Honored but Invisible: An Inside Look at Teaching in Community Colleges.

Honored but Invisible: An Inside Look at Teaching in Community Colleges by W. Norton Grubb and Associates. Routledge, New York. 1999, 392 pages, $24.99 (Paper) ISBN 0-415-92165-1, $75.00 (Cloth) ISBN 0-415-92164.

   If I don't know I don't know
   I think I know
   If I don't know I know
   I think I don't know

R.D. Laing, Knots, 1971

Laing's words apply in many ways to community college educators today: We often take for granted that we know more than we really do about our students and our institutions. At the same time, we are often unaware that we already have important data, so we keep trying to develop new programs, wasting precious time and resources when the basics are already in place. In some cases, we do not even know the right questions to ask about what we are doing as educators. Clearly there is much we still need to study and learn about our increasingly important colleges, and this book provides some timely and provocative research. It will definitely spark some heated debate.

Talking about his own well-known and often quoted research on higher education, prominent scholar and educator Ernest Pascarella noted with some dismay that of the more than 2,000 studies he and Terenzini reviewed (Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991), only about 5% of those studies focused on community colleges (Pascarella, 1997). That was unfortunate for a number of reasons, he explained, but especially because statistics suggest that somewhere between 40% and 50% of all students enrolled in four-year institutions in the United States started in community colleges. In some states, such as California, the percentages may even be higher. In short, he felt that researchers of all kinds, at all levels of higher education, should be paying more attention to community colleges.

Having said that, it is also important to note, as Pascarella and others have, that much of the research about community colleges conducted thus far by scholars from four-year schools seems biased or negative in tone and perspective. Researchers at four-year institutions often view community colleges as second-class institutions, barely part of the higher education system, not much more than extensions of high school. It is not surprising that their theories and advice are ignored by community college practitioners, despite the fact that there may be some useful suggestions within the diatribes and condescending language.

How refreshing, therefore, to encounter this volume, Honored But Invisible, by W. Norton Grubb and associates. Professor Grubb holds the prestigious David Gardner Chair in Higher Education at the School of Education at the University of California, Berkeley, and has written several books on education. Let me say three things about this book right from the beginning. First, as a community college teacher myself, I think everyone working in community colleges who is truly committed to studying and improving their colleges ought to read this book, including teachers, administrators, and researchers. Second, from my own perspective as a community college researcher, I think this book holds up a very powerful, provocative, and much needed mirror. Some of my colleagues, I am sure, are not going to like what this book says, as the writers do question the very essence of what community colleges believe themselves to be doing. In short, although we profess ourselves to be true "teaching institutions," we often do not accomplish or even support that important mission.

On the other hand, the book clearly approaches community colleges with respect and in the spirit of offering constructive suggestions. Our first reaction might be defensive, but it should be noted that Grubb and his associates level some of the same kinds of criticisms at four-year institutions, with their particular pretensions and shortcomings, as outlined for example in the recent Boyer Commission Report (Kenny, 1998).

Third, and perhaps most important, these researchers present the actual words of community college faculty, and they have attempted to include a wide range of opinions and points of view, much in the spirit of Seidman's work (Seidman, 1985). They interviewed 257 teachers from many different subject areas, covering 32 colleges in 11 states. They also offer a number of concrete suggestions, something many researchers and scholars are loath to do. Although I cannot agree with all the conclusions Professor Grubb and his associates have reached, and some of their observations are indeed painful to read, I have already found this volume to be of great inspiration to my own teaching and future research.

The book comprises an introduction and 10 chapters. The authors do not wait long before raising the first controversial issue in the introduction: Community colleges usually define themselves as teaching as opposed to research institutions, where teaching is supposed to get more attention than publishing. This defining and differentiating belief, however, does not always reflect the reality:

   Given the hiring processes of most community colleges and the lack of
   preparation in pedagogy ... it's all too common to find instructors who
   speak the language of good teaching but who have paid little attention to
   their own practices. While tenure may not depend on publishing, it may not
   depend on teaching either.... And the dark side of being a teaching
   institution is that faculty have to teach much more --an average of sixteen
   classroom hours a week, 50 percent more than faculty in state colleges and
   more than twice that of faculty in research universities.... Thus the
   unending claims about community colleges as teaching institutions rely on
   certain conditions the absence of research, a faculty drawn to teaching,
   small classes--that could enhance teaching but do not necessarily ... do
   so. The evidence that community colleges are teaching oriented is simply
   missing. (p. 9)

Grubb and his associates note that one of the reasons there is no real evidence that community colleges are teaching colleges is the dearth of empirical studies about community college teaching. Their study attempts to remedy this. In fact, the authors chide their own research colleagues for their lack of real investigation and their "diatribes" (p. 11) against community colleges. In that context, these authors decided to conduct this empirical study, with a rigorous methodology carefully outlined and explained. They found some excellent teaching and some terrible teaching. They take great pains to show us what both may look like and sound like. They do not blame, but they do not avoid saying what they found and what they and others think about the situation. They also mention that they were not able to interview students (one of the suggestions I would have made), though their classroom observations are fairly detailed.

The authors also mention the shortcomings of (and their own frustrations with) the organizational structure of a bound book as opposed to an electronic version with hyperlinks, and I agree with them. A number of times I wished I could have zoomed to another page for added insights or quotes and then zoomed back, but that is a minor quibble. There is much to study and absorb here.

Chapter 1 sets out to define different theoretical approaches to good teaching and reveals what we know instinctively: There are many different ideas about what constitutes that elusive goal. Later chapters provide greater detail about different approaches to teaching, including both academic and vocational-occupational classroom experiences. The chapter builds the frame and vocabulary to which we must respond if we are to reach an understanding about what teachers really do in the modern community college classroom.

One very important feeling permeates this first chapter: Many practitioners have no way to know or find out if they really are good teachers, and have nobody they can talk to about it. The chapter identifies two basic pedagogical styles, and takes pains to describe not only the theoretical frameworks, but also some of the implications of those two styles--the traditional, teacher-centered, didactic model, and the more student-centered, so-called "meaning-making" style. A third model, sometimes called the "student-support" model is also presented, and all three are worth reviewing and matching against one's own classroom predilections.

Chapter 2, "The Modal Classroom," provides an enlightening look at the variety of lecture and discussion formats used in community college classrooms. It is interesting to note that the particular pedagogical style or method seems to be less important than instructor skill and engagement in terms of promoting student interest and good teaching. The researchers allow us to listen in on a number of different courses, and to get a feel for what works and what doesn't--and why. Another important theme emerges in this chapter: The teachers for the most part are sincere about wanting to do a good job with their students, but they consistently get little or no support from the institutions to help them assess or improve their own teaching:

   ... the question we raise persistently is whether there is anything--in
   their preparation for teaching, in their networks of peers, in mentoring
   early in their teaching careers, in staff development, in the culture of
   the institution that sponsors their teaching--that would give them that
   control, enable them to improve their teaching. All too often ... there is
   nothing to help them. (p. 95)

Occupational instruction is the focus of Chapter 3, "Lecture/Workshop and `Hands-On' Learning." This is a very important yet often overlooked area for community colleges, and Professor Grubb has written previously about the relationship of education and job training. The authors note that even those students who are in college taking academic classes will eventually be looking for jobs. They also note that "About 60 percent of all students declare they are there for occupational purposes,including an especially large fraction of part-time and older students." (p.97)

A fairly recent Rand report warned us, in fact, of the fiscal and social implications for the state of California, for example, if we continue to ignore the importance of job and career training for community college students (Benjamin & Carroll, 1997), so this is a timely subject. The range of occupational competencies taught in community colleges is vast--from auto mechanics to child development to dairy farming--but the techniques used share some basic good and bad characteristics. The challenge for instructors then, whether in lectures or so-called "hands-on" instruction, is to ensure that students are prepared to apply practically what they learn in classrooms and shops. Problem-solving and critical thinking are just as important, and just as difficult, for these occupational instructors and their students as they are in the academic subject areas. Yet these teachers receive little support from their respective institutions.

Chapter 4 combines academic and occupational concerns in a discussion entitled "Literacy in the Classroom." As open-access institutions by definition, community colleges admit students of extraordinarily different ranges of ability, as anyone who teaches or works in a community will recognize. This chapter provides a glimpse at the frustrations of community college faculty when faced with so many underprepared students, especially because they are trained neither to recognize nor contend with diverse student needs. Instructors are also well aware that for many students, this is their last chance at getting a decent education. This is a fascinating and disturbing chapter, covering subjects from composition to carpentry. I'm sure it will provoke much discussion, some of it perhaps angry denial. My own research suggests that Grubb and associates are right when they conclude that

   Other troubling patterns emerge because of the isolation of community
   college instructors--the lack of adequate discussion and professional
   development that would allow them to develop critical understanding of
   teaching and the institutional conditions and relentless schedules that
   influence how they teach. (p. 168)

One of the most hotly contested areas in higher education today is that of remedial education, the subject of Chapter 5, "Remedial/Developmental Education." The chapter presents several kinds of remedial theory and classes, from the grossly ineffective to the most creative. Perhaps the most thought-provoking sections of the chapter involve what has come to be known as the "learning community" approach, which the authors discuss in more detail in subsequent chapters. One might hope that if more teachers, department chairs, deans of instruction, and other administrators read this chapter, more learning communities might develop and flourish within the community college setting.

Directly related to the subject matter in the previous chapter, Chapter 6, "Standards and Content," discusses the special issues that are particularly relevant to open admission institutions like community colleges, and the challenges they bring. The chapter is illuminating in several ways, as it attempts to frame the standards dilemma from the perspectives of teachers and the institutions themselves, including both internal and external influences. Teachers try in a variety of ways, some effective and some not, to make up for the skills and competencies their students don't have but need in order to persist; yet again, they receive little or no institutional support:

   The institutions themselves are in a bind because of four "structural"
   characteristics of community colleges: "allegiance to open access ... lack
   of preparation for teaching ... enrollment and funding ... and at a more
   abstract level, the dominant purposes of open-access institutions are not
   particularly consistent with high standards. (pp, 239-241).

In Chapter 7, "Innovative Practices," we are introduced to some of the hopes and promises of pedagogical and institutional innovations. The authors provide examples of both academic and occupational teachers moving away from lecture in a number of creative ways, or at least trying to do so. They correctly note that just changing the form is not enough. For example, introducing small group discussion or so-called collaborative learning is not sufficient if conducted without understanding pedagogical implications and learning styles. Their section on the use and misuse of technology in the classroom is an excellent example of a potentially good idea that has not realized its potential for a variety of reasons. Although many have been quick to jump on the distance learning bandwagon, for example, the researchers identify some of the disadvantages for certain kinds of students, the very students we find in abundance at community colleges. On the other hand, they demonstrate in detail the effectiveness and benefits of learning communities, using examples from several states.

For me, one of the most interesting suggestions the authors make relates to what they call "Integrating Academic and Occupational Education." As our economy becomes more complicated and global, many have pointed out that it is important for all of our students to develop a variety of competencies, regardless of their chosen field. As the authors state, however, the historical division between the academic and occupational areas is both wide and deep, and will require greatly increased institutional support and individual innovation to overcome.

Chapter 8, "The Institutional Influences on Teaching," presents a number of "distressingly negative" (p. 281) findings. Nevertheless, by profiling three community colleges, the chapter demonstrates the wonderful possibilities of what community colleges can be. We hear some familiar refrains here, a number of which I have observed through my own experience and research. Teachers are fragmented and unable to concentrate on their classroom teaching because of conflicting campus responsibilities. They are often isolated, a characteristic of teaching in general, but exacerbated by the community college environment and lack of institutional support or venues to discuss teaching. The basic difficulties are compounded by complex and often seemingly arbitrary hiring practices, the tenure process, and classroom teaching evaluations. For the most part, community college teachers are not required to have any pre-service education. Staff development is either nonexistent or not taken seriously. Many administrators don't have much interest in or knowledge about teaching, and have enormous bureaucratic responsibilities that keep them from concentrating on the teaching process or the needs of teachers.

Here is one representative teacher's quote:

   The administration has nothing to do with effective or innovative teaching.
   They're so busy counting beans and filling out forms and doing things like
   that, so busy in the mechanics that the creative and the innovative is way,
   way in the back seat, you know. (p. 303)

On the other hand, as mentioned above, the researchers present in some detail what they refer to as, "exemplars of teaching colleges," noting that "the faculty almost uniformly reported that their administrators are committed to teaching, and that there was no mistaking the institutional culture of innovation and experimentation" (p. 311). These examples should prove illuminating for those looking for specific guidelines and inspiration.

Resource allocations, whether in government or community college campuses, often determine the success or failure of programs; they also reflect and determine priorities. Chapter 9, "Funding and Policy," graphically illustrates the implications of inadequate funding for teaching, and ultimately for students. This chapter should spark useful debate and dialogue, as it covers pervasive issues such as external funding, the negative effects of the increased use of part-time instructors for primarily fiscal motives, and state and federal policies. The conclusion is that additional funding to support teaching is, in both philosophical and realistic terms, "necessary but not sufficient" to create real change and positive difference. Increased funding without careful attention to the larger context as explicated in previous chapters will never be enough, as we have seen in countless government and education programs over the past several decades.

The final chapter, "Alternative Futures," posits the ideal "teaching college." (p. 346) Many critics argue that community colleges have outlived their original purpose, or that they have lost their guiding spirit. Others argue (Dougherty, 1994) that we need to find alternative forms for these institutions, perhaps, for example, making them a part of the state college systems. This chapter summarizes some of the great debates about the nature and future of community colleges in one particular case (pp. 350-351) and finally puts to rest the damaging (and misinformed) notion of the so-called "cooling out" function propounded by Clark (1994). The authors raise the increasingly important and relevant question of "the conflict between the local and the global" (p. 353) that will continue to be debated for a long time. The authors also present some specific examples of the questions we need to be asking, as we come full circle back to Laing's quote:

   One way to resolve the debate between open access and high standards, for
   example, is to develop a better understanding of what educational
   institutions can do for underprepared students. (p. 354)

They also conclude that there are many kinds of good teaching, and community college students need all of them. Teachers need better training, and we all need to pay more attention to the results--what students are actually doing in the classrooms--when we assess and evaluate teaching practices:

   The shining moments of teaching and learning in community colleges were
   memorable because of what students were doing, in classrooms where they
   were coming to astonishing understandings of their own under the steady
   guidance of the instructor "teaching from the sidelines.... and in this
   sense, the very best teaching we saw took place where students have been
   freed to come to their own understanding of reading, or math, or their
   future occupation, or the role of science or markets in society. (pp.
   358-359)

The authors call for administrative changes, restructuring work requirements and course loads, as well as greater engagement by administrators with regard to teaching issues. Teaching should shift from an almost totally individual responsibility, they believe, to a more institutional responsibility, with much greater institutional support. State and federal policy must shift as well, including increased funding, analysis, and dissemination of research and examples of best practices. The book ends by quoting one instructor who encapsulates for them the key issues of their research findings: "It's a teaching institution, but there's almost nothing for the teacher." The authors conclude by using that same instructor's definition of what we need to study:

   teaching your teachers how to teach, teaching them how to research,
   teaching them how to assess the results of what they're doing, keeping them
   in communities so they talk to each other. (pp. 366-367)

Those of us who care deeply about our community colleges and our students may debate some of the particulars of this volume, as I myself do. If we are debating across departmental and bureaucratic boundaries, we are already moving in the right direction. Time and money are spent on all kinds of special programs. Yet, those who have most contact with students, those charged ultimately with the responsibility for student competence and student success, are often "invisible", as the title suggests, when the important decisions have to be made and when research is conducted. We may not want to look in the mirror that this important volume presents, but too much is at stake for us to refrain from entering the debate and to refrain from raising these questions, especially of ourselves.

References

Benjamin, R., & Carroll, S. (1997). Breaking the social contract: The fiscal crisis in California higher education (Unrestricted Draft Version: Prepared for the California Education Roundtable DRU-1635-IET). Santa Monica, CA: Rand.

Clark, B. R. (1994). The 'cooling out' function revisited (Reprinted from New Directions for Community Colleges, 1980). In J. L. Ratcliff (Ed.), Community colleges, (2nd ed., pp. 67-78). Needham Heights, MA: Simon & Schuster Custom Publishing.

Dougherty, K. J. (1994). The contradictory college: The conflicting origins, impacts, and futures of the community college. Buffalo, NY: State University of New York Press.

Kenny, S. S. C. (1998). Reinventing undergraduate education: A blueprint for America's research universities. Stony Brook, NY: The Boyer Commission on Educating Undergraduates in the Research University.

Pascarella, E. T. (1997, January-February). It's time we started paying attention to community college students. About Campus, pp. 14-17.

Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (1991). How college affects students: Findings and insights from twenty years of research (1st ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Seidman, E. (1985). In the words of the faculty: Perspectives on improving teaching and educational quality in community colleges (1st ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Steven K. Steinberg teaches English at Santa Monica College in Santa Monica, California. ([e-mail])