|
|
By Ben Miller — April 22, 2014
Community colleges are a significant portion of the higher education system, enrolling over 10.6 million students each year. Especially for low-income, minority, and first generation students, they provide the initial gateway to higher education. When operating well, these institutions can provide students with access to low-cost programs well-attuned to local labor market needs, build a basis for transferring to a four-year college, or accomplishing a host of other missions.
But as Josh Wyner lays out in his excellent new book, “What Excellent Community Colleges Do,” getting these institutions to the point where they can accomplish all these goals is a product of intentional, dedicated action. Wyner’s book draws on concrete examples from his work administering the Aspen Prize for Community College Excellence, to talk about the types of hard work, committed culture from leadership down to faculty, good communication with the business sector, and a number of other factors that America’s most successful community colleges possess. Not only does doing so help the reader better understand how complex ideas play out in practice, it also makes the book very lively and engaging to read. This is not a dry tome. It’s an engaging and readable discussion of how specific colleges addressed pressing national challenges with a great mixture of policy and examples. And if you have any interest in community colleges, or really lessons about effective higher education structure and completion, it’s very much worth reading.
Today and tomorrow Ed Central is running excerpt from an e-mail interview with Josh about some of the themes in his book, what it takes to build a successful culture, the all-too-often ignored importance of leadership, and several other interesting issues the book discusses. Some of the Ed Central questions have been edited down.
Ed Central: The book argues that successful community colleges have an established culture that helps them thrive, not just the specific policy interventions they pursue. In looking at the colleges you highlight, when and how did they build these cultures? Is it a matter of turning around an entirely under-performing college or tapping into existing support to do things better?
Josh Wyner: So much of the work in recent years to improve community colleges has focused on replicating particular educational programs or student services models that have been effective elsewhere. While those reforms matter– and indeed comprise a big part of what my book describes–I have yet to see an exceptional community college that was built solely through the adoption of isolated programs, no matter how effective. Establishing an organization that continuously drives toward excellent student outcomes also requires intentional efforts to build a strong culture.
Nowhere is this more apparent than at Valencia College, in Orlando, Florida. Valencia has built a faculty professional development process–including a unique tenure system–entirely around improving student learning in the classroom. Most tenured faculty have come through this system, so there is now a pervasive culture built around professors and staff analyzing and adapting their practice to improve student outcomes.
Valencia has also built its culture by developing a series of “Big Ideas.” This is a process by which the entire college decides on an area of focus to advance student success that, in turn, guides a huge amount of the reform effort for several years. When data showed that students failing even one of their first five courses had a much lower chance of graduating, the Big Idea became, “Student failure occurs at the front door.“ This in turn led to many highly effective reforms, including Valencia’s well-known system of student advising (LifeMap) and the policy of prohibiting late registration for courses. College leaders understood that engaging everyone in figuring out a central theory of action will not only lead to a set of strong programs, but a common sense of purpose and focus that will drive all decisions.
EC: How much do you think the states matter in encouraging the types of policies you see successful community colleges pursue? Is there a model form of governance or relationships that states should strive to emulate?
JW: State policy can set the stage–or hinder efforts–to achieve higher levels of community college student success. Students’ bachelor’s degree aspirations will not be met unless incentives are provided for four-year colleges to take more transfer students and apply all of their community college credits to a major. Community colleges will continue to be frustrated in their attempts to accelerate completion of developmental education and core courses as long as funding and reporting structures are built around old models defined by courses and semesters. Clearly, some state systems are more focused on resolving these things than others.
At the same time, states and systems should also be thinking about how to support the development of stronger cultures within higher education institutions. How can they help community college trustees understand gaps in student success and how to hire presidents who can close them? How can they provide leadership professional development aligned to the actions of today’s excellent presidents? To advance excellence in the sector, we need to continue advancing state policies to remove barriers to innovation and strengthen student pathways, but we need to dramatically accelerate intentional efforts to build a new generation of exceptional leaders.
EC: What characteristics or traits do these exceptional leaders have in common? And do they suggest any need to rethink the way community colleges currently search for their leaders?
JW: In the first year of the Aspen Prize, each of the five top colleges had a really strong president who had been at the college for a decade or more. That got us wondering: How were these presidents different from others? Working with Achieving the Dream (ATD), Aspen researched the qualities of presidents whose community colleges finished in the top five of the Aspen prize process in 2011 and/or whose colleges had achieved the greatest student outcome gains among ATD presidents. We found that exceptional presidents possessed five common qualities above all others: deep commitment to student access and success, willingness to take risks, strong internal change management ability, the vision and capacity to build external partnerships, and strong fundraising ability. Yet we found that boards of trustees hiring new presidents often overlook two of those five characteristics–risk-taking and change management ability. So, yes, boards of trustees need tools that help them take a different focus when hiring, and we also need new professional development models for current and aspiring presidents to develop these key capabilities. Aspen and Achieving the Dream are working to build both of those.
EC: What role can the federal government play in these efforts? It seems noticeably absent from a lot of the interventions and ideas discussed.
JW: Federal financial aid programs are worth billions to community colleges every year, but the dollars flow through students, not directly to the institutions. So it’s not clear how that money can be leveraged to impact institutions. Perhaps that’s why so much effort is being devoted at the federal level to providing better information to students and families. While the Department of Education should continue helping students become smarter consumers, it seems unlikely that, in the increasingly complicated and diversified higher education marketplace, moving consumer decisions alone will create enough of an impetus for colleges to improve student outcomes. The Department is also trying to cut off institutional eligibility to receive student financial aid for especially poor-performing institutions, the basic idea behind the gainful employment regulations. But while this approach could force colleges to avoid or curtail the worst practices, it is unclear that it would do much to create incentives for excellent practice.
Perhaps the most important role the federal government can play in advancing community college student success is to design new competitive grant funding programs that create incentives for innovative practice tied to specific goals. Among those worth considering are improving completion among student populations who disproportionately arrive at college underprepared; increasing rates and numbers of low-income community college students who attain a bachelor’s degree; and ensuring that greater numbers of college graduates are employed with strong wages. Community colleges won’t be able to achieve those goals by acting alone. They’ll have to act in concert with other types of institutions—and that’s something to incentivize.
- See more at: http://www.edcentral.org/wyner-excellent-community-colleges/#sthash.4W4xiMQA.dpuf
Norman Stahl
[log in to unmask]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To access the LRNASST-L archives or User Guide, or to change your
subscription options (including subscribe/unsubscribe), point your web browser to
http://www.lists.ufl.edu/archives/lrnasst-l.html
To contact the LRNASST-L owner, email [log in to unmask]
|
|
|
Archives |
April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011, Week 3 January 2011, Week 2 January 2011, Week 1 January 2011 December 2010, Week 5 December 2010, Week 4 December 2010, Week 3 December 2010, Week 2 December 2010, Week 1 November 2010, Week 5 November 2010, Week 4 November 2010, Week 3 November 2010, Week 2 November 2010, Week 1 October 2010, Week 5 October 2010, Week 4 October 2010, Week 3 October 2010, Week 2 October 2010, Week 1 September 2010, Week 5 September 2010, Week 4 September 2010, Week 3 September 2010, Week 2 September 2010, Week 1 August 2010, Week 5 August 2010, Week 4 August 2010, Week 3 August 2010, Week 2 August 2010, Week 1 July 2010, Week 5 July 2010, Week 4 July 2010, Week 3 July 2010, Week 2 July 2010, Week 1 June 2010, Week 5 June 2010, Week 4 June 2010, Week 3 June 2010, Week 2 June 2010, Week 1 May 2010, Week 4 May 2010, Week 3 May 2010, Week 2 May 2010, Week 1 April 2010, Week 5 April 2010, Week 4 April 2010, Week 3 April 2010, Week 2 April 2010, Week 1 March 2010, Week 5 March 2010, Week 4 March 2010, Week 3 March 2010, Week 2 March 2010, Week 1 February 2010, Week 4 February 2010, Week 3 February 2010, Week 2 February 2010, Week 1 January 2010, Week 5 January 2010, Week 4 January 2010, Week 3 January 2010, Week 2 January 2010, Week 1 December 2009, Week 5 December 2009, Week 4 December 2009, Week 3 December 2009, Week 2 December 2009, Week 1 November 2009, Week 5 November 2009, Week 4 November 2009, Week 3 November 2009, Week 2 November 2009, Week 1 October 2009, Week 5 October 2009, Week 4 October 2009, Week 3 October 2009, Week 2 October 2009, Week 1 September 2009, Week 5 September 2009, Week 4 September 2009, Week 3 September 2009, Week 2 September 2009, Week 1 August 2009, Week 5 August 2009, Week 4 August 2009, Week 3 August 2009, Week 2 August 2009, Week 1 July 2009, Week 5 July 2009, Week 4 July 2009, Week 3 July 2009, Week 2 July 2009, Week 1 June 2009, Week 5 June 2009, Week 4 June 2009, Week 3 June 2009, Week 2 June 2009, Week 1 May 2009, Week 5 May 2009, Week 4 May 2009, Week 3 May 2009, Week 2 May 2009, Week 1 April 2009, Week 5 April 2009, Week 4 April 2009, Week 3 April 2009, Week 2 April 2009, Week 1 March 2009, Week 5 March 2009, Week 4 March 2009, Week 3 March 2009, Week 2 March 2009, Week 1 February 2009, Week 4 February 2009, Week 3 February 2009, Week 2 February 2009, Week 1 January 2009, Week 5 January 2009, Week 4 January 2009, Week 3 January 2009, Week 2 January 2009, Week 1 December 2008, Week 5 December 2008, Week 4 December 2008, Week 3 December 2008, Week 2 December 2008, Week 1 November 2008, Week 5 November 2008, Week 4 November 2008, Week 3 November 2008, Week 2 November 2008, Week 1 October 2008, Week 5 October 2008, Week 4 October 2008, Week 3 October 2008, Week 2 October 2008, Week 1 September 2008, Week 5 September 2008, Week 4 September 2008, Week 3 September 2008, Week 2 September 2008, Week 1 August 2008, Week 5 August 2008, Week 4 August 2008, Week 3 August 2008, Week 2 August 2008, Week 1 July 2008, Week 5 July 2008, Week 4 July 2008, Week 3 July 2008, Week 2 July 2008, Week 1 June 2008, Week 5 June 2008, Week 4 June 2008, Week 3 June 2008, Week 2 June 2008, Week 1 May 2008, Week 5 May 2008, Week 4 May 2008, Week 3 May 2008, Week 2 May 2008, Week 1 April 2008, Week 5 April 2008, Week 4 April 2008, Week 3 April 2008, Week 2 April 2008, Week 1 March 2008, Week 5 March 2008, Week 4 March 2008, Week 3 March 2008, Week 2 March 2008, Week 1 February 2008, Week 5 February 2008, Week 4 February 2008, Week 3 February 2008, Week 2 February 2008, Week 1 January 2008, Week 5 January 2008, Week 4 January 2008, Week 3 January 2008, Week 2 January 2008, Week 1 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003 December 2002 November 2002 October 2002 September 2002 August 2002 July 2002 June 2002 May 2002 April 2002 March 2002 February 2002 January 2002 December 2001 November 2001 October 2001 September 2001 August 2001 July 2001 June 2001 May 2001 April 2001 March 2001 February 2001 January 2001 December 2000 November 2000 October 2000 September 2000 August 2000 July 2000 June 2000 May 2000 April 2000 March 2000 February 2000 January 2000 December 1999 November 1999 October 1999 September 1999 August 1999 July 1999 June 1999 May 1999 April 1999 March 1999 February 1999 January 1999 December 1998 November 1998 October 1998 September 1998 August 1998 July 1998 June 1998 May 1998 April 1998 March 1998 February 1998 January 1998 December 1997 November 1997 October 1997 September 1997 August 1997 July 1997 June 1997 May 1997 April 1997 March 1997 February 1997 January 1997 December 1996 November 1996 October 1996 September 1996 August 1996 July 1996 June 1996 May 1996 April 1996 March 1996 February 1996 January 1996 December 1995 November 1995 October 1995 September 1995 August 1995 July 1995 June 1995 May 1995 April 1995 March 1995 February 1995 January 1995
|
|