Creating Change and Advancing Student Success through Short-Term Goals

We live in a goal-driven environment in higher education. We also live in a data-driven environment. And let us not forget the environments driven by equity, systemic change, and accountability. With so many purported drivers, it is reasonable to question whether we are just paying lip-service to these ideas or whether we know how to translate them into action. Do any of these drivers produce more results than the others? In other words, what is actually driving the higher education bus?

We don't purport to have the answers to such questions. But we can say that approximately eighteen months ago, Montgomery County Community College (MC3) confronted the aforementioned environments head-on when it undertook the challenge of achieving five difficult student success goals in less than a year. By committing to a process of data-informed intervention and cross-college collaboration, MC3 ended up in a markedly different place from where it started.

The Context and the Goals

Situated approximately 20 miles northwest of Philadelphia, MC3 has three on-ground locations in Montgomery County (as well as a virtual campus) and offers 50 areas of study to the roughly 16,500 credit-seeking students it serves annually. MC3 has a student population that is more diverse than the county itself. Approximately 70% of its students attend school part-time, and approximately 75% of them have jobs. The college also has a history of engaging in student success work; it is an Achieving the Dream Leader College of Distinction and a recipient of the Leah Meyer Austin Award. Additionally, MC3 has been acknowledged for its work with military veterans and adult learners.

In this context, in the summer of 2018, the college's Board of Trustees (BOT) charged MC3 leadership with developing a set of short-term "reach goals" to achieve during the next year. These goals were supposed to orient the college community to a clear set of near-term goals, increase employee and student motivation and collaboration, and advance the long-term student success and institutional goals outlined in MC3's five-year strategic plan. These "reach goals" were, by definition, intended to be difficult to attain.

To identify which goals to pursue, leadership started by concurrently reaching out to subject-matter experts within the higher education community for input and examining institutional data around more than twenty possible goals. In selecting goals from among the numerous possibilities, MC3 leaders were able to guide their decisions by the BOT and the input of experts, as well as by the extent to which they believed that MC3 could meaningfully deploy resources against potential goals in the given time frame. Additionally, in selecting goals, leaders needed to ensure that all goals would be able to be completely evaluated by the end of June 2019. Because the charge was presented in the summer of 2018, this created an abbreviated timeline for the process of identifying goals, developing strategies to achieve them, and implementing those strategies.

After convening on multiple occasions in summer 2018 to talk through the data, leadership determined that MC3 would focus on four goals during 2018–2019:

• Increase new student enrollment by 5%
• Reduce the course withdrawal rate by 13%
• Increase the number of students in STEM courses using 24/7 online tutoring by 100%
• Increase the graduation rate for students with 45 or more credits by 9%

For each of these goals, the numeric targets were selected by reviewing data from prior years and then setting targets that were suitably beyond the ranges evidenced over those years.

In addition to the goals selected by leadership, the BOT requested that MC3 set an additional goal:

• Increase fall-to-spring retention rates by 5%

As anyone who has worked on improving student retention will appreciate, an improvement of that magnitude in a span of a few months is no small feat. Ultimately, leadership determined that the retention goal would be specifically targeted to part-time students.

Collectively, these five goals were informally approved by the BOT in late July 2018 and formally approved when the board reconvened from summer break in September 2018.

Much of the work to achieve the goals was undertaken simultaneously and in a coordinated fashion. Several of the efforts were designed to impact multiple goals, and success on certain goals was expected to positively support the attainment of others. Nonetheless, for the sake of clarity, we address each goal separately here.

Goal 1: Increase New Student Enrollment

Like many colleges, MC3 has experienced declines in enrollment over the past several years. Since 2015, the college has seen enrollment decline by approximately 16%. These declines have been largely driven by declines in new student enrollment. Indeed, prior to fall 2018, no fall term had exhibited year-over-year growth in new student enrollment since 2011. These factors were key in leadership's decision to set a goal to increase new student enrollment by 5% (over the prior year) in 2018–2019 (defined as summer 2018, fall 2018, and spring 2019). Although these terms do not compose the typical college academic or fiscal year, they were chosen to allow for evaluation of the goal by the end of June 2019, as per the BOT. This decision, however, meant that MC3 could only marginally impact summer 2018 enrollment (given that the goals were not approved until July, informally, and November, formally). Moreover, it meant that there was limited time to affect fall enrollment as well, since as fall enrollment had begun in March 2018.

Despite the condensed time frame, MC3 engaged in many efforts aimed at reaching the enrollment goal:

• Hosted twenty virtual open houses
• Increased the engagement of admissions and dual-enrollment coordinators with partner high schools
• Launched a new student onboarding experience called Ready. Set. MontGO!
• Expanded Weeks of Welcome! (WOW), a set of programs designed to facilitate student engagement with and knowledge of MC3
• Adjusted the college's CRM recruiting funnel
• Deployed additional marketing in the form of television and radio commercials

As table 1 shows, these efforts yielded gains over the prior year during every term and increased growth in each subsequent term. Ultimately, however, the college did not reach its goal of a 5% increase in new student enrollment, coming in at +3.9%. This outcome was a complex one for MC3 to handle. In one respect, the college had fallen short of its goal. However, it had reversed a long-term downward trend in new student enrollment, and not acknowledging that fact—and the considerable efforts put forward by college employees—would have negatively impacted morale. In light of this, leadership had to work to effectively communicate that although the goal was not reached, the efforts in pursuit of that goal and the progress made toward achieving it were significant and appreciated.

Table 1. Goal 1: Increase New Student Enrollment by 5%

Final: +3.9%
Summer 2018	Fall 2018	Spring 2019
+2.7%	+3.3%	+7.1%

Goal 2: Reduce the Course Withdrawal Rate

In contrast to the rationale for addressing new student enrollment, the college did not seek to improve the course withdrawal rate because it was struggling in that area. In fact, MC3 had a course withdrawal rate that compared favorably with rates at peer institutions. However, our internal data showed that a significant percentage of student course withdrawals was avoidable. That is, while some course withdrawals were a function of massive changes in students' lives or their life goals—and thus were appropriate and advisable—many others were a function of lack of information or lack of a support available through the college. Thus, given the importance of timely credit accumulation and the potential negative effects of withdrawals on financial aid, the college determined it would seek to decrease the rate of course withdrawals by 13% over the fall 2018 and spring 2019 terms (as compared with the prior year).

To achieve this goal, the College implemented several programs and process changes:

• Launched a "persistence project" focused on shifting classroom practices/policies to promote student persistence
• Expanded "early alert" reporting to all faculty (with academic alerts during the first 20% of courses)
• Scaled 24/7 online tutoring to all students
• Launched an English and ESL faculty–student success initiative
• Increased awareness of student supports and faculty resources
• Established a new process to ensure advisor review of all course withdrawal requests to identify interventions prior to withdrawal
• Implemented an automated process to notify faculty of students' submitting to withdraw
• Increased student outreach among all support programs regarding academic progression.

As table 2 shows, this considerable work culminated in exceeding the goal. At the end of the fall 2018 and spring 2019 terms, the college had an aggregated course withdrawal rate that was 14% lower than the prior year—equating to 636 fewer course withdrawals.

This was a substantial success for MC3, and it was celebrated with a college-wide event for students and staff. Although the event entailed some (relatively modest) expense, the college believed that the achievement of such a goal required a recognition of the efforts that students and staff put forth to achieve it. Ultimately, the event also proved to be a great opportunity for staff and students to connect with one another.

Table 2. Goal 2: Reduce the Course Withdrawal Rate by 13%

Final: –14%
Fall 2018	Spring 2019
–18.1%	–11.2%

Goal 3: Increase the Number of Students in STEM Courses Using 24/7 Online Tutoring

Interestingly, based on a subsequent analysis, the college found strong indications that the success achieved in decreasing course withdrawals was supported by its scaling of 24/7 online tutoring. And while increasing 24/7 online tutoring use in STEM courses was one of the college's goals, the college had piloted that support for the first time just a year before. The initial pilot was in fall 2017 for students enrolled in STEM courses; it showed promise, with online tutoring users earning statistically significantly higher grades and persisting at higher rates than their non-using peers. Given that data, the college determined that it would set a goal to increase 24/7 online tutoring use for students in STEM courses by 100% in the fall 2018 semester (compared with the prior fall term). (While MC3 actually made 24/7 online tutoring available to the entire college starting in fall 2018, the STEM student cohort was selected for the goal given the availability of baseline data.)

To achieve this goal, MC3 engaged in various efforts:

• Conducted professional development for faculty on 24/7 online tutoring
• Launched nudge campaigns to increase student use of tutoring
• Featured 24/7 online tutoring at student resource fairs
• Supported tutoring registrations at campus events
• Used student support programs (Gateway to College, KEYS, Veterans) to encourage use of tutoring
• Embedded access to the tutoring platform in students' Blackboard shells
• Increased student-facing marketing for 24/7 online tutoring

(Note: MC3 continued to provide face-to-face tutoring as well; the 24/7 online tutoring was a supplement for, not a replacement of, face-to-face tutoring.)

As table 3 shows, the college exceeded its tutoring goal—ultimately more than doubling it. Further, analysis of the fall 2018 outcomes again showed statistically significantly better grades and higher rates of fall–spring persistence for students using 24/7 online tutoring.

As with the course withdrawal goal, the college held a campus-wide celebration upon attaining this goal. Notably, this practice of celebrating significant institutional achievements simultaneously with staff and students has been a beneficial by-product of the process and has seemingly rooted itself in the institutional culture.

Table 3. Goal 3: Increase STEM Students' Use of 24/7 Online Tutoring by 100%

Final: +212%
Fall 2018
+212%

Goal 4: Increase the Graduation Rate for Students with 45 or More Credits

Whereas MC3 made progress on the above goals, and actually exceeded the targets on two of them, the college experienced a wholly different outcome in its pursuit of increasing the graduation rate of students with 45 or more credits.

In recent years, the college had increased its focus on accelerating students' paths to graduation. In alignment with those efforts, MC3 adopted the goal of helping students with 45 or more completed credits (by the end of the fall 2018 semester) to graduate by the following spring. Given that most of our students attend part-time, expecting that we could get students to take up to 15 credits over the winter and spring terms might be described as overly ambitious. It was. Still, in summer 2018, the outcome was not known, and MC3 decided that it would seek to increase the 45+ credit cohort's graduation rate by 9% from the prior year.

To attain such an outcome, MC3 employed the following approaches:

• Launched a faculty-led completion initiative (including personal outreach) to students in the 45+ credit cohort
• Implemented a "Spring Across the Finish Line" program for students who did not complete in fall or register for spring
• Reviewed winter and spring schedules to ensure completion pathways
• Scaled 24/7 online tutoring to all students and faculty, with a specific focus on barrier courses
• Expanded completion initiative teams to include enrollment services and student affairs staff
• Developed a "Plus One and Done!" awareness campaign to encourage students to add an additional course to accelerate their completion
• Created completion-incentive financial support programs.

As table 4 indicates, the college did not come close to achieving this goal. One possible reason for this is that, in prior years, MC3 had implemented initiatives that helped graduate large groups of students who did not realize they had sufficient credits to graduate. Therefore, fewer students with most or all of the credits they needed to graduate remained in the pipeline and the efforts made around these students in prior years had increased the baseline comparison rate.

The college also learned, after the fact, that some of the programming it was implementing against this goal was targeting only specific cohort subgroups, instead of the entire cohort. This was a function of a lack of communication and, in several cases, a lack of resources. Considering that MC3 pursued the other goals simultaneously and that the college runs lean in terms of personnel, such an outcome should not have been unexpected. However, it proved to be a valuable reminder about prioritization, communication, and resource allocation.

Table 4. Goal 4: Increase the Graduation Rate for Students with 45+ Credits by 9%

Final: –0.3%
Fall 2018 / Spring 2019
–0.3% (–3 students)

Goal 5: Increase Fall-to-Spring Retention Rates

As mentioned earlier, the BOT recommended the goal of increasing fall-to-spring retention rates by 5%. College leaders understood that this would be a difficult goal to accomplish in a single year. They therefore decided to focus on part-time degree-seeking students, which were steadily increasing at MC3; by fall 2018, 72% of students were enrolled part-time. The college also focused on part-time student retention given the disparity in retention rates between part-time and full-time students. Whereas 78% of full-time students in fall 2017 were retained in spring 2018, only 63% of part-time students were retained.

MC3 attempted to reach this goal in several ways:

• Validated students' schedules to ensure a clear pathway for progression
• Had advisors case-manage students to assess re-enrollment plans
• Identified holistic student support services for student referrals
• Improved schedule alignment through the use of an analytics platform
• Launched a partnership with JED Campus to implement institutional changes to meet student well-being needs

As table 5 shows, although the college increased the fall-to-spring retention rate for part-time (PT) students (+1.4%), it clearly failed to reach its goal. Interestingly, the college actually increased the full-time (FT) fall-spring retention rate by a greater percentage: 2.2%. It is likely that this increase was a function of some of the interventions aimed at promoting PT student retention impacting FT student retention. Rising tides, do, after all, lift all ships.

Although college leaders were not satisfied with these results, the fact that fall-to-spring retention was not increased by 5% was unsurprising. Many realized that such a shift would require a slightly longer time frame to realize. To that end, the college adopted a goal in 2019 to increase fall-to-spring retention by 5% over three years.

Table 5. Goal 5: Increase the Fall-to-Spring Retention Rate by 5%

Final: +1.4%
	PT Students	FT Students
Fall 2018–Spring 2019	+1.4%	+2.2%

Outcomes, Challenges, and Final Thoughts

In the end, what did it all mean? MC3 had achieved some goals and made progress on others, and this undoubtedly had a positive impact on many students. Through the goal-setting process and the subsequent efforts to achieve them, the college also implemented a model of data-informed intervention, accountability, and transparency that was part of, and facilitated, MC3's work to undertake systems-level changes. Moreover, some undertakings—notably around tutoring—began to address the equity issues present at the college. Leaders also reinforced the importance of working collaboratively to make meaningful change.

To be sure, there were challenges. The college missed one goal by a mile. There was pushback at times and confusion at other times. The model of setting very difficult short-term goals every year was not sustainable. And college leaders remain constantly tested to do more to set meaningful goals, to use data more effectively, to create a more equitable institution, to facilitate more systemic change, and to hold themselves accountable for such things.

Yet, all of us at MC3 made inroads in these areas and are currently holding our ground and making strategic advances. And while we are sure that neither goals, data, equity, systemic change, or accountability alone drive our higher education bus, we are equally sure that all of these need to be onboard if we want to get anywhere meaningful.

---

Kevin Pollock is the President of Montgomery County Community College.

Victoria Bastecki-Perez is the Interim President and Provost at Montgomery County Community College.

Celeste Schwartz is Vice President for Information Technology and Chief Digital Officer at Montgomery County Community College.

Philip Needles is Vice President of Student Services at Montgomery County Community College.

David Kowalski is Associate Vice President for Institutional Effectiveness & Strategic Innovation at Montgomery County Community College.