During the 2015–16 school year, Ohio launched a revamped dual-enrollment program called College Credit Plus (CCP). This state-run, state-funded program offers academically eligible students in grades 7–12 the opportunity to earn postsecondary credit by taking college courses for free before graduating from high school. State law requires all public schools and public colleges and universities to participate, but dozens of private schools and private higher education institutions also choose to do so.
Given the state’s significant investment—just over $55 million was paid to colleges and universities through CCP in 2022—as well as the program’s myriad potential benefits for students and families, it’s imperative that state leaders keep a close eye on it. In 2021, the Ohio Auditor of State conducted a performance audit that offered an in-depth look at the program.
The good news is that overall participation, student impacts, and tuition savings are positive. The bad news is that traditionally underserved groups are missing out on CCP’s benefits for a variety of reasons, and one of them seems to be a lack of state oversight. The audit found that there were “significant levels of non-compliance with program requirements among school districts.” For instance, surveys revealed that nearly half of districts—43 percent—didn’t start communicating with students about CCP until high school, even though state law requires them to begin in sixth grade. Similar non-compliance issues cropped up with digital information access. Districts are required by law to promote CCP on their website, but 37 percent reported that they didn’t. In both cases, districts that followed the law—they began their communication efforts prior to high school, and promoted the program on their website—reported a higher number of CCP hours per student.
The audit also suggested that by modifying forms and muddying informational waters, some districts were discouraging students from participating (perhaps because CCP courses are funded via a deduction to districts’ state aid). The Ohio Department of Higher Education provides schools with standard templates for program applications and forms, but the audit notes that it’s “common” for districts to edit these templates before using them. The department’s annual notice form, for example, is intended to provide families with concise and accurate information about CCP. But approximately 80 percent of the documents reviewed by the audit team were different from the template, and more than half were missing at least one element. Audit findings also indicated that some districts added “guidance” regarding costs to their intent to participate forms. Because they “did not clearly indicate” that the default participation option allows students to complete courses for free, families might have assumed there was a substantial cost associated with the program and avoided signing up.
You might be wondering how a state-run program that’s well past its infancy could allow so many districts to break or bend the law to the detriment of students. The audit offers an answer: Because there’s no “formal compliance or oversight function for CCP” established in law, the state education agencies that oversee it “are not required to, and have chosen not to, take the initiative necessary to follow through with compliance-related activities.” In other words, even though the law says that districts have to do these things, no one is making sure they actually do. As a result, students and families all over the state are losing out on the potential benefits of dual enrollment.
Fortunately, lawmakers have been paying attention. Senate Bill 104, which was introduced this spring, would address many of the problems identified by the audit. The most significant provision mandates that the leaders of the state agencies responsible for running the program—the Department of Education and Workforce and the Department of Higher Education—shall “monitor and enforce compliance” with state requirements for public and participating nonpublic secondary schools, state colleges and universities, and participating private institutions of higher education. This explicit mandate would add much-needed oversight to the program, and would eliminate the existing loophole that allows districts and schools to ignore state rules and laws.
Should it become law, the bill would also do the following:
- The Department of Education and Workforce would be responsible for including on state report cards data indicating whether a school provides information to students and families about CCP and promotes the program as required by law. This data wouldn’t be a rated component, and would be identified by a simple “yes” or “no.”
- Public and participating nonpublic schools would be required to use forms developed by the state. Schools would be prohibited from modifying any form without approval.
- Public and participating private colleges would be required to provide participants with an orientation that meets guidelines issued by the overseeing agencies. This is likely an effort to smooth students’ transition between high school and college courses.
- Under current law, students or their parents must notify their secondary school by April 1 that they intend to participate in CCP the following school year. SB 104 would adjust this timeline and allow for notification prior to the next semester rather than the next school year. There would still be a notification deadline chosen by the chancellor of higher education, but allowing students to opt-in every semester rather than once a year should make CCP more easily accessible.
- The chancellor would be required to establish an alternative credentialing process to certify as CCP instructors those who have relevant teaching experience without requiring them to complete additional graduate-level coursework. This follows in the footsteps of other recent state policy changes seeking to eliminate burdensome requirements that keep qualified teachers out of classrooms.
- Current law requires secondary schools to treat CCP courses as equivalent to AP, IB, and honors courses when awarding grades and determining class standing. That means if it’s school policy to weight AP, IB, or honors courses, then CCP courses must be weighted, as well. SB 104 clarifies that this requirement pertains to all CCP courses.
- Under current policy, the cost of college textbooks is deducted from district funding when a student participates in CCP. These costs have long been the subject of ire from districts, which complain that prices are too high and textbooks often go unused. SB 104 would address this issue by requiring participating colleges and universities to “endeavor to use open-source materials, in lieu of purchase-only textbooks” in CCP courses as much as possible. If a purchase-only textbook is used when open-source materials are available, the higher education institution would be required to cover the textbook cost. However, if there are no open-source materials available, the cost of the textbook would be split fifty-fifty between the institution and the secondary school.
All things considered, SB 104 is a smart piece of legislation that directly addresses many of the issues identified by the CCP audit. These changes would strengthen the program, and would help ensure that every academically-prepared student has access to dual-enrollment courses. Here’s hoping lawmakers take up and pass SB 104 during the upcoming legislative session.
