College Readiness Lit Review

A Literature Review and Analysis of College Readiness in Practice Background Recent studies within education research have identified a disconnect between high school and college as evidenced by data such as high level of remediation courses, high college drop-out rate, and overall poor performance of first-year students in post-secondary settings (Venezia, et al, 2003). The K-16 disconnect issue is even more apparent among first-generation and minority college students (Kirst & Venezia, 2004; Conley, 2005). Traditional programs that bridge the education systems between K-12 and college such as AP, dual/concurrent enrollment, and IB have only reached a minority of college bound students, leaving a number of students ill-prepared for postsecondary learning (Conley, 2005). Regardless of learner background and preparation, first year college students are not performing at a ‘college level’ in their post-secondary endeavors with 61 percent of these students in 2-year public schools taking at least one remedial course (NCES 2004010). Framing the issue with the term ‘college readiness’, academics have produced research literature describing the high school-college disconnect and have proposed approaches to bridge the gap within the education system along two major veins. One direction involves establishing college readiness standards on a subject-bysubject level, while also embedding distinctive learning practices in the curriculum, such as college level cognitive strategies and ‘habits of the mind’ (Conley, 2007). Other solutions involve a more macro approach, informing state policy makers and education administrators on ways to improve the alignment of education as a K-16 system (Venezia, et al, 2003).

Research questions Drawing from the current college readiness research, this literature review involves investigating college readiness and related terms to establish a conceptual landscape of the college readiness discussion as it relates to the facilitation and implementation of change for the K-12 and postsecondary system. The intention of the review is to further define and disseminate the notion of college readiness to the education community by attempting to answer the following questions: • • •

How is college readiness defined within the literature? What are the parallels and intersections amongst the literature? What criteria can be extracted from the literature to guide in the analysis of college readiness initiatives?

• •

What college readiness skills and curriculum standards does the literature indicate? How can the college readiness landscape be used to inform stakeholders on improving the education system?

Methodology The primary task of this literature review is to initially define what college readiness is and examine how this definition has guided educators, policymakers, and stakeholders in developing instructional and informational solutions. To accomplish this task, the facets of the definition are being used to establish a set of comparative criteria which function as filters for an initial illustrative state-by-state college readiness implementation analysis. Furthermore, as the literature reveals, college readiness also involves defining student behaviors or ‘habits of the mind’, and other skills needed to fill the K-16 disconnect. The parallels in the definitions might also function as further curriculum guidelines.

Defining College Readiness The principal definition of college readiness derives from the research of Conley (2007) through the Educational Policy Improvement Center (EPIC). Conley (2007) defined college readiness as a “multi-faceted concept compromising numerous variables that include factors both internal and external to the school environment” (p. 12). These variables are overlapping and interconnected skills and capabilities students need to possess in order to be college ready. These include contextual skills relating to college life, academic behaviors relating to study skills and metacogntion, mastery of key curriculum content and academic skills, and most fundamental, the knowledge required to master subjects defined as key cognitive strategies, or habits of the mind.

Analyzing the Standards The four variables in Conley’s definition each contain potential research directions that can inform high school curriculum development and curriculum design. Of note, Conley and EPIC have developed a comprehensive set of college readiness standards titled, Standards for Success (S4S) which focus on disciplines of English, Math, Natural and Social Sciences, Second Languages, and Arts. The standards encompass content knowledge and are underlined with key cognitive strategies (Conley, 2003; 2005). Other groups and states have established similar standards related to college readiness such as the American Diploma Project (ADP), and testing companies such as College Board (College Board Standards for College Success), and ACT (College Readiness Standards for EXPLORE, PLAN, and the ACT). To enhance the understanding of the standards within Conley’s model, part of this research focuses on comparing the S4S standards with the ADP standards and extracting the cognitive strategies from the analysis. Moving forward, the process

will consists of establishing a list of key cognitive strategies, summarizing the standards from the literature, and identifying the intersections between the standards and strategies.

Program analysis criteria As indicated in the college readiness literature, part of the issue is framed within a policy disconnect (Venezia, et al, 2003). When states adopt new policies on implementing college readiness, policymakers may or may not be facilitating change appropriately. Therefore, at this initial stage of our project, it is important to identify and focus analysis also on these policy level implications. Thus far we have extracted several analysis criteria to be used to evaluate state-based college readiness initiatives (Conley, 2007; Callan et. al, 2006; Kirst & Venezia, 2005). These include: •

K-16 alignment of coursework and assessment

•

College ready knowledge and skills embedded in curriculum

•

A comprehensive assessment system

•

State college readiness budget

•

Statewide data system

•

State accountability system

•

Student and teacher support

Further directions Our process has just begun and begun to shape into three major elements, each of which can potentially lead to other research directions. These include analyzing the college readiness standards, defining the ‘habits’ of the mind’ required for postsecondary success into curriculum guidelines, and establishing criterion to evaluate state college readiness programs. The intention at this phase is to paint a landscape of college readiness and follow the research threads as they reveal themselves in the literature. In essence, this work might serve as a compendium on college readiness, compiling a database of articles and reports – both theoretical and prescriptive – which might serve as an instructional guide for the education community.

Bibliography Callan, P.M., Finnery, J.E., Kirst, M.W., Usdan, M.D., & Venezia, A. (2006). Claiming Common Ground: State Policymaking for Improving College Readiness and Success.

The National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education. National Center Report #06-1. Conley, D. T. (2005). College Knowledge. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Conley, D. T. (2003). Understanding University Success: A Project of the Association of American Universities and The Pew Charitable Trusts. Eugene: Center for Educational Policy Research. Conley, D. (2007). Towards a More Comprehensive Comprehension of College Readiness. Eugene, OR: Educational Policy Improvement Center. Kirst, M. V. (2004). From High School to College: Improving Opportunities for Success in Postseconday Eudcation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES). (2004). The Condition of Education (NCES 2004-077). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. Venezia, A., Kirst, M.W., & Antonio, A.L. (2003). Betraying the college dream: How disconnected K-12 and postsecondary education systems undermine student aspirations. Final Policy Report from Stanford University’s Bridge Project. Venezia, A. & Kirst, M.W. (2005). Inequitable opportunities: How current education systems and policies undermine chances for student persistence and success in college. Educational Policy, 19(2), 283-307.