ERIC ED482059: Preparing for College: Building Expectations, Changing Realities.

30 Pages·2003·0.66 MB·English

by  ERIC

DOCUMENT RESUME
HE 036 355
ED 482 059
Zoe B.
Tierney, William G.; Colyar, Julia E.; Corwin,
AUTHOR
Changing
Preparing for College: Building Expectations,
TITLE
Realities.
2003-00-00
PUB DATE
Education Policy
29p.; Prepared by the Center for Higher
NOTE
Analysis (Los Angeles, CA).
For full text: http://www.usc.edu/dept/chepa.
AVAILABLE FROM
Descriptive (141)
Reports
PUB TYPE
EDRS Price MF01/PCO2 Plus Postage.
EDRS PRICE
Education;
Accountability; *College Preparation; Higher
DESCRIPTORS
Program Development; *Program Improvement
ABSTRACT
that might
This monograph discusses the specific components
of low-income urban youth when
be used to improve the college-going rates
programs" that supplement or
they participate in "college preparation
people have ideas about helping
complement what takes place in school. Many
successful. College preparation
youth, but not all approaches are equally
continuing disparities in educational
programs cannot be blamed for
inequity. This monograph
achievement nor viewed as a cure-all for educational
likely to improve educational
considers the program components that are most
discusses nine key components:
achievement for underrepresented students and
(2) academic, college, and career
a rigorous academic curriculum;
(1)
(4) incorporation of students'
(3) cocurricular activities;
counseling;
(6) peer support;
(7)
(5) family and community engagement;
cultures;
priorities.
(SLD)
(8) timing of interventions; and (9) funding
mentoring;
Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made
from the original document.
Center for Higher Education Policy Analysis
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Office of Educational Research and Improvement
PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND
EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION
DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS
CENTER (ERIC)
BEEN GRANTED BY
This document has been reproduced as
received from the person or organization
originating it.
O Minor changes have been made to
improve reproduction quality.
e
7/0
Points of view or opinions stated in this
TO THE EDUCATIONAL RES URCES
document do not necessarily represent
INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)
official OERI position or policy.
1
A publication of the Center for Higher Education Policy Analysis
Rossier School of Education
It
MISR
University of Southern California
or
SC FLO OT,
$DUO_Afr I ON
AVAILABLE
COP"
BEsT
2
Center for Higher Education Policy Analysis
Copyright 2003
One of us was pregnant during the writing of this monograph.
We dedicate this to Teva Rose Corwin.
May she grow up in an equitable and just world.
We encourage readers to reproduce and disseminate this with permission. If
you would like to be placed on our mailing list, send us an email at:
[email protected]
CHEPA
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
Center for Higher Education Policy Analysis, WPH 701
Los Angeles, CA 90089-0031
Tel: [phone] / Fax: [phone]
[email protected]
This document is also available in PDF format on the CHEPA web site at:
http://www.usc.edu/dept/chepa
3
Center for Higher Education Policy Analysis
Building Expectations, Changing Realities
Julia E. Colyar
William G. Tierney
Zoe B. Corwin
A publication of the Center for Higher Education Policy Analysis
USC
Rossier School of Education
ROSSIER
University of Southern California
SCHOOL OF
EDUCATION
4
Ji 1113S-J..]:Ii3
PILLU
Throughout the 20th century access to a postsecondary education was seen as a primary
route out of poverty. Although policies, approaches, and programs varied over time, the
transition from high school to college was a major hurdle for first-generation, low-
income, urban youth. Adolescents and their families frequently had little idea about
what college entailed, and their preparation for doing college work often suffered in
under-funded and inadequate schools. Unfortunately, similar problems still confront us in
the 21st century.
In this monograph we discuss the specific components that might be employed to
improve college-going rates of low-income urban youth when they participate in
"college preparation programs." These are programs that supplement and/or
complement what takes place in school. They range from programs that begin as early as
the seventh grade to programs that do not begin until the senior year in high school.
They might be programs that focus exclusively on increasing academic skills or programs
that are social in nature and provide adolescents with recreational activities during the
summer months. Some involve families, counselors, mentors, and peers in their activities
and others do not. On the optimistic side, there seem to be as many people with ideas
for helping youth as there are youth in need of support. On the more troubling side,
however, not all approaches are equally successful.
Outreach programs have begun to come under increased scrutiny. Current programs are
expected to meet higher levels of accountability from foundations and granting agencies.
And yet, there still is no consensus on what makes a program successful. Numerous
programs have been created, revised, dissolved and recreated, but programmatic success
still remains a mystery. According to many researchers, little empirical evidence has been
collected about program effectiveness.
BEST COPY AVAILABLE
:4,
College preparation programs neither can be blamed for the continuing disparities in
educational achievement nor viewed as a cure-all for educational inequity. Structural
inequity creates unequal opportunities, and the quality of one's schooling varies
dramatically based on social class and race. Nevertheless, the remarkable diversity in
college preparation programs raises a question that is the driving force in this
monograph: With a finite amount of time and resources, which programmatic
components are most likely to improve educational achievement for underrepresented
youth in the United States?
In the pages that follow are evaluations of nine key components of college preparation
programs. In each section we have attempted to provide the core debates, definitions,
and suggestions for improving each component. We do not intend to suggest that for a
program to be successful, it needs to include and develop each component. Instead, we
advocate adapting program design to the unique needs of the populations served. We
begin with some background about the nine components and then proceed to a
discussion of each one.
William G. Tierney
1-U_W3 JA lialiiaajti
Overview
1
Academic Preparation:
The Key to College Enrollment
2
Guiding Advice:
Quality Counseling Enhances College-Going
4
Outside the Curriculum:
Do Co-Curricular Activities Influence College-Going?
6
Cultural Wealth:
Tapping Into Local Identities
8
Family Matters:
Families Influence College-Going
10
Friends in School:
Peer Groups Influence College-Going
12
The Tasks of Mentoring:
A Critical Component for College-Going
14
When to Begin:
The Earlier the Better
16
Weighing the Costs:
Evaluating Quality, Determining Priorities
18
Conclusion
20
About CHEPA
21
Acknowledgements
21
®
and supplement a
College preparation programs enhance
low-income,
school's regular activities to assist primarily
be able to
minority youth who might otherwise not
in significant ways,
attend college. While individual programs vary
there are several commonalities across programs.
research examining
Based on more than a decade of qualitative
college preparation
geographically and programmatically diverse
Higher Education Policy Analysis
programs, the Center for
pertaining to central aspects
(CHEPA) developed nine hypotheses
then commissioned a panel
of college preparation programs. We
college access to conduct
of well-respected scholars in the field of
topics. Our primary goal
extensive literature reviews on the nine
research literature said about the
was to find what the
college preparation
influence the following factors have on
and enrollment:
1. A rigorous academic curriculum
counseling
2. Academic, college, and career
3. Co-curricular activities
cultures
4. Incorporation of students'
5. Family and community engagement
6. Peer support
7. Mentoring
Vrogrammatic Ement s
a tiwitiesidlorm
8. Timing of interventions
dorm
go
T
re0-i am 4 :"
epha ois-- col
9. Funding priorities
has been that
Throughout the undertaking our assumption
useful guideposts for
research on topics such as these can be
ought not be thought of
practitioners and policymakers, but they
might discover in a laboratory. That is,
as findings such as one
SupporefkletWak6
Social
unchanging black boxes where
schools and classrooms are not
CAW
ag
w Lpsuppo
variable to produce a desired result. In
fhinking about
sliud nt.
one can manipulate one
eon
inputs change from year
69
dynamic environments in which multiple
ft@ig.
make causal predictions.
to year, one ought not expect to
_Mentor 13 Ir.cgq
Nevertheless, a great deal of research provides
FteN06-
of college
clear indications about significant components
preparation programs.
well researched
As might be expected, while some areas are
doubt. In the
and conclusive, other areas are open to
conducted the
acknowledgements we list the authors who
of this monograph.
research that serves as the backbone
in late 2003 that fleshes
We will publish a book with SUNY Press
out the findings.
MAIIAINIMO
=4141111111
.
1
Academic preparation is the central component of college-going. Virtually
all researchers agree that without a rigorous curriculumespecially
including a focus on math and language skillsstudents will not be
prepared for college.
Why Strong Academic Preparation is Important:
Groups of students who continue to be underrepresented in higher education
are also less likely to be prepared for college.
College enrollment rates and persistence to graduation are higher among
students who participate in college prep compared to students enrolled in a
vocational program.
Preparation via academic curriculum is particularly important to the college
enrollment decisions of low-income students.
Students enrolled in affluent school communities are more likely to participate
in a rigorous curricular program.
Students from economically disadvantaged families are more likely to be
enrolled in non-academic curricular tracks or academic tracks that are
not rigorous.
'
.
- . .
.
I
I I
I
I
.
I .
.
.
0
.
.
1
A
AVAILABLE
9 BEST
COPY
Strategies for Supporting and Strengthening Academics in
College Preparation Programs:
1. Begin efforts to improve academic preparation before high school: Long-term
attention to academics is key. Begin as early as possible, no later than middle school.
With an early start, programs can improve academic preparation and raise
educational expectations.
2. Ensure that students have opportunities to enroll in rigorous coursework: College
preparation programs can have an impact on students' predisposition for rigorous
coursework. Encourage students to seek enrollment in challenging courses, including
honors and advanced mathematics when they are available. Emphasize the
development of skill sets and academic rigor rather than just enrollment in
"Advanced Placement." Create individual academic plans for students so that they
look ahead to specific courses and goals.
3. Offer additional academic support: Provide tutoring, test preparation, note-taking
and study skills assistance, and academic counseling.
4. Coordinate with K-12 and college educators: Share expertise and resources with other
educators; collaboration promotes awareness at all levels.
Fast Facts on Academics
Of first-generation students enrolled in four-year schools:
64% completed advanced math; 11% completed only algebra I or geometry.
83% of students who complete algebra by 8th grade go on to complete advanced
math in high school.
71% of students who enroll in a rigorous academic curriculum in high school persist to
complete a bachelor's degree (including first-generation students).
We concur with the U.S. Department of Education's definition of rigorous as "including at least 4 years of
English and mathematics (including precalculus), 3 years each of science (including biology, chemistry, and
physics) and social studies, 3 years of foreign language, and one honors/AP course or AP test score" (U.S.
Department of Education, NCES, "The Condition of Education 2002").
About Academic Preparation
-:-:5-.1L11LL-11
I
Cabrera, A.F., and La Nasa, S.M. (Eds.).(2000). Understanding the college
choice of disadvantaged students. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Oakes, J. (1985). Keeping track: How schools structure inequality. New
Haven: Yale University Press.
Perna, L.W. (2000). Differences in the decision to attend college among
African Americans, Hispanics, and Whites. Journal of Higher Education,
71(2), 117-141.
Tierney, W.G., and Hagedorn, L.S. (Eds). (2002). Increasing access to
college: Extending possibilities for all students. Albany, NY: State
University of New York Press.
(2003). "Understanding University Success." Published by the Center for
Educational Policy Research, University of Oregon. (www.s4s.org).
JO