Washington Monthly is one of those publications that the general public and media largely ignore, but policy wonks and public officials pore over the magazine with great devotion. A recent issue explores student retention at America's higher education institutions, focusing on schools with truly deplorable graduation rates. As is often the case with contemporary journalism and commentary, the piece concerns four-year colleges and universities, virtually ignoring community colleges.
However, a number of the points raised by writers Ben Miller and Phuong Ly may be worthy of contemplation by two-year college educators. As a bonus, it's written in jargon-free prose—a celebrated characteristic of Washington Monthly.
Most importantly, according to the article, it is by no means inevitable that an institution serving students who are poor and/or members of ethnic minority groups will display low rates of graduation. Many such schools do pretty well, in fact.
Furthermore, the examples gathered for the article do not indicate that students drop out because of the rigor of the curriculum or the mode of instruction, even though selective schools obviously retain students more effectively overall.
As reported here before, and as the article seems to confirm, enhanced student advising and counseling may be a wise investment. Another component of success is making college services (libraries, tutoring, extracurricular activities) available when students need them. It's all about "engagement," according to a variety of studies. Apparently the more personal contact the better. Such enhancement requires added revenue, of course, but improvement is by no means out of reach, and the practical remedies discussed by the authors pointedly don't entail diluting content or transforming pedagogy.
It is important to add, however, based on the article, that schools with a high proportion of part-time students from the immediate local vicinity (in other words like community colleges) are less likely to have high graduation rates. Other characteristics shared by two-year institutions may not bode well for student success either—especially their lack of selectivity as open admission institutions.
It's a complicated landscape when examining the article's findings through the lens of two-year college instruction. But the piece is worthy of consideration and discussion.
Selected excerpts may not be a good idea with this particular article. It's best to read the entire thing, and it's generating a lot of buzz these days. Here's the link.
Comments