Webinar Update on Developmental Education Practices for Counselors, Faculty, and Student Affairs Staff

On October 28, 2011 I conducted a webinar with faculty and staff at Austin Community College (TX) on a wide range of current topics confronting the field of developmental education. I began with an overview of what I thought were the forces at work on the field, both good and bad. I especially focused on the recent event in Ohio banning developmental-level courses at public four-year institutions. Previously postings to this blog explained my thoughts on this issue recently.

Following an overview of the trends impacting the field, I moved into the heart of the webinar with identifying promising and best practices of developmental education applied to counselors, faculty members, and student affairs staff. Go to the top menu bar in this web site and click on "my talks" and then click on "narrated PP presentations." This webinar is the first presentation listed. A handout of the key slides from the webinar is the next item. You can also reach this web site by clicking on this sentence. Your comments are welcome.

Advocacy and Legitimacy

I recently particiated at the Mid-America Association of Educational Opportunity Program Personnel (MAEOPP) Conference hosted at The Abbey at Lake Geneva in Wisconsin. One of our keynote speakers was Dr. Arnold Mitchem, President of the Council on Opportunity in Education. One of the important issues raised with his keynote talk was the need for both "advocacy" and "legitimacy" for TRIO programs. Advocacy is necessary to remind the government of its values and why investing in TRIO programs is money well spent. So far, TRIO programs have served over 2,000,000 students who are low-income, first-generation, historically underrepresented, and students with physical disabilities.

During this time of economic chaos both within the U.S. government as well internationally, political leaders have to carefully consider where to invest an ever shrinking pool of public dollars. "Legitimacy" of TRIO programs, and their worthiness of continued if not increased funding, is dependent upon evidence that TRIO works. "Best practices" is a term used frequently by many in society and too often with differing meanings. A true best practice has evidence that the activity contributes to higher student outcomes. While we within the TRIO community know we are 'legitimate', those outside the field are too often uninformed. We must continually conduct research to document the excellent work being done with students. This raises the legitimacy of TRIO within their eyes and can influence their policy and budget decisions.

To that end, MAEOPP and the Jandris Center for Innovative Higher Education has created a Best Education Practices Center for program improvement and better service for students. The student population the Center is focused upon are lower-income, first-generation college, and historically-underrepresented. The Center also can be effective for supporting the legitimacy of TRIO locally and nationally. We look forward to TRIO programs within the MAEOPP area submitting their education practices they would like to contribute for the TRIO community. The Center staff is eager to support your nominations of education practices. Please click on the "contact us" tab on the top menu bar to obtain email and phone information directly to the Best Education Practices Center staff.

The Limited Value of "What Works" Research

In the current edition of Education Week, Bo Yan and Mike Slagle write following:

"Ever since educational research became an academic discipline more than a century ago, researchers and educators have been vocal in their dissatisfaction over its impact on practice. For decades, education research has been criticized as confusing, irrelevant, and of little practical use, fueling a pessimistic view that research probably will not lead to better schools.

In response, the federal government and the research community have zeroed in on so-called “what works” research, and, in recent years, studies have mushroomed to answer a broad range of policy questions, such as: Do school vouchers work? Does technology improve student learning? Are private schools better than public schools? At the same time, existing studies on intervention strategies and programs are scrutinized to provide educators, policymakers, and the public with trusted and easy-to-understand scientific evidence of effective programming. The federal What Works Clearinghouse is a premier example of such endeavors.

This is all well and good, but we would argue that it is far from enough. We believe it is time for a research shift, and instead of making determinations about whether programs work or not, attention should turn to identifying the right students for whom a program is effective and the necessary contextual conditions that make a program work. What’s more, local schools should conduct rigorous studies to determine whether programs and initiatives will work for their students..."

Agreed. Rather than the singular focus on "does it work", we need the answers of "how it works". Articles next to never explain in a systematic way what is really unique about the practice, what are the essential elements, what are the critical implementation steps that are never discussed elsewhere, and what were the major mistakes you made on the way to perfecting the practice. That is practical information to improve student outcomes. Being a judge is much easier than being a good teacher.

Asst Secretary Ochoa Promotes Best Practices

Recently Assistant Secretary of Education Ochoa addressed the national leaders of federally-funded TRIO programs concerning priorities of the Secretary of Education's Office. Among topics in his speech were the need to identify, validate, and disseminate (IVD) best practices of TRIO programs. Following is part of a news report of his speech that concerns IVD.

“In TRIO programs, students are empowered to perform and succeed and there are many promising programs that demonstrate that fact,” he said, pointing to the Upward Bound summer program at the University of South Carolina as an example. Through the program, graduating high school seniors can take a college-credit research methodology course taught by one of the university’s professors.

“We know that TRIO programs work. But in this age of accountability, knowing that these programs do well is not enough,” Ochoa said. “We will need to develop a body of evidence that both quantifies the impact and cost effectiveness of these programs and that can demonstrate that effectiveness to legislators, policymakers and the public.” The Education Department plans to enhance existing data collection activities to measure outcomes and impact, help identify best practices and disseminate the results to all its grantees. (emphasis mine).

“To improve student outcomes, we need to spur the field to come up with innovative solutions to address the completion challenge and improve higher education productivity, build evidence of what works through rigorous evaluations and scale up and disseminate those strategies that prove successful,” he said.

Source: Jones, Joyce. (2011, March 8). Ochoa Hails Catalytic Impact of TRIO Programs on K-12 Level. Diverse Issues in Higher Education. Retrieved from http://diverseeducation.com/article/14862/

It is good to see public statements such as this by the Department of Education. I have been advocating for such an  approach for nearly twenty years. Before budget  cuts in the mid 1990s, the Department funded the National Diffusion Network (NDN). It was responsible for identifying promising and best practices, vigorously validating them regarding effectiveness, and disseminating those validated programs with the rest of the education community. I directed the national Supplemental Instruction program which was the only higher education program validated by the NDN. We already have a proven formula for IVD through a similar process used by the old NDN. It is time to get started again with IVD. I am working with a regional education association to conduct a pilot test of IVD with education programs located within a geographical region. Check back with this blog for updates on the progress.

Learning Assistance Often Ignores Impact of Culture on Learning of Students

Too often learning assistance and developmental education conferences and publications treat the issue of cultural and ethnic diversity as only an issue of demographics and not of pedagogy. Decades ago it was believed that sensitivity in this area was observing and honoring cultural events and including people of various cultures in class materials. This was a good start after that the previous focus only on dominant culture examples.The next step is required in learning assistance, teach multiculturally. WHile this has been widely adopted in education, the learning assistance community is far behind. Following is a good reader to illustrate practical ways to meaningfully engage students of different cultures in the classroom, honor their expertise, and make the classroom a richer and more productive environment for students of all cultures and backgrounds.

Higbee, J. L., Lundell, D. B., & Duranczyk, I. M. (Eds.) (2003). Multiculturalism in developmental education. Minneapolis, MN: Center for Research on Developmental Education, General College, University of Minnesota. Retrieved July 4, 2004, from: http://tinyurl.com/2e5wa23

The first three chapters of this monograph provide models for integrating multiculturalism in developmental education. The remaining chapters focus on conversations related to multiculturalism in developmental education, reported by our colleagues in the General College of the University of Minnesota. The work of these authors reflects the General College's efforts to implement its multicultural mission. The following chapters are included in this monograph: The Centrality of Multiculturalism in Developmental Education (Karen L. Miksch, Patrick L. Bruch, Jeanne L. Higbee, Rashné R. Jehangir, and Dana Britt Lundell); Walking the Talk: Using Learning-Centered Strategies to Close Performance Gaps (Donna McKusick and Irving Pressley McPhail); Creating Access Through Universal Instructional Design (Karen S. Kalivoda); Multicultural Legacies for the 21st Century: A Conversation with James A. Banks (Patrick L. Bruch, Jeanne L. Higbee, and Dana Britt Lundell); Is there a Role for Academic Achievement Tests in Multicultural Developmental Education? (Thomas Brothen and Cathrine Wambach); The Triumphs and Tribulations of a Multicultural Concerns Committee (David L. Ghere); MultiCultural Development Center (MCDC): Sharing Diversity (Ghafar A. Lakanwal and Holly Choon Hyang Pettman); Summary Report on the Third National Meeting on Future Directions in Developmental Education: Grants, Research, Diversity, and Multiculturalism (Dana Britt Lundell); Report of the Future Directions Meeting Multicultural Themes Track (Jeanne L. Higbee and Holly Choon Hyang Pettman); and appendices.

Socially contructed learning spaces rather than instructional technology

I have been thinking about the terms "instructional technology" and "learning technology." They are often used interchangeably by many, includinig myself.  Doing so blurs their distinctions. I have implemented a number of Web 2.0 learning tools within my class: wiki web pages, podcasts, self-create music vidoes on a history topic, etc. Yesterday Brian Fredrickson and I facilitated a conference session on "Social media and learning spaces in schools, work sites, and communities." It was at MinneBar with over 1,000 in attendance. We had a great discussion and many within the audience shared how they use Web 2.0 for learning purposes.

Over the past couple of years, I now understand that my role is creating and facilitating "learning spaces" within the classroom so that students are active participants and co-creators of the class experience and learning outcomes. It is really not about which Web 2.0 technology tool or services that is used, it is the engagement and co-creation by students that makes the difference. It reminded me about the classic Barr and Tagg article from the mid 1990s that identified the shift from a teacher-dirven to a student collaborator learning environment within the classroom.

Barr, R. B., & Tagg, J. (1995). From teaching to learning: A new paradigm for undergraduate education. Change Magazine, 27(6), 13-25. Retrieved July 4, 2004, from: http://critical.tamucc.edu/~blalock/readings/tch2learn.htm

This is one of the most often cited articles on this topic and is credited by some as helping to influence higher education significantly since it was published in a journal that is frequently read by college presidents and chief academic and student affair officers. According to the authors, a paradigm shift is occurring in American higher education. Under the traditional, dominant "Instruction Paradigm," colleges are institutions that exist to provide instruction. Subtly but profoundly, however, a "Learning Paradigm" is taking hold, whereby colleges are institutions that exist to produce learning. This shift is both needed and wanted, and it changes everything. The writers provided a detailed matrix to compare the old instruction paradigm with the new learning paradigm in the following dimensions: mission and purposes; criteria for success; teaching/learning structures; learning theory; productivity/funding; and nature of roles.

Mainstreaming best practices of learning assistance and developmental education within first-year courses

Isolated and prerequisite remedial and developmental level courses are on the chopping block. FOr good or bad, the national dialogue argues for their relegation to community colleges and prohibition at four-year institutions. How are needs met for students who still some of the outcomes from such courses? Embedding the best elements into rigorous, first-year courses is a solution. Doing so benefits all students within the courses since all will experience turbulence within the curriculum. Following is an article that describes changes forecast a decade ago.

Damashek, R. (1999). Reflections on the future of developmental education, Part II. Journal of Developmental Education, 23(2), 18-20, 22. Retrieved July 4, 2004 from:  http://www.ced.appstate.edu/centers/ncde/reserve%20reading/V23-2damashek%20 reflections.htm

Interviews were conducted with a number of leaders within developmental education: David Arendale, Hunter Boylan, Kaylene Gebert, Martha Maxwell, Santiago Silva, and Diana Vukovich. The dialogue points to several emerging trends: (a) mainstreaming, (b) removal of developmental education from 4-year institutions, and c) increased professionalism of developmental educators. Mainstreaming developmental education courses into college-level, graduation-credit programs of study fits into the paradigm of learning assistance and enrichment for all students. The participants in the discussion were unanimous in proposing a comprehensive academic support program that would include elements such as a learning center, adjunct or paired courses, Supplemental Instruction, tutoring, student assessment, and program evaluation. Boylan advocates funds for professional development and Gebert proposes faculty, student, and staff recognition whereas Silva includes academic advising, counseling, career services, mentoring, and especially faculty training in his list of important program components. Arendale and Vukovich propose a complete paradigm shift away from the medical model to learning support for all students. By deferring to Maxwell’s (1997) latest book Improving Student Learning, Vukovich gives Maxwell credit for providing insight into best practices based on years of experience and the best research resulting in the recommendation of a comprehensive learning assistance model. the value of such a model is that it is more easily integrated into the academic process because it is understood as service for all students. This model is not burdened by the stigma of serving only the least able students, who, for many academic, administrative, and political leaders, are seen as a drain on the institution’s academic standards.