Vertex

How Race to GED Was Established

What became Virginia’s Race to GED adult education program began with a Workforce Investment Board (WIB) grant in Superintendent’s Region XII. In July 2003, the Western Piedmont WIB, Area XVII, awarded the regional adult education program manager a grant to attract and educate a substantial number of adult students who had the ability to get their General Education Development (GED) certificate quickly. The Office of Adult Education and Literacy (OAEL) in the Virginia Department of Education (DOE) provided advisory and technical support as Region XII developed the program to attract and educate students. Since auto racing is popular in Virginia’s western Piedmont region, which encompasses Superintendent’s Region XII, the resulting educational program became known as "Race to GED".

By October 2003, Virginia’s Governor, Mark Warner, added the Race to GED program to his administration’s Education for a Lifetime initiative. The governor explained that the Race to GED initiative was a way to double the number of adults who receive a high school equivalency credential. He expected the annual rate to double by the end of 2005. Governor Warner saw that adults with a GED or other high school credential were capable of moving through post-secondary or technical education. He viewed Race to GED as another way to improve the skills of Virginia’s workforce thus increasing the state’s role in the global economy.

In 2004, Race to GED became a state-approved educational program. It was designed for "individuals between 18 and 64 years of age, who are employed or able to be employed, and can demonstrate academic readiness to prepare for and pass the English version of the GED tests" (OAEL, 2004, p. I-1) within 90 days and with 60 hours or less of instruction. This program includes three educational components: 1) Fast Track, 2) GED Preparation, and 3) Adult Basic Education. The high school credential adult students pursue may be a GED, external diploma, or high school diploma.

In January 2004, four other adult education programs, (Hampton City, Prince William County, Russell County, and Virginia Beach City) joined Region XII as pilot sites for the Race to GED initiative. The initial emphasis for the pilots was attracting and educating adults who could engage in sufficiently intense study to enable them to take and pass the GED tests within the short timeframe.

A First Look: Research Questions

Table 1: Means of Students’ Reading and Math TABE Scale Scores for the
Two of Fast Track Groups

The research focused on the fast track component of Race to GED. We looked at Virginia’s National Reporting System (NRS) data to determine characteristics of the fast track students. The characteristics of the students were investigated by using data from the NRS database. The guiding questions were

What were characteristics of the students in fast track who received a high school credential?

Did fast track students differ from other adult education students with the NRS goal of "obtain a GED"?

Methods and Procedures:

Who Were the Students in the Study?

Table 2: Age of Students by Gender, Year of Intake and Type of Program

State guidelines require that fast track students have a TABE scale score of 543+ for applied mathematics and 567+ for reading. Placement in GED preparation (commonly called GED prep) requires a minimum scale score of 500 in both reading and applied mathematics (OAEL, 2004). Using the five pilot programs’ NRS data, we identified 547 students who, at intake, said they wanted to "obtain a GED" or be in "fast track". In the adult education system, "intake" is a detailed information gathering and assessment process that students experience when they enter a program.

Figure 1: TABE reading scale scores of students by year and group

Three hundred forty-six of the 547 students eligible for the study had received their high school credential and exited the program by December 31, 2004. We referred these 346 students as "completers". Even though some of the pilot sites told us all their data had not been entered into the NRS database on that date, we used the NRS data available on December 31, 2004.

These 346 students were identified them with one of three distinct groups. Date of enrollment and TABE scale score determined a student’s placement group. Those placement groups were

Figure 2: TABE math scale scores of students by year and group

Students first entering with TABE scale scores sufficient for the fast track program (identified as fast track); students who had been in other adult education classes and whose TABE scores qualified them for fast track (identified as fast track with experience); and, students whose goal was to get a GED but who did not participate in fast track or fast track with experience (identified as obtain GED).

Sources of Data

Data gathered through the NRS database and GED tests results from the GED Testing Service were sources of the quantitative data. For the time period July 2002 through December 2004, we needed to associate individual GED tests scores with individual students in the NRS database. We found students had not signed releases for their individual GED tests records. Therefore, we used only the average scores without any individual identification. We used typical statistical procedures to analyze the data.

Results:

Were the Students Similar?

Table 3: Fast Track: Numbers and Percentages of Students by Ethnicity
and Year of Intake

First we wanted to determine if the three groups of students started at the same level as measured by the TABE reading and math scale scores. There were no significant differences for the TABE reading scores (t(253) = 1.266, p = .207) or the TABE applied math scale scores (t(125) = 0.426, p = 0.671) between fast track and fast track with experience students (see Table 1). Since only a student’s lowest TABE scale score was recorded in the database, the numbers (n) of students in Table 1 were different.

Who Participated?

Describing Students by TABE Scale Scores

Figure 3: Comparison of student ages by group at intake and exit

Program intake counselors used TABE assessment scale scores to determine a student’s placement group. Since Virginia had moved away from using the grade equivalency for TABE assessment scores, we confined our reporting to scale scores.

We looked at the TABE results by scale score and placement group to determine the strengths of each group by year. We thought an analysis by year might tell us if students were similar or different each year.

The fast track student scores ranked highest in both reading and applied math (see Figure 1 and 2). Their average scale scores for the two years were 614.5 for reading and 595.4 for applied mathematics. We noted that obtain GED students scored slightly higher than fast track with experience in 2004-2005. There were no fast track classes in 2002-2003.

Figure 4: Comparison of students by gender and year of intake

In 2003-2004, our analysis revealed significant differences between the TABE scale scores for the placement groups. These significant differences held for both reading and math TABE assessments. There was no difference for 2004-2005, but we assume that the fact we had only half a year’s data may have influenced that finding. These significances suggest that the TABE does in fact identify students with differing educational attainment.

The state guidelines assert that the lower TABE scale score in either reading or math is used for placement (OAEL, 2004). Between 2003-2004 and 2004-2005, there was a large increase in the obtain GED group’s math scores. In both 2003-2004 and 2004-2005, obtain GED students had reading scale scores well above the state guideline of 567+. The 2004-2005 TABE reading and math scores indicated obtain GED students were qualified for fast track placement. If this finding holds true for the entire year, intake counselors may need to reevaluate the way students are placed. If students qualified for fast track are able to meet the intense class scheduling, counselors may find placing them in fast track will keep them for getting bored and dropping out of the program.

Table 4: Obtain GED: Numbers and Percentages of Students by Ethnicity
and Year of Intake

Describing Students by Age

We considered the age of students both at program intake and exit. For these students, "exit", as defined in the NRS system, meant they had taken the GED tests or completed another high school credential. Again we felt it was important to determine if the students’ ages were similar or different year to year.

Table 5: Fast Track with Experience: Numbers and Percentages of
Students by Ethnicity and Year of Intake

Fast track students were the youngest, while fast track with experience were the oldest at about 30 years old (see Figure 3). The differences between fast track students’ intake and exit ages reflect the intensity of the program.

We used a one-way ANOVA and found significant differences between the three groups for age at intake (F(2, 343) = 7.28, p =.001) and exit (F(2, 343) = 18.23. p = .000). We used a Scheffe test to determine which groups were different between the three placement groups at exit; using the significance level was 0.05: fast track (M = 26.1, SD = 9.9) was significantly different then the other groups; obtain GED (M = 32.6, SD = 15.4) and fast track with experience (M = 31.375, SD = 13.6).

Table 6: Percentages of Noncompleters by Gender

Fast track students were younger than fast track with experience students. Both male and female fast track students’ ages decreased the second year. The ages of females in the other two placement groups were steadier than that of their male counterparts. The results of this preliminary look at students’ ages demonstrated that adult educators are attracting a younger population in fast track.

We also investigated whether male and female students differed by age at intake and placement type (see Table 2). Except for fast track students in 2004-2005, the females were older than the males in the same placement group. For fast track in 2004-2005, females and males were similar in age.

Describing Students by Gender

Table 7: Percentages of Noncompleters by Ethnicity

We wanted to know which gender and placement group had higher completion rates. As we examined the student data by gender for those who completed a program, we discovered a pattern of more males completing in obtain GED and fast track groups. Completion for fast track females increased from 39.2% in 2003-2004 to 46.9% in the first six months of 2004-2005. In all groups, male student completion decreased in 2004-2005. The number of completers for male obtain GED students were highest in 2002-2003 and 2003-2004. More female fast track with experience students were completers in 2004-2005.

Table 8: Percentages of Noncompleters by Employment

Four pilot sites did not have fast track classes until January 2004. We speculate intake counselors more accurately placed students with the goal to "obtain a GED" when fast track classes became available. More accurate placement may explain the drop from a peak enrollment in 2002-2003 for males in the obtain GED group. The number of males enrolling in fast track dropped in 2004-2005. That drop might be explained by the fact the 2004-2005 data represented only the first six months of the year. In fast track for 2004-2005, females were approaching the same enrollment numbers as males (see Figure 4).

Describing Students by Ethnicity

Table 9: Percentages of Completers by Employment

We examined student ethnicity by program type and year. For all groups, Caucasian students were the majority over the three years. African Americans had the next highest enrollment (see Tables 3, 4, and 5).

Receiving a High School Credential and Differences in Gender

Once we examined the 346 completers, we investigated to determine if the remaining 201 students who had not exited (noncompleters) differed from them. Females were 55.7 % of noncompleters compared with 38.2% of female completers. The percentages were reversed for males; noncompleters were 44.3% compared to 61.8% for completers. The percentages do not add up to 100% because some students dropped out. See Tables 6.

Receiving a High School Credential and Differences in Ethnicity

For African Americans, both completers and noncompleters were approximately 28%. The percentages within each ethnic group were approximately the same for completers and noncompleters (see Table 7). The only exception was Hawaiians who had no students in the noncompleters category.

Table 10: Means and Standard Deviations for Three Groups with Goal
of "Get a GED"

Receiving a High School Credential and Differences in Employment

The NRS database collects employment information by "employed", "unemployed (in labor force)" and "unemployed (not in labor force)" categories. There were a total of 116 fast track students in the noncompleters category, of which 57, or almost half, were employed. A similar number were completers and half of them were employed. We suspect many of these were fast track students who had just entered the program in fall 2004 (see Table 8). When we receive the year-end data in July 2005, we expect to find these students had completed the program quickly.

When we examined employment data for students known as completers, we found fast track students were more likely to be employed. The obtain GED students were the least likely to be employed. Overall, the highest percentage was 78.7% for obtain GED students who were unemployed not in the labor force. See Table 9.

Attendance Hours between Groups

Figure 5: Attendance means for types of participation for years
2003-2004 and 2004-2005

The NRS database captures student attendance from intake until they leave or complete the program. When we examined attendance hours for the 346 completers in the study, we expected the hours for fast track with experience students to be more than the other groups. They had been in adult education classes prior to moving into fast track (M =149.1). The fast track students averaged 36.61 hours in class. That is much less than the state guideline of 60 hours or less. Those in obtain GED had only one more hour of instruction than the 60 hours required for fast track (see Figure 5).

We assumed there were significant differences in the time that it took students in the various placement groups to complete a high school credential. When we compared the three student groups using an ANOVA, we found significant differences (F(2,542) = 82.352, p =.000). All groups were significantly different from the other groups (see Table 10).

Differences in GED Tests Scores between Groups

In Figure 6, both fast track and fast track with experience groups were included under the "fast track" heading. We assumed the students with the highest TABE scale scores would have higher GED tests scores. Fast track students had higher GED tests scores than obtain GED students for both years.

Table 11: Means and Standard Deviations for GED Scores by Group and Year

The mean GED scores for the combined fast track groups were higher than the mean scores for obtain GED students (see Table 11). We expected the findings given the higher TABE scale scores for fast track students.

Conclusions

In this first year of the Race to GED program, fast track students came from two different groups. The first group consisted of students who were placed directly into fast track after the TABE assessment. The second group had previously been in adult education classes and was qualified to move into fast track classes.

Figure 6: Students' average GED scores by year and group

The placement group identifications we assigned allowed us to distinguish key characteristics among the students. At intake, fast track and fast track with experience students had similar TABE scale scores. Reading scale scores for fast track students were only slightly higher than students’ scores in the other two groups. Since all the reading scores were above the state-recommended minimum for fast track, we questioned why intake counselors had not placed all the qualified students in the fast track placement group. That was the type of question the quantitative data could not answer.

The obtain GED students’ TABE math scale scores rose over 100 points in 2004-2005 from the previous two years. Their 2004-2005 scores indicated they were eligible for fast track. Again we are concerned about the placement of qualified students.

The data suggested practices for placing students in the appropriate group might need to be examined by the program administrators. Do the intake counselors clearly understand the state guidelines for placement in each of the three groups in Race to GED?

Students were not similar in age. The fast track students were younger. We speculate that the fact the fast track students had not been out of high school very long influenced their willingness to participate in a short, intense program that would enable them to study for a GED. Maybe the younger males in fast track were there because they were willing to spend six to eight weeks studying even though they were likely employed.

The significant differences in the ages at exit reflected the fact that fast track with experience students had been in other adult education programs, so their time in the classes would be longer. Fast track students’ ages at exit reflected the short time it took to complete the program.

We found the fact that so many fewer females completed the program than males needed further investigation. The NRS data does not include enough information for us to hypothesize about why only 38% of females completed the program.

Another obvious concern was that 57.8% of African Americans had either completed or were still in the program. That meant 42% had dropped out. We need further research to discover how programs can retain African American students until they get their high school credential.

About half of the fast track students in the completers and noncompleters categories were employed. We speculate that the chance to get a GED quickly may have drawn them to the program initially. Other research might tell us what kept them there.

We can suggest that the fast track program had a positive affect on the five programs in the pilot study. For example, fast track students’ GED scores improved 23 points between 2003-2004 and 2004-2005. We speculate that the programs had developed curricula that were better meeting the needs of students in a short, intense program of study. Analysis of the qualitative data from each of the pilot sites would help increase the understand some of the changes the quantitative data pinpoint.

References

Office of Adult Education and Literacy, Virginia Department of Education. (2004, August). Race to GED 2004-2005 implementation & marketing guide. Richmond, VA: Author.