Local College Access Strategies: Issues of Equity for Place-Based Initiatives

• In Event: Charting Reform, Achieving Equity in a Diverse Nation

Abstract

Access to college is a critical barometer for the equitable distribution of opportunity in the U.S. and persistent enrollment gaps by race and class suggest that little progress has been made. In this paper we consider one state level strategy designed to address the inequitable distribution of postsecondary opportunity. We ask, “How do local communities facilitate access to college, given an existing state policy context?” Our purpose is to consider whether place-based strategies designed in different ways and targeting different communities are likely to affect the equitable distribution of postsecondary opportunity in Michigan.

Michigan has initiated two separate strategies to leverage local efforts with state resources to address the postsecondary needs of local communities. First, in 2008, Governor Jennifer Granholm signed into law Promise Zone legislation to capitalize on the Kalamazoo model by creating an incentive for communities to develop college access agendas (Miller-Adams, 2008). Second, Michigan formed a statewide College Access Network (MCAN) and launched an ambitious plan to create Local College Access Networks (LCAN) across the state. Both of these approaches focus on local communities but make different assumptions about the nature of the access challenge and the mechanisms by which to improve access in the state.

We utilize Perna and Thomas’s (2008) multi-level conceptual framework for student success as a way to situate the current investigation at multiple levels, ranging from individual and familial background characteristics to school structures and social conditions. We conduct this investigation as an embedded case study where the two separate approaches are units of analysis, and the socio-political background in Michigan is considered the case context. Yin (2009) suggests that this approach is appropriate when the purpose of the study is to describe the features, context, and process of the phenomenon under investigation. We utilize publicly available quantitative data, document analysis, and interviews of key stakeholders to examine these two separate policy strategies to improve access to college.

Initial findings suggest that these two approaches developed in different ways and target different communities across the state. Where Promise Zones focus almost entirely on urban communities, nearly half of the LCANs are organized in rural communities in the Northern and central parts of the state. The LCANs focus on establishing additional support services and strategies to provide students and parents with better information to navigate the college going process, assuming the primary barrier to access is the extent to which students and parents are informed. Promise Zones assume the primary barrier to access is cost and the guarantee of tuition will eliminate the barrier and attract families to the community. Only three zones offer scholarships and none provide a full guarantee.

Author

• Nathan J. Daun-Barnett, University at Buffalo - SUNY