) (0.047)** (0.113) (0.046) LBT 5 to 12 -0.197 -0.021 0.001 0.036 -0.132 -0.053 -0.125 -0.209 -0.062 (0.044)*** (0.028) (0.053) (0.064) (0.041)*** (0.029)* (0.047)*** (0.110)* (0.045) LBT 3 to 4 x Integrated Student -0.024 -0.037 -0.093 -0.089 -0.040 -0.051 -0.020 0.057 -0.048 (0.023) (0.021)* (0.045)** (0.044)** (0.024) (0.019)*** (0.037) (0.080) (0.047) LBT 5 to 12 x Integrated Student -0.119 -0.097 -0.143 -0.237 -0.100 -0.142 -0.114 0.054 -0.083 (0.037)*** (0.027)*** (0.048)*** (0.051)*** (0.031)*** (0.025)*** (0.042)*** (0.081) (0.042)** LBT 3 to 4 x Direct TLE -0.020 -0.087 -0.117 -0.225 -0.052 -0.102 -0.012 -0.182 -0.073 (0.032) (0.019)*** (0.045)** (0.057)*** (0.036) (0.024)*** (0.050) (0.075)** (0.040)* LBT 5 to 12 x Direct TLE 0.033 -0.084 -0.058 -0.150 0.012 -0.075 0.026 -0.080 -0.071 (0.045) (0.031)*** (0.046) (0.067)** (0.044) (0.031)** (0.050) (0.084) (0.035)** PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 29 Asian-PI Latino White Black Foreign HS HS Diploma GED or Equivalent Adult Ed Non HS graduate LBT 3 to 4 x Transferable ESL 0.052 -0.014 -0.073 0.084 0.024 0.026 -0.046 -0.053 0.011 (0.029)* (0.021) (0.037)** (0.053) (0.035) (0.025) (0.040) (0.089) (0.043) LBT 5 to 12 x Transferable ESL -0.078 -0.089 -0.175 0.047 -0.135 -0.082 -0.160 -0.095 -0.075 (0.034)** (0.028)*** (0.041)*** (0.054) (0.036)*** (0.029)*** (0.052)*** (0.094) (0.034)** Constant 0.201 0.033 0.096 0.101 0.123 0.150 0.012 0.351 0.156 (0.095)** (0.038) (0.052)* (0.064) (0.069)* (0.064)** (0.071) (0.152)** (0.062)** Obs 55,982 27,301 22,755 2,587 49,507 39,526 6,432 1,908 6,706 R-squared 0.273 0.162 0.246 0.271 0.275 0.226 0.242 0.265 0.219 SOURCES: Author calculations from COMIS data. NOTES: Each column is a separate regression on pathway features using the population indicated in the column. All models include gender, race/ethnicity/highest level of education, academic preparedness/and low-income covariates, as well as year, college, and term fixed effects. Reference categories: Asian, foreign HS, permanent resident, non-traditional student, one/two levels below transfe r. *** p< l.lm , ** p< l.lq , * p< l.m. Only main effects are shown here, but full results are available upon request. All models only include those students enrolled in ESL pathways in our catalog scan and enrolled in college for the first time between nlml and nlmq . PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 30 TABLE B ms Fixed effects models of ESL pathway features on achieving throughput, within r years —by race/ethnicity and education status Asian-PI Latino White Black Foreign HS HS Diploma GED or Equivalent Adult Ed Non HS graduate Student Took an Integrated Course 0.152 0.059 0.064 0.126 0.126 0.096 0.195 -0.038 0.109 (0.069)** (0.032)* (0.064) (0.104) (0.055)** (0.048)** (0.065)*** (0.159) (0.061)* Sequence Feeds into TLE 0.048 0.115 0.184 0.361 0.131 0.197 0.061 -0.325 0.117 (0.032) (0.032)*** (0.048)*** (0.087)*** (0.042)*** (0.043)*** (0.158) (0.150)** (0.084) Student Took Transferable ESL Course 0.205 0.168 0.249 0.131 0.222 0.191 0.195 0.206 0.188 (0.062)*** (0.037)*** (0.052)*** (0.086) (0.052)*** (0.046)*** (0.072)*** (0.112)* (0.048)*** Integrated Student x Feed Direct TLE -0.106 0.013 0.086 -0.111 -0.064 -0.051 -0.048 0.105 -0.039 (0.076) (0.037) (0.077) (0.104) (0.071) (0.052) (0.065) (0.125) (0.048) LBT 3 to 4 -0.154 -0.050 0.006 -0.036 -0.110 -0.062 -0.032 -0.292 -0.014 (0.032)*** (0.030) (0.059) (0.087) (0.041)*** (0.030)** (0.054) (0.141)** (0.063) LBT 5 to 12 -0.212 -0.021 -0.035 0.035 -0.167 -0.067 -0.167 -0.281 -0.001 (0.052)*** (0.034) (0.072) (0.090) (0.053)*** (0.035)* (0.065)** (0.159)* (0.069) LBT 3 to 4 x Integrated Student 0.011 -0.003 -0.012 0.037 -0.008 0.003 -0.128 0.111 0.001 (0.026) (0.028) (0.053) (0.069) (0.030) (0.023) (0.052)** (0.108) (0.060) LBT 5 to 12 x Integrated Student -0.072 -0.086 -0.066 -0.148 -0.062 -0.089 -0.132 -0.037 -0.107 (0.042)* (0.031)*** (0.063) (0.072)** (0.040) (0.027)*** (0.057)** (0.134) (0.057)* LBT 3 to 4 x Direct TLE -0.011 -0.100 -0.131 -0.165 -0.055 -0.109 -0.064 -0.029 -0.081 (0.028) (0.027)*** (0.049)*** (0.084)* (0.041) (0.027)*** (0.061) (0.091) (0.058) LBT 5 to 12 x Direct TLE 0.006 -0.099 -0.116 -0.237 -0.028 -0.123 0.015 0.022 -0.130 (0.052) (0.031)*** (0.051)** (0.084)*** (0.049) (0.036)*** (0.070) (0.106) (0.062)** PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 31 Asian-PI Latino White Black Foreign HS HS Diploma GED or Equivalent Adult Ed Non HS graduate LBT 3 to 4 x Transferable ESL 0.068 0.019 -0.018 0.105 0.068 0.061 0.025 0.002 0.019 (0.038)* (0.029) (0.049) (0.091) (0.039)* (0.029)** (0.064) (0.099) (0.048) LBT 5 to 12 x Transferable ESL 0.022 -0.055 -0.113 0.159 -0.017 -0.004 0.028 -0.123 -0.065 (0.053) (0.035) (0.057)* (0.095)* (0.050) (0.041) (0.070) (0.114) (0.048) Constant 0.224 0.001 -0.062 0.010 0.105 0.091 0.101 0.497 0.065 (0.074)*** (0.044) (0.066) (0.128) (0.057)* (0.065) (0.170) (0.193)** (0.099) Obs 30,069 15,478 12,017 1,434 23,529 23,564 2,939 1,234 3,937 R-squared 0.255 0.188 0.273 0.287 0.257 0.228 0.248 0.363 0.245 SOURCES: Author calculations from COMIS data. NOTES: Each column is a separate regression on pathway features using the population indicated in the column. All models include gender, race/ethnicity/highest level of education, academic preparedness/and low-income covariates, as well as year, college, and term fixed effects. Reference categories: Asian, foreign HS, permanent resident, non-traditional student, one/two levels below transfe r *** p< l.lm , ** p< l.lq , * p< l.m. Only main effects are shown here, but full results are available upon request. All models only include those students enrolled in ESL pathways in our catalog scan and enrolled in college for the first time between nlml and nlmn . PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 32 TABLE B mt Fixed effects models of ESL pathway features on accumulating transfer credits, within r years —by race/ethnicity and education status Asian-PI Latino White Black Foreign HS HS Diploma GED or Equivalent Adult Ed Non HS graduate Student Took an Integrated Course 3.623 2.232 2.112 4.193 3.088 1.510 12.256 5.308 11.316 (2.512) (2.144) (3.873) (6.801) (2.234) (2.817) (4.649)*** (10.101) (6.366)* Sequence Feeds into TLE -3.818 10.833 -2.114 10.841 -5.361 17.051 27.425 2.615 13.732 (1.141)*** (2.329)*** (3.406) (6.601) (2.196)** (3.574)*** (6.426)*** (18.043) (10.096) Student Took Transferable ESL Course 7.975 8.587 12.208 16.721 7.723 8.792 11.902 13.850 9.389 (2.650)*** (2.143)*** (3.255)*** (6.986)** (2.796)*** (2.604)*** (3.840)*** (10.638) (4.174)** Integrated Student x Feed Direct TLE -0.671 -0.316 -0.014 -6.724 -1.868 -0.817 -2.976 0.010 -4.285 (2.664) (2.384) (3.221) (6.678) (2.278) (2.883) (4.772) (8.278) (4.641) LBT 3 to 4 -5.124 -0.695 -2.366 7.717 -5.892 -0.151 2.196 -11.071 3.764 (1.343)*** (1.742) (4.321) (6.942) (2.091)*** (2.192) (4.856) (11.508) (5.726) LBT 5 to 12 -10.929 -4.206 -4.473 -1.106 -10.376 -5.391 0.875 -3.848 0.718 (2.501)*** (1.927)** (4.872) (7.961) (3.191)*** (2.702)** (6.752) (13.014) (6.668) LBT 3 to 4 x Integrated Student 0.283 0.717 2.629 -0.435 1.564 0.908 -6.176 1.040 -4.408 (1.125) (1.774) (1.832) (5.641) (1.037) (1.529) (3.042)** (6.789) (4.258) LBT 5 to 12 x Integrated Student 1.222 5.388 -1.213 3.488 0.425 2.151 -1.928 2.404 -2.447 (2.159) (2.075)** (3.011) (6.229) (2.395) (1.901) (4.971) (7.099) (4.611) LBT 3 to 4 x Direct TLE 0.870 -5.309 -2.809 -6.309 -0.615 -5.420 -1.528 8.839 -4.775 (1.176) (1.542)*** (3.742) (6.405) (1.831) (1.891)*** (4.017) (7.618) (4.393) LBT 5 to 12 x Direct TLE 0.560 -7.709 -2.460 -7.904 -0.375 -4.977 -4.825 1.554 -12.501 (1.750) (2.752)*** (4.261) (7.754) (2.474) (2.454)** (5.560) (9.086) (5.470)** PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 33 Asian-PI Latino White Black Foreign HS HS Diploma GED or Equivalent Adult Ed Non HS graduate LBT 3 to 4 x Transferable ESL 2.443 5.196 -0.211 0.670 3.930 3.380 2.053 2.366 1.895 (1.355)* (1.544)*** (2.838) (6.416) (1.502)** (1.288)** (3.901) (9.588) (4.260) LBT 5 to 12 x Transferable ESL 5.646 7.154 4.798 7.338 8.043 6.396 3.222 3.072 9.386 (2.267)** (2.402)*** (3.301) (7.422) (2.653)*** (2.332)*** (3.878) (10.405) (3.931)** Constant 72.884 55.723 63.909 41.321 73.197 51.103 39.236 54.144 35.756 (2.767)*** (2.937)*** (5.252)*** (9.969)*** (3.114)*** (4.448)*** (6.725)*** (21.024)** (11.426)*** Obs 29,525 14,915 11,729 1,367 23,088 23,066 2,851 1,178 3,739 R-squared 0.117 0.100 0.156 0.297 0.114 0.126 0.150 0.259 0.149 SOURCES: Author calculations from COMIS data. NOTES: All models include gender, race/ethnicity/highest level of education, academic preparedness/and low-income covariates, as well as year, college, and term fixed effects. Reference categories: Asian, foreign HS, permanent resident, non-traditional stu dent, one/two levels below transfer. *** p< l.lm , ** p< l.lq , * p< l.m. Only main effects are shown here, but full results are available upon request. All models only include those students enrolled in ESL pathways in our catalog scan and enrolled in college for the first time between nlml and nlmn . PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 34 TABLE B mu Fixed effects models of ESL pathway features on degree- attainment, within r years —by race/ethnicity and education status Asian-PI Latino White Black Foreign HS HS Diploma GED or Equivalent Adult Ed Non HS graduate Student Took an Integrated Course 0.013 0.043 -0.026 0.104 0.037 0.013 0.131 -0.073 -0.010 (0.050) (0.024)* (0.047) (0.054)* (0.038) (0.042) (0.049)*** (0.104) (0.046) Sequence Feeds into TLE -0.057 0.056 0.016 0.011 -0.010 0.079 0.072 -0.346 0.009 (0.048) (0.033)* (0.048) (0.048) (0.038) (0.050) (0.068) (0.130)*** (0.068) Student Took Transferable ESL Course 0.144 0.051 0.149 0.099 0.175 0.081 0.094 0.030 0.137 (0.047)*** (0.026)* (0.038)*** (0.054)* (0.035)*** (0.025)*** (0.050)* (0.113) (0.039)*** Integrated Student x Feed Direct TLE 0.076 0.028 0.039 0.018 0.020 0.038 -0.084 0.190 0.084 (0.065) (0.035) (0.043) (0.042) (0.044) (0.049) (0.057) (0.091)** (0.040)** LBT 3 to 4 -0.032 -0.026 0.012 0.067 0.014 -0.012 -0.135 -0.140 -0.002 (0.040) (0.030) (0.049) (0.055) (0.037) (0.028) (0.051)** (0.132) (0.054) LBT 5 to 12 -0.057 -0.025 -0.063 0.091 -0.018 -0.027 -0.213 -0.232 -0.005 (0.063) (0.030) (0.056) (0.053)* (0.049) (0.034) (0.061)*** (0.139)* (0.063) LBT 3 to 4 x Integrated Student 0.015 0.009 0.028 -0.085 -0.016 0.018 0.001 -0.102 0.018 (0.022) (0.023) (0.032) (0.050)* (0.019) (0.020) (0.038) (0.069) (0.040) LBT 5 to 12 x Integrated Student -0.045 -0.045 0.028 -0.114 -0.054 -0.031 -0.011 0.002 0.016 (0.036) (0.025)* (0.038) (0.051)** (0.033)* (0.024) (0.044) (0.072) (0.043) LBT 3 to 4 x Direct TLE 0.067 -0.035 -0.015 -0.068 0.023 -0.029 0.121 0.246 0.039 (0.034)* (0.022) (0.048) (0.050) (0.030) (0.023) (0.045)*** (0.079)*** (0.046) LBT 5 to 12 x Direct TLE 0.042 -0.019 0.016 -0.131 0.029 -0.040 0.164 0.167 -0.027 (0.047) (0.028) (0.054) (0.051)** (0.036) (0.026) (0.054)*** (0.086)* (0.054) PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 35 Asian-PI Latino White Black Foreign HS HS Diploma GED or Equivalent Adult Ed Non HS graduate LBT 3 to 4 x Transferable ESL -0.046 0.028 -0.052 0.024 -0.053 0.013 0.025 0.061 -0.058 (0.051) (0.034) (0.037) (0.058) (0.038) (0.030) (0.048) (0.113) (0.043) LBT 5 to 12 x Transferable ESL -0.020 0.005 -0.081 -0.004 -0.073 0.013 0.021 0.124 -0.051 (0.053) (0.029) (0.041)* (0.071) (0.040)* (0.031) (0.057) (0.116) (0.045) Constant 0.203 0.002 0.003 0.039 0.132 0.039 0.015 0.358 0.023 (0.046)*** (0.035) (0.055) (0.068) (0.042)*** (0.050) (0.084) (0.169)** (0.073) Obs 30,069 15,478 12,017 1,434 23,529 23,564 2,939 1,234 3,937 R-squared 0.127 0.093 0.096 0.180 0.122 0.102 0.143 0.167 0.139 SOURCES: Author calculations from COMIS data. NOTES: Each column is a separate regression on pathway features using the population indicated in the column. All models include gender, race/ethnicity/highest level of education, academic preparedness/and low-income covariates, as well as year, college, and term fixed effects. Reference categories: Asian, foreign HS, permanent resident, non-traditional student, one/two levels below transfer. *** p< l.lm , ** p< l.lq , * p< l.m. Only main effects are shown here, but full results are availab le upon request. All models only include those students enrolled in ESL pathways in our catalog scan and enrolled in college for the first time between nlml and nlmn . PPIC.ORGTechnical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 36 TABLE B nl Fixed effects models of ESL pathway features on transfer to a four-year co llege, within r years —by race/ethnicity and education status Asian-PI Latino White Black Foreign HS HS Diploma GED or Equivalent Adult Ed Non HS graduate Student Took an Integrated Course -0.012 -0.006 0.031 0.002 0.023 -0.004 0.064 -0.044 0.010 (0.030) (0.023) (0.046) (0.056) (0.023) (0.042) (0.065) (0.087) (0.042) Sequence Feeds into TLE -0.007 0.036 0.045 0.047 0.012 0.065 -0.010 0.031 0.107 (0.016) (0.023) (0.031) (0.136) (0.023) (0.020)*** (0.178) (0.070) (0.033)*** Student Took Transferable ESL Course -0.007 0.029 0.070 0.053 0.005 0.054 -0.040 -0.044 0.021 (0.021) (0.014)** (0.029)** (0.041) (0.018) (0.014)*** (0.036) (0.084) (0.031) Integrated Student x Feed Direct TLE 0.033 0.008 0.005 0.025 0.006 0.020 -0.046 0.037 -0.018 (0.029) (0.018) (0.037) (0.043) (0.025) (0.040) (0.061) (0.051) (0.028) LBT 3 to 4 -0.056 -0.002 0.039 0.023 -0.024 0.015 -0.030 -0.028 0.004 (0.020)*** (0.018) (0.048) (0.080) (0.025) (0.024) (0.050) (0.086) (0.043) LBT 5 to 12 -0.158 -0.025 0.000 -0.021 -0.107 -0.034 -0.062 -0.048 -0.044 (0.034)*** (0.019) (0.046) (0.077) (0.032)*** (0.027) (0.056) (0.084) (0.044) LBT 3 to 4 x Integrated Student -0.018 -0.005 -0.044 -0.085-0.037 -0.014 -0.041 0.002 -0.006 (0.017) (0.014) (0.024)* (0.055) (0.020)* (0.014) (0.040) (0.072) (0.043) LBT 5 to 12 x Integrated Student -0.014 -0.008 -0.050 -0.041-0.023 -0.040 -0.076 0.038 -0.003 (0.018) (0.017) (0.022)** (0.055) (0.018) (0.017)** (0.040)* (0.072) (0.042) LBT 3 to 4 x Direct TLE -0.027 -0.017 -0.056 -0.030-0.008 -0.069 -0.073 -0.071 -0.063 (0.017) (0.014) (0.039) (0.083) (0.019) (0.021)*** (0.044) (0.050) (0.036)* LBT 5 to 12 x Direct TLE -0.006 -0.006 -0.031 -0.0830.019 -0.050 -0.063 -0.139 -0.082 (0.032) (0.016) (0.035) (0.077) (0.028) (0.027)* (0.051) (0.056)** (0.034)** LBT 3 to 4 x Transferable ESL 0.061 -0.018 -0.056 0.014 0.028 -0.009 0.099 0.066 -0.000 (0.018)*** (0.013) (0.025)** (0.058) (0.016)* (0.019) (0.039)** (0.058) (0.040) LBT 5 to 12 x Transferable ESL 0.062 -0.013 -0.059 -0.0300.023 -0.022 0.063 0.108 0.017 (0.021)*** (0.015) (0.027)** (0.063) (0.019) (0.016) (0.040) (0.093) (0.036) Constant 0.196 0.070 0.078 -0.003 0.140 0.140 0.305 0.126 0.146 (0.031)*** (0.031)** (0.052) (0.144) (0.034)*** (0.029)*** (0.185) (0.109) (0.035)*** PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 37 Asian-PI Latino White Black Foreign HS HS Diploma GED or Equivalent Adult Ed Non HS graduate Obs 30,069 15,478 12,017 1,434 23,529 23,564 2,939 1,234 3,937 R-squared 0.178 0.049 0.133 0.168 0.155 0.147 0.162 0.170 0.146 SOURCES: Author calculations from COMIS data. NOTES: Each column is a separate regression on pathway features using the population indicated in the column. All models include gender, race/ethnicity/highest level of education, academic preparedness/and low-income covariates, as well as year, college, and term fixed effects. Reference categories: Asian, foreign HS, permanent resident, non- traditional student, one/two levels below transfer. *** p< l.lm , ** p< l.lq , * p< l.m. Only main effects are shown here, but full results are available upon request. All models only include those student s enrolled in ESL pathways in our catalog scan and enrolled in college for the first time between nlml and nlmn . PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 38 TABLE B nm Wald chi-square test across race/ethnic groups, by ESL pathway feature and outcome Throughput (3-Year) Throughput (6-Year) Proportion Transfer Credits Transfer to 4-Year Degree Attainment Integration Asian/Black (2.75) (0.0973)* White/Black (5.01) (0.0252)** Latino/Black (4.92) (0.0266)** Direct TLE Asian/Black (9.57) (0.0020)*** Asian/Latino (4.06) (0.0439)** Asian/Latino (37.17) (0.0000)*** Asian/White (3.01) (0.0826)* Asian/Latino (6.64) (0.0100)*** Latino/Black (14.35) (0.0002)*** Asian/Black (14.83) (0.0001)*** Asian/Black (5.41) (0.0201)** White/Black (12.95) (0.0003)*** Asian/White (8.59) (0.0034)*** Latino/White (9.01) (0.0027)*** Latino/Black (10.63) (0.0011)*** White/Black (4.30) (0.0381)** Transfer ESL Asian/Black (3.68) (0.0550)* Asian/Latino (3.18) (0.0747)* Asian/Latino (4.28) (0.0387)** Latino/Black (3.69) (0.0547)** Asian/White (6.97) (0.0083)*** Latino/White (4.81) (0.0283)** White/Black (7.70) (0.0055)*** NOTES: Each column represents an outcome, and each row header indicates the pathway feature within which we compare race/ethnic group coefficients. *** p< l.lm , ** p< l.lq , * p< l.m. Only statistically significant results are shown, but full results are available upon request. Throughput ( o-Year) includes those students enrolled in ESL pathways in our catalog scan and enrolled in college for the first time between nlml and nlmq ; all other outcomes are that between nlml and nlmn . PPIC.ORG Technical Appendices English as a Second Language in California’s Community Colleges 39 TABLE B nn Wald chi-square test across prior education groups, by ESL pathway feature and outcome Throughput (3-Year) Throughput (6-Year) Proportion Transfer Credits Transfer to 4-Year Degree Attainment Integration Foreign/AdultEd (6.29) (0.0122)** Foreign/GED (3.90) (0.0483)** Foreign/GED (2.89) (0.0892)* HS/AdultEd (7.32) (0.0068)*** HS/GED (7.40) (0.0065)*** HS/GED (6.10) (0.0135)** GED/AdultEd (6.33) (0.0119)** GED/AdultEd (4.79) (0.0286)** Adult Ed/Non HS Grad (4.79) (0.0285)** GED/NonHS Grad (6.48) (0.0109)** Direct TLE Foreign/HS (4.33) (0.0373)** Foreign/AdultEd (9.15) (0.0025)*** Foreign/HS (21.63) (0.0000)*** Foreign/HS (4.38) (0.0363)** Foreign/HS (2.98) (0.0845)* Foreign/GED (3.71) (0.0539)* HS/AdultEd (12.58) (0.0004)*** Foreign/GED (21.19) (0.0000)*** Foreign/NonHS (8.18) (0.0042)*** Foreign/AdultEd (6.80) (0.0091)*** HS/AdultEd (4.28) (0.0385)** AdultEd/NonHS (8.63) (0.0033)*** Foreign/NonHS (3.95) (0.0468)** HS/AdultEd (10.71) (0.0011)*** GED/AdultEd (4.43) (0.0354)** HS/GED (3.15) (0.0758)* GED/AdultEd (10.92) (0.0010)*** AdultEd/NonHS (9.21) (0.0024)*** Transfer ESL Foreign/HS (4.68) (0.0305)** Foreign/HS (5.94) (0.0148)** Foreign/HS (16.07) (0.0001)*** Foreign/NonHS (3.29) (0.0697)* HS/GED (7.97) (0.0047)*** Foreign/GED (3.53) (0.0602)* HS/GED (6.35) (0.0117)** Foreign/AdultEd (2.78) (0.0955)* GED/NonHS (3.40) (0.0650)* NOTES: Each column represents an outcome, and each row header indicates the pathway feature within which we compare race/ethnic group coefficients. *** p< l.lm , ** p< l.lq , * p< l.m. Only statistically significant results are shown, but full results are av ailable upon request. Throughput ( o-Year) includes those students enrolled in ESL pathways in our catalog scan and enrolled in college for the first time between nlml and nlmq ; all other outcomes are that between nlml and nlmn . The Public Policy Institute of California is dedicated to informing and improving public policy in California through independent, objective, nonpartisan research. Public Policy Institute of California 500 Washington Street, Suite 600 San Francisco, CA 94111 T: 415.291.440 0 F: 415.291.4401 PPIC.ORG P PIC Sacramento Center Senator Office Building 1121 L Street, Suite 801 Sacramento, CA 95814 T: 916.440.1120 F: 916.440.1121" ["post_date_gmt"]=> string(19) "2019-04-29 17:57:11" ["comment_status"]=> string(6) "closed" ["ping_status"]=> string(6) "closed" ["post_password"]=> string(0) "" ["post_name"]=> string(16) "0419orr-appendix" ["to_ping"]=> string(0) "" ["pinged"]=> string(0) "" ["post_modified"]=> string(19) "2019-04-29 10:57:28" ["post_modified_gmt"]=> string(19) "2019-04-29 17:57:28" ["post_content_filtered"]=> string(0) "" ["guid"]=> string(60) "https://www.ppic.org/wp-content/uploads/0419orr-appendix.pdf" ["menu_order"]=> int(0) ["post_mime_type"]=> string(15) "application/pdf" ["comment_count"]=> string(1) "0" ["filter"]=> string(3) "raw" ["status"]=> string(7) "inherit" ["attachment_authors"]=> bool(false) }