An Application of Double-loop Learning to Community College Remedial Education: A New Model of Integrated Supports for Ongoing Student Success

Community colleges have multiple missions and one of them is to provide open access services to those seeking to further their education. Community colleges provide remedial courses in math, reading, and writing because many of their students do not meet entrance requirements in these core subjects. However, the usual developmental education track in which these courses are offered is one-size-fits-all and does not target the individual needs and strengths of these students. As a result, these students often fail to continue on to credit courses or to complete a degree or certificate. In addition to the development track, a large percentage of community colleges also provide adult basic education courses for students who have not received a high school diploma and need to remediate their skills to complete a GED® and then pursue further training or education. These students also drop- or stop-out in large numbers and few actually continue on to complete a degree or certificate. These two groups of students who do not continue to post-secondary training may not be able to find viable careers, leading to a national shortage of sufficiently skilled workers. Current approaches to serving both of these student populations in community colleges—developmental track and adult literacy students—are similar, but do not achieve their desired outcomes for large numbers of students. These approaches reflect a single-loop method of learning that does not foster creative ways to achieve desired outcomes. The current paradigm for delivering these forms of remedial education needs to be changed if students are to be more successful in college. This study takes a double-loop approach to developing greater individualized learning programs for students who need them. This new model for providing more targeted, customized, and just-in-time remedial education reflects current research in the field. Elements of this new approach include integrated classes, better diagnostic instruments, use of technology, and tutoring that meets the needs of individual students. The model presented in this study has applicability beyond those students who need remedial education. It can be used for any student who requires the skills deemed necessary to complete their desired program of study successfully. This research also identified organizational learning and change pitfalls that perpetuate the single-loop approach to education in colleges and discussed needed management and leadership styles for implementing required organizational changes that better serve all students.AN APPLICATION OF DOUBLE-LOOP LEARNING TO COMMUNITY COLLEGE REMEDIAL EDUCATION An Application of Double-loop Learning to Community College Remedial Education: A New Model of Integrated Supports for Ongoing Student Success Andrew T. Doren A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the University of Maryland University College in Partial Fulfillment of The Requirements for the Doctor of Management Degree Mary Ellen Duncan, Ph.D. Michael Evanchik, Ph.D. James Tschechtelin, Ph.D. AN APPLICATION OF DOUBLE-LOOP LEARNING TO COMMUNITY COLLEGE REMEDIAL EDUCATION ABSTRACT Community colleges have multiple missions and one of them is to provide open access services to those seeking to further their education. Community colleges provide remedial courses in math, reading, and writing because many of their students do not meet entrance requirements in these core subjects. However, the usual developmental education track in which these courses are offered is one-size-fits-all and does not target the individual needs and strengths of these students. As a result, these students often fail to continue on to credit courses or to complete a degree or certificate. In addition to the development track, a large percentage of community colleges also provide adult basic education courses for students who have not received a high school diploma and need to remediate their skills to complete a GED® and then pursue further training or education. These students also drop- or stop-out in large numbers and few actually continue on to complete a degree or certificate. These two groups of students who do not continue to post-secondary training may not be able to find viable careers, leading to a national shortage of sufficiently skilled workers. Current approaches to serving both of these student populations in community colleges—developmental track and adult literacy students—are similar, but do not achieve their desired outcomes for large numbers of students. These approaches reflect a single-loop method of learning that does not foster creative ways to achieve desired outcomes. The current paradigm for delivering these forms of remedial education needs to be changed if students are to be more successful in college. This study takes a double-loop approach to developing greater individualized learning programs for students who need them. This new model for providing more targeted, customized, and just-in-time remedial education reflects current research in the field. Elements of this new approach include integrated classes, better diagnostic instruments, use of technology, and tutoring that meets the needs of individual students. The model presented in this study has applicability beyond those students who need remedial education. It can be used for any student who requires the skills deemed necessary to complete their desired program of study successfully. This research also identified organizational learning and change pitfalls that perpetuate the single-loop approach to education in colleges and discussed needed management and leadership styles for implementing required organizational changes that better serve all students. AN APPLICATION OF DOUBLE-LOOP LEARNING TO COMMUNITY COLLEGE REMEDIAL EDUCATION ii © COPYRIGHT BY Andrew Andrew Andrew Andrew T. T. DorenDoren Doren 20 13 AN APPLICATION OF DOUBLE-LOOP LEARNING TO COMMUNITY COLLEGE REMEDIAL EDUCATION iii Dedication This work is dedicated to every college student who has struggled through, or continues to struggle in, remedial courses in their higher education journey, as well as those students everywhere whose future potential has yet to be “uncorked.” As all scholars naively hope, I wish that this research may play at least a small role in changing the world of higher education for the better! AN APPLICATION OF DOUBLE-LOOP LEARNING TO COMMUNITY COLLEGE REMEDIAL EDUCATION iv Acknowledgements I would like to first and foremost thank the University of Maryland University College (UMUC) and various other parties involved in the creation of the Doctor of Management in Community College Policy and Administration (DMCCPA). I am grateful for their vision and forethought in creating such a valuable program for someone like myself, who otherwise would not have ventured forward with this demanding undertaking. Perhaps most importantly, I want to thank UMUC for advertising the program in industry publications and for the anonymous and generous donor who made this all a reality for me! I also want to thank all the professors and administrative staff involved in the DMCCPA program for making the journey toward my doctorate so interesting, rewarding, and challenging in a very positive way. Special thanks go out to Professors Mary Ellen Duncan, Michael Evanchik, and James “uncork your genius” Tschechtelin, who provided numerous ideas, insights, and words of encouragement throughout the three years of the program. One of my many goals is to continue to contribute to others as they have all contributed to my own personal and professional development. Much love, appreciation, and many thanks go out to my wife and daughter, who somehow put up with and also encouraged my seemingly endless nights and weekends of study and research. My daughter actually labeled my new ailment “readiosis,” or the inability to stop reading multiple books or articles on a near constant basis. Although a wonderful experience for me, we are all glad it is over! As the son of hardworking immigrants who never had the opportunity for college, I am just a bit proud to be the first in my extended family to have reached the highest level of educational achievement. AN APPLICATION OF DOUBLE-LOOP LEARNING TO COMMUNITY COLLEGE REMEDIAL EDUCATION v Lastly, many thanks and very best wishes go out to my fellow UMUC colleagues with whom I have shared numerous thoughts, laughs, and complaints as we moved forward together in this adventure. May we continue to stick together as one big, happy family of doctors! AN APPLICATION OF DOUBLE-LOOP LEARNING TO COMMUNITY COLLEGE REMEDIAL EDUCATION vi Table of ContentsTable of ContentsTable of ContentsTable of ContentsTable of ContentsTable of Contents Table of Contents Table of Contents Table of Contents Table of ContentsTable of Contents Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 2 Background and Context: The “Myth” of Open Access ............................................ 2 Statement of Problem and Purpose: Doing the Same Things Over Again and Expecting Different results .................................................................................. 4 Importance to Community College Management—From Single to Double Loops.................................................................................................................... 8 Research Questions and Statement of Purpose: Bringing New Ways of Thinking to the Remedial Issue ........................................................................... 10 Definitions Used ........................................................................................................ 13 Dissertation Organization .......................................................................................... 14 2 LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................................... 16 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 16 Why the Remedial Issue? K-12 and College Readiness ............................................ 16 Academic Remediation in Community Colleges ....................................................... 21 Effectiveness of Remedial Education ........................................................................ 26 Adult Basic Education Under the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 Title II Adult Education and Family Literacy Act ............................................... 30 The Title II Adult Education and Family Literacy Act ........................................ 31 WIA Accountability Mechanism ......................................................................... 32 WIA and the Community College ....................................................................... 34 “TEGLs” as a Catalyst for Change ...................................................................... 35 Setting the Stage for Future WIA Changes.......................................................... 37 Current Models of Collaboration ......................................................................... 39 The Theory of Action Perspective ............................................................................. 41 Trending Towards a Better Solution .......................................................................... 45 3 CONCEPTUAL MODEL OF INTEGRATED JUST-IN-TIME REMEDIAL EDUCATION DELIVERY.................................................................. 46 Overview and Explanation ......................................................................................... 46 Summary .................................................................................................................... 62 AN APPLICATION OF DOUBLE-LOOP LEARNING TO COMMUNITY COLLEGE REMEDIAL EDUCATION vii Chapter 4 METHODOLOGIES ................................................................................................. 63 Discussion and Background on Evidence-based Literature Used in the Dissertation .......................................................................................................... 63 Systematic Review of the Literature and Methodology ............................................ 82 Evidence-based Systematic Review of Methodology ................................................ 83 Discussion of Evidence-based Research Findings and Use of Expert Panel ............. 99 5 ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION OF EXPERT READER FEEDBACK ................102 Summary and Discussion of Key Literature Review Theme .....................................102 Analysis and Summary of Findings ...........................................................................104 Expert Panel Feedback ...............................................................................................105 Expert Reviewer #1—Classmate .........................................................................107 Expert Reviewer #2—Adult Basic Education Expert ..........................................107 Expert Reviewer #3—Adult Basic Education Expert ..........................................109 Expert Reviewer #4—Remedial/Developmental Education Expert ....................110 Expert Reviewer #5—Remedial/Developmental Education Expert ....................111 Summary of Expert Reader Feedback and Integration into Dissertation ..................112 Conclusions ................................................................................................................114 6 DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS AND PRODUCT MODEL ......................................116 From Single- to Double-loop Learning in the Community College ..........................117 Discussion of Change Leadership Needed to Implement Double-loop Learning .....123 Limitations of Current Model and Implications for Future Research ........................127 BIBLIOGRAPHY ......................................................................................................131 AN APPLICATION OF DOUBLE-LOOP LEARNING TO COMMUNITY COLLEGE REMEDIAL EDUCATION viii LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Community College Missions.................................................................................... 2 2 Failure of Remediation .............................................................................................. 4 3 Conley’s 7 Principles of College and Career Readiness ............................................ 20 4 Roueche and Roueche’s Recommendations for “Making Remedial Education Work” ....................................................................................................... 27 5 Key Features of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 ........................................... 30 6 Purpose of AEFLA Funding ...................................................................................... 31 7 Core NRS Outcome Measures ................................................................................... 33 8 The Breaking Through Initiative’s Four Strategies for Increasing Student Access and Success .................................................................................................... 40 9 Virginia’s Community College Goals ....................................................................... 58 10 Initial Research Materials .......................................................................................... 65 11 Breakdown of Expert Reviewers’ Scores ..................................................................106 12 Parallels Between Kotter’s and Schein’s Ideas of Organizational Change ...............125 13 Guidelines for Formulating a Vision .........................................................................126 AN APPLICATION OF DOUBLE-LOOP LEARNING TO COMMUNITY COLLEGE REMEDIAL EDUCATION ix LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Model of management and organizational learning................................................... 43 2 Common “Just-in-time remedial” model for greater student success ........................ 47 3 Supports for students.................................................................................................. 49 4 Community college enrollment process..................................................................... 49 5 Placement ................................................................................................................... 55 6 Relevance ................................................................................................................... 60 7 Preparation ................................................................................................................. 61 8 The “myth” of open access ........................................................................................118 9 Author’s version of Argyris’s (2005) managerial and organizational learning paradigm as applied to the concept of remedial education in community colleges ...120 AN APPLICATION OF DOUBLE-LOOP LEARNING TO COMMUNITY COLLEGE REMEDIAL EDUCATION 1 About one-third don’t graduate high school in ten years. The second third- actually more like 40 percent of the total- get a little college. And the [last] third gets an associate’s degree or more. This has been pretty flat for the past thirty years. Then you juxtapose that against the workforce needs of the country, we’re several million down now and we’ll be 7 to 8 million down within a few years. And in this global economy we’ve got…. China as an obvious example. As soon as they become as productive as we are they will swamp the economy with qualified workers. We have to do better than “sort of” educating one-third plus a few to an associates’ degree level. We don’t need incrementalism—we need new models. (Peter Smith, as quoted in Kamenetz, 2010, p. 132) AN APPLICATION OF DOUBLE-LOOP LEARNING TO COMMUNITY COLLEGE REMEDIAL EDUCATION 2 Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION From a public policy standpoint, it makes little sense to promote greater college access if students are failing once they get there. Figuring out how to boost college completion is the challenge. (Brock, 2010, p. 115) Background and Context: The “Myth” of Open Access From their beginnings over a century ago, community colleges have continued to carry out multiple missions, which have often led to what Dougherty and Townsend (2006) call “mission conflict” among these sometimes competing interests (p. 9). Whether it be the goals of open access, transfer, workforce training or any number of others, community colleges have always had to balance varying priorities with internal and external stakeholders, along with the broader communities they are tasked to serve. Smith (2000) emphasizes this point by indicating that a community college’s governing board is mainly responsible to the community, and not necessarily to its students or faculty. Regardless of how these responsibilities are viewed, the fact is that community colleges need to take varying stakeholders into consideration in carrying out their multiple missions (see Table 1). The idea of higher education access has proved to be a “major theme” in the United States, stemming from the creation of the G.I. Table 1. Most community college missions are focused on the following: To serve all segments of society equally and fairly through open-access admissions To provide comprehensive educational programs To serve the community by being a locally based higher-education institution Teaching and learning To foster lifelong learning (Source: Vaughan, 2006, p. 3) AN APPLICATION OF DOUBLE-LOOP LEARNING TO COMMUNITY COLLEGE REMEDIAL EDUCATION 3 Bill at the end of World War II along with the massive social changes brought about by the civil rights and anti-poverty movements in the 1960s and 1970s (Vaughan, 2006, p. 3). The ideal of education access for all therefore led to the egalitarian “open access” policies found in most community colleges today, something that Shannon and Smith (2006) have emphasized as having had one of the greatest impacts on higher education in the nation (p. 15). Vaughan (2006), however, is quick to point out that the concept of open access is incorrectly understood as meaning that anyone can enter without the necessary prerequisites for effective learning to take place. Rather, open access means that people will not be simply turned away from college, but instead be provided with support services “to ensure that every student has the opportunity to succeed academically” (pp. 4-5). This egalitarian commitment to open access and admissions policies on the part of community colleges appears to have worked well, as evidenced by the many long-term benefits they conveyed to an American society in which well over 40% of undergraduates are being served by these institutions (Sullivan, 2010). Brock (2010) points out that despite the substantial increase in higher education access for the population overall during the last 40 years, “success in college—as measured by persistence and degree attainment—has not improved at all” (p. 110). Despite the longer-term financial pressures on community colleges, Zeiss (2003) declares that they “are facing a permanent shift from being public-supported to being public-assisted institutions” (p. 53). It does not appear that the open access mission is disappearing anytime soon. Nevertheless, economic, social, and political pressures on community colleges will provide their leadership with ethical challenges as they are forced to make difficult decisions AN APPLICATION OF DOUBLE-LOOP LEARNING TO COMMUNITY COLLEGE REMEDIAL EDUCATION 4 around the fundamental philosophy of open admissions policies (Ingram & Morrissey, 2009, p. 31). Statement of Problem and Purpose: Doing the Same Things Over Again and Expecting Different Resu