A study of fourteen colleges finds that community colleges require certain kinds of social know-how—skills and knowledge less available to disadvantaged students. They present seven obstacles: (1) bureaucratic hurdles, (2) confusing choices, (3) student-initiated guidance, (4) limited counselor availability, (5) poor advice from staff, (6) delayed detection of costly mistakes, and (7) poor handling of conflicting demands. However, we find that a very different kind of college—the private occupational college—takes steps to structure out the need for this social know-how and address the needs of disadvantaged students. We speculate about possible policy implications.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Apling, Richard N. 1993. Proprietary schools and their students. Journal of Higher Education64 (4): 379-416.
Bailey, T., N. Badway, and P. Gumport. 2001. For-profit higher education and community colleges. Stanford, CA: Center for Postsecondary Improvement.
4.
Bourdieu, Pierre, and John C. Passeron. 1977. Reproduction in education, society and culture. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
5.
Brewer, Dominic J., and Maryann Gray. 1999. Dofaculty connect school to work? Evidence from community colleges. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis21 (4): 405-16.
6.
Brint, Steven, and J. Karabel. 1989. The diverted dream: Community colleges and the promise of educational opportunity in America, 1900-1985. New York: Oxford University Press.
7.
Deil, Regina, and James Rosenbaum. 2001. How can low-status colleges help young adults gain access to better jobs? Practitioners’ applications of human capital vs. sociological models. Paper presented to the American Sociological Association, Los Angeles, 19 August.
8.
Dougherty, Kevin J. 1994. The contradictory college: The conflicting origins, impacts, and cultures of the community college. Albany: State University of New York Press.
9.
Grubb, Norton W. 1996. Working in the middle: Strengthening education and training for the mid-skilled labor force. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
10.
Heckman, James J. 1999. Doing it right: Job training and education. Public Interest135:86-107.
11.
London, Howard B. 1978. The culture of a community college. New York: Praeger.
12.
National Center for Educational Statistics. 1998. Total first-time freshman enrolled in institutions of higher education and degree-granting institutions, 1955-1996. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
13.
Neumann, R. W., and D. Riesman. 1980. The community college elite. In New directions in community colleges #32: Questioning the community college role, edited by G. Vaughan, 53-71. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
14.
Orfield, Gary, and Faith G. Paul. 1994. High hopes, long odds: A major report on Hoosier teens and the American dream. Indianapolis: Indiana Youth Institute.
15.
Richardson, R. C., E. A. Fisk, and M. A. Okum. 1983. Literacy in the open-access college. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
16.
Shaw, Kathleen M. 1997. Remedial education as ideological background: Emerging remedial education policies in the community college. Education Evaluation and Analysis19 (3): 284-96.
17.
Tinto, Vincent. 1993. Leaving college. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
18.
Weis, Lois. 1985. Between two worlds: Black students in an urban community college. Boston: Routledge Kegan Paul.
19.
Wilms, Wellford W. 1974. Public and proprietary vocational training: A study of effectiveness. Berkeley, CA: Center for Research and Development in Higher Education.
20.
Zwerling, L. Steven, and Howard B. London. 1992. First-generation students: Confronting the cultural issues. In New directions in community colleges 80. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
