By Katherine Mangan As the pressure on community colleges to accelerate or even eliminate remedial-education requirements intensifies, vexing questions are being asked about the impact such a shift could have on low-income and minority students. Those who are the least prepared for college stand the most to lose from policies that push students quickly into college-level classes, according to some of the educators gathered here for the annual meeting of the American Association of Community Colleges. And those students tend, disproportionately, to be minority and poor.
But others argue that struggling students are ill served when they have to pass through a lengthy series of remedial courses before they can start earning college credit. Too often, they get discouraged and drop out before earning a single credit. “For many of these students, a remedial course is their first college experience, as well as their last,” Stan Jones, president of the nonprofit advocacy group Complete College America, said on Monday during a session that delved into the politics behind developmental-education reform. Community colleges have done a great job of diversifying their first-year classes, he said. “But if you fast-forward to graduation day and look at who’s on the stage, they’ve lost a lot of that representation.”
Mr. Jones, whose group is working with 32 states and the District of Columbia to advance its college-completion goals, added that there are “no good answers” to what happens to the least-prepared students “when they insist on wanting an academic program.” Many could benefit, he said, by enrolling in a short-term certificate program that offers job training, with remediation built in. That sounds like tracking to some educators who remember the days when minority students were routinely routed to vocational courses. But with so many employers lining up to hire students with technical skills in fields like manufacturing and welding, “voc-ed” doesn’t carry the stigma it once did.
The session served as a sparring match of sorts between Mr. Jones and one of his most persistent critics, who says Complete College America exaggerates the shortcomings of remedial education and pushes simplistic solutions for complex problems. The tone on Monday, however, was polite as the two, meeting for the first time, agreed on one key point: that most stand-alone remedial courses, by themselves, aren’t serving students well. Hunter R. Boylan, director of the National Center for Developmental Education and a professor of higher education at Appalachian State University, said that if state legislators enacted one-size-fits-all models for streamlining remedial education, “there could be a lot of collateral damage” to minority and low-income students. “If you don’t pilot innovations before mandating them statewide, the unintended consequences will come up and bite you,” he said. “If you pilot an innovation, you can work the bugs out before everybody has to live with it.”
‘Legislators Are Getting Anxious’
So why all the focus now on fixing remedial education? Several factors have created a “sense of urgency,” according to Matt Gianneschi, vice president for policy and programs at the Education Commission of the States, a national nonprofit group that tracks state policy trends. The Common Core State Standards, a set of benchmarks that have been adopted by 45 states, will create a “common exit point and common entry point that has never existed before,” he said. The benchmarks will sharply delineate who is and isn’t ready for college, he said, and are likely to show that even fewer students are prepared. That’s the last thing that two-year colleges want to hear at a time when President Obama and major foundations are calling for double-digit increases in their completion rates. “It’s creating real urgency, and legislators are getting anxious,” said Mr. Gianneschi. As a result, many are no longer content to defer to faculty members on academic matters. “Many legislatures are now looking at ways they can force their priorities on the academy to get them to move in new directions.”
In Florida, they’re making remediation optional for most high-school graduates. In Connecticut, they’re limiting it to one semester, unless it’s embedded in a college-credit course. And in statehouses across the country, groups like Complete College America are urging lawmakers to replace stand-alone remedial courses with models that are offered either alongside or as part of college-credit classes. In Texas, lawmakers seeking to cut remediation costs and put more students directly into college classes passed legislation, taking effect next year, that will bump many of the least-prepared students from remedial education to adult basic education. Karen Laljiani, associate vice president of Cedar Valley College, said her college would be able to offer only two levels of remedial mathematics instead of four. Those at the upper end of the cutoff will be accelerated into credit courses, which has some faculty members worried about an influx of unprepared students.
Helping the Least-Prepared
The big question, though, is what will happen to students who used to place into the lowest levels of remedial math, some of whom might test at third-grade levels. Some might qualify for short-term, noncredit certificate programs that provide training for blue-collar jobs. And in some cases, remediation could be built right into the course. The college may have to refer others to community groups that handle literacy and job training—a prospect that many community-college educators see as abandoning their open-door mission. Colleges that are already struggling with reduced enrollment also worry about the additional tuition revenue they’ll lose when students are moved into adult basic education, for which they typically don’t receive any state funds.
Among the questions that the changes are raising: What responsibility do community colleges have to educate students who are so far behind that they would struggle even in remedial classes? How do they structure those courses at a time when the emphasis is on accelerating students into college-level classes? The head of the National Association for Developmental Education said her group was worried that colleges would start turning those least-prepared students away as pressure to push students through to completion intensified. “If open-access institutions are forced to shut that door, it would be a dark day," said Patti Levine-Brown, a professor of communications at Florida State College at Jacksonville and former president of the National Association for Developmental Education. "It would go against everything we were created to do.”
Published Research: Peer study group leader self disclosure during a study group session
Allen, A., & Court, S. (2009). Leader self disclosure within PAL: A case study. Australasian Journal of Peer Learning, 2(1), 68-86. Retrieved from http://ro.uow.edu.au/ajpl/vol2/iss1/1.
Peer Assisted Learning (PAL) is a variant of the Supplemental Instruction (SI) program. The PAL leaders were the subject of this study at Bournemouth University in England. The issue under investigation was self disclosure of the PAL leaders within the learning environment and the impact on students. Qualitative and quantitative methods were used to gain insight about the levels and nature of PAL leader self-disclosure during PAL sessions. Results show that 46% are open with their feelings and 84% often use personal examples within a PAL session. Qualitative methodology identified the types of ways disclosure was used to build trust with students and illustrate what the PAL leader was trying to communicate.
Published Research: Using Bloom's Taxonomy in a peer learning program
Aline, F., Zeng, S., & Yu, Y. M. (2012). Using Bloom’s Taxonomy in a peer-led workshop in probability and statistics. Conference Proceedings of the The Peer-led Team Learning International Society Inaugural Conference, Brooklyn, NY. Retrieved from http://pltlis.org/wp-content/uploads/2012%20Proceedings/Aline-2012.docx
Bloom’s Taxonomy goes hand in hand with the peer-led workshop's methods by providing us as peer leaders with a structured order of the learning levels taken to extend our learning capabilities. We, the Peer Leaders, assist students into progressing to the next level in mathematics by going beyond recalling, understanding and applying (Levels 1-3 of Bloom’s Taxonomy). In our Probability and Statistics I and II workshop, we apply Bloom’s Taxonomy to help the students, especially with the application of comprehension, application, and analysis (Levels 2-4). By proposing questions to the students, we initiate the recollection of the subject at hand. As a result, these questions help the establishment and encouragement of critical thinking for the students, especially in the higher levels. The Analytical level (Level 4) specifically shows that an individual can know whether what he or she is doing allows them to perform well in the subject.
Published Research: Impact on Peer Leaders in Peer Learning Programs
Alberte, J. L., Cruz, A., Rodriguez, N., & Pitzer, T. (2012). The PLTL leader boost. Conference Proceedings of the The Peer-led Team Learning International Society Inaugural Conference, Brooklyn, NY. Retrieved from http://pltlis.org/wp-content/uploads/2012%20Proceedings/Alberte-3-2012.docx
Qualitative data has demonstrated the impact of PLTL on a Peer Leader’s academic performance. In this paper we quantitatively show the presence of the Peer Leader boost at Florida International University. Just as in any apprenticeship role, Peer Leaders undergo an extensive training program and it is this experience which provides an advantage. Training includes pedagogy, classroom dynamics, science concepts, and critical thinking skills equipping Peer Leaders with the necessary skills to manage a productive active learning environment. Initial observations and feedback indicate that participation as a Peer Leader adds value such as enculturation in the discipline, increased performance in traditionally assessed learning outcomes, and increased retention within the discipline. Preliminary data demonstrates a significant difference in the academic success of Peer Leaders in their own course work. This analysis was performed on large enrollment upper-level courses which indicated up to a letter grade difference between Peer Leaders and non-Peer Leaders.
Published Research: Impact of peer learning with postgraduate students
Zaccagnini, M., & Verenikina, I. (2014). Peer Assisted Study Sessions for postgraduate international students in Australia. Journal of Peer Learning, 6(1), 86-102. Retrieved from: http://ro.uow.edu.au/ajpl/vol6/iss1/8.
Peer Assisted Study Sessions (PASS), a peer led academic support program that has multiple documented academic, social, and transition benefits, is increasingly being utilised in Australian instituti ons. Whilst PASS has been evaluated from multiple angles in regard to the undergraduate cohort, there is limited research regarding the benefits of PASS for postgraduate students, particularly international postgraduate students. This specific cohort's perspective is significant as international students constitute a large proportion of postgraduate students in Australian universities. This study investigates the role of PASS in contributing to the experience of international postgraduate coursework students at an Australian university through an investigation of its perceived benefits by this cohort of students.
How ‘Undermatching’ Shapes Students’ College Experience
“Undermatching,” the phenomenon in which students enroll at less-selective colleges than their academic qualifications suggest they could have attended, is a hot topic in higher-education research. Among the topics studies have examined so far: how common undermatching is, its effect on graduation rates, and a low-cost way to change where high-achieving, low-income students apply to and enroll in college.
A paper scheduled to be presented on Friday at the American Educational Research Association’s annual meeting considers undermatching from a different angle: how it shapes high-achieving students’ experience in their first year of college. Using data from the National Survey of Student Engagement, the paper compares the self-reported engagement, satisfaction, and gains in knowledge, skills, and personal development for high-achieving, undermatched students and their peers attending “match” institutions.
The undermatched students reported a less-challenging academic environment, lower satisfaction, and fewer gains. Those findings, the paper says, may explain why students who undermatch are less likely to graduate, as other research has found. But some experiences of undermatched students were more positive than those of their peers at more-selective colleges. The undermatched students reported having more interactions with professors and higher engagement in active and collaborative learning styles.
The paper, “Selectivity and the College Experience: How Undermatching Shapes the College Experience Among High-Achieving Students,” is by Kevin J. Fosnacht, a research analyst at the National Survey of Student Engagement.
Free Interstate College Access Evaluation Project Teleconference
The College and Career Readiness Evaluation Consortium
Please join the free teleconference on Thursday, March 20th, 2014 at 10:00 am (Central) To register, subscribe to our group mailings here. You will receive an invitation for the event that includes the telephone number (not toll free) and your unique registration code. If you would like to receive automatic calendar invites to our group calls, please email us at CollegeAccessAffinityGroup@ed.gov with the address where you would like to receive the notifications.
NOTE: Due to the high volume of calls please dial in 10 minutes prior to the scheduled call time to ensure that you are on the line by 10:00 am (Central).
Join us to learn about an interstate college access evaluation project that is using multi-state data to effectively enhance our work. This effort grew out of project directors wanting to conduct a self-evaluation of the GEAR UP program nationally, partnerships with the National Council for Community and Education Partnerships, ACT, Inc., and the National Student Clearinghouse Research Center that have proven invaluable to the project, and a desire to conduct the first large-scale longitudinal GEAR UP evaluation. The first deliverable that the Consortium has accomplished is common definitions for services in GEAR UP/college access programs. Ultimately, this research and evaluation will strengthen the GEAR UP project, as well as inform college access programming in local education agencies outside of GEAR UP—all while working to meet the President’s 2020 goal.
Please cut and paste the link below into your browser to down load the power point presentation for this Affinity Group Call. There you will also find updated information on news and events within the US Department of Education, White House, and much more. http://www2.ed.gov/news/av/audio/college-access/index.html