Inside Higher Ed
We had a conversation in the deans’ weekly meeting that got me wondering how other colleges have solved (or not solved) a dilemma.
The topic was developmental English. Right now, if students place into it (which most don’t), it’s a corequisite for the first composition course. The idea is to use it to offer extra support to students who need it to raise their game in composition. Rather than teaching skills in the abstract and in isolation, they can be geared toward the assignments in the credit-bearing class. It’s a model that gets students on the degree path right away, and that has shown better success than a stand-alone course. So far, so good.
But students don’t always behave in the ways we expect them to.
Requiring the course for the students who place into it ensures that it’s eligible for financial aid. It also greatly increases the chances that students will attend faithfully. As Kay McClenney noted years ago, students don’t do optional.
So, what should we do when students who were required to take the support class fail the support class but pass the college-level class?
It’s a conflict between the letter of the law and the spirit of the law. But when financial aid hangs in the balance, we have to be particularly careful. That’s especially true in a political climate in which certain actors are looking for excuses to attack.
Philosophically, it seems clear that a student who felt misplaced, didn’t bother showing up for the developmental class and then passed the credit-bearing class proved their point. We thought they needed the extra help, but they proved otherwise. The educator in me wants to say more power to ’em.
By the letter of the policy, though, failing the developmental class means losing eligibility for the corequisite course. (That’s literally what “corequisite” means.) If the student isn’t eligible for the second class, then they’re disqualified, even if their performance indicates passing work.
I’d prefer to make the developmental class recommended, as opposed to required, but “students don’t do optional” suggests that rendering it optional will mean that many students who could have used the help would skip it. The tutoring center provides a sort of confirmation. Far fewer students go for tutoring—which is free—than would likely benefit from it. We let students know about tutoring, it’s easy to find on campus and the spot is pleasant and welcoming, but uptake remains stubbornly low relative to apparent need.
Financial aid adds another wrinkle. Optional courses aren’t eligible for financial aid coverage. Even if we convinced the right students that the class would be beneficial, it wouldn’t count toward their financial aid. Selling them on a class they couldn’t afford wouldn’t do anyone any good.
Of course, if community college were free, we could easily allow students waivers for the coreq if they passed the higher-level class without worrying about financial aid. But in this world, that’s not an option.
All that said, there’s no way that we’re the only college facing this dilemma.
Wise and worldly readers who have lived this reality, have you found an elegant resolution? If so, I’d love to hear it! I can be reached at deandad (at) gmail (dot) com, or on Bluesky at deandad.bsky.social. Thanks!
