Imagine that instead of being paid based on your job description that your boss focused on what the results were from you doing your job description. Do you think that would change how you worked?
In September, Gov. Abbott signed Texas House Bill 8, which transforms how community colleges will be paid going forward. This new law is a major paradigm shift for 50 community college districts serving approximately 775,000 students in Texas.
Instead of doing their “job description,” which linked state funding to the student numbers in community colleges, community colleges now will be funded by how many students graduate and move on to four-year universities.
Specifically, community colleges will receive $3,500 per student for every student that does any of the following:
- High school student completes 15 credit hours of dual credit from a community college,
- Student completes their associate’s degree (described as a credential of value),
- Two-year college graduate transfers to an in-state public or private four-year university
Although data on this new performance-based funding model won’t be available for several years, we can easily explore extensive research on performance-based funding over the past 30 years to see what institutional actions will have the most impact on student success.
How community colleges can capitalize
In order for community colleges to maximize their ability to capitalize on this massive funding reallocation, they must re-examine and realign their internal systems, structure, and staffing.
What does this mean? In short, there is significant evidence that colleges must do more to invest in quality advising that guides students to courses, degrees, and jobs that motivate and reward their efforts.
For decades we have known that the more colleges invest in mentoring and supporting their students, the more success their students will have. When someone feels like they matter, they are inspired to push through hurdles and reach goals.
Student sense of belonging in college has been closely tied to their retention and graduation, and belonging often occurs by colleges taking the time to get to know their students and guiding them to academic and co-curricular pathways that offer meaningful engagement.
These behaviors are rooted in quality advising—academic, career and co-curricular. When colleges reduce advisor case loads and prioritize on one-on-one conversations that allow for customized support, students feel known, informed, and motivated to take the necessary steps to persist and graduate.
In one of the most robust studies of student success at a community college level, the City University of New York used an eight-year randomized control research design with over 900 students to demonstrate that students receiving comprehensive advising from an advisor with a manageable case load—in addition to several other student supports—were more likely to earn more college credits and complete their degrees (18% higher).
Multiple Ohio community colleges replicated this model several years later and discovered that there was a 15% increase in rate of completion for students receiving additional support.
Eliminating ‘credential creep’
What will not work? First, credential inflation—a process in which colleges give out credit for classes and degrees without student effort will only weaken the degree and labor-market value.
High schools forced into performance-based funding have done this for years. The result is undereducated and under-employable graduates.
Texas House Bill 8 has attempted to minimize this “credential creep” by specifying that funding for degrees completed must be in fields of “value,” meaning degrees leading to jobs in high-demand with clear labor-market returns.
Second, this new funding approach could tempt community colleges to focus on admitting the students most likely to graduate. Texas has attempted to minimize this by offering additional weighted funding if community colleges educate students from economically and/or academically disadvantaged backgrounds, or students who are adult learners.
Third, performance-based funding can frighten colleges into focusing extensive effort on measuring success instead of allocating funding to programs that will most positively impact student success.
Imagine a person repeatedly checking their retirement savings as it goes up and down in the stock market instead of using their time to wisely invest in the best stocks. Community colleges need to focus on tangible, research-proven methods for moving the graduation needle.
The time has come for community colleges in Texas to recognize that their funding, and ultimately their survival, will be linked to quality advising systems and staffing that imbed student connection and career guidance.
Students having developmental conversations with advisors rooted in quantitative data linked to their personal and professional interests will ultimately propel both students and their colleges to new levels of achievement and return on investment.
