Search News


Browse Archives

News

Community College Accountability

October 7, 2009

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

Accountability initiatives are not new to community colleges. But because scholars and educators have long disagreed about how to measure and compare the institutions' success in educating students, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the Lumina Foundation for Education announced Tuesday their funding of an effort to create a national, voluntary accountability system for community colleges.

The project, which is being funded with $1 million in grants from the two foundations, will gather leaders from groups like the American Association of Community Colleges, the Association of Community College Trustees and select community college districts to hash out what officials call a “common set of metrics and data points to evaluate their effectiveness, both internally and against one another, developed specifically for their mission.”

Eight community college sites around the country, mostly from urban areas, will pilot the new accountability system. Then, in two years, the project will expand and pilot in up to 20 more localities. Ultimately, project organizers hope their to-be-created system will be adopted by community colleges across the country to help improve the outcomes of their students.

Kent Phillippe, who as director of research at AACC has helped to plan this project, said there are few details of exactly what metrics this universal system would include, as the initiative is still in its nascent stages and the pilot sites still do not know exactly what data they will be tracking. Still, he argued that the project's creation reflects a sentiment among community college officials that the common metrics that have long been used to judge their institutions’ relative success -- led by the federal graduation rate -- are insufficient and do not help institutions improve themselves. He also added that some new metrics are needed and must be developed.

“We need to try to build on progression measures of students and not just focus on the final outcome of degree and certificate attainment,” Phillippe said. “For instance, we need to highlight certain points along the learning path toward reaching graduation, such as the attainment of 30 credit hours or 60 credit hours or after the progression from development to college-level coursework [all points after which it is more likely that a student will graduate]. We also need to catch the things that community colleges do that aren’t necessarily credential specific, such as work force and community development. Maybe we could track job placement rates in these programs or show the income change among students who’ve taken x number of courses at a community college.”

Officials from Gates and Lumina expressed a similar desire to see better measurements taken at prescribed benchmarks as students move through community colleges.

“We need to see beyond graduation rates,” said Holly Zanville, a senior program director at Lumina. “Even if colleges find that they have poor graduation rates -- and many of them do -- they can’t tell where students get lost and how they can get along to improve themselves. We need to pay more attention to milestone markers. Of course, we’re still interested in outcomes, but we need to know more about what’s happening along the way. For instance, it’d be great to know the point at which students transfer onward.”

Diane Troyer, a senior program officer at Gates, said the foundation believes its support for this community college project will also help institutions work toward the philanthropy's publicly stated goal to “double the percentage of low-income young people who earn a postsecondary credential by the age of 26” by 2027, a benchmark that has appears to have influenced some of the goals set by the Obama administration. She also believes the critical mass of publicity that community colleges have recently received, not only from the federal government but from organizations like hers, bodes well for the success of this project.

“A lot more attention has been cast upon community colleges and the role they play in the full picture of higher education,” Troyer said. “But, more attention has to be placed on completion initiatives. Consensus is what really matters when considering what we should be measuring [for this project]. Having these national benchmarks for colleges to assess their own performance will help them tremendously.”

Community college presidents at the project’s pilot institutions said they are excited to work with some of their peer institutions to compare and contrast some of the data they already collect to assess themselves.

“Most of us don’t have large research departments like universities have, and we haven’t had the resources to do this kind of work,” said Jerry Sue Thornton, president of Cuyahoga Community College, in Cleveland, Ohio. “For us and others involved with this pilot, it’s not about having a measuring stick or a strict comparison base, but trying to improve ourselves by sharing data with each other.”

Thornton said Cuyahoga will be using this project to take a close look at what she called its “gatekeeper courses” -- those like algebra that are at the beginning of a sequence and, if not passed, keep many students from graduating. In addition, she said her institution will focus on shortening the amount of time its students spend in developmental courses, comparing and contrasting remedial sections of varying lengths and methods to see which achieve success and which do not.

Roy Flores, president of Pima Community College, in Arizona, said such a universal system will give his institution a more effective way to identify its shortcomings and remedy them.

“We’re very data driven, and that’s already reflected in our plans and measures,” Flores said. “It’s something we’ve been doing for some time. But, more importantly, this is an opportunity to learn from other colleges as well. There’s outstanding work being done by other colleges, and we’re mindful of the fact that some of them don’t look a lot like Pima.”

At least one prominent outside observer of this major community college initiative, however, expressed his appreciation for the project but wondered why the two-year sector appears to have bought into the notion of a universal accountability system long after the idea won favor among many officials at four-year institutions.

“I’ve had a lot of conversations with community college leaders in the past and -- fussed at them isn’t the right word -- but just didn’t understand why they weren’t the leader in this accountability movement,” said Charles Miller, former chair of former Education Secretary Margaret Spellings' Commission on the Future of Higher Education, known colloquially as the Spellings Commission. “Community colleges tend to have -- not an inferiority complex -- but they feel like they have to wait in line behind their big brothers for some things. I commend them for doing this now. I don’t know the details of what they’re producing, but I have no reason to doubt they’ll come out with a good idea.”

Miller said he hopes the project embraces the idea of a “unit record system,” or a method of tracking a student’s progress throughout his or her educational career. Though this recommendation of the Spellings Commission ultimately never received the support of educators nationally, Miller said it would benefit community colleges most.

“One of the problems with accountability for community colleges is the need to follow students beyond community college,” Miller said. “Most community college students don’t come for the purpose of getting a degree or a certificate, and they’ll have to find a way to measure that. These accountability efforts often focus so much on degree completion, but that’s definitely not the only thing that community colleges do.”

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Community College Accountability

  • This new grant can do a lot of good
  • Posted by Bernard Luskin , CEO and Senior Provost at Touro University on October 7, 2009 at 6:30am EDT
  • Done correctly a great deal of good can come from this research. One of the major areas of missunderstanding has to do with graduation and completion rates. If the 60 unit requirement for the AA degree can be made consistent, the number of AA degree graduates would statistically skyrocket. What happens in a great number of cases is that students that are transferring to four year institutions, complete most of their requirements in a CC. The requirements are uneven among community colleges and extra units are added. The students skip the final three or six units, and therefore receipt of the AA, because the added units are unique, the students are focused on transfer. Yet, the student has completed his or her planned program and transfers, performs well and graduates with a BA. So, this is a situation where reporting distorts actual benefits and results, i.e., it is statistically accurate and actually wrongly interpreted in the reporting. There are a number of situations like this that can be higlighted for solution through a program like this one. Good luck.

    Bernie Luskin
    Chair, Emeritus, AACC Board of Directors

  • About time
  • Posted by A Student , Any major dude at Lansing Community College on October 7, 2009 at 7:30am EDT
  • Containing costs is one thing. Lack of productive planning is another.

    Appointing faculty three days before semester-start shows. Really.

    So does faculty going "off-textbook" -- WITHOUT appropriate hard-copy scaffolding. Especially when textbooks are $100+/each.

  • accountability on a faster timeline
  • Posted by Trace Urdan , Research Analyst at Signal Hill on October 7, 2009 at 10:00am EDT
  • Subject matter accountability is useful and Blackboard has robust software called "Outcomes" that serves as a tool and a blueprint to get there already. But the pace of this grant process is laughably slow. The Obama administration is exploring increased accountability measures in upcoming neg-reg and looking at making measures a requirement of SAFRA grants. Somehow the market-funded schools are held to and measure completion without confusion and measure placement as well. They have penalties attached to not meeting certain thresholds. I suspect that with the right incentives, community colleges could work out accountability measures on a much faster timeline than that implied by this study and grant process. This is not a new idea or too much to ask.

  • Problems with Community College Benchmarks
  • Posted by Keith Johnson on October 7, 2009 at 10:00am EDT
  • This initiative is sorely needed and a major step forward. I would like to add comments that suggest the benchmarks in higher education may have to be adjusted to take the distinctiveness of community colleges into account.

    A benchmark that examines how many of the community's candidate students are admitted and served by the local community college would be very useful, just as is the measure of how many students graduate or transfer to a four year institution. But these two goals operate at cross purposes. That is, admitting more and more of the student age cohort will include a larger proportion of poorly prepared high school and GED applicants and reduce the proportion of successful outcomes. This problem (multiple community college goals, often incompatible) cannot be resolved merely by creating benchmarks that are measured appropriately across campuses.

    Community colleges offer remediation of poorly prepared students, job training in so called "career courses," academic preparation for transfer students, and non credit courses to serve community interests, among many competing demands. I am concerned with pressures that would arise from instituting benchmarks that would give weight to some of the more obvious community college goals while slighting others, especially services to students that are not recognized and easily measured.

    Nevertheless, community colleges have to organize and plan their operations rationally (even if they usually don't), and benchmarks are the way to do it. This is fine as long as benchmarks are seen to be what they really are, a partial measure of an institutions contribution to its constituents.

  • Early Student Transfer in Community Colleges
  • Posted by David Mathieu , Executive Director, Center for Undergraduate Studies at Walden University on October 7, 2009 at 10:45am EDT
  • I appreciate and agree with the comments of Bernie Luskin from AACC. I would add, however, that the issue he describes impacting degree completion at the associate degree level is even more profound than he implies. As a former chief academic and student affairs officer in public two-year transfer institutions in Minnesota and Wisconsin, I would venture to say that 40-50% of the students who do not complete their associate degree can be placed into the category of students who "early transfer" to four-year institutions. Although these students are reported as not successful in any standard report of institutional effectiveness based on graduation rates, it is clear that they are indeed successful in completing their goal of transfer to and completion of a baccalaureate degree.

    I believe there are two causal factors of importance in my experience: 1) Students in associate degree institutions who plan to pursue a baccalaureate degree quickly learn that there is often little value in completing the associate degree prior to transfer. The receiving institution does not require the AA degree and, as a transfer degree, the associate does not define well as a good stopping point halfway to the four-year degree. Completion of transferable general education requirement packages and completion of anticipated lower division required courses for the four-year major are viewed as more important academic goals to achieve at the two-year institution than completion of the Associate Degree. 2) Wherever I have served in two-year institutions, many students have told me that the representatives of four-year institutions have encouraged them to complete their AA degree, but that it really isn't necessary if they would like to transfer soon. The representatives, in my view, follow NACADA and other ethical standards in this area, but they cannot tell students prospects that the AA degree is required or assumed as a prerequisite for transfer if it is not. Thus, "early transfer" often becomes the focus of the discussion between the representative and the student when the question "when can I transfer" is raised by the student.

    Like Bernie Luskin, I also hope that the grant may spur further investigation into the degree completion measures and provide better understanding of the issue of early transfer.

    David Mathieu

    Minneapolis, Minnesota

  • Community College assessment
  • Posted by Bob King , President/ Council on Postsecondary Education at KY on October 8, 2009 at 1:15am EDT
  • I would strongly suggest you contact the community colleges that are part of the SUNY system. They have been assessing student learning outcomes for nearly five years, and have seen, as a result, improved instruction and higher success rates for students.

  • accountabilty for all!
  • Posted by MM at Millennium Education Group on October 8, 2009 at 3:30pm EDT
  • All hail the AACC, Lumina & Gates Foundation for taking the lead on this important project to measure the performance of our community colleges. Comparable data, report guidelines, and measurement tools of schools currently exist in several studies done by The Ohio State University and the Accrediting Agencies who oversee technical and career-oriented programs, and colleges. In general, the outcomes measured by these agencies are reflective of the institution’s mission. As summarized by Mr. Philippe , the community college has a diverse mission; however, this must be measured somehow and program performance must be evaluated against its stated objectives – these are fundamental tenets of post-secondary education. For those daunted by the challenges of measuring two-year or less GE completion or transfer programs – think about the stated outcome and how to measure it: do the students state that as their goal?– if so measure that and hold students and the college accountable for accomplishing that goal together; how does the community college document and verify transfer to a four-year program? If that was the goal and student was successful then that should be a positive outcome. I agree with Mr. Udan that the urgency to accomplish this methodology needs to be a priority and I hope the worth of such a venture is apparent to all higher education leaders. That this epiphany to tackle this type of measurement for programs and colleges who use our tax dollars is just now gaining traction still amazes me. I am hopeful the leaders and project managers of this initiative utilize and tap into the experiences of those within the higher education community who have successfully monitored and measure program outcomes (i.e. student graduation and placement rates). Having a level playing field for all program offerings (regardless of tax status) and disclosing this information to all consumers will allow new students the opportunity to select the program that best fits their needs and has a proven track record.

  • Keith Johnson
  • Posted by DFS on October 8, 2009 at 3:30pm EDT
  • CC benchmarks as only a partial revelation: exactly, sir.

    You have hit it precisely on the head. The CC mission is the most dynamic. There can be no room for absolutism there.

  • Necessary, Complex, and Welcomed
  • Posted by Anthony Tricoli , President at Georgia Perimeter College on October 8, 2009 at 5:45pm EDT
  • Reaching agreement on a set of metrics for a universal system of accountability is among the greatest challenges facing those of us who lead two-year colleges in America.

    Accountability measures for community colleges is about measuring success of America's community college students, and the college's success in helping those students to attain "their" goals. Measuring the success of two-year college students must incorporate the goals the students have set for themselves. If the goal of a student is to complete one course, and they do, then they have been successul. If the goal of a student is to complete fifteen units in order to get a raise from their employer, and they do, then they have been successful. If the goal of a student is to graduate and/or transfer, and they do, then they have been successful. In turn, if two-year colleges help students to achieve their goals, then we have been successful. In my opinion, the greatest misunderstanding and misjustice to two-year colleges is the application of the same accountability standards used by four-year institutions to two-year colleges. The missions of the two institutions are as distinctly different as are our student populations. Four year institutions "select" from among their applicant pools the best students, those who they believe have the greatest promise, those who they believe will achieve the greatest success. Two year institutions "welcome" all who believe they can benefit from the experience. It's a matter of mission, "select" versus "welcome". I believe strongly in accountability, I look forward to hearing the results of the initial study, and would like to participate in any part of the study which would help to identify the most appropriate evaluation criteria for our institutions.

  • CC Identity Crisis
  • Posted by Hannah on October 9, 2009 at 2:30pm EDT
  • As other posters have noted, community colleges serve too many different needs to devise and apply "benchmarks." The main problem is that CC's cannot decide if they are an extension of K-12 education--with all the requisite measures and accountability--or a component of a university "higher" education. Benchmarks may be possible to measure how well and ESL student understands an essay in English or how well a remedial math student answers calculus and trig problems. Or how well a vocational ed student masters his or her craft. But how do you measure a philosophy or literature student's capacity to critically interpret and analyze competency in appling Iser's or Campbell's theories on reflection, fiction and myth to an essay in the Washington Post? Or a creative writing student's new version of a traditional haiku? Those with a "higher ed" lens on CC's rightly abhor any hints at "accountability" since the very notion of what a university does is question, challenge, innovate, and create. Those with a K-14 lens see little problem with testing to see how well the taxpayers' money is being spent. Until we take into consideration the schizod nature of community colleges, any discussion of accountability in CC's is a waste of verbiage.