Community College Governance,Funding, and Accountability: A Century of Issues and Trends

Community colleges in America are now very visible and highly respected institutions of higher education. More than 1,000 community colleges in all 50 states now comprise nearly 25% of all colleges and universities in the U.S., with over 6.5 million students, or about 45% of all college students.

State and local governance and coordination of community colleges vary from single-state governing boards to minimal state control and strong local governing boards. The relative degrees of state and local control of community colleges generally “follow the money,” in that accountability to state and local governing board and state legislatures is generally about proportional to the funds provided by each level of government.

Funding for operational support of community colleges comes primarily from state and local governments, with considerable federal support for grants and subsidized loans to students. In 2000–2001, the largest proportional funding sources for community colleges were: state governments (44.6%), local governments (19.5%), tuition and fees (19.5%) and the federal government (5.4%). State lotteries in at least 38 states represent a relatively new source of funds for community colleges, often in the form of student scholarships.

Many of the earliest public junior colleges charged no tuition, especially in California in the early 1900s. Now many community college students pay $3,000 or more per year in tuition and fees, and recent annual tuition increases in many states have been in double digits. This is a troubling trend that threatens to reduce access to higher education for poor people.     

Community College Mission: Re(S)ources Make a Difference

Community colleges are unique among higher education institutions in their potential access to local appropriations as well as state funding. A total of 26 states reported to the Education Commission of the States in 2001 that community colleges in their states received some share of local funding. Using data for 781 public community colleges, we explored the implications of resource dependency theory for mission differentiation between dual-funded and state-funded colleges. Significant differences were observed in their student bodies, programming, expenditures, and outcomes. These differences have implications for the increasing dependence on state funding for community colleges and the roles these institutions play.     

Impact of Institutional and Student Characteristics on Texas Community Colleges under the State’s Performance Funding Model

The study examined how institutional and student characteristics may influence the earning of student success points by state-supported community colleges under the Texas performance funding system that was fully implemented in the 2016–2017 biennium. Texas has historically funded community colleges based on an enrollment formula; however, the funding system was revised in 2013 by setting aside 10% of the enrollment-based formula funding appropriations to be earned back through a performance funding system based on student success points earned. The quantitative study used a correlation design with three hierarchical multiple regression analyses to examine the relationships between the student outcomes measures for public community colleges and institutional and student characteristics. The data examined were collected by the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board and made available to the public through an interactive website tool. Findings showed that although several student and institutional characteristics were significant predictors of the total success points earned, when the analysis focused on the change in success points between two sets of three-year averages, none of the student or institutional characteristics were significant predictors. These findings support the design of the Texas performance funding system and suggest that community colleges serving higher proportions of at-risk students, including students who are a minority, low socioeconomic status, part-time, and are age 25 and older, will not be disadvantaged using the system’s methodology of comparing an institution to its own historic performance. The contributions of this study are intended to assist state policymakers who are designing performance funding systems.     

Current Developments in Community College Performance Funding

Since the initiation of performance funding in Tennessee in the late 1970s, approximately 30 states have, at some point, attempted a funding model that includes performance on a set of indicators. The purpose of the present study was to capture the current status of performance funding in public statewide community college systems and to assess which performance indicators were collected at the state level. Data were obtained through the 2012 Survey of Finance and Access Issues conducted by the Education Policy Center at the University of Alabama. The survey was administered to the National Council of State Directors of Community Colleges, and 50 responses were obtained from 49 states. Not every survey respondent answered each survey item. Findings showed that 19 states used performance funding for community colleges, with six of those states allocating at least 10% of state funds based on performance. An analysis of indicators captured at the state level (not exclusively for performance funding) showed a decline of emphasis on process indicators and greater emphasis on outputs. The performance-based distribution of base funding and the inclusion of output measures that capture intermediate indicators of success are consistent with the principles of Performance Funding 2.0, a new form of performance funding recently discussed in the literature. Future research should include tracking the current findings over time and expanding the existing literature on whether performance funding influences outcomes.     

The New Norm: Community Colleges to Deal with Recessionary Fallout

Since the beginning of the Great Recession, many community colleges have experienced significant declines in state revenue, increases in enrollment, higher tuition, and flat or declining state student aid. These conditions have also occurred in an environment of heightened accountability with pressure to advance a student success agenda and to meet workforce training needs. Findings from the annual survey of state community college directors conducted by the Education Policy Center at the University of Alabama, in partnership with Iowa State University and The University of North Carolina at Charlotte, show that the majority of state directors feel states are moving toward a privatized model of higher education and that structural deficits exist in state budgets disadvantaging community colleges. The concern is that these and other related findings demonstrate a situation that may not improve as the nation climbs out of recession; this situation is creating a new norm in community college funding.     

新时代职业教育校企命运共同体的内涵特征与实现路径

随着社会的快速发展和职业教育的不断变革,职业教育校企合作呈现出新的时代内涵,职业教育校企命运共同体应运而生并呈现出新的方向。职业教育校企命运共同体由“校企利益共同体”“校企情感共同体”“校企文化共同体”和“校企责任共同体”组成,是职业教育校企合作的最高形态,具有共生性、包容性、开放性和互补性等特征。新时代职业教育校企命运共同体的建设和健康发展,需要构筑义利统一的发展共识,需要构建情理交融的共生合作机制,需要共建开放包容的合作文化,需要落实互融共生的责任主体。     

Covet Thy Neighbor or “Reverse Policy Diffusion”? State Adoption of Performance Funding 2.0

Performance funding has become an increasingly prevalent state policy to incentivize student retention and degree completion at public colleges. Using a Cox proportional hazards model on state-level data from years 2000 to 2013, this study analyzes the latest wave of policies that embed base appropriations into the state budget to fund student outcomes. Results indicate that having a greater proportion of bordering performance funding states diminishes the likelihood of policy adoption, capturing a “reverse policy diffusion” effect. States with Republican-controlled legislatures, more professionalized legislatures, and rapid growth in unemployment rates are more likely to adopt the policy, while those with higher educational attainment levels and more bachelor’s degrees awarded per student are less likely. Implications include the surprising finding of reverse policy diffusion, which suggests that states are delaying adoption until after they can observe the political consequences and impacts of the policy in neighboring states. Findings point to a policy learning effect—by observing other state’s experiences, policymakers can make more informed decisions about whether to pursue performance funding as an accountability tool.     

PRESIDENTS’ VIEWS ON CURRENT AND FUTURE ISSUES FACING THE COMMUNITY AND JUNIOR COLLEGE

This study provides a foundation for discussion of major issues facing community colleges in America. The purpose of the study was to ascertain how many community college presidents rank order issues facing their institutions, now and five years hence. Additionally, the study sought to more comprehensively examine recent literature about issues facing community colleges for purposes of comparison with the findings of the study, and for explication of issues identified. The data for analysis were collected from a population survey of all public and private community college presidents listed in the Education Directory of Colleges and Universities, 1981‐1982. Issues used in the survey were identified a priori, from a review of the literature, and were validated using a panel of community college presidents. The major findings were that both public and private community college presidents agree that the top issues facing their institutions five years hence are: financial support for institution, achieving institutional mission, and maintaining enrollments. Other major current issues include faculty and staff relations, planning and administering the budget, governing board relations, administrative team relations, state relations, public and community relations, and program development and evaluation. Additionally, questions were raised in the study regarding “presidential priority rankings of issues,” based upon directions suggested in the literature review about what issues seem most pressing in the decade of the 1980s.     

Assessing a State-Mandated Institutional Accountability Program: The Perceptions of Selected Community College Leaders

ABSTRACT

In the spring of 2002 we conducted a structure-focused case study at 4 North Carolina community colleges to understand how selected senior campus leaders assessed a new legislatively-mandated institutional-accountability program. Using confidential interviews and document analysis we collected, analyzed, and interpreted data that revealed clear differences in how leaders regarded the accountability program. These distinct, campus-specific perspectives are characterized as “bureaucratic meddling,” “benign intrusion,” “an opportunity to demonstrate accountability,” and “the divided leaders.” Despite these distinct perspectives, however, we also found 2 overarching themes that illuminated common reactions to the accountability program. First, leaders at 3 of the 4 institutions reported that performance ratings under the accountability program were instrumental in prompting changes in instructional programs or staffing. Second, faculty leaders at 3 institutions exhibited an apathy or unawareness of state indicators, even though some state funding was linked to measures regarding student performance.     

A STUDY OF STATE ASSOCIATIONS OF COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT GOVERNING BOARDS

This study describes the organization, staffing, cost‐sharing alternatives, and administrative patterns of associations that coordinate community/junior college local governing board activities on a statewide basis. A review of literature is provided.

Methodology used for the study included letter‐surveys to state associations of community/junior colleges, community college presidents’ organizations, trustee organizations, and knowledgeable community college individuals in 33 states. Information concerning structure of community college associations, organizations of local trustees and college presidents, whether such organized groups operate as one common group or as separate organizations, and definition of any paid staff was obtained. Results were tabulated for 25 states identified as sharing state and local control of community/junior colleges. Tables are included to show: (1) states that elect trustees, states that appoint trustees, and the number of college districts and campus locations in each state; (2) organization and staffing patterns of trustee organizations and chief administrator groups; (3) patterns of organization types in the 25 states; and (4) fee structure used to finance state community college associations in a selection of state examples.

It was found that little work has been done to evaluate effectiveness of the various systems cited. Information furnished by the study did not give evidence that one form of structure serves more effectively than another.     

Increasing Completion and Cutting Costs: An Examination of How the Flipped Classroom and One-Room Schoolhouse Models Benefit Community Colleges

Community colleges continue to operate in a society of accountability and efficiencies. Throughout the country, states have implemented performance-based funding and completion agendas while also tightening or restricting funding for higher education. The state of Ohio has implemented one of the boldest performance funding plans in the country while also mandating that higher education institutions limit spending and lower costs to students. This article explores how Central Ohio Technical College has implemented the flipped classroom and one-room school house models in college-level mathematics courses and how both models of instruction can help community colleges increase successful completion rates to meet performance-based funding completion metrics while also limiting instructional cost.     

社区管理与服务专业设置“社区交通管理”课程的必要性简

随着机动车保有量的增加，社区交通安全问题日益突出，在公安机关交通管理部门警力不足的背景下，社区交通安全建设需要具有懂交通管理知识、会交通管理技能的社区管理人才。本文在分析社区交通安全形势的基础上，说明社区管理机构是社区交通安全建设社会化的主力，从而进一步揭示了高职院校社区管理与服务专业开设“社区交通管理”课程的必要性。     

APPLICATIONS OF TECHNOLOGY IN COMMUNITY COLLEGES

This article discusses community college involvement in a key welfare-to-work training program, the Jobs Opportunities and Basic Skills Training Program (JOBS), as a mirror to reflect on the larger issue of how federal and state workforce policy impacts publicly-controlled institutions of higher education. A qualitative assessment of JOBS programs at community colleges framed discussion regarding the challenges community colleges face as they attempt to preserve these programs within an era of devolved responsibility for welfare-to-work funding from the federal government to the states.     

Implementing transfer and articulation: A case study of community colleges and state universities

This study examined the cultural aspects of a transfer articulation policy between public community colleges and state universities enacted by a newly consolidated state governing board for higher education in a northeastern state. A qualitative multisite case study design explored how key stakeholders, faculty, administrators and staff viewed the transfer policy from their unique perspectives. Tierney’s (2008) cultural analysis of governance was used to examine the effectiveness of communication and decision-making on the part of the board. The study also applied Handel’s (2011) theory of a transfer affirming culture along with Jain, Herrera, Bernal, and Solorzano’s (2011) research on the requisite services for pretransfer and posttransfer success of nontraditional students. The use of several theoretical frameworks provides “a more powerful lens than when using only one in helping to interpret and understand culture” (Kezar &; Eckel, 2002, p. 440). The study was guided by the following question: How do community college and state university faculty, administrators and staff perceive the Transfer Mobility Policy in relation to their campus cultures? The findings identified difficulties with community college curricula and student transfer advising as well as a cultural gap between the community colleges and the state university. They underscored the politics that surrounds higher education governance reform and resultant clash between political and academic cultures. This study may help policy makers promote statewide transfer and articulation initiatives and be instructive for faculty, administrators, and staff as they seek to improve the success of students who transfer from community colleges to four-year colleges and universities.     

An Ohio Model for Articulated Teacher Education

Due to teacher shortages and the need for increased diversity within the teaching profession, there is a renewed interest in the utilization of community colleges for the preparation of P–12 teachers. Various articulation models have been proposed in several states. This case study explores the collaboration between a large, urban community college and a research I university for the preparation of business-education teachers in the state of Ohio. Reasons for the partnership are described, along with the challenges faced and the strategies used to develop a seamless pathway for a true “2 + 2” program for teacher education.     

Creating a New Architecture for the Learning College

The publication of A Nation at Risk in 1983 triggered a series of major reform efforts in education that are still evolving. As part of the reform efforts, leaders began to refer to a Learning Revolution that would “place learning first by overhauling the traditional architecture of education.” The old architecture—time-bound, place-bound, role-bound, and bureaucracy-bound—was an artifact of earlier eras when school was designed for an agricultural and an industrial economy. It was easy for educational leaders to “place learning first” by changing their language. Vice Presidents of Academic Affairs became Vice Presidents of Learning; Learning Outcomes became the universal goal; the institutions became Learning Colleges. New mission and value statements began to appear in community college catalogs to reflect the new emphasis on learning. The American Association of Community Colleges joined the revolution with a new mission statement: “Building a nation of learners by advancing America's community colleges.” The really hard work was to “overhaul the traditional architecture.” This brief article takes a first step in suggesting what that “overhaul” might look like for departmental structures, workload formula, grading, late registration, and some of the time-bound artifacts. It is noted that the 5 examples are but the tip of the iceberg if community colleges are to fully engage the Learning Revolution.     

三全育人视域下高校学生社区育人模式研究

“三全育人”指出要实现全员、全方位、全过程育人,是新时代高校立德树人的重要途径。学生社区作为大学生学习生活聚集平台的教育功能受到更多的关注。移动互联技术的发展冲破了高校的传统樊篱,推动高等教育改革重新整合教育资源,给高校思想政治教育带来了新趋势,高校后勤社会化改革也为学生社区更好发挥教育功能奠定了基础。在此背景下,不少高校积极开展学生社区育人模式改革,社区书院、社区党建、智慧社区、学生自治和邻里规划等社区新型学生社区教育管理服务模式得到了实践,并取得显著成效。     

Financial challenges in higher education: community college leadership style and ranking

A large number of new community college presidents will be hired in the next 5 years due to vacancies. New leaders must be prepared to lead their institutions through the challenges facing community colleges. Forty-one community college presidents in North Carolina participated in our research (70.7% response rate). We found that community college presidents’ perceptions of their management styles all fall within the “team management” orientation according to the Blake and Mouton Managerial Grid (Blake & Mouton, 1964). We then examined the financial management challenges faced by community college presidents and found empirical evidence regarding how community college presidents rank six of the most critical financial challenges identified in the literature. Presidents’ rankings of the six most critical financial challenges showed that the three most pressing concerns are maintaining student access during times of increasing educational costs, managing enrollment during times of decreasing state funding, and lowering costs without damaging academic quality.