Online Learning: Does It Help Low-Income and Underprepared Students?

Online learning has generated much enthusiasm for its potential to promote greater access to college by reducing the cost and time of commuting and, in the case of asynchronous approaches, by allowing students to study on a schedule that is optimal for them. The enthusiasm surrounding these and other innovative, technology-based programs has led educators to ask whether the continuing expansion of online learning could be leveraged to increase the academic access, progression, and success of low-income and underprepared college students. However, this review of the postsecondary literature on online learning strongly suggests that online coursework--at least as currently and typically implemented--may hinder progression for low-income and underprepared students. The paper explores why students might struggle in these courses, discusses current access barriers to online education, and offers suggestions on how public policy and institutional practice could be changed to allow online learning to better meet its potential in terms of improving both college access and student progression

Choosing between online and face-to-face courses: Community college student voices

In this study, community college students discussed their experiences with online and face-to-face learning as well as their reasons for selecting online (rather than face to face) sections of specific courses. Students reported lower levels of instructor presence in online courses and that they needed to “teach themselves.” Accordingly, most students preferred to take only “easy” academic subjects online; they preferred to take “difficult” or “important” subjects face to face. To meet students’ needs, then, colleges need to either more explicitly build instructor presence and guidance into online courses or continue to provide ample face-to-face sections of courses for those students who prefer them

Does Size Matter? The Effect of Resource Base on Faculty Service Quality Perceptions in Academic Libraries

We explore whether the relative size of an academic library's resource base, as indicated by the Carnegie classification of the library's parent institution, impacts faculty perceptions of library service quality. Using results from the 2006 administration of the LibQUAL+® survey, the study tests for statistically significant differences between research universities and masters-level universities in terms of faculty minimum, perceived, desired and adequacy gap scores for each of the three LibQUAL+® service dimensions (Information Control, Library as Place, and Affect of Service). Findings suggest that university type does impact expectations and perceptions of service quality, but does not impact ratings of service adequacy, the extent to which faculty perceive that a library meets their expectations

Adaptability to Online Learning: Differences Across Types of Students and Academic Subject Areas

Using a dataset containing nearly 500,000 courses taken by over 40,000 community and technical college students in Washington State, this study examines how well students adapt to the online environment in terms of their ability to persist and earn strong grades in online courses relative to their ability to do so in face-to-face courses. While all types of students in the study suffered decrements in performance in online courses, some struggled more than others to adapt: males, younger students, Black students, and students with lower grade point averages. In particular, students struggled in subject areas such as English and social science, which was due in part to negative peer effects in these online courses

When College Students Start Behind

Almost two thirds of students who enter community colleges every year are judged to be academically not ready to engage in college-level coursework. In order to enroll, these students typically must take one or more “remedial” or “developmental” math or English courses that will not count toward their college degree. The bulk of the evidence, however, suggests that the $4 billion annual investment in services to help underprepared students is having little positive impact on the success of those students in community colleges. This report for The Century Foundation's College Completion Series reviews that research, describes findings from studies on four types of reforms underway at various colleges, and concludes with the argument that a wholesale redesign of the student experience at community colleges is needed to make a real difference in the outcomes of underprepared students

Comparing Service Priorities Between Staff and Users in Association of Research Libraries (ARL) Member Libraries

Using the results for participating Association of Research Libraries from the 2006 LibQUAL+® library service quality survey, we examine the service priorities of library staff (for example, whether desired scores for each survey item are above or below average) and the extent to which they are aligned with the priorities of undergraduates, graduate students, and faculty. Item priorities were compared among the four groups using hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) to correct for the non-independence of responses within institutions. Results indicate that substantial misalignments between library staff and users exist; library staff set a lower service priority for most LibQUAL+® Information Control items and a higher priority on almost all Affect of Service items than did users

Getting our priorities in order: are our service values in line with the communities we serve?

Purpose – LibQUAL+® allows users to rate their minimum, perceived, and desired levels of service for 22 items in three dimensions: information control, library as place, and service affect. Using the results from the 2005 survey at the University of Texas at Austin, this paper aims to examine how well the service priorities of library staff are aligned with the priorities of undergraduates, graduate students, and faculty. Design/methodology/approach – The paper has re-scaled the "desired" score for each item to reflect the degree to which the item is above or below the average desired level for that individual. The rescaled scores (termed "priority" scores) for the 22 items were then compared between the four groups using a multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA). Findings – Preliminary results indicate that service priorities for library staff align more closely with those of undergraduates than with those of graduate students and faculty. Practical implications – This analysis is a first step in identifying service priority gaps between library staff and the users they serve. The intention is to promote discussion among library staff about users' needs and how closely staff service priorities align with those needs. In addition, the findings may prove useful as management information by allowing the analysis of users' service priorities and integrating the results of this analysis into organizational decision making and planning processes. Originality/value – This paper describes a development of LibQUAL+® that enables a greater depth of understanding of service priorities

Comparing Service Priorities Between Staff and Users in Association of Research Libraries (ARL) Member Libraries

Using the results for participating Association of Research Libraries from the 2006 LibQUAL+® library service quality survey, we examine the service priorities of library staff (for example, whether desired scores for each survey item are above or below average) and the extent to which they are aligned with the priorities of undergraduates, graduate students, and faculty. Item priorities were compared among the four groups using hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) to correct for the non-independence of responses within institutions. Results indicate that substantial misalignments between library staff and users exist; library staff set a lower service priority for most LibQUAL+® Information Control items and a higher priority on almost all Affect of Service items than did users

The Role of Librarians in Guided Pathways Reforms

In the book Redesigning America’s Community Colleges, the authors briefly noted the role that librarians might play in informing and supporting guided pathways reform. In this short essay, one of the book’s authors joins with a librarian to provide updated and revised thoughts on the role of librarians in guided pathways. First, the authors discuss the importance of embedding critical thinking into guided pathways curricula and librarians’ unique position to support that goal. Then they discuss various models by which colleges might leverage librarians’ expertise and which models seem more or less compatible with the guided pathways framework

A Longitudinal Analysis of Community College Pathways to Computer Science Bachelor’s Degrees

A Longitudinal Analysis of Community College Pathways to Computer Science Bachelor’s Degrees is one in a series of Google reports designed to explore the pathways and experiences that community college students — especially those from underrepresented groups — follow to a bachelor’s degree in computer science (CS) and the opportunities that exist or that might be created to ensure successful career advancement. While the companion report, Student Perspectives of Community College Pathways to Computer Science Bachelor’s Degrees (Lyon & Denner, 2016), takes a qualitative approach to understanding the challenges facing underrepresented community college students in California who hope to transfer and complete a bachelor’s degree in CS, this report investigates the national landscape of CS students at community colleges in order to better understand student behaviors and institutional characteristics that support or hinder community college students’ efforts to attain a CS bachelor’s degree. Key findings and recommendations: In general, the data suggest that navigating the community college pathway to a CS bachelor’s degree is complex and challenging, such that only students who are focused and fortunate are able to navigate the pathway successfully. To create more structured and supported pathways that will help a larger number of underrepresented community college students to attain a CS bachelor’s degree, two- and four-year colleges — particularly those in major technology hubs — need to partner more closely together. In particular: » Nearby community colleges and four-year colleges should work together to create CS-specific program maps that guarantee acceptance to the destination college’s CS-related majors if students complete specific courses with a specific grade point average. » Program maps should include options for different levels of math and science preparation based on the specific requirements of certain CS subfields, and should perhaps include a CS-specific prebaccalaureate award as a formal stepping-stone to transfer, in order to entice more CS associate degree earners to transfer into CS programs at four-year colleges. » Community colleges should proactively recruit underrepresented students into CS majors, emphasizing the wide array of creative, prosocial, and well-paid careers available to those with CS expertise. » Four-year colleges should encourage transfer students to select a major prior to transfer, and for those who choose a CS major, provide tailored support services, proactively track progress, and intervene when students appear to be veering “off track.” » CS departments should emphasize the career rewards that come with completing a higher degree, ensure that students encounter interesting and meaningful programming assignments, and encourage students to work collaboratively on assignments