Credit or Noncredit? A Comparison of Workforce Training Outcomes in Virginia’s Community Colleges

• In Event: Noncredit Workforce Training in Community Colleges

Abstract

Community colleges are key providers of workforce training that offer various programs to help students develop skills across a wide range of occupations. In recent years, short-term programs that lead to industry-recognized credentials have drawn increasing attention from policy makers as a promising way to connect students more efficiently to in-demand jobs in the local labor market. Yet, even among programs that prepare students for the same occupation and credentials, there is wide variation in their structure and delivery.  In Virginia, for a given occupational field such as Nurse Aide, a community college may offer training through credit-bearing programs, noncredit programs, or both. While these programs prepare students for the same occupation and credential (e.g. Certified Nursing Assistant), they differ in important ways, including program structure, training duration, funding mechanisms, and the availability of support services, which may lead to different academic and labor market outcomes. 

In this study, we will focus on a specific type of noncredit programs at the Virginia Community College System (VCCS): FastForward programs. FastForward programs were first introduced in Summer 2016 and must fit two important criteria: (1) to lead to an industry-recognized third-party credential; and (2) lead to employment in a high-demand field, as defined by the Virginia Board for Workforce Development. Importantly, the introduction of FastForward also led to systematic high-quality data collection of student-level enrollment, completion, and credential attainment.  

Among FastForward programs, we will find credit-bearing programs that “match”, in that both the FastForward and credit-bearing versions prepare the students to earn the same or comparable industry credential, and for employment in the same profession. Most of the corresponding credit-bearing programs lead to short-term certificates and are designed to be completed in less than one year, typically requiring students to earn 15-20 credit hours. 

To estimate the impact of FastForward relative to credit-bearing programs on employment and earnings outcomes, we will use a comparative individual fixed effects (CIFE) model.   To estimate the impact of FastForward relative to credit-bearing programs on academic outcomes (including credential attainment, program completion, and pursuing additional training), we will use variation within and across colleges over time in the offering of FastForward versus credit-bearing programs. We will use student-level administrative data from VCCS that  includes enrollment and completion records in both sectors matched with quarterly earnings records from the Virginia Employment Commission. Our preliminary analysis sample, which includes students from five of the most popular healthcare programs

These results will significantly contribute to the scant literature on the relative effectiveness of credit and noncredit pathways that lead to the same industry-recognized credentials. By drawing comparisons between programs that serve similar labor market goals but differ in structure, our study will offer valuable insights into how institutional design shapes student outcomes. This has direct implications for policy makers and college administrators who contemplate best approaches to align workforce training with the needs of an ever-changing labor market.

Authors

• Kelli Ann Bird
  Non-Presenting Co-Author

• Michael Alexander Cooper, University of California Irvine
  Presenting Author

• Di Xu, University of California Irvine
  Non-Presenting Co-Author