News, Views and Careers for All of Higher Education
Oct. 30, 2006
Remedial education at community colleges frequently must serve both students fresh from high school and those who have been out of the classroom for years, if not decades. But do older and younger students respond differently to remediation? And should two-year institutions think about the groups differently when considering their needs? Yes and yes, according to a new report from the Community College Research Center at Teachers College at Columbia University.
The study, “Stepping Stones to a Degree: The Impact of Enrollment Pathways and Milestones on Older Community College Student Outcomes, is slated to be released in the November 2007 edition of Research in Higher Education. It shows that older students who enrolled in remedial courses – particularly in mathematics – were “less negatively” affected in terms of time to program completion than were younger students who also took the courses.
Specifically, younger students who took remedial courses were 42 percent less likely to graduate than their peers who weren’t in the stepping-stone classes. Older students needing remediation decreased their odds of graduation in a particular term by 23 percent. A key factor in both cases is that remedial classes rarely count toward a student’s graduation.
The study also found that, after controlling for factors such as test scores and enrollment patters, older students were more likely to graduate in a given period and less likely to be motivated by credit milestones — such as passing an introductory class — than their younger counterparts.
In short, the report suggests that traditional students who take remedial courses at a two-year college are likely to need more motivation than adult students, who tend to see remediation as a brush up.
“Older students are more dogged,” said Davis Jenkins, a senior research associate at CCRC. “Younger students are not always as determined, and the negative experience of taking remediation hurts them worse.”
Or, as the report says: “It is likely that older students, having been out of school longer, were more likely to need some remediation (but not a lot) because their basic skills were merely ‘rusty’ rather than grossly deficient.”
The researchers based their report on data from about 30,000 traditional students and 5,700 older students who were first-time, degree-seeking community college students enrolled any time between fall 1998 and spring 2004.
Researchers found that about 60 percent of students were taking remedial classes, and that those students were, as a whole, less likely to graduate in a given term than their counterparts who did not need remediation.
For students enrolled in remedial writing, passing a standard, first-year composition course more than doubled their odds of graduation – with little difference between age groups. But among students who passed a basic college algebra course, the odds of graduation were much higher for younger students than their adult classmates — suggesting that for the students right out of high school, gaining confidence in their academic abilities early on is vital.
All this is fodder for those who believe age of students in remedial courses is a key determinate of their classroom needs.
“This suggests that community colleges target different support services for different groups,” Jenkins said. “Most community colleges base class placement on test scores and lump all students into a semester-long course. Maybe it makes sense for them to offer a short, brush-up seminar for adults, and to put more energy into counseling programs for the younger student who isn’t engaged.”
The report says that attention should be paid to traditional students to help pass “gatekeeper” courses, which substantially increase the chance that they will go on to graduate. These students would benefit from orientation to college life courses and intensive advising, according to the study.
For adult learners, researchers say shorter courses with flexible schedules might be more appropriate, particularly given the likelihood that the students are juggling a career and a family.
Kent Phillippe, a senior research associate at the American Association of Community Colleges, said that he agrees that a more nuanced look at remediation is needed.
“It’s important to look at students’ trajectories and their needs,” he said. “Earning credits early in their first year is important for traditional-age students.”
Want it on paper? Print this page.
Know someone who’d be interested? Forward this story.
Want to stay informed? Sign up for free daily news e-mail.
Advertisement
Upon rereading the article, I find the conclusions even more absurd.
I read the article as discussing the effects of taking remedial courses on students’ prospects of graduation. But actually, as reported, the study considers students’ prospects of graduation in a given time frame. Obviously, all other things being equal, having to take a non-credit remedial course will tend to push a student’s graduation back compared to other students who will be taking a for-credit course at the same time.
math prof, at 1:15 pm EST on October 30, 2006
math prof, I see it a bit differently.
Older students may enter community colleges needing a “brush-up” in one or two academic areas; but they already have the life and study skills needed for college success, because they have been able to stay afloat in the work world.
Younger ("traditional-age")students in need of remediation, on the other hand, have not learned how to study nor how to work toward a goal. They haven’t mastered subject areas because they do not know how. In some cases, they may not be motivated. In others, they have learned ways of coping with school that interfere with their success. In the most tragic cases, they may actually have been taught ways of studying that lead to failure at the college level.
They need retraining at a deeper and more intensive level than adult students may require. They need a reorientation in their whole approach to learning.
English prof, at 2:01 pm EST on October 30, 2006
math prof, I see it a bit differently.
Older students may enter community colleges needing a “brush-up” in one or two academic areas; but they already have the life and study skills needed for college success, because they have been able to stay afloat in the work world.
Younger ("traditional-age") students are in need of remediation, on the other hand, often because have not learned how to study nor how to work toward a goal. They haven’t mastered subject areas because they do not know how to achieve academic mastery. In some cases, they may not be motivated to do so. Others have learned ways of coping with school that interfere with academic success. In the most tragic cases, students may actually have been taught ways to study that lead to failure at the college level.
Such students need retraining at a deeper and more intensive level than adult students may require. They need to reorient their whole approach to learning.
English prof, at 2:01 pm EST on October 30, 2006
My disagreement with the article was its absurd conclusion that the effect of taking remedial math (or other) courses is to negatively impact student’s graduation rates.
I completely agree with you that “traditional” students in community colleges who need to take remedial courses enter with fundamental problems, and it is these problems that often prevent them from succeeding.
math prof, at 4:25 pm EST on October 30, 2006
Math Prof is correct. It is a waste of time comparing the completion time of students who take remidial courses to those who do not. These courses always put a student back by at least a semester. Once they finish the coursework, however, they are more prepared for the higher level material than the so called traditional students. This study is flawed in its apporach to evaluating the community college courses.
Instead of focusing on completion time and student attitudes, why not conduct studies on how to improve the way these courses are taught. It was mentioned in the article that offering a more flexible time schedule might improve student success. Redesigning the way the courses are taught would also work. I have taught and tutored many developmental math courses. One class I tutored treated the students (both adult returnees and recent high school grads)like they were children. It was supposed to be a “hand-on” learning lab, but instead it just instilled more frustration and resentment in the students. Professors need to learn informal educational techniques which will appeal to students of all ages. Once courses are designed to engage students, they will not resent being in a remedial class. They will learn the material, and graduate when they are finished.
Math Muse, Academic Tutor at Northern VA Community College, at 7:11 am EST on November 2, 2006
I have many disagreements with the article, but the most substantial is the assumption that all non-traditional students need only “brush up” and that a short review seminar is sufficient. I have not found that to be generally true AT ALL.
Many of my non-traditional students graduated from high school at a time when no algebra was required for a high school diploma. Many of these students have never been exposed to algebra ever in their lives. Not only do they need a full semester of remediation, but they may need a FEW semesters of it before they can survive a college-level math class.
Non-traditional students do come with a generally more serious attitude. Most of them see the value of the degree they want in real-world terms since they’ve been surviving without a degree and know the difficulties of that.
I don’t know that any amount of counseling or motivating can give the traditional students that kind of insight or work ethic. It is quite possibly one of those things that only experience can teach.
Math Goddess, at 4:01 pm EST on November 2, 2006
What this study does not address is what happens if students do not take remedial courses. What would the graduation/success rates be if the students did not get help at all?
Jim Lambrinos, Reading Instructor at El Paso Community College, at 3:55 pm EST on November 8, 2006
Advertisement
or search for jobs directly.
The University of Minnesota is a premier employer and a talent magnet attracting leading faculty and staff from around the ... see job
Hofstra University seeks a Dean of University Advisement to provide leadership, vision and oversight of the Center for ... see job
Nursing Clinical Instructors Part-time, Day (D) & Evening/Weekend (E/W) Howard Community College is seeking nursing clinical ... see job
Angelo State University is an equal opportunity employer and seeks to build a diverse workforce community. see job
UNC Kenan-Flagler Business School is seeking to fill one or more tenure track, tenured, or fixed term faculty positions in ... see job
Hillsborough Community College is a public, comprehensive multi-campus, state-supported community college located in the ... see job
The Department of Management invites applications for a full-time position in the area of Strategic Management and/ or ... see job
Undergraduate Program Manager, Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies — University of Notre Dame. see job
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, IRVINE. The Department of Logic and Philosophy of Science invites applications for a tenured ... see job
Angelo State University is an equal opportunity employer and seeks to build a diverse workforce community. see job
“Less Negatively” Affected???
The interpretation put on this data is absurd.
According to this report, the data shows that students who take remedial math courses are less likely to graduate from community colleges than those who don’t. But it is ridiculous to conclude from this data that taking remedial math courses negatively affects students’ graduation prospects. Surely the conclusion to be drawn is that poorly prepared students, who require remediation in mathematics, are less likely to graduate than better prepared students.
And as for finding a difference between two groups of students: (1) those who continue on from high school, and (2) those who return after many years, there is a simple explanation. Consider a student in a remedial math course. There are two reasons a student might be in such a course: (a) The student didn’t learn the material in high school in the first place, or (b) the student originally learned the material but forgot it in the interim. Obviously students in category (b) are better prepared and hence more likely to graduate than students in category (a), and obviously the proportion of these students is much higher in group (2) than it is in group (1).
math prof, at 11:21 am EST on October 30, 2006