annotated bibliography final

Running Head: ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 1

Annotated Bibliography

Brenda Sipe

Ferris State University

Critical Issues

IDSL 810

Dr. Roberta Teahen and Dr. Gary Wheeler

July 26, 2015

ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 2

Annotated Bibliography

805 Readings

Dezure, D. (2015). Innovations in the undergraduate curriculum. In L. R. Lattuca (Ed.), National

reports on the undergraduate curriculum: Higher Education Curriculum. Retrieved from

http://education.stateuniversity.com/pages/1896/Curriculum-Higher-Education.html

Dezure describes curriculum trends in the twenty-first century as content mastery

evolving to focus on broad competencies, and integrative learning experiences. She says

diversity learning and global competency emerged as undergraduate curriculum issues

recently, and that global competency skills include critical thinking, communication

skills, technological skills, and collaboration. Learning communities were initiated to

address the development of these proficiencies. She also describes strategies and

structures that have evolved to assist students in integrating the elements of their college

experience.

While offering few opinions or little deep analysis, Dezure places recent trends in

curriculum development on a linear timeline where they can be understood in context,

and she provides an overview of current trends which the researcher can study further.

Mullen, C. M. (2012). Why access matters: The community college student body. Washington,

D.C.: American Association of Community Colleges (Policy Brief 2012-01PBL).

This brief discusses open access policies espoused by most community colleges. Public

demands for return on investment threaten this access. According to the author, since

open access benefits students as well as other higher educational institutions, by serving


the population of minorities and adults, community colleges should not be penalized.

This brief focuses on ways to ensure access is not limited to high potential students.

Mullen provides useful data regarding community college demographics and trends, as

well as arguments about the clarity and accuracy of current completion data. He suggests

timely policies and data standards that will inform legislation and ensure access not be

eroded in the name of completion.

810 Readings & Video

American Association of Community Colleges. (2012, April). Reclaiming the American dream:

A report from the 21st-Century Commission on the Future of Community Colleges.

Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.aacc.nche.edu/21stCenturyReport

The American Association of Community Colleges launched the 21st Century Initiative

in 2011 with the goal of educating an additional five million students with degrees or

credentials by 2020. In phase one, information was gathered from over 1,300

stakeholders from across the U.S., and several dozen issues were identified. In phase two,

the 21st Century Commission on the Future of Community Colleges met with the goal of

preserving its mission and imagining a new future. This report is a culmination of that

effort.

This report summarizes challenges facing community colleges, and proposes a detailed,

yet cohesive, plan for addressing issues and creating massive change. Particularly useful

are specific examples of community colleges as entrepreneurs, numerous reference

tables, material on common core state standards, and a degree qualification profile from

the Lumina Foundation.


American Association of Community Colleges. (2014). Empowering community colleges to

build the nation’s future: An implementation guide. Retrieved from:

www.aacc21stcenturycenter.org

This report is an implementation guide for community colleges as a follow up to 2012's

report: Reclaiming the American dream. Dr. Walter Bumphus, president and CEO of the

American Association of Community Colleges, states that community colleges must

change dramatically while remaining firm in their values: opportunity, equity, and

academic excellence.

This report contains a detailed plan for implementation of the three R's: redesign students'

educational experiences, reinvent institutional roles, and reset the system to promote

student success; along with seven specific recommendations. Useful resource material is

included on pathways, completion, common core standards, college readiness, K-12 and

community college collaboration, and dual enrollment.

Humphreys, D. (2012). What's wrong with the completion agenda--and what we can do about it.

Liberal Education, 98(1), 8-17.

Humphreys states that completion initiatives have been designed as a result of the larger

trend of adults going back to college in order to succeed in a global economy, and not

completing. She believes these initiatives are too simplistic. Accordingly, since public

funding has been cut due to an economic downturn, issues need to be solved with less

money. Today’s workforce needs global skills, so Humphreys advocates a completion

plus quality approach.


Humphreys makes a timely and convincing argument that the focus on completion alone

can undermine the teaching of critical thinking, writing, and communication skills, all of

which are needed to succeed in a global economy. She discusses useful practices and

suggests policies that can promote both quality and completion.

Johnson, L., Becker Adams, S., Estrada, V., & Freeman, A. (2014). The NMC Horizon report:

2014 higher education edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.

This report from an international body of experts examines technology trends which will

have an impact on education in the next five years. Six emerging technologies are

identified for higher education. Trends and challenges for each of the technologies are

also discussed.

Topic discussions are thoroughly researched with diagrams, numerous examples, and

references to actual projects for further reading. The report is comprehensive and

valuable for prioritizing institutional initiatives related to technology.

Jones, S. (2015). The game changers: Strategies to boost college completion and close attainment

gaps. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 47(2), 24-29.

Jones, founder of Complete College America (CCA), recommends five strategies for

increasing student success: performance funding, co-requisite remediation, 15 to finish,

structured schedules, and guided pathways. The CCA Alliance now includes 35 states as

members.


Jones cites several studies supporting these five strategies, offering compelling evidence

that they work. Graphs and charts are useful to the researcher as a reference for these

student success strategies.

Rao, D. (February, 2004). The open door policy: Hidden barriers to postsecondary education for

nontraditional adult learners. Focus on Basics: Connecting Research and Practice, 6, 10-

13. Retrieved from 2004. http://www.ncsall.net/?id=1742004

According to Rao, non-traditional adult learners benefit by the open door policy of most

community colleges, but they are often ill-prepared for the rigors of college. Nearly all

community colleges offer remedial courses in math, English, and writing, which are

typically non-degree bearing courses. Success rates for remediation vary, as do standards

from college to college, and state to state. Cost is also a deterrent.

Rao's belief that community colleges need to re-think admitting students with very low

academic skills is in disparity with his belief in open access for all. The author offers no

suggestion as to alternative educational paths for students whose skills are lacking. Data

presented, is however, useful to the researcher.

Recombinant education: Regenerating the learning ecosystem. (2012) KnowledgeWorks

Forecast 3.0. Cincinnati: KnowledgeWorks.

This report examines five major societal shifts or disruptions that the authors believe will

impact learning over the next decade, along with ideas for responding to these disruptions

creatively. They are: democratized start-up, high fidelity living, de-institutionalized

production, customizable value webs, and shareable cities. The report makes the case for


leaders to prioritize changes, creatively integrating technological advances into

educational practice.

In addition to identifying these five disruptions, the article is a valuable resource for

knowledge about how companies outside of academia are responding to trends. The

report also cites examples of how some of these trends are being used in education. The

report should help administrators make plans for the technological future of their

institutions.

Rhoades, G. (2012). The incomplete completion agenda: Implications for academe and the

academy. Liberal Education, 98(1), 18-25.

Rhoades observes that state governments are instituting policies designed to increase

student performance despite government funds for education being cut. According to

Rhoades the completion agenda threatens to create social stratification and reduce quality

of education. The policy discourse differs according to political party, but doesn't address

developing the next generation of educational leaders. Rhoades argues that policy makers

should prioritize quality by better supporting tenure track faculty and assisting adjunct

faculty with their jobs. He believes that academic quality and student success would

follow.

Rhoades primarily holds government and policies responsible for the issues colleges are

facing. His article sheds light on some of the ways policies influence results, and offers

insights to leaders who aspire to influence policy.


Smith, C. A., Baldwin, C., & Schmidt, G. (2015, April). Student success centers: Leading the

charge for change at community colleges. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning,

47(2), 30-39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00091383.2015.1018087

The authors show how grant-funded student success centers formed around a

shared agenda in Arkansas, Connecticut, California, Michigan, New Jersey, Ohio, and

Texas have increased student success and completion at community colleges. These

centers provide practical support and vision for: research, policy development, program

design, and fundraising. According to the authors, the centers have made impressive

progress, but challenges include reliance on funding, state governance in states that

already have centralized structures like California and Connecticut, and initiative fatigue.

Smith, Baldwin, and Schmidt are advocates of Student Success Centers, as

indicated by their respective positions. They believe in the value of the centers, even

though, they do not make a strong case for the need of centers in states that already have

a coordinating agency. They discuss initiative fatigue but also list numerous initiatives

that the Student Success Centers have undertaken despite concern about ongoing funds.

The authors offer a detailed case study about the Michigan Student Success Center.

Tinto, V. (Author). (2012, 2015). Promoting student success one class at a time. Retrieved from

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3845TFfAAeY

Dr. Tinto says that to make change in student completion rates, the most important thing

to address is what happens in the classroom. He asks what community colleges can do to

reshape classroom learning and success, and states that students are more successful in


classrooms where expectations are clear, consistent, and high, but there must be support

that is connected to the classroom itself. The path to success for students must be clear.

Dr. Tinto is informative and convincing, providing several clear examples to illustrate his

point of view.

Remediation Issue Paper

Advisory Committee on Student Financial Assistance. (2012). Pathways to success: Integrating

learning with life and work to increase national college completion, a report to the U.S.

Congress and Secretary of Education. Washington, D.C.

This report focuses on measures to assist non-traditional students to complete credentials

or degrees, in order to further the 2020 goal of the United States of increasing the number

of college graduates. The authors state that helping non-traditional students succeed is

challenging because higher education and financial aid are not structured to support these

students, and there is inadequate data regarding non-traditional students. The advisory

committee held a hearing in 2011 with two panels of experts, state and institutional, to

address barriers, best practices, and federal role regarding non-traditional students. The

results of this hearing comprise the body of this report.

The results of the hearing are extremely useful, as a wealth of information regarding

possible practices and implications for higher education is included in the transcripts. The

report closes with a valuable summary of innovative proposals and practices which are

highlighted throughout the transcript.


Arendale, D. R. (2010). Access at the crossroads: Learning assistance in higher education. In K.

Ward & L. E. Wolf-Wendel (Eds.), Ashe Higher Ed Report (Vol. 35, pp. 1-145).

Hoboken, NJ: Wiley InterScience.

Arendale states there are many types of learning assistance which serve students,

particularly those of diverse backgrounds, and the institution, by preserving access and

promoting completion. His report shows how a wide range of students use non-credit

activities like tutoring, study groups, and learning assistance centers. Because it is at the

crossroads of academic affairs, student services, and enrollment management, learning

assistance is often controversial, and poorly coordinated. Arendale begins his report with

a comprehensive history of learning assistance, followed by a thorough discussion and

organization of current practices. Finally, he analyzes best practices, along with

supporting case studies, and makes recommendations for comprehensive actions and

coordinated solutions.

Arendale's work is valuable for its detailed analysis of a complex subject which is timely

because of its implications for both access and completion. His conclusion that learning

assistance must transform itself is well-supported throughout his report, particularly with

case studies.

Arum, R., Roksa, J., & Cho, E. (2011). Improving undergraduate learning: findings and policy

recommendations from the SSRC-CLA longitudinal project. New York: Social Science

Research Council.

This report extends the findings of "Academically Adrift: Limited Learning on College

Campuses" (University of Chicago Press, 2011) by documenting results of the Collegiate


Learning Assessment (CLA) which was administered to several thousand traditional age

college students in spring of 2009. The report also tracks academic practices, and

differences in individuals and institutions.

The findings are credible because this was a relatively large and comprehensive research

project. There may be limited value, however, for community colleges, since the

information was obtained after four years of college. Several themes, however, are

relevant to community colleges. The recommendations for policymakers, practitioners,

and institutions for improving undergraduate learning are applicable anywhere.

Attewell, P., Lavin, D., Domina, T., & Levey, T. (2006). New evidence on college remediation.

The Journal of Higher Education, 77(5), 886-924.

Using data from the National Educational Longitudinal Study, this essay describes how

much remediation occurs in college and what types of students enroll in remedial courses.

It then examines the effects of remediation on completion rates and time to completion,

and whether some kinds of remediation are more successful than others. In conclusion,

the authors sift out implications from the data that will inform current policy

controversies about remediation.

This essay is a valuable resource for study on remediation. The authors thoroughly

discuss the history of remediation and controversies surrounding it, including its

relationship to open access and degree completion. The study, including research

methods, variables, and findings, is analyzed and explained in detail, so that the authors'

conclusions are substantiated and thoroughly believable.


Collins, M. L. (2015). Heavy lifting: the state capacities required for scaled developmental

education reform. Boston, MA: Jobs for the Future.

Collins examines what four states, Connecticut, Florida, North Carolina, and Virginia,

have done through system-wide developmental education reform, to help more students

earn degrees or credentials. He discusses which aspects of each state's initiatives were

successful, or less than successful. He states that core capacities needed by states for this

reform include: strategic planning, engagement, commuication, implementation, and

evaluation.

The stories of the four states provide compelling evidence of the effectiveness of the

reform. They are particularly valuable since each state's situation is unique, as well as the

challenges they faced. This should be useful to other states, in avoiding the same

mistakes. The author concludes with restating the enormity of the challenge, particularly

in the face of budget cuts, but leaves the reader with questions to ponder prior to

undertaking large-scale reform.

Duke, A.-E., & Strawn, J. (2008). Overcoming obstacles, optimizing opportunities: state policies

to increase postsecondary attainment for low-skilled adults. Breaking Through. Boston,

MA: Jobs for the Future.

This is an overview of a multi-part initiative of Jobs for the Future and the National

Council for Workforce Education. The goal of the initiative is to help community

colleges with assisting low-skilled adult students in obtaining a degree or credentials.

Duke and Strawn introduce reports uncovering some ways state policy can help lower-

skilled adults succeed.


The authors present useful statistics regarding the challenges confronting low skilled

adults in today's job market. As part of a much larger, comprehensive initiative funded by

Charles Stewart Mott Foundation, North Carolina Glaxo Smith Kline Foundation, and the

Ford Foundation, the initiative provides sound insight into how state policy and

community college practice can impact the future of these adult students and our

workforce. With its focus on low-skilled adults, this report is particularly useful to

researchers studying education for these students.

Levin, H. M., & Calcagno, J. C. (2008). Remediation in the community college: An evaluator's

perspective. Community College Review, 35(3), 181-207. doi:

10.1177/0091552107310118

According to the authors, there is a lack of rigorous analysis on the effectiveness of

remedial education. The authors provide a conceptual framework for evaluating remedial

education, including a list of factors needed for successful interventions, and a number of

approaches that use these factors. Additionally they discuss alternative research designs,

and list basic data requirements.

This article is valuable to researchers who plan to undertake a study of remediation. It is

timely in that it addresses an issue that is at the forefront of the completion and access

controversy, and one that is underrepresented with accurate data.

Perun, S. A. (2015). "What the hell is revise?”: A qualitative study of student approaches to

coursework in developmental English at one urban-serving community college.

Community College Review, 43(3), 245-263. doi: 10.1177/0091552115580593


Perun conducted this study with the goal of learning how interactions between the

content, professor, and student, shape the outcome of developmental English in one urban

community college. He finds that students' high school experiences initially effect their

approach to learning. Passing the course, however, requires them to learn to revise their

work. He concludes that pedagogy focused on drafting and revising, along with a

professor who gives the students a sense that they belong in higher education, helps

students succeed.

According to Perun, there has been little research into the pedagogy of development

education. As such, this study is valuable for its research into a specific group of students

and professors, and for the numerous examples from actual student interviews. Perun

accurately recognizes the sample is small, and more research is needed.

Pretlow III, J., & Wathington, H. D. (2013). Who places into developmental education and why.

Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 37, 794-799. doi:

10.1080/10668926.2012.719482

The authors examine a sample of young community college students in Texas who placed

into developmental education, to better understand why they required remediation. The

authors postulate that there are actions that leaders and policymakers can take to increase

these students' chances of completion.

The sample characteristics are carefully described, and conclusions drawn. Though

limited in its scope, due to the narrow frame of reference, results are interesting and can

lead to a greater understanding of actionable steps which states and administrators can

take to increase effectiveness of remediation.


Pruett, P. S., & Absher, B. (2015). Factors influencing retention of developmental education

students in community colleges. The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, 32-40.

The authors present results of a qualitative study of data based on prior results of the

Community College Survey of Student Engagement (CCSSE) of 2013. The authors

conclude that results show grade point average, academic engagement, type of

developmental courses, time spent preparing for class, parents' education level, and

income level, all significantly impact retention. This quantitative study uses binary

logistic regressional analysis.

The study is well organized and documented. Terms are defined and definitions are

explained, apparently based on sound statistical design. The authors admit the possibility

of variables and potential skewed results. Recommedations are useful for administration

and faculty who want to increase retention at their community colleges.

Richardson, J. W. (2005). "Who shall be educated?" The case of restricting remediation at the

City University of New York. Education and Urban Society, 37(2), 174-192. doi:

10.1177/0013124504271987

Richardson examines, in retrospect, the City University of New York's, (CUNY's), Board

of Trustees, and the New York State Board of Regents' decision to end remedial courses

at all the system's senior colleges in 2000. According to Richardson, this is a symptom of

a national trend to limit access in the name of higher quality education. Limiting open

access most acutely impacts inner city, lower income, and non-traditional students, since

they are the ones most in need of remedial education. Paradoxically, they comprise the


population the system was established to serve. She focuses her research on some of the

intended and unintended consequences of this decision.

Though the same trend has occurred in numerous states across the country, Richardson

chooses to focus on CUNY because of its status as one of the largest mega-public

educational institutions in the nation. Her conclusions about equity are pertinent to those

studying access and remediation.

Schnee, E. (2014). "A foundation for something bigger": Community college students'

experience of remediation in the context of a learning community. Community College

Review, 42(3), 242-261. doi: 10.1177/0091552114527604

Schnee's study explores a first-semester learning community for developmental English

at an urban community college, and its impact on the students in the course. Data were

collected through interviews over a three-year period with a cohort of 15 students who

were enrolled in the lowest level of developmental English, linked with Introduction to

Psychology, and a student development course. She focuses on reporting the students'

experiences, and perspectives, analyzing them in the context of the issue of college

remediation.

Although a very small study of only 15 students, Schnee reveals implications for

community college research and practice. Her findings inform the reader, and guide the

independent researcher with questions for further investigation.


Scott-Clayton, J., & Crosta, P. M. (2014). Improving the targeting of treatment: Evidence from

college remediation. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 36(3), 371-393. doi:

10.3102/0162373713517935

Screening for remediation, according to the authors, is not consistent, and extreme mis-

assignments are common, with under-placement in developmental education, much more

common than over-placement in college courses. The authors state that using high school

transcripts in student placement is useful, but not adding test scores. They are concerned

by the racial and gender inequity of some screening policies, and suggest that the use of

more accurate screening tools would not only promote equity, but success for more

students.

This aspect of the remediation issue, how students are screened and placed in

remediation, has value to many other dialogues about developmental education. The

authors present convincing data to support their argument.

Ward, N. (2006). Improving equity and access for low-income and minority youth into

institutions of higher education. Urban Education, 41(1), 50-70. doi:

10.1177/0042085905282253

Ward addresses the problem of understanding the low level of academic success of racial

and ethnic minorities as compared to their Caucasian peers. She also describes several

federal initiatives designed to improve equity in higher education for minorities. She

focuses on one new initiative, Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for

Undergraduate Programs, GEAR UP, implemented successfully in Connecticut.


Ward's article provides specific, detailed, information about one initiative, GEAR UP,

and underscores implications for educational policy and practices that promote equity for

minorities and low-income students.

annotated bibliography final

Documents

Transcript of annotated bibliography final