The Contradictory College: Reflections on Its Origins and Its Contributions

• In Event: 63.087 - Sheraton Roundtable Session 11 - Grand Centre
  In Roundtable Session: 63.087-4 - Revisiting the Contradictory College: 25 Years Later

Abstract

A. Objectives or purposes

The purpose of this presentation is to (1) analyze the factors that led to The Contradictory College and (2) provide an assessment of the book’s contributions, analyzing what parts have held up and what parts would need revising.

B. Perspective(s) or theoretical framework

Sociology and political science, particularly that focused on higher education, social stratification, and policy making.

C. Methods, techniques, or modes of inquiry

Review of the literature.

D. Data sources, evidence, objects, or materials*

Review of the research literature on community colleges. I will be examining journal articles, books, research reports, etc. on the origins, operation, and social impacts of community colleges.

E. Results and/or substantiated conclusions or warrants for arguments/point of view

The book emerged out of scholarly and policy debates about the community college during the 1970s through the early 1990s. It reflected the rising importance of community colleges, debates over what role it should play in widening college access given the sparse scholarly literature on community colleges’ operations, and theoretical developments in the analysis of political processes and the role of the state. I will draw on new research and theory in sociology, political science, and other fields concerning social stratification, organizational dynamics, and the sociology of politics and the state.

The book’s central argument is that the community college has contradictory impacts: both advancing college opportunity (the so-called democratizing effect) but also hindering baccalaureate aspirants’ pursuit of a bachelor’s degree (the diversionary effect). The book was devoted to documenting these impacts, analyzing how they are produced, and explaining how they arose out of the particular historical development of community colleges. Both aspects of the book’s central argument have been replicated in subsequent research by studies using more sophisticated quantitative methods. Where the book’s argument has not fared as well is in explaining how those impacts are produced.

Subsequent research has replicated the book’s finding that greater attrition in the community college and breakdowns in transfer advising play an important role in the diversionary effect. But, later research has not confirmed that community college transfers experience greater attrition in universities. Later research has also spotlighted factors that the Contradictory College did not explore, such as the negative impact on student persistence and transfer from poorly delivered remedial education and poorly integrated part-time instructors. Finally, the book’s overall analysis would benefit from considering recent work in critical race, feminist, and class theories and research and more recent work on the politics of policymaking and state development.

F. Scientific or scholarly significance of the study or work

In understanding a work, it is important to understand its origins and how they influenced its theoretical perspective, research design, and findings. With regard to a book’s findings, it is important to acknowledge that it has limitations. It is important to sift through its conceptual framework, methods, and findings to determine which ones have held up and which ones have not and need revising.

Author

• Kevin J. Dougherty, Teachers College, Columbia University