Domina: What Works in College Outreach

I am a huge proponent of college outreach programs, so the results of this survey and article were a bit disheartening.  I know all community based organizations are not the best run, but Upward Bound is supposed to be one of the best.  That students in those programs were not more likely to graduate high school is sad...

I have worked with several CBOs when I did undergrad admissions, with varying organization and structure.  Some programs picked the cream of the crop to graduate high school and get into selective colleges, and some even went further to help these students through college (like One Voice).  Still other organizations take any kind of students into their organizations and help them with the college process-- as long as students are intrinsically motivated (like MOSTE).  Others work directly with colleges/universities and do a CBO/school approach to provide support during the application process, college readiness after being admitted, and then support from the school (Posse Foundation).  Granted, Posse is expensive, with One Voice having paid staff, and MOSTE comprised of volunteers- with success of the programming in the same order.  Others are schools that have a college-prep emphasis, such as Yes Prep in Houston and Green Dot in Los Angeles.  These are all charter-type schools and have very extensive outside funding.

pg. 127-- 5% of all high school students are in college outreach program.  10% of poor in these programs.  We know very little about how well these programs work and is they are successful.

pg. 132-- discusses the Quantum Opportunities Program.  In each of the sites, half the students received services and half to a control group.  I understand why there is a control group BUT if this program is a success, aren't students missing a great opportunity for their future?

Upward Bound is talked about at length, and per student, it is costly.  Not only costly but  it does not seem to be successful :(  This is terrible that students in Upward Bound are no more likely to graduate from high school than non-participants.  It also discussed Talent Search Programs (like One Voice that I worked with in LA)-- these type of organizations too do not do better for enrolling in four-year colleges.  Again, terrible -- we all want to believe in these programs, but can we?

I am facebook friends with the two groups of students I admitted with One Voice at Bucknell, and most of them are struggling-- Bucknell is not the easiest place for low-socioeconomic, minority students, especially students who do not have the strongest academic background.  However, the second group is doing better than the first.  I mandated (and by mandated-- I made the students think it was required when it wasn't-- whoops) that these students were active in a mentoring program through multicultural student services.  The combination of support to college and in college helped.  But this article is just talking about the bridge to college.

Results found that the CBOs are not successful-- or as successful as they set out to be, but programs within a school have a much stronger probability of success.  This is yet another thing that disadvantages minority and low-socioeconomic students.  Schools that have the resources for college and career centers and other outreach programs will have higher graduation rates.  The research suggests that resources devoted to outside community based organizations should be diverted to building programs within the schools, perhaps with schools like Yes Prep (the most successful that I have seen of public/charter schools).