Advising Within the Context of Dual-Credit Education: Opportunities and Challenges

• In Event: Marriott Roundtable Session 17
  In Roundtable Session: Two Birds With One Stone? An Examination of the Effectiveness and the Implementation of Dual-Credit Education Programs

Abstract

The expansion of dual-credit (DC) programs has placed pressure on universities and community colleges to extend and modify advising practices to meet the needs of students earning college credit before they graduate from high school. In a recent qualitative study exploring the implementation of DC programs in Texas, community college administrators reported that the degree to which the counselors interact and engage with DC students and their families hinges on available resources. The community college administrators also reported that they often work with high school counselors, who may have less knowledge about the rigor and the transferability of college-level courses than college counselors (Miller, Kosiewicz, Wang, Marwah, Delhommer, & Daugherty, 2017). Adding to these difficulties, administrators also expressed frustration that many DC students have not chosen a college major, and that some are academically and emotionally underprepared to take college-level coursework (Miller, et. al, 2017). The combination of these factors pose significant challenges for college and high school counselors who are tasked with advising DC students on appropriate course-taking, credit transfer, and accessing relevant student support services.

With the goal of better understanding advising within the context of DC education and offering practical, evidence-based suggestions on how to improve dual credit advising processes and practices, this study is the first to investigate in-depth how universities, community colleges, and high schools counsel students into DC courses. Framed by the theories of policy sociology (Gerwitz & Cribb, 2002), public management (Gray & Jenkins, 2006), and sensemaking (Spillane, Reiser, & Reimer, 2002), this study specifically examines how the scope, depth, and quality of advising of DC students are influenced by macro- and micro-level system pressures, resource constraints and governance structures, as well as the advisor’s prior knowledge, beliefs, and perspectives about DC education. The theory of sensemaking, in particular, draws useful attention to the effects that implicit bias might have on the nature and quality of advising that students, specifically traditionally underserved students, receive.

For this study, we will conduct semi-structured interviews with 50 high school counselors and 50 college counselors from 25 DC partnerships across Texas. These interviews will gather information that will help us to accurately characterize advising approaches, and their limitations, and will gather suggestions for how to improve DC advising. We will specifically collect data about: (1) the kinds of information high school and college counselors share with DC students; (2) how high school and college counselors work with each other and with college faculty to effectively address the needs of DC students; (3) the strategies that high school and college counselors use to help DC students select courses; (4) how and the extent that counselors and advisors consider a student’s academic and behavioral preparation, as well as a student’s major and/or career plans, when they deliver advising; and (5) the challenges that high school and college counselors encounter when advising DC students. In our interviews, we will also collect informational materials given to DC students, and gather tools that counselors use to facilitate the advising process.

Authors

• Holly Kosiewicz, Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board

• Trey Miller, American Institutes for Research

• Courtney Tanenbaum, American Institutes for Research