David Arendale's Personal Web Site

Arendale, D. (Ed.). (2005). Postsecondary peer cooperative learning programs annotated bibliography. [On-line]. Retrieved June 24, 2004, from http://www.tc.umn.edu/~arend011/bibdir.htm
This database identifies more than 700 articles, book chapters, dissertations, and reports related to the six major postsecondary peer cooperative learning programs: Accelerated Learning Groups, Emerging Scholars Program, Peer-Led Team Learning, Supplemental Instruction, Structured Learning Assistance, and Video-based Supplemental Instruction. The documents provide program descriptions, evaluation studies, and identification of critical program features that should be implemented to achieve optimal program and student outcomes. The data is available both through a downloadable report as well as a searchable database.

Posted by David Arendale at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

In response to many of the trends areas identified earlier in thisblog series, a number of model practices have been identified that meet the needs of students admitted through academic access programs and the newly recognized needs of the general student population. While the need for academic access, developmental education, and learning assistance programs appears to be stable, if not increasing, the form of such services will probably need to evolve to meet the needs and requirements of students, institutions, policy makers, and the general public. A review of the history of this topic has confirmed that the language and form of programs have changed over time. The following is a sample of some of the emerging practices that are being adopted for use.

Posted by David Arendale at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Task Force on Remedial Education. (1997). Report of the task force on remedial education. Boston, MA: University of Massachusetts. Retrieved July 4, 2004, from: http://cit.necc.mass.edu/mccdec/Report%20of%20the%20Task%20Force.htm
In this document, the Task Force on Remedial Education examines the issue of remedial education, describes the scope of remedial education at the University,

The report offers recommendations for policies and administrative procedures that will foster student learning through remedial education: 1. The University of Massachusetts should continue to offer limited remedial programs to address the needs of its admitted students. 2. The University and the Community Colleges should explore additional avenues of collaboration that might improve or enhance the quality and cost-effectiveness of remediation available to students enrolled in both sectors. 3. All entering first-time freshmen and transfer students should continue to be assessed by each campus to determine appropriate course assignments for mathematics and writing. 4. Campus faculty and administrators responsible for remedial programs at UMass campuses should increase their levels of communication and collaboration with each other. 5. The University should develop better methods for assessing the outcomes of remedial instruction, working collaboratively with other sectors of higher education as necessary.

Posted by David Arendale at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Task Force on Remedial Education. (2001). Collaborating to strengthen student preparation. Springfield, IL: Illinois Community College System. Retrieved July 4, 2004, from: http//www.hcc.cc.il.us/staff/padriacs/taskforcereport.pdf
The Remedial Education Task Force identified priority needs for remedial education in Illinois.

Strategies identified for implementation included further alignment of standardized student assessment instruments; agreement on student placement parameters; reinforce current P-16 collaborations; promote earlier awareness of rising academic and workplace standards; development of strategies for earlier intervention in P-12 pipeline; intervene with students while still in high school; align high school graduation and college entrance requirements; provide more feedback to high schools concerning their graduates needing remediation; provide alternatives to academic term length developmental courses to remediate weaknesses; coordinate Adult Education, ESL, and college developmental programs; track students who enroll in remedial courses to evaluate the effectiveness of the intervention; develop comprehensive student support systems that address both academic and nonacademic needs; provide remedial education via alternative educational delivery systems; provide professional development for full- and part-time remedial instructors to improve their skills and integrate technology within the classroom; and develop state-wide standards for remedial education courses.

Posted by David Arendale at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Shaw, K. M. (1997). Remedial education as ideological battleground: Emerging remedial education policies in the community college. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 19(3), 284-296.
The author describes the current debate about the appropriate location of remedial education classes and their frequent placement with public community colleges. The ideological underpinnings for the debate are examined. Distinctions are drawn between developmental and remedial education and the appropriate implementation by community colleges. Some institutions are strongly controlled by state-level policy making that strictly dictates the implementation of policy down to the individual institution regarding testing, admissions, placement into remedial courses, and the curriculum of such courses. Other states provide guidelines that are open for interpretation by the individual institution. Still other states are not directive regarding such matters which are left for local control. This represents three distinct policy models used by public community colleges in the U.S.

Posted by David Arendale at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Ruppert, S. S. (2003). Closing the college participation gap. Washington, D.C.: Education Commission of the States. Retrieved July 4, 2004, from: http//www.ecs.org/clearinghouse/47/84/4784.pdf
This national report examines the college participation rates of each state. The policy implications of this report is that a higher percentage of Americans could benefit from college education and the requirements required of the publicly-funded institutions and the states.

The report states that the challenge is not only to accommodate a greater number of students, but also to increase the proportion of the population that goes to college and successfully completes its learning goals. The consequences for academic access programs would dramatically increase with a corresponding increase in the entering student body which would naturally represent a wide range of academic preparation levels. Developmental education is one of the interventions recommended by a companion report, Narrowing the gaps in educational attainment within states A policymaker's guide to assessing and responding to needs for community college services available from http//www.communitycollegepolicy.org/html/Issues/Access/pdf/ NCHEMSReport.pdf

Posted by David Arendale at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Parsad, B., & Lewis, L. (2003). Remedial education at degree-granting postsecondary institutions in Fall 2000 Statistical analysis report. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved July 4, 2004, from: http//nces.ed.gov/pubs2004/2004010.pdf
This study was conducted through the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) Postsecondary Education Quick Information System (PEQIS). It was designed to provide current national estimates of the prevalence and characteristics of remedial courses and enrollments in degree-granting 2-year and 4-year postsecondary institutions that enrolled freshmen in fall 2000, and to report changes in remediation from fall 1995.

For the purposes of this study, remedial education courses were defined as courses in reading, writing, or mathematics for college-level students lacking those skills necessary to perform college-level work at the level required by the institution. This report presents data on remedial course offerings, student participation in remedial programs, institutional structure of remedial programs, and the delivery of remedial courses through distance education. This study examined two issues not covered in the 1995 survey types of technology used in the delivery of remedial education through distance education courses, and the use of computers as hands-on instructional tool for on-campus remedial education. The data are presented by institutional type: public 2-year, private 2-year, public 4-year, and private 4-year.

Posted by David Arendale at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

O'Brien, C., & Shedd, J. (2001). Getting through college: Voices of low-income and minority students in New England. Washington, D.C.: The Institute for Higher Education Policy. Retrieved July 4, 2004, from: http://www.ihep.org/Pubs/PDF/Nelliemae.pdf This research study employed surveys and in-depth interviews with currently enrolled low-income and minority students in the New England region concerning their feelings about the obstacles they face in succeeding in college and what strategies they are employing to deal with the environment.

Findings from the study include: 1. Pre-college academic preparation programs were rated highly as supporting current college success though only one-fourth of eligible students are able to participate at the high school level. 2. Financial aid was a key factor in college attendance though one-third indicated that their financial aid package was inadequate and caused other hardships in their lives. 3. Minority students were more likely to participate in pre-college programs than their counterparts. Recommendations offered by the report include: increased awareness of pre-college academic preparation programs; increased offerings of grants in lieu of loans; increased efforts to establish a "campus community" for students who live off-campus, have families, off-campus employment, and other responsibilities away from the campus.

Posted by David Arendale at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

O’Brien, C. T. (2004). Indicators of opportunity in higher education. Washington, D.C.: The Pell Institute for the Study of Opportunity in Higher Education. Most students from low-income families (below $25,000 annual income) do not attend college since it appears unattainable. Those who do attend from this group generally attend public two your or proprietary colleges. Most of these students will not complete a four-year baccalaureate degree. Postsecondary education is becoming more stratified by students’ income.

Posted by David Arendale at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (1)

NERCHE. (2002). Developmental education and college opportunity in New England: Lessons for a national study of state and system policy impacts. Washington, D.C.: The Institute for Higher Education Policy and New England Resource Center for Higher Education. Retrieved July 4, 2004, from: http://www.nerche.org/IHEP/FinalRep/NERCHEfinal.pdf
This pilot project does not evaluate New England’s state policies or compare New England public institutions, but rather provides important clues and lessons on how developmental education policies are being implemented in a specific geographic region, and what questions need to be considered in a national study or project.

Common characteristics of developmental education (DE) programs were: formation of two-year/four year partnerships; outsourcing of DE to local community colleges; transfer of priority of DE to two-year colleges; centralize DE programs at four-year colleges; providing summer bridge DE programs; and using ACT Accuplacer for assessment of students. Numerous recommendations were made for a national study on developmental education: examine both centralized and decentralized state system policy approaches to DE; financial implications of statewide DE policy; curriculum impacts of DE policies; admissions decisions and enrollment yields impacted by DE programs and policies; and examine student responses and perspectives as a consequence of changing statewide policies related to DE.

Posted by David Arendale at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

NCPPHE. (2004). Measuring up: The national report card on higher education. San Jose, CA: National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education. Retrieved October 10, 2004, from: http://measuringup.highereducation.org.
Although more high school graduates are prepared for college, most states, and the nation as a whole. have made few gains in college enrollment and completion over the last decade. And for most American families, paying for college has become more difficult. This report is the first to examine ten-year performance trends in the nation as a whole and in each of the 50 states. The achievement gains are not evenly spread through the population, the report also finds. Substantial racial, ethnic, income, and geographical disparities are hidden in the rising national averages in achievement.
The findings suggest that the national standards movement, and other reforms at the elementary and secondary school levels, have produced larger numbers of college-ready students.

More high school students are taking rigorous courses, such as upper-level math and science. In many states, however, smaller proportions of students are completing high school and going to college following graduation. Moreover, only slightly more of those who do enroll in college are completing two- and four-year degree programs than was the case a decade ago. The report evaluates the performance of each state in five areas: preparation for college; participation (do state residents enroll in college-level education?); completion (what percentage of those enrolled in higher education receive degrees or certificates?); affordability; and benefits (what economic and civic benefits accrue to a state that has a more highly-educated population?).

Posted by David Arendale at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Martinez, S., Snider, L. A., & Day, E. (2003). Remediation in higher education: A review of the literature. Topeka, KS: Kansas State Board of Education. Retrieved July 4, 2004, from: http://www.ksde.org/pre/postsecondary_remediation.doc
This national survey of developmental education dealt with the following issues: reason for DE enrollment levels; strategies to reduce need for DE; institutional type to provide DE; financial responsibility for DE; factors that make DE more effective; and suggested DE research topics. The report concludes with a state by state analysis of DE by identifying the following features: annual cost, enrollment percentage, state laws and policies or proposed changes, and restrictions on provision of DE.

Posted by David Arendale at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Lizotte, R. (1998). Access and quality: Improving the performance of Massachusetts Community College developmental education programs. Boston, MA: Massachusetts Community College System. The Massachusetts Community College Developmental Education Committee was charged to identify practices and models for adoption by the state's community colleges. Some of the recommendations include the following four areas. Assessment and Placement: mandatory comprehensive assessment of all incoming students; mandatory placement into appropriate courses. Curriculum Design and Delivery: comprehensive developmental curriculum; exit criteria for each developmental course; conduct continuous outcome research to measure program effectiveness. Support Services: monitor student success through intrusive advising; provide tutors and Supplemental Instruction program. Organizational Structure: professional development of faculty; fund full-time faculty to teach developmental courses.

Posted by David Arendale at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Jenkins, D., & Boswell, K. (2003). State policies on community college remedial education: Findings from a national survey. Washington, D.C.: Center for Community College Policy, Education Commission of the States. Retrieved February 26, 2005, from http://www.communitycollegepolicy.org/pdf/FINAL%20REMEDIAL%20POLICY.pdf These changes have increased enrollment in remedial education at public community colleges. Most states have instituted evaluation programs to monitor such enrollment at the community college and transfer to four-year institutions.

Ten states currently prohibit or discourage remedial education at public four-year institutions: Arizona, Colorado, Georgia, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, New Mexico, South Carolina, Utah, and Virginia. Louisiana will prohibit such coursework beginning in 2005. Remedial education is being curtailed with the City University of New York System and the California State University System. Massachusetts restricts such enrollment to a smaller percentage.

Posted by David Arendale at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Kipp, S. M., Price, D. V., & Wohlford, J. K. (2002). Unequal opportunity: Disparities in college access among the 50 states. Indianapolis, IN: Lumina Foundation for Education. Retrieved July 4, 2004, from: http://www.luminafoundation.org This national study investigates academic access in all 50 states for students of varying levels of income and academic preparation. Two major dimensions were studied at the 2,800 postsecondary institutions in the study: admissibility and affordability. While most states provide low-income dependent students with access to public two-year institutions without borrowing, fewer states provide similar access to public four-year institutions.

The major findings of the study include: the percentage of admissible institutions varies widely among states; the percentage of affordable institutions varies widely among states; low-income dependent and independent students have fewer accessible options than median-income students; and borrowing is more frequently required to achieve affordability for low-income dependent students than it is for median-income dependent students. Part of this variability in access is due to differences across and within states in students' academic preparation, selectivity of institutions, variations in tuition policies, and variations regarding state financial aid programs.

Posted by David Arendale at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (8)

Jehangir, R. R. (2002). Higher education for whom? The battle to include developmental education at the four-year university. In J. L. Higbee, D. B. Lundell, & I. M. Duranczyk (Eds.), Developmental education: Policy and practice (pp. 17-34). Auburn, GA: National Association for Developmental Education. This article was an early one that forecast of increased pressure for access programs and developmental educaiton at large public four-year universities. This would eventually occur at the University of Minnesota when the General College was closed after a strategic restructuring of the institution.

This chapter examines the debate regarding the role of developmental education at public four-year universities, and will focus on the following topics: discussion of the historic and political forces that have shaped perceptions regarding DE; a description of DE and developmental students; an examination of the debate around its place in higher education with specific attention to current state legislative action against DE at the public four-year university; and recommendations for developmental educators who seek to challenge the merit of such legislation and create a paradigm shift around perceptions of DE.

Posted by David Arendale at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Furlong, T., & Fleishman, S. (2000). College preparatory program agreements between state universities and community colleges: A Level 1 review. Tallahassee, FL: Florida State Board of Community Colleges. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED440716). There is increased discussion among state policy makers to differentiate missions of public two-year and four-year institutgions. Some of these discussions include placing access programs and developmental education primarily with two-year institutions. Such an arrangement occured decades ago in the Florida public higher education system.

This report reviews the long history of college preparatory programs offered to state university students in Florida through partnerships with local community colleges. Courses are offered either at the community college or by the community college on the university campus. Results of the study suggest that: (1) administration of the college-university agreements are sound; (2) communication between sectors is adequate; (3) there are not problems with delivery of services to students; (4) community colleges are perceived to be best suited for delivery of remedial instruction; and (5) the majority of students successfully perform college-level coursework after completing college preparatory courses.

Posted by David Arendale at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Cunningham, A., Redmond, C., & Merisotis, J. (2003). Investing early: Intervention programs in selected U.S. states. Montreal, Canada: The Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation. Retrieved July 4, 2004, from
http://www.millenniumscholarships.ca/images/Publications/investingeng_web2.pdf More attention is placed on earlier academic preparation programs for potential college students. Rather than focusing on high school juniors and seniors, the research clearly suggests reaching into middle school to begin the preparation and transition process for college, especially those students who would be first-generation college or from historically-underrepresented backgrounds.

This study focused on 17 pre-college intervention programs offered in 12 states that are targeted for middle-school or high-school students. Effective programs had the following characteristics: they were comprehensive involving multiple areas (college awareness, financial aid counseling, academic enrichment, financial incentives); academic development (tutoring, mentoring, coursework) were important components; linkage with area postsecondary institutions. One of the biggest problems cited among the programs was that many eligible students did not participate in the programs for a variety of personal reasons and also that the programs limited their size due to budget constraints.

Posted by David Arendale at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Cloud, J. (2002, October 14). Who's ready for colege? [Sic] Conservatives want to get rid of remedial education. If so, only two-thirds of today's freshmen need apply. Time Magazine. This is one of the few times that the mainstream press has reported on developmental education. Rather than focusing on a more balanced presentation, the article focuses on the proposed policies in a few states regarding what they call remedial education.

The article repeats previously reported research such as about one-third of entering students need to enroll in one or more developmental courses. Several states are reported to ban financial support for developmental education, even at the community college level.

Posted by David Arendale at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (1)

Boylan, H. R., Saxon, D. P., & Boylan, H. M. (2002). State policies on remediation at public colleges and universities. Unpublished manuscript, National Center for Developmental Education, Appalachian State University, Boone, NC. Retrieved July 4, 2004, from: http://www.ced.appstate.edu/centers/ncde/reserve%20reading/state%20 Policies.htm This is probably the most comprehensive and accurate national survey of current policies regarding access education and developmental education. It illustrates how mixed the state policies are across the U.S. regarding opportunities for students.

The authors conduced a survey of higher education officials of all 50 states. States where developmental courses are restricted at state two and four-year institutions: California, Massachusetts, Mississippi, Missouri, New York, New Mexico, Texas, Utah, Washington, and Wisconsin. States where developmental courses are restricted to only two-year institutions: Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Montana, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia. Other survey results include regulations concerning mandatory testing and placement, impact upon financial aid, type of academic credit awarded, and state efforts to reduce the need for developmental education coursework by changes with high school curriculum.

Posted by David Arendale at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Bastedo, M. N., & Gumport, P. J. (2003). Access to what? Mission differentiation and academic stratification in U.S. public higher education. Higher Education: The International Journal of Higher Education and Educational Planning, 46(3), 341-359. This is one of the most important articles written about access policy in the past several years. Rather than focusing on battles occurring at individual colleges regarding access policies and programs, it describes a national trend that is impacting similar programs across the U.S. People working at colleges that are undergoing significant "mission differentiation" and "strategic reogranization" should pay particular attention to this article.

This article analyzes developmental education policy in Massachusetts and New York to examine recent policy decisions regarding the termination of academic programs, elimination of remedial education, promotion of honors colleges within each state system. A result of these policy decisions has been to increase stratification of programs and students within a public state higher education system as well as with individual institutions within the state system. The authors argue that more intense analysis needs to be conducted before systematic changes are made within education systems to avoid or at least forecast major changes in the stratification of student opportunity to attend postsecondary education.

Posted by David Arendale at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Barton, P. E. (2002). The closing of the education frontier? Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. Retrieved June 1, 2006, from http://www.ets.org/Media/Research/pdf/PICFRONTIER.pdf Many publications today describe the current or near future decline of opportunity for access to postsecondary education. Barton, on the other hand, argues that the decline has occurred for decades.

The author makes an implicit analogy with a theory that early America was defined by the opportunity presented by Frederick Jackson Turner's thesis of the 'opening of the American west'. The Turner thesis was, "Up to our own day American history has been in a large degree the history of the colonization of the Great West. The existence of an area of free land, its continuous recession, and the advance of American settlement westward explain American development". Accordingly, America changed when the West was closed and opportunity ended in 1893. Using this concept as a counterpoint, Barton questions whether the frontier of educational opportunity has already closed, and thereby changing American culture. He argues that there is empirical evidence that postsecondary educational opportunity has closed, and therefore changing the nature of American society. Barton's data challenges the conventional wisdom that educational attainment has continued to increase during the last quarter century. He paints a picture of an educational system that is not producing more high school graduates, that continues to display great social inequality, and that is not able to support greater proportions of students through to degree in four-year college programs.

Posted by David Arendale at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)