Many schools' move-days have come and gone, students are back, and classes have begun. In California the state's budget woes have resulted in fewer sections of high demand classes and larger enrollments in those sections that are still being offered. This is particularly troubling since CSU and UC students are having to pay tuition at a rate higher than the state contribution. According to the Los Angeles Times this is the first time in the history of the CSU and UC that this has ever happened and it appears that students will be paying higher rates indefinitely. The implications appear dire for low income, minority, and first generation students. If you don't believe me, then let's take a quick look at something really basic: textbooks.
From a student learning perspective, larger classes impair student learning by severely limiting the amount of contact between students and faculty. The physical and cognitive distance between students and faculty is a real barrier to student success. So much so, that Bill Tierney, director of the USC Center for Higher Education Policy Analysis, has quipped, "Distance education begins at the second row." Students need access to their faculty for myriad reasons. The most fundamental reason being self-monitoring of learning; students learn by actively engaging the content and their social and academic milieus (Astin, 1996; Baxter Magolda, 1992). So, if student learning is already challenged by large class sections, imagine the difficulties presented by not being able to obtain a textbook.
The San Francisco Chronicle recently reported that students are competing for seats in crowded classes, paying more than ever, and are not buying their required texts. Indeed, the Chronicle of Higher Education reported that 7 out of 10 students chose to not buy the required text for class. The Chronicle obtained this data from a research project run by Student PIRGs (political interest research group). According to the report, 13 schools were sampled and 1905 completed surveys were returned wherein students overwhelmingly responded that they did not buy a text because of cost. Moreover, these students also recognized that their in-class experience would be qualitatively worse without the textbook.
The problems for first generation, minority, and low SES students are magnified by the our current economic malaise. Whereas middle and upper-middle class families can move their students to less-impacted private schools, low SES families are less able to afford the higher costs of attendance. Our public universities belong to all citizens. Generations of taxpayers have paid in to a system of higher education regardless of whether they or their progeny actually enrolled. Our students (whether rich or poor, majority or minority, first, second, or third generation) deserve a quality learning experience. According to Labaree (2007), states "cannot afford to let public schools fail, even if their own children are gaining consumer benefits from education elsewhere" (p. 179). The costs of an unlettered and chronically poor underclass are felt throughout society. We know that education in general, and higher education in particular, produces significant lasting positive changes in students and in their communities. What happens when we let our schools deteriorate to such a degree that students do not or can not purchase the books required to set them on the path to learning?
Healing our social woes begins in public primary school and goes all the way to public postsecondary institutions. Whether families or even those without children use public education is not the issue. Rather, citizens must choose where they want to pay for the underdeveloped and unschooled. That is, we can invest more in our educational infrastructure to promote greater economic parity. Or, we can pay for more police, prisons, and welfare. Kids that are in school are not running with gangs. Young adults and emerging adults that are in school are on a path towards greater degrees of cognitive and affective development. These are positive outcomes that are relatively easy to see. Yet, it is difficult to persuade someone to go to class if they don't have access to the course content.
Learners first, students always!
Astin, A. (1996). Involvement in learning revisited: What we have learned. Journal of College Student Development, 37, 123-133.
Baxter Magolda, M. B. (1992). Knowing and reasoning in college: Gender related patterns in students' intellectual development. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.
Labaree, D. F. (2007). No exit: Public education as an inescapably public good. In D. F. Labaree (Ed.), Education, markets, and the public good: The selected works of David Labaree. New York, NY: Routledge.
No comments:
Post a Comment