The Bridge and the Troll Underneath: Summer Bridge Programs and Degree Completion, by Daniel Douglas and Paul Attewell

College graduation rates in the United States are low in both real and relative terms. This has left policymakers and leaders of these institutions looking for novel solutions, while perhaps ignoring extant but underused programs. This paper, published here in the November issue of the American Journal of Education, examines the effect on degree completion of “summer bridge” programs, which have students enroll in coursework prior to beginning their first full academic year.

Some scholars have attempted to explain low rates of degree completion by pointing to poor academic preparation among a growing proportion of college students. This is evidenced by the high numbers of students requiring remediation upon entering college. Unfortunately, these remedial sequences are often non-credit bearing and have been linked to student discouragement and retention problems. Other scholars have emphasized the role of early academic momentum in bolstering degree completion. Clifford Adelman’s research shows that students with higher rates of course-taking and credit accumulation are more likely to finish college on time. These two perspectives converge in the examination of summer bridge programs, as the programs both address poor academic preparation and boost early momentum.

Our research uses the nationally-representative Beyond Postsecondary Study (BPS) college transcript data as well as data from one large university system to assess the effects of summer bridge programs on degree completion. The analysis utilizes a quasi-experimental technique called propensity score matching to account for selection effects among students.

In the national data, we find that at community colleges and less-selective four-year colleges, students who attend bridge programs are ten percentage points more likely to finish degrees within six years. Furthermore, while all student subgroups benefit from the effects of bridge programs on degree completion, the effects are larger for black and Hispanic students (compared to whites, Asians, and others), first-generation college students, and students with lower GPAs in high school.

While the national data clearly suggest that bridge programs help students complete their degrees, these data are not sufficiently detailed to suggest how this effect is produced. We turned to data from a large university system. The university system restricts students from beginning certain coursework until they successfully complete assigned remedial courses; students who require remedial coursework are eligible to enroll in the university’s bridge programs. These data suggest that, on average, students who enrolled in bridge programs: a) were more likely to be retained into their second year, b) passed a larger proportion of their courses, and c) attempted and earned more credits in their first two years than comparable students who did not attend bridge programs.

Broadly, our findings suggest that colleges could fruitfully make more use of bridge programs to bolster both retention and degree completion, especially among high-risk populations. But given that some other studies, including a randomized controlled trial, have found mixed effects, we recommend that college administrators first document the impact of their own existing bridge programs as a first step before expanding their current offerings. But our research also suggests another perspective on this mixed evidence. Although the national data showed only long-term effects of bridge programs, we found strong immediate effects in the large university system studied, where these programs directly addressed the institution’s highly consequential remediation policies. Beyond its general effect on academic preparation, this particular bridge program increased academic momentum by allowing students to avoid remedial sequences that research has shown to have serious negative consequences. This suggests that bridge programs are only one part of the complex puzzle of boosting degree completion.

Daniel Douglas is a PhD candidate in the Department of Sociology at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York. His research examines evaluation systems and measurement, particularly in the context of education. 

 Paul Attewell, distinguished professor of sociology and urban education at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York, currently researches the reasons behind low college graduation rates and attempts to identify interventions that improve degree completion.