The roundtable discussions were lively and engaging, and as promised we hope to continue those conversations online. Our plan is to periodically post a question and some of the responses by table participants. By simply selecting any one of the available questions listed below, you will take a seat at an electronic table where you can interact with your colleagues.
The first question had to do with access and mission and is posted below with its framing paragraph.
If the access paradigm is no longer viable, how do we limit access? How do we define "ability to benefit" in our mission statement?
Community colleges have been the open door to higher education for excluded and underrepresented populations for more than half a decade. Now with escalating tuitions and fees, flat federal funding, and high rates of unemployment, traditional and non-traditional students are flocking to community colleges. Additionally, reduced state and local aid has caused programs and positions to be eliminated. Some community colleges have been forced to cap enrollment. With such high demand and limited seats, not everyone is assured admission.
Responses of roundtable participants centered largely around CAP A level. Are we doing the best we can with this population? Many faculty members, especially those hired at the last minute, are not trained to teach at the A level and that may factor into the poor success rate. Our pedagogy needs to be different. At the CAP A level, success is much more of a community problem and needs a community answer. There needs to be continuous communication between teachers, students and the support systems, and the student needs to learn that the classroom is itself a community.
The "ability to benefit" is very complicated. In one summer class, one student missed class to get AIDS testing; another for a court case; another because of the child care program her child was in. These students all had the academic ability to benefit, but not the practical or personal ability. The teacher's ability to tap into a given student's learning style is also part of the equation of defining "ability to benefit." Can you really tell who will succeed or "benefit" based on the placement test? Perhaps we could maintain open access but have the introductory courses as the place where students demonstrate their "ability to benefit."
We are assuming that by limiting access that we mean trimming the lowest levels, the least prepared for college, who may be the most in need of a chance. Should we question that assumption? Are there other demographic groups that may be limited?
The second question had to do with access and mission and is posted below with its framing paragraph.
Access without success is meaningless. What are the most important ways that faculty, staff and administrators can promote student success in academic performance, retention, course and program completion, and transfer?
Although we can point to many successful student stories at CCP, our data show that the median cumulative GPA for all students is about 2.6; approximately 12% of our students end the semester with unfavorable academic status (probation or dropped); approximately 25% of our credit students leave at the end of the term; and about 16% of students graduate.
Responses of roundtable participants focused on expectations, early intervention and use of resources. What has the student come to the College to achieve? How does he/she define success? We need to understand how students view being at CCP & start working with them from that viewpoint.
Students are expected to bring certain behaviors and motivation, a work ethic that will lead to success. We must be candid with students, no matter what the expectations are; students want to know the boundaries and the potential obstacles. The message we give students about expectations must be consistent and start from the time they enter the College - at placement testing, the campus tour, orientation, the first day of class. Students need to be engaged in the process of learning as well as the content of the course and have opportunities to apply what they are learning. Inconsistent expectations may make it difficult for students to succeed. For example, a student may have an "easy" teacher and then a "hard" teacher and thus be unprepared for the increased challenges.
Information about support resources (workshops, learning lab, student exchange of phone numbers, etc.) can be critical to student success. Are all teachers, full- and part-time aware of the College resources and do they inform students?
Look at successful faculty and you will find successful students.
The third question was also about access and mission and is posted below with its framing paragraph.
If we can't do everything, we must prioritize. What is essential for us to continue? What should we forgo? What can CCP be the best at?
Christine McPhail suggests a critic's view that "community colleges have mismanaged their mission by trying to be all things to all people all the time." W. Norton Grubb and Marvin Lazerson note that "the original purpose of the community college was transfer education and it always saw itself as serving 'the total post high school needs of the community'." Over time, those needs have changed. Today, as noted by Arthur Levine, community colleges are facing an onslaught of students asking them to provide English language instruction, vocational education, remedial instruction, worker retraining, access to four-year institutions and life-long learning.
Roundtable participants suggested the following as essential to continue:
They felt that serving a diverse population is what we do best.
They suggested that we forgo:
What would you add to these categories?
Question 4 had to do with integrating career programs with liberal education and general education and is posted below with its framing paragraph.
How can career programs be better integrated with liberal/general education? What are the best ways to bring both faculties together for discussion and learning?
There is a growing belief that community colleges should make their different purposes, namely academic preparation for transfer and occupational programming, more compatible with one another. At present, according to Grubb and Lazerson, these two approaches to education in the community colleges are "independent islands of disconnected activities". Career faculty focus on student development and the demands of regulating agencies, while liberal education faculty tend to focus on intellectual development. As noted by Omundson, "fragmented curricula are delivered to students as if they were fragmented persons".
It has also been noted that career programs are actually learning communities and that because of this phenomenon career programs have stronger retention and graduation rates than transfer programs. How can community college faculty bring the liberal arts into the learning communities which naturally develop in career programs?
Responses of roundtable participants focused on 1) increasing awareness of expectations in career programs and 2) integrating career and general education through program-specific courses.
It is a myth that career degrees are purely vocational. Liberal Arts faculty may not understand what is taught in career programs. Career and Liberal Arts educators have the same expectations of students. Both want students to write to a competent level, think at a critical level and utilize problem solving skills. Faculty in all disciplines need to develop a unified front - then present it as a common thread in every course, e.g., elements of English, Math and Science. Liberal arts and career faculty can learn from each other by observing in each other's classrooms.
General education needs to be program-specific; we don't need broad prescriptions for critical thinking. For example, sections could be focused on death and dying for Nursing students or the sociological impact of crime for Justice students. In contracted training for business, communication skills are needed as well as other skills and knowledge related to the specific industry. Liberal Arts education cannot be mandated in career programs by liberal arts educators. Many programs must meet program and accreditation needs. A mandate will not work across the College. Each individual program must be assessed.
Question 5 had to do with workforce development. It is posted below with its framing paragraph.
Many legislators emphasize the role of community colleges in workforce development. What do we need to do to develop knowledge workers of the future?
Context: Meeting workforce needs has traditionally not been perceived as the work of "college." Yet, reading, writing and critical thinking can be touted as a powerful portfolio of job skills. Our challenge is to "sell" to faculty, students, legislators and employers the importance of achieving the credentials of occupational programs along with the more conceptual goals of general education which in the long run may help students achieve higher levels on the professional ladder.
Responses focused on 1) job-readiness skills and 2) the disconnect between credit and non-credit courses.
Students need study and listening skills, the ability to give feedback, positive work habits, knowledge of types of questions to ask, ability to work in groups, interviewing skills, public speaking and competence with technology. It was felt that FOS 101 would be a good place to start working on these skills and perhaps should be required of all entering students as it is in some universities. Psychology 107, Applications in Psychology, addresses many of these job-readiness skills. Career faculty should also be tapped for ideas.
Students entering the College need English and math but for some students this concentration is overwhelming. Students should have the option of taking career-interest and/or non-credit courses. There is short-term training offered at the College that overlaps the content of credit courses. Faculty teaching credit courses have no idea what is happening in noncredit courses that offer similar content, e.g., software applications. There is a failure to articulate between the credit and noncredit areas of the College.
Question 6 also had to do with workforce development. It is posted below with its framing paragraph.
Question: How do we raise students' levels of aspirations and help them see the range of options they can pursue with further education?
Context: Students are increasingly coming to the college with a vocational orientation, looking for short term training so they can get a job and realize the American dream. Employers too are looking for credentialed workers to fill immediate needs of their organizations. The temptation for students is to get a "quick and dirty education" and go to work. This may work well in the short term, but the opportunities for advancement may be limited.
Responses from group participants centered on recommendations to broaden student understanding of career options.
Some students may choose and commit to a major too hastily without considering other options.
Question 7 had to do with the role of staff.
Question: What is the role of staff in promoting the success of students? How can staff be more integrated into the teaching and learning mission of the college?
Context: Staff members are on the front lines everyday interacting with students, addressing their inquiries and concerns and often receiving their unadulterated feedback. As implementers of policy and procedure, they are a rich source of information as to what works and what changes may be effective. A large percentage of staff members are not only educated but spearheading and running businesses, community projects, church initiatives, etc. They often interact with students in these venues also. How can we better utilize their insights and suggestions and incorporate them into our vision of student success?
While staff are not directly providing instruction, staff can be supportive in many ways. The following suggestions were made by group participants.
Question 8 had to do with the role of student services and is posted below with its framing paragraph.
Question: As enrollment increases so does the need for student services. Would student services be more effective if there were greater integration with academic life? What steps would have to be taken to achieve this?
Context: CCP's organizational structure separates academic and student affairs. Except for academic advising - counseling, career services, financial aid, and student activities fall under student affairs. The Freshman Orientation Seminar was one attempt to integrate the academic and student affairs area, but not many of our students take the course.
A joint report by the American Association for Higher Education, the American College Personnel Association, and the National Association of Student Personnel Administrators (1998) makes the case that "only when everyone on campus - particularly academic affairs and student affairs - shares the responsibility for student learning will we be able to make significant progress in improving it."
Responses of roundtable participants focused on more structured opportunities for students to learn about what it means to be a student. It was suggested that there be mandatory student orientations and a freshman orientation course. There could also be mandatory workshops on specific topics related to navigating the system. Another way to infuse a greater understanding of "college" is to incorporate information and discussion about student and academic services into the syllabus. Overall, students need to feel more comfortable asking for help, and there needs to be improved communication between student services and academic life.
Question 9 had to do with advocacy and funding and is posted below with its framing paragraph.
Question: What role can faculty, staff and administrators play in advocating for the needs of community colleges with our funding sources and in exploring innovative funding alternatives?
Context: The decline in federal, state and city funding holds no promise of abating anytime soon. As George Boggs (Change, November/December 2004) points out, support for K-12, Medicaid, and corrections has garnered more attention than support of higher education which state legislators see as more discretionary. (Students and their families can be charged for services received.) However, community colleges depend to a much greater extent on public resources than other sectors of higher education. They are also more affordable and cost effective. Community college leaders must make a stronger case to persuade legislators of the valuable personal and economic benefits of higher education to our communities and larger society. At the same time, we need to become more entrepreneurial in our efforts to increase funding.
Roundtable participants noted that political advocacy should be framed broadly as serving not just CCP but the people of Philadelphia - reminding people who benefits from a well-funded college.
Suggestions were offered in 3 areas:
Funding sources beyond the city and state.
Lobbying efforts
Additions to college offerings
Question 10 had to do with internal college climate and is posted below with its framing paragraph.
What are the issues causing conflict among faculty and between faculty and administrators at CCP? Identify strategies for unifying our community so that together we can achieve our College's vision of student success.
Context: Bruce Omundson cites as a major challenge overcoming the isolation and divisiveness among both faculty members and administrators. Faculty members are often reluctant or too pressured by work load to work across disciplines, and colleges often do not present opportunities for faculty to learn from one another. Administrators are increasingly drawn to the bottom line and are not seen as attuned to the power of learning to transform lives. Decision- and policy-making often do not take into account the professionalism and expertise of faculty and staff.
Roundtable participants raised conflict-causing issues among faculty and between faculty and administrators and suggested some solutions.
Faculty Conflict Causers
Faculty and Administrator Conflict Causers
Suggested Solutions