Search News


Browse Archives

News

'Defending the Community College Equity Agenda'

December 19, 2006

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

Community colleges enroll almost half of undergraduates and large shares of the minority and low-income students in higher education today. Yet these institutions frequently struggle to receive public attention -- and funds. A new collection of essays -- Defending the Community College Equity Agenda -- has just been published by Johns Hopkins University Press. The collection was edited by Thomas Bailey, director of the Community College Research Center, at Teachers College, Columbia University, and Vanessa Smith Morest, assistant director of the center. Bailey responded to questions about the themes of the book.

Q: How would you define "the equity agenda?"

A: As we define it in our book, the “equity agenda” in higher education is made up of three components: equity in college preparation, access to college, and success in satisfying college goals. All institutions -- whether two-year or four-year, private or public -- face challenges in achieving the equity agenda. But community colleges are particularly important, because they play such a large role in educating students who are low income, minorities, or academically unprepared for the rigors of college. The “open-door” mission of community colleges (they accept many applicants who are not academically prepared to tackle college-level coursework) has leveled the playing field for countless students by giving them a fair shot at higher education no matter where they attended high school or whether or not they come from families with educational and financial resources that facilitate access to college and success once there. Our book examines how well the community colleges are fulfilling their “open door” mission and what can be done to help them succeed when economic, political, and social challenges -- such as limited funding and soaring enrollments -- have made doing so increasingly difficult.

Q: Much of the public debate about minority students focuses on admission to a few elite colleges -- what is the community college role in promoting the education of minority students?

A: Minority, especially Hispanic, low-income, first generation, and immigrant students are all concentrated in community colleges. In 2005, there were about 7,000 black and Hispanic students enrolled at Bronx Community College alone, while there were fewer than 7,500 matriculated in all of the Ivy League. Furthermore, the typical BCC students came from lower income families than minority students at Harvard and Columbia. At a time when other institutions, such as the elite colleges you mention, are working to diversify their student bodies, community colleges are launching millions of minority students on their first steps of a college education and providing a second chance at college for minority and immigrant adults seeking to better their lives.

This isn’t to say, however, that they always succeed in fulfilling that goal. Research reported in this book has shown that black, Hispanic and low-income community college students are less likely to complete degrees or transfer to four-year colleges than their upper-income and white counterparts. Like many who attend community colleges, minority students often begin with the goal of earning a college degree, but they frequently leave college without achieving that goal. Eight years after initial enrollment, only 20 percent of black community college students complete a degree or certificate at any institution.

Community colleges can be proud of their efforts to provide access to college for many students, but more progress needs to be made in improving outcomes for students once they get to college. This will be no easy feat. Most colleges are funded and judged on the basis of enrollments rather than on the educational and employment success of their students. A seismic shift is needed to change the focus from enrollment -- as it has traditionally been -- to student achievement.

Q: How are changes in state priorities and funding patterns affecting community colleges?

A: Cuts in funding to community colleges pose a severe threat to the equity mission of these institutions. It is ironic that community colleges enroll the hardest to serve students -- students attending part time and those who are low-income and often academically under-prepared -- but receive less funding per student than four-year institutions.

Moreover, in the last decade or so, we have seen the budgets for community colleges in many states stagnate or shrink. This has been caused by a number of factors, most notably the recession of the early 2000s, when state higher education budgets were hit hard. The impact on community colleges was greatest, however, because they are more dependent on state revenues than four-year public colleges. Though some community colleges have benefited in the last couple of years as their state economies have grown stronger, a debate over the public’s role in offering higher education has also taken place. This has led to a shift in funding to medical care, pensions, prisons, and other services to the detriment of community colleges.  Despite the cyclical ups and downs of funding, the long-term trend has been a shrinking share of state funding going to community colleges.

This has caused an increase in tuition rates for students, the effect of which has been exacerbated by a shift away from needs-based financial aid. But the shrinking revenue per student has also made it difficult for colleges to maintain the teaching and services necessary for their growing and increasingly diverse student bodies. Simply put, for too long community colleges have been trying to do too much with too little. While colleges can always do more with the resources they have, and our book contains many recommendations to help them do that, these institutions do need more resources so that they can help disadvantaged students get the help they need to succeed in college. We’re hoping this is something that our newly-elected officials nationwide will take on as part of their legislative agendas in the new year.

Q: What is the impact of for-profit higher education on community colleges generally and specifically their role serving disadvantaged students?

A: Our book looked at the impact of the growth of for-profit higher education on community colleges. For-profit institutions account for a very small share of the two-year sector, although the number of associates degrees and certificates conferred by for-profit colleges is growing, especially in occupational fields. Based on current systems for funding and regulating colleges, there is little evidence that for-profit institutions are threatening the enrollments of community colleges.

The for-profits do tend to enroll a slightly higher percentage of minority students than do public community colleges. And while there is tremendous variability in the quality of the for-profits, there are higher quality institutions among them. Some of these colleges have coordinated and well-organized student services and strong ties to local businesses. These policies make sense for both the for-profits and public community colleges.

Q: Are there states or college districts you would point to as models for successfully defending the equity priorities in these challenging economic times?

A: No single college has found the magic formula for achieving the equity agenda, but one broad conclusion that emerged clearly from our research was that if colleges are going to shift from a focus on enrollments to one on student success, then colleges must have a better sense of where and why students have trouble, and what policies and practices are most effective. In most cases, colleges do not have the institutional research capacity to allow them to use their own data to develop a full understanding of what happens to their students. As colleges work to develop this capacity, state community college offices can provide tremendous help by maintaining and using comprehensive student record databases.

Of the states in our study, Florida and Washington are particularly committed to the use of statewide data to track the progress of students. Florida is a national leader in its ability to track students from high school into college and throughout the public higher education system. The state office provides extensive feedback to the individual colleges. Washington State has also done important research tracking students into the labor market. Both states are well above average on measures of student completion.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on 'Defending the Community College Equity Agenda'

  • Florida's useless tracking information
  • Posted by Glen McGhee at FHEAP on December 19, 2006 at 9:10am EST
  • It may be that "Florida is a national leader in its ability to track students from high school into college and throughout the public higher education system," but this hasn't helped policy makers figure out how to produce more 4 year college graduates, their apparent goal.
    Maybe, just maybe, it has something to do with the high school dropout rate, which, as has been widely reported, has recently ticked upwards.
    Even after priming the high school system with Dual Enrollment, AP and IB classes, the state is left watching the end of the pipe, wondering what to do next.
    The other big weakness, of course, is the lack of longitudinal studies to track what happens to the grads once they leave school. The new A-Plus-Plus legislation, however, makes an important exception to this by requiring drop-out "Exit interviews." But good luck catching up with those that drop-out of the system!

  • Posted by Annie on December 19, 2006 at 10:45am EST
  • These are critically important questions to be asking, and these authors seem to represent a viewpoint often lacking in research on community colleges: They understand the role played by community colleges in America's higher-education system but are not afraid to ask tough questions about outcomes. After 20 years in community-college education, I have come to appreciate the real dilemma for this sector, and that is that no one can identify what causes that particular 20 percent of students to achieve success when the other 80 percent don't. Unlike the fact that high-school grades and SAT scores can relatively reliably predict the success of baccalaureate-going students, we have little insight into the personal and psychological characteristics that will result in one student rather than another completing a community-college degree. Yes, academic support programs and other factors can make a difference on the margin, but the fact that these researchers say they found no magic programs or policies out there may simply be what inevitably happens when you take the risk of offering educational opportunity for disadvantaged populations. In my opinion, transforming the lives of that 20 percent is worth the public investment--but let's shoot for 50!

  • getting squeezed
  • Posted by bradley bleck , instructor at Spokane Falls CC on December 19, 2006 at 6:25pm EST
  • As the article notes, the colleges (schools in general) that have the toughest job receive the least funding per student. Clearly most CC students need more of just about everything than does a student at either a state school or an elite institution, state or otherwise, but the funding doesn't follow. It's certainly not each according to his/her needs when it comes to higher ed, but more along the lines of each according to how well their parents have done. Such is life in America.

    Under the guise of making college more accessible, our governor has proposed freezing tuition and fees at Washington's Community and Technical Colleges for the next two years and limiting increases after that. Never mind that they are already limited to some degree, this will squeeze the institutions already hardest hit. CC's in Washington get to keep what are called "excess" tuition dollars, meaning that when they over-enroll beyond the budgeted Full-Time Equivalent (FTE), the colleges get to keep a good chuck of those dollars even though state funding doesn't come for those students. These "excess" funds have become crucial to probably every CC in the state, and now they seem to be becoming more and more of each college's core funding model.

    If increased state support were coming with the limits placed on tuition, I'd be all in favor, but quality will suffer when demands on the CC's increase and funding stagnates or, more likely, declines, if only because we will have to divert more and more money to heat buildings and the like. Couple this with more students and a strained system is going to take another step towards the breaking point, all under a phonied-up guise of enhancing access. Someone, somewhere, has to pay.

  • higher education researchers
  • Posted by PS on December 20, 2006 at 11:00am EST
  • I like the idea of this book. While higher education researchers like Hurtado and Edley spend most of their time on affirmative action research at very selective universities, which only impacts a few hundred or thousand minority students, the plight of minority students at community colleges, which impacts hundreds of thousands of minority students, is virtually ignored. This topics explored in this book are timely, useful, and - unfortunately - rare.

  • Additional---and critical---data points.
  • Posted by Cliff Adelman , Senior Associate at Institute for Higher Education Policy on December 21, 2006 at 4:40am EST
  • Tom & Co. are on track, as usual, with some thoughtful work. But to add the universe of navigation points, here are few more items and guidances from the national data:

    1) In analyzing community college populations, always, always divide by age at point of entry. Your daughter and your brother-in-law live on different planets with different life trajectories. While the proportion of traditional-age students at community colleges has increased from 32 percent in 1990 to 42 percent today, that's half the proportion of traditional-age kids at 4-year colleges. Older beginning students do not complete degrees or transfer at a rate anywhere near that of traditional-age students, and to lump the two populations in the same bin is to distort analysis, and prevents you from seeing what's really going in the histories of those students.
    2) Of traditional-age African-American students who enter higher education, a higher percentage start at highly selective institutions (5%) than the parallel population of white students (3%). Of traditional-age students, African-Americans are no more likely to start out at community colleges than white students (for both groups, it's been around 40% for the past 30 years--and the reason is transparent, the draw of the HBCUs for African-Americans). Latinos are another story: over half of the traditional-age Latinos who enter higher education start in community colleges, and that's been true for 30 years, too.
    3) Among older beginning students (defined at 24 and up---i.e. from the point of "independence" under financial aid regulations), you will find a higher proportion of white students than minorities.
    4) When you ask not "who starts at a community college?" but "who attends a community college at some time?" the answers are well over 50%, with no differences by race/ethnicity.
    5) However, no matter how you cut the data, community colleges disproportionately serve lower income/SES populations, and are given probably 80 percent of the remediation job.
    They do it better than the 4-year schools. The more people we urge into the system under current trajectories, the greater the pressure on community colleges to handle the remedial groups, which means---as Baily & Co. point out---more creative interactions and interventions in feeder high schools.

    P.S. All the data above come from both the NELS:88/2000 longitudinal study and the Beginning Postsecondary Students longitudinal study of 1995/96-2001.

  • On Institutional Research
  • Posted by Chris Efthimiou , Director of Institutional Research at Bronx Community College on December 21, 2006 at 2:15pm EST
  • While aggregated student information from database systems is critical to understanding an issue or population at a college, whether it be cross-sectional (point in time) or longitudinal (over time), it does not go very far figuring out the strengths and weaknesses of specific classroom or programmatic interventions that aim to help make college diplomas a reality to more students. Granted that shooting for a 90% graduation rate is unrealistic in the current context but more attention needs to be focused on gathering, analyzing and reporting information on local practices that contribute (and don't contribute) to student success. This information is not only derived from database systems but also from local observations, interviews and surveys.