“This is a moment to pause, take stock, and act with intention,” the report concludes.
Photo illustration by Justin Morrison/Inside Higher Ed | urbazon/E+/Getty Images
As dual enrollment has proliferated across the country, a growing number of states are focused on getting as many students into their programs as possible. But a new report from the dual-enrollment accrediting body and association, the National Association of Concurrent Enrollment Programs, warns that “piecemeal” policies guiding the quality of dual-enrollment programs across the U.S. are preventing those programs from being as effective as they could be.
“When used intentionally, dual enrollment offers states a powerful structural tool for system alignment,” the report says. “However, realizing this potential requires moving beyond treating dual enrollment as an add-on to existing structures and instead designing policy that establishes its role as a unifying part of the system itself.”
The goal of the report, which was funded by the Gates Foundation, is to provide states with a framework to ensure quality in their dual-enrollment programs, said Dianne Barker, NACEP’s deputy executive director of policy and program strategy. There’s no one-size-fits-all approach that will work for every state, she said, and there is no one state that is currently doing dual enrollment perfectly. But the report includes steps states can take to try to improve the quality of their dual-enrollment policies and benefit their students.
“It was really meant almost as a tool kit for states to turn the mirror on themselves, look at what they’re doing, assess it, decide, ‘Is this what we want? Are we providing our students what we want to provide them? Are we empowering institutions and K–12 to deliver that?’” she said.
Barker said the research supports NACEP’s view that current policies vary wildly in quality from state to state, whether they determine funding mechanics or the structure of the partnerships between their K–12 schools and higher education institutions.
The report lays out three elements that define quality: rigor, or whether the difficulty is on par with a college class; readiness, or the college’s ability to support high school participants; and relevance, or how the dual-enrollment offerings align with students’ future degrees, credentials or careers.
It outlines existing policies related to dual enrollment quality, finding that 10 states and the District of Columbia lack any quality-related legislation, while 22 states have “some” such legislation; the last 18 have “holistic” quality legislation, meaning they have “clear, consistent expectations for dual-enrollment program quality.” States without any such policies enter what NACEP described as a “quality lottery” for dually enrolled students, “in which a student’s experience depends mainly on local priorities, capacity, and the strength of the partnerships rather than on consistent statewide standards. In these contexts, key elements of program design, including advising, student supports, and partnership practices, may vary significantly across programs.”
NACEP also notes that most state policy regarding quality stops at the course level, meaning there is no legislation related to advising or academic supports, which it says are key elements of a successful dual-enrollment program.
Among other recommendations, the report suggests that states should enshrine into law the goals of their dual-enrollment programs, such as improving college-going rates or making college more affordable.
“When states do not clearly define whether dual enrollment is intended to accelerate college completion for affordability, expand access and readiness, engage underrepresented student groups, or create pathways to specific majors or careers, the program design, funding, and outcomes become misaligned,” the report states, noting that only a small number of states currently have such a definition.
It concludes by encouraging states to use the current expansion of dual enrollment as an opportunity to ensure that their programs are not only growing quickly but also working well.
“This is a moment to pause, take stock, and act with intention. The policies, partnerships, and practices that exist today provide a foundation, but not yet a system,” the report reads. “By aligning purpose, defining expectations, supporting implementation, and assessing outcomes, states can move beyond participation alone and ensure that quality is not left to chance.”
