Education 266
Urban College Access:
A Critical Examination of Policies and Interventions
Professor: Erica YamamuraCourse: Education 266, Winter 2007
Office: Willis 105 Tues/Thurs 1:15pm-3:00pm
Office Hours: Tues 3pm-4pm, Willis 114
Weds 10am-12pm, and by appointment
Email:
Course Description
Urban underrepresented students (low-income, first generation, refugee, undocumented, African American, Latina/o, and Native Americans) continue to be one of the least represented groups in higher education and face innumerable structural and individual barriers in gaining access to college. Since 1965, significant gains have been made in college access (equitable preparation and resources to attend college) for underrepresented students with the implementation of policies and programs to actively address issues of access. However, many of these gains have been stifled in recent times, particularly with access to selective public universities. Economic uncertainties, legal decisions, and policy shifts have changed the way in which universities and policymakers can address issues of access.
This course will focus on two areas of access: K-12 college preparation and university admissions. We will begin by looking at school, family, and community conditions that shape urban students’ access to college and contemporary frameworks used to understand these processes, specifically sociological (cultural and social capital) and legal (critical race theory) lenses. Following, policies and interventions that address college access for urban underrepresented students will be examined with special attention to affirmative action, need and ‘merit’-based financial aid, and university outreach programs. Lastly, future directions for programs and policies will be explored.
Course Objectives
Through this course, you will:
- Gain a critical understanding of issues urban students face in their pursuit of a four-year college degree and the federal and state policies and interventions created to improve these conditions
- Explore and critique traditional and contemporary frameworks utilized in the study of access
- Identify and analyze linkages between policy and educational interventions
- Cultivate participation skills for seminar discussion, including active listening and thoughtfully engaging in class discussions
- Develop and hone writing skills through critical responses and reflection, peer editing, and revision workshops
Required Texts
Carleton Bookstore:
- McDonough, P.M. (1997).Choosing colleges: How social class and schools structure opportunity [$22]
- Tierney, W.G. & Colyar, J. (2006). Urban high school students and the challenge of access: Many routes, difficult paths[$30]
Additional readings available through EReserve (password: educ) and on Moodle
Evaluation Criteria:
Participation & Engagement15%
Weekly “Critically Thunk” Questions10%
Content Quizzes15%
“Devil’s Advocate” Response Papers25%
Final Project35%
Class Participation and Engagement (15%):Participation and engagement are requisite components of the course. The course will both individual and group-based activities within (discussion, activities, peer review, etc.) and outside (reading, research, and reflection) of the classroom setting. You are expected to come to class having read for the entire week by Tuesday each week (except for Week 1) and be ready to discuss and engage in activities that will expand upon the material presented in the readings. You are required to bring readings for the week to class, as we will refer to them during our discussion and activities. In addition, assignments and activities will privilege multiple learning styles (visual, auditory, sensory, etc.) and your openness to listen, share, reflect upon, and critique your views and your classmates will be encouraged. In this way, participation is viewed as both a thoughtful listening exercise and verbal exchange and analytic quality over quantity will be rewarded. At times, we will discuss controversial topics and discussions may become heated, uncomfortable, and/or frustrating. As a professor, I seek to create a respectful learning community and require students be open to a multiplicity of viewpoints and can ‘agree to disagree’ as well.
Students’ experiences are valuable to learning about college access and each student has had a unique
pathway to higher education. Therefore, throughout the course, you will be asked to share your own educational background, experiences, and questions/contentions about various educational issues. In addition, this course will discuss controversial topics, which may elicit strong feelings and emotions and can push you out of your comfort zone. The instructor expects you to respect each other’s views, no matter how oppositional. This class is about learning about the complexity of educational issues, talking through difficult issues, and becoming aware of a range of perspectives.
Weekly “Critically Thunk” Exchange (10%): You will be required to post or answer 2 “critically thunk” questions, thereby requiring students to read ahead, thoughtfully construct discussion questions, and begin to dialogue on course readings before actual class time. Questions are due every Monday at 1:00pm on the class discussion board and those who are directed to respond must do so by Tuesday at 1:00pm. Students will alternate weeks of posting q’s and answering q’s--last name: A-N: post questions odd weeks, answer even weeks
O-Z: answer questions odd weeks, post questions even weeks.
Questions posted should demonstrate (1) your understanding (or lack thereof) of the readings that week and (2) open up a line of inquiry to expand upon the topics illuminated in the reading materials. Responses to questions should (1) articulate a thoughtful and analytical perspective and (2) support/counter with direct evidence from the readings, when possible.
Content Quizzes (15%): In order to regulate your engagement with course readings, and in lieu of a midterm examination, you will have 3 unannounced content quizzes that will ascertain your knowledge of the reading materials for a particular week (i.e. not cumulative). Quizzes cannot be made up if you are not present for class, aside from a verifiable absence from the Dean of Students office. The final content quiz grade will be calculated by the sum of your two highest scores (i.e. your lowest quiz score will be dropped).
“Devil’s Advocate” Response Paper (25%):You will be required to submit a “devil’s advocate” paper weeks 4 and 6 in which, based on class discussions, you will play devil’s advocate and analyze an issue using a viewpoint other than your own (the opposing side, through a different theoretical lens, from another standpoint, etc.). Papers will be no longer than 5 pages, double spaced. The first section (2-2.5 pages) will explain the ‘devil’s advocate’ perspective on one of the issues discussed in class, and should be well substantiated (incorporate at least one research study to substantiate your point) and include at least one concrete example (from the readings, discussion, or your lived experience) to support your argument. The next section (2-2.5 pages) will be a reflective piece in which you will discuss (1) your own personal view on the issue (2) how the exercise challenged you/your view (3) the ways in which the activity re-informed your viewpoint, allowing for a critical interrogation of the issue at hand.
Final Project (35%): At the beginning of the quarter you will be assigned a team of 3-4 (depending on class size) to (1) write a 10 page policy brief and (2) present on one key topic on urban college access. This project will allow you to explore in depth one specific topic area and offer practical and realistic policy insights to improve urban college access. This project will also include disseminating your brief to relevant educational administrators and policymakers (that you identify) to enhance the on-going dialogue on urban college access as a Carleton student.
Week 5: Submit a one-page proposal of your intended topic (12 pt font, double spaced, 1” margins), including your topic, and a list of three articles/books in APA format (references from the required readings do not count) that you intend to use in forming your policy brief (1%)
Week 6/7: Meet with the instructor to discuss your project topic; a sign up sheet will be passed around in class week 5 to sign up for a meeting time. If sufficient progress has not been made on your project topic (narrowing down of area, change in topic, etc.), you may be required to have a follow up consultation (2%)
Week 8:Submit a full first draft of the policy brief incorporating feedback from the peer review session. This draft will be peer reviewed in detail by one member of the course and the professor; keep peer-reviewed drafts—attach to final paper (2%)
Week 10:
Presentation (15%): Your group will give a 20 minute presentation on your policy brief. You are encouraged to utilize your creative juices and appeal to visual, auditory, and tactile senses in your presentation. Your final presentation grade will be determined by individual (5%) and group (10%) scores. You will be required to evaluate the contribution of each group member, including yourself, on a scale of 1-5 and provide a one paragraph narrative to support your score the evening (10:00pm) following the presentation.
Final Policy Brief (15%):The final policy brief is due on the last day of class, Thursday, March 8 (1:15pm). Please attach all peer and professor reviewed drafts to the final paper
Policies
Illness/Emergencies/ Unforeseeable Absences:Please let me know (when possible) if an illness/emergency or unforeseeable circumstance arises and you cannot attend class. More than 2 unexcused absences will result in youroverall grade being lowered by one full grade (i.e. A to B). The only excused absences that will be accepted (i.e. death in the family, family emergency, medical emergency/leave, etc.) must be verifiable through the Dean of Students Office.
Late/Missed Assignments: Assignments not turned in during the first 10 minutes of class on the due date will be penalized one grade per day late (A to B, etc.) and will not be accepted after 3 days. Emailed assignments will not be accepted.
Students with Special Needs: Students who need special accommodations should bring this to my attention after the first class either by email or in-person.
Academic Honesty: The standards set by the Dean of Students Office will be adhered to in this course. As such, “it is assumed that a student is the author of all course work (quizzes, tests, papers, lab work, etc.) that he/she submits, whether for a grade or not, and that the work has not been submitted for credit in another class without the instructor's permission. Images, ideas, data, audio clips, or phrases borrowed from others should be fully identified by standard procedures for making such acknowledgment.”
Course Overview
Week 1: Introduction to Urban College Access
What is urban college access? Why should we study urban college access? What relevance does urban college access have in your life?
Week 2: Urban Educational Context: Family and Peers
What does college preparation in urban public schools look like today? In particular, how do family and peers shape urban students’ college pathways?
Required Readings:
Ogbu, J.U. and Simons, H.D. (1998). Voluntary and involuntary minorities: A cultural-ecological theory of school performance with some implications for education. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 29 (2), 155-188 [MOODLE]
Stanton-Salazar, R.D. (2004). Social capital among working-class minority students In M.A. Gibson, P. Gandara, and J.P. Koyama (Eds.) School connections: U.S. Mexican youth, peers, and school achievement.New York: Teachers College Press, 18-38 [EReserve]
Tierney, W.G. & Colyar, J. (2006). Urban high school students and the challenge of access: Many routes, difficult paths. New York: Peter Lang Publishing, Chapters 1-4, 1-69
Recommended Readings:
Kozol, J. (1992). Savage inequalities: Children in America’s schools.New York: Harper Perennial.
Kozol, J. (2005). The shame of the nation: The restoration of apartheid schooling in America. New York: Crown Publishers
Oakes, J. (1985). Keeping track: How schools structure inequality. New Haven, CT: YaleUniversity Press
Rosenbloom, S.R. and Way, N. (2004). Experiences of discrimination among African American, Asian American, and Latino adolescents in an urban high school. Youth & Society, 35 (4)
Week 3 Urban Educational Context: Educational Opportunities, Tracking and College Counseling
How does tracking, the quality of your HS, and college counseling shape urban students’ college pathways?
Required Readings:
Solorzano, D.G. and Ornelas, A. (2004). A critical race analysis of Latina/o and African American advanced placement enrollment in public high schools. The High School Journal, 87 (3): 15-26 [MOODLE]
McDonough, P.M., Korn, J., and Yamazaki, E. (1997). Access, equity, and the privatization of college counseling. Review of Higher Education, 20 (3), 296-316 [MOODLE]
Tierney, W.G. & Colyar, J. (2006). Urban high school students and the challenge of access: Many routes, difficult paths. New York: Peter Lang Publishing, Chapters 5-8, 70-148
Recommended Readings:
Delpit, L. (1995). Other people’s children: Cultural conflict in the classroom.New York: New York Press
Oakes, J. (1985). Keeping track: How schools structure inequality. New Haven, CT: YaleUniversity Press
Suskind, R. (1998). A hope in the unseen: An American odyssey from the inner city to the Ivy League.New York: Broadway Books.
Yonezawa, S. and Jones, M. (2006). Student perspectives on tracking and detracking. Theory into Practice, 45(1), 15-23
Week 4 College Access
What is college choice? In what ways does college choice further/limit our understanding of college access and equity?
Due: Thursday--Devil’s Advocate Paper #1 (12.5%)
Required Readings:
Hossler, D., Braxton, J. and Coopersmith G. (1989). Understanding student college choice. In J. Smart Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, Vol. 5. New York: Agathon Press, 248-281 [EReserve]
McDonough, P. (1997). Choosing Colleges: How Social Class and Schools Structure Opportunity.New York: State University of New York Press, Chapter 1-2, 1-44
Freeman, K. (2005). African Americans and college choice: The influence of family and school.New York: SUNY Press, Chapter 8, 81-96 [EReserve]
Teranishi,R.T., Ceja, M., Antonio, A., Allen, W.R., and McDonough, P.M. (2004). The college-choice process for Asian Pacific Americans: Ethnicity and socioeconomic class in context. Review of Higher Education, 27 (4), 527-548 [MOODLE]
Recommended Readings:
Conchas, G.Q. (2001). Structural failure and success: Understanding the variability in Latino School Engagement. Harvard Educational Review, 71 (3), 475-504
Freeman, K. (1997). Increasing African Americans’ participation in higher education: African American high-school students’ perspectives. Journal of Higher Education, 68 (5), 523-550
Garcia, L.M. (2005). Variations in Latino groups in U.S. post-secondary educational attainment. Research in Higher Education, 46 (5), 511-530 [MOODLE]
Gonzalez, K.P., Stone, C. and Jovel, J.E. (2003). Examining the role of social capital in access to college for Latinas: Toward a college opportunity framework. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 2 (1), 146-170.
Maxey, J., Lee, J.S., and McLure, G.T. (1995). Are black students less likely to enroll at their first-choice college? The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, 7.
Week 5 Theoretical Foundations of Access: Capital and CRT
What is capital? What is critical race theory (CRT)? How does ‘capital’ (or the lack thereof) impact college access for urban and minority students? How can a CRT framework be used to understand college access for urban underrepresented students?
Due:Thursday--Final Project Proposal (1%)
Required Readings:
McDonough, P. (1997). Choosing Colleges: How Social Class and Schools Structure Opportunity.New York: StateUniversity of New York Press, Chapters 3, 45-89
Delgado, R. & Stefancic, J. (2001). Critical race theory: An introduction. New York: New York University Press, Chapter 1, p.1-35 [EReserve]
Haney-Lopez, I. “Colorblind to the reality of race in America,” Chronicle of Higher Education (November 2006), p-1-7 [MOODLE]
Solorzano, D.G., & Bernal, D.D. (2001). Examining transformational resistance through a Critical Race and Latcrit theory framework: Chicana and Chicano students in an urban context. Urban Education, 36 (3), 208-337 [MOODLE]
Recommended Readings:
Bell, D. (1992). Faces at the bottom of the well: The permanence of racism. New York: Basic Books
Bell, D. (2004). Silent covenants: Brown v. Board of Education and the unfulfilled hopes for racial reform.Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press
Deyhle, D. (1995). Navajo youth and Anglo racism: Cultural integrity and resistance. Harvard Educational Review, 65 (3), 403-444
Ladson-Billings, G. (1999). Just what is critical race theory and what’s it doing in a nice field like education? In L. Parker, D. Deyhle, & S. Villenas (Eds.), Race is…Race isn’t: Critical race theory and qualitative studies in education.Boulder, CO: Westview Press, p.7-31
Lynn, M. (1999). Toward a critical race pedagogy: A research note. Urban Education, 33 (5), 606-626
Solorzano, D.G. (1998). Critical race theory, race, gender, microaggressions, and the experience of Chicana and Chicano scholars. Qualitative Studies in Education, 11 (1), 121-136
Week 6 College Admissions and the Social Construction of “Merit”
What is “merit” in college admissions and how has it evolved throughout history? And how do current conceptions of merit increase/limit access to higher education?
Due: Thursday--Devil’s Advocate Paper #2 (12.5%)
Meet w/instructor to discuss final project W6/W7 (2%)
Required Readings:
Carter, P. (2003). “Black” cultural capital, status positioning, and schooling conflicts for low-income African American youth. Social Problems, 50 (1), 136-155 [MOODLE]
Contreras, F. (2005). The reconstruction of merit post-Proposition 209. Education Policy, 19(2), 371-393 [MOODLE]
McDonough, P. (1997). Choosing Colleges: How Social Class and Schools Structure Opportunity.New York: State University of New York Press, Chapter 6, 149-162
Steinberg, J. (2003). The gatekeepers: Inside the admissions process of a premier college.New York: Penguin, Chapter 10, 235-261 [EReserve]
Farrell, E.F. (January, 2007). When legacies are a college’s lifeblood. Chronicle of Higher Education, Students, Volume 53, Issue 20, Page A33, January 19, 2004 [MOODLE]
Recommended Readings:
Fetter, J. (1995). Questions and admissions: Reflections on 100,000 admissions decisions at Stanford.Stanford, CA: StanfordUniversity Press
Oakes, J., Rogers, J., Lipton, M., Morrell, E. (2002). The social construction of college access: Confronting the technical, cultural, and political barriers to low-income students of color. In W.G. Tierney and L.S. Hagedorn (Eds.), Increasing access to college: Extending possibilities for all students. New York: SUNY Press