The present study sought to determine the extent to which participation in a post-secondary honors program affected academic achievement. Archival data were collected on three cohorts of high-achieving students at a large, public university. Propensity scores were calculated on factors predicting participation in honors and used as t he covariate. The Johnson-Neyman technique was used to determine the values of the covariate on which the groups differed. The effect of participating in honors was greater for smaller covariate values. The findings offer a positive outcome associated with participation for students at the lower end of the propensity score continuum, providing evidence to conclude that such programs are beneficial to a sub-set of high-achieving students.

1. Effects of Participation in
a Post-Secondary
Honors Program using
Propensity Score as a
Covariate
Scott R. Furtwengler, Ph.D.
Brazosport College/University of Houston
April 17, 2015
AERA, Chicago, IL

2. Overview
 Introduction
 Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References

3. Introduction: Literature
 Small sample sizes
 Within- rather than between-group studies
 Determined significance rather than
magnitude of effect
 Few factors included

4. Introduction: Literature
 Keller & Lacy (2013); Shushok (2006); and
Slavin, et al. (2008)
 Seifert, Pacarella, Colangelo, & Assouline
(2007): Participation in honors programs
significantly affects students’
undergraduate experience regarding
academic achievement and cognitive
development, but the effects may not be as
global as some proponents of honors
education have suggested.

5. Introduction: Purpose
 To determine the estimated level of effect
for participation in a post-secondary honors
program on academic achievement.

6. Introduction: Rationale
 A gap in the research exists in quantitatively
measuring high-achieving students’ academic
performance with regard to participation in honors
programs
 Differences in mean level first-year cumulative
GPAs were measured between students who
participated in a post-secondary honors program
and those who did not at a large, four-year research
university.
 Archival data were collected and analyzed to
determine if those who participated in the post-
secondary honors program earned a higher
cumulative GPA than those in the traditional
curriculum.

7. Introduction: Methods
 Participants – 3 cohorts
 Quasi-experimental
 IV (honors/non-honors), DV (1st Year
CGPA)
 Data Collection – Archival (gender,
ethnicity, SAT, HSPR)
 Data Analysis – ANCOVA, Johnson-
Neyman Technique

8. Results: 2009 Cohort
Hire

9. Results: 2009 Cohort
Hire

10. Results: 2010 Cohort

11. Results: 2010 Cohort

12. Results: 2011 Cohort

13. Results: 2011 Cohort

14. Discussion
 Participation in a post-secondary honors
program positively influences academic
performance as measured by cumulative
GPA for a subset of high-achieving
students.

15. Limitations
 Self-selection into program
 Fidelity to intervention
 Confounding variables

16. References
 Keller & Lacy (2013). Propensity score analysis of an honors
program’s contribution to students’ retention and graduation
outcomes. Journal of the National Collegiate Honors Council,
13, 73-84.
 Seifert, Pacarella, Colangelo, & Assouline (2007). The effects
of honors program participation on experiences of good
practices and learning outcomes. Journal of College Student
Development, 48, 57-74.
 Shushok (2006). Student outcomes and honors programs: A
longitudinal study of 172 honors students, 2000–2004. Journal
of the National Collegiate Honors Council, 7, 85–96.
 Slavin, C., Coladarci, T., & Pratt, P. A. (2008). Is student
participation in an honors program related to retention and
graduation rates? Journal of the National Collegiate Honors
Council--Online Archive, 66.

17. Contact:
 Scott R. Furtwengler, PhD
 scott.furtwengler@brazosport.edu