The Challenges of Transitional Periods for Students with Disabilities by Megan Workmon

The transition from high school to college is a trying period of time for any student. Yet students with disabilities face inherent barriers in pursuing their education and later entering into the workforce. Transitional periods, moving from high school to college and then college to the workforce, present a variety of complex and difficult challenges for this population. Disabled high school students receive services provided from a wide assortment of government programs, such as Department of Education, Health and Human Services (HHS), Department of Labor and Social Security Administration (SSA) , yet as soon as they are legal adults they must apply and be found eligible to each individual program.  In a 2012 study, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) determined that students with disabilities are unlikely to be ready to transition to life post-high school as they have limited opportunities to gain vocational training or life skills while in school. Further, it is particularly difficult for students and their families to navigate the complex government structures in place to assist those with disabilities, most families unaware of the full range of services available at the government level as well as the institutional level (GAO, 2012).  The GAO study recommends an interdepartmental transition strategy from all government departments, working toward common outcome goals and increasing program awareness. However, as much as these agencies plan on developing a comprehensive program to assist in the transition between high school and higher education, that fact remains that there currently is little to no transitional assistance offered to students with disabilities beyond what little programming exists at the college or university level.

As the student population changes across the country, the enrollment of more students with disabilities in general and the increased presence of disabled veterans (DiRamio, Ackerman & Mitchell, 2008), serving this population efficiently and effectively is in the best interest of institutions especially considering that college completion and post-graduation employment for students with disabilities continues to be a significant challenge. According to the U.S. Census (2002), disabled persons are remarkably underemployed or unemployed when compared to the general population, earning significantly less regardless of their disability type. This disparity is even more extreme when considering gender, as disabled women earn less than disabled men (U.S. Census, 2002). Predating the GAO study, Adelman and Vogel (1990) found that students with disabilities are less likely to have experienced career enhancing activities, simply not having the time to devote to these activities or facing physical or cognitive limitations. Several professional organizations, such as the Association on Higher Education and Disability (AHEAD) and the Career Opportunities for Students with Disabilities (COSD) currently work to help disabled students become competitive in the career search as well as improve the employment rate of disabled graduates nationwide. However, there still seems to be a programming disconnect between disability offices providing accommodations and assisting students with disabilities through intentional transitional programming and career services.

References

Adelman, P.B. & Vogel, S.A. (1990). College graduates with learning disabilities: Employment attainment and career patterns. Learning Disability Quarterly, 13(3), 154-166.

DiRamio, D., Ackerman, R. & Mitchell, R.L. (2008). From combat to campus: Voices of student-veterans. Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice, 45, 73-102.

Government Accountability Office (GAO). (2012). Better federal coordination could lessen challenges in the transition from high school. GAO-12-594. Retrieved from http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-12-594.

U.S. Census. (2002). Americans with disabilities. Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/disability/sipp/disab02/ds02t5.html.

Are Students Enrolled in Massive Open Online Courses Really "Students"? by Christa Steiner

The subject of online education is one that tends to prompt a lot of response.  I recently read an article from Inside Higher Ed, entitled “Formerly Known as Students”.  This article looked at the impact of massive open online classes (also known as “MOOC”s), and questioned as to whether the people registered in these courses could really be labeled as “students”.

MOOCs provide the opportunity for a number of students to participate in courses that may otherwise be unavailable to them, but one has to wonder if they are getting the same education from the experience as would a student in a more personable setting.  With student to faculty ratios sometimes nearing 150,000:1 (Byerly, 2012), it is difficult to say whether the professor may ever have the time to respond to student questions or form any sort of relationship.  Even if a professor responded to only one percent of the students in his course, he would still be taking on over 1,000 students in some cases.

The article discusses whether or not the people taking these courses should be labeled as “students”, or if it would be more appropriate to deem them “online learners” or even “registrants”.  While this focus on terminology may seem petty, it has been argued that the term “student” implies a certain amount of responsibility on the part of the professor (Byerly, 2012), which may not be enacted in such a broad classroom setting.  If a student were to ask a question, seek advice, or request a letter of recommendation, is it even possible for the professor to respond to the student’s needs? 

This is not saying that the student wouldn’t receive any feedback at all.  In the article, the students were provided instantaneous response through automated test grading, and were sometimes offered the option of online discussions lead by alumni volunteers or graduate students.  If the online learners are gaining as much from a course as they otherwise would in the classroom, then who are we to say that they are not technically “students”? And how do you measure how much one student gets out of a class in comparison to their online counterpart?  Is it elitist to say that a student enrolled in an online course is less of a “real student”, or is there something fundamentally missing when enrolled in one of these MOOCs?

What do you think?  Is someone who is taking a course still considered a student if the professor is unable to invest a certain degree of time and effort into her success and progress?  Should an online student be considered comparable to a traditional student?  What, if anything, “distinguishes a course from a set of lectures” (Byerly, 2012)?

Byerly, A. (2012).  Formerly known as students.  Inside Higher Ed.  Retrieved from 

http://www.insidehighered.com/views/2012/10/29/essay-how-moocs-raise-questions-about-definition-student

Should you accept gifts from students? - Arina Shvarts

With the holidays right around the corner I felt that the article by Lionel G. Standing titled “The Problem of Student Gift Giving” would be very interesting to discuss. Standing argues that professors should never accept gifts from students. He believes that students who give gifts have ulterior motives such as expecting to receive a passing grade on a mid-term or a high mark on a paper. According to Standing (2012, para. 4), “the social norm of reciprocity then means that we are motivated to return the benefit somehow.” With this statement, the author is implying that once a professor receives a gift, they are expected to return the favor.

Standing goes even further by comparing academia to politics. He claims that if a politician or government official accepts a gift from a lobbyist it is considered bribery, the same goes with higher education instructors. Standing also shares a few personal experiences in which some of his friends or colleagues were in situations where they accepted a gift from a student and later discovered that this student had failed the course or plagiarized their dissertation. This created a very uncomfortable dilemma for these instructors.

In the article, Standing does take culture into account. International students who attend colleges and universities in the United States or Canada may give their professors a gift as a gesture of gratitude and appreciation. Standing claims that these gifts are more appropriate to accept, as are gifts from graduate students.  But in general, no matter how tempting it may be, Standing believes that professors should say “no, thank you” to gifts from their undergraduate students.

As student affairs professionals we might also receive gifts from the students we work with. Colleagues and classmates, do you think it is inappropriate or unethical for us to accept them?

Standing, L.G. (2012). The problem of student gift giving. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from http://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2012/10/29/essay-why-professors-should-reject-student-gifts

School Vouchers by Vincent Scarfo

When I tell people I am pursuing a degree in education, they tend to ask if I want to be a teacher, because most people don’t think of Student Affairs when it comes to education. While this misunderstanding can be tedious to explain, it also leads to some interesting conversations about K-12 education. With the election coming up, these conversations tend to focus on access, cost, and equity in education, but the most interesting conversation is about Governor Romney’s plan for school vouchers.

While vouchers would appear to increase access to private and charter schools, there would still be the difference in price to be paid by the student’s family. This would mean wealthier families would still be able to afford the higher rated private schools. Many of these schools are also religiously affiliated, leading to religious indoctrination and a lack of secular options. The vouchers would also remove funding from public schools, which desperately need the funds.

Proponents argue that students at private schools should not pay for education twice, and want the money they spend on public school back in the form of a voucher; however, funding for public school is not tuition based, it comes from taxes. Taxpayers without children still fund schools, and they don’t get money back because they are not utilizing the school services. If that were how taxes worked, we wouldn’t have many local government services (e.g. parks, libraries, etc.). Public schools are already underfunded, with large classroom sizes, a lack of teachers, and inequity between schools in different neighborhoods. It is foolish to believe these schools could succeed with even less funding.

This may seem like a strictly K-12 issue, but it may come to affect college access in major ways. Currently, private schools and public schools in wealthier districts have higher graduation rates and college acceptance rates than public schools in less affluent areas. The voucher system would widen this gap even further by underfunding public schools to the point of a less than quality education, and making families pay for private schools to ensure their students get a quality education. The communities with the lowest socioeconomic status will suffer the most, and have less access to a quality education. How can students stay competitive in their college search if they are unable to buy a quality education?

Instead of funding voucher programs, the government should invest in the public school system. The reason people want a voucher program is the poor quality of public schools. Instead of abandoning ship, lets make repairs and improve the current system. Better public schools would mean that anyone could have access to a quality education. Bronfenbrenner’s Sphere’s of Influence has shown that rallying the community behind the school will make it more successful. Investing in the community is a better investment than pulling people out.

Private colleges boom as California universities falter: By Rose. R

For many generations, the University of California, California State University systems, and community colleges, have been distinguished as some of the best examples of what public institutions of higher education should be. In the past, CSU campuses enrolled 420,000 students at all it's 23 campuses, with a tuition of  $5,970 per year. While UC’s tuition was $13,200, and enrolled a total of 222,000 at it’s 10 campuses.

Over recent years, California’s Public Higher Education system has been plagued with a $2.5 billion dollar budget cuts that have not only increased tuition, laid off academic advisers, cut class enrollments for students, but also put in jeopardy the future of higher education. In an article titled “Private colleges boom as California universities falter”, Christina Hoag (2012) suggests that although budget cuts have had detrimental effects in higher education, the educational crisis has a flip side to it(Hoag, 2012). With an immense number of California students disillusioned with the costs of tuition and fewer classes, private institutions and out-of-state schools are experiencing an increase in enrollment from freshman and transfer students to earn their college degrees. ."When it takes more than six years to graduate from a public university, that makes all of California's private schools a much better value for the money," states Homa Shabahangm the vice provost of the University of La Verne, whose enrollment has increased by 70 percent in the past five years.

But the University of La Verne is not the only private institution experiencing a higher demand from California students. Northern Arizona University has also received an increase of 40 percent enrollment over the last three years. The school has been recruiting California students by providing a break on out-of state tuition rates, which means out of state students will be allowed to pay for their tuition at a discounted rate.  The University of Oregon has hired more admissions counselors to recruit highs school freshmens from all over California. Their numbers have gone up from 177 five years ago, to 449 just this year. Saint Mary's College of California has also experienced a 51 percent increase in application submissions since 2009, with nearly 6,000 students applying for 600 freshman slots. Beseda, a representative from Saint Mary's states that "We're happy to have these students but I hope nobody thinks we're the long-term solution, the long-term solution is to invest more in higher education."
Because budget cuts have made it a lot harder for students to get admitted or graduate on time, private colleges and universities have responded to this crisis by recruiting students and promising smaller classes, course availability, graduating on-time, and good financial aid packet. 

If students are enrolling at private institutions of higher education, what will California public institutions going to have to do to bring their enrollment numbers up? As future student affairs professionals, how can we help? What are the implications for those of us planning to work at California public institutions? How do budget cuts affect student affairs in the public sector? 

-Rose R.

                                                       References

Hoag, C. (2012). Private colleges boom as calif universities falter. San francisco chronicle, Retrieved from http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Private-colleges-boom-as-Calif-universities-falter-3967405.php 

Medina, J. (2012, June 01). California cuts threaten the status of universities. The new york times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/02/us/california-cuts-threaten-the-status-of-universities.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&

Are College Students Still Learning?

Sofia Janney-Roberts

 

                I recently read an article in the NY Times that completely shocked me. Written by Bob Herbert, the piece reported on the findings of the book, Academically Adrift: Limited Learning on College Campuses (Arum & Roska, 2011), (2011). According to the authors’ findings, college students are graduating with much less critical thinking, communication, and reasoning skills than in the past. Upwards of 45% of students showed no improvement in these areas after their first two years. Many graduates could not even solve simple tasks such as distinguishing fact from opinion. When compared with their peers from the 1960s, the 2,300 students surveyed also spent 50% less time studying, with 36% percent reporting allotting less than five hours a week on homework. Yet, the average grade point average of such students was above a B (Herbert, 2011).

                The article criticized both students for attempting to “slide-by” and institutions for allowing them to. However, I suspect that much more is at play than simply shocking statistics. The educational landscape has changed drastically since the 1960s and I don’t believe that a side-by-side comparison of outcomes between today’s graduates and past graduates is fair. Institutions have greatly diversified in type and in population. There are now colleges for every type of student – those that commute, want to obtain a technical degree, are returning to school after a long time, as well as the traditional student. While I applaud this trend and promote equity efforts, I wonder if something has been lost in the shift towards diversification. Are colleges (and students) still making learning the clear and pure priority?

                The rise in professionally focused programs likely also contributes. The liberal arts curriculum which was the hard and fast rule of the past, now serves a limited percentage of college students.  I presume, from my own experience, that outcomes from liberal arts schools—where critical thinking and communication is central to the curriculum—would differ from the results indicated in the national study. However, these programs are not necessarily better or produce more prepared students. One has to wonder what important and indicative skills the study highlighted in Academic Drift is not measuring.

                Even if it does not paint a complete picture, this report still garners attention. Critical thinking, reasoning and communication are important qualities to instill in students – clearly something needs to change, regardless of the mission of a university’s curriculum. Perhaps the answer is not to limit criticism to the students and faculty, but to look to administrators as well. As students and institutions become more diverse, and programs become more career focused, it is up to student services to fill in the gaps. As student affairs professionals, how and when can we capitalize on opportunities to create thoughtful and productive graduates? 

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/05/opinion/05herbert.html?_r=0

Once Upon a White Student Union by Mace Porotesano

 So, the other day this past week I received an email from a friend who said this: “Watch this video. The panel is very interesting. You'll feel enlightened.

http://live.huffingtonpost.com/r/segment/5075b4be2b8c2a504c0004d2”

After I watched the entire panel discussion, I was very much indeed enlightened. The conversation was very thought provoking and touched upon some diversity and racial issues in higher education, for example, affirmative action, and admissions. But it ultimately made me think about how multicultural centers in the future would look like and the role of student affairs professionals in higher education. The Towson University student leader Matthew Heimbach, wishes to create a white student organization “to allow students to come together and advocate for their own interests” (Hanrahan, 2012).  Towson University is a public university located in an urban area in Baltimore, Maryland. There are about 18,000 undergraduate students, and 4,000 graduate students at the University. I think that every student should have this right and exercise his or her right to associate. Being inclusive of all cultures and identities is crucial in student affairs. But I also think its’ important that the administration monitors and oversees what organizations’ are doing.

In the PASA program, we discuss the importance of diversity on campus and the many positive impacts it has on students’ personal development and growth throughout college. Multicultural centers are the (lack of a better word) “awareness” hubs of bringing different groups together, such as racial, ethnic, gender, sexual orientation, religious affiliation groups, etc. to establish a greater understanding, sensitivity, and appreciation of history, values and experiences. Diversity and multiculturalism call for positive identity development for all individuals and asserts toleration of all different beliefs and values. Student affairs professionals are in the position to provide support of the different perspectives within the campus community, and if students’ wish to create a white student union, the support must be there (NASPA Website).

After watching the panel discussion and discovering a little research, Heimbachs’ rationale for establishing such an organization was reasonable but the meetings and actions taken on behalf of their organization can rub off as ignorance. I believe that these instances and situations in a higher education setting can be set in positive light when student affairs professionals take immediate action in community and coalition building between all multicultural groups and parties. What are some other measures or potential aids can student affairs do in a situation like this?

Though the panel discussion was formulated because of the creation of a white student union at Towson University, it touched based on a plethora of dynamic issues that pertained to the American history. I think the panel surfaced a lot of important points to talk about, but this also made me think about Towson students and and their reactions to this. This situation in Towson University is interesting to me and I think that this case foreshadows the road that multicultural centers in higher education maybe taking. As a student affairs professional at Towson, what are some ways you would go about to open dialogue or discussion to the student population about this controversial idea? How would administrators go about the process of implementing a safe-space for students who wish to start a white student union? As Patton stated in her book Cultural Centers in Higher Education, when cultural centers are implemented, questions should be asked like: What is the mission of the culture center? What are student learning outcomes reflected in the mission? What are the programmatic goals of the culture center? How do these goals align with the mission?  If the culture is race specific, how are other students invited to engage within the culture space? To what extent is the programming curriculum designed to promote cross-cultural interactions among students from diverse backgrounds?

References:

Hanrahan, M. (n.d.). White Student Union: Towson University Student Matthew Heimbach Discusses Controversial Group On HuffPost Live. Retrieved October 22, 2012, from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/11/white-student-union-towson-university_n_1958868.html.

 NASPA | Commitment to Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity. NASPA - Student Affairs Administrators in Higher Education. Retrieved October 22, 2012, from http://www.naspa.org/about/diversity.cfm

Patton, L. D. (2010). Culture centers in higher education perspectives on identity, theory, and practice. Sterling, Va.: Stylus.