iriscalderon4747-blog

[iriscalderon4747-blog]

The purpose of this study was to ascertain perceptions of persistence among underprepared community college students attending an urban, culturally diverse at Broward College in the southeastern United States.  Total number of students consisted of 22 individuals. Out of the 22 students, 6 were graduates, 12 were considered “persisters” and 4 were drop outs. The factors of considered were support systems, personal attributes and other characteristics. The researcher intent was to know what attributes the graduates or those who have earned a minimum of 30 credits had as compared   to those who dropped out. Student success in the context of this study was defined as completing any remedial courses, maintaining a GPA of at least a 2.0 and either graduated of completed 30 credits at Broward College.

Additionally, “the researcher examined the effects of learning communities on college students” attitudes toward college” so that factors can be identified that would lower attrition rates (p. 15). As for ethnicity demographics, 36% of the students were African Americans, 39% were Caucasian, Hispanics were at 22% and Asian constituted 3% of the overall student population as per Achieving the dream (2006). Upon interviewing the participants, there were for four themes that emerged as affecting persistence. These four themes identifies were: precollege characteristics, support from external sources, social involvement and lastly academic integration. Furthermore, within each of these themes, there were also subthemes.

Within the first theme with regard to precollege characteristics, there were 6 subthemes that manifested to include: “sense of responsibility, goal orientation, faith, resourceful ness, cultural and racial identity and determination” (p.17). The second theme’s subthemes were support from family members, friends and even high school teachers. The next theme pertained to social involvement as to whether or not they engaged with campus clubs and organizations focusing on interaction among other students. The fourth theme involved academic integration and whether the student felt included in the academia culture such as establishing relationships with faculty or was able to cultivate essential study habits.

Among all the students involved in the study, the most common factors mentioned was support from family, friends and high school teachers, their faith and the personal characteristics of independence. The ”persisters” mentioned determination, goal orientation, a sense of responsibility and resourcefulness most often. They were also likely to include how their race and ethnicity contributed to their success. This cohort also mentioned of being more involved with campus activities and felt that education was liberating with the objection of achieving their goals. While the drop outs unfortunately were “more likely to deterred by life circumstances” (p.17).

Incidentally, larger social circles from “external college support and community influences” were positively attributed to stronger impact in persistence (p.17). Interestingly enough, the graduates and “persisters” were either “first generation college students and first generation in the U.S., non-native English speakers, female and were from underrepresented minority populations” (pp. 17-18). These students relied on their individually identified cultural affiliations for inspiration and guidance to persevere and all saw attaining a degree as an opportunity of success.

In conclusion, this study identified the factors that had the most impact on community college persistence.  First was the inclusion of parental and family support. Next was the support of faculty to aid in the student learning experiences. Third is the instructional delivery system particularly with regard to developmental classes where they can be presented focusing on utilizing adult education as opposed to methods used for students in high school. The next factor should be “allowing students to earn transferable credits” while enrolled in developmental programs (p.20). The fifth factor would involve ”college administrators and staff aid in supporting  the transition of students, as they mainstream within the general student population” (p.22). Lastly, the final focus mentioned would be to “increase student’s sense of academic integration, so administrators could group students based on their major to increase their academic discipline identification” (p.22).

Barbatis, P. (2010). Underprepared, ethnically diverse community college students: factors contributing to persistence. Journal of Developmental Education, 33, 3, Proquest.

[iriscalderon4747-blog]

Unraveling factors contributing to the Persistence of Ethnically Diverse and Underprepared Community College Students

The purpose of this study was to ascertain perceptions of persistence among underprepared community college students attending an urban, culturally diverse at Broward College in the southeastern United States.  Total number of students consisted of 22 individuals. Out of the 22 students, 6 were graduates, 12 were considered “persisters” and 4 were drop outs. The factors of considered were support systems, personal attributes and other characteristics. The researcher intent was to know what attributes the graduates or those who have earned a minimum of 30 credits had as compared   to those who dropped out. Student success in the context of this study was defined as completing any remedial courses, maintaining a GPA of at least a 2.0 and either graduated of completed 30 credits at Broward College.

Additionally, “the researcher examined the effects of learning communities on college students” attitudes toward college” so that factors can be identified that would lower attrition rates (p. 15). As for ethnicity demographics, 36% of the students were African Americans, 39% were Caucasian, Hispanics were at 22% and Asian constituted 3% of the overall student population as per Achieving the dream (2006). Upon interviewing the participants, there were for four themes that emerged as affecting persistence. These four themes identifies were: precollege characteristics, support from external sources, social involvement and lastly academic integration. Furthermore, within each of these themes, there were also subthemes.

Within the first theme with regard to precollege characteristics, there were 6 subthemes that manifested to include: “sense of responsibility, goal orientation, faith, resourceful ness, cultural and racial identity and determination” (p.17). The second theme’s subthemes were support from family members, friends and even high school teachers. The next theme pertained to social involvement as to whether or not they engaged with campus clubs and organizations focusing on interaction among other students. The fourth theme involved academic integration and whether the student felt included in the academia culture such as establishing relationships with faculty or was able to cultivate essential study habits.

Among all the students involved in the study, the most common factors mentioned was support from family, friends and high school teachers, their faith and the personal characteristics of independence. The ”persisters” mentioned determination, goal orientation, a sense of responsibility and resourcefulness most often. They were also likely to include how their race and ethnicity contributed to their success. This cohort also mentioned of being more involved with campus activities and felt that education was liberating with the objection of achieving their goals. While the drop outs unfortunately were “more likely to deterred by life circumstances” (p.17).

Incidentally, larger social circles from “external college support and community influences” were positively attributed to stronger impact in persistence (p.17). Interestingly enough, the graduates and “persisters” were either “first generation college students and first generation in the U.S., non-native English speakers, female and were from underrepresented minority populations” (pp. 17-18). These students relied on their individually identified cultural affiliations for inspiration and guidance to persevere and all saw attaining a degree as an opportunity of success.

In conclusion, this study identified the factors that had the most impact on community college persistence.  First was the inclusion of parental and family support. Next was the support of faculty to aid in the student learning experiences. Third is the instructional delivery system particularly with regard todevelopmental classes where they can be presented focusing on utilizing adult education as opposed to methods used for students in high school. The next factor should be “allowing students to earn transferable credits” while enrolled in developmental programs (p.20). The fifth factor would involve ”college administrators and staff aid in supporting  the transition of students, as they mainstream within the general student population” (p.22). Lastly, the final focus mentioned would be to “increase student’s sense of academic integration, so administrators could group students based on their major to increase their academic discipline identification” (p.22).

Barbatis, P. (2010). Underprepared, ethnically diverse community college students: factors contributing to persistence. Journal of Developmental Education, 33, 3, Proquest.

[iriscalderon4747-blog]

Milwaukee- "It's a Hard Knock Life"

Goldrick-Rab, Sara. (2016) Paying the price: college costs, financial aid, and the betrayal of the American dream. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago. DOI:10.7208/Chicago/9780226404486.001.0001

For low-come and minority students, an important factor in selecting a college is in its proximity to home’ so they can continue to keep close ties with family, friends and for work obligations. College opportunities within a given city will determine the college experience as well as the price for attending. Within Higher education, funding equity does not exist. Some colleges will either have access to hefty endowments; while other colleges have to heavily rely on state funding.

In the city of Milwaukee,” the importance of location, community, and funding equity” is quite evident (p.192). Milwaukee happens to be “one of the poorest and most segregated cities” in the U.S (p.193).  Twenty five percent of “families live below the federal poverty level” and over 36 percent have annual incomes of $25,000 or less. Milwaukee also has the second highest level of” black-white segregation” in the nation and is “one of the worst places to live for African Americans” (p.193).  In an attempt to boost economic prosperity,” political leaders at the state, county, and municipal levels are trying to increase the percentage of college graduates” in a state that already lags behind every other city in the U.S (p.194).

Funding inequity within the state of Wisconsin is very apparent when we compare UW- Milwaukee and UW-Madison. UW- Milwaukee receives $10 million in endowment and state funding while Madison received close to $2.2 billion. This disparity is further compounded by the fact that in 2014-15 UW- Milwaukee “educated 2,176 African Americans “(at 8% of total enrollment) while UW-Madison enrolled 961 African Americans at 2% of total enrollment (p.199). As a result, funding for public higher Ed in Milwaukee was unable to keep up with increased enrollment. By the early 1980’s “UW-Milwaukee tuition, surpassed state support and became the largest source of university funding” (p.201). “Today, UW-Milwaukee students and their families need to “rely on their incomes and savings, alongside grants and loans” for the bulk of their higher Ed costs with modest to minimal “contribution from the state” (p.202). Twenty percent of their students rely on financial aid; and regrettably, UW- Milwaukee has been viewed as the “step child within the UV system” (p.204). 

Furthermore, the drop- out rate risk in Milwaukee was very high and included those receiving Pell Grants.  Unfortunately, “three in ten students don’t return” after their first year and within four years, about “14% complete their bachelors” (p.204). With limited funding from the state, “the price of attending public higher education in Milwaukee” resulted to being the highest anywhere in the state (p.205). In 2008 students in Milwaukee faced a 19% increase in their net price than other students enrolled elsewhere. This increase resulted in a dependency of seventy-four percent of students on loans, versus 53% of students attending college outside of Milwaukee.

With regard to unemployment rates, African Americans living in Milwaukee were three times more likely than whites to remain unemployed in 2008. Compounding matters even further for students from Milwaukee; they were drastically less likely to be provided work study funds at 1%, while other students within the state had access to this form of financial aid by almost 13%. These “disparities in work-study allocations from the federal government” confirms that such funding is made available to older and more prestigious universities and colleges; while those institutions that truly need it are struggling to stay afloat by transfer the bulk of attendance to their students, who are already struggling economically.

These obstacles present serious challenges for students upon graduation. Students “who left college without a credential” in Milwaukee “were more likely to be in debt at 66% vs. 47% elsewhere” (p.217). Those who fell into this category of “dropping out” were forced to return to their impoverished communities with even further debt. For those few who were fortunate enough to have graduated, these students would have taken roughly anywhere from three to six years to have attained a credential, in turn acquiring more debt over time.

In conclusion, as beautifully explained within this literature; where one chooses to go to college significantly matters. Factors to consider when choosing a college would be on the resources available within the state, city, municipality and college as well as federal support. The more resources available from these sources, the less likely students will have to take out loans and work longer hours to try and keep up with financial obligations; while missing out on rich campus social networking opportunities. Reading this literature was deeply humbling and I truly hope that Milwaukee reclaims its crowned title from 1936 as “the best governed city in the U.S “(p.192).

[iriscalderon4747-blog]

A Brief Overview on Developmental Education

Cohen, Arthur, M., Brawer, Florence, B., Kisker, Carrie, B. (2014). The American community college. Sixth edition.

Chapter 8: Developmental Education

“Throughout the developed world, the standard of literacy required of modern society” has risen while American literacy rates have not kept up to rise in standards; primarily because the United States has not had a “uniformed system of educational evaluation” (p.236). As a result, federal legislation placed emphasize on periodically testing students to encourage schools to aid in their improvement. These concerns on literacy were not unfounded; for educators were aware of test scores of students looking to enter college. Interestingly enough, according to the College Board in 2012, there indicated a positive correlation between SAT scores with family income. Students who came from an income level greater than $100,000 attained high grades in reading, math and writing; while those students coming from income levels less than $20,000, had lesser scores on all three areas.

Emphasize on the “importance of education for the civic well-being of our nation” was addressed in 1983, by a report conducted by the National Commission on Excellence in Education called A Nation at Risk” (p.240). “This report suggested that states adopt a curriculum; known as the New Basics” (p.240). The “New Basics” curriculum was to consist of “four years of English; three years of science, math and social studies and two years of foreign language” for college bound students (p.240). This curriculum replicate how high schools were instructed in the 50’s; which focused more on academics and less on occupational classes such as typing. Despite such considerations; in 2013 a report conducted by the National Center on Education and the Economy indicated that there were “continued disconnect between demands in college-level English and Mathematics courses and high school requirements” reflected in “subject matter content and in faculty expectations of students” (p.242).

The United States has never had a uniformed standard of admission in all colleges. As universities became competitive and financial aid made readily available to them; for community colleges to coexist, admission requirements needed to be relaxed. A pool of applicants who were inclined to be less academically prepared became their student base.  Unfortunately, these underprepared students posed to be a problem in instructional planning. These concerns were warranted by the rise in remedial course instruction or developmental courses in all public two year colleges.  It’s estimated that” 40 percent of all college students and 58 percent of community college students” do require some form of medial instruction (Fulton, 2012).

When it came to developmental teaching; “students are part of the instructors’ working conditions” (p.247). If students’ academic abilities are not more alike, instruction becomes challenging; and for those students who are more capable, it also hinders on their educational attainment. By separating “developmental education staff from the rest of an academic discipline centered faculty has gained a sense of professional consciousness” but eventually, a different problem emerges where” developmental instructors are part time” (pp.247-248).

Furthermore, most states do have “regulations governing remedial instruction” (p.248). Some states mandated that remedial instruction are not to be offered in public universities; while other states have placed limits on the number of developmental courses; or have arranged to have remedial instruction be provided within community colleges. To determine student placement, the most accurate indicator would be based off high school grade-point averages combined with placement tests. As students are identified to need additional instruction, there are numerous options presented by integrated programs. For example, with changing demographics in the United States, where English is a second language to some students as well as first generation Americans who attend college, developmental courses are crucial for acculturation. For older students, they are also likely to need remedial courses because over time, they might have forgotten some mathematics and English skills. Aside from developmental courses offered; “there’s learning assistance to be included in regular college classes; learning communities; precollege bridge programs” (p.251). Special treatment when applied, along with tutoring, learning aids yield results. The practice that colleges allowed students drop in and drop out at will; have been redesigned to keep students in school to aid in improving retention and credential rates.  

While community colleges grapple with supporting students to become more academically competent; they still have to maintain legitimacy as an educational institution. Legitimacy is dependent on “its academic standards and the definition of its guiding principles” (p.255). While academic standards certify that the degree holder has met requirements for either employment or “further study at another institution”; legitimacy serves as the institutions’ reputation (p.255).

[iriscalderon4747-blog]

The Shocking reality of Homelessness in Colleges

Hallett, Ronald., E. (2010). Homeless: how residential instability complicates students’ lives. About Campus (pp.11-16) DOI: 10.1002/abc.20023

This article focuses on the residential instability experienced by “homeless students transitioning from high school to college” (p.11). These “mobile student groups” consists of: undocumented youth; foster care youth and those migrating from farms. It is highly suggested that these students need “safe places”, where individuals can freely discuss “their experiences and receive guidance navigating the barriers” that affect their engagement in furthering their education (p. 11).

The National Alliance of End Homelessness in 2006, estimated that close to 3.5 million people become homeless each year. Students from these families experience “many barriers that impede their education pursuits which include, narcotics, exposure to violence and residential mobility” (p. 12). Federal Law came up with the” McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act shapes how educational institutions define homelessness as an individual who lacks an adequate, fixed regular place to stay” (p.12).  Furthermore, to complicate things more, there are two categories for “homeless youth”; where they either live on the street on in shelters. “Street youth” tend to live in a car or an abandoned building.  There’s also “couch surfers” who sleep in the couches or the floors of different family and friends. “Currently federal legislation focuses on supporting students from kindergarten through high school” and does not provide much support of housing students at postsecondary institutions. (p.12). Where federal law lags behind; “institutions can volunteer to take steps to increase educational access for homeless and other highly mobile students” (p.13).

For decades, student advocates have worked to “increase access for underrepresented students” (p.12). Once an individual is admitted, without stable housing; the college experience becomes challenging. If students are not able to meet their basic needs, it does not seem realistic that they can pursue a degree.With the reality of homeless students coming from financially unstable families; “these students receive aid from federal, state and institutions to help offset family contributions” (p.13). Unfortunately, federal financial aid mostly finances a portion of tuition, housing and books but does not cover personal and other related educational expenses. Unlike general low-income students; homeless students face even more expenses that warrant special consideration. Additionally, these students may feel “obligated to provide support to their families” (p.13). Therefore, students in these precarious situations, are in dire need of guidance on how to best manage their “finite resources without jeopardizing their education” (p. 13). Developing programs that teach individuals to budget and provide access to obtain additional funds are crucial. Furthermore, the “nonacademic expenses” makes it difficult “to survive the social expectation of participating in campus life” (p.14).

To help address the barrier of attaining stable housing; campus housing is practical solution. Housing would become an issue during breaks. To counter this, one approach is to perhaps permit homeless students to stay in the dorms year round as it applies to international students. Another option is to “provide holistic academic advising that includes helping students create a plan for breaks to limit stress” (p. 14). Additionally, “resource centers on campus could partner with organizations that serve mobile populations” for some organizations may have “access to short-term housing options which may include, hotel vouchers or transitional housing” (p.14).

“Federal Law that protects educational access of students without residential stability; uses the term “homeless youth” (p.15).  Identifying students in need of such supports can be difficult. Firstly, most youth do not identify as “homeless” and there is a sense of shame that many experience for not having a stable residence. Also, due to the voluntary nature of registering for classes or even assisting with financial aid applications, makes offering information of available resources on campus and within the community even more challenging to provide on an individual basis. Therefore individuals working directing with students; faculty, academic advisors; counseling programs and educational resources centers would likely be the “safe haven” where intervention opportunities might occur.  

In conclusion, to help struggling “mobile students and homeless students” have chance of attaining a college credential; multi-faceted support needs to be provided to ensure a diverse student background. In doing so, eliminating the term “homeless” and use subcategories such as ”youth living in shelters or doubled up families” could contribute to greater engagement, “for youth are most likely to self-identity with these groups” more easily (p.16). Additionally, programs need to be developed to encourage such students to apply to college to help counter self-discouragement at each level of progression with the institution. Addressing the needs of this population by having contingency plans would make college a much more attainable goal.

[iriscalderon4747-blog]

How CUNY addressed student outcomes positively by implementing the ASAP initiative

Kolenovic. Zineta., Linderman. Donna., and Karp., Melinda Mechur. (2013) Improving student outcomes via comprehensive supports: three-year outcomes from CUNY’s accelerated study in associate programs (ASAP). Community College Review. 41 (4) 271-291.

Low degree completion rates and transfer rates are a pertinent issue community colleges face around the nation. One study addressing this concern, occurred  in “2007 with the Office of the Mayor’s Center for Economic Opportunity (CEO) providing funds for CUNY to develop a new approach to community college students” (p.273) The purpose of this program was to assist socially and economically disadvantaged students to quickly earn an associate degree in three years and compare them with a comparison group not participating in the program. Originally named the ASAP initiative, the program was created to overcome social and economic barriers that would hinder graduation rates. The ASAP goal was to increase graduation rates by 50% for associated degree attainment within three years for its program participants. At that time only about “13% of CUNY community college” typically earned a degree (p.273).

To qualify for ASAP in 2007, the criteria included: New York City residency; less than 12 credits attained; pursuing an associates in an approved major (based on the city’s economic need and transfer opportunities within CUNY); involvement in no other CUNY program enrollment; completion of developmental coursework (math, reading and writing) and finally having taken the CUNY Assessment Test to determine “college readiness”. By the start of Fall 2007, “28% completed developmental courses” (p.273). After CUNY test scores were received, prospective students were invited to group or individual information sessions to be informed of the ASAP program.

Once the 2007 cohort was decided upon; ASAP staff were available (funded by the program budget of the general CUNY budget) to provide an extensive “array of services and program requirements”, (P.273). The program components included: full-time study (12+ credits per semester); a consolidated schedule in blocks to free up time for other commitments; cohorts were organized by major where students shadowed other fellow ASAP students; full-time ASAP staff were hands on to provide thorough and individualized advisement as well as career development services; advising sessions to be offered twice a month and “special programs to include tutoring, weekly seminars, leadership opportunities, employment services and transfer advising” (p.273-274). Furthermore, tuition waivers are offered to ease the financial burden of any” gaps” between financial aid awards and the costs of associated between tuition and fees. Additionally, MetroCard’s were offered for transportation costs as well as textbook accessibility.

The “Conceptual Framework” used by ASAP is “based in three interrelated constructs” (p.274). They were, student’s “ability to gain and retain academic momentum, the development of college integration and belonging and access to timely and relevant support services” (p.274). With the first component of the “importance of academic momentum”, it would be demonstrated in say the number of credits completed (milestones). Next is “Integration and Belonging” where building strong relationships with peers, advisors and faculty are likely to encourage support navigating through college and provide validation. The final component is “the need for timely and relevant support services”, which addresses student services to proactively address potential problems encountered that would threat successful completion. This would involve “supplemental programs such as career workshops” (p.277).

The description of ASAP students indicated that “students were more likely to be female than male (54% vs. 46%)” (p.281). The majority of ASAP students were “Hispanic at 37% or black at 32%” and the average age of ASAP students was 20 years (p.281).The majority of students enlisted were first time freshmen and about 25% were transfer students. “58% were Pell Grant recipients with a median income of $38,725, furthermore students needed to maintain a “C” average” (p.281).

Findings indicated that, ASAP participation did “positively influence a wide array of academic outcomes to include retention and credit accrual” (p.285). The ASAP initiative demonstrated that students enrolled were significantly more likely to attain degrees as opposed to the comparison group. After the three years, this study indicated 55% of ASAP students did earn a degree as compared to 26% of the comparison group.

Notable limitations in this study included a 2007 cohort that did not begin the program with remedial instruction (students received remedial instruction prior to program start). Therefore, these students were not completely representative to the” typical” community college student population. Also, this study can’t positively confirm whether successful completion was really due to the ASAP initiative or if it was really attributive to preexisting student characteristics. None the less, this study strongly suggests that by providing students with individualized support and “guidance, over a course of multiple semesters can increase student’s chances of obtaining a college credential” (p.288).

[iriscalderon4747-blog]

Overcoming challenges non-traditional Students (older students) face when compared with traditional students in credential attainment within Community Colleges Settings By: Iris Calderon

Calcagno, Juan Carlos., Crosta, Peter., Bailey Thomas., and Jenkins, Davis. (2007). Does Age of Entrance Affect Community College Completion Probabilities? Evidence from a Discrete-time Hazard Model. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. Vol. 29. No. 3, pp. 218-235.

This study tests the hypothesis that non-traditional students (aged 25-64) are less likely than traditional students to obtain degrees; but when math scores are factored in, this hypothesis is reversed. It’s possible that since older students have been able retain basic math skills even though they have been away from school.

Calcagno, Juan Carlos., Crosta, Peter., Bailey, Thomas., and Davis Jenkins. (2007). STEPPING STONES TO A DEGREE: THE IMPACT OF ENROLLMENT PATHWAYS AND MILESTONES ON COMMUNITY COLLEGE STUDENT OUTCOMES. Research in Higher Education, Vol.48, No. 7. DOI: 10.1007/s11162-007-9053-8.

Study demonstrates that traditional students and nontraditional students respond differently in relation to reaching credit miles and in remedial instruction. Younger students see remedial courses unfavorably which affects degree attainment while older students are less negatively affected. In retrospect, younger students see “milestones” such as completion of 50% of degree required courses more favorably than older students.

Choy, Susan. (2002). Nontraditional undergraduates: Findings from: The Condition of Education. http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2002/2002012.pdf.

This article makes mention of characteristics that are distinguishable to “nontraditional” students and that 73% of students are in some way “nontraditional”. Factors considered are: delays in enrollment; full time work; part-time status within an academic year; dependents; single parent status and not attaining H.S. diploma or GED. Two-thirds of nontraditional students consider themselves employees first and foremost to some degree, while “traditional” students consider themselves to be primarily students.

Crawford- Sorey., Kellie., and Harris-Duggan., Molly. (2008). Differential predictors of persistence between community college adult and traditional-aged students. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 32:2, 75-100, DOIU: 10. 1080/10668920701380967.

This research study indicated that for traditional students, encouragement and support is the strongest predictor in completing a college degree while for adult students it’s also important but to a lesser extent. Within one population, students enrolled in technical and occupational programs are more likely to persist as opposed to students enrolled in transfer degree programs.    

Dill, Patricia. L., and Henley, Tracy B.(1998) Stressors of college: a comparison of traditional and nontraditional Students. The Journal of Psychology, 132:1, 25-32, DOI: 10.1080/002239898809599261.

This article illustrates the difference between traditional and nontraditional students (aged 24-54 years). Nontraditional students reported more negatively of bad teachers or classes but were also saw attending classes and doing homework to be more desirable with greater enthusiasm than traditional students. However, traditional students demonstrated getter classroom attendance and worried more about school grades more often. (Life/ work balance comes to into play here for the non-traditional student).

Donaldson,. Joe F. and Graham,. Steve. (1999). A model of college outcomes for adults. Adult Education Quarterly, Vol. 50. No. 1, pp 24-40.

Adults report that while enrolled in school, work is still the highest priority and then it’s personal and family time, so with multiple priorities and time constraints, the ability to devote to time on campus and their peers will be limited. To compensate, adult students use their life experience and knowledge in their class discussion activities.

Kasworm, Carol E., and Pike., Gary R. (1994). ADULT UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS: EVALUATING THE APPROPRIATENESS OF A TRADITIONAL MODEL OF ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE. Research in Higher Education, Vol. 35, No. 6 pp. 689-710.

This paper acknowledges the “problematic picture” of nontraditional students having to thrive in a model best suited for “traditional” students. Adult students bring an enriched infusion of varied work, family and life experience. Factors that are commonly used to predict success of traditional students would need to be modified to accommodate such changes to better factor in concerns of adult students.

Kasworm,. Karen E. (2003). Setting the stage: adults in higher education. New Directions for Student Services, No. 102. pp.3-10.

This article provides an overview of “nontraditional students” and their relationship within the “traditional youth environments” and their challenges within higher ed. Understanding their motives, perceptions, capacities and goals within higher education and “implications for student Services”.

Metzner., Barbara. S., and Bean., John P. (1987). The estimation of a conceptual model of nontraditional undergraduate student attrition. Research in Higher Education. Vol. 27, No. 1. pp. 15-38.

This article examines variables for a model focusing on nontraditional (commuter, part-time) data where dropout rates were either due to GPA, program degree utility for employment, age affecting drop out and in satisfaction in student support.

Spanard,. Jan-Marie.A. (1990). Beyond intent: reentering college to complete the degree. Review of Educational Research, Vol. 60, No. 3, pp. 309-344.

Here’s a descriptive model that demonstrates various pathways where adult students encounter difficulty and where decisions are likely to be altered with regard to reentry, retention and degree attainment. It also informs how the pathways can be addressed by institutions to proactively intervene.

[iriscalderon4747-blog]

Addressing Community College Credential Rates

What obstacles affect credential attainment among community college students and what solutions can be of remedy? Community Colleges have large numbers of students who do not continue for longer than a semester; fall short of program completion or do not attain a credential. These challenges stem from three levels of influence to include: the macro-level, institutional practice and social, academic and economic factors that students bring with them upon enrollment. I will provide a brief example of each component to grasp their significance of being barriers in student retention and success. Upon initial enrollment, each student might report multiple reasons of enrollment, whether it's for practical considerations or for personal enrichment which were at 42% and 46% respectively. When there were no single reason for attending, roughly 1/3 of students reported thier intention was to ultimately attend a 4 year college. After enrollment, progression through community colleges are slow and regardless of intitial intentions to complete, dropouts are high. In 2003 after 3 years, 16% of first time community college students attained a certificate or associate degree and from this cohort, 40% were still enrolled. When completion date was increased from 3 to 6 years, for example in 1995, 36% of students did attain a credential, while another 17.5% were still enrolled. Increased number of years allotted for a student to complete, tended to have a positive affect on graduation rates. In addressing institutional practices, one component that had very limited literature was in the area of faculty and their role on student success. There is mention of part time faculty being paid substantially less and the lack of institutions available to provide professional development opportunities. Another obstacle was in the lack of available faculty in key fields such as in the areas of Nursing, Allied Health, Engineering and Mathematics since potential faculty tend to be highly compensated elsewhere. Lastly, the final level that needs to be addressed is social, academic and economic that can also play a role in hindering student success. An example is with regard to first generation students, who tend to be not well informed of the financial aid options available to them. They don't have an immediate family member they could go to who can give advise, and as a result they tend to be less likely to apply for grants and loans by the application deadline. Unfortunately, families differentiated by social class will receive different quality of college financing options. In conclusion, as briefly indicated above, all three level of influence can have detrimental effects on student retention and rates of success. Addressing one component will not be sufficient, for they are all interrelated. Reform is needed at multiple levels which can not be attained by solely focusing on the student or institution alone.

[iriscalderon4747-blog]

The Community College

Community Colleges have been defined by the institutions on opposite sides of their curricular offerings, to be an extension of high school, or the first two years of university. This phenomenon is known as vertical expansion. I’ve learned to appreciate the overwhelming burden that Community Colleges undertake with being a little bit of everything for everyone, whether their curricular functions as depicted in each state’s legislation, would include: academic transfer preparation, continuing education, developments education, occupational education and community service.

In the area of Academic transfer preparation, community colleges relieved universities from having to support freshmen and sophomores that were less pronounced. With continuing education, community colleges operated with the intent of offering lifelong learning. In developmental education, which is also viewed as remedial, preparatory, or basic skills studies and their roles were to assist individuals who were poorly prepared in secondary schools. Lastly, with community service function, it included short courses, workshops and courses that were noncredit which are open to both students and the general public. In performing all these tasks, these institutions have experienced criticism with not doing enough in one form or another in these curricula areas; but in actuality a closer look needs to be placed on the nature of courses and students.

In looking at the student demographics of those who attend community colleges; what differentiates these students from those who attend four- year universities are the constrains of part-time or full-time jobs, child-caring responsibilities, family commitments, commuting long distances and other obligations. These issues are often the primary reasons why community college student tend to not complete their degree. Colleges have initiated programs (i.e. Childcare services) to assist students with various services but it’s still a challenge to provide both education and support services that can accommodate the hectic lives of these students.

A closer look at gender comparisons indicated that in 2010, women lead in attendance at 57%. Additionally, gender-differentiated fields emerged that were revealed by associated degrees awarded.  Women earned the majority of their degrees in the areas of: education, health professions and business. Men, on the other hand, earned the majority of their degrees in: mechanic and repair technologies, engineering technology, computer and information science and physical sciences.  Many community colleges are focusing on increasing enrollment for males while also aiming to increase female participation in the areas of science, technology, engineering and math (STEM).

Diligent recruitment of racial and ethnic minorities by community colleges has yielded a sizable increase from this segment of the population who did not previously attend college. The ethnic composition of students, are more reflected in community colleges as opposed to universities because of the institutions locale. Had it not been for community colleges, a notable percentage of these students would not have otherwise have attended college, so it ultimately comes down to the option of attending a community college or nothing at all.

The overarching question is whether community colleges are working to serve all students, regardless of backgrounds, goals, academic level of preparedness, family commitments and ability to pay to name a few of the issues to contend with. Passing students to enter universities for their baccalaureate is not the exclusive function of community colleges. In practicing the following goals of students enrollment in college; enrollment in transfer credits; obtaining an associate degree; admittance to a high-level technical program; graduating from high level programs and transferring to a university where to find and attain a level of equivalence is highly improbable.

Classifying students into special groups were inspired by political interests rather than educational ones. The value of classifications from student’s life conditions become of upmost importance rather than placing students in categories based on their age. Especially since there is no age limit where one has to be a student like it’s practiced in high school. Figuring out the reasons as to why students attend college is not easy to unravel. Students attend community colleges for a multitude of reasons and some might have multiple purposes for attending. The popular belief that sets community college students from those in four year institutions is that they are interested in the practical; meaning in the ability of earning more money as opposed to being interested in academic studies. On the contrary, community college students in general tend to be less academically prepared; may have lesser aspirations and are from lower social economic status.

On the flipside, measuring students’ abilities has not been such an easy task, for a student can be knowledgeable in one area and be deficient in another. Testing and program placement were practiced because of legislators who were highly concerned due to the high dropout rates. I see student assessments as a benefit on the students’ behalf, for if remedial courses are needed it’s best that those are taken first as opposed to allowing a student to take a course their ill equipped for and failing, losing out on their investment of time and money.