Literature Review of College Access Programs Effectiveness in Academic and Non-Academic Skills Training

Natalie C DunnWestern Oregon University

ED 633

Introduction

College Access Programs have been identified as one of the most effective

outreach initiatives to create postsecondary opportunities to underrepresented student

populations. College Access or pre-college programs were formulated during President

Lyndon B. Johnson's War on Poverty in the mid-1960. The Higher Education Act of

1965 established federal guidelines for need-based student aid, grants, work-study, and

loan programs. Its purpose was to aid in strengthening minority-servicing institutions

and encouraged access to high education for low-income students (Edwards, 2013).

According to US Department of Labor research study in 2006, 90% of career path

jobs in the United States that lead to self-sufficiency in the 21st century will require some

form of postsecondary education. By 2018, it estimated that 62% of the jobs in the

United States will require a college education, and that over half of those jobs will require

a four-year degree. (Dyce, Alfold, Long 2013)

The key components of college preparation or access programs include a rigorous

academic program, access to timely and relevant materials, and adequate support

structures. These programs assist the students with “researching colleges, writing essays

and letters, completing college and financial aid applications” (Bloom, 2008).

Types of College Access Programs

There are three types of college access programs.i There are federal government

programs, community based programs, and college campus based programs. It is

important to acknowledge hybrid programs created as the college access and college

preparedness programs have evolved over the years.

Throughout last 30 years of national and state educational reforms mandating

rigorous courses, high stakes testing and accountability, little has improved. College

readiness rates are still low, student drop-out rates are high, and the achievement gap is

present and wide. (Barnes and Slate, 2014) Research studies have attempted to evaluate

college readiness programs across the country. Both federal and state government

agencies are constantly creating assessment tools based on surveys of educational

leadership, teachers, and the public. Program models are evaluated on effectiveness

through reviews of standardized tests, Advanced Placement scores, and other

measurements attended while attending K-12 schools.

However, the debate continues on these programs’ effectiveness, successes, and

outcomes. It is not proper to continue to identify the effective model for college

readiness until addressing the following areas: (1) acknowledging the influence of non-

academic skills on college access programs and (2) examining current effectiveness and

assessment models for college access programs and (3) finally identifying skills that are

specific to academic achievement versus college readiness. In this paper I have

reviewed ten articles to bring awareness to the influence of non-academic skills and the

effectiveness and assessment model attempting to evaluate college access programs.

Building College Going Capital

Most common goals and components of college access programs involve

promoting college attendance, college awareness, college exposure, building of student

self-esteem, increasing high school retention, and completion of high school. Research

studies overlapped in their thoughts around college going capital. However, it was clear

that their research outcomes incorporated working with first generation students beyond

academic performance.

The framework for these college access programs focuses on the individual

learners (their experiences, backgrounds, talents, interests, and needs) (Hewett and

Rogers, 2003). Dr. Tara Yossi (2005) identified six types of community cultural wealth

that are culturally-validating strengths: aspirational capital, familial capital, social capital,

linguistic capital, resistant capital, and navigational capital. This research is the

framework for further discussion for non-academic skills training. Yossi’s definition of

community cultural was mentioned as a part of Dr. Erica K. Yamamura’s work in the

South Texas area.

Research by Dyce, Alfold, and Long, surveyed 75 parents and 76 students on the

aspirations of attending college. They participated in a three year intensive college

access program based on academic enrichment, leadership development, and family

involvement. A pseudonym was used for this project. For demographics, only 55 of 76

students made it to the program. 42% of these respondents were black, 24% were

Hispanic, 22% were White, and 7% identified as multiracial. There was a review of

transcripts and the students’ grade point averages were 4.0-5.0 (34%), 3.0-3.9 (38%), and

below 3.0 (28%). Aspiration capital is the ability to maintain the hopes and dreams for

the future, even in the face of real and perceived barriers. College access programs must

provide academic, social and emotional support, family involvement initiatives,

leadership development and service learning. Long term support of these first generation

students can not end with graduating from high school. Thus, providing information to

not only the student participating but managing formal and informal discussions with

family members would lead both (parents and first generation students) towards college

aspirations (Dyce, Albold, and Long 156)

Social capital is a specific knowledge or strategies that can be applied to the

process that leads to college enrollment. These themes draw merit to engage first

generation students, their parents and others to create a curriculum filled with activities

both trending with academic and non-academic skills. These non-academic skills would

provide more experiences and engagement to go beyond attending postsecondary

institution and allow the first generation students to learn how the world works.

Dr. Janice Bloom surveyed 13 students from different social classes and racial

backgrounds going through the college application process during their senior year in

high school. Rather than giving motivational speeches, the college access program

directors should be engaging first generation students to build their knowledge through

their own experience but also widening their range of context. “It is a series of personal

experiences of college campuses build over long period of time. It is built through visits,

summer programs, connections with family and friends stretching over students’ lifetimes

and utilized in increasingly intense ways as they enter high school.” (Bloom 2008)

Bloom also stated that college access programs are unable to address “some the barriers

such as college costs and change larger issues around social inequities.” (2)

In a cohort study conducted involving 187 GEAR UP students in 4 different

school districts throughout the state of Colorado, social and cultural capitals are crucial

for college attendance. 70.1 % (131) of the participants were Latino/a, 28.9 % (54) were

identified as White and 0.5 % (1) identified as other. One participant did not have

ethnicity information. The definition of social capital was cited as “specific knowledge or

strategy that can be applied to the process that leads to college enrollment.” Researchers

identified five critical elements of college preparation programs and six additional

elements as important to college preparation programs. The five critical elements were

college visits, promoting rigorous coursework, parental involvement, and beginning

college preparation in the 8th grade. The six additional elements identified included:

college awareness or exposure, goal of promoting academic skills, parent college

awareness, parent assistance with financial aid forms and involvement in student

activities, SAT/ACT training, and tuition reimbursement. Again, further separation

would occur to divide activities that are task –specific around attending college and

future planning versus activities designed to welcome first generation students into a

college environment. Tutoring and mentoring were segmented as academic performance

activities. However, tutoring and mentoring were not found to be significantly related to

college readiness. (Cates and Schaffle, 2011)

Cultural capital is basic information on the norms and exceptions in the process of

college selection. Cultural Capital includes maintaining academic knowledge as well as

cultural values. (Hemings, 2007) Cultural capital is also known to take form of

educational credentials, and ultimately, to career and social success. (Barnes and Slate,

2014)

Dr. Erica Yamamura facilitated five focus groups of 123 individuals representing

school administrators, teachers, parents and students in the Borderland Valley in South

Texas. Each focus group consisted of 6 community leaders, 7 college track students, 4

non-college track students, 4 Superintendents, 8 Teachers/Counselors, and 5 parents.

Yamamura considered if there a community responsibility for college readiness and

described this sense of community through “borderland cultural wealth.” Cultural

wealth can mirror the discussion around capital and assist with developing a college-

going culture. Cultural wealth is “cultural assets present in the region that when

cultivated and tapped into effectively can improve college preparation and access.”

(Yamamura, 2010)

Activities involving college access program participants along with their parents

and siblings will allow for further discussions developing future generations attending

college. Yamamura also integrated Chicana feminist theory into her research to

acknowledge the community’s cultural wealth. She identified five roles within Chicana

feminist theory (1) respeto (respect) (2) confianza (mutual trust), (3) buen ejemplos

(exemplary models), (4) consejos (narrative storytelling) and (5) testimonies

(testimonials). There were two areas of academic skill support needed to assist first

generation students adapt to a diverse college environment were effective communication

skills and training. If these students were unable to build these skills along with a strong

sense of their Latino/a culture and heritage and this may inhibit and cause them to be less

comfortable when the cultural fabric changes when attending college. In order to build

collective responsibility for

In a study completed by Kathleen L Byrd and Ginger MacDonald in 2005, eight

participants volunteered in structured 30-60 minute interviews in a study to learn what it

means to be college ready. These first generation student participants were juniors or

seniors having earned an Associates of Arts degree from a community college and were

at least 25 years of age or older. Ten themes emerged and were organized into three

categories. Three categories were identified (a) skills and abilities perceived as important

for college readiness (with themes of academic skills, time management, goal focus, and

self-advocacy, (b) background factors and life experiences that contribute to college

readiness (with themes of family factors, career influences, financial concerns, and

college preparation) and (c) nontraditional student self-concept (with themes of self-

concept, college system and irrelevant information). One theme identified as critical in

this study was the students’ ability to advocate for them and learn to navigate through

college system. This non-academic skill set allows for first generation student the

ability to approach professors, seek out advisors, and develop their own sense of being a

capable college student. They notated that understanding of college readiness must

include skills not measured by standardized tests. (Byrd and McDonald 2005).

Evaluation/Assessment of Program Effectiveness

Program Effectiveness is critical for those within the program along with external

stakeholders. First generation students and programs assisting in improving college

enrollment have been evaluated on fundamental statistical data: standardized scores such

as SAT or ACT, high school grades, and Advanced Placement scores. An issue

identified in some research studies involving first generation college access programs

involves monitoring program evaluations. In some cases the only established evaluation

tools involved reviewing the attendance logs of the participants. It is critical that college

access programs move beyond attendance logs and create long term tracking for current,

active, inactive, and drop-outs of the program.

However, many factors have been shown to relate to such outcomes of academic

achievement which can “threaten the validity of statements we may wish to make about

test scores and their impact on college success.” (Camara 2013) In order to evaluate a

college access program overall effectiveness, Dr. Wayne Camara defined college

preparedness as an academic knowledge and skills to qualify for placement into an entry

level college credit coursework by reviewing Common Core State Standards and College

and Career-Ready along with several states independently designed assessments. He also

acknowledged “dimension of college readiness” which included (a) key cognitive skills,

(b) key content knowledge (c) key learning skills (d) key transition knowledge skills.(22)

He suggested longitudinal predictive studies which follow students complete high school

requirements and assesses as they enter postsecondary education using a variety of

outcomes as potential criteria. He created a chronology of College and career assessment

that identified milestones in college and career success. This diagram identified both

measurable standard benchmark such as test scores and non-academic skills such as

retention and persistence. He also extends the effectiveness model to graduating from

college.

Between, 2003-2009, the College Board conducted a study of 173 schools

across the country on the effectiveness of GEAR UP on college readiness for students in

College Placement

Test

RemediationY/N

Grades & GPA

College & Career test

scores

Academic Prepartion

Course Placement

Retention & Persistence

Graduation and Time to

Degree

low-income schools. Race was not indicated through the research study. GEAR UP

(Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs) offers a wide

range of services to students beginning in the seventh grade and following them on a

cohort model throughout the completion of high school. Since the program’s inception in

1998, over $3 trillion dollars had been spent to serve over eight million underserved

students. (Bausmith and France 2012). They attempted to evaluate these programs and

found “encouraging results on the college readiness outcomes measured.” (244) They

requested more research involving to track both high school activities such as GPA and

graduation rates and in postsecondary school activities such as college enrollment. It is

clear that further evaluation of college access programs effectiveness may continue

beyond the first generation student’s initial involvement.

In 2011, Dr. Wally Barnes and Dr. John R. Slate completed a state-wide multi-

year study of ethnic differences between White, Black, and Latino high school graduates

populations of 1,099 in 2006-2007 school year, 1,361 in 2007-2008 school year, 1,376

for the 2008-2009 school year in the State of Texas for college readiness. State of Texas

indicators utilized were such as AP exam scores, dual credit course enrollment, SAT

critical reading and math scores, ACT English and math scores, advanced coursework in

science, math, and foreign language, scores from state college readiness assessments, and

Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills scores. The scores were then reviewed

based on race. White students exhibited high college readiness rates than Black and

Hispanic students. Hispanic students outperformed Black students. Through this study,

they recommended that schools and or school districts could not solely measure college

readiness on GPA and standardized test scores. College readiness was described as “a

storehouse of cultural, social, economic, and symbolic capital.” It is important that

students must develop college knowledge.” (Barnes and Slate 2011) They also

concluded that college readiness rates are low, student dropout rates are high and

achievement gap is wide and stable. (75)

Researchers from the Education Research Center at Texas A&M University were

commissioned by the Texas Higher Education Commission to selected 6 schools through

Texas GO Center program and provide in-depth examination. 30 high schools were

identified and 23 respondents agreed to participate. Telephone interviews were conducted

with members of the GO Centers. GO Centers are a network of college access centers.

Three core components were identified GO Centers are being effective and exemplary.

GO Center Staff members have an understanding of how students develop college going

aspirations, comprehensive services are provided to students and parents. Finally, its

visibility in the community allowed community partnerships to be built between the

center and other community stakeholders. (Stillsano, Waxman, Brown, Alford, 2014)

Academic Achievement versus College Readiness

Through the research involving cultural capital, many researchers identified

college readiness activities as moving beyond academic achievement. Byrd and

MacDonald detailed in their research previously stated the ability for a first generation

student to learn advocacy skills. First generation participants in their study also

perceived the importance of writing, reading, and math along with time management

skills. Half of the respondents stressed reading skills. Reading skills were also

emphasized as a platform for which critical thinking, problem solving, and effective

expression are launched. (Barnes and Slate, 60)

In Howard Johnston’s 2010 report for the Education Partnerships Inc., three of the

five activities of college access programs combine both academic achievement and

college readiness. First, the offering of courses and well prepared curriculum would

prepare first generation students for college level work. Second, allowing first

generations to be surrounded by adults and peers who build and support their college

going aspirations. Finally, High school administration and teachers would engage and

assist students in completing the critical steps for college entry.

Yamamura’s study on the focus groups identified nine elements college going

culture which include: (a) college talk (b) clear college expectations (c) college

information and resources (d) comprehensive counseling model (e) college-focused

testing and curricula (f) an active, informed and meaning faculty involvement (h) college

and university partnership (i) ongoing articulation. Again, these activities are separated

by academic achievement or college readiness. Although without academic achievement

there would be no college readiness, it correct from the literature that there is a clear

intersection of high school and postsecondary education.

Camara(2013) suggests a consortium of research conducted over time and across

postsecondary institutions would provide the most compelling evidence for college and

career readiness benchmarks and standards.

Conclusion

College readiness or access programs assist first generation students through

activities in which affect their academic achievement and offer the opportunities for

enrolling into postsecondary institutions. The debate will continue on the outcomes and

effectiveness of these programs. There are specific characteristics that are identified as

key components for college preparation: rigorous academic program, access to timely and

relevant college information, and adequate support structures. (Yamamura, Martinez,

Saenz, 2010; Hewett and Rogers, 2003, Cates, Schaefle, 2011) Three areas detailed in

this paper were acknowledging the influence of non-academic skill training, examining

the current models for college access programs, and determining skills that enrich

academic achievement or college readiness. The consistent message throughout all

research of college access programs involves time. Over time with specific activities

nurturing first generation students and their families towards college aspiration, these

interactions will create experiences to allow understanding of the college environment.

(Bloom, 2008, Yamamura, Martinez, Saenz, 2010) In order to effectively evaluate and

assess the effectiveness of these programs again time is needed as factor in order define

the overall success. Further research is needed continuing through the pipeline as first

generation students graduate from high school, enroll in college, and then hopefully

graduate. (Camera, 2013; Yamamura, Martinez, Saenz, 2010)

References:

Barnes, W and Slate, J.R (2014) College-Readiness rates in Texas: A Statewide, Multiyear Study of Ethnic Differences. Education and Urban Society. 46(1) 59-87

Bausmith, J.M , France, M (2012) The impact of GEAR UP on college readiness for students in low income schools. Journal of Ecuation for Students Placed at Risk (JESPAR) 17(4) 234-246

Bloom, J (2008) The pedagogy of college access programs: A Critical Anaylsis. (ASHE/Lumina Policy Briefs and Critical Essays No.5) Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University, Department of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies

Byrd, K.L. , Macdonald, G. (2005) Defining college readiness from the inside out: First-Generation College Student Perspectives. Community College Review 33(1) 22-37.

Camara, W. (2013) Defining and measuring college and career readiness: A Validation Framework. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice. Winter 2013 32 (4), 16-27

Cates, J.T., Schaefle, S.E. (2011) The relationship between a college preparation program and at-risk students’ college readiness. Journal of Latinos and Education. 10(4) 320-334.

Dyce, C.M., Albold,C, Long, D (2013) Moving from college aspiration to attainment: Learning From One College Access Program. High School Journal 96(2), 152-165

Hewett, S. M., & Rodgers, W. J. (2003). The citadel gear-up program and learner-centered education: Together a Framework for Student Success. Education-Indianapolis Then Chula Vista-, 124(1), 86-91.

Johnston, H. (2010). Pathways to College: What High Schools Can Do to Prepare Students for College Admission and Academic Success in Higher Education. Education Partnerships, Inc.

Stillsano, J.R. Waxman, H.C., Brown, D.B, Alford, B.L (2014) Using case study methodology to examine practices in exemplary college access center.Journal of Ethnographic &Qualitative Research. 8(1), 173-189

Yamamura, E.K. , Martinez, M.A., Saenz, V.B (2010) Moving beyond high school expectations: Examining Stakeholders’ Responsibility for Increasing Latina/o Students’ College Readiness. High School Journal. 93(3), 126-148

i There are three federal programs: Upward Bound, Talent Search, and GEAR UP. Upward

Bound was authorized as a pilot project to support low-income youth in the graduating from

high school and pursuing a college education. The program serves youth between the ages

of 13 to 19. Upward Bound offers an extensive program involving college campus

exposure and college coursework for its participants. Talent Search serves students between

ages 11 and 27 who have completed the fifth grade. Talent Search provides various services

for current enrolled and retention services for high school dropouts. GEAR UP (Gaining

Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs) offers a wide range of

services to students beginning in the seventh grade and following them on a cohort model

throughout the completion of high school.

A second type of college access programs is a community based program. These programs

are facilitated through local churches, other youth organizations, or K-12 school districts.

Outside agencies such as community colleges, community collaborative programs through

community partnerships and other postsecondary institutions can create the final type of

college access program. This model can be based on the campus of a postsecondary

institution or other community facility. Most of these programs expose students to

particular areas of discipline such STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and

Mathematics).