Measuring Relationships Between High-Impact Practice Participation and Engagement at Community Colleges

Abstract

Objective/Research Question:

The purpose of this study was to measure the relationship between High-Impact Practices (HIPs) and engagement at community colleges. The research question guiding this study was: Accounting for student background and institutional characteristics, how do student-level individual participation and institution-level average participation in HIPs relate to engagement measures of institutional practices and student behaviors at community colleges?

Methods:

Using data from 79,755 respondents to the Community College Survey of Student Engagement from 455 institutions, the relationship between HIP participation and engagement was tested via hierarchical linear modeling. This analysis measured the relationship for both student participation (student-level) and institutional average (institution-level) with three measures of engagement: academic challenge, support for learners, and student-faculty interaction.

Results:

Almost all student-level HIPs were statistically, significantly, and positively related to these measures; however, the magnitude of specific practices such as class attendance, tutoring, and service-learning held the highest practical significance. Institution-level measures held similar, positive relationships with engagement; however, these relationships were not as wide-spread across all HIPs.

Contributions:

For the last decade, researchers have related participation in high-impact practices (HIPs) to engagement among students at 4-year institutions. The same fundamental understanding for community colleges was not addressed in the literature until this research. From these results, the student-level relationships advance a fundamental understanding between HIP participation and engagement, whereas the institutional-level relationships highlight specific experiences to guide community college policy and practice. Equity concerns of underrepresented students’ participation are also presented.

Keywords

high-impact practices student engagement survey research multilevel modeling the community college survey of student engagement

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Angell

L. R.

(2009). Construct validity of the community college survey of student engagement (CCSSE). Community College Journal of Research & Practice, 33(7), 564–570.

Astin

A. W.

(1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal of College Student Personnel, 25(4), 297–308.

Bahr

P. R.

Chen

Boeck

C. A.

Clasing-Manquian

Cummins

(2025). In what institutional contexts do adult community college students prosper? Community College Review, 53(1), 105–133.

Bailey

T. R.

Jaggars

S. S.

Jenkins

(2015). Redesigning America’s community colleges: A clearer path to student success. Harvard University Press.

Berg

Lee

Randolph

Ryu

Shapiro

(2023). Current term enrollment estimates: Spring 2023. National Student Clearinghouse Research Center.

Bonet

Walters

B. R.

(2016). High impact practices: Student engagement and retention. College Student Journal, 50(2), 224–235.

Bowman

N. A.

(2011). Examining systematic errors in predictors of college student self-reported gains. In Herzog

Bowman

N. A.

(Eds.), New directions for institutional research: No. 150. Validity and limitations of college student self-report data (pp. 7–20). Jossey-Bass.

Broton

K. M.

Mohebali

Lingo

M. D.

(2022). Basic needs insecurity and mental health: Community college students’ dual challenges and use of social support. Community College Review, 50(4), 456–482.

Brownell

J. E.

Swaner

L. E.

(2010). Five high impact practices: Research on learning outcomes, completion and quality. Association of American Colleges & Universities.

10.

Bureau of Labor Statistics, U. S. Department of Labor. (2025). 61.4 percent of recent high school graduates enrolled in college in October 2023. The Economics Daily. Retrieved February 12, 2025 from https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2024/61-4-percent-of-recent-high-school-graduates-enrolled-in-college-in-october-2023.html

11.

Butler

Christofili

(2014). Project-based learning communities in developmental education: A case study of lessons learned. Community College Journal of Research & Practice, 38(7), 638–650.

12.

Center for Community College Student Engagement. (2013). A matter of degrees: Engaging practices, engaging students (high-impact practices for community college student engagement). The University of Texas at Austin, Community College Leadership Program.

13.

Center for Community College Student Engagement. (2014). A matter of degrees. Practices to pathways: High-impact practices for community college student success. University of Texas at Austin, Program in Higher Education Leadership.

14.

Chan

H. Y.

Wang

(2016). Interact for what? The relationship between interpersonal interaction based on motivation and educational outcomes among students in manufacturing programs at two-year technical colleges. Community College Review, 44(1), 26–48.

15.

Chickering

A. W.

Gamson

Z. F.

(1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. AAHE Bulletin, 3–7.

16.

Crisp

(2016). Promising practices and programs: Current efforts and future directions. In Crisp

Hatch

D. K.

(Eds.), New directions for community colleges: No. 175. Promising and high-impact practices: Student success programs in the community college context (pp. 103–110). Jossey-Bass.

17.

Dika

S. L.

Wang

D’Amico

M. M.

Serrata

Bohlig

E. M.

(2024). A critical examination of perceptions of supportive institutional environment among transfer-seeking community college students. Community College Journal of Research & Practice, 48(7), 453–470.

18.

Dowd

A. C.

Sawatzky

Korn

(2011). Theoretical foundations and a research agenda to validate measures of intercultural effort. Review of Higher Education, 35(1), 17–44.

19.

Enders

C. K.

Tofighi

(2007). Centering predictor variables in cross-sectional multilevel models: A new look at an old issue. Psychological Methods, 12(2), 121–138.

20.

Ethington

C. A.

(1997). A hierarchical linear modeling approach to studying college effects. In Smart

J. C.

(Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (12th ed., pp. 165–194). Agathon.

21.

Fink

(2025). How many community colleges fully recovered their enrollments three years after the pandemic? Too few. Community College Research Center. Retrieved January 13 from https://ccrc.tc.columbia.edu/easyblog/how-many-community-colleges-fully-recovered-their-enrollments-three-years-after-the-pandemic-too-few.html

22.

Finley

A. P.

McNair

(2013). Assessing underserved students’ engagement in high-impact practices. Association of American Colleges and Universities.

23.

Fong

C. J.

Fathi

Adelugba

S. F.

García

A. J.

Garza

Pinto

G. L.

(2025). Belongingness moderates student mindsets’ influence among first-generation, community college students of color. Social Psychology of Education, 28(1), 1–17.

24.

Garvey

J. C.

BrckaLorenz

Latopolski

Hurtado

S. S.

(2018). High-impact practices and student–faculty interactions for students across sexual orientations. Journal of College Student Development, 59(2), 210–226.

25.

Gonyea

R. M.

Miller

(2011). Clearing the air about the use of self-reported gains in institutional research. In Herzog

Bowman

N. A.

(Eds.), New directions for institutional research: No. 150. Validity and limitations of college student self-report data (pp. 99–111). Jossey-Bass.

26.

Hatch

D. K.

(2012). Unpacking the black box of student engagement: The need for programmatic investigation of high impact practices. Community College Journal of Research & Practice, 36(11), 903–915.

27.

Hatch

D. K.

(2016). A brief history and a framework for understanding commonalities and differences of community college student success programs. In Crisp

Hatch

D. K.

(Eds.), New directions for community colleges: No. 175. Promising and high-impact practices: Student success programs in the community college context (pp. 19–31). Jossey-Bass.

28.

Hatch

D. K.

(2017). The structure of student engagement in community college student success programs: A quantitative activity systems analysis. AERA Open, 3(4), 1–14.

29.

Hatch

D. K.

Crisp

Wesley

(2016). What’s in a name? The challenge and utility of defining promising and high-impact practices. In Crisp

Hatch

D. K.

(Eds.), New directions for community colleges: No. 175. Promising and high-impact practices: Student success programs in the community college context (pp. 9–17). Jossey-Bass.

30.

Hatch

D. K.

Garcia

C. E.

(2017). Academic advising and the persistence intentions of community college students in their first weeks in college. Review of Higher Education, 40(3), 353–390.

31.

Hox

(2010). Multilevel analysis: Techniques and applications. Lawrence Erlbaum.

32.

Hurley

R. G.

(2009). Formation of community college clusters using the CCSSE benchmarks for extra-large community colleges. Journal of Applied Research in the Community College, 16(2), 31–36.

33.

Jaeger

A. J.

Eagan

M. K.

Jr . (2009). Unintended consequences: Examining the effect of part-time faculty members on associate’s degree completion. Community College Review, 36(3), 167–194.

34.

Johnson

S. R.

Stage

F. K.

(2018). Academic engagement and student success: Do high-impact practices mean higher graduation rates? Journal of Higher Education, 89(5), 753–781.

35.

Jones

W. A.

(2013). The relationship between student body racial composition and the normative environment toward diversity at community colleges. Community College Review, 41(3), 249–265.

36.

Jones

W. A.

(2016). Factors correlated with the interactional diversity of community college students. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 9(1), 81–94.

37.

Kilgo

C. A.

Ezell Sheets

J. K.

Pascarella

E. T.

(2015). The link between high-impact practices and student learning: Some longitudinal evidence. Higher Education, 69(4), 509–525.

38.

Kilgo

C. A.

Linley

J. L.

Renn

K. A.

Woodford

M. R.

(2019). High-impact for whom? The influence of environment and identity on lesbian, gay, bisexual, and queer college students’ participation in high-impact practices. Journal of College Student Development, 60(4), 421–436.

39.

Kisker

C. B.

Cohen

A. M.

Brawer

F. B.

(Eds.). (2023). The American community college (7th ed.). Jossey-Bass.

40.

Kuh

O’Donnell

Schneider

C. G.

(2017). HIPs at ten. Change, 49(5), 8–16.

41.

Kuh

G. D.

(2008). High-impact educational practices: What they are, who has access to them, and why they matter. Association of American Colleges & Universities.

42.

Kuh

G. D.

Cruce

T. M.

Shoup

Kinzie

Gonyea

R. M.

(2008). Unmasking the effects of student engagement on first-year college grades and persistence. Journal of Higher Education, 79, 540–563.

43.

Kuh

G. D.

Kinzie

(2018, May 1). What really makes a “high-impact” practice high impact? (views column). Inside Higher Ed. https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2018/05/01/kuh-and-kinzie-respond-essay-questioning-high-impact-practices-opinion

44.

Kuh

G. D.

O’Donnell

Reed

(2013). Ensuring quality and taking high-impact practices to scale. Association of American Colleges & Universities.

45.

Lai

M. H. C.

Kwok

O. M.

(2015). Examining the rule of thumb of not using multilevel modeling: The “design effect smaller than two” rule. Journal of Experiential Education, 83(3), 423–438.

46.

Lundberg

C. A.

Kim

Y. K.

Andrade

L. M.

Bahner

D. T.

(2018). High expectations, strong support: Faculty behaviors predicting Latina/o community college student learning. Journal of College Student Development, 59(1), 55–70.

47.

Maas

C. J. M.

Hox

J. J.

(2005). Sufficient sample sizes for multilevel modeling. Methodology, 1(3), 86–91.

48.

Marti

C. N.

(2008). Dimensions of student engagement in American community colleges: Using the community college student report in research and practice. Community College Journal of Research & Practice, 33(1), 1–24.

49.

Martinez

(2018). Changes, challenges, and opportunities for student services at one baccalaureate degree–granting community college. Community College Review, 46(1), 82–103.

50.

Mayhew

M. J.

Rockenbach

A. N.

Bowman

N. A.

Seifert

T. A.

Wolniak

G. C.

(2016). How college affects students: 21st century evidence that higher education works. Wiley.

51.

McBride

P. E.

(2019). Addressing the lack of mental health services for at-risk students at a two-year community college: A contemporary review. Community College Journal of Research & Practice, 43(2), 146–148.

52.

McCarrell

Selznick

(2020). (Re)measuring community college student engagement: Testing a seven-factor CCSSE model. Community College Review, 48(4), 400–422.

53.

McClenney

K. M.

(2004). Redefining quality in community colleges: Focusing on good educational practice. Change, 36(6), 16–21.

54.

McClenney

K. M.

(2006). Benchmarking effective educational practice. In Seybert

J. A.

(Ed.), New directions for community colleges: No. 134. Benchmarking: An essential tool for assessment, accountability, and improvement (pp. 47–55). Wiley.

55.

McClenney

K. M.

(2007). Research update: The community college survey of student engagement. Community College Review, 35(2), 137–146.

56.

McClenney

K. M.

Marti

C. N.

(2006). Exploring relationships between student engagement and student outcomes in community colleges: report on validation research (Working paper). Community College Survey of Student Engagement, Community College Leadership Program, University of Texas at Austin.

57.

McClenney

K. M.

Marti

C. N.

Adkins

(2006). Student engagement and student outcomes: Key findings from CCSSE validation research. Community College Leadership Program, University of Texas at Austin.

58.

McCormick

A. C.

Kinzie

Gonyea

R. M.

(2013). Student engagement: Bridging research and practice to improve the quality of undergraduate education. In M. Paulsen (Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (pp. 47–92). Springer.

59.

McCormick

A. C.

McClenney

(2012). Will these trees ever bear fruit? A response to the special issue on student engagement. Review of Higher Education, 35(2), 307–333.

60.

Miller

A. L.

Rocconi

L. M.

Dumford

A. D.

(2018). Focus on the finish line: Does high-impact practice participation influence career plans and early job attainment? Higher Education, 75(3), 489–506.

61.

Museus

S. D.

LePeau

L. A.

(2023). The devil in the details: How high-impact practices can miss the mark. New Directions for Student Services, 2023(181), 7–17.

62.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2023). Undergraduate enrollment. Condition of education. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences.

63.

National Survey of Student Engagement. (2006). Engaged learning: fostering success for all students. Annual report 2006. ERIC Number: ED512619.

64.

Niehaus

Campbell

C. M.

Inkelas

K. K.

(2014). HLM behind the curtain: Unveiling decisions behind the use and interpretation of HLM in higher education research. Research in Higher Education, 55(1), 101–122.

65.

Nora

Crisp

Matthews

(2011). A reconceptualization of CCSSE’s benchmarks of student engagement. Review of Higher Education, 35(1), 105–130.

66.

Nunnally

Bernstein

(Eds.). (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.

67.

Pace

C. R.

(1980). Measuring the quality of student effort. Current Issues in Higher Education, 2, 10–16.

68.

Parlier

T. R.

Rocconi

L. M.

Skolits

Davidson

C. T.

(2022). The effect of learning community participation on community college students’ perceptions of learning gains and engagement. Community College Journal of Research & Practice, 46(4), 272–283.

69.

Pascarella

E. T.

Seifert

T. A.

Blaich

(2010). How effective are the NSSE benchmarks in predicting important educational outcomes? Change, 42(1), 16–22.

70.

Payne

S. L.

Kleine

K. L. M.

Purcell

Carter

G. R.

(2005). Evaluating academic challenge beyond the NSSE. Innovative Higher Education, 30(2), 129–146.

71.

Pike

G. R.

(2013). NSSE benchmarks and institutional outcomes: A note on the importance of considering the intended uses of a measure in validity studies. Research in Higher Education, 54(2), 149–170.

72.

Pike

G. R.

Rocconi

L. M.

(2012). Multilevel modeling: Presenting and publishing the results for internal and external constituents. In Lott

J. L.

Antony

J. S.

(Eds.), New directions for institutional research: No. 154. Multilevel modeling: Techniques and applications in institutional research (pp. 111–124). Jossey-Bass.

73.

Porter

S. R.

(2011). Do college student surveys have any validity? Review of Higher Education, 35(1), 45–76.

74.

Quaye

S. J.

Harper

S. R.

Pendakur

S. L.

(Eds.) (2019). Student engagement in higher education: Theoretical perspectives and practical approaches for diverse populations. Routledge.

75.

Ribera

A. K.

Miller

A. L.

Dumford

A. D.

(2017). Sense of peer belonging and institutional acceptance in the first year: The role of high-impact practices. Journal of College Student Development, 58(4), 545–563.

76.

Romero

(2012). Participation in learning communities as a predictor of student success at a community college. Journal of Applied Research in the Community College, 20(1), 33–40.

77.

Saenz

V. B.

Hatch

Bukoski

B. E.

Kim

Lee

K. H.

Valdez

(2011). Community college student engagement patterns: A typology revealed through exploratory cluster analysis. Community College Review, 39(3), 235–267.

78.

Sass

M. S.

Coll

(2015). The effect of service learning on community college students. Community College Journal of Research & Practice, 39(3), 280–288.

79.

Savage

J. S.

Smith

A. B.

(2008). General and specific goal orientations as correlates of adult student degree completion: Lessons from the community college of the air force. Journal of College Student Retention Research Theory and Practice, 9(4), 461–485.

80.

Schudde

(2019). Short- and long-term impacts of engagement experiences with faculty and peers at community colleges. Review of Higher Education, 42(2), 385–426.

81.

Schuetz

(2008a). A theory-driven model of community college student engagement. Community College Journal of Research & Practice, 32(4-6), 305–324.

82.

Schuetz

(2008b). Developing a theory-driven model of community college student engagement. In Schuetz

Barr

(Eds.), New directions for community colleges: No 144. Are community colleges underprepared for underprepared students? (pp. 17–28). Wiley.

83.

Snijders

T. A.

Bosker

R. J.

(2011). Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling. Sage.

84.

Tennessee Board of Regents. (2016). TBR high impact practices (Web page). http://www.tbr.edu/studentsuccess/tbrhighimpactpractices

85.

Tinto

(Ed.). (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press.

86.

Townsend

B. K.

Wilson

K. B.

(2009). The academic and social integration of persisting community college transfer students. Journal of College Student Retention Research Theory and Practice, 10(4), 405–423.

87.

Turnquest

K. N.

Fan

Snodgrass Rangel

Dyer

Master

(2024). Student engagement, school involvement, and transfer student success. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 79(102322), 105–133.

88.

Valentine

Price

Yang

(2021). High-impact practices and gains in student learning: Evidence from Georgia, Montana, and Wisconsin. Lumina Foundation. ERIC Number: ED611259.

89.

Wang

(2017). Toward a holistic theoretical model of momentum for community college student success. In Paulsen

M. B.

(Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (pp. 259–308). Springer.

90.

Wang

(2024). Delivering promise: Equity-driven educational change and innovation in community and technical colleges. Harvard Education Press.

91.

Wang

Wickersham

Sun

Chan

H. Y.

(2017). Math requirement fulfillment and educational success of community college students: A matter of when. Community College Review, 45(2), 99–118.

92.

Wang

(2024). Advancing community college student engagement and success: Validation study of community college survey of student engagement (CCSSE). (Publication No. 31238690). [Doctoral dissertation, University of North Carolina at Charlotte]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.

93.

Wolniak

G. C.

Engberg

M. E.

(2019). Do “high-impact” college experiences affect early career outcomes? Review of Higher Education, 42(3), 825–858.

94.

Zilvinskis

(2019). Measuring quality in high-impact practices. Higher Education, 78(4), 687–709.

95.

Zilvinskis

Broton

K. M.

Pangburn

Schooley

(2025). Unmet needs: Campus support for community college students in need of food and housing assistance. New Directions for Community Colleges, 2025(212), 125–135.

96.

Zilvinskis

Kinzie

Daday

O’Donnell

Vande Zande

(2022). Delivering on the promise of high-impact practices: Research and models for achieving equity, fidelity, impact, and scale. Stylus.

97.

Zilvinskis

Masseria

A. A.

Pike

G. R.

(2017). Student engagement and student learning: Examining the convergent and discriminant validity of the revised national survey of student engagement. Research in Higher Education, 58(8), 880–903.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.64 MB