While the concept is well worn in the realm of credit bearing programs, defining completion in the context of nondegree programs is a complex endeavor. That’s largely due to the wide variation in the structure of nondegree programs. 

This complexity comes into particular focus as states and institutions work to meet the eligibility criteria for Workforce Pell, including the specific requirement that programs have 70% completion rates within 150% of normal completion time. This work raises a critical question with much broader relevance to the field: how do we appropriately define completion in nondegree programs of study? 

This piece considers this question based on the authors’ experience analyzing nondegree, noncredit student data and highlights key issues for consideration. 

Lack of consistency in the length of programs is a major challenge. The vast majority of bachelor’s degrees are comprised of approximately 120 credits, or 40 courses, with a suggested time frame of four years, and associate degrees contain about 60 credits, or 20 courses, with a suggested time frame of two years. By contrast, nondegree programs vary in length. Some are as short as a single course completed in a week, while others can consist of many courses and take up to 18 months. Those eligible for Workforce Pell would be in a much narrower range: four to 16 semester credit hours (six to 24 quarter credit hours), or one to four typical college courses. 

Defining a suitable endpoint associated with nondegree programs is another significant challenge. In terms of completion, both bachelor’s and associate programs have a pre-defined milestone, earning a degree. Nondegree programs are often built to incorporate multiple stackable credentials—and Workforce Pell rules explicitly encourage this—even if the precise meaning of stackability is still unclear. But in essence, stackability means that a single program may have more than one meaningful off-ramp. An analogy to degree programs is the en route master’s degree embedded within many doctoral programs; the student does not reach the defined end of the program, but earns something recognized and valuable. In the context of nondegree workforce programs, stackable credentials may be industry-recognized certifications, such as phlebotomy in healthcare or AWS Cloud in IT. 

The emphasis on stackability complicates notions of completion. But more clarity is possible if we consider the common features that most, if not all, nondegree programs share. 

  • Nondegree programs have courses. Courses are encounters with curriculum that take place over a defined time frame and result in an assessment outcome or grade. Course timing may vary. Grades may be binary (pass or fail) or may have intervals (A through F). Given this, we may define completion of courses as one indicator of progression.
  • Nondegree programs have one or more credentials to be earned. Some credentials may be earned through the completion of a single course, while others may require multiple course completions. Some credentials, like certifications, may also require passing exams outside of the course structure, though coursework often helps prepare students for these exams. Credentials have value outside of their programs since they signal knowledge and skills to potential employers. Given this, we may define completion of credentials, distinct from or short of program completion, as a valuable outcome. We may also define the completion of course sequences that qualify a student to take a certification exam, or those that represent full occupational preparation, as a valuable outcome. 
  • Nondegree programs have a true endpoint. As with any program of study, once a student has completed all program requirements, including elective courses, they will be conferred a certificate of completion. Given this, we would certainly define program completion as a valuable outcome. Importantly, this will likely be the only definition that will matter for determining Workforce Pell eligibility. 

Given these features, we should consider how nondegree programs—particularly those potentially eligible for Workforce Pell—could be best designed so that completion reflects the intended program goals, maximizes student value, and maintains program eligibility. 

Student intent is key but can be complex. Clarifying the definition of nondegree completion also has implications for better understanding student intentions and experiences in short-term workforce programs more generally. Most existing data collection efforts view student completion of short-term programs as binary (e.g., completed or did not complete), but this may miss the complexity of how students in these programs actually progress through courses. While full completion is an important outcome, in reality, students may choose to only take the courses that deliver the skills and credentials they most need to quickly enter the workforce. 

The Workforce Pell requirement of a 70% “verified” job placement rate within 180 days after completion provides an important guideline for aligning completion with valuable labor market outcomes. But even this can be complicated given that nondegree programs do not have the same uniform endpoints as degree programs. Rolling completions will complicate efforts to determine cohorts and to track job placement. 

Given the wide variation in nondegree and noncredit programs, states and institutions will have to give careful thought to how to define completion milestones that set reasonable goals for students and that carry meaning in the labor market.

Dan Douglas is an assistant professor of sociology at Montclair State University. Justin Vinton is a faculty Research Associate at the Education and Employment Research Center (EERC) at Rutgers University’s School of Management and Labor Relations. And Michelle Van Noy is director of the EERC.