The Relationship Between Student Success Courses and Academic Achievement of Community College Students

Measuring Up: The National Report on Higher Education stated in 2006: “Texas’ under-performance in educating its young population could limit the state’s access to a competitive workforce and weaken its economy over time.” Yet in the intervening years, Texas leaders have done nothing to reverse this downward trend, instead slashing scholarships and other resources even further.

College Success: Chapter 1 is a great recourse for every student whether they are experienced or not. Specifically, descriptions about the best possible choices made to get the most out of your experience are plentiful, and self-assessments are included to evaluate a starting point. If one were to follow the step-by-step advice given, such as overcoming obstacles and enriching your learning experience, it would be close to impossible not to have a great experience at college. The author wasn’t afraid to delve deep into the fact that college is difficult and requires a lot of commitment to follow through. The information given is easily suitable for a wide range of students, including anything from discovering resources many colleges offer,

This journal article written by William Zumeta in April, 1992, is an extensive argument to suggest state policymakers would be wise to conduct research to maintain healthy colleges and universities to address the increasing demands of demographics and economics at state level. In addition, Zumeta suggests the private sector should be included more in state planning and addresses the effects of the public sector tuition policies. According to Zumeta, “The goal of state policy in higher education after all must be to serve the broader public interest as fully as possible with limited resources.” Although this journal article is dated, Zumeta and his colleagues challenged state policymakers to include the private sector in forming appropriations

A proposed creation of the Public College Quality Compact, a fund to encourage states to reinvest in postsecondary education. In addition to other requirements, states that wish to participate in the fund would be required to create reliable funding streams to public colleges and universities that provide a least as much as the maximum Pell Grant per student in support. Ensuring that states make reliable investments in their citizens will mean that college education is affordable for low income students who pursue their

Financial barriers for higher education has climbed over the last ten years. Today, over 40 million Americans have student loans. Of these 40 million, most individuals are struggling to maintain payments on the loans (Hillary for America, 2016). Since 2004, the tuition for in-state colleges and universities has risen by about 42 percent and with the recent Great Recession, states have continued to decrease spending on higher education at a rapid rate (Hillary for America, 2016). It is estimated that states are only contributing around $1,805 per student, which is estimated to be 20 percent less than what was contributed only seven years’ prior. The federal government in

Gary Colombo, Robert Cullen, and Bonnie Lisle in their book “Rereading America” feel that commencing college is a very disturbing experience. So many things we have to deal while starting college, but the major challenges are expanded difficulty levels and higher expectation which we are not familiar over the years of high school. In order to solve this issue, we have to remodel ourselves by taking up the challenge and rethink about our strength and flaws. To succeed in college we need to be mentally strong and dedicated towards our goal.

Kris, a wife and a mother, worries about the increasing cost of higher education. She and her husband have a two year old daughter whom they are determined to send to college. They want their daughter to succeed in life, but they have to weigh the complications of going to college as well. “I have always thought about college as a “catch 22”...You’re taught from a young age that in order to achieve the “American Dream” you must graduate high school and go to college,” Kris contemplates (Kris 5).Throughout Kris’s ten years of experience with college, she has seen the tuition increase to shocking heights. In fact, she claims that community colleges cost as much as state colleges did when she first started her college hunt. Back then, she

“The Debate Over Free Community College” is an article published in The Atlantic by Emily Deruy on July 27,2015. Which discusses the Tennessee Promise program and the Oregon program which offers the first two years of community college at no cost for it’s students if the requirements are met for each program. It also brings up different perspectives on the outlook of the overall program and things it would affect in either a positive or negative way. Also including some statistical and demographical information on the state of Tennessee and Oregon.

In 2000, the Board of Ursinus College, raised its tuition from $19,331 to $23,460. This turned out to be a 17.6% increase. Surprisingly, the tuition increase proved to be a positive change for Ursinus College. The college received more than 200 applicants than its previous year (Brickley, Smith and Zimmerman, 2009, p. 110). Other regional institutions such as University of Notre Dame, Bryn Mawr College and Rice University also experienced a similar trend once they increased their tuition rates (Brickley, Smith and Zimmerman, 2009, p. 110). The president of Ursinus College deduced that the tuition increase affected enrollment rate (increased enrollment). She simply stated that “people don’t want cheap” (Brickley, Smith and Zimmerman, 2009, p. 110).

The topic of this paper is the states’ decreasing financial support of higher education, the reaction and response from institutions who have lost funding, and the creative ways public institutions are locating additional streams of revenue. States have been the primary backer of public institutions, but since the recession states have shown less commitment financially while still heavily regulating higher education. As a result some institutions have had to change their practices while others have challenged their state’s regulations all together. Many have speculated that state funding may never return to its former highs. Rather than make an enemy of the state, some schools have discovered new and unconvential ways of raising funds for their institution.

The rising cost of education in Texas colleges started in 2003 when the deregulation was lifted. Then, soon after, the Texas State legislature cut the education budget because of a drop in the economy in 2008. The cut in funding and the removal of the deregulation law allowed colleges across Texas a way to recoup lost resources by raising the cost of tuition. The raising cost of tuition has limited the amount of attending students from graduating in the expected time frame, left students in debt, and has denied the chance of countless others from attending the college of their choice. This essay will reflect on supporting evidence to demonstrate how the increase of cost of college tuition over the past 10 years has affected future and current student enrollment.

Community colleges have roots dating back to the 1900’s and became more homogenous with the help of the 1960’s California Master Plan for Higher Education. In the past, community colleges were tuition-free or subsidized by local property taxes and state appropriations (Cohen, M. & Brawer, F. 2008). Currently, community college financing has been unpredictable “due to the discretionary nature of state support and the vagaries of funding initiatives” (Phelan, 2014, pg. 7). Nevertheless, colleges continue to be dependent on state appropriations and local property taxes as the primary source of revenue. Due to the instability associated with appropriations, community colleges must develop dynamic budgets that have the capacity to overcome fluctuations in revenue and enable the college to offer affordable access to higher education to its constituents.

The limited evidence available suggests that some of the most popular strategies for improving student success are not cost-effective. New strategies to cut costs and improve college success are therefore imperative. Some believe that redesigning courses to make use of instructional technologies will lead to better outcomes at lower cost, although the evidence is mixed. Recently, a growing number of institutions are going beyond redesigning courses and instead changing the way they organize programs and supports along the student’s “pathway” through college. These efforts are promising, but their effects on cost per completion are not yet certain. Meager funding has so far hampered efforts by policy makers to fund colleges based on outcomes rather than how many students they enroll, but some states are beginning to increase the share of appropriations tied to outcomes. The increases in tuition at post-secondary education institutions has an impacts on enrollment. We use data on all U.S. public 4-year colleges and universities from 1991 to 2006 and illustrate that tuition increased dramatically beginning in the early part of this decade. We examine impacts of such increases on total enrollment and credit hours, and estimate differences by type of institution. We estimate that the average tuition and fee elasticity of total headcount is -0.0958. At the mean, a $100 increase in tuition and fees would lead to a decline in enrollment of about 0.25 percent, with larger effects at Research I universities. We find limited evidence that especially large tuition increases elicit disproportionate enrollment

The landscape of state-funded higher education has become one of diminishing resources (Tinto, 2007). This trend which began within the last few decades has continued to the present time. Across the country, state legislatures have cut an average of 28% of its funding to state higher education since the great recession of 2008 after adjusting for inflation (Mitchell, Palacios, & Leachman, 2014). By virtue of their make-up, state intuitions of higher education still get the majority of their funding through state endowments, but revenue collection from students (mainly undergraduates) via tuition and fees, are becoming an increasingly important resource stream for fiscal solvency (York online textbook). According to a recent report, public four-year institutions spent an astounding $457 per student in recruiting affiliated expenditures. That is to say, every member from the freshman class of 2013 in the United States cost their respective schools nearly $500 to recruit them (Noel-Levitz, 2013). With universities investing such vast amounts of money, time, and effort; it is safe to assume that retention of these college freshmen is vital to their future fiscal health, and the ultimate goal (of both student and institution) of baccalaureate degree conferral.

Upon identifying programs available on various college campuses as they relate to first year students; it has become noticeable that university leaders are concerned with the retention of students within their first and second year of college. Therefore many universities have developed programs that are focused on the success of the freshman student and ensuring that group of students’ matriculations throughout their degree programs. As quoted in “The Dynamics of Organization in Higher Education (Kuh, 1996) “the frequent and increasingly predictable accusation that institutions of higher education operate in “silos” is based on their various schools, colleges, and athletic programs operating in parallel with one another, more focused on promoting than on adhering to or accomplishing broader institutional