Exploring the Implementation of an Early Start Program at One California State University Campus

• In Event: 72.028 - Examining California State University Remediation Policies and Practices: Implications for Students, Faculty, and Staff

Abstract

Purpose
The purpose of this paper was to explore the implementation of top-down, system-wide mandates such as the CSU Early Start Program (ESP). I was particularly interested in the challenges associated with the change process and understanding the impact of ESP on organizational subsystems (e.g., departments, divisions) and individuals (e.g. faculty and staff) within those subsystems. Emphasis was placed on faculty members as they have primary responsibility for fundamental areas such as the curriculum and methods of instruction (Hendrickson et al., 2014). Student Affairs professionals were also central to this study as they are essential in developing, supporting, and implementing such initiatives (Tinto, 1998). They play an especially crucial function in fully residential, co-curricular programs such as the one examined in this study.

Conceptual Framework
Conceptually this study was guided by theories of organizational change. To help understand and capture the complexity of this case study, I drew from various schools of thought related to change (Kezar, 2014). As ESP originated outside of the organization, evolutionary theories were appropriate for this work. Given that the ways in which ESP is carried out is determined at the organizational level, this study also lent itself to scientific management theories (Kezar, 2014).

Method/Data
Case study is not only suitable for studying processes, but allows for an in-depth examination of the phenomenon under study. This study is an example of an intrinsic case study (Stake, 1995). I was intrinsically interested in ESP at one CSU campus where approximately 70% of first year students admitted need at least one or more developmental course(s) in both math and English. My interest stemmed from its fully funded residential component as well as observed on-the-ground tensions regarding ESP. Primary sources of evidence include: 1) semi-structured interviews with faculty, staff, and administrators; 2) organizational documents centered on ESP such as program reports and campus-wide email correspondence; and 3) participant observations on campus.

Results
Preliminary findings reveal two main themes: a) faculty resistance; and b) staff burnout. Faculty resistance stemmed from limited involvement in the ESP planning process. Issues related to faculty governance were frequently cited. Staff burnout was related to the extensive amount of programming during the summer. To provide students with a co-curricular experience staff (and students) facilitated 199 events. However, these events were carried out on top of existing responsibilities within their designated areas.

Scholarly Significance
This paper is intended as a discussion piece for administrators responding to system-wide mandates such as ESP or those committed to addressing the nation’s developmental education crisis at the organization level. This study promises to provide valuable insights regarding the implementation process of developmental education initiatives and how we can better involve and support individuals who play an integral role in facilitating or impeding progress toward full compliance and the overall effectiveness of such programs. In sum, this study will help highlight implications for policy and practice as well as areas for future research.

Author

• Edna Martinez, California State University - San Bernardino