Two Strategies to Change Community Colleges

An earlier paper addressed the need for increased attention on Utah’s community colleges. This paper will briefly address two strategies for increasing that attention.

Change the Lens

When President Obama announced his community college plan he did so as an economic program rather than an education program. Perhaps, community colleges have become increasingly seen as “the stepchild of the higher education system.” We tend to cobble all public higher education into one group and talk merely about education. We assume that all students, no matter which school they attend, have the same objects and goals for their education. This assumption is becoming increasing suspect as the past decade has seen a large growth in non-traditional students who may be seeking limited workforce training or personal enrichment. Community colleges have been cast as more of a “college” than an integral part of the economic “community.”

Utah should begin to change this lens on all levels of higher education, but particularly at the community college level. Efforts to spur regional economic growth and creating regional well-paying jobs should be the public focus of community colleges. Community colleges must be active players in their respective, well, communities. Listening to constituent feedback and responding to unique economic pressures. While this may add the politicization of higher education, it will help individuals realize there is much more to community college than two more years of public education.

Become More Selective

Community colleges have been the nation’s “open access” institutions. Unfortunately this has lead to a common perception that community colleges are somehow less than other institutions. The mission of “open access” speaks not to the quality of education but to the population it serves. Providing quality education to underprivileged does not make the education any less good.

Community colleges can combat this image by enhancing its mission as a community institution. The institution could provide a “preference” for students from the “community” the college serves. The preference may be superficial (merely stated in policies) or real (an actual tuition waiver or priority in registration) but it will change the perception that community colleges somehow deliver a less-good education. At the very least, the move will create movement and thoughts for further reform. It will draw attention to the institution and create an alliance between college and the community.

Conclusion

I am not convinced that these two suggestions are the solution to all problems, but pushing the line on traditional thought must be done to enact progress towards a better model.