Research Into Practice

2004

Improving College Access for Minority, Low-Income, and First-Generation Students

By
Shayna Klopott, Research Associate
Institute for Educational Leadership

Dr. Monica Martinez, Project Director
Institute for Educational Leadership

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this paper is to synthesize the recommendations made in four white papers commissioned by the Pathways to College Network focused on elements that lead to increased access to college for minority, low-income, and first-generation students. These papers are “How Do Educators’ Cultural Belief Systems Affect Underserved Students’ Pursuit of Postsecondary Education?” coauthored by Pat George and Dr. Rosa Aronson from the National Association of Secondary School Principals (NASSP); “How Is School Reform Tied to Increasing College Access and Success for Low-Income and Minority Youth?” coauthored by Dr. Monica Martinez and Shayna Klopott from the Institute for Educational Leadership (IEL); “How Do Pre-Collegiate Academic Outreach Programs Impact College-Going Among Underrepresented Students?” coauthored by Dr. Yvette Gullatt and Wendy Jan from the University of California, Office of the President (UCOP); and “The Middle Grades: Putting All Students on Track for College” by Dr. Sharon Camblin of Change Systems for Educators. The four papers identify a common problem: the current structure of middle and high schools is inadequate to prepare minority, low-income, and first-generation students to attend college. Although each paper examines a different cause, each comes to the conclusion: that a successful change will require significant transformation in secondary education and possibly a complete overhaul of the existing preschool through college (P-16) system.

The paper “How Do Educators’ Cultural Belief Systems Affect Underserved Students’ Pursuit of Postsecondary Education?” examines the relationship between educators’ cultural beliefs – an individual’s ways of viewing the world based on cultural norms and expectations – and underserved students’ pursuit of postsecondary education. It argues that many, if not most, teachers are unprepared to work with the diverse students that fill today’s schools. The authors contend that educators frequently alter – if unconsciously – their expectations of students’ abilities and achievement based on race, gender, socioeconomic status, and other demographic characteristics, and consequently are less likely to assign advanced work to underserved students. Additionally, different cultural expectations and understandings of learning styles and student, teacher, and family roles often lead to a disconnect between schools and families/communities, limiting the effects of classroom learning for students who see few connections to the real world.

The paper “How Is School Reform Tied to Increasing College Access and Success for Low-Income and Minority Youth?” examines the predictors of college-going behavior and explores the ways in which a number of high school reform efforts address those predictors. It concludes that, while most high school reform efforts were not primarily designed to increase college access, many of them have incorporated practices, such as increased academic press and support structures for students that improve the likelihood that underrepresented minority and low-income youth will successfully enroll in and complete college. Martinez and Klopott find that the most common elements of these reform initiatives include access to a common core academic curriculum for all students, a balance of academic and social support for the purpose of developing social networks and instrumental relationships, the use of small or personalized learning environments and the alignment of curriculum between and among various levels.

The paper “How Do Pre-Collegiate Academic Outreach Programs Impact College-Going Among Underrepresented Students?” identifies the characteristics of effective programs, and the implications for pre-collegiate academic development programs and for school reform. The authors conclude that most pre-collegiate outreach programs are designed to counter the effects of negative influences and lack of school and/or community resources that inhibit student learning and goalsetting. This is called the deficit-building model. Gullatt and Jan (2002) identify 10 principles of practice common to strong pre-collegiate outreach programs designed on the deficitbuilding model:

• high standards for program students and staff;
• personalized attention for students;
• adult role models;
• peer support;
• K-12 program integration;
• strategically timed interventions;
• long-term investment in students;
• school/society bridge for students;
• scholarship assistance; and
• evaluation designs that contribute results to interventions.

The most successful pre-collegiate programs, they contend, are developed around these principles and provide experiences that enable underrepresented youth to successfully enroll in college.

The paper “The Middle Grades: Putting All Students on Track for College” seeks to answer four critical questions:

• What is the relationship between the middle grades and college access?
• How can middle schools mitigate the challenges faced
  by the underserved student?
• What are the capacities that middle schools need in
  order to ensure college access for the underserved student?
• How can middle schools develop those capacities?

The author argues that it is during the middle grades that students need to begin to develop college awareness/predisposition and to plan for college by ensuring that their academic plans are well aligned with college enrollment requirements and by developing an understanding that college is possible, even for students who don’t come from traditional collegegoing families. Additionally, the author contends that it is the middle school’s job to provide both students and their families with the counseling and activities needed to develop this awareness and planning and to provide the academic rigor and support to make college access a possibility. Finally, the author suggests that middle schools need to develop clear standards, high expectations, and school structures that meet students’ needs.

Each of the four papers concludes with a series of recommendations. Although the language varies from paper to paper, there was significant commonality among them. Overall, there are 13 unique recommendations that address the inadequate college preparation of minority, low-income, and first-generation students. By synthesizing these 13 original recommendations, we arrived at 5. The remainder of this paper provides concrete explanations of how to achieve each of the following recommendations:

• raise expectations for students,
• provide academic support,
• improve social support for students,
• P-16 alignment, and
• make quality evaluations a component of all new efforts.

Raise Expectations

Research on the relationship between teachers’ expectations and student performance indicates that teachers’ judgments and expectations of student ability influence student performance (Alvidrez & Weinstein, 1999; Jussim & Eccles, 1992; Anyon, 1980). Therefore, creating an environment in which students are expected to achieve at high levels and where they are encouraged and supported in doing so is a critical means of preparing students for college attendance. A summary of specific ways educators can raise expectations for their students follows.

Rigorous curriculum. Require all students to take an academically rigorous core curriculum. Providing access to such a curriculum sends teachers and students a message that all students can complete high-level work (Martinez & Klopott, 2002; George & Aronson, 2002; Camblin, 2003).

College readiness. Instill the expectation of college readiness in students as early as the middle grades to ensure that they begin to develop college and career aspirations, as well as to create an appropriate academic plan (Camblin, 2003).

Goals. Instill the expectation among staff and faculty that college preparation will be a goal for every student. In turn, students will work harder, internalize the expectation, and consequently work toward college enrollment as a personal goal (Martinez & Klopott, 2002; George & Aronson, 2002; Camblin, 2003).

Cultural beliefs. Address the cultural beliefs of school staff. Teachers should work to recognize their own cultural beliefs and understand how those beliefs might affect their pedagogy and their interactions with students. Once aware of their biases, teachers are able to change their practices and more effectively meet their students’ needs (George & Aronson, 2002; Camblin, 2003).

Previous knowledge. Incorporate students’ cultural, linguistic, and historical knowledge into the curricula and activities of the school. In doing so, students will see their cultures and languages as assets and will become more engaged in the teaching and learning process (George & Aronson, 2002; Gullat & Jan, 2002; Camblin, 2003).

Higher order skills. Teach higher order skills to all students as opposed to developing memorization. When students are placed in classrooms that provide more intense, varied, and authentic instructional experiences (knowledge construction and relevance) they demonstrate the ability to master more complex and demanding tasks (Newman & Wehlage, 1996; Martinez & Klopott, 2002; George & Aronson, 2002; Camblin, 2003).

High expectations. Work with families and postsecondary institutions to create high expectations and clear pathways to postsecondary education. Parental support and knowledge of the college-going process is crucial to helping students attain bachelor’s degrees. By working with both parents and postsecondary institutions, high schools can assure that parents have the information that their children need to attend college (Martinez & Klopott, 2002; Gullat & Jan, 2002; Camblin, 2003).

Provide Academic Support

One of the most important components of college preparation is strong academic support. Research shows that students who take high-level high school courses, including advanced mathematics, are more likely to enroll in and complete bachelor’s programs than those who do not (Adelman, 1999). However, low-income, underrepresented-minority, and first-generation students are often unprepared for and discouraged from taking such courses. By providing consistent academic support so that these students can take and successfully complete academically rigorous courses, high schools can ensure that students have the opportunity to prepare for postsecondary education.

Learning environments. Develop personalized learning environments where teachers know their students well. This enables teachers to design lessons and provide academic support that meets the needs and interests of individual students (Martinez & Klopott, 2002; George & Aronson, 2002; Gullat & Jan, 2002; Camblin, 2003).

Curriculum. Align curricula within the school. Teachers from each grade level, including postsecondary faculty, should work together to align the content and skills presented in each course to provide academic continuity from year to year within subject areas. Cohesion in course material from grade to grade ensures that students are prepared for each subsequent
course level, which greatly improves their chances for success (Martinez & Klopott, 2002; George & Aronson, 2002).

Partnerships. Develop partnerships with higher education to provide timely academic interventions. Academic interventions come in numerous forms, including but not limited to, using university partners to tutor students and to help them with accelerated coursework, and training teachers to provide intensive reading remediation so that their students can participate in content area work. Such interventions enable high schools to enroll more students in high-level coursework, help them succeed, and provide additional resources for students (Martinez & Klopott, 2002; George & Aronson, 2002; Gullat & Jan, 2002).

School/community connection. Improve the school/ community connection to bring relevance to students’ learning experience, thus engaging students in school while building ties to the community. For students who are most at risk for school failure, linking education to experience is often a critical form of support (Martinez & Klopott, 2002; George & Aronson, 2002; Camblin, 2003).

Additional resources. Provide additional resources to students who are challenged by academically rigorous work. This can include before- or after-school tutoring, small classes, Saturday school, and catch-up classes, among other possibilities (Martinez & Klopott, 2002; George & Aronson, 2002; Gullat & Jan, 2002).

Student/staff time. Give school staff, including counselors, the time to help each student develop an academic program that meets their needs and adequately prepares them to meet their postsecondary goals. Having an adult help students align their coursework and their academic and career goals is a crucial aspect of academic support, particularly for students who are academically unprepared (George & Aronson, 2002; Martinez & Klopott, 2002; Camblin, 2003).

School capacity. Work to build school capacity so that faculties can think systematically, reflect on their own beliefs, evaluate their own teaching, see instruction as the interaction among teachers, students, and the activities and materials, and be inclusive in the school and community (Camblin, 2003).

Social Support

Another crucial aspect of preparing underserved students for college attendance is helping students develop strong social networks that support them in their academic and emotional development. In addition, schools should work to ensure that students have access to the information and adults that can help them make appropriate educational decisions (Martinez & Klopott, 2002; Camblin, 2003). This support can come from school, home, and the community.

Support from adults. Provide adult “guides” to help students set and work toward goals. Students, particularly those placed at risk by non-school circumstances, need to have an adult in the school that can support them through any turmoil that might erupt in their lives and help them make decisions. Teachers, counselors, and administrators can serve as guides to students (Martinez & Klopott, 2002; George & Aronson, 2002; Gullat & Jan, 2002; Camblin, 2003).

Structure. Provide structures that enable students to know each other well. The development of strong peer networks provides students with another resource for information, as well as for support. Such networks provide students with a positive context in which they can work through a rigorous and demanding curriculum (Martinez & Klopott, 2002; George & Aronson, 2002; Camblin, 2003).

Partnerships. Develop partnerships with higher education to provide timely support-focused interventions. Supportfocused interventions entail the provision of information, such as what courses need to be completed for college enrollment and how and when to apply for financial aid, as well as having adults guide students through the difficult years of adolescence and the college-going process. These adults may be school staff (teachers, counselors, and administrators) or mentors available through programs in which university partners match college students with high school students (Martinez & Klopott, 2002; George & Aronson, 2002; Gullat & Jan, 2002; Camblin, 2003).

Community ties. Develop strong ties to community organizations and families to provide a supportive environment for students. Communities can provide validation and support students’ academic experiences and can help schools validate students’ struggles to balance the world of school and their home communities (which often are quite different with regard to culture, language, etc.). Learning to balance these two parts of their lives – or to live in two worlds, as it is often described – is critical to students who intend to pursue postsecondary education (George & Aronson, 2002).

P-16 Alignment

Inherent in the recommendations to prepare students academically for postsecondary success is the need for alignment and collaboration across the P-16 system. Aligning curricula and expectations from grade to grade, as well as aligning high school graduation and college entrance requirements, ensures that students are prepared for each successive year of school; aware of each successive set of expectations; and prepared for full participation in postsecondary education (Kirst, 2001). Close collaboration among institutions enables educators to provide students with the information they need to successfully enroll in postsecondary education (McDonough, 1997; Cabrera & La Nasa, 2000b). Here are a few examples of effective collaboration.

Align curricula. Align curricula across grades from kindergarten through college. By working together to develop high expectations early in students’ academic careers and to continually reinforce and build on those expectations, educators can ensure that students are prepared for rigorous college curricula (Martinez & Klopott, 2002; George & Aronson, 2002; Gullat & Jan, 2002).

College application process. Provide students with information about, and help with, the college application process prior to high school. Because students’ high school coursework greatly affects their college eligibility and their success in postsecondary education, they should receive the information regarding academic requirements for college enrollment as early as possible (no later than 7th grade). School counselors and postsecondary institutions should work together to provide this information until the students have successfully enrolled in a postsecondary institution (Gullat & Jan, 2002; Camblin, 2003).

Outreach programs. Begin university outreach programs to help students reach fluency in mathematics and reading early enough to prepare students for advanced level math (Algebra II and beyond) and reading-based subject areas (Gullat & Jan, 2002; Camblin, 2003).

Quality Evaluations

In doing the research for the white papers, both Martinez and Klopott and Gullat and Jan found a significant dearth of data regarding the success rates of both high school reform initiatives and pre-college programs for low-income and minority students (Martinez & Klopott, 2002; Gullat & Jan, 2002). Without this type of data, program effectiveness cannot be documented and it is impossible to make midcourse corrections (Gandara, 2001; Cohen, 2001). The following indicate a few important places that data can be found.

Evaluations. Conduct well-designed evaluations that link reform practices or outreach initiatives to indicators of college preparedness (Martinez & Klopott, 2002; Gullat & Jan, 2002).

Program data. Collect data on high school graduation rates and college enrollment rates, in addition to student achievement scores. For example, if a school implements program X, it should collect data on the graduation and college enrollment rates of the students who participate in it and should compare it to data of non-participants to see if program X is effective (Gullat & Jan, 2002; Martinez & Klopott, 2002).

Postsecondary enrollment data. Collect data on the types of postsecondary institutions in which students enroll and on their enrollment status. Students’ college graduation rates are greatly influenced by the type of institution (whether two- or four-year) in which they enroll, as well as by their enrollment status (full- or part-time). They should compare the success rates of students who did and students who did not complete the program (Martinez & Klopott, 2002).

Graduation data. Collect data on college graduation rates, including the number of years that it takes students to complete their bachelor’s degree. Schools, model developers, and outreach programs designed to help students enter and succeed in college should continue to collect data on the number of students that go through the program and then complete their secondary education. They should compare the college completion rates of students who complete the outreach program to students who did not (Gullat & Jan, 2002; Martinez & Klopott, 2002).

CONCLUSION

In this paper we have summarized the recommendations of four previous papers commissioned by the Pathways to College Network. The research discussed in them suggests a framework for a fundamental shift in our understanding of the purpose of, and practices within, secondary education. Within it, we can successfully prepare all students for postsecondary education. The framework calls for high schools and the systems in which they operate to provide access to strong social and academic support for students and for alignment within and between systems. It is our goal to stimulate conversations and debates about the framework presented in these recommendations among policymakers at the school, district, state, and federal level that will ultimately lead to the substantial changes in practice and policy that are necessary to provide all students with the opportunity to successfully enroll in and complete postsecondary education. Although we recognize that additional recommendations could be made to improve the relationship between secondary education and college preparedness, this analysis is limited to those that were made in the earlier papers.

REFERENCES

Adelman, C. (1999). Answers in the tool box: Academic intensity, attendance patterns, and bachelor’s degree attainment. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

Alvidrez, J., & Weinstein, R. S. (1999). Early teacher perceptions and later student academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(4), 731-746.

Anyon, J. (1980). Social class and the hidden curriculum of work. Journal of Education, 162, 67-96.

Berkner, L., & Chavez, L. (1997). Access to postsecondary education for the 1992 high school graduates (NCES Publication No. 98- 105). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

Cabrera, A. F., & La Nasa, S. M. (2000a). On the path to college: Three critical tasks facing America’s disadvantaged. University Park: Pennsylvania State University, Center for the Study of Higher Education.

Cabrera, A. F., & La Nasa, S. M. (2000b). Understanding the college choice process. In A. F. Cabrera & S. M. La Nasa (Eds.), Understanding the college choice of disadvantaged students: New directions for institutional research, Number 107 (pp. 5- 22). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Camblin, S. (2003). The middle grades: Putting all students on track for college. Boston: Pathways to College Network Clearinghouse. Retrieved February 4, 2004, from www.prel.org/products/pcn_/middle-grades.htm

Cohen, M. (2001). Transforming the American high school: New directions for state and local policy. Retrieved December 5, 2001, from www.aspeninstitute.org/aspeninstitute/files/Img/pdf/ highschools.pdf

Gandara, P. (with Bial, D.). (2001). Paving the way to postsecondary education: K-12 intervention programs for underrepresented youth (NCES Publication No. 2001-205). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.

George, P., & Aronson, R. (2002). How do educators’ cultural belief systems affect underserved students’ pursuit of postsecondary education? Boston: Pathways to College Network Clearinghouse. Retrieved February 4, 2004, from www.prel.org/products/pn_/cultural-belief.htm

Gullat, Y., & Jan, W. (2002). How do pre-collegiate academic outreach programs impact college-going among underrepresented students? Boston: Pathways to College Network Clearinghouse.

Jussim, L., & Eccles, J. S. (1992). Teacher perceptions: II. Construction and reflection of student achievement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 947-961.

Kirst, M. W. (2001). Overcoming the high school senior slump: New education policies. Perspectives in public policy: Connecting higher education and the public schools. Washington, DC: The Institute for Educational Leadership and the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED455720)

Kozma, R. B., & Croninger, R. C. (1992). Technology and the fate of at-risk students. Education and Urban Society, 24(4), 440-453.

Martinez, M. R., & Klopott, S. (2002). How is school reform tied to increasing college access and success for low-income and minority youth? Boston: Pathways to College Network Clearinghouse.

McDonough, P. M. (1997). Choosing colleges: How social class and schools structure opportunity. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

Newman, F. M., & Wehlage, G. G. (1996). Authentic achievement: Restructuring schools for intellectual quality. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Nieto, S. (1992). Affirming diversity: The sociopolitical context of multicultural education. New York: Longman.

This paper is one in a series written for the Pathways to College Network. Material has been adapted with permission.