The Need for and Scope of Community-Based College Success Programming

• In Event: Supporting College Success for Economically Marginalized Students Through Community Programming

Abstract

Due to long-standing disparities in bachelor’s degree completion rates across economic and racial groups, US postsecondary institutions have invested heavily in retention programming specifically for first-generation college students and students of color. This programming varies tremendously, including everything from orientation and summer bridge programs to peer mentoring and learning communities. However, such programming has yet to appreciably reduce disparities in completion rates, largely due to the systemic racism and classism students face after matriculation.

In response to the insufficient support provided by postsecondary institutions, community-based organizations across the country have developed college success programs (CSPs) that vary in size and structure but are unified by the mission to support traditionally underrepresented and underserved students through college at no cost. Many CSPs have self-reported considerable success at supporting degree attainment amongst their students. However, postsecondary institutions and the administrators, staff, and faculty who work within them have paid little to no attention to these programs. As a result, postsecondary personnel know little about community-based college success programs, have conducted virtually no research about them, and have failed to learn from their successes.

This presentation will review the scope of community-based college success programs across the country and also dive deeply into the: (1) aims and objectives, (2) student demographics, and (3) methods and structures of eleven CSPs that participated in a mixed-method study funded by the Spencer Foundation. Four types of organizational data were collected from each CSP: observational data collected by the PI on site visits, qualitative data collected via interviews with at least two staff members at each CSP, archival data collected from publicly available websites and documents from each CSP, and outcome data internal to the organizations.

Results demonstrate the enormous range of CSP programming available. Whereas some programs serve thousands of students annually virtually, other programs serve several dozen students using high-touch, relationally-focused programming. However, despite this diversity of programming, the CSPs were unified in the demographics of students served (almost exclusively economically marginalized students, the majority of whom were first generation college students of color) and the challenges faced (interfacing with postsecondary institutions; securing funding; etc.). Additional results as well as implications for both community-based and postsecondary programming will be shared.

Authors

• Abigail Hoxsey, Purdue University

• Eileen Elizabeth Joy, Purdue University