A recent column discussed Seattle Mayor Jenny Durkan’s proposal of free tuition for city high school graduates at the three community colleges in the city. Some of the questions raised by the proposal deserve further examination.
One of those questions involves the impact such a program would have if the idea should spread to our county. The answer isn’t simple — in no small part because “it depends.” In this case, it depends on what the program looks like when it is adopted.
The Graduate School of Education at the University of Pennsylvania initiated and continuously updates a database of all “Promise Programs,” a term that has been generally accepted as descriptive of this type of educational opportunity. There are currently 363 promise programs around the country and it does not appear that any two are truly identical.
As to whether a program like Seattle’s is ultimately successful, two factors are crucial. The first is the group that the program is intended to help. The “Tennessee Model” that Durkan based her proposal on is doing well in terms of participation — its defined goal — but has primarily helped good students from middle-class homes. This is clearly not a “second chance” model.
The second factor is funding. If the goal is to help students who are qualified to succeed in a college level program but lack the money to enroll, a scholarship program is the only barrier and its costs are limited to tuition and, perhaps, books.
If the goal is to help students who did poorly in high school, though, there are additional, indirect costs to consider. One of these involves the instructional costs of remedial work to bring the student’s academic and learning skills up to college level. A second, less visible, cost is that of counseling, mentoring and advising. Most high school students who did poorly have never developed the study habits and self-discipline that are necessary learning skills to succeed at college level. This is especially true for those in academic degree programs but is also very important for students in certificate programs.
The leaders of two community colleges in our county are aware of promise programs and recognize the strengths and weaknesses of each type.
David Beyer is president of Everett Community College and very knowledgeable about the potential impact of promise programs and how they relate to the need for post-K12 education in the coming job markets. He adds that the Tennessee Model tends to favor kids from middle-class families and says, “That is only part of the population we need to serve if we are to live up to our responsibility.”
He is confident that they could handle an enrollment increase but is concerned about realistic funding for this type of program. As he says, “We have to watch our budget very carefully. We currently get less than 50 percent of our financing from the state, and tuition is a major source of revenue. If the promise students are not paying tuition, then who is? Those proposing programs have to take financial responsibility for them.”
Of course, the broader the program is, the more critical the funding issue becomes. As a scholarship program based on high school performance, the indirect costs of enrollment would be minimal. The larger the program becomes, though, the less prepared some of the high school graduates are, and the counseling, remedial instruction and other indirect costs mount up.
And it is exactly that kind of broadening which appeals to Christina Castorena, interim president of Edmonds Community College. She says, “Our college is incredibly diverse in so many ways. For instance, the graduates this month ranged in age from 17 to 73.”
She believes that many students in the community do poorly in high school because they lack the kind of educational support system that kids from middle class homes enjoy. And because of this she says, “Promise programs are most successful when paired with student support systems.”
The shortcomings and failures of our K-12 system are substantial and they are not likely to be cured anytime soon. Remedial courses are a growth industry in four-year colleges and universities across the country but have not been able to stem the tide of failures and dropouts in higher education — a high-penalty issue for individuals who financed their effort with student loans.
Labor force forecasts are calling for sharply increased numbers of workers with post-high school educations — technical skill certificates, baccalaureate and associate degrees. To meet this need and continue our prosperity, we need to correct the shortcomings of our K-12 system, not simply kick it down the road.
Promise programs are a good first step, but we have a lot more work to do. Let’s do it.
James McCusker is a Bothell economist, educator and consultant.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
