TCCTA Blog

Grads Flock to Community Colleges

We notice them every now and then—students in our community college classes who already have bachelor's degrees. When you visit with them privately they express a variety of reasons for their presence, usually related to a dead end in the job department. 

The phenomenon may be more common than we think. Please have a look at this article by Matt Krupnick, produced by The Hechinger Report, published in U.S. News. 

Here are some numbers:

A surprising one out of every 14 of the people who attend community colleges—widely regarded as low-tuition options for the less-well-prepared—has already earned a bachelor's degree, according to the American Association of Community Colleges. That's 770,000 students. At some community colleges, the proportion is as high as 1 in 5.

Any high proportion of these folks at a given community college is probably explained by local economic circumstances, such as layoffs. All the same, this category of student is worth noting and sharing. Our story isn't all about low graduation rates.

One of the perennial difficulties with measuring student success is the variety of permutations. Let's say a student with a bachelor's degree enrolls in a two-year school, perhaps to gain a credential for prospective employment in a new field. Then, conditions improve and the student gets his or her old job back, so the individual doesn't complete the program. By some metrics this is failure. But it's not. 

One of the persons interviewed for the article is Richard Rhodes, president of Austin Community College, who shares an anecdote regarding a classroom visit. 

It's not discussed in the piece, but we also notice some students with degrees—often retired seniors—who want to use their time to learn about, say, the humanities or fine arts, while earning credits. They often make outstanding students who add extra diversity to the mix of a class. 

 

Electives and "Credit Creep"

"Remember electives?" may become a common question one day (some say it's already here) when teachers gather around the camp fire. Here in Texas, the purging of many elective courses from the curriculum is partly due to state-mandated caps on courses students are expected to take within newly trimmed fields of study.

Some two-year schools are moving away from declared majors toward general studies, which also tends to narrow the range of options. See this article by Alia Malik, in the San Antonio Express-News, regarding the Alamo Colleges. 

It's all designed so students don't "waste" courses on their path to a degree. 

Regarding at least the issue of electives, we may want to draw comfort in the fact that this is a national trend. Please have a look at this article by Daniel Regan, in the Chronicle of Higher Education. The writer is dean of academic affairs at Johnson State College, in Vermont. 

Here is a good passage from the article:

Yet nothing in accrediting standards would seem to question the continued desirability of a roughly equal division between general-education, major-program, and elective credits. The reality, however, is anything but equality. At the three institutions where I have worked — for six, 14, and 21 years — the overall share of the undergraduate curriculum occupied by general education remained about the same. Major programs, on the other hand, tended to follow an upward "credit creep." At these institutions, as elsewhere, administrators and student advisers understandably discouraged bachelor’s candidates from assembling gratuitous credits beyond those required for graduation. The predictable result was a decrease in elective credits.

"Credit creep" can apply to any discipline at any school, but university academic departments are ground zero. As pointed out here before, if you were, for instance, a professor of philosophy at a regional university (flagships are trying to keep more people out, not in), you'd want as many required courses in your discipline as possible. 

Please read the entire piece for some perceptive observations on the value of electives. 

Child Care and College Completion

Many of our students are, or at least should be, in the at-risk category, simply because they are single parents of small children. Some colleges and universities offer child care centers on campus, usually in conjunction with programs in early childhood education. Such sites are very popular. 

Please have a look at this brief article on one program at North Carolina’s Halifax Community College, published by the 21st Century Center of the AACC, written by Ellen Ullman. 

There are plenty of caveats: The article profiles a very small program, doesn't get into the costs and liabilities, and presents no hard data. It's totally anecdotal—the Original Sin of modern education discussions. 

Obviously not every college has the resources to pull off something like this, but it's worth considering nonetheless. When students disappear from class, we tend to say "life got in the way." These events can include transportation failure, job situations, family circumstances, etc. Importantly, it usually doesn't have anything to do with academic rigor or the curriculum. 

Imagine those single parents in your class who would jump at the chance to have their kids in a solid, high-quality program at an early age, right on campus. If current studies are correct, kids in pre-K programs end up performing better when they hit school, and single parents reportedly have a better college completion rate when such programs are available. This is probably hard to quantify. 

The article mentions the cost to students. It doesn't have to be free. And you will note that some independent school districts in Texas offer such programs, serving mainly teenage moms. 

Expensive Textbook Raises Issues

It is generally assumed that departmental faculty agreement on a required text can be beneficial. Such uniformity is less confusing for students, more manageable for bookstores, and creates a larger pool of used books, which saves money. 

But what if a required text is really expensive? Should individual teachers be allowed to choose another book or books that are cheaper—even free—and presumably just as good? With open educational resources (free online materials, commonly called OER), a whole new arena for controversy is on display. 

Please read about an interesting case from Cal State, Fullerton, as reported by Scott Jaschik, in Inside Higher Ed. The issue there is complicated by the fact that the expensive required text is authored by Cal State educators. Professors often assign their own books, particularly at the upper level where individual research plays a large role. But this book is an introductory algebra text (cost new: $180) published by a major company, Pearson. 

Community college faculty often assign their own work, too. For one thing, it makes sense to incorporate the instructor's teaching format and sequence of topics into a customized text or workbook. Generally it's less expensive than other materials. But what about requiring it for all students taking courses in the department from all teachers?  

If the issue involved a text that, say, cost $50, and another other cost $45, it would be an easy call to encourage departmental discretion. But what about comparing $180 and free, assuming little or no difference in quality. The OER movement is gaining traction in the marketplace, with online books written by prize-winning scholars in a wide range of disciplines. 

Yogi Berra once reportedly noted that it's hard to make predictions, especially about the future. But this one is easy. Absent any solid research indicating that students learn better with traditional texts, we will all be using OER, or something like it, in a few years. It's hard to beat free. 

Is the textbook dead? Have a look at this piece by Will Oremus, in Slate, for a sample of what's going on. 

Lecture Me

The lecture as a pedagogical tool has become unfashionable. In fact, some purported reformers would like to see it abolished. You'll even hear some teachers sheepishly confess to lecturing, as if guilty of practicing the dark arts, unholy and abominable.

Today, active learning, collaborative learning, and other student-centered strategies—excellent techniques in the right hands—are more likely to receive gestures of approval from the education gods. But what's happening is not just another educational trend. The growth of online instruction, for instance, has undoubtedly contributed to the decline of lecture.

As a potential counterpoint, please have a look at this piece by Molly Worthen, in the New York Times. She is a professor of history at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. The article is attracting a lot of attention. 

The writer points out rightly that a good lecture is more than a recitation of information. Lectures can be dramatic, thought-provoking, and interactive. You remember.

Obviously pedagogy must change with new circumstances. For example, the personal computer and internet have changed everything about our lives, so there is no reason for instruction to be exempt. 

However, teaching is a very idiosyncratic craft. A good lecturer should be given room to exercise this craft without apology. Incidentally, supervisors often observe, when reading student evaluations, that the most popular professors are very traditional ("old school") in their approach.

This is not to suggest that our job is to give students what they want, but to recognize that many have a hunger for this type of learning—in contrast to the spoon-fed worksheets and handouts used in high school. Freshmen experiencing a good lecture feel like adults for the first time, as if they are finally getting the real deal. It can be liberating. 

Turning High School Into College

We talk a lot about dual credit's new expansion into the mainstream, but a more significant change may be taking place in the Rio Grande Valley, with a major surge in growth of Early College High School. Please read about it, in a report by Sarah Butrymowicz for the Hechinger Report, a highly regarded non-profit publication with national readership. 

This fall, the Pharr-San Juan-Alamo Independent School District (PSJA) became the first truly large early college school district in the country. Nearly all high schoolers are systematically enrolled in college courses to work toward an associate’s degree, at South Texas College, before getting their high school diploma. Many are in the ninth grade.

"That means the majority of students at the school will graduate from high school with at least some college credit," according to the article.

So far the success numbers are impressive. Please get the details from the piece, which includes links on related topics. 

A key issue to keep in mind with this program is the same as with with dual credit. It is one thing to selectively choose students who would have likely succeeded anyway, and then measure their subsequent success. It is another to pick students randomly—as with a lottery discussed in the article—or en masse, where things are apparently headed in South Texas.

The success numbers in the next few years, as the program grows, will be watched carefully by policy makers around the country. 

Another complication. However chosen, students who volunteer for early college are probably blessed, almost by definition, with personal ambition and parental support. Their odds are already more favorable for success than others in similar at-risk categories. Consequently the chief overall benefit of early college high school may be financial. 

The End is Not Near

Some of us think we know a lot about community colleges, but we often forget or ignore the rich history of how our schools came about and why. Gore Vidal called our country the United States of Amnesia, and he may have been onto something. 

Please have a look at this post by blogger Sean Trainor, writing for Time. Importantly, although the author is an educator, he is unaffiliated with community colleges, so presumably the piece is not a PR exercise. Even those of us who pretend to be experts (or perhaps once had a course on the history of higher education) will likely learn something from reading it. 

It is striking and refreshing to read a piece that doesn't obsess over graduation rates, new paradigms, funding models, or the End of the World As We Know It. 

The takeaway is that community colleges grew out of necessity, and are more indispensable than ever. The author does not ignore problems:

Community colleges are not, of course, beyond reproach. Chronically underfunded, they rely even more heavily upon exploitative adjunct labor arrangements than B.A.-granting institutions. And, in their earnest desire to ensure positive career outcomes for students, many schools have risked becoming publicly funded training centers for private concerns.

Time magazine, alas, is not what it used to be in terms of popularity and impact—think back when the coffee tables of middle class America displayed a weekly copy. But this article deserves wide circulation among individuals in our profession.  

"Tickets to Nowhere"

States around the country, including Texas, have greatly improved their high school graduation rates. While we certainly hope the spike is due to more students being ready for college and career, a recent study casts doubt on this assumption. 

The report, "How the States Got Their Rates," was issued by Achieve, a nonprofit group that works with states to raise academic standards and graduation requirements. The study is covered by Katherine Mangan, in the Chronicle of Higher Education. 

Note: Texas may be something of an outlier regarding this study, as it concerns, among other issues, the impact of the federal core curriculum, in which our state does not participate. Some Texas policy makers have stated that our standards are actually higher than the federal core. However, in recent years, the high school dropout rate here has also declined significantly, paralleling many other states. 

One reported concern is a trend toward offering high school students divergent tracks in the curriculum. Weaker students (or their parents) often choose a more career-oriented path, perhaps for very good reasons. Then, later, they want to attend college—again, for very good reasons. They start out behind as a result. 

Here a couple of key passages from the CHE piece:

The increase in high-school graduation rates nationwide is generally a good thing, Mr. [Michael] Cohen, [president of Achieve], said. But when credentials are handed out for work that doesn’t prepare someone for college or a career, "these diplomas are tickets to nowhere that provide false assurances of academic readiness for success in college and career."

The group found, among other things, that:

• Many states give students multiple diploma options, a number of which fall short of assuring readiness for college.
• Twenty states do not offer a diploma that requires students to complete college- and career-ready standards in English and math.
• Only nine states that offer multiple diplomas report which students complete which requirements, making it hard for policy makers to interpret high-school graduation rates.

"Tracking" students is an old controversy. Besides the reported phenomena discussed above, there are added issues of ethnicity and income. If those in the less collegiate track tend to come from poor families who are African-American or Hispanic, it's a dilemma with tragic implications. 

"Campus Carry" Challenges

Community colleges face a unique set of challenges in implementing the new campus carry law. The good news is that two-year schools have until August 2017, while public universities must have a plan by next school year. Baccalaureate institutions are presently engaged in various thorny issues, especially the allowance under the statute of so-called gun-free zones. 

University of North Texas System Chancellor Lee Jackson joked recently that someone suggested to him that his schools ban guns on all parts of campus where alcohol is served—and then begin serving alcohol in all campus buildings. This is reported by Matthew Watkins, in the Texas Tribune. The Trib piece also notes that some private schools—exempt from campus carry as they wish—are moving to ban guns on their campuses. One can envision worried parents factoring in this exemption when choosing a school for their children next year. 

As you have undoubtedly noticed, there is no shortage of media reports on this issue. The focus here in the coming months should probably concern any new information and interpretations that appear in various outlets—especially developments that may affect community colleges. There is no sense in repeating the sundry and anecdotal "dueling scenarios." You can get those anywhere, Google knows. 

One of the distinct challenges of two-year schools involves a shortage of resources on many campuses. Whether for crisis counseling for troubled students, physical infrastructure, or the availability of security officers, small colleges are at a disadvantage. For a view of the complexity involved, please have a look at this article in the Chronicle of Higher Education by Mary Ellen McIntire and Ellen Wexler. 

A more reflective analysis is offered by Matt Reed, in Inside Higher Ed. The writer contemplates the fact that community colleges are designed intentionally for openness. "It's baked into the cake." He expresses concern that our schools may appear less welcoming to our student population. It's a nice take on potential unintended consequences.  

Finally here is a YouTube video on how one school in Ohio is training its stakeholders on the subject of campus shooters, in the wake of recent tragedies around the country. The training goes by the acronym ALICE, and it reportedly is gaining attention. 

Moneyball for Student Retention

When students fail or bail out early in their first "gateway" course, statistically speaking, we've lost them, perhaps forever.

One promising idea to help those at risk involves the use of "big data," which can be aggregated and interpreted to pinpoint the most effective and timely intervention. The strategy is sometimes tagged as Moneyball, which first appeared in the context of baseball statistics, of all things. (If hits don't win games, what good are they?) The idea is to measure what you really want to measure, not just what's traditional or more readily available. 

Please read this article from a recent segment on NPR. The piece nicely explains how the regimen works, including discussion of a pilot program at Valencia College, a huge community college in Florida. The article also provides links to software companies available presently to employ this strategy.

Here's a concise passage on the mechanics:

Here's how it works: The system vacuums up as much data as possible on things such as student participation online in assignments and discussion boards, how often and how long a student logs in to the school's learning platform, and data on a student's academic background. It's refreshed four times a day to create a student "engagement score," among other data points.

"It's unique because it's not just grade data or did they reply to something. It's a more holistic view of the student," says Valencia mathematics professor Brian Macon. "I don't think I'd want to teach without it now that I've had it for a year."

Of course, professors have long had the ability to send a pep talk email or try to motivate and engage students with the right words after class or during office hours.

Again, please read the entire article. Of all the ideas to improve student "engagement," this is the type of program that may be most promising. And it seems practical in terms of resources. Hiring regiments of highly trained advisors is probably not going to happen. 

Such a strategy is not "hand-holding," as some may infer. Teachers rightfully encourage, remind, and even browbeat students ("Where were you, Dude?) all the time. Now there are tools available to target problems with more efficiency, especially perhaps with online instruction, hybrids, and large sections of traditional courses. Presumably each teacher would still decide which students should be contacted and the means to do so, but equipped with the most pertinent information. Some freshmen need an early F, as a wake-up call. Others are more likely to respond to simple encouragement. 

Best of all, focused personal intervention does not involve watering down content or gaming the curriculum.

From a faculty perspective, that says a lot.