Kicking the can down the road: Ohio four-year institutions to ban remedial courses. Tells K-12 to fix the problem.

The Hamilton Journal-News reported by 2015 nearly all remedial (also called developmental level) courses would be eliminated at public four-year colleges in Ohio. "The nearly 40 percent of college freshmen in Ohio who are not ready for college-level work will take most of their remedial courses at community colleges under a statewide plan that dramatically changes how four-year schools provide instruction to those needing extra help." The newspaper reporter stated, "Ohio is following a national trend that critics say could limit access to the four-year degrees many need for high-paying jobs. Some fear it may discourage some students from attending college at all." State education leaders, at least those at the four-year institutions, said the long-term solution was for elementary and secondary education to do a better job. "By the end of 2012, university and college presidents must develop standards of what it means for a student to be “remediation free.”

Critics of the plan said “A lot of the students who need remediation are the same students who have already been marginalized by the system because they attended the worst high schools and are the least prepared,” said Tara L. Parker, a University of Massachusetts professor who studies developmental education. “There is no evidence community colleges do remedial courses any better or cheaper.”

The "Ohio Solution" is the same one that has been talked about since the mid 1970s with the "Nation At Risk" report. Elementary and secondary education must do a better job. Better articulation agreements need to be developed between secondary and postsecondary education. An endless number of education commissions made up of leaders from K-12 education, postsecondary education, corporate world, public advocacy groups, and the rest have been talking and experimenting for years to make "this problem" go away.

It appears the intense fiscal pressures facing public four-year colleges due to decreasing financial support from state government has renewed the desire to "save costs" and eliminate remedial or developmental-level courses. State officials claim offering these courses at the four-year public four-year colleges costs $130 million annually. While to the average taxpayer this seems considerable, what is the combined budget for these public colleges? National studies on this issue report the funds devoted to offering these courses is between one and five percent. Most faculty who teach these courses are part-time and paid considerably less than full-time and especially tenured faculty members at the same four-year institution.

The "Ohio Solution" has been implemented previously in many other places. They all share the same problems with achieving their stated goals:

1. Changing K-12 education curriculum does nothing to meet the needs of returning adults to education. While their exit from high school might have given them adequate skills for immediate entry to college, the long period out of school has led to atrophy of their skills and need for basic level instruction to bring them back to college-readiness.
2. Even if a school district wanted to change its curriculum, if it has less economic resources, how can it be expected to do the same level of quality as the better-funded suburban schools?
3. Changing K-12 education curriculum does nothing for the students who are not enrolled in rigorous college-bound curriculum. Some students and their parents have other future plans that initially do not include college. Maybe they plan to begin a family. Maybe attend a trade school or continue in the family business. Do we want to only have one track choice for students in high school?
4. Changing K-12 education curriculum does nothing for the students who do not fully focus on their classes, read their textbooks with great intensity, and complete all homework to perfection. If everyone earned A's in their classes, achieved to highest level of proficiency with all high risks tests, and in general, were "on task" all the time, they might not need the developmental-level courses. Assuming that they immediately enter postsecondary education immediately after successful completion of high school. With skyrocketing tuition costs, family members out of work or working low-wage jobs, and difficulty for high-school students to earn much at part-time jobs that now are sought by the out-of-work adults, it is not so easy to immediately attend college. Some have to earn some money first.

A wise person once said, "complex problems require complex solutions." The "Ohio Solution" fails on this account.

David Arendale, Associate Professor and Co-Director of the Jandris Center for Innovative Higher Education, University of Minnesota. Post comments to this blog or contact the author directly at arendale@umn.edu

It is More than Just the Money: More Challenges for "Low-Income" Students

In a recent blog posting from "College Bound", they reported some familiar statistics, 84 percent of high-income students enroll in college in the fall after high school, just 54 percent of those from low-income families go on to college, according to 2009 National Center for Education Statistics data. Poor students go to college at lower rates than wealthy students did 30 years ago. By age 24, young adults from high-income families are 10 times more likely to earn a bachelor's degree than those from low-income households. The authors asked, "What changes should be made to improve the landscape?"

The logical response is that it mostly about more financial aid (more grants than loans). That diverts from the bigger issue of lacking social capital for these low-income students. Probing further would reveal that a larger percentage of these "low-income" students are first-generation college, students of color, attended rural or urban school districts, and a variety of other factors. The answer to the question "what changes should be made...?" leads to a larger critique of higher education beyond just making some more money available. What changes does higher education institutions need to make to become more welcoming learning environments rather than focusing on the "deficits" of money. All institutions need to have a welcoming and supportive environment: trade school, community college, four-year liberal arts, and research-intensive universities.

Questions to ask of all institutions include:

• What sorts of faculty development programs do they have that provide comprehensive and ongoing efforts to enable them to embed best practices of Universal Instructional Design into their courses? How are they building in academic supports in the class rather than just passing them off to someone else?


• How high of a priority has the institution placed on raising more funds for grants targeted for students from low SES backgrounds? Are these funds keeping up with the dramatic increases in tuition and other costs associated with college?


• How comprehensive are learning assistance activities for students? Are these provided through both credit and noncredit venues? Are exit competencies in developmental-level courses articulated with entry level expectations for college-level courses that they take next? What efforts are being made to take academic-term length developmental-level courses and turn them into a series of modules that can be taken independent of one another to quicken time for completion and less use of Pell grant money to pay for the tuition?

This is just scratching the surface of the issue for what are the challenges for "low-income" students. It is not just about the money.

[Click here to read entire entry from the College Bound blog.]

Illinois Establishes Performance-Based Funding for Colleges

Governor Pat Quinn of Illinois signed a bill establishing performance-based measures to determine funding for public universities, community colleges and other state education agencies. Metrics such as student success in degree and certificate completion will be developed to influence a portion of state funding for higher education institutions.This matches our approach this year to budget for results for all appropriations in the Illinois Senate and extends it to Illinois universities," Maloney said. "Officials from WIU and other state institutions have been involved in setting the parameters for our initial measures. This has been a priority for me as Chairman of the Senate Higher Education Committee, and the opportunity to improve academic results and ensure funds are spent most efficiently make it one of the most important bills passed this year.House Bill 1503 will take effect in 2013 and begin with metrics to affect a small percentage of funding that would increase over time. Allocations would be based on academic milestones, retention, and time to completion. Statistics on students who are academically or financially at-risk, first-generation students, low-income students, and those traditionally underrepresented in higher education will also be measured to affect funding. [Click to read the entire press release.]

This provides a great opportunity for leaders in college access and student success programs to highlight their activities, approaches, and services increasing positive outcomes for students. Colleges in Illinois will be redoubling their efforts to increase access and college completion. The answers can come from their own college TRIO, learning assistance, and developmental education programs. They have solutions that could be scaled up for wider implementation.

Why only the "outstanding" college students receive slate mobile computers?

I just read an announcement about the University of Southern Mississippi was handing out 1,000 slate computers to their "outstanding" students. [Click to read the online article.] The curious thing about the plan was to only share them with "outstanding" students defined as those from the Honors College, McNair Scholars Program, and Southern Style leadership group.

The article states "Tablets are like the Swiss Army Knife to academic excellence. By leveraging this new technology, we are committed to transforming the way students interact, engage and learn in the classrooms," said Homer Coffman, CIO at Southern Miss, in a statement released today. "The iTech department at Southern Miss is continually challenging itself to support emerging technology and find new ways to put information into the students' hands."

With such a great technology, why not the "average" students or targeting those that are facing academic challenges in a class or two? Why not for students who do not have a mobile device, perhaps due to low income? The college I work at provides an iPad for all first-year students enrolled in the College of Education and Human Development. [Click to read the press release.\ Results look promising. We are repeating the distribution this year at no cost to the students. Preliminary from the instructors in more than 30 classes report favorable positive resutls from the students and the faculty members who enhanced their classroom learning enviroinment.  It was also good to know that everyone in the classroom had an effective mobile computer and bridged the "digital divide" due to income restrictions and social capital that some students have and others do not.

Congrats to the University of Southern Mississippi for their bold decision to distribute the 1,000 tablet computers. Please consider more inclusion with next year's program to those who are not quite as outstanding as others (yet). Maybe the mobile devices could help propel more students to that category. Outstanding students probably have more social capital than others. Let's see what happens when more resources are provided to those who might need the resource more.

Chicago Community College Model for Developmental-Level Courses

• News: Remedial Plus at a Chicago Community College- Inside Higher Ed
  While most two-year institutions struggle with the high costs and low passing rates of remedial courses, administrators in one Chicago community college believe they've found a way to double pass rates.
  (tags: developmental_level_courses community_colleges learning_assistance,_de,_access)

Social Capital, Identity, and Resegregation

Certain groups of students bring less social capital with them to college— students from low socioeconomic backgrounds, first-generation college stu¬dents, and historically underrepresented students of color. Learning assistance services, especially developmental courses, are essential for overcoming disad¬vantaged backgrounds. Learning assistance is essential for providing access to a broad range of institutions.

The student groups that had not traditionally attended college before have a variety of overlapping identities, some of which pose barriers that impede success in college. Walpole (2007) analyzed this population and names one group “economically and educationally challenged.” “All [economically and educationally challenged] students, regardless of gender, race, or ethnicity, face challenges in accessing, persisting, and graduating from college. The intersec¬tions of these identity statuses and educational processes and outcomes are non-linear and deserve additional attention” (p. x). Walpole states that chal¬lenges for these students are not the result of a failure to try or that they are somehow inferior to the students from dominate cultures. “Rather these stu¬dents must cope with a structure and a system that defines merit in ways that do not privilege them” (p. 15).

Learning assistance can help these new students overcome the barriers that might limit their chances for succeeding in postsecondary education. Deciding whether to curtail or eliminate credit-based learning assistance such as developmental courses does not just affect campus economics or perceptions of institutional prestige. It is not a race- and class-neutral deci¬sion. This report illustrates how a wide range of students at most institu¬tions, regardless of their classification, use noncredit learning assistance activities such as tutoring, study groups, learning assistance centers, and the like. Lack of access to credit-based learning assistance, however, raises issues of class, race, and culture. It is a serious decision to tell essentially an entire group of students who share common demographic identities such as first-generation college students, students of color, and low socioeco¬nomic students to begin their college career at a two-year college, while privileged students can begin wherever they want. No one quite says it that way. The impact is the same, however, if the needed resources are not avail¬able and the campus culture is not welcoming to the new students. The risk is de facto resegregation of postsecondary education in the United States and all the disastrous results for individuals and society that would occur (Bowen, Chingos, and McPherson, 2009).

Excerpted from Access at the Crossroads (Arendale, 2010).

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.