At each of my visits last week to WSU, USU and the U of U, students or faculty brought up the need for a success strategy for Latinos. Latinos lag behind other ethnic groups in terms of higher education attainment. That is an issue – a compounding issue, given that the U.S. population increases by four people each minute and that two of the four are Latino.
I believe the first three points of my white paper – improving college readiness, cost, and flexibility – form the foundation of a success strategy. This morning I read a good article on Latino higher education success published by the National Conference of State Legislatures that seems to agree. Some highlights:
Raymund Paredes, Texas Higher Education Commissioner, stresses that “access without preparation is not opportunity. If you’re not well-prepared, your chances of succeeding in college are very, very low.”
UTEP President Diana Natalicio says that “you must do the following: raise aspirations, prepare students for academic success in college; make sure education is affordable; allow students to participate on their own terms – such as on weekends, evenings and online; and ensure everyone can participate, regardless of family and work obligations.”
Texas Rep. Joaquin Castro says that “developmental or remedial education is ‘the graveyard of higher education, where many dreams die.’”
Thoughts?
With the changes you’re proposing, everyone has an equal opportunity to succeed. Some students may have more hurdles to clear and take more time but the end result will be the same. Am I missing something?
As someone who works in developmental education, I felt it would be appropriate to respond to your post, particularly the quotes from Texas Higher Education Commissioner, Raymund Paredes, and Texas Representative, Joaquin Castro.
While everyone agrees that having better prepared students on campus is a good thing, many institutions of higher education have widened participation to include students who historically have not had the opportunity. This is true not only in the U.S. but also in countries that have traditionally reserved postsecondary education for the elite, such as England. Access and preparation are important but in cases in which preparation has not occurred (and there are a variety of reasons for this), support can and should be provided within higher education institutions.
The benefits of a well-educated citizenry are undeniable. “The social and economic opportunities facing our country can best be addressed by educating many more people beyond high school. As we attain the goal, we improve the economy, strengthen civic engagement and reduce the costs of crime, poverty and health care and, in short, improve the human condition” (Lumina Foundation for Education). Higher education literature is replete with examples of initiatives aimed at supporting students from all backgrounds—first generation, low socioeconomic status, underprepared, ethnically diverse, and so forth.
For students who currently arrive at our institutions unprepared to succeed, one type of support is developmental education. Without developmental education programs, many would be denied the opportunity not only for access, but for success. While developmental education programs within higher education are often criticized, for 67% of the 2009-2010 graduating class at Utah Valley University, developmental education—basic composition and developmental math courses—enabled students to realize their dreams. Two-thirds of that graduating class would not have been successful in attaining a degree without developmental education. What a loss to our community and to our future!
I volunteer for the Utah Scholars program sponsored by USHE. We go out into many 8th grade classrooms to have the “college readiness” discussion. As a Latino who went to secondary schools in Utah, I know the importance of that discussion. Therefore, I suggest that your committee view expanding the Utah Scholars program because it targets low income schools, in which there are a lot of Latino students, and it is a volunteer based effort, so the cost is minimal. As a professor of education and a Latino, I am willing to help your efforts should you need my service.
Maureen, thanks. To be clear, I’m not talking about cutting developmental ed. I’m mostly talking about decreasing the need for it for students coming out of high school. We can remediate them, or we can teach them in high school.
Axel, I’ve recently enjoyed some great conversations about the Utah Scholars program. It is wonderful! I benefitted from someone taking time to inform/motivate me about college, and I’m sure that you did too. You’re about God’s work. Keep it up!
There are elements within Hispanic/Latino culture and society (they also exist in all cultures and societies) that discount the value of education at any level, but particularly Higher Education. There are also documented institutional biases within the education system in this State that have discouraged Hispanic/Latino students from aspiring to anything beyond vocational training. These can be difficult barriers to surmount.
Programs such as Utah Scholars (thank you Axel), MESA, and others, are critical to presenting the idea of Higher Education to Hispanic/Latino students early in their Secondary Education experience. Additionally, there are programs at the Elementary Education level that help to encourage students to excel academically. Access to charter programs such as AMES, also helps disadvantaged students to prepare for success in Higher Education.
My children attended Granger Elementary in the Granite School District. It was and is a very diverse school. I remember that at Parent Teacher nights, the Hispanic/Latino population was always well represented. I disagree with the notion that children of Hispanic/Latino families do not receive the same level of support in academics as those from the dominant culture. There are economic inequalities, but they are not exclusive to minorities in this area, besides, theoretically there are no differences between East side and West side schools in the Granite District — yea, maybe.
I do not believe in quotas, but I do believe that it is important to continually gage participation and graduation rates against service population demographic breakdowns. Anomalies in these rates must be addressed aggressively (lest they be litigated). Success in this endeavor cannot be won without a continuous and coordinated effort between USHE, USOE and the Hispanic/Latino community.
I have noticed over the years that there is a tendency with our institutions of higher education to “solve” their diversity issues (sometimes that means meeting quotas) by recruiting out-of-state. There may be some justification for doing that with the African-American community, but the Hispanic/Latino community in the State is substantially more significant and there should be no excuse for looking elsewhere to fill set-aside admissions slots and scholarships. The same can be said for mentor, community liaison and recruiting positions in these institutions. State funds must not be used to recruit qualified applicants from out-of-state! That is a cop out. It does not solve the problem. It serves only to gloss over it.
Now, on the related issue of Developmental Education. To assume that a High School Diploma/GED or equivalent is a guarantee of success in Higher Ed. is a bit of a stretch. I do not condemn USOE. Quite often, 18 year old kids just are not ready, intellectually or emotionally, to take advanced courses. Many first-in-their-family college attenders are non-traditional students. By the time they have made the decision to attend college, they have likely forgotten what they learned in High School (assuming they learned anything). Developmental Education gives these students (Hispanic/Latino or otherwise) the opportunity to build, or rebuild, the necessary academic foundations to meet their academic goals.
The non-traditional student ought to be granted the same level of respect and cooperation as the traditional. They should not be condemned for either not receiving a High School diploma, or forgetting what they learned. These students are tax-payers, just as the parents of traditional students are (sometimes they are also the parents of traditional students).
It troubles me that SLCC now requires a High School Diploma or equivalent to be matriculated. What is the Legislature’s position on this? Is it the expectation that USOE will be responsible for being the gatekeeper into USHE, regardless of age? Is Adult Education through USOE more cost effective than Developmental Education through USHE? Is Adult Education or the Community School as academically rigorous as Developmental Education through USHE?
Why force the student to spend the money on USOE courses when they will have to take the placement exams anyway? If they have not been adequately prepared by USOE, they will then have to spend more money on developmental courses with USHE.
Those are some of my thoughts. I hope they are helpful.