Ohio College Credit Plus: A Policy Analysis of Two Central Ohio Public High Schools in the First Year of Implementation

In an effort to broaden access, meet burgeoning workforce needs, and reduce the cost of postsecondary attainment, Ohio has implemented policy to provide college credit options to high school students. The purpose of this research study was to develop a descriptive first-year profile of the implementation of Ohio's College Credit Plus policy for two central Ohio high schools. This policy implementation analysis employed a multi-pronged approach using case study and policy implementation evaluation framework. Document review and administrative interviews provided the primary data sources.;Additionally, while program reporting is not yet required or available, preliminary enrollment information from the two case study sites indicates potential continuation of historic trends of limited minority participation. The funding model requires the district to cover tuition and material in an environment where public educational funding has eroded. K-12 administrators expressed concerns regarding the financial sustainability of the program. While some critical barriers to access have been removed, student support systems and counseling services have not been increased to assist those students that may need guidance in understanding alternative program offerings, risks and benefits, and designing an appropriate academic plan.;Finally, secondary and postsecondary institutional objectives and organizational structures generate conflict in establishing and managing dual enrollment course offerings. These conflicts surface in teacher-faculty interactions, academic calendars, and, for some innovative school models, such as early college high schools, a discrepancy between competency-based progression and seat time in assessing credits earned.;As the program matures and additional elements are created to ensure compliance and student success, this dual enrollment policy holds the potential to move Ohio forward in creating a more equitable and effective K-16 continuum, but there are program elements, which if not addressed, create the risk that it will not.;Several overarching themes surfaced. Confusion regarding the regulations exacerbated inconsistent application and compliance across institutions. No explicit process is defined for assessing or reporting on compliance. Additional inconsistency is evident in program offerings based on district cultures, location, and size. Course offerings differ in number, quality, delivery, and subject orientation.