Low-Income Latino Students and California’s Early Assessment Program

Abstract

Spanish

California’s Early Assessment Program is designed to notify students about their college readiness, encouraging them to take action to improve their skills during their senior year. The author uses qualitative methods and applies sense-making theory to examine how students attending majority Latino, low-income high schools make sense of the information the program provides. The findings suggest that participants’ limited prior knowledge of the program and shared views of standardized assessments influenced students’ perceptions of the program.

Keywords

college readiness early assessments higher education Latina(o)qualitative remediation

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Addy

S. D.

Wight

(2012). Basic facts about low-income children, 2010: Children ages 12 through 17. New York, NY: National Center for Children in Poverty. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10022/AC:P:13184

American College Testing. (2012). ACT National Curriculum Survey 2012: Policy implications on preparing for higher standards. Retrieved from http://www.act.org/research/policymakers/pdf/NCS-PolicySummary2012.pdf

Bailey

M. J.

Dynarski

S. M.

(2011). Gains and gaps: Changing inequality in U.S. college entry and completion (No. w17633). Washington, DC: National Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/papers/w17633

Baldassare

Bonner

Petek

Shrestha

(2012). Californians and the future (PPIC Statewide Survey). San Francisco: Public Policy Institute of California. Retrieved from http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/survey/S_1212MBS.pdf

Baldassare

Bonner

Petek

Willcoxon

(2010). Californians and higher education (PPIC Statewide Survey). San Francisco: Public Policy Institute of California. Retrieved from http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/survey/S_1110MBS.pdf

Bautsch

(2013). Hot topics in higher education: Reforming remedial education. National Conference of State Legislatures. Retrieved from http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research/educ/improving-college-completion-reforming-remedial.aspx

Blumer

(1954). What is wrong with social theory? American Sociological Review, 19(1), 3-10.

California State University. (2010). The Early Start Program—Executive Order No. 1048 [Memorandum]. Retrieved from http://www.calstate.edu/eo/EO-1048.pdf

California State University. (2011). California State University’s Early Start Program frequently asked questions. Retrieved from https://www.calstate.edu/acadaff/EarlyStart/docs/ES_FAQs.pdf

10.

California State University. (2015). CSU freshman proficiency rates. Retrieved from http://asd.calstate.edu/performance/proficiency.shtml

11.

California State University. (n.d.-a). CSU success: Early Assessment Program. Retrieved from http://www.csusuccess.org/star

12.

California State University. (n.d.-b). The Early Assessment Program: Helping high school students meet college expectations in mathematics and English: A joint program of California State University and California Public Schools. Retrieved from http://www.calstate.edu/eap/documents/eap_program_description.pdf

13.

California State University. (n.d.-c). The Early Assessment Program brochure. Retrieved from http://www.calstate.edu/eap/documents/eap_brochure2.pdf

14.

California State University. (n.d.-d). EAP handbook for school site leaders. Retrieved from http://www.calstate.edu/eap/documents/site-leader-handbook/professional-development.shtml

15.

California State University. (n.d.-e). Expository reading and writing course. Retrieved from http://www.calstate.edu/eap/englishcourse/

16.

Coburn

C. E.

(2001). Collective sensemaking about reading: How teachers mediate reading policy in their professional communities. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23, 145-170. doi:10.3102/01623737023002145

17.

Conley

D. T.

(2005). College knowledge: What it really takes for students to succeed and what we can do to get them ready. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

18.

Conley

D. T.

(2008). Redefining college readiness. Eugene, OR: Educational Policy Improvement Center.

19.

Conley

D. T.

(2010). College and career ready: Helping all students succeed beyond high school. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

20.

Creswell

J. W.

(2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

21.

Cuban

(1988). The managerial imperative and the practice of leadership in schools. Albany: State University of New York Press.

22.

Deil-Amen

Tevis

T. L.

(2010). Circumscribed agency: The relevance of standardized college entrance exams for low SES high school students. The Review of Higher Education, 33(2), 141-175. doi:10.1353/rhe.0.0125

23.

Fay

M. P.

Barnett

E. A.

Trimble

M. J.

Pheatt

L. E.

(2014). Early assessments and transition curricula: What states can do. New York, NY: Community College Research Center.

24.

Fry

Taylor

(2013). Hispanic high school graduates pass whites in rate of college enrollment. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center.

25.

Gewertz

(2011, January). Success of college-readiness intervention hard to gauge. Education Week, 30(18), 1. Retrieved from http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2011/01/20/18eap_ep.h30.html

26.

Glaser

B. G.

Strauss

A. L.

(1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago, IL: Aldine.

27.

Goen-Salter

(2008). Critiquing the need to eliminate remediation: Lessons from San Francisco State. Journal of Basic Writing (CUNY), 27(2), 81-105.

28.

Hafner

(2007). Evaluating the impact of reading and writing professional development on student reading and writing outcomes (Program Evaluation and Research Collaborative). Los Angeles: California State University Los Angeles. Retrieved from https://www.calstate.edu/teacherED/docs/7-20-07Evaluation_Report_May2007.pdf

29.

Hafner

Joseph

McCormick

(2010). College readiness for all: Assessing the impact of English professional development on teaching practice and student learning. Journal of Urban Learning, Teaching, and Research, 6, 15-30. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ943186

30.

Heck

R. H.

(2011). Conceptualizing and conducting meaningful research studies in education. In Conrad

C. F.

Serlin

R. C.

(Eds.), The SAGE handbook for research in education (2nd ed., pp. 199-217). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

31.

Honig

(2006). Complexity and policy implementation. In Honig

(Ed.), New directions in education policy implementation (pp. 1-23). Albany: State University of New York Press.

32.

Howell

J. S.

Kurlaender

Grodsky

(2010). Postsecondary preparation and remediation: Examining the effect of the Early Assessment Program at California State University. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 29, 726-748. doi:10.1002/pam.20526

33.

Johnson

Christensen

L. B.

(2012). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

34.

Johnson

(2009). Educating California: Choices for the future. San Francisco: Public Policy Institute of California. Retrieved from http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/report/R_609HJR.pdf

35.

Knudson

R. E.

Zitzer-Comfort

Quirk

Alexander

(2008). The California State University Early Assessment Program. The Clearing House, 81, 227-231. doi:10.3200/TCHS.81.5.227-231

36.

Kurlaender

(2014). Assessing the promise of California’s Early Assessment Program for community colleges. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 655, 36-55. Retrieved from http://ann.sagepub.com/content/655/1/36.short

37.

Kurlaender

Howell

Grodsky

Jackson

(2012, March). Ready or not? California’s Early Assessment Program and the transition to college. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Society of Research on Educational Effectiveness, Washington, D.C.

38.

Lareau

(1987). Social class differences in family-school relationship: The importance of cultural capital. Sociology of Education, 60, 73-85.

39.

Long

B. T.

(2014). Supporting disadvantaged youth proposal 6: Addressing the academic barriers to higher education (The Hamilton Project). Washington, DC: Brookings. Retrieved from http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/papers/2014/06/19_hamilton_policies_addressing_poverty/higher_education_remediation_long.pdf

40.

Lopez

M. H.

(2014). In 2014, Latinos will surpass whites as largest racial/ethnic group in California. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center. Retrieved from http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/01/24/in-2014-latinos-will-surpass-Whites-as-largest-racialethnic-group-in-california/

41.

Martin

A. J.

Dowson

(2009). Interpersonal relationships, motivation, engagement, and achievement: Yields for theory, current issues, and educational practice. Review of Educational Research, 79, 327-365. doi:10.3102/0034654308325583

42.

Maxwell

J. A.

(2012). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (Vol. 41). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

43.

Mazmanian

D. A.

Sabatier

P. A.

(1981). Effective policy implementation. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

44.

McCormick

N. J.

Lucas

M. S.

(2011). Exploring mathematics college readiness in the United States. Current Issues in Education, 14(1), 1-28. Retrieved from http://cie.asu.edu/ojs/index.php/cieatasu/article/viewFile/680/88

45.

McDonough

P. M.

(1997). Choosing colleges: How social class and schools structure opportunity. Albany: State University of New York Press.

46.

McLaughlin

M. W.

(1987). Learning from experience: Lessons from policy implementation. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 9(2), 171-178. doi:10.2307/1163728

47.

Merriam

S. B.

(1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

48.

Miles

M. B.

Huberman

A. M.

(1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

49.

Mills

J. H.

(2003). Making sense of organizational change. London, England: Routledge.

50.

Morgan

(2008). Focus groups. In Given

(Ed.), The SAGE encyclopedia of qualitative research methods (pp. 353-355). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

51.

Ogunwole

S. U.

Drewery

M. P.

Rios-Vargas

(2012, May). The population with a bachelor’s degree or higher by race and Hispanic origin: 2006–2010 (American Community Survey Brief No. 10-19). Washington, DC: The United States Census Bureau. Retrieved from https://www.census.gov/prod/2012pubs/acsbr10-19.pdf

52.

Orfield

Frankenberg

(2014). Increasingly segregated and unequal schools as courts reverse policy. Educational Administration Quarterly, 50, 718-734. doi:10.1177/0013161X14548942

53.

Park

Jones

Yonezawa

Mehan

Datnow

(2009). Placing youth sensemaking center stage to improve opportunities for success in postsecondary education. The Teachers College Record, ID Number:15845. Available from http://www.tcrecord.org

54.

Perna

L. W.

Armijo

(2014). The persistence of unaligned K–12 and higher education systems: Why have statewide alignment efforts been ineffective? The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 655, 16-35.

55.

Pinkus

(2008). Using early-warning data to improve graduation rates: Closing cracks in the education system. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education. Retrieved from http://beta.fresnounified.org/gradtf/Shared%20Documents/Using%20Early%20Warning%20Data%20to%20Improve%20Graduation%20Rates,%20Closing%20Cracks%20in%20the%20Education%20System.pdf

56.

Pintrich

P. R.

Schunk

D. H.

(2002). The role of goals and goal orientation. In Pintrich

P. R.

Schunk

D. H.

(Eds.), Motivation in education: Theory, research and application (2nd ed., pp. 190-242). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Simon & Schuster.

57.

Pitkin

Myers

(2012). Generational projections of the California population by nativity and year of immigrant arrival (Report No. 54). Los Angeles: Population Dynamics Research Group, Price School of Public Policy, University of Southern California. Retrieved from http://www.usc.edu/schools/price/research/popdynamics/futures/2012_Pitkin-Myers_CA-Pop-Projections.pdf

58.

Policy Analysis for California Education. (2012). California’s Early Assessment Program: Its effectiveness and the obstacles to successful program implementation. Stanford, CA: Policy Analysis for California Education. Retrieved from http://www.stanford.edu/group/pace/cgi-bin/wordpress/californias-early-assessment-program-its-effectiveness-and-the-obstacles-to-successful-program-implementation

59.

Roderick

Nagaoka

Coca

(2009). College readiness for all: The challenge for urban high schools. The Future of Children, 19(1), 185-210. doi:10.1353/foc.0.0024

60.

Spence

(2007). The California Early Assessment Program: Implications for states developing readiness agendas. In Hoffman

Vargas

Venezia

Miller

M. S.

(Eds.), Minding the gap: Why integrating high school with college makes sense and how to do it (pp. 113-120). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.

61.

Spillane

J. P.

Diamond

J. B.

Burch

Hallett

Jita

Zoltners

(2002). Managing in the middle: School leaders and the enactment of accountability policy. Educational Policy, 16, 731-762. doi:10.1177/089590402237311

62.

Spillane

J. P.

Reiser

B. J.

Reimer

(2002). Policy implementation and cognition: Reframing and refocusing implementation research. Review of Educational Research, 72, 387-431. doi:10.3102/00346543072003387

63.

Sumner

Butcher

(2011). Self-directed learning and the sensemaking paradox. Humand-Computer Interaction, 26(1), 123-159. doi:10.1080/07370024.2011.556552

64.

Tierney

W. G.

Clemens

R. F.

(2011). Qualitative research and public policy: The challenges of relevance and trustworthiness. In Smart

(Ed.), Overview of higher education: Handbook of theory and research (Vol. 26, pp. 57–83). New York, NY: Agathon Press.

65.

Tierney

W. G.

Garcia

L. D.

(2011). Remediation in higher education: The role of information. American Behavioral Scientist, 55, 102-120. doi:10.1177/0002764210381869

66.

U.S. Department of Education. (2011a). Percentage of first-year undergraduate students who took remedial education courses, by selected characteristics: 2003-04 and 2007-08 [Table 243]. Washington, DC: U.S. National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d11/tables/dt11_243.asp

67.

U.S. Department of Education. (2011b). Percentage of degree-granting institutions offering remedial services, by control and level of institution: 1989-90 through 2010-11 [Table 344]. Washington, DC: U.S. National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d11/tables/dt11_344.asp

68.

Venezia

Jaeger

(2013). Transitions from high school to college. The Future of Children, 23(1), 117-136.

69.

Venezia

Voloch

(2012). Using college placement exams as early signals of college readiness: An examination of California’s Early Assessment Program and New York’s at home in college program. New Directions for Higher Education, 2012(158), 71-79. doi:10.1002/he.20016

70.

Walpole

McDonough

P. M.

Bauer

C. J.

Gibson

Kanyi

Toliver

(2005). This test is unfair: Urban African American and Latino high school students’ perceptions of standardized college admission tests. Urban Education, 40, 321-349. doi:10.1177/0042085905274536

71.

Weatherly

Lipsky

(1977). Street-level bureaucrats and institutional innovation: Implementing special education reform. Harvard Educational Review, 47(2), 171-197. Retrieved from http://www.des.ucdavis.edu/Faculty/Sabatier/weatherlylipsky1977.pdf

72.

Weick

K. E.

(1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

73.

Weick

K. E.

Sutcliffe

K. M.

Obstfeld

(2005). Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organization Science, 16(4), 409-421. doi:10.1287/orsc.1050.0133

74.

Wiley

Wyatt

Camara

W. J.

(2010). The Development of a Multidimensional College Readiness Index (Vol. 3, College Board Research Report). Retrieved from http://www.cascadeeducationalconsultants.com/resources/Blog/College-Readiness-Index.pdf

75.

Wise

S. L.

DeMars

C. E.

(2005). Low examinee effort in low-stakes assessment: Problems and potential solutions. Educational Assessment, 10, 1-17. doi:10.1207/s15326977ea1001_1

76.

Zickuhr

Smith

(2012). Digital differences. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2012/04/13/digital-differences/