UPDATE ON RESEARCH AND LEADERSHIP Winter 2023 Vol. 31, No. 1 PROMISING PRACTICES TO SUPPORT COMMUNITY COLLEGES DURING THE COVID-19 ERA Considering ways community colleges can alleviate systemic challenges during the COVID-19 era? OCCRL HOSTS 2022 INSTITUTIONAL RESEARCH SUMMIT How can community colleges advance cultures of inquiry towards equitable student outcomes? We See You: Supporting Racially Minoritized Adults at the Community College A case for addressing institutional inequities at the community college to meet the needs and capitalize on the strengths of BIPOC adult students (p. 4).
The Office of Community College Research and Leadership (OCCRL) was established in 1989 at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. OCCRL is affiliated with the Department of Educational Policy, Organization, & Leadership in the College of Education. Projects of this office are supported by the Illinois Community College Board and the Illinois State Board of Education, along with other state, federal, private, and not-for-profit organizations. The content within publications does not necessarily represent the positions or policies of our sponsors or the University of Illinois. Comments or inquiries about our publications are welcome and should be directed to occrl@illinois. edu. The UPDATE is prepared pursuant to a grant from the Illinois Community College Board (State Award Identification Number: AH165). ©2023 Board of Trustees, University of Illinois. UPDATE on Research and Leadership is an OCCRL newsletter with articles on programs, policies, and research that highlights transitions to, through, and out of postsecondary education. Sign up via the OCCRL mailing list to receive regular news and updates from OCCRL. 2 UPDATE - WINTER 2023 04 13 11 08
Our mission is to use research and evaluation methods to improve policies, programs, and practices to enhance community college education and transition to college for diverse learners at the state, national, and international levels. UPDATE - WINTER 2023 3 CONTENTS Editor-at-Large: Lorenzo Baber Managing Editors: Lorenzo Baber, Eboni M. Zamani-Gallaher and Raina Dyer-Barr Copy Editor: Raina Dyer-Barr, and Sal Nudo Graphic Designer: Jason A. Keist Follow Us! DIRECTOR’S NOTE It is an incredible honor to return to the University of Illinois and serve as the Director of the Office of Community College Research and Leadership (OCCRL). As I start this new role, I reflect on 2007 when OCCRL Founder Debra Bragg introduced me to the world of community college research. Despite two graduate degrees in higher education and a research focus on equity and access, I did not have any academic or practical experience with community colleges. Nevertheless, it did not take long for me to appreciate Dr. Bragg’s vision for OCCRL - aligning critical research with fierce advocacy for a set of institutions long marginalized by postsecondary scholars and policymakers. When Dr. Eboni Zamani-Gallagher took on the Director role, I appreciated how she extended the OCCRL vision by directing scholarly maladjustment to normed patterns of racialized inequalities at community colleges. Long before the events during the summer of 2020, Dr. Zamani-Gallaher understood the unique positionality of community colleges in advancing social and economic justice for diverse learners and marginalized communities. As the third OCCRL Director, I embrace the visions of my predecessors – OCCRL as a center that directs meticulous research, equitable excellence, and evidencebased advocacy for community colleges. As this edition of UPDATE demonstrates, OCCRL continues to shine a light on community colleges as a unique invention of the American democratic experiment while pushing policy and practice towards fulfilling the promise to provide educational opportunities for anyone, anytime, anywhere. This edition also highlights the role of participatory action research in developing sustainable rubrics for evaluating equitable program outcomes; expands understanding of racially minoritized adult students; reviews promising approaches for supporting community college students during the COVID pandemic; and summarizes the virtual summit held this past summer, Activating Equity-Conscious, Data-Informed Institutional. I invite you to read, reflect, and continue to partner with us as we continue our mission during a critical moment in human history. OCCRL 3.0, let’s go! Dr. Lorenzo Baber Director, OCCRL 13 OCCRL HOSTS 2022 INSTITUTIONAL RESEARCH SUMMIT Raina Dyer-Barr 04 WE SEE YOU: SUPPORTING RACIALLY MINORITIZED ADULTS AT THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE Jason A. Keist 08 WHAT’S IN YOUR TOOLKIT? USING RUBRICS TO SUPPORT THE PROGRAM REVIEW PROCESS Jewel A. Bourne 11 PROMISING PRACTICES TO SUPPORT COMMUNITY COLLEGES DURING THE COVID-19 ERA Colvin T. Georges Jr.
Community colleges have long served the interests of a diverse population of learners who differ in distinct ways from students attending four-year universities. Due to their affordability (Ritt, 2008), flexibility of course scheduling and format (Iloh, 2018), and nature of open access (Geller, 2001), public twoyear institutions are inviting to those students considered “nontraditional”; therefore, it is understandable that 41% of those enrolled part-time at community colleges also work full-time (Berker & Horn, 2003). As community college practitioners, we may heed the words of Clark (2012) who reminds us that, “The ‘nontraditional community college student’ is our traditional student” (p. 511). Twenty-seven percent of all undergraduates are aged 24 years or older (Blumenstyk, 2018). Despite their significant presence on college campuses, “adults are often institutionally invisible, marginalized, and taken for granted” (Sissel et al., 2001, p. 18). Although, to avoid a color-evasive “all students matter” narrative, we must consider not only the ways age shapes college-going but also how students’ racialized experiences exacerbate educational inequities at the community college. Adult Educators: Let’s Call a Thing a Thing A growing cadre of scholars within adult education have argued that adult learners’ overlapping social locations (including race, gender, and socio-economic status) influence their academic experiences and, thusly, should inform how we reflect upon our own positionalities as instructors, administrators, and/or researchers (Johnson-Bailey, 2002; Patton et al., 2007). As instructors, considerations of students’ racialized realities should be incorporated within our classroom praxis in ways that create space for the valuation of racially minoritized adult learners’ experiential truths. Johnson-Bailey’s (2002) essay emphasizing the centrality of race in adult educative contexts reveals the lack of racially minoritized adult student voices in the construction of adult education theory and resultant pedagogical practices. The author argues that adult education scholars fail to discuss how race affects students’ lives as well as how race affects teaching and learning, but instead oftentimes take a colorblind perspective, which “views all racial issues as We See You: Supporting Racially Minoritized Adults at the Community College by Jason A. Keist 4 UPDATE - WINTER 2023
inconsequential when not expressed as part of any classroom or curriculum equation” (p. 42). Sidestepping and/or truncating conversations pertaining to racism distances educators from constructing safe, just, and trustworthy classrooms. Adult Black Men at the Community College If we were to narrow our focus to Black men, we see that an overwhelming majority of Black men ages 18 years and older (70.5%) enter higher education through community colleges with the intent to pursue upwards social mobility through the attainment of a credential (NCES, 2015). Obtaining the requisite skills necessary to secure living wage employment is especially important for Black men attending community colleges who, according to Wood et al. (2015), averaged below $30,000/year in adjusted gross income upon entry; therefore, it is imperative that we better understand how to support these learners. Although, community college professionals, scholars, and other key stakeholders remain in the dark regarding the motivations, needs, and strengths of racially minoritized adults. Jain and Crisp (2018) review of scholarly literature confirms the dearth of peer-reviewed works centering racially minoritized adult collegians across institutional types by stating, “Unfortunately, very little is known, even at a descriptive level about racially minoritized adult students” (p. 10). The authors further state, “It is therefore highly problematic that our review identified relatively few studies that considered the role of race in shaping the college decisions and experiences of adult students” (p. 12). In particular, empirical inquiry into the college experiences of Black men ages 25 years and older remains virtually invisible (Baber, 2018; Goings, 2018, 2017; Rosser-Mims et al., 2014; Ross-Gordon 2005; Kasworm, 2002; Ross-Gordon & BrownHaywood, 2000; Spradley, 2001; Cain, 1987). Moreover, in the context of 2-year public colleges, the literature is even less available. Accordingly, we must ask ourselves: since peerreviewed works centering community college-going for adult Black men are absent, how do we know if these institutions are equitably serving them? Unfortunately, aside from practitioner’s anecdotal evidence and nationally aggregated statistical data, we do not know. According to the National Student Clearinghouse Research Center (Shapiro et al., 2017), 37.5% of all students in the nation who began their postsecondary education at a 2-year public college in fall 2011 went on to complete a degree at a two- or four-year institution by 2017 (Fig. 8, p. 14). When disaggregated by race and gender, the six-year completion rate for all Black men attending community colleges was 34.9%, while 62.4% of their white and 44.2% of their Hispanic male peers completed a degree by 2017 (Fig 16, p. 18). When we further disaggregate this data by students’ age, gender, and race, we find that 29% of Black men aged 25 years and older earned a degree within six years compared to 39% and 33% of white and Hispanic men respectively (Shapiro et al., 2017, Appendix C, Table 47). The remaining 71% of adult Black men who began at the community college were either not enrolled or still enrolled after six years of beginning their program of study. We are informed by the aforementioned data points that Black men aged 25 years and older who begin at the community college are earning college credentials within six years at lower rates than the national average and are also being surpassed by their younger Black male peers on these benchmarks. While syntheses of scholarship over the last decade focusing on Black men enrolled at community colleges has revealed a surge of scholarly interest resulting in impressive research implications (Wood et al., 2015; Wood, 2010), the majority of extant studies either a) do not include samples of Black men aged over 24 years, or b) do not disaggregate by participants’ age when these older students are accounted for within the study’s sample. Nonetheless, adult Black men are astutely focused on their postsecondary aspirations and deserve intentional scholarly foci and action-oriented goal-setting that centers racial equity at the institutional level. Rosser-Mims et al. (2014) comments on the need for institutions of higher education to respond appropriately to demographic changes The fact that there is an increase in the number of Black males of age 25 and older returning to higher education warrants greater attention by educational institutions. These institutions must find ways to adapt to a changing clientele and then design their programs to address the special needs of this population” (p. 66) College-Level Responsibilities Because the average community college student is 28 years of age (Ma & Baum, 2016), professionals at the community college have an ethical obligation to interrogate marginalizing forces on their campuses that create inequitable outcomes for racially minoritized adult students; especially the omnipresence of race. Campus ethos refers to an institution’s “policies, programs, campus resources, and day-to-day practices that shape the way students experience and succeed in community college” (Harris & Wood, 2016, p. 41). Discourse surrounding student performance speaks largely to where institutions locate the onus of student academic outcomes. In-line with the “bootstrap” mentality which in embedded within EuroAmerican culture, colleges more readily place responsibility for UPDATE - WINTER 2023 5
student success squarely on the students themselves, which can lead to the disenfranchisement (and further traumatization) of BIPOC students. Instead, colleges must redirect their focus to cultivating a campus ethos that foregrounds an equity-centered approach to student engagement and retention efforts. Addressing institutional inequities cannot involve quick fixes, nor should their original intent (social justice) be watereddown to appease powerful interests. Harris, Barone, and Davis (2015) call our attention to the ways interest convergence works to undercut equity-minded interventions Within the last 45 years, activist-scholars have envisioned radical reform in higher education to meaningfully restructure the antiquated views on curricula, policies and procedures, and pedagogies originally constructed for and by white men. However, these radical calls for new educational efforts often have been co-opted and systematized by institutions and people in power, resulting in limited progressive aims (p. 33) Therefore, institutional stakeholders must first employ level-setting surrounding a) definitions of equity and social justice and b) intended outcomes of planned efforts prior to taking action steps to ameliorate inequitable structures. While we continue to mirror excellence in education for all of our adult students, we must also not lose sight of the growing proportion of racially minoritized adult students who choose to call our institutions home and who entrust in us to properly serve their best interests. The tides are gradually shifting towards attending to the needs of racially minoritized adult community college students, as well as the unique gendered and ethnic characteristics that constitute this category of learners. Although, we remain in the infancy stages of intentionally and courageously constructing college-level supports and processes that unabashedly “call a thing a thing” and dutifully answer this call through concerted efforts to close racial equity gaps for racially minoritized adult collegians. Jason A. Keist can be reached at [email protected]. References Baber, L., Fletcher, R., & Graham, E. (2015). Black men attending community colleges: Examining an institutional approach toward equity. New Directions for Community Colleges, 172, 97-107. Blumenstyk, G. (2018). The Adult Student: The population colleges- and the nation- can’t afford to ignore, The Chronicle of Higher Education. February 5, 2018. Berker, A., Horn, L., & Carroll, C. D. (2003). Work first, study second: Adult undergraduates who combine employment and postsecondary enrollment. Postsecondary Educational Descriptive Analysis Reports. Cain, R.A. (1987). Counseling African-American adult learners. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 35(2), 25–28. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/073 77366.1987.10401102 Clark, L. (2012). When nontraditional is traditional: A faculty dialogue with graduating community college students about persistence. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 36(7), 511-519. Geller (2001). A brief history of community colleges and a personal view of some issues (open admissions, occupational training and leadership). U.S. Department of Education. Goings, R. B. (2017). Traditional and nontraditional highachieving Black males’ strategies for interacting with faculty at a historically Black college and university. The Journal of Men’s Studies, 25(3), 316-335. Goings, R.B. (2018). “Making up for lost time”: The transition experiences of nontraditional Black male undergraduates. Adult Learning, 29(4), 158-169. https://doi. org/10.1177/1045159518783200. Harris, J. C., Barone, R. P., & Davis, L. P. (2015). Who benefits?: A critical race analysis of the (d)evolving language of inclusion in higher education. Thought & Action, 2015, 21-38. Harris, F., & Wood, J. L. (2016). Applying the SocioEcological Outcomes Model to the student experiences of men of color: Applying the SEO Model to the student experiences of men of color. New Directions for Community Colleges, 174, 35-46. 6 UPDATE - WINTER 2023
Iloh, C. (2018). Toward a new model of college “choice” for a twenty-first-century context. Harvard Educational Review, 88(2), 227-244. Jain, D., & Crisp, G. (2018). Creating inclusive and equitable environments for racially minoritized adult learners: Recommendations for research, policy, and practice. ASHENITE Paper Series. Retrieved from https://cece.sitehost. iu.edu/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/CreatingInclusive-and-Equitable-environments-for-raciallyminoritized-adult-learners-FINAL.pdf Johnson-Bailey, J. (2002). Race matters: The unspoken variable in the teaching learning transaction. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 93, 39-50.Ritt, E. (2008). Redefining tradition: Adult learners and higher education. Adult Learning, 19(1-2), 12-16. Kasworm, C. (2002). African American adult undergraduates: Differing cultural realities. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 50(1), 10- 20. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/07377366.2002.10401191. Ma, J. & Baum, S. (2016). Trends in community colleges: Enrollment, prices, student debt, and completion. (2016). Student Debt, 23. National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). Demographic enrollment characteristics of nontraditional students: 2001-2012. (2015). Retrieved from https://nces. ed.gov/pubs2015/2015025.pdf . Patton, L. D., McEwen, M., Rendón, L., & Howard‐ Hamilton, M. F. (2007). Critical race perspectives on theory in student affairs. New Directions for Student Services, 2007(120), 39-53. Rosser-Mims, D.; Palmer, G. A.; & Harroff, P. (2014). The reentry adult college student: An exploration of the Black male experience. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 144, 59-68. https://doi.org/10.1002/ace.20114. Ross-Gordon, J.M. (2005). The adult learner of color: An overlooked college student population. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 53(2), 2–11. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/07377366.2005.10400064. Ross-Gordon, J.M., & Brown-Haywood, F. (2000). Keys to college success as seen through the eyes of African American adult students. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 48(3), 14–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/07377366.2000.104 00410. Shapiro, D., Dundar, A., Huie, F., Wakhungu, P. K., Yuan, X., Nathan, A. & Bhimdiwali, A. (2017). Completing college: A national view of student completion rates – Fall 2011 Cohort (Signature Report No. 14). Herndon, VA: National Student Clearinghouse Research Center. Sissel, P. A., Hansman, C. A., & Kasworm, C. E. (2001). The politics of neglect: Adult learners in higher education. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 91, 17- 28. Spradley, P. (2001). Strategies for educating the adult Black male in college. Eric Digest. ED464524, 1-4. The George Washington University. Retrieved from https://www.gpo. gov/fdsys/pkg/ERIC-ED464524/pdf/ERIC-ED464524.pdf. Wood, J. L. (2010). African American males in the community college: Towards a model of academic success. Arizona State University. (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3410569) Wood, J. L., Harris III, F., & White, K. (2015). Teaching men of color in the community college: A guidebook. Montezuma Publishing. UPDATE - WINTER 2023 7
As the field of higher education contends with “the great resignation” and institutions work to combat burnout, the demand for tools and support for practitioners to advance equity-conscious practices has never been more tangible. The identification of high-quality programming as a strategy to advance equitable outcomes across Illinois’ higher education systems, particularly for Black, Latinx, low-income, rural, and working adult populations (Illinois Board of Higher Education, 2021) precipitates the need for devices that empower comprehensive assessment. In continued efforts to support practitioners and the development of equitable programming and outcomes for students, OCCRL engaged the field in participatory action research toward the development of an equity-centered rubric to advance learning and support for the Illinois CTE Program Review Process. The Equity Centered Program Review Rubric for Career Technical Education is an institutional assessment tool that provides a framework for institutional improvement efforts and fosters transformational change. As an instrument that considers equitable approaches, the rubric encourages active stakeholder participation in the review process to propel throughout assessment discussion and critical thought about the program review as both, a process and deliverable. The rubric builds on the four goals of the initial evaluation study of the program review process: 1. “improve the efficiency and efficacy of the program review process by identifying challenges, redundancies, and omissions, and provide recommendations for refining the process. 2. Examine variations of the program review process across institutional contexts and institutional identities (e.g., rural/suburban/urban, minority-serving institutions/ predominately white institutions, small/large student populations) to understand how the process is utilized across diverse institutions throughout Illinois. 3. Identify professional development, technical support, and supplemental materials that could improve outcomes associated with the program review. 4. Enhance the application of program review findings in colleges’ campus-level programmatic planning and decision-making” (Fox, Thrill, & Keist, 2018, p. 1) In direct response to the third goal of the evaluation study is to create relevant supplemental materials to enhance the outcomes of the program review process. In direct response, to the third goal of the evaluation study, OCCRL’s rubric is positioned as relevant supplemental material meant to enhance the outcomes of the program review process. The rubric attends to the findings of an initial evaluation study where participants identified that job aids such as rubrics could be used to support internal feedback and professional development as well as structure feedback from the Illinois Community College Board (ICCB). Participants summarized… ‘that was basically for the use with the ICCB WHAT’S IN YOUR TOOLKIT? Utilizing Rubrics to Support the Program Review Process By Jewel A. Bourne 8 UPDATE - WINTER 2023
feedback, perhaps they could establish a rubric that would be shared with all the colleges, so that you would know some items and what the various criteria would be for “emerging, meeting, and exceeding” on that rubric.’” (Fox, Thrill, & Keist, pp. 21-22). In alignment with the definition of program review a type of evaluation of institutional, instructional support, student service or administrative program, department, or unit (Beers, 2011, p.63-64), the rubric serves to support practitioners as they engage in the review process. The rubric furnishes benchmarking as a best practice by which to assess their response and document areas of strength and opportunities for growth. In alignment with the goals of statewide program review as provided by ICCB: The rubric advances equity-guided program review for Career Technical Programs in Illinois by cultivating environments that • concentrate on strategic campus-level planning and decision-making related to instructional programming and academic support services, including but not limited to program revisions, program closures, and revisions to services. • address inequities to support program improvement. • support the delivery of locally responsive, cost-effective, high-quality programs and services across Illinois’ community college system. (ICCB, 2020) As one of the stated purposes of program review is to address inequities (the use of the rubric enables institutions to leverage program review to attend to equity gaps and engage in ongoing, consistent, and specific analysis to evaluate progress. While the rubric focused on the quality of response, it also foregrounds the development of inquiry that is contextualized and intentional. The tool is attentive to the different processes across community colleges’ distinct geographical locations and unique organizational structures and resources. This design serves to encourage the prioritization and inclusion of data indicators that concentrate on equity gaps. These approaches are beneficial in adapting a campus culture that views program review as a valuable process. Utilization of the program review rubric can shift faculty and staff perspectives of the process from laborious and compliancebased to a more meaningful data analysis that enacts program improvement and contributes to a culture of transparency. The rubric can be activated as a tool to gauge the extent of faculty and administrative participation. Furthermore, it can be engaged as a mechanism by which to evaluate areas where all stakeholders of the campus, including academic support professionals and students, are currently involved and forecast areas in which they can be consulted. As it relates to stakeholder involvement, consideration of the data-driven rubric submissions provides opportunities to evaluate the impact of programmatic elements resulting from the program review. The design elements of the rubric facilitate the identification of challenging areas. Receptivity of these areas for growth, in turn, promotes the implementation of feasible, measurable and actionable steps. Furthermore, the rubric’s promotion of consistent data analysis advances opportunities to evaluate the immediate impact of changes that result from the program review process. From this practice, new questions are potentially stimulated surrounding program improvement, including the production of new areas for analysis, including disaggregated data needs that address equity gaps in programming, performance, and service. As a benchmarking tool, the rubric provides an opportunity to examine the extent to which the program satisfies elements of the template (need, cost, quality, incorporation of student voice, overall review, and process of review). The rubric affords contextualized program evaluation of responsiveness to local needs, cost efficiency, and integration of quality programming components. The rubric supports the development of a program review process that is well documented. Additionally, the use of the program review rubric contributes to the implementation of the review process to inform campus planning initiatives, quality improvement efforts, and budget allocation decisions as it requires institutions to consider their responsiveness to advancing equity. As we consider the urgency of resources that equip institutions and practitioners to advance and embed racial equity and favorable outcomes for historically minoritized groups, the rubric advances an environmental shift regarding the program review process as “one more thing to do, as something that we check a box on, get it done and sits on a shelf and is never again looked at until the next time you are scrambling to complete it.” (Georges, Jr. & Bourne, 2021,11:15) to a continuous improvement model that informs overall strategic planning and actionable items. Furthermore, the utilization of the rubric to probe programmatic methods and outcomes demonstrates a commitment shared throughout the college geared toward UPDATE - WINTER 2023 9
fostering systemic and localized changes that improve equity for underserved students (Fox, Thrill, & Keist, p. 8).” While the statewide program review process for Illinois community colleges required by the Illinois Community College Board (ICCB) is scheduled on a five-year cycle, it is also a measure that contributes to a continuous process that speaks to the fact that “the value of program review is lost without regular opportunities for engagement and reflection on what has been learned through the process” (Eggleston, 2020). Program review benefits institutions as an addition to their evaluation toolkit that contributes to the discussion of program strengths and arranges areas for improvement by prioritization of data identification and analysis. The rubric provides an opportunity to measure improvements and ensure incorporation as a part of the college’s strategic planning. Furthermore, the rubric affords the exploration of mechanisms and methods to increase institutional buy-in across administration and faculty. The Equity Centered Rubric for CTE Program Review in Illinois Community Colleges (OCCRL, 2022) is a tool pursuant to the completion and submission of the program review and provides opportunities for programs to explore opportunities for advancement congruent with the ICCB goals for Career Technical Education to participate in the reduction of inequities, strengthen programming and contributing to the economic development of the state. (ICCB, 2021) References Fox, H. L., Thrill, C. R., & Keist, J. (2018). Advancing program review: Evaluating and envisioning the future of program review at Illinois community colleges. Champaign, IL: Office of Community College Research and Leadership, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Georges, Jr., C.T., & Bourne, J. A. (2021, January 28). Conversations with practitioners: The importance of quality program review to advance community college student support services program review [Webinar]. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Office of Community College Research and Leadership; Illinois Community College Student Activities Association. Illinois Board of Higher Education. (2021). A thriving Illinois: Higher education paths to equity, sustainability, and growth. Illinois Community College Board (2020). Program Review. Illinois Community College Board. (2021). Program Review Manual: Fiscal Year 2022-2026. Office of Community College Leadership (OCCRL). (2022). Equity-Centered Rubric for CTE Program Review in Illinois Community Colleges. “Manuscript in preparation”. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. 10 UPDATE - WINTER 2023 Jewel A. Bourne can be reached at [email protected].
C OVID-19 has changed the world as we knew it. More specifically, American higher education. The consequences of COVID-19 have unveiled the structural and systemic inequities at community colleges. Community colleges serve students with the greatest need, but state and federal governments still underfund them compared to their fouryear counterparts (Swaminathan, 2020). Now, amid the challenges of this global pandemic – community colleges are expected to step up and offer training for industry-relevant skills (Inside California Education, 2020). However, on a national scale, enrollment at these institutions has decreased – and the people suffering the most are racially minoritized and economically disadvantaged students. In this blog, I offer three promising practices that can be employed at community colleges to alleviate the systemic challenges during the COVID-19 era. Increased Funding from Federal and State Governments Before America entered this global pandemic, community colleges were still under-resourced and underfunded. They were always responsible for increasing social mobility and providing economic advancement opportunities for anyone wanting to enroll. While this was noteworthy, community colleges have had to make do with less. There have been instances where mental health services were discontinued due to funding concerns, as we have seen at Harrisburg Area Community College in Harrisburg, PA (McLarty, 2019). Currently, there is an opportunity for federal and state leaders to prioritize community colleges, particularly through funding. If these institutions enroll about half of the total undergraduate population and numerous industries rely on them to produce high-quality graduates - there needs to be a commitment to equitably serving students affected the most by COVID-19. Some institutions, such as Quinsigamond Community College, provided laptops, Wi-Fi devices, and other monetary resources to students (Swaminathan, 2020). However, this practice does not reflect what is happening on all community college campuses, nor does this institution have unlimited resources to support all of their students, especially those with the greatest needs. Thus, the need for increased funding. This can also be in the form of scholarships. Equity Consciousness vs. Deficit Minded Approach Faculty and staff administrators at community colleges need to be equity conscious, especially during this time. Scholars have noted the importance of higher education institutions adopting this frame of mind to best serve students. Bensimon (2007) posited that equity-minded educators can identify the systemic issues negatively impacting student outcomes. Bensimon (2007) also posited that educators need to take an introspective look at the structural barriers from an institutional level and work to dismantle them. When educators blame students, particularly racially minoritized students, for things that are out of their control – this demonstrates a deficit minded approach, and students tend to suffer. The needs of racially minoritized students from underserved backgrounds do not mirror the needs of white students from affluent families. During this COVID-19 era, I suggest that educators be flexible with assignments and check-in with students to ensure that they are okay, Promising Practices to Support Community Colleges During the COVID-19 Era By Colvin T. Georges Jr. UPDATE - WINTER 2023 11
both physically and emotionally, especially if they are not submitting assignments or if they are late. Educators are in positions of power, and they determine the methods and delivery of instruction in the classroom. Educators should use this power to support their students, especially those that are struggling and from disadvantaged backgrounds, e.g., no access to the internet, housing issues, financial concerns, etc. This is where student success truly comes into play, particularly focusing on supporting the holistic needs of students, e.g., academic and social engagement, mental health, etc. In this way, students can receive support and able to complete their remaining requirements toward graduation. Anti-Racist Framework If an institution has not adopted or developed an anti-racist framework, especially during these times – now is the time to do so. To support this claim, I borrow from an AntiBlackness framework created by Dr. Regina Stanback Stroud (Stroud, Hotep, Wood, & Harris, 2020). Dr. Stroud serves as the Chancellor for Peralta Community College District. She recommends that anyone in a position of leadership for community colleges, it is crucial that they develop a comprehensive anti-Blackness framework. She created her framework based on the work of Darrell Smith, who proposed the framework of comprehensive diversity. The specific components of this framework that I will highlight are climate/culture, privilege and preference systems, policiespractices-procedures, resource allocation, and structure. There were several other domains of this framework, but I believe these are the ones that can alleviate the systemic issues impacting student experiences and outcomes during COVID-19. Developing a comprehensive framework with a focus on anti-racism will have lasting effects on the campus community by dismantling systems of institutionalized cultures of racism, dominance, and white supremacy. This is a critical need, especially during COVID-19, where so many Black students and other racially minoritized groups hold intersecting social identities and have unique needs. Racially minoritized students are being discriminated against, and there is a perceived inferiority complex about these students. Now is the time for community colleges to truly cultivate anti-racist environments so that students feel a sense of belonging, especially on digital platforms. When students feel a sense of belonging to their institution, this increases their chances of completion (Strayhorn, 2019). Student completion is essential, especially considering the decrease in community college enrollment and the growing unemployment rates. Helpful Resources Provided below are several additional resources to support community college educators and students during the COVID-19 pandemic: 1. ED COVID-19 Handbook: Strategies for Safe Operation and Addressing the Impact of COVID-19 on Higher Education Students, Faculty, and Staff – U.S. Department of Education 2. Face Sheet: Addressing the Risk of COVID-19 in Schools While Protecting the Civil Rights of Students – U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights 3. 360-Degree Student Equity Audit: Keep equity at the center of your COVID-19 response and recovery plans to help build a more equitable future - EAB 4. COVID-19 Resources: Resources about COVID-19 and Disability Prospective and Current Students, Faculty, and Staff in Higher Education – National Center for College Students with Disabilities 5. Designing an Accessible Online Course – Explore Access: Tools for Promoting Disability Access and Inclusion Colvin T. Georges can be reached at [email protected]. References Bensimon, E. M. (2007). The underestimated significance of practitioner knowledge in the scholarship on student success. The Review of Higher Education, 30(4), 441–469. Inside California Education. (2020). Community colleges: Learning and helping during the pandemic [Video]. PBS. McLarty, C. (2019, October 23). Students protest changes to HACC’s mental health resources. ABC27. Strayhorn, T. L. (2019). College students’ sense of belonging: A key to educational success for all students (2nd ed.). Routledge. Stroud, R. S., Hotep, L., Wood, J. L., & Harris III, F. (2020, June 25). Addressing anti-Blackness on campus: Implications for educators and institutions [Video]. YouTube. Swaminathan, A. (2020, October 10). Community colleges are experiencing existential crises with more stimulus uncertain. Yahoo News. 12 UPDATE - WINTER 2023
The Office of Community College Research and Leadership (OCCRL) hosted the Activating Equity-Conscious, Data-Informed Institutional Effectiveness Efforts virtual summit on June 2, 2022. The half-day conference, made possible by support from the Illinois Community College Board, brought together institutional researchers, administrative leaders, faculty, community college scholars, policy analysts, and other expert stakeholders interested in advancing equity conscious cultures of inquiry that expand their work with critical theoretical, methodological, and analytic tools. The conference began with brief remarks from OCCRL Director, Dr. Eboni Zamani-Gallaher, welcoming more than 160 registrants. Participants then dispersed to attend their choice of two concurrent morning breakout sessions. One session was led by Dr. Amanda Latz, an Associate Professor of Higher Education and Community College Leadership at Ball State University. This session, titled, The Utilities of Photovoice in Advancing Community College Program Assessment and Evaluation introduced photovoice as a methodology and a form of critical participatory action research (CPAR); highlighted ways that photovoice can be integrated and utilized in traditional assessment and evaluation practices at community colleges; and offered several practical examples for participants to consider. A second morning breakout session was delivered by Dr. Asif Wilson, an Assistant Professor of Curriculum and Instruction at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign and a longtime OCCRL affiliate. Dr. Wilson’s prerecorded session, titled, Socially Just Community Engaged Research, provided an overview of another important research methodology – socially just community engaged research – which centers justice and situates research participants as co-authors. This interactive session also engaged participants in dialogue and reflective activities around questions of what it means for institutions to center justice in public and community engaged relationships as well as what it means in theory and practice to be a justice-centered researcher and/or practitioner. After a short break, the summit resumed with a midday keynote panel titled Anti-racist Research and Policy: The Utilities of IR in Fostering Transformative Change. The panel was moderated by Dr. Frankie Santos Laanan, Associate Dean for Faculty and Student Affairs and Professor of Education, Culture, and Society at the University of Utah. The five panelists were: Ace Charette, an institutional researcher at Turtle Mountain Community College; Dr. Tina King, Assistant Superintendent and Vice President for Student Affairs (ASVPSA) at Southwestern College; Dr. Heather McCambly, Assistant Professor of Higher Education Policy at the University of Pittsburgh; Dr. Mayra Padilla, Dean of Institutional Effectiveness & Equity at Contra Costa College; and Nathan Wilson, Deputy Director for Research and Information Technology at the Illinois Community College Board (ICCB). This one-hour long moderated discussion was designed to offer participants an opportunity to learn from a panel of experts with unique experiences and perspectives on a range of topics related to anti-racist research and policy, creating inclusive campuses and equitable outcomes, and practical strategies for fostering transformational change at community colleges. OCCRL HOSTS 2022 INSTITUTIONAL RESEARCH SUMMIT By Raina Dyer-Barr UPDATE - WINTER 2023 13
The summit was rounded out with two afternoon breakout sessions led by former OCCRL assistant director, Dr. Marci Rockey, and former OCCRL research associate, Dr. Colvin Georges. In her presentation titled, Moving Beyond the Numbers, Dr. Rockey emphasized the importance of advancing race-conscious institutional research and effectiveness in the rural Illinois community college context and highlighted specific ways for practitioners in these institutions to intentionally apply a race-conscious lens to their work. Dr. Georges’ session, Engaging Community College Student Activism: The Applicability of Critical Participatory Action Research, highlighted the various ways that anti-racist education and critical participatory action research (CPAR) apply to the community college context and introduced participants to specific tools they could utilize to center the voices of student activists and bolster institutional effectiveness. Ultimately, this half-day virtual convening, provided community college faculty, staff, administrators, and other stakeholders from across the state an exciting and accessible learning and professional development opportunity focused on increasing awareness of the need to advance cultures of inquiry at community colleges to achieve inclusive campuses and equitable outcomes. 14 UPDATE - WINTER 2023 Raina Dyer-Barr can be reached at [email protected]
2023 Chicago, IL 4/20-4/22 UPDATE - WINTER 2023 15
Editor-at-Large: Eboni M. Zamani-Gallaher Managing Editors: Eboni M. Zamani-Gallaher and Raina Dyer-Barr Copy Editor: Raina Dyer-Barr Graphic Designer: Jason A. Keist