That’s one of the key findings of a new study titled, “A New Measure of College Quality to Study the Effects of College Sector and Peers on Degree Attainment.”
“In determining bachelor’s or any degree attainment, students’ own ability is relatively more important in the two-year sector, while peer ability is relatively more important in the four-year sector,” states the study, written by Jonathan Smith, a policy research scientist at The College Board, and Kevin Stange, a public policy professor at the University of Michigan.
“One interpretation is that individual traits ― such as the ability to navigate a complex transfer process or balance school with other commitments ― are more important in the two-year setting, which has less structure and institutional support,” the study states. “By contrast, peers help serve that role at four-year institutions.”
Regardless of the explanation, the authors say the finding “suggests that the nature of the production process is different across sectors.”
The study adds to the well-established body of literature that delineates disparities in degree attainment between the two- and four-year sectors. The authors find, for instance, that recent high school graduates who start at four-year colleges are roughly 50 percentage points more likely to earn a bachelor’s degree within six years than those who begin at two-year colleges.
But the study seeks to drill down on the underlying factors as to why those disparities exist. Namely, it seeks to determine whether those disparities arise from the lack of selectivity in the admissions process at community colleges; the challenges associated with the transfer process; or whether students at two-year colleges simply have “traits or intentions that make them less likely to complete degrees than those starting at four-year colleges.”
