11
This article was downloaded by: [University of Birmingham] On: 09 October 2014, At: 11:08 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Community Junior College Research Quarterly of Research and Practice Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ucjc19 WHY DON'T POORLY PREPARED STUDENTS SEEK HELP? Jack Friedlander a a Center for the Study of Community Colleges Published online: 09 Jul 2006. To cite this article: Jack Friedlander (1981) WHY DON'T POORLY PREPARED STUDENTS SEEK HELP?, Community Junior College Research Quarterly of Research and Practice, 6:1, 29-38 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0361697810060103 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http:// www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

WHY DON'T POORLY PREPARED STUDENTS SEEK HELP?

  • Upload
    jack

  • View
    214

  • Download
    1

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: WHY DON'T POORLY PREPARED STUDENTS SEEK HELP?

This article was downloaded by: [University of Birmingham]On: 09 October 2014, At: 11:08Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Community Junior College Research Quarterly ofResearch and PracticePublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ucjc19

WHY DON'T POORLY PREPARED STUDENTS SEEK HELP?Jack Friedlander aa Center for the Study of Community CollegesPublished online: 09 Jul 2006.

To cite this article: Jack Friedlander (1981) WHY DON'T POORLY PREPARED STUDENTS SEEK HELP?, Community Junior CollegeResearch Quarterly of Research and Practice, 6:1, 29-38

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0361697810060103

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) containedin the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of theContent. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon andshould be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable forany losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use ofthe Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Page 2: WHY DON'T POORLY PREPARED STUDENTS SEEK HELP?

WHY DON'T POORLY PREPAREDSTUDENTS SEEK HELP?

Jack FriedlanderCenter for the Study of Community Colleges

The objectives of this study were to determine the percentage of stu-dents who felt they were weak in an academic skill and who took a col-lege assistance program designed to correct that deficiency and to identifythe reasons given by students weak in an academic skill for not using acollege support service from which they could benefit. Analyses of sur-vey data obtained from 268 instructors and 6,428 of their students en-rolled in a cross section of courses in a large multicampus urban commu-nity college district showed the following: (1) of those students whodid not feel confident in a skill, less than 30% took advantage of a supportprogram designed to assist them in that skill; (2) more than 40% of thefaculty felt that the primary reason students did not take advantage ofa needed support service was that they were not willing to devote theextra time or effort required to avail themselves of the service; and (3)the main reasons most academically underprepared students gave fornot using a support service were that they did not feel a need for theservice or had no time for the service. Implications of these findings foreducational policy are discussed.

Since the early 1970s there has been a steady increase in thenumber of students in the community colleges who enter withserious deficiencies in basic skills, poorly developed study habits,and inadequate mastery of high school subject matter (Lukenbill& McCabe, 1978; Cohen & Brawer, 1981). Results of testing pro-grams indicate that in many urban community colleges, more than40% of the entering students are deficient in their reading, writing,and computational skills (Friedlander, 1981; McCabe, 1981).

Studies conducted at the national and district levels showedthat faculty members are finding it difficult to present collegelevel courses to students lacking the educational background neededto succeed in their classes. According to results of nationwide sur-veys (Cohen & Brawer, 1977; Brawer & Friedlander, 1979; Cohen& Friedlander, 1980) of teachers in the humanities, sciences, andsocial sciences more than half of the faculty state that their coursescould be made better if they had students who were better preparedto handle course requirements. Faculty members in a large urban

Community/Junior College Quarterly, 6:29-38, 1981 29Copyright © 1981 by Hemisphere Publishing Corporation

0277-6774/81/040029-10 $2.25

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 1

1:08

09

Oct

ober

201

4

Page 3: WHY DON'T POORLY PREPARED STUDENTS SEEK HELP?

30 J. FRIEDLANDER

multicampus community college district reported that more than50% of the students enrolled in their classes have difficulty or areunable to understand course reading assignments, to express them-selves in writing, to learn on their own, to solve problems thatrequire arithmetic, or to understand science developments (Fried-lander, in press). Among the findings reported in an accreditationstudy conducted at Miami-Dade Community College District wasthat it is very difficult if not impossible to maintain quality edu-cation when a number of students lack proficiency in basic skills.In addition, many instructors do not feel they have the propertraining needed to teach students who are academically under-prepared (Lukenbill & McCabe, 1978).

The major approach used by community colleges to cope withthe vast numbers of underprepared students has been to establishor greatly expand their academic support programs (Cross, 1976;Maxwell, 1979). These have typically included remedial courses,tutoring, special instructional services (e.g., reading and writinglaboratories, audiotutorial programs) and counseling (personal,academic, and career).

Given the substantial commitment of resources needed to sus-tain these programs, and the significance of their objectives, it wouldseem important at this time to assess the extent to which thesesupport services are reaching their intended audiences. This ques-tion is especially pertinent because participation in many, andin some colleges all, of the support program and services is volun-tary (Cross, 1976).

The objectives of this study were to address the following threequestions: (1) What percentage of the students who regarded them-selves as weak in an academic skill took advantage of a college as-sistance program designed to correct that deficiency? (2) Whatreasons did students who noted that they were weak in an aca-demic skill give for not using a college support service from whichthey could benefit? (3) What do faculty members think are thereasons students have for not taking advantage of a needed sup-port service? These questions can be answered from data obtainedin a survey of faculty (N = 268) and students (N = 6,426) in alarge multicampus urban community college district.

This study conducted by the Center for the Study of Commu-nity Colleges involved administering surveys to instructors andstudents in 13% of all class sections offered at 10 a.m. and 7 p.m.The surveys were administered on Wednesday of the fifth weekof the fall 1980 term. Completed surveys were obtained from 268instructors and 6,426 of their students. Surveys were returned

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 1

1:08

09

Oct

ober

201

4

Page 4: WHY DON'T POORLY PREPARED STUDENTS SEEK HELP?

POORLY PREPARED STUDENTS 31

from 82% of the classes in which they were distributed. The classesused in this study represent a good cross section of the subjectareas taught in the multicampus district.

RESULTS

Use of Academic Support Services

A major objective of this study was to determine the percentageof students who thought that they were weak in an academic skilland who took advantage of a college assistance program designedto correct that deficiency. Two of the items on the student sur-vey were used to satisfy this objective. One of the items had stu-dents rate their skills on a 3-point scale ("confident," "somewhatconfident," "not confident") in a variety of areas. These includedreading, writing, arithmetic, algebra, science, and study skills. Theother item used in this study had students indicate which if anyof nine support programs they had taken advantage of at theircollege.

The data presented in Table 1 show that of those students whodid not feel confident in a skill area, less than 30% took advan-tage of a support program designed to assist them in that skill area.

More specifically, the table reveals the following:

Of the students who did not feel confident in their writing ability,29% sought some type of assistance for their writing skills.

Of those who did not feel confident in their reading ability, 28%took advantage of the college's support programs to improvereading.

TABLE 1 Confidence of Students in Their Abilities and Their Use of Sup-port Services

Confidence of students using service

Type of support service used Confident {%) Not confident (%)

282920192710

Reading skillsWriting skillsArithmetic skillsAlgebra skillsStudy skillsScientific thinking skills

242321232713

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 1

1:08

09

Oct

ober

201

4

Page 5: WHY DON'T POORLY PREPARED STUDENTS SEEK HELP?

32 J. FRIEDLANDER

Of those students who did not feel confident in their ability tosolve problems that require arithmetic, 20% received assistancefrom a college support program in developmental mathematics.

Of those students who were not confident in their ability in sci-ence, 10% took advantage of the college support program inthat area.

These findings indicate that despite the efforts to provide stu-dents with the support programs and assistance they need to succeedin college-level courses, the majority of those who can profit mostfrom the assistance provided are not taking advantage of theseprograms. The information reported in Table 1 also shows thatthere is little or no difference in the use of support services bystudents who are confident and those who are not confident intheir abilities.

Reasons for Not Using Support Services

One of the items on the student survey asked respondents whodid not use a particular support service to indicate their primaryreason for not doing so. The response categories were as follows:"I do not need it." "I have no time for it." "Service is offeredat an inconvenient time." "I have heard that this service is notvery helpful." The data presented in Table 2 are based on responsesfrom only those students who reported a lack of confidence in askill area and who did not take advantage of a support programdesigned to correct that deficiency.

As shown in Table 2, the reason most students had for not usinga support service from which they could benefit was that theydid not feel a need for the service. The second most frequentlycited reason for not taking advantage of a needed support servicewas that they had no time. The third most mentioned reason givenfor not using a service was that it was offered at an inconvenienttime. Less than 4% of the students noted that they did not use asupport service designed to correct a skill in which they were de-ficient because they heard that service was not very helpful.

A surprising finding to appear in Table 2 was the high percent-age of students—in most instances more than 50%—who felt thatthey did not need assistance from a support service designed tocorrect a skill area in which they were deficient. Possibly this re-sponse resulted from students' belief that a particular skill in whichthey were weak was not really needed to succeed in the coursesin which they were enrolled.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 1

1:08

09

Oct

ober

201

4

Page 6: WHY DON'T POORLY PREPARED STUDENTS SEEK HELP?

TABLE 2 Reasons Students Who Were Not Confident in a Skill Gave for Not Using a Support Service

Skills in whichstudents not confident

Reading (no help in reading)Reading (no basic skills course)Writing (no help in writing)Writing (no basic skills course)Arithmetic (no basic skills course in math)Arithmetic (no tutoring in math)Algebra (no basic skills course in math)Algebra (no tutoring in math)Science (no basic skills course in science)Science (no tutoring in science)Study skills (no help with study skills)

Do notneed service

50.249.544.258.260.660.966.766.973.171.843.9

Reason

No timefor service

29.627.834.625.222.822.119.619.216.917.131.6

for not using service (%)

Service offered atinconvenient time

17.519.718.414.314.114.312.212.08.29.2

20.4

Heard servicewas not helpful

2.73.02.82.22.52.71.61.91.81.94.1

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 1

1:08

09

Oct

ober

201

4

Page 7: WHY DON'T POORLY PREPARED STUDENTS SEEK HELP?

34 J. FRIEDLANDER

The data presented in Table 2 demonstrate that the factor oftime—no time for service and service offered at an inconvenienttime—were cited by more than 35% of the students as the primarydeterrent preventing them from improving their skills in the abilityareas on which education is based—reading, writing, arithmetic,and study skills. For example, of those students who were notconfident in their writing ability and who did not seek assistanceto improve their writing, 53% stated that they did not do so eitherbecause they did not have time to use the assistance services pro-vided (34.6%) or that the service was offered at an inconvenienttime (18.4%).

Faculty Perceptions of Lack of Support Services Use

Instructors were asked concerning a specified course they wereteaching, "If students do not use a needed service, why do youthink this is so?" The response categories were as follows: (1) stu-dents are not aware of the service; (2) students do not believe thatthey can benefit from the service; (3) students are not willing todevote extra time or effort; and (4) students do not find servicesavailable at a convenient time. Responses to this question are pre-sented in Table 3.

The information presented in Table 3 shows that, according to54% of the faculty, the reason that most students who are weakin reading and writing do not take basic skills courses in thoseareas is because they are not willing to devote the extra time oreffort needed to receive assistance from the services. Almost halfof the instructors (49%) felt that the major reason students whoneed to improve their skills in mathematics do not enroll in basicskills courses offered in this area is because they are not willingto devote the extra time or effort to these services. Moreover, 46%of the instructors felt the same about students weak in the sci-ences.

An additional 15-20% of the faculty felt that the major reasonstudents do not take advantage of needed support programs isthat the services are not available at a convenient time. Thus thefactor of time—not willing to devote the extra time and servicesoffered at an inconvenient time—was cited by more than 50% ofthe faculty as the primary reason students do not take advantageof a support service designed to improve skills in which they aredeficient.

Less than 20% of the instructors felt that the primary reasonstudents do not use a particular support service to improve a basic

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 1

1:08

09

Oct

ober

201

4

Page 8: WHY DON'T POORLY PREPARED STUDENTS SEEK HELP?

TABLE 3 Reasons Faculty Gave for Why Students Do Not Use A Needed Support Service

Supportservice

Basic skills coursesin reading and writing

Basic skills coursesin math

Basic skills coursesin the sciences

Tutoring in mathTutoring in science

Not willing tospend time or effort

54

49

464140

Reason for not using service (%)

Service offered atinconvenient time

15

15

161920

Do notneed service

16

19

191515

Not awareof service

15

17

182525

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 1

1:08

09

Oct

ober

201

4

Page 9: WHY DON'T POORLY PREPARED STUDENTS SEEK HELP?

36 J. FRIEDLANDER

skill in which they Eire weak is because they do not believe theycan benefit from the service. Between 15 and 25% of the instruc-tors said that the primary reason students do not take advantage ofa particular service they needed is because they are not aware ofthe service. Their responses ranged from 15% with respect to basicskills courses in reading and writing to 25% with regard to tutoringin math and science.

DISCUSSION

Most community colleges have initiated comprehensive supportprograms and services to help students succeed in college. Theseprograms are similar in their basic objectives and in the kinds ofservices they employ to help students. The programs differ in themethods used and in the assumptions on which these methodsare based.

One widely used approach to help students adjust to academicdemands is to make comprehensive support programs known andeasily accessible to them but to leave involvement in these pro-grams completely up to the student. This approach is based onthe assumption that if these students need help they will take theinitiative to seek assistance from an appropriate campus resource.According to this assumption, students who are weak in math willtake the initiative to seek help through tutoring, developmentalmath courses, or some other related resource.

Although this method of relying on student initiative to takeadvantage of campus resources is widespread, one finding of thisstudy showed that in a district where such a method was in effect,less than 30% of those students who did not feel confident in a basicskill area took advantage of a college support service designed tocorrect that deficiency. In fact, students who lacked confidencein their academic abilities were in most instances no more likelyto seek assistance from an appropriate academic support servicethan were those who were confident in their abilities. These find-ings lead to the following policy question: Should communitycolleges leave it to the students' own initiative to develop the skillsnecessary to succeed in the courses in which they enroll? Or shouldthe colleges require them to take whatever steps are necessary todevelop proficiency in basic skill areas needed to succeed in theircourses?

The fundamental goals of most community college educationalprograms include the development of student competencies in suchbasic skill areas as reading, writing, computing, and science. Given

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 1

1:08

09

Oct

ober

201

4

Page 10: WHY DON'T POORLY PREPARED STUDENTS SEEK HELP?

POORLY PREPARED STUDENTS 37

the importance of these objectives, it was somewhat surprising tolearn that such a high percentage of the students who were de-ficient in these basic skill areas did not feel they needed assistancefrom a related college support service. One possible explanationfor this finding is that such students may not see the need to im-prove their skills in these areas because these skills were not re-quired to pass the courses in which they were enrolled. To theextent that this explanation is true, then the following policy ques-tion needs to be addressed: Should community colleges assumethat all students will have developed at least a minimum proficiencyin such basic skill areas as reading, writing, computing, and under-standing science on the completion of their degree or certificateprograms? Or should all students in degree and certificate pro-grams be required to demonstrate proficiency in these basic skillsin order to be awarded an associate's degree or occupationalcertificate?

More than 40% of the students who were deficient in a basicskill and who did not seek assistance from the college supportprograms reported that they did not have time to use the serviceor that the service was offered at an inconvenient time. This factorof time was also cited by more than half the faculty members asthe primary reason students do not take advantage of ancillaryservices to improve their basic skills. If students who are weakin basic skills needed to succeed in their courses do not have timeto take advantage of needed programs—because they are enrolledin the evening, attend college part time, are employed full time,or have other commitments—then the following policy questionshould be asked: Should community colleges continue to offercourses to students who, for whatever reasons, are not willing todevote the extra time needed to strengthen their skills and let thestudents sink or swim? Or should colleges offer courses only tostudents who are willing to commit whatever time is needed to dowell in their courses?

Evaluations of the effectiveness of college ancillary servicesshould be based on both the extent to which these services areused by students for whom the programs are especially designedto serve and the effects these programs have on student learningand development. The findings of this study suggest that no matterhow good a college's ancillary services may be, a substantial pro-portion of the students who could benefit most from these pro-grams will not take advantage of them if left to their own initia-tive, either because they do not feel that they need the service orbecause they do not have time for it. College managers should

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 1

1:08

09

Oct

ober

201

4

Page 11: WHY DON'T POORLY PREPARED STUDENTS SEEK HELP?

38 J. FRIEDLANDER

keep these findings in mind when deciding which of the followingalternatives to pursue: leave the involvement in academic supportprograms completely up to the student; have college staff memberstake the initiative to encourage academically underprepared studentsto seek assistance from an appropriate support service; or have thecollege take the initiative by instituting policies that require stu-dents to do whatever is necessary to develop proficiency in thosebasic skill areas needed to succeed in their courses.

REFERENCES

Brawer, F. B., & Friedlander, J. Science and social science in the two-yearcollege. Topical Paper No. 69. Los Angeles: Center for the Study of Com-munity Colleges and ERIC Clearinghouse for Junior Colleges, 1979.

Cohen, A. M., & Brawer, F. B. Functional literacy for community collegestudents. Paper presented at the Conference on Adult Literacy, Ann Arbor,June 1981.

Cohen, A. M., & Brawer, F. B. The two-year college instructor today. NewYork: Praeger, 1977.

Cohen, A.M., and Friedlander, J. What do instructors want? Community CollegeReview, 1980, 7, 66-71.

Cross, P. K. Accent on learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1976.Friedlander, J. Student and faculty ratings of academic abilities of community

college students. Los Angeles: Center for the Study of Community Colleges,1981.

Friedlander, J. Educational abilities and success of students enrolled in commu-nity college liberal arts courses. Community College Review (in press).

Lukenbill, J. D., & McCabe, R. H. General education in a changing society.Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt, 1978.

Maxwell, M. Improving student learning skills. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass,1979.

McCabe, R. H. Now is the time to reform the American community college.Miami: Miami-Dade Community College, 1981.

Received May 27, 1981Accepted July 20, 1981

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 1

1:08

09

Oct

ober

201

4