Advertisement

News, Views and Careers for All of Higher Education

Aug. 13, 2007

Why Differences in Community Colleges Matter

A new Education Department analysis of two-year colleges confirms widely held beliefs about them, such as that they enroll many low-income, part-time students and that their student bodies are diverse. But the analysis — by examining different groups of two-year colleges (including those in the for-profit sector) — also finds that there are significant differences within the two-year sector, and that these differences result in different demographics, faculty characteristics, enrollment goals and graduation rates.

Looking for a job?
See all new postings
Browse all job listings:
Faculty: 3,481
Administrative: 1,574
Executive: 156
FEATURED EMPLOYERS
Post a job

Related stories

The analysis arrives at a time of increased interest among some educators, foundation and government officials in using more subtlety and sophistication in looking at community colleges, which have too frequently in the past been assumed to all be similar and to be defined by a single characteristic of not awarding bachelor’s degrees. That plenty of community colleges these days do award such degrees (while others say they never will) is but one example of how the assumption that community colleges are all alike is somewhat like assuming Ohio State University and Oberlin College are similar because they both award bachelor’s degrees and are in the same state.

One sign of the increased interest in classifying community colleges is that last year’s Carnegie Classifications included for the first time subcategories for community colleges, based largely on location (rural, suburban, urban) and size. That system is based largely on the work of Stephen G. Katsinas, director of the Education Policy Center at the University of Alabama at Tuscaloosa, and David E. Hardy, director of research at the center.

The Education Department’s report is based (with different category names) on a 2001 classification that divided two-year institutions into seven categories:

  • Small public institutions (student headcount under 2,000).
  • Medium-sized public institutions (headcount of 2,000-9,999).
  • Large public institutions (headcount of at least 10,000).
  • Non-profit allied health institutions.
  • Other nonprofit institutions.
  • For-profit degree granting institutions.
  • Other for-profit institutions

In some of the areas examined by the Education Department, comparable data were not available for all categories. But where available, the data point to differentiating characteristics among the different two-year sectors.

In terms of faculty members, across two-year sectors, more find themselves categorized as “instructor” as in any other classification. At degree-granting, for-profit institutions, 81.3 percent of faculty members are instructors. Percentages are smaller in the nonprofit sector, from 34.4 percent at medium-sized community colleges to 53.7 percent at small institutions. Full professors are relatively rare in the two-year sector, with the largest concentration at large publics, 13.6 percent of the faculty. Only 1.7 percent of faculty members at nonprofit allied health institutions have that rank. (Many community colleges, as the report notes, do not use academic ranks.)

Salary data included in the report are a bit out of date, coming from the 2002-3 academic year. But they suggest that where one teaches has a big impact on what one takes home. The best average full-time faculty salary, across rank, was at large publics (which are also more likely than other sectors to be urban): $57,198. By comparison, the average for small publics (frequently in rural areas) was $39,059 and the average for degree-granting for-profit colleges was $29,340.

In numerous ways, student characteristics for different groups of community colleges suggest that many more traditional college students — those enrolling shortly after high school, full time — are at smaller two-year institutions. More than half of new students, for instance, at small publics are full-time students enrolled for the first time in a program for which they are seeking a college degree or certificate. At large publics, that percentage is only 29.1 percent.

Students at small publics are also more likely than those at large publics to be under the age of 20 (31.1 percent vs. 19.5 percent), white (82.9 percent vs. 56.4 percent), enrolled full time (45.7 percent vs. 27.0 percent) and financially dependent on their parents (45.1 percent vs. 39.6 percent). Medium-sized institutions are generally in the middle. Women are in the majority across the two-year categories.

Not surprisingly, given the extensive research that students who are better off financially and have fewer outside obligations may be more likely to graduate in a timely fashion, there are also notable differences in students’ graduation goals and attainment. Coming into college, the 1996 cohort was much more likely to aspire to earning a bachelor’s degree or higher if they enrolled at a large public institution. But success rates show a different picture.

While 85.6 percent of 1996 students at large publics aspired to earn a bachelor’s degree or higher, only 33.8 percent had earned a certificate or two-year or four-year degree by 2001. Another 19 percent were still enrolled. At small publics, there was a lesser level of initial expectation of earning a bachelor’s degree or higher (only 56.3 percent). But by 2001, 45 percent had earned a certificate or degree and another 13.7 percent were still enrolled.

Degree-granting for-profit higher education performed better still, according to the Education Department data. During the same time period, 54.2 percent had earned a degree or certificate.

— Scott Jaschik

Got something to say?


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

Comments

Thinking Aloud

I am trying to determine why for-profit colleges have a higher grad rate than Community Colleges or other two-year programs. It comes to mind that many degree granting for-profits, especially in the career school sector, do not allow students to pay for school on a class-by-class basis. When a student enrolls, he/she must buy the whole package, and often, this package is much more expensive than a degree at a Community College. Therefore, the stakes are a bit higher for this population. They MUST finish, or they owe on loans for classes that neither grant them a degree nor transfer.

The push for student retention also seems greater in the for-profit sector, which can be a good thing or a bad thing. While many student services departments are honestly concerned with the welfare of their students, other disreputable administrators are concerned only with the numbers: graduate them out, no matter what.

Finally, the view of “students as customers” can be a double edged sword. Instructors can be motivated to provide the best services for the money, but they can also be incited to give into ridiculous whims to avoid academic disputes and/or can be fired for poor student evaluations. Low salaries and high pressures like these can create constant turnover.

So while the numbers look good in the for-profit sector, we need to take a closer look at what is being done to achieve those numbers. Which schools are helping students, and which are hurting them?

kgotthardt, at 10:15 am EDT on August 13, 2007

Community college interest — Finally!

Proprietary 2-yr colleges tend to have higher graduation rates because they do not have to be comprehensive in nature (they do not serve a local “community” with comprehensive needs), therefore they can offer only those career programs in high demand in the first place. Also, many are very light on general education requirements, if they have them at all.

I’d like to take this opportunity to thank Inside Higher Ed for its coverage of community college issues. Proportionally, while it still has a way to go, Inside does a much better job than other publications which cover a broad higher education spectrum. Thank you, Inside Higher Ed!

Kevin Drumm, College President, at 11:15 am EDT on August 13, 2007

By the numbers

kgotthardt’s speculations about why for-profit institutions show good results for their students have merit. Also, good retention and placement rates recognize two realities that affect every sector in higher education: it is more expensive to recruit new students than to find ways to retain the ones already enrolled, and, the best advertising is word-of-mouth: appropriately educated/employed graduates are trusted sources of new referrals that help keep the institution in business. For more on for-profits and community colleges, see also this research from Columbia University’s Community College Research Center:http://www.stanford.edu/group/ncpi/documents/pdfs/forprofitandcc.pdf

Tom Flint, Director of Accreditation at Kaplan University, at 11:15 am EDT on August 13, 2007

Why two year colleges differ in completion

One reason why public two-year colleges have lower completion rates is that a lot of students claim to be degree-seeking who are not. They do this to be eligible for some kinds of financial aid. That creates an artificially high cohort as the denominator, and is difficult to sift out. It is rare for this to happen at private career colleges because of the practice of longer contracts as noted above, and also because students generally don’t go to such schools on a casual basis.

Note also that some states, including Oregon, don’t allow the use of multi-term contracts at degree-granting institutions. For-profit schools are thus not allowed to obligate students for more than a term at a time.

Alan Contreras, State of Oregon, at 12:10 pm EDT on August 13, 2007

Classification of Community Colleges

Our large, urban, southern California public community college offers police and fire academy training, as well as apprenticeship. These three non-traditional programs enroll just over 25% of our total college students (yes, these are college programs for college units/credit), but are not AA/AS degree tract programs (though a few of these students complete other degree programs and transfer).

We enroll about 60% males overall (a high proportion of males are in these three non-traditional programs; note the difference in definition of non-traditional student). In our traditional programs there are about 45% males. At the other three community college districts in Orange County, CA overall enrollments are about 40-45% males, versus our 60% male.

Graduation rates and transfer to four-year universities varies from very low to very high, depending upon the program within our institution. Overall rate comparisons to anyone else is problematic, and even comparisions of transfer and/or graduation rates year-to-year are almost meaningless because of shifting program enrollments. And, of first-time freshmen with a goal of earning a vocational certificate and who’s first-year enrollment is over 50% in courses designated occupational/ vocational within our college credit programs, 0.1% (less than one percent) actually earn a certificate. They get their certificates or liscense from the State of California, and don’t need/care about getting a piece of paper from a community college.

Most recent community college studies have failed to measure the population (denominator) appropriatedly when computing completion and transfer rates. While I agree with the overall conclusion of the article/report that community colleges differ and need to be categorized, “you are barking up the wrong tree” — i.e. try looking at vocational/occupational as separate populations. Our police academy,fire academy, and apprenticeship programs do not even meet on campus. Overall, while our district/colleges typically have “low” transfer and “low” certificate/associate degree completion rates, we are extremely successful in helping students meet their goals and getting the education and training they want and need.

R Hirsch, Research Analyst at RSCCD, at 12:35 pm EDT on August 13, 2007

not all seek degrees or certificates

Another reason private two-year schools may be graduating a higher percentage students is because many students enroll in classes at the local CC to learn a particular skill set not requiring a degree, such as brushing up on C++ or accounting practices or what have you, never mind the senior citizen who may talk a writing or literature or history class because they want to learn something. Graduation rates are a dicey measure of success for any particular CC, never mind as a comparative tool.

bradley bleck, instructor at Spokane Falls CC, at 12:35 pm EDT on August 13, 2007

Community College study

Having served in both for-profit and non-profit institutions it is obvious to me that as to completion....for-profits are more under the gun by regulators and the public (read lawsuits) for failure to place students in high demand, high pay entry level positions. That, in itself is a stimulus to retain and complete.

As to retention itself, successful for-profit expect and require that every instructor follow up on their absentees on a daily basis. The reporting mechanisms for this activity are far more sophisticated than likely to be found in publics. Plus, failure to follow-up impacts continued employment with the for-profit institution. Imagine trying to tie this concern to a public instructor job description!

The present atmosphere of academic elitism found on non-profits does not lend itself to conducting business in the same manner as is found in the for-profits.

As to the “total package” tuition comments regarding for-profits, recognize that the percentage of default on Federally-backed loan programs is comparable to non-profits in that many of the same regs govern both. Additionally, for-profits have the advantage of being able to turn deadbeats over to collection agencies!

Larry Moser, Director, at 2:50 pm EDT on August 13, 2007

The imperative to increase enrollment

RE: the hypothesis that retention rates might be better at for-profits than publics because of the link between enrollment and funding — I don’t know about the rest of the states, but here in California a community college’s funding is tied directly to the number of students it enrolls. So I’d say the fiscal incentive to find and retain warm bodies applies to the public sector as well.

Prof. Challenger, at 4:40 pm EDT on August 13, 2007

Larry writes.....

“Additionally, for-profits have the advantage of being able to turn deadbeats over to collection agencies!”

First, since it has been shown more minority students coming from poorer backgrounds enroll in these private, for-profits, we can assume that the defaulting population also consists of high numbers of minorities.

When private colleges do not provide necessary remedial intervention, make promises they cannot keep, and leech the loan system, we have a small percentage of people making a killing off the tax payers and the students.

If these students are “deadbeats,” we must ask the question, “Who has beaten them dead?”

kgotthardt, at 7:20 pm EDT on August 13, 2007

“Why two year colleges differ in completionOne reason why public two-year colleges have lower completion rates is that a lot of students claim to be degree-seeking who are not. They do this to be eligible for some kinds of financial aid.”

Actually Allen,

The majority of students, about 70% do wish to complete a degree and get a bachelor’s from a four year institution. You can look at: U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. (2001). Community College Transfer Rates to 4-Year Institutions Using Alternative Definitions of Transfer. Washington, DC: Bradburn, E.M., Hurst, D.G., and Peng, S.

This study points out that many CC students do want a degree, but how factors, like working full time and going to school part time, not reciving enough financial aid from the schools, and a lack of proper counseling leads to poor retention.

Marjorie D., at 2:55 pm EDT on July 15, 2008

Advertisement

 Jobs Related to Why Differences in Community Colleges Matter

or search for jobs directly.

It Sr Project Leader
University of Pennsylvania

The nation’s first university, Penn is a world-renowned leader in education, research, and innovation. Situated on a ... see job

Department Office Support III
Princeton University

Position Summary: “Position UPDATED FEBRUARY 12,2008″ Reporting to the Center Manager, the position provides ... see job

Executive Director
Princeton University

Position Summary: Search Re-opened July 2008 Princeton University seeks a health professional of vision and ... see job

Events and Publications Coordinator Temporary*
Princeton University

Position Summary: The Events and Publications Coordinator, under the guidance of the Center Manager, ... see job

It Data Management Manager
University of Pennsylvania

The nation’s first university, Penn is a world-renowned leader in education, research, and innovation. Situated on a ... see job

Child Development Associate
Hillsborough Community College

Hillsborough Community College is a public, comprehensive multi-campus, state-supported community college located in the ... see job

Director, Office of Institutional Accreditation, Strategic Planning and Effectiveness (OIASPE)
University of Colorado at Denver and Health Sciences Center-Anschutz Medical Campus in Aurora

Posting Description: The University of Colorado Denver is seeking nominations and applications for the ... see job

Assistant Director of Student Financial Services
Argosy University

The Assistant Director of Student Financial Services is responsible for explaining all aspects of the financial aid process ... see job

Director, Center for the Arts
College of Staten Island

The College of Staten Island (CSI), a senior college of the City University of New York, is recruiting for a Director for the ... see job

Enterprise Automation Manager
University of Pennsylvania

The nation’s first university, Penn is a world-renowned leader in education, research, and innovation. Situated on a ... see job