Completion to Access
Thursday was opening day of the semester, a day wen we here all kinds of speeches from many of the mucky-mucks. I teach in a state supported institue of higher learning in the great (but broke) stage of California. As was not a surprise to anyone, we were told that there wasn't any money. There wasn't going to be any money. And don't expect a money miracle to happen. Hardly shocking. What was discussed was a notion of moving from a model of "access for all" to "services for those who will complete." The merits of this system is certainly open to debate. Personally, if the changes help cut some of the dead weight out, I'm for it. (Dead weight, to me, are the students who have little to no interest in doing the home work, studying, preparing, or paying attention in class -- I don't mind students that are struggling to succeed -- if they are working hard, they are the type of student I like.) There are far too many students in the Community College system who are not serious students.
The state has recently invested in the technology to track students far better than they used to. Students who flunk out of one Community College, are now barred from just going to another one. While I think that we give way to many second and third chances to students, at least there is now an attempt to be more careful with which students use the resources.
The down side of the "completion" model, is that it asks the schools to be somewhat clairvoyant. We are encouraged to have students successfully complete classes (that means make it to census (week 3), and to add/drop date (week 9) and finally end the class with a "C" or better). Looking at the statistics, they have determined that students who haven't added a class by the middle of the first week are unlikely to successfully complete a class, so we (the instructors) have been encouraged to not admit students after the first class session.
We have also been told that they are tracking classes which are popular with students who don't complete certificates or degrees (I believe that If a student completes a certificate or degree anywhere within the state higher ed system in (I think) seven years from starting they are counted as someone who completes). Classes that cater to students who don't complete are going to be considered for cutting (at least until the budget crises recedes). Some of this is worrying to me, as we use many of community members in our productions. Community members are non-traditional students who are taking classes (our shows are a class) for enrichment, fun, etc. but are not pursuing a degree or certificate, and have no plans on completing one.
Focussing the resources on traditional students who are working to a degree makes a certain amount of sense when we can't afford all the students who want classes. However, I think it is a shame, as many of those community members who take a class just for fun are excellent students who bring a breadth of experience and diversity to the classroom not found in the UC's, CSU's or private university classrooms.
One thing that doesn't seem to be on the table at all is raising the cost of tuition, or correlating tuition somehow to being in a degree program/GPA etc. so that those taking classes just for fun (or not succeeding at classes) pay a higher cost, and those focussing on a degree, or having a good GPA pay less per unit. Either way, even with the increased fees being charged to Community College students, California residents still pay one of the lowest costs for higher ed in the country.
Anyway, I was going to get out my soap box, but I haven't yet. There are some concerning things in the new model -- and some positive things. My biggest concern is that the faculty and administration are able to navigate the new model, encourage student success, and not lower the standards of education that many expect from the instructors.
The state has recently invested in the technology to track students far better than they used to. Students who flunk out of one Community College, are now barred from just going to another one. While I think that we give way to many second and third chances to students, at least there is now an attempt to be more careful with which students use the resources.
The down side of the "completion" model, is that it asks the schools to be somewhat clairvoyant. We are encouraged to have students successfully complete classes (that means make it to census (week 3), and to add/drop date (week 9) and finally end the class with a "C" or better). Looking at the statistics, they have determined that students who haven't added a class by the middle of the first week are unlikely to successfully complete a class, so we (the instructors) have been encouraged to not admit students after the first class session.
We have also been told that they are tracking classes which are popular with students who don't complete certificates or degrees (I believe that If a student completes a certificate or degree anywhere within the state higher ed system in (I think) seven years from starting they are counted as someone who completes). Classes that cater to students who don't complete are going to be considered for cutting (at least until the budget crises recedes). Some of this is worrying to me, as we use many of community members in our productions. Community members are non-traditional students who are taking classes (our shows are a class) for enrichment, fun, etc. but are not pursuing a degree or certificate, and have no plans on completing one.
Focussing the resources on traditional students who are working to a degree makes a certain amount of sense when we can't afford all the students who want classes. However, I think it is a shame, as many of those community members who take a class just for fun are excellent students who bring a breadth of experience and diversity to the classroom not found in the UC's, CSU's or private university classrooms.
One thing that doesn't seem to be on the table at all is raising the cost of tuition, or correlating tuition somehow to being in a degree program/GPA etc. so that those taking classes just for fun (or not succeeding at classes) pay a higher cost, and those focussing on a degree, or having a good GPA pay less per unit. Either way, even with the increased fees being charged to Community College students, California residents still pay one of the lowest costs for higher ed in the country.
Anyway, I was going to get out my soap box, but I haven't yet. There are some concerning things in the new model -- and some positive things. My biggest concern is that the faculty and administration are able to navigate the new model, encourage student success, and not lower the standards of education that many expect from the instructors.