Running Head: COLLEGE PREPAREDNESS

College Preparedness:
The Most Critical Issue in Higher Education
Melissa Corts
Purposes and Policies
Fall 2014

COLLEGE PREPAREDNESS

The purpose of this paper is to defend the claim that the need for college preparedness
programs for underrepresented students is the most critical issue facing higher education today.
At first I thought that programs specifically for low-income students were the most critical, but
then I realized that every studentregardless of the situation they were born intodeserves to
ability to enter into these programs. Also, it is common that low-income students will also be a
part of other underrepresented groups, such as minority and/or first-generation students. These
groups of students are so under resourced that they are at a disadvantage throughout the entire
college process; when applying to colleges, getting accepted into colleges, and ultimately
receiving their degree. As higher education professionals we seek to provide equally beneficial
education to all students, but for students who are not prepared for a competitive academic
environment, failure or withdrawal is more likely than with their represented counter parts.
Today, more than ever, there are a large percentage of students that are pursuing some
form of higher education but for underrepresented students (e.g., low-income, first-generation,
minority, and non-traditional age) the hurdles to reach these goals are especially high.
Throughout this paper the reasons for this preparation gap between underrepresented students
and their represented peers will be discussed at lengthnamely because of the financial
implication, societal structure, lack of awareness, and poverty.
In order to understand how we got to where we are today, we must first take a look at hoe
this issue began. We often forget that while attending colleges and universities today is almost a
given for students, this was not always the case. In fact, it is only within the most recent
generations that we see this trend starting to build. Up until the early 1920s enrollment in some
form of higher education remained below 5 percent of the total number of college age students
(roughly 18 to 24 years old) and jumped up slightly in 1949 to 15 percent because of veteran

COLLEGE PREPAREDNESS

enrollment thanks to the G.I. Bill (Bowen, Kurzweil, & Tobin, 2005). As you can see, for most of
our history a college degree was not that important, and not because people could not afford to
go to college or because they were not prepared for higher education, but rather because it was
viewed as a waste of resources since individuals did not need a college degree in order to enter
the work force or advance within it. It was not until the early 20th century that a college degree
became a precursor for social and economic mobility, which is reflective of the growing number
(15 percent to 60 percent) of college age students enrolled in some form of higher education
today (Bowen, Kurzweil, & Tobin, 2005).
Higher base-salaries and wage stability associated with attaining a bachelors degree as
compared to those without one has placed a value on college education. Statistics mirror these
changing perceptions: in 1980, individuals employed and holding a bachelors degree were
making roughly $45,000 and by 2007 this average wage increased by 6.7 percent to roughly
$48,000. On the other hand, individuals who were the same age but did not have a college
education saw a 17 percent decline with their salary, and those who had less than a high school
education saw a 23 percent decrease (Goldrick-Rab & Cook, 2011). These numbers tell us that
there is a hefty price that Americans will pay, so to speak, for not pursuing a college degree today
that was not present thirty years ago.
Subsequently, with larger benefits comes higher demand, leading to an overall decline in
the level of academic preparation for those who are able to apply to college. Due to the increase
in applicants, without an increase in the number of students that institutions could take in,
institutions of higher education started to become more selective and take the best of the pool or
the students who closest fit their mission. The academic climate of college age students has
decreased over time due to the larger number of students, how much exactly is hard to say due to

COLLEGE PREPAREDNESS

reasons such as new forms of testing and grade inflation. According to one measuretested
math abilitythe proportion of college-goers in the bottom quartile of the [socioeconomic]
distribution has increased (from 11% to 16% between 1970 and 1990) while the representation of
students with scores in the top quartile has decreased (41% to 33%). Taking these changes into
account, it should come as no surprise that 40 percent of college students require at least one
remedial course, (Goldrick-Rab & Cook, p., 2011). However, the number of students needing
remedial courses is the highest among those who exist within the low level of socioeconomic
statustoday, 63 percent of students who come from families within this level need remediation
in order to qualify for college, mostly in reading. Throughout history, represented students (who
are assumed to be wealthy, white students) always had the necessary resources and social
benefits that led them to remain at the top of this pool. So, regardless of there being more access
to higher education for the underrepresented population, the desire to enroll these wealthy, white
and prepared students was only perpetuated.
First, there are real differences in the access to college of students from low-income and
high-income families, and these differences are exacerbated by differences in the quality of the
institutions that the two groups of students attend. However, the pattern has changed over the
past 30 years. Higher education in general is now more accessible to students from low-income
families, as are higher-quality institutions. The fact that gaps remain should not blind us to the
real progress that has been made (Bowen et al., 2005). That said, the preparation students receive
in high school has been found to be the greatest predictor of bachelors degree attainment. The
Social Issue Report (2010) notes that a strong high school curriculum includes four years of
challenging mathematicsending with at least an Algebra II level courseworkand four years
of grade-level English. Underserved students have the least access to strong academic programs

COLLEGE PREPAREDNESS

and are less likely to be on a college-preparatory track. The K-12 system fails prepare our
students to enter into college. Also, there is a lack of curriculum, alignment between high school
and post-secondary institutions and there are quality disparities in K-12 teaching between
schools (SIR, 2010).
In many states, there is a significant gap in per-student funding between school districts
with the highest poverty rates. There is not enough state funding to compensate for the lower
school revenue from local property taxes in high poverty districts. The funding gap often
translates into lower teacher salaries, higher teacher turnover, less qualified teachers, and limited
numbers of guidance counselors, making it more difficult for at-risk students to navigate the path
to college. Further, because of the lack of societal expectations for the academic attainment of atrisk students, state funding is often not applied equitable towards the necessary academic support
programs that ensure those students success. Even when students facing such challenges enroll
in college, they often need to take multiple remedial classes. Doing so prolongs the time to
graduation, adds to the total cost of a degree, and decreases motivation. (SIR, 2010) Poverty is
the biggest barrier to college attendance. Students from poor families of all ethnic backgrounds
and those whose parents did not have a college education are even less likely than
underrepresented minorities as a whole to enroll in college or even to complete high school. Due
to this we are seeing our current issue perpetuated by the system of social and economic class
that systematically grants advantages to those of privilege, (Zusman, 1999).
Among those who do enter college, only a third or so will enroll in four-year colleges,
and very few will enroll in the nations elite institutions. Young adults from families in the
bottom income bracket are eight times less likely than others in their age group to complete a
bachelors degree (Zusman, 1999). Financial burden, lower levels of academic preparation, and

COLLEGE PREPAREDNESS

lower expectations, all of which are often associated with areas of poverty, perpetuate the
preparation gap.
Even if they are qualified for college, students of limited means encounter yet another
barrier to college entryaffordability. In recent years, college affordability has become a much
greater problem for low-income families. At public four-year institutions, tuition and fees that
averaged 57% of family income for low-income families in 1992 had jumped to 73% of their
income by 2005. Financial aid cannot keep pace with increasing college costs: the average
federal need-based Pell grant now covers only 25% of total costs at public four-year colleges
down from 47% in 1975and only 10% of private college costsdown from 24% in 1975 (SIR,
2010). The burden of paying for college is then shifted to students and their families, which often
forces low-income students to work more than half time and live away from campus, both risk
factors that further decrease their chances of academic attainment (SIR, 2010). These financial
constraints are definitely a concern as far as getting students to the point of being able to enroll in
college, but they are not necessarily a major contributor to the enrollment gap. Yes, higher
education is expensive but due to the current financial aid policies and subsidized tuition, only a
relatively small group of students are completely barred from being able to pay for college.
Simply making financial aid policies more generous might not boost enrollment very much, but
making them less generous could have dire consequences (Bowen et al., 2005). However, in
order to benefit from the financial assistance programs available, the students must be aware that
they exist: this leads us to our next barrier to entry.
All middle and high schools need a college-counseling program to build students
college-going goals and abilities. Planning for college must begin early to raise student and
family awareness, expectations, and aspirations for college. Many middle school students do not

COLLEGE PREPAREDNESS

understand that the courses they take in school are determining their chances to get into college.
The chances for college access and success for minority and low-income students are further
diminished by the lack of quality counseling. Because of limited resources in many low-income
urban and rural areas and the insufficient number of counselors, low-income and minority
students are not well informed about the college admission process and requirements. As a result,
these students are less likely than others to explore an array of college options, to take college
admissions tests, or complete the admissions procedureseven if they are well qualified for
college (SIR, 2010). In addition, first generations college-goers are often unaware of all available
options to pay for college. Because many students and their families are uninformed of the
potentially available funding, they often dont consider the college option. According to data
from the National Education Longitudinal study (NELS:88), less than half (47 percent) of
students whose parents did not got to college enrolled in any postsecondary institution the year
after graduating from high school compared to the 85 percent of students whose parents had
college degrees. College planning for these students begins too late and they are less likely to
fulfill their postsecondary plans.
Students in U.S. colleges and universities today are very different from those of even
twenty years ago. A much larger proportion than in the past are older, part-time, and from ethnic
minority groups. In 2000, students aged 25 years and older composed about 40 percent of total
college enrollments and nearly one-quarter of full-time enrollments. Over one-quarter of all
college students were ethnic minorities, up from 16 percent in 1980, with the greatest increases
among Latino students, who are predicted to surpass African-American enrollment one day soon.
(Zusman, 1999) However, college participation, especially in four-year colleges and universities,
remains unequal. Despite growth in numbers, minorities remain underrepresented in higher

COLLEGE PREPAREDNESS

education overall. Fewer minority students complete high school, although in recent decades the
gaps in high school dropout rates among ethnic groups educated in the U.S. are getting smaller.
Once they graduate high school, however, only a little over half of African American and Latino
graduates enter college, compared to nearly two-thirds of white high school graduates. Close to
half of underrepresented students who do attend college enroll in two-year institutions. Because
most of these students do not transfer to baccalaureate-granting institutions, an even smaller
proportion receives their bachelors degree. In 2000-2001, African Americans received less than
9 percent of all bachelors degrees, and Latinos received only 6 percent, even though together
these two groups constituted one-quarter of high school graduates and one-third of the collegeage population. Despite a greater awareness of the need for postsecondary education in terms of
wages, job security, and job satisfaction, according to some estimates the percentage of entering
students who achieve their goal of earning a bachelors degree is lower today than it was in the
1970sone reason for this declineor at least stagnationin college completion rates is the
enrollment of less prepared students, (Goldrick-Rab & Cook, 2011).
The overall advantages associated with growing up in a well to-do family (including
receiving better-quality primary and secondary education and having more supportive peers and
role models) are mostly responsible for the gap in enrollment. These take the form of both
differences in academic preparedness and differences in sophistication about the college
application and financial aid processes. Minority students (who are disproportionality
represented among the socioeconomically disadvantaged) have academic preparation deficits
that go beyond those we would anticipate on the basis of their family income alone (Bowen et
al., 2005). This is why enrollment maximization is not the best policy to pursue; college
completion (in a timely fashion) is a more important goal. With the completion objective in

COLLEGE PREPAREDNESS

mind, there is a great deal to be said for increasing the level of college preparation of students
from low-income families who may be possible college-goers, and providing more resources to
underrepresented students, and to their institutions, as they go through college. (Bowen et al.,
2005).
If we do not make the necessary changes not to college preparedness, the future of higher
education could be dark as far as college access and college completion are concerned. First, the
growing demand for higher education will collide with enrollment limits. As a result, budgetary
demands on governments that already have limited revenues to meet other social needs, greater
public readiness to consider higher education a private good, and consequent reduction in public
funding for higher education (Engle, 2007). Public institutions will face pressures to enroll more
students with less funding and to shift admission prioritiesfor example, to reduce the number
of graduate students and deny admission to students needing remedial assistance. Many private
institutions and some public ones will have a sellers market, allowing them to become more
selective (Zusman, 1999). Enrollment caps, increased selectivity, and targeted admissions may
create what has been described as a cascading effect, where higher income or better prepared
students take the place of students who otherwise would have been admitted, who in turn enroll
in those institutions one step down in selectivity, until those at the bottom have no place to
enroll (Zusman, 1999).
Second, rising tuition costs, if not coupled with adequate financial support, may keep
low-income students from entering or from completing college. For example, for students from
the bottom 25 percent of family income, total costs at four-year public colleges equaled over 70
percent of family income in 2003. Although financial aid reduces these charges substantially
(and costs vary greatly among states and institutions), the overall price for college has increased

COLLEGE PREPAREDNESS

10

at both public and private institutions. Moreover, over the past 25 years, federal, state, and
institutional financial aid programs have increasingly shifted away from both grants and needbased support. Federal financial aid has moved overwhelmingly toward loans, rising from about
half to about 70 percent of all federal aid, and aid eligibility has been expanded to include more
middle-class students (Engle, 2007). At the state level, non-need-based merit aid, which
disproportionately aids middle- and upper-income students, rose from 10 percent of state grant
dollars in the early 1990s to nearly one-quarter in 2002. Low-income students are most affected
by these changes because they are less willing to incur large amounts of debt to finance college
and may not be eligible for merit aid, and grant programs have not increased enough to cover
the expanded pool (Engle, 2007).
Third, financial support alone will not ensure access and success in college. Low-income,
underrepresented ethnic minority, and first-generation students often come from schools with
fewer academic resources, have less academic preparation, and may have lower expectations.
The differences in the resources available to rich and poor school districts are grossly unequal as
compared to the education their pupils receive (Zusman, 1999). Unless higher education
institutions work with low-wealth schools and communities to advocate for increased resources
and to improve their students college readiness, U.S. society will lose the talents of a growing
segment of the population. In addition, relatively few such students will attend four-year colleges
and universities without active intervention. Finally, the increasingly diverse student body will
continue to change the face of the campus. Colleges will need to develop ways to respond
effectively especially to those low-income, first-generation African American and Latino
students who do make it to college but who tend to drop out at higher rates than do middle-class
white students (Engle, 2007). This may mean more academic supportincluding remedial

COLLEGE PREPAREDNESS

11

education where necessaryand more support for English as a second language, as more nonnative-English speakers enter college. It will also require college climates and curricula that
welcome students differing backgrounds and perspectives as opportunities to enlarge the range
of voices and experiences and to build upon students diverse language and cultural backgrounds
in preparing them for a more interdependent global society (Zusman, 1999).
In order to offset these negative implications, we need to get to the problem at its roots
in primary and secondary education. I realize that as professionals in higher education we do not
have control over the learning process in primary and secondary education, but if we hope to get
students to a college ready level then we need to team up with the appropriate educators to create
programs that will help to close this preparation gap. However, we also must realize that if we
are to start a program that works with individuals at a very young age, then there would be a lag
of a few generations before everyone was on the same page. For this reason, I also suggest that
we created programs that will educate adult going to college now or in the future, as well as
adults who have children so that their children can be adequately prepared. It might be a large
task, but it is one that is absolutely necessary if we want to diminish the inequalities among all
students regardless of their family situation or racial background.

COLLEGE PREPAREDNESS

12
References

Altbach, P., Goldrick-Rab, S., & Cook, M. (2011). College Students in Changing Contexts. In
American higher education in the twenty-first century: Social, political, and economic
challenges (3rd ed., pp. 254-72). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Bowen, W., Kurzweil, M., & Tobin, E. (2006). Equity and excellence in American higher
education. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press.

Engle, J. (2007). Postsecondary Access and Success for First-Generation College Students.
American Academic, Vol. 3, 25-48.

The Pell Institute (2008). Moving Beyond Access: College Success for Low-Income, First-G
eneration Students. Washington, DC: Author.

Root Cause (2010, September 1). Social Issue Report; Education and Youth Development:
College access and success. Boston, MA: Author.

Zusman, Ami. (1999). Issues Facing Higher Education in the Twenty-First Century. In American
higher education in the twenty-first century: Social, political, and economic
challenges (1st ed.). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.