by Jamal Eric Watson
While many land-grant flagships
strive to keep costs low for students, they have not been as successful in
yielding high graduation rates, and, as a result, many students—including high
numbers of Blacks and Latinos—fall through the cracks.
Dr. José Cruz, the vice president
for higher education, policy and practice at the Education Trust, a nonprofit
organization that pushes high academic achievement and seeks to narrow
opportunity and achievement gaps—especially among minority students from
pre-kindergarten to college—says that most of the nation’s land-grant
institutions have neglected their mission to educate diverse populations in
favor of recruiting high-achieving students from relatively wealthy families
who can help the schools climb in national rankings.
“The main challenge is associated
with how flagships make decisions about how to invest their financial aid
dollars,” says Cruz. He points out that, from 2003 to 2007, public research
universities increased the amount of aid to students whose parents make at
least $115,000 a year by 28 percent. He adds that these schools routinely award
as much in financial aid to students whose parents make more than $80,000 a
year as to those whose parents make less than $54,000 a year.
“We are using the data to drive
policy discussions at all levels,” says Cruz, who organized a briefing on
Capitol Hill in July to talk with congressional leaders about the importance of
safeguarding the Pell Grant and other federally supported financial aid
programs. The Pell Grant program faces serious threats in budget negotiations
for fiscal year 2012. The U.S. Senate recently rejected a move by the House of
Representatives to slash support for the program, yet it remains unclear how
the program ultimately will fare once the Senate drafts its budget.
Dr. F. King Alexander, president of
California State University, Long Beach, was at the congressional briefing.
This school and California State University, Fullerton, were two of the five
institutions applauded in an Education Trust report released in June titled
“Priced Out: How the Wrong Financial-Aid Policies Hurt Low-Income Students.”
They were recognized for being the most affordable and accessible institutions
with high graduation rates. The other three schools are the University of North
Carolina at Greensboro, City University of New York Queens College and City
University of New York Baruch College.
At CSULB, Alexander says that the
challenge to remain accessible and to graduate students within the traditional
six years has proved somewhat difficult for many public institutions,
particularly when state legislatures have authorized drastic cutbacks to higher
education.
“We are spending 50 percent less
today than we were in 1980,” says Alexander, whose student population at CSULB
is approximately 35,000 students, making it the 25th largest university in the
United States. “If the federal government does not stop states from abandoning
their commitments to education, no institutions will qualify based on the
Education Trust’s guidelines. It’s shocking that five made it.” CSULB officials
have created a bold initiative called Project Green Light. Two full-time
academic advisors track down students who drop out of CSULB during their junior
and senior years and provide them with a pathway to re-enroll and graduate in a
timely fashion.
“We’ve found that most did not know
that they were that close to graduating,” says Alexander, who adds that the
initiative has led to approximately 80 additional students re-enrolling at
CSULB and graduating each year. “We reel them back in. We say, ‘Here are the
three courses you need. We will help you sign up for them, and we will help you
graduate.’ We not only want to provide access, but we’re focused on
completion.” Other land-grant institutions face similar challenges with
graduating students.
“We struggle and invest in this
issue every day,” says Graeme Baxter, provost and vice president for academic affairs
at the University of the District of Columbia, one of only a handful of urban
land-grant institutions in the nation. “Many of our students historically lead
home lives that make it extremely difficult for them to complete their
education. They may stop in and stop out.” Tuition at the school is about
$3,000 for D.C. residents.
“UDC is maximally accessible,” says
Baxter. “Throughout our entire history we have served the underrepresented by
having open enrollment and extremely low tuition. I don’t know how much more
accessible we can be.”
An anonymous $6 million gift to the
University of North Carolina at Greensboro has allowed college officials to
launch a program that provides financial assistance to students who come from a
family of four that makes $24,000 a year or less. The program is in its second
year. A survey of students on campus revealed that 900 qualified for
assistance. So far, college officials have been able to support about 40
students with varying forms of funding.
“We are an institution committed to
diversity, inclusiveness and access,” says Dr. David Perrin, provost and
executive vice chancellor at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro. In
a report released in 2010 titled “Opportunity Adrift: Our Flagship Universities
Are Straying from Their Public Mission,” and also in the recent “Priced Out ”
report, the Education Trust argues that state universities are failing in their
mission to provide an affordable education to middle- and low-income families,
with minority students feeling the impact the most.
“It’s almost as if some of America’s
best public colleges have forgotten that they are, in fact, public,” says Kati
Haycock, president of the Education Trust.
“Priced Out” finds that just five of
the nation’s nearly 1,200 four-year colleges and universities have student
bodies that are at least 30 percent low-income and offer low-income students a
chance at an affordable bachelor’s degree.
Dr. Wendell Hall, director of
student success and research at the Association of Public and Land-Grant
Universities, says that the two reports released by the Education Trust do not
tell the entire story.
“I think there are some contextual
factors missing,” he says, adding that one of the criteria noted in Education
Trust’s “Priced Out” report is graduation rates, an unreliable source of data
he says because only first-year students—not transfer and part-time
students—are counted in graduation rates among colleges and universities.
“Overall, all universities can do better, but some of the issues raised in the
report are higher education trends in general and do not necessarily point out
what’s happening at the majority of [APLU] institutions.”
The reports, which are being
discussed on campuses nationwide, have raised questions about the future of
land-grant universities, particularly in an age where private and for-profit
universities such as the University of Phoenix are vying for low-income
students. The overall debate about the future of land-grant universities is
likely to continue. At a conference in June titled “The Legacy and the Promise:
150 Years of Land-Grant Universities,” scholars debated the role that these
institutions play in developing society. The conference was held at
Pennsylvania State University as the first in a series of nationwide events
leading up to the 150th anniversary in 2012 of the Morrill Land Grant College
Act.
“Land-grant institutions’ historical
development has been bumpy and contentious at times,” says Dr. Roger Williams,
co-chairman of the conference and executive director of Penn State’s alumni
association.
“The conditions and circumstances of
land-grant universities have changed dramatically and will continue to change.
Our essential mission remains intact—teaching, research and outreach/public
service—and those, too, will continue to evolve. But land-grant universities
will remain fundamentally oriented to serving our respective publics and
improving the human condition. That’s what our DNA is.”
Dr. Ray Mobley of Florida A&M and Dr. Sowerby (right) confer about the farm visit.
