Achieving the Dream also recommends that colleges bring external stakeholders, such as K-12 school districts, universities, community members, parents, and businesses, into their student success efforts (Box 4.1). Most of the Round 1 colleges succeeded at bringing some of these external stakeholders into their work (see Figure 4.5). High school districts and universities were common external partners. A majority of the Round 1 colleges were collaborating with these institutions through activities such as “early college” high schools, dual enrollment programs, high school-to-college “bridge programs,” early college placement assessments, or articulation agree- ments with four-year colleges and universities.15 Perhaps the best example of these partnerships, El Paso Community College worked intensively with multiple K-12 school districts to develop a multifaceted College Readiness Initiative, which provided early college assessments, advising,
15
Early college high schools combine high school and college curricula, allowing students to earn a high school diploma and an associate’s degree in a compressed period of time. High school-to-college bridge programs are generally summer preparation programs for recent high school graduates that focus on increasing graduates’ academic skills and making them more college-ready.
Achieving the Dream: Community Colleges Count Figure 4.5
Number of Achieving the Dream Round 1 Colleges with at Least Some Involvement from External Stakeholders in the Institutional Improvement Process, Spring 2009
SOURCE: Information collected from faculty, staff, and administrators during two rounds of implementation research across all 26 Round 1 colleges, cross-referenced against reports submitted by college representatives, Achieving the Dream coaches, and data facilitators.
NOTE: Community members include businesses, nonprofits, community-based organizations, and local residents.
and preparation to high school students.16 Other colleges, such as Martin Community College, University of New Mexico–Gallup, South Texas College, and Tallahassee Community College, also had multiple avenues for students to begin preparing for college and earn college credits while they were still enrolled in high school.
Many Round 1 colleges also sought input from local community members, businesses, nonprofit organizations, and other interested parties. As described earlier, some schools worked with Public Agenda, an Achieving the Dream partner with expertise in community engagement, to develop “community conversations,” through which they brought a number of community members and parents into the colleges to hear their hopes and desires for their programs and
16
For more information, see the case study on El Paso Community College in Kerrigan and Slater (2010).
0 5 10 15 20 25
K-12 schools Universities Community members
N u m b e r o f c o ll e g e s
their students. Although a number of colleges had been working with community and business leaders for several years, Achieving the Dream had at least a moderate influence on nearly half of the Round 1 colleges’ external engagement activities.
Summary
The Round 1 Achieving the Dream colleges, as a whole, were able to moderately engage a number of internal and external stakeholders in their efforts to improve students’ achievement. Colleges were most successful at engaging faculty and staff in developing strategies that were aimed at improving students’ achievement, and a majority of schools engaged at least some of these personnel in committees tasked with leading the colleges’ efforts. Faculty and staff also had at least some exposure to data on student outcomes, although the type of data that were reviewed and the regularity of their use varied across institutions. The Round 1 colleges were also success- ful at garnering the participation of students and external stakeholders in their work, with some playing a particularly active role in the colleges’ reform efforts.
While the Round 1 colleges had many successes engaging faculty and staff, a few limi- tations were apparent in their work. Most important, adjunct faculty, who are typically respon- sible for teaching many of the developmental and entry-level classes that students take upon entering college, tended to be absent from the colleges’ reform efforts. This disconnect means that many of the classroom reforms with which colleges experimented may not have reached many of the students who could have benefited the most from the colleges’ work. Additionally, while faculty and staff had some exposure to data, they did not make regular use of the institu- tional-level data on which Achieving the Dream has been most focused. Instead, faculty tended to focus on data that were closest to their classroom practice, such as grades and course evalua- tions. Finally, faculty and staff tended to have less of a voice in colleges’ leadership and policymaking committees, meaning that their influence on colleges’ reform agendas tended to be more limited.
Given these findings, Achieving the Dream might wish to consider additional ways to help colleges engage faculty and staff in the leadership and management of colleges’ reform efforts. In particular, colleges seem to need more support in engaging adjunct faculty and staff in their work. Additionally, colleges may need more guidance on developing concrete ways to involve faculty leaders, such as deans and department chairs, in data analysis, as well as in the leadership and management of colleges’ reforms. Several colleges have provided strong models for involving faculty and staff more broadly in their efforts, which provide good examples for the initiative to follow. A more defined approach for bringing faculty and staff into colleges’ efforts may help further strengthen their already good work in this area.
Chapter 5