This document analyzes data on the college pathways and outcomes of Philadelphia students. Some of the key findings include: 1) The number of college applications from Philadelphia students has increased significantly from 2003-2009, but acceptances and enrollments did not increase at the same rate. 2) Over 23% of Philadelphia students at four-year institutions required developmental education, especially in English. At the community college, over half of students required developmental courses in math or English. 3) While getting through the first year of college is important, students can fall off track even after the second year - 25% failed to complete within 6 years after the second year. The document discusses these findings and poses questions to

1. Pathways to Postsecondary
Completion:
How Are Philadelphia Students Faring?
October 2011

2. Table of Contents
1. Introduction ..............................................................................................................2
About this Report .....................................................................................................3
2. Data Findings ...........................................................................................................6
3. Preliminary Recommendations ............................................................................. 19
Moving Forward: Policy Recommendations .......................................................... 19
Moving Forward: Recommendations for Future Data Collection ......................... 20
Questions for Further Reflection ........................................................................... 22
Closing Thoughts .................................................................................................. 23

3. 1. Introduction
“In order to be a truly great city, in order to be a true world-class city, in
order to be a city of hope and opportunity, the new Philadelphia must be
‘The Education City.’” -Mayor Michael Nutter
Since his inauguration, increasing college completion rates among Philadelphians has
been an educational and economic development priority for Mayor Nutter and his
administration. This agenda has drawn national recognition to Philadelphia as a city that
is working across community stakeholders to improve college access at a time when the
national focus on college completion is increasing.
Many policymakers, funders, and local advocates recognize the importance of raising the
education level of the American populace if the United States is to compete effectively in
the global marketplace. The Obama administration and national foundations like the Bill
and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Lumina Foundation for Education have set forth
public goals for increasing the number of Americans with college degrees, and even in
these difficult economic times, they have made substantive investments in college
completion.
Reaching the broad and ambitious goals of the college completion movement requires
finding a way to ground and focus conversations at the level of serving students. Across
communities, data use has emerged as a key method of achieving this objective. Efforts
like Complete College America are helping states to delve more deeply into their
educational data, develop a clearer understanding of students’ college completion
patterns, and ultimately identify strategies that can help localities, states, and the nation
achieve stronger educational and occupational outcomes for young adults.
Mayor Nutter, upon taking office, formed the Philadelphia Council for College and
Career Success, a group with a vision to ensure that all Philadelphia youth are prepared
for educational and economic success. The Council includes a range of leaders from the
School District of Philadelphia, Philadelphia’s multiple colleges and universities,
influential business organizations, research organizations, and members of the nonprofit
provider community. The Council’s leadership team is comprised of three committees:
Project U-Turn, which focuses on high school dropouts; WorkReady, which focuses on
connecting education and employment; and CollegeReady, which is devoted to
increasing college access and success. CollegeReady has been instrumental as the
steward of the local college completion agenda, pushing data collection to the forefront in
its efforts to support that agenda. These partners have employed the use of data to
activate conversations about Philadelphia students’ college completion patterns and to
create a stronger sense of accountability across all Council partners and in the
community. Nationally about 20% of ninth graders graduate high school on time and go
2|Page

4. on to graduate college within six years. Philadelphia’s college completion rate is about
half of that, creating even greater urgency within an already pressing issue.1
About this Report
Most recently, a subcommittee of CollegeReady, the Data Workteam, spearheaded the
development of a comprehensive set of common college metrics and a tool for collecting
these data across colleges serving Philadelphia’s high school students. Twenty colleges
submitted a first round of data in the summer of 2011 using this tool. This report offers
data analyses from this data collection effort and seeks to provide answers to three critical
questions:
1. What are the college access and success patterns of Philadelphia students, including
not only those who graduated from public (including charter) high schools but also
from private and Archdiocese high schools, once they enter college?
2. What are the specific points of progress and challenge for students from Philadelphia
high schools as they move from the application process through developmental
education coursework and toward graduation?
3. How do patterns for students from Philadelphia high schools compare to students
from non-Philadelphia high schools?
Section 2 of this report provides an overview of our Data Findings, which OMG
developed in partnership with the CollegeReady Data Workteam’s senior leadership. We
used the Loss-Momentum Framework2 developed by the Bill and Melinda Gates
Foundation to organize these findings and explore the success and loss patterns of
students from Philadelphia high schools across four key junctures in their college
experience:
Connection: This reflects students’ success in the college admissions process
and includes the following indicators: number of applications, number of
acceptances, and number of students who enrolled.
Entry: This reflects students’ placement and outcomes in developmental
education coursework and includes the following indicators: number of
students who took developmental education courses in English and math and
those who passed developmental education courses in English and math.
1
To date, data use in Philadelphia has focused primarily on analyses of National Student Clearinghouse data provided by the School
District of Philadelphia and also through research conducted by the OMG Center, supported by the John S. and James L. Knight
Foundation. The full OMG report, College Access and Success in Philadelphia: College Enrollment Activity can be found online at:
https://knight.box.net/shared/lv3eiqg542.
2
The Loss-Momentum Framework was designed by the Completion by Design Assistance Team at the Bill and Melinda Gates
Foundation. The Completion by Design initiative is a five-year investment by the Foundation to enable groups of community college
campuses in several states to collaborate on the design and implementation of a model pathway to completion. For the full framework,
see the Technical Appendix.
3|Page

5. Progress: This reflects students’ movement through credit-bearing
coursework and includes the following indicators: number of students who
completed their first and second semesters, those who completed their second
year, and those who were in good academic standing and/or on track to
graduate after two years.
Completion: This reflects students’ graduation from college and includes the
following indicators: the number of students graduating in four years or in six
years.
In the final section of this report we present some Preliminary Recommendations and
offer some ideas about how to move forward with policy and data activities. In addition,
we pose a series of questions to further the conversation around these data so that the
Council and the community can continue to generate ideas about what these data mean
for policy and data collection moving forward.
Throughout the report, we include a series of Technical Notes with information about the
data in this report, highlighting how we conducted our analyses, as well as some of the
challenges and limitations to data interpretation.
4|Page

6. Introductory Technical Notes
The Mayor's Office of Education requested data from 30 local and
statewide colleges and universities for this study, including public and
private, as well as two-year and four-year institutions, and received
analyzable data from 20 diverse institutions.
These participating institutions submitted information about seven
freshman cohorts entering college between 2003 and 2009, tracking their
progress from the application process through graduation to the extent
possible. The 2003 cohorts across the colleges, for example, offer
longitudinal data from first-year students' application submissions to six-
year completion rates. In addition, colleges provided disaggregated
information across these indicators specifically for students from
individual Philadelphia high schools.
Given that not all colleges provided data for all indicators, this report does
not always present data for the same cohort (i.e., the same groups of
colleges and universities) from connection through completion. In order to
maximize the data, we made decisions about what institutions to include in
our analysis on the basis of which ones had complete data in any one of
the four Loss-Momentum areas: connection, entry, progress, or
completion. In other words, the groups of colleges and universities
included in analyses may be different across each phase. It is always noted
throughout the report which institutions are included in any given analysis.
Because the data were provided in the aggregate, individual-level progress,
such as success in one step of the pathway in relation to a previous step,
could not be assessed.
The primary focus of this report is the postsecondary success of
Philadelphia high school graduates. Thus, we present data on most
indicators for the cohort of students coming from Philadelphia high schools
only. Many colleges provided comparable data on students entering from
non-Philadelphia high schools as well, and we use those data to present
some comparative findings of students coming from Philadelphia versus
non-Philadelphia high schools.
Community colleges represent a unique postsecondary experience and, as
such, the data from the community college in our study (Community
College of Philadelphia) were analyzed separately.
For a complete list of participating colleges and universities, a full
overview of the metrics collected and their definitions, and a description
of the student population, see the Technical Appendix.
5|Page

7. 2. Data Findings
The key findings of our analysis are the following:
The number of college applications is rising faster than acceptance and
1 enrollment figures.
Developmental education course requirements are high for Philadelphia
2 students entering college, especially at the community college.
Getting through the first semester and the first year of college are not the
3 only critical retention points for students; students may also be losing ground
even after completing their second year.
Academic challenges may explain only a portion of the loss of Philadelphia
4 students from college.
Many Philadelphia students are taking more than four years to complete
5 college.
Colleges of different selectivity (e.g., very competitive, competitive, non-
6 competitive) tend to enroll Philadelphia students from certain high school
types (e.g., special admissions, parochial, and neighborhood).
Differences exist between the college success patterns of students from
7 Philadelphia versus non-Philadelphia high schools.
Each of these findings is described in more detail below. In addition, we highlight some
questions for further reflection based on preliminary conversations with local
postsecondary leaders and some of the research-based strategies included in the Loss-
Momentum Framework introduced earlier.
6|Page

8. The number of college applications is rising faster than
1 acceptance and enrollment figures.
The number of applications to colleges increased between 2003 and 2009, but the
degree to which this led to an increase in acceptances and enrollments was more
moderate. Over the six-year period, the number of college applications from
Philadelphia high school students steadily increased. The large increase in applications,
however, did not produce a significant corresponding increase in acceptances or
enrollment. Figure 1 shows that from 2003-2009, college applications increased by 61%
(an additional 6,752 applications), acceptances increased by 22% (an additional 1,394
acceptances), and there was a 15% increase in enrollments (an additional 307 students).
Figure 1: Total number of applications, acceptances, and enrollments from 2003 to 2009 among 2003 through
2009 first-fall entering student cohorts from Philadelphia high schools
20000
18000 17899
17009
16000
14949 15427
14000
13378
12644
12000
11147
10000
8000 7774
6930 7220
6000 6380 6469 6347 6522
4000
2000 2015 2149 2253 2105 2195 2189 2322
1129 1266 1296 1173 1148
0
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Applications Acceptances Enrollments CCP Enrollments
Note: No application or acceptance data are from CCP because CCP has non-competitive enrollment.
7|Page

9. In other words, for every 20 additional applications submitted, there were approximately
four additional acceptances and one additional enrollment (Figure 2).
Figure 2: Change from 2003 to 2009 in applications, acceptances, and
enrollments among 2003 through 2009 first-fall entering student cohorts from
Philadelphia high schools
For every 20
additional
applications
from
Philadelphia There were
high school approximately and
students from 4 additional 1 additional
2003 to 2009, acceptances, enrollment.
Note: Rates were calculated by dividing the number of increased applications and
acceptances by the number of increased enrollments.
Questions for Further Reflection:
1. What is driving the increase in applications: more students applying or more
applications per students?
2. Why hasn’t the increase in college applications led to a greater rise in acceptances and
subsequent enrollments?
8|Page

10. 2 Developmental education course requirements are high for
Philadelphia students entering college, especially at the
community college.
Over 23% of Philadelphia students entering four-year institution were placed or
enrolled in remedial course work in math and/or English. Placement and enrollment of
students from Philadelphia high schools in developmental education math and English
courses remained steady from 2006-2009, with about one-third of students from
Philadelphia high schools requiring English remediation and about one-fourth requiring
math remediation (Figure 3).
Figure 3: Placement/enrollment rates in math and English developmental education courses at select four-
year colleges* among 2006 to 2009 first-fall entering student cohorts from Philadelphia high schools
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
33% 33% 32% 35%
30%
23% 24% 24%
20% 18%
10%
0%
2006 2007 2008 2009
% placed in
% took English % took mathin
% placed
English Math
*Colleges represented in developmental education analyses:
Math: Bloomsburg, Chestnut Hill, Holy Family, Indiana, Lock Haven, Millersville, Shippensburg, Slippery Rock, Temple
English: Bloomsburg, Chestnut Hill, Holy Family, Millersville, Moore, Shippensburg, Temple, UArts
Note: Developmental education course data prior to 2006 were unavailable.
9|Page

11. At CCP, an even higher percentage of students enrolled in developmental education
coursework; more than half of entering students enrolled in English and/or math
developmental education courses. Between 2006 and 2009, on average, 83% of students
entering CCP from Philadelphia high schools required developmental education courses
for English and 63% for math (Figure 4). Developmental education enrollment at CCP
was over 40 percentage points higher than at the four-year colleges.
Figure 4: Placement/Enrollment rates in math and English developmental education courses at CCP
among 2006 to 2009 first-fall entering cohorts from Philadelphia high schools
% placed in % placed in
English Math
Across four-year institutions and CCP, developmental education enrollment rates were
higher for English than for math. In addition to enrolling more often in English than math
courses, students were more likely to pass English courses. Students passed English
courses on average 91% of the time versus 76% of the time for math at four-year
colleges; at CCP, students passed English courses on average 45% of the time versus
41% of the time for math.
Questions for Further Reflection:
1. What are some of the differences among students enrolling in four- and two-year
institutions that might be driving higher developmental education course rates at CCP?
2. What is driving higher developmental education enrollment and pass rates in English
versus math and what are the policy implications at both the K-12 and college levels?
3. How does placement and success in developmental education courses impact students’
performance in introductory college-level coursework and their prospects for
completing college?
10 | P a g e

12. 3 Getting through the first semester and the first year of
college are not the only critical retention points for students;
students may also be losing ground even after completing
their second year.
Students are equally likely to be off the pathway to six-year completion after their
second year of college as before their second year of college. Twenty-three percent of
students left college before completing their second year; however, an additional 25% of
students failed to complete college after six years (Figure 5).
Figure 5: Proportion of first-fall students from Philadelphia high schools who matriculated into select colleges* in 2003 and
persisted and met graduation milestones from first semester through to four- and six-year graduation
completed at least 1 course credit in first 23
99% percentage
semester
point drop
retained fall 1 to fall 2 (i.e., returned for a 2nd from entry
83%
spring semester) to end of
completed fall 1 through spring 2 (i.e., second
77% year
completed first 4 consecutive semesters)
in good standing fall 1 through spring 2** 70% 25
percentage
on track to graduate fall 1 through spring 2*** 35% point drop
from end
of second
4‐year graduation 28% year to 6‐
year
6‐year graduation 52% graduation
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
*Colleges represented: Bloomsburg, East Stroudsburg, Indiana, La Salle, Lock Haven, Millersville, Moore, Peirce, Shippensburg, Temple,
UArts, West Chester
**Completed first four consecutive semesters and earned minimum GPA to be considered in good academic standing at individual institution
***Completed first four consecutive semesters and earned enough credits to enter third fall as a junior
Questions for Further Reflection:
1. To what extent do changes in progress numbers represent students leaving college
versus simply not being on track to a four- or six-year graduation but still enrolled?
1. Among those students who leave college or are at risk of not completing, what
connections might exist between why and when a student falls off the pathway to
graduation, and how might strategies be targeted for students falling off track at
different points on the college continuum?
11 | P a g e

13. 4 Academic challenges may explain only a portion of the loss
of Philadelphia students from college.
Only half of students at four-year institutions who persisted through their second year
accumulated enough credits to be on track to a four-year graduation. Although 70% of
students completed their first two years of college in good academic standing, a vast
majority of those still enrolled after two years, only half of those students had
accumulated enough credits to enroll as juniors in their third year of college (see Figure 5
on previous page).
Questions for Further Reflection:
1. What is driving the low percentage of students who are on track to graduate in four
years after the second year?
2. What are the different student support strategies or institutional policy changes that can
help students to pursue and stay on a four-year, or alternatively a six-year, track to
graduation?
Technical Notes
It is important to note that our analyses of progress and completion in
Findings 3-5 do not include data about the number of students that transfer
to other institutions. The inclusion in our data of students who transfer
could explain some of the drop-off observed along the progress
continuum.
From a study conducted by OMG in 2010 (see earlier footnote), we know
that 32% of Philadelphia public school students attending college enrolled
in more than one college, representing either transfers or concurrent
enrollment (e.g., taking summer classes at a different institution).
12 | P a g e

14. 5 Among Philadelphia students completing college, many
are taking more than four years to complete.
A little over a quarter of the students in this study graduated in four years, and
approximately an additional quarter graduated within six years. Six-year graduation
rates were almost twice that of four-year graduation rates. Twenty-eight percent of
students who entered four-year institutions from Philadelphia high schools in 2003
graduated in four years. The number of students who graduated in six years was nearly
double (52%), representing an additional 24 percentage points of graduated college
students (Figure 6).
Figure 6: Proportion of first-fall students from Philadelphia high schools who matriculated into select
colleges* in 2003 and graduated in four and six years
28%
52%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
on‐time graduation 6‐year graduation
*Colleges represented: Bloomsburg, East Stroudsburg, Indiana, La Salle, Lock Haven, Millersville, Moore,
Peirce, Shippensburg, Temple, UArts, West Chester
The difference between six-year and four-year graduation rates is particularly
pronounced among “very competitive” colleges. The difference overall between four-
year and six-year graduation is 24 percentage points, whereas within “very competitive”
institutions, the difference is 31 percentage points (24% of students who entered “very
competitive” colleges from Philadelphia high schools in 2003 had graduated by 2007 [in
four years], and 55% had graduated by 2009 [in six years]). By comparison, the
difference between four-year and six-year graduation rates at “competitive” colleges was
19 percentage points (30% and 49%, respectively). (Figure 7).
13 | P a g e

15. Figure 7: Proportion of first-fall students from Philadelphia high schools who matriculated into select
colleges* in 2003 and graduated in four and six years from “competitive” and “very competitive”
colleges
*Colleges represented: Competitive: Bloomsburg, East Stroudsburg, Indiana, La Salle, Lock Haven,
Millersville, Moore, Peirce, Shippensburg, USciences, West Chester; Very Competitive: Temple, UArts
Questions for Further Reflection:
1. What is the impact on students of taking six years versus four years to graduate?
2. How are college-level policies impacting students’ longer time to graduation and/or
supporting students who take longer?
14 | P a g e

16. 6 Colleges of different selectivity (e.g., very competitive,
competitive, non-competitive) tend to enroll Philadelphia
students from certain high school types (e.g., special
admissions, parochial, and neighborhood).
Non-competitive college (CCP) enrollees from Philadelphia came disproportionately
from neighborhood and citywide public schools compared with other college selectivity
types. In 2009, across all of the college enrollees in this study from Philadelphia, 22%
were from neighborhood and citywide high schools; however, at CCP, 48% of
Philadelphia students were from these school types (Figure 8).
Figure 8: First-fall student enrollment in colleges and universities, by college selectivity group and high school type, in 2009.
100% 3%
8% 5% 5%
10% 11%
90%
High School Type
25%
80% 21% Private 30%
28% 22%
Total percent of first-fall student enrollment
36%
70%
12%
Archdiocese
60% 4%
22% 19% 11%
13% 13%
50% Charter
22%
40% 39%
18%
24% School District of
30% 33%
Philadelphia, Special
48% Admissions Only
20% School District of
28% 33%
23% Philadelphia
10% 21%
15%
0%
Very Competitive Less Not Special
competitive competitive competitive
N=814 N=1239 N=118 N=1168 N=27 TOTAL=3,366
Note: The stacked colors represent the high school types from which the students graduated prior to their college enrollment.
Includes all colleges in the study except Peirce and UPenn because of incomplete Philadelphia high school enrollment data.
A higher ratio of “competitive” college enrollees from Philadelphia came from
Archdiocese high schools compared with other college selectivity groups. Across all of
the Philadelphia graduates attending college in this study, 30% were from Archdiocese
schools; however, 36% of the Philadelphia students attending “competitive” colleges
were from Archdiocese high schools (Figure 8).
15 | P a g e

17. Philadelphia special admissions high school graduates in this study enrolled at a
higher proportion in “very competitive” colleges compared with other college types.
Across all of the Philadelphia graduates attending college in this study, 22% were from
special admissions high schools; however, 39% of the Philadelphia students attending
“very competitive” colleges were from special admissions high schools. (See Figure 8 on
page 17.)
Philadelphia charter high school graduates enrolled in “competitive” and non-
competitive colleges in similar proportions to their overall representation in the study
sample. Charter school graduates made up a relatively small part of this sample overall,
11%. Twelve percent of the Philadelphia students attending “competitive” colleges and
13% attending non-competitive colleges were from charter schools. (See Figure 8 on
page 17.)
Questions for Further Reflection:
1. What is there to learn from the patterns of students enrolling in certain college types
from specific high school types?
2. What are the reasons that pathways to certain college types are different across
different high school types?
16 | P a g e

18. 7 The data suggest that differences exist between the
patterns of students from Philadelphia versus non-
Philadelphia high schools.
In 2003, students from Philadelphia high schools had marginally lower acceptance
rates than non-Philadelphia students, but very slightly higher enrollment rates. In
2003, students from Philadelphia high schools were accepted about 6% less often than
students from non-Philadelphia high schools; however, enrollment rates of students
accepted from Philadelphia high schools were two percentage points higher. This
suggests that Philadelphia students enrolled more often in colleges that accepted them
(Figure 9).
Figure 9: Connection and entry patterns among students from Philadelphia versus non-Philadelphia high
schools, 2003 fall entering cohort
Connection
Acceptance rates Enrollment rates
were 6 percentage were 2 percentage
points lower among points higher among
Philadelphia Philadelphia
students students
Note: Acceptance rate is the percent of applicants who were accepted. Enrollment rate is the percent of accepted
students who enrolled. The Technical Appendix provides a list of the colleges included in each analysis.
Although Philadelphia and non-Philadelphia students enrolled at near equal rates,
developmental education course requirements were much higher among Philadelphia
students. Trends show that once enrolled, more Philadelphia high school students
required developmental education courses in English and math than their non-
Philadelphia counterparts; the differences were 20 percentage points higher in English
and 13 percentage points higher in math in 2005 (Figure 10).
Figure 10: Developmental education course enrollment and pass rates among students from Philadelphia
versus non-Philadelphia high schools, 2005 fall entering cohort
Entry
English Math
developmental developmental
education course education course
enrollment rates enrollment rates
were 20 percentage were 13 percentage
points higher among points higher among
Philadelphia Philadelphia
students students
17 | P a g e

19. Both four-year and six-year graduation rates were lower among Philadelphia students
at four-year colleges than among non-Philadelphia students. Philadelphia students’
four-year graduation rates were 24 percentage points lower than those of non-
Philadelphia students, and six-year graduation rates were 23 percentage points lower
among students enrolled in four-year colleges (Figure 11).
Figure 11: Completion rates among students from Philadelphia versus non-Philadelphia high schools, 2003 fall
entering cohort
Completion
Four-year Six-year
graduation rates graduation rates
were 24 were 23
percentage points percentage points
lower among lower among
Philadelphia Philadelphia
students students
Questions for Further Reflection:
1. What practices are in place at colleges for supporting Philadelphia students’ progress
across the entire college continuum?
Technical Notes
Our comparison of Philadelphia versus non-Philadelphia student patterns
includes a smaller number of colleges than the other analyses since fewer
colleges provided non-Philadelphia student data. As for the analyses of
Philadelphia students above, the colleges that provided data on
connection, entry, and completion are different for each step in the
progression, making comparisons across the continuum challenging. The
Technical Appendix provides a full overview of which colleges included
both Philadelphia and non-Philadelphia data that were used in our
analyses.
18 | P a g e

20. 3. Preliminary Recommendations
As a community that seeks to build its profile as a city working to address its low rates of
educational attainment, Philadelphia is poised for greater economic, cultural, and
community development. However, to meet this important charge, Philadelphia
stakeholders will need to continue to connect the mayor’s ambitious goal of doubling the
number of Philadelphians with college degrees to the ground-level work that leads to real
changes for students in the community.
We hope that the data presented in this report can help to do just that, guide new
conversations about policies and practices as well as future data collection efforts that can
lead to action in the community. Below, we offer some preliminary but concrete policy
and data recommendations for moving forward, as well as a series of questions for
refining and generating new ideas among Council members and in the Philadelphia
community.
Moving Forward: Policy Recommendations
Data Findings Policy Directions
1. Identify opportunities across K-12
and postsecondary partners for
Student applications are rising faster
Connection than acceptances and enrollments.
increasing not only Philadelphia
student applications but also
corresponding enrollments
Developmental education course 2. Explore strategies at the K-12
requirements are high for and postsecondary levels to
Entry Philadelphia students entering minimize the burden of
college, especially at the community developmental education as a
college. barrier
Getting through the first semester
and the first year of college are not
3. Target persistence strategies to
the only critical retention points for
students dropping off after
students; students may also be
completing a second year
Progress losing ground even after completing
their second year.
Academic challenges appear to 4. Consider and address non-
explain only a portion of Philadelphia academic reasons for student
student drop off once in college. loss
19 | P a g e

21. Policy Recommendations (cont’d)
5. Design policies that help more
students graduate within four
Among Philadelphia students years
Completion completing college, many are taking 6. Ensure that policies, particularly
more than four years to graduate. financial aid policies, support
longer times to graduation when
appropriate
7. Identify the reasons why these
High School Colleges of different selectivity tend
to enroll Philadelphia students from
primary pathways exist (e.g.,
Type certain high school types.
academic preparation,
recruitment policies)
Philadelphia Differences exist between the 8. Identify particular strategies that
patterns of students from have been successful in targeting
vs. Non- Philadelphia versus non-Philadelphia the needs of Philadelphia
Philadelphia high schools. students
Moving Forward: Recommendations for Future Data Collection
Although we have identified some key findings and some possible policy implications
and directions in this report, one of the most important next steps out of this effort will be
to improve data collection and analysis moving forward. As with any new data collection,
a crucial element of this process has been not only learning from the content of the data,
but also identifying some of the specific challenges in collecting and analyzing these
data.
This first round of the Council’s data collection uncovered some key challenges around
(1) individual institutional research capacity, (2) shared interpretations of data definitions,
and (3) data interpretation. These types of challenges are typical of multi-system data
collection efforts. Developing a common set of indicators for collection across
independent institutions is an iterative process; refinements need to continue to be made
if these data are to inform policy changes and drive effective improvement strategies and
practices in a meaningful way.
We have developed a series of recommendations that we hope can help strengthen these
data efforts in the future.
Add additional variables: Information about introductory college-level (credit-bearing)
coursework (e.g., Gateway Math and English classes) would add opportunities for
additional analyses.
• Although information was available about developmental education course
enrollment and pass rates, the degree to which this led to students’ enrollment in
introductory college-level coursework versus additional developmental education
courses could not be determined.
20 | P a g e

22. Strengthen areas in which data were missing: Less complete developmental education and
non-Philadelphia student data limited the ability to analyze and draw firm conclusions
about these points along the pathway to completion. Only 11 of 20 schools in the study
provided developmental education data on their Philadelphia students for both Math and
English, and only seven schools provided such information about non-Philadelphia
students. This represented fewer schools than in our other analyses.
Collect additional years of data: Although we highlight areas to strengthen this data
collection, the data from the original template suggested many trends. However, the most
recent data in this study was from the 2008-2009 academic year. Information from the
2009-2010 and 2010-2011 academic years will be particularly useful in order to explore
significant contextual influences like the economy that may have had an impact in the
most recent years.
Collect student-level data: A longer-term goal for this effort might be to collect and
analyze data at the student level. The collection of data at the school level limited the
ability to track the progress of individual students across the college continuum. For
example, from the data in this study, it could not be determined whether an increase in
applications across colleges represented an increase in the number of students applying or
an increase in the number of applications per student. Likewise, bivariate and
multivariate analyses, which could highlight associations between demographic factors
and the outcomes in this study, can only be conducted with student-level data.
Furthermore, without student-level data, we cannot track the impact of transfer patterns
on these data. Without the ability to match students across colleges, we cannot determine
if a student enrolling initially in one college graduates from another college.
Finally, student-level data would offer the opportunity to link School District of
Philadelphia, Archdiocese, and Independent high school data and answer additional
questions about the connection of students from the K-12 to the postsecondary education
system.
Align metrics with those of Complete College America: Complete College America is a
national nonprofit working to increase the number of Americans with a college degree
and to close degree attainment gaps for traditionally underrepresented students. In July
2010, the National Governors Association (NGA) adopted the Complete College
America Common Completion Metrics, highlighting the importance of consistent data to
document the progress and success of postsecondary students across all states. Having a
commensurate set of metrics from Philadelphia would signal Philadelphia’s willingness
to align with this national agenda, and would allow for higher-quality data reporting and
use to drive policy.
21 | P a g e

23. Questions for Further Reflection
A key focus of this report is to present data in a way that can contribute to new
conversations across the community. For all of our findings, we posed a number of
questions for further reflection that arose during the analysis process and during ongoing
conversations with Council members. We have compiled these below. Throughout the
community, we hope that these questions can help make the data presented in this report
actionable and drive partners toward an aligned, multi-sector response in supporting
students’ degree attainment once in college.
1. What is driving the increase in applications: more students applying or more
applications per students?
2. Why hasn’t the increase in college applications led to a greater rise in acceptances and
subsequent enrollments?
3. What are some of the differences among students enrolling in four- and two-year
institutions that might be driving higher developmental education course rates at CCP?
4. What is driving higher developmental education enrollment and pass rates in English
versus math and what are the policy implications at both the K-12 and college levels?
5. How does placement and success in developmental education courses impact students’
performance in introductory college-level coursework and their prospects for
completing college?
6. To what extent do changes in progress numbers represent students leaving college
versus simply not being on track to a four- or six-year graduation but still enrolled?
7. Among those students who leave college or are at risk of not completing, what
connections might exist between why and when a student falls off the pathway to
graduation, and how might strategies be targeted for students falling off track at
different points on the college continuum?
8. What is driving the low percentage of students who are on track to graduate in four
years after the second year?
22 | P a g e

24. 9. What are the different student support strategies or institutional policy changes that can
help students to pursue and stay on a four-year, or alternatively a six-year, track to
graduation?
10. What is the impact on students of taking six years versus four years to graduate?
11. How are college-level policies impacting students’ longer time to graduation and/or
supporting students who take longer?
12. What is there to learn from the patterns of students enrolling in certain college types
from specific high school types?
13. What are the reasons that pathways to certain college types are different across
different high school types?
14. What practices are in place at colleges for supporting Philadelphia students’ progress
across the entire college continuum?
Closing Thoughts
In order to reach Mayor Nutter’s goal of doubling the baccalaureate attainment rate of
Philadelphians by 2017, the partners in this work will need to explore the questions
outlined above and develop policies to address the challenges that the data reveal.
Furthermore, college-specific strategies that have improved access and completion
outcomes for students do exist in the community, and offer learning opportunities for
other colleges. Improving and standardizing the use of data across Pennsylvania colleges
will help institutions to maximize the successes and better understand the challenges,
while enabling better tracking of changes in college outcomes over time.
The Council for College and Career Success, with its representatives from a variety of
stakeholder groups, has an opportunity to facilitate the alignment of college success
strategies among colleges and between the K-12 and postsecondary system. The data
suggest that strategies to help students progress through the first years of college and
persist through to college completion need to be diverse and adaptable, addressing
academic, financial, and students’ life circumstances. Employing a holistic approach that
includes curriculum alignment, adequate financial aid offerings, and targeted student
advising services will be essential for achieving the Mayor’s college completion goal for
Philadelphians and for positioning Philadelphians to succeed in a world that increasingly
demands a college-educated workforce.
23 | P a g e