19 April 2013

Not a "graveyard"

The buzz about developmental education comprises multifarious perspectives. Developmental education has been referred to as the "graveyard" of higher education and higher ed's "bridge to nowhere" by groups such as Complete College America. Some, and the AACC no less, have even suggested that community colleges may need to rethink their mission, going "beyond the open door" to consider tough questions like, "Whom do we serve?" Policy recommendations include reducing or eliminating developmental education as seen in proposed legislation in Connecticut to cut it. In response, groups such as the Center for the Future of Higher Education have formed and dissolved as quickly as they were established in order to address this rapid narrowing of the community college mission. Analyses include a report on the impact of the completion agenda on access while others focus on research. Articles, reports, studies, blog posts, and sundry media, which put dev ed in the limelight, abound.

At the same time, questions arise surrounding the foundations that support the work of Complete College America and similar initiatives. What is the underlying impetus for this ubiquitous, laser focus on completion? Could it stem from the history of investment in the student loan industry by contributing foundations such as Lumina?

Furthermore, there is a great deal of discourse on best practices in developmental education and the calls for dramatic change in order to promote student degree and certificate completion; however, as noted in MDRC's report "Unlocking the Gate," "While research on best practices in developmental education abounds, little rigorous research exists to demonstrate the effects of these reforms on students' achievement."

Clearly, this is a complex, multi-layered issue embedded within an equally complex landscape that cannot be understood at a cursory level. The question of developmental education is as much about access and equity -- the very premises upon which our community college system was built -- as it is about success and completion.

Amid the din and clamor of this nationwide discourse about developmental education and student completion, we have a glimmer of hope -- a kernel of energy.

In the context of a community college,


our Lane Community College developmental writing students have achieved success in program-level writing courses at a rate that is 10% higher than students placing directly into program-level writing. (This is based on Lane's Achieving the Dream cohort data of degree-seeking students entering in Fall 2006 through Fall 2008, following those students for three years.)

Developmental education strikes at the very heart of the purpose of the community college in a vibrant democracy.

It is not a "graveyard."

Developmental education is, in fact, a bedrock.

It is a foundation that we believe will grow stronger and more prominent through innovative work such as this Digital Collaboration project and our commitment to access, equity, and success for our students.

1 comment:

  1. When I first heard of outcomes-based education - lo, these many year ago - I began with a fundamental objection to one of its premises: that outcomes must be measurable to be valid. For so man facets of higher education, this is simply not possible, in spite of how valid, necessary, essential, and fundamentally useful to a member of democratic society the learning in question may be. In all the years I've watched the battle over these issues, I've never seen any significant discussions challenging this faulty premise.

    ReplyDelete