Journal of Negro Education

The Role of Postsecondary Remediation for African American Students: A Review of

Research
Author(s): Ryan J. Davis and Robert T. Palmer
Source: The Journal of Negro Education, Vol. 79, No. 4 (Fall 2010), pp. 503-520
Published by: Journal of Negro Education
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/41341092
Accessed: 24-08-2019 22:56 UTC

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/41341092?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Journal of Negro Education is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to The Journal of Negro Education

This content downloaded from 132.174.250.76 on Sat, 24 Aug 2019 22:56:25 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 The Journal of Negro Education, 79(4), 503-520

The Role of Postsecondary Remediation for African

American Students: A Review of Research
Ryan J. Davis University of Maryland, College Park
Robert T. Palmer State University of New York-Binghamton

The role of remediation in higher education has generated much debate over the last two decades.
While states have enacted policies that reduced or eliminated postsecondary remediation, many
policy actors and analysts have not completely acknowledged the ways in which remediation
affects college access and success for African American students. This review of research first
explains why African American students are disproportionately underprepared for college-level
work. Then, the authors summarize the debates concerning the role of remediation in higher
education, synthesize the research on the effectiveness of postsecondary remediation, and discuss
major and recent policy enactments . They draw implications for the ways in which postsecondary
remediation affects Africans American students and offer recommendations for future research
and policy.

Keywords: higher education, remediation, African American students, academic success

Since the late 1990s, the role of postsecondary remediation has become a great concern to state
policymakers, education policy analysts, institutional researchers, college faculty, and
administrators (Bettinger & Long, 2007; Mazzeo, 2002; Soliday, 2002). While some research on
the effectiveness of postsecondary remediation has produced mixed findings (Calcagno & Long,
2008), most studies suggest that remedial programs increase the likelihood of successful college-
level course completion and persistence to degree attainment (Attewell, Lavin, Domina, & Levey,
2006; Bahr, 2007, 2008a; Bettinger & Long, 2004, 2005, 2007, 2009; Boylan, Bonham, & Tafari,
2005; Kreysa, 2007). Despite the evidence that illustrates remedial programs have a positive
impact on college access and student success, policymakers and analysts remain concerned about
the duplication of costs and tax dollars spent on remedial needs (Terry, 2007), negative public
perceptions (Presley, 2008), delayed time to degree completion (Melguizo, Hagedorn, & Cypers,
2008), and potential decrease in university rankings (Richardson, 2005).
State policymakers and college leaders have been particularly concerned about the extent to
which colleges and universities can maintain academic quality and achieve institutional equity
(Perin, 2006). More specifically, given that underrepresented students rely disproportionately on
postsecondary remediation as a means to gain access to four-year colleges and universities, state
and institutional officials remain perplexed about ways to increase academic rigor while providing
opportunities for underrepresented students to access these institutions. Therefore, the policy
debate concerning postsecondary remediation amounts to whether states and state higher
education systems should maintain, revise, reduce, or eliminate remediation from public college
and university settings. Given that 22 states or state higher education systems have already
reduced or eliminated remediation from four-year colleges (Parker, 2007), this dispute has been a
contentious policy issue in recent years.
African American students are most likely to rely on postsecondary remediation as a means
for gaining access to higher education (Attewell et al., 2006). In fact, African American students
are nearly twice as likely as White students to be found in remedial programs (Attewell et al.,
2006). Therefore, if quality and equity are equally important policy matters, state and institutional
leaders not only need to consider ways to maintain a strong curriculum and respectable standards,
but also understand how postsecondary remediation affects access to and success in four-year

© The Journal of Negro Education, 2010, Vol. 79, No. 4 503

This content downloaded from 132.174.250.76 on Sat, 24 Aug 2019 22:56:25 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
institutions for African American students. However, little attention has been devoted to this
matter.

To that end, this article reviews research on postsecondary remediation to understand its
impact on college access and success for African American students. To contextualize why
African American students are disproportionately underprepared for college-level work, there is
first review literature on the academic experiences and outcomes of African American students in
elementary and secondary schools. Particular attention is paid to their academic outcomes in
mathematics, reading, and writing provided that these subjects represent the critical areas in which
underprepared students subsequently require postsecondary remediation. Then, the authors
summarize the debates concerning the role of remediation in higher education, synthesize the
research on the effectiveness of postsecondary remediation, and discuss recent and major policy
enactments. In each section of this article, the ways in which postsecondary remediation impacts
African American student enrollment and success in higher education are implicated. Finally,
recommendations for future research and policy are offered.

African Americans in Education

Landmark Supreme Court cases (e.g., Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 195
pieces of legislation (e.g., Civil Rights Act of 1964 , Higher Education Act of 1965) ha
African Americans to make significant gains in education. Although more recent polici
increasing access to higher education have not been targeted at African Americans in
the percentage of Blacks in higher education has grown over time. In fact, data from t
Council on Education's (2009) Minorities in Higher Education status report indicated t
enrollment for African Americans increased by 46% between 1996 and 2006.
While college access for African Americans has steadily increased over the years,
need for postsecondary remediation (Merisotis & Phipps, 2000). The historical con
which African Americans have been (mis)educated has generated persistent achiev
between their White and Asian American counterparts (Jackson, 2007). In urban, pre
Black school settings, contemporary problems include: weak college preparatory curr
Advanced Placement exam passing rates, ineffective and insufficient guidance counse
unqualified teachers, minimal and archaic school materials, and inadequate schoo
(Kozol, 2005). These complex issues exist in many school systems across tiie country,
in underfunded and poorly structured urban school districts that serve large numbers
American students (Condron & Roscigno, 2003).
Another problem that affects educational progress for African American student
discrimination (Jackson, 2007). Evidence indicates that institutional or systemic
embedded in many public policies, which negatively affect the educational outcomes
American students (Harper, Patton, & Wooden, 2009). Some of the institutional struct
schools that impede college access for African American students are nationally consi
example, it is well-known that African American students typically do not perfo
standardized tests when compared to their White counterparts (Darling-Hammond, 20
(1997) concluded the discrepancy in standardized test scores between African Am
White students may be caused by "stereotype threat," which is anxiety that arises when
are placed at risk of affirming a negative stereotype about their identity group.
differences in test performance between African American and White students,
universities continually employ such measures to determine college admission e
research suggests that standardized tests are weak measures of academic success for s
color (Hoffman & Lowitzki, 2005).
Furthermore, school psychologists attribute the most influential factors rela
disproportionate number of underperforming African American students to a lack of
involvement, failures of regular and special education systems, and pressures from p
teachers (Kearns, Ford, & Linney, 2005). Still, others have found negative teacher per

504 ©The Journal of Negro Education, 2010, Vol 79, No. 4

This content downloaded from 132.174.250.76 on Sat, 24 Aug 2019 22:56:25 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
low expectations of African American students as contributing factors to the low levels of
achievement (Osburne, 200 1 ).
Therefore, it appears that the compilation of problems that many African American students
in urban schools face may be attributed to poor educational environments and culturally irrelevant
public policy. Jones (2002) summarized the cause of these issues:

Many current school reform policies are causing achievement gaps to widen rather than close. These policies are
focusing primarily on high standards and assessment while neglecting issues of access to high-quality education
taught by competent and caring teachers who hold high expectations for currently underachieving students, (p. ix)

The impact of these policies, as described by Jones, cripples the opportunity for African American
students to enroll and become successful in higher education. Outcomes of poor educational
experiences lead to social and economic fallbacks that adversely affect individual communities
and the society at large (Kozol, 2005).
One of the most important components of African American students' experiences and
outcomes in education involves their achievement levels in mathematics, science, reading, and
writing - four critical subjects areas in which students must succeed to become adequately
prepared for college-level work. However, the aggregate of African American students continually
perform worse than their White and Asian counterparts in mathematics, science, and reading. Even
after controlling for socioeconomic differences, these achievement gaps exist between African
American students and their peers (Attewell et al, 2006).
Thernstrom and Thernstrom (2003) found that African American students are more likely
than all other racial and ethnic groups to score "below basic" in reading, mathematics, and science
on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). Lewis and his colleagues (2008)
analyzed NAEP data and found that African American students in urban school settings achieve
well below the national average. At the fourth-grade level, Lewis and associates found that more
than 60% of African American students scored "below basic" in reading and only 12% of African
Americans pupils were proficient in math. At the eighth-grade level, Lewis and others found that
eight percent of African American students scored "below basic" in math - four percentage points
lower than all fourth grade students in 2005. Furthermore, 89% of African American eighth
graders were found not proficient in reading across the 1 1 urban school districts studied, which
was particularly worrisome given the national average for "at proficient" eighth grade students
was 26%. These pronounced and persistent achievement gaps begin as early as kindergarten and
persist through students' senior year in high school (Bahr, 2010). This outcome can be attributed,
in part, to the environmental and systemic issues that undercut academic preparation described
earlier in this section. Consequently, given that colleges and universities largely - and in many
cases solely - adopt standardized placement exams to assess students' academic prowess, African
American students disproportionately rely on college remediation as a means to access
postsecondary education.

A Brief Overview of Remediation in Higher Education

Postsecondary remediation - often interchangeably termed developmental education - inv

colleges and universities admitting students who they believe have the ability to complete a
with some developmental assistance. Remediation is designed to enhance academic def
among America's underprepared college students through academic support, with pr
components ranging from a single course offering to more comprehensive academic and s
support services, such as tutorial support, counseling, and study skill seminars (Attewell
2006; Boylan & Bonham, 2007).
A large number of Americans leave high school underprepared for college-level work. In
research suggests that roughly 30% of all undergraduates enroll in remedial courses at fo
colleges (Attewell et al., 2006; Strong American Schools, 2008). Greene and Foster (200
that about 68% of all American students and 80% of African American students leave hig

© The Journal of Negro Education, 2010, Vol 79, No. 4 505

This content downloaded from 132.174.250.76 on Sat, 24 Aug 2019 22:56:25 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
'minimally' underprepared. Other research has noted that African American students are nearly
twice as likely as White students to be found in remedial programs (Attewell et al., 2006). Since a
disproportionate number of African American students complete high school underprepared for
college-level work, the elimination of remediation affects access to higher education for a larger
proportion of African American students than it does White students (Bettinger & Long, 2007).
Postsecondary remediation policy is often enacted by states or state higher education systems
and implemented by institutions. Therefore, states and state higher education systems often set the
policies that govern where, how, and who pays for remediation at public institutions (Bettinger &
Long, 2007). Despite the important role states play in determining remediation policy, state
legislators appear to be unclear about what remedial education is, whom it serves, how much it
costs, and who should provide it (Merisotis & Phipps, 2000). A survey on whether colleges and
universities should give remedial education more attention revealed that 32% of legislators were in
agreement, 34% were in disagreement, and 32% remained neutral (Breneman & Merisotis, 2002).
States and higher education systems are raising policy questions that threaten to reduce,
eliminate, or shift the costs of remediation to other systems or individuals, including the students
(Bettinger & Long, 2007). These threats have been most pronounced at public four-year colleges
(Parker, 2007). In fact, Parker noted that roughly 22 states or higher education systems have either
reduced or eliminated postsecondary remediation.
The debate over whether state higher education systems should provide remedial education is
rooted in conflicting ideologies related to equity and excellence (Perin, 2006). On the one hand,
the evolving need for colleges and universities to become more selective has placed pressures on
state and institutional leaders to raise admissions standards. As such, many state legislators and
college administrators have increased standardized requirements such as grade point average
(GPA) and scholastic assessment test (SAT) scores to improve their placement in university
ranking systems (Institute for Higher Education Policy, 2007; Richardson, 2005). On the other
hand, the mission and goals of many colleges and universities to increase opportunity and equity
for underprepared and underrepresented students, many of whom are low-income, African
American, and Hispanic (Bettinger & Long, 2007). The intersection between these two demands
has placed postsecondary remediation center stage of the most controversial and contested higher
education policy debates in the 21st century (Bahr, 2007, 2008a).

Debates on Postsecondary Remediation

Discussions concerning whether American higher education should offer remedia

to the 19th century when Harvard and Yale expressed differing views on th
developmental assistance (Breneman & Haarlow, 1998). More specifically, in
Report called for an end to admitting students with "defective preparation" (Bri
Meanwhile, former Harvard University President Charles W. Eliot, in his 1869 in
took the opposing view by stating, "The American college is obliged to supplemen
school. Whatever elementary instruction the schools fail to give, the college must
2000, p. 2). In the 1870s, Harvard instituted the first freshman compositi
accommodate students' academic deficiencies and the institutions academic
(Maxwell, 1997).
In the middle of the 18th century, land-grant colleges created academic depar
students with deficiencies in reading, writing, and arithmetic skills (Breneman &
and by the 19th century, 40% of the 238,000 students enrolled in American high
participated in remedial education (Ignash, 1997).
The influx of World War II veterans coupled with the passage of the Civil Righ
and Higher Education Act of 1965 sparked another surge of students who n
assistance (Merisotis & Phipps, 2000). Between the 1960s and 1980s, thousands of u
students took advantage of open admissions policies (Breneman & Merisotis,
government believed that every person who was motivated and could benef

506 ©The Journal of Negro Education, 2010, Vol. 79, No. 4

This content downloaded from 132.174.250.76 on Sat, 24 Aug 2019 22:56:25 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
education should have the opportunity to attend (Callan, 2001). This federal commitment to
expand educational opportunity for all Americans made college access a fundamental policy goal
at the federal level. Due to this unprecedented commitment, colleges and universities had no
choice but to offer remedial education to students who were ill-equipped for the academic rigors
of college-level work.
The historical backdrop of remediation in higher education has been relevant in recent debates
as states and state higher education systems struggle with policy alternatives of the role and
relevancy of postsecondary remediation. Arguments for and against postsecondary remediation are
very convincing and warrant careful attention because of the shared goals of academic quality and
institutional equity.

Arguments against Remediation

Some opponents argue for the reduction or elimination of college remediation because they
purport remediation diverts human and financial resources from other academic priorities (Phelan,
2000; Roueche & Roueche, 1999; Terry, 2007). Critics also maintain that postsecondary
remediation is not a prudent investment because students are taught skills in college that they
should have acquired in high school (Тепу, 2007). Others specify that a remedial education
curriculum is not appropriate for four-year institutions and that the academic needs of unprepared
students might be best served by community colleges (Phelan, 2000; Roueche & Roueche, 1999).
Furthermore, researchers question the effect of postsecondary remediation in preparing students to
successfully negotiate the academic demands of college (Adelman, 2004; Attewell et al., 2006).
Moreover, policy analysts assert there is a lack of documentation evaluating the efficacy of
remedial education while others completely dismiss the efficacy of remedial education on
promoting college success (Adelman, 2004; Merisotis & Phipps, 2000). Perhaps most importantly,
critics feel that investing in remediation is not pragmatic because some studies indicate that
students who participate in remedial education are less likely to graduate (Adelman, 2004; Bahr,
2007; Bailey, Jeong, & Cho, 2008).
Some policy analysts and institutional leaders who oppose postsecondary remediation have
offered their personal views and values about the role and relevancy of postsecondary remediation.
According to an expurgated record of comments, a former Queens College president asserted
"[Garbage] in, [garbage] out . . . if you take in [garbage] and turn out [garbage] that is slightly
more literate, you're still left with [garbage]" (Marcus, 2000, p. 14). Similarly, Manno (1996)
characterized postsecondary remediation as a "dumbed down" system and argued, "remediation
sends the wrong message to students: 'Don't bother working hard. It doesn't matter. We'll admit
you anyway'" (p. 80),

Arguments for Remediation

Supporters of remedial policies argue that eliminating postsecondary remediation has adverse
implications for students of color (Attewell et al., 2006; Bahr, 2008a, 2010). In a case study about
remediation reform, Richardson (2005) argued that "Restrictive entry policies that intentionally or
unintentionally bar the entry of African Americans and Hispanics from the nation's colleges and
universities appear not only discriminatory but also economically foolish" (p. 185). Similarly,
proponents of remedial programs assert that attacks to dismantle developmental education in four-
year public institutions are ultimately an effort to stymie access of postsecondary education for
historically oppressed groups (Attewell et al., 2006). Attewell and colleagues also explained "...
policies that prevent students who need remedial/developmental work from enrolling in four-year
colleges could greatly reduce the likelihood that [students of color] would ever obtain bachelor's
degrees" (p. 887).
Other proponents of postsecondary remediation contend that shifting developmental education
solely to community colleges further compounds their overwhelmed financial and human

© The Journal of Negro Education, 2010, Vol . 79, No. 4 507

This content downloaded from 132.174.250.76 on Sat, 24 Aug 2019 22:56:25 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
resources, reduces educational opportunities for remedial students, and creates revenue problems
for colleges grappling with enrollment losses (Roueche & Roueche, 1999). Similarly, Parker
(2007) argued there is insufficient data to assess the effectiveness of remedial programs in
community colleges and designate two-year institutions as the best and only place for college
students who need remediation. Research has supported this claim and found that students,
especially African American and Latinos, in remedial education at community colleges tend to
feel ostracized about their placement (Parker & Richardson, 2005), powerless about the future
(Callahan & Chumney, 2009), and unclear about how to meet their academic goals (Deil-Amen &
Rosenbaum, 2002) compared to students' experiences and the accumulation of resources in
remedial programs at four-year colleges. Parker also posited that a large proportion of students
who are denied access to four-year institutions will likely not transfer to such institutions once
remedial coursework is complete, which is consistent with other research that suggests community
college students are less likely to earn a bachelor's degree than students who begin college at four-
year institutions (Long & Kurlaender, 2009).
Moreover, Parker (2007) argued that ending college remediation ". . . fail[s] to address the
root causes of student underpreparation" (p. 3). She added, "By pointing the finger at the students,
as opposed to addressing academic disparities between schools and colleges, higher education
policymakers miss the target of reducing remediation" (p. 5). Kimbrough and Harper (2006)
unequivocally explained that the dismantling of remedial programs has had negative implications
for minority students. Specifically, they noted: "This policy shift has had negative effects on
African American men . . . who previously relied upon developmental studies programs as a one-
chance opportunity for admission to postsecondary institutions" (p. 192).
Finally, while a few studies (e.g., Alliance for Excellent Education, 2006; Terry, 2007) take
issue with the cost of remediation, especially due to the current economic climate in the United
States, many economists and policy analysts estimate that postsecondary remediation comprises a
small portion of the total higher education budget and even enables states to obtain fiscal returns
on their investment. Breneman (1998) pointed out that the total national expenditure of remedial
education at public institutions is less than one percent each year. Breneman and Haarlow (1998)
posited that if one-third of all students taking at least one remedial course were to earn a
baccalaureate degree, they would generate more than $74 billion in federal tax revenue and $13
billion in state and local tax dollars, while only costing $1 billion to remediate. Spann (2000)
indicated that the graduation rate for remedial students would have to drop below one percent
before taxpayers would see a net loss on investment. Merisotis and Phipps (2000) noted that state
funds would not be appropriated to more worthy initiatives if remediation were to be removed
from all postsecondary institutions.

The Effectiveness of Postsecondary Remediation

In order to design policy that reduces postsecondary remediation, more research is need
understand the effectiveness of postsecondary remediation on diverse students at both
four-year institutions (Parker, 2007). Researchers need to engage in empirical investigat
decipher what approaches in postsecondary remediation work, under what conditi
contexts, and for whom, to arrive at informed policy decisions. Unfortunately, as Mer
Phipps (2000) purported, "research about the effectiveness of remedial education progra
typically been sporadic, underfunded, and inconclusive" (p. 75).
Notwithstanding these discrepancies, there has been some empirical research conduc
examines the efficacy of postsecondary remediation on student outcomes. While some s
have produced mixed results (Calcagno & Long, 2008), other research on postseco
remediation indicates that remedial programs increase the likelihood of successful comp
college-level coursework and facilitate persistence to degree attainment (Attewell et al.,
Bahr, 2007, 2008a, 2010).

508 ©The Journal of Negro Education, 2010, Vol 79, No. 4

This content downloaded from 132.174.250.76 on Sat, 24 Aug 2019 22:56:25 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Positive Effects

Research has demonstrated about one-half of remedial students complete their degrees (Attewell et
al., 2006), which is quite similar to national college completion rates (Seidman, 2005). In fact,
many assessments of remedial programs over the years seem to show successful outcomes in
remedial education, enabling underprepared students to successfully progress through the college
curriculum and complete their degrees at the same rate of their peers (Bahr, 2008a).
These programs have been found to be particularly helpful for African American students,
serving as a conduit through which many underrepresented students of color have accessed
postsecondary education (Attewell et al., 2006; Bahr, 2010). Using the National Educational
Longitudinal Study (NELS: 88), Attewell and colleagues (2006) found that 61% of African
American students enrolled in remedial courses and 50% completed their degrees. They concluded
that "If those students were deemed unsuited for college and denied entry to four-year institutions,
a large proportion of minority graduates in the high school class of 1992 would never have
received degrees" (p. 915).
More recent studies confirm the effectiveness of remedial programs (Bahr, 2007, 2008a;
Bettinger & Long, 2004, 2005, 2007, 2009; Moss & Yeaton, 2006). Bettinger and Long (2007,
2009) used longitudinal information from college transcripts, college applications, and
standardized tests to examine remediation in Ohio, the fifth largest public higher education system
in the country. After controlling for the test scores and background characteristics of 28,000
students placed in remedial English and mathematics, Bettinger and Long (2007) found that
students who enrolled in college remedial courses were more likely to transfer to a four-year
institution and complete a bachelor's degree. Bettinger and Long's (2004) earlier research on
postsecondary remediation at non-selective four-year colleges revealed findings that are consistent
with their more recent work.

Little or No Adverse Effects

While most research on postsecondary remediation generally suggests such intervention increases
access and success for underprepared students, some research has demonstrated that the remedial
students who have the poorest skills are the least likely to complete the remedial course sequence
and persist toward graduation (Bahr, 2007). The students who are most underprepared are
overwhelmingly African American and ultimately accumulate a larger tuition bill due to their need
to enroll and repeat remedial courses (Melguizo et al., 2008). Bahr (2010) concluded that racial
disparities in postsecondary mathematics remediation are present between African American and
White students because of the inequities experienced at the pre-college level. Therefore, Bahr
argued that ". . . it is critically important that we identify points of intervention to increase both the
overall success rate of students and the racial equity of remediation."
Other studies have also found that postsecondary remediation has no or little impact on course
completion and student persistence, especially for many African American students who require
two or more remedial courses. For example, Bailey and associates (2008) found that only between
30%-40% of students who were referred to remediation at community colleges complete their
remedial course sequence, and African American students who required two or more remedial
courses were among those least likely to remediate successfully. Bailey and colleagues also
observed that colleges tend to lose students early in the remedial course sequence. Therefore, early
intervention and formative evaluation is necessary to understand reasons for students' early
withdrawal or failure.
One large scale study, conducted by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES,
1996), found that freshmen enrolled in remedial courses were less likely to persist in their second
year compared to all other students. However, researchers (Bettinger & Long, 2007) have
indicated that the NCES study failed to control for characteristics related to ability. Consequently,
students with higher abilities who are adequately prepared for college are expected to persist at

© The Journal of Negro Education, 2010, Vol. 79, No. 4 509

This content downloaded from 132.174.250.76 on Sat, 24 Aug 2019 22:56:25 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
higher rates. Failing to separate these differences make direct comparisons inaccurate (Bettinger &
Long, 2007). Unfortunately, as discussed, several studies on postsecondary remediation have been
methodologically weak (Bahr, 2008a). Therefore, more rigorous and sound research that examines
the outcomes of postsecondary remediation is needed (Bahr, 2009). Notwithstanding such
limitations, it appears that remedial programs generally lead to positive student outcomes unless
students are 'severely' underprepared.
The students who do enter college severely underprepared ultimately accumulate higher
tuition costs and spend more time in college (Melguizo et al., 2008). Melguizo and associates used
descriptive and multivariate analyses to compare differences in financial costs and time delays for
transfer students with different remediation needs across nine community colleges in Los Angeles.
Not surprisingly, Melguizo and her colleagues found that students who were least prepared for
college-level work - which were predominantly African American and Hispanic students -
suffered most from excess money and time spent completing remedial course sequences. In
particular, they found that students with the greatest academic need spent nearly $7,000 and five
years enrolled at community colleges, compared to better prepared students who spent just over
$4,000 and were enrolled for roughly two and one-half years. This disparity may be attributed to a
lack of social and academic support, poor academic advising, and K-16 misalignment (Bahr,
2008b, 2010). Therefore, the best ways to decrease financial costs and time for students may be to
increase the allocation resources and improve the alignment between school systems and levels of
education within and across states.
To summarize, the most prudent investment in postsecondary remediation occurs when
students complete their remedial course sequence successfully and persist to graduation. Bahr
(2010) found that, among students who require postsecondary remediation, regardless of their
academic deficiencies, are just as likely to complete their degrees as students who never relied on
developmental assistance. Therefore, identifying promising practices in postsecondary remediation
would benefit students and institutions. Unfortunately, the paucity of rigorous research has not
identified the most promising practices on ways policies, practices and pedagogy can best shape
student success in postsecondary remediation. Therefore, many states and state higher education
systems have enacted policies to reduce or eliminate postsecondary remediation without sufficient
evidence or effort to improve remedial programs.

Postsecondary Remediation Policy Enactments

The most notable policy enactment concerning remedial education at four-year colleges
the state of New York. In the late- 1990s, as one of the nation's largest and most diverse
systems, the City University of New York (CUNY) case became one of the most contro
decisions to phase out remedial education in the history of American higher education
& Bastedo, 2001). Prior to political controversy, CUNY operated as an open a
institution - a policy that valued remedial assistance for local inner-city students (Rich
2005). In 1970, Robert E. Marshak, City College President, purported "the guiding princ
open admissions] was to be that although CUNY could not guarantee that all stude
deficiencies would overcome their handicaps, each student would be given a chance
himself [or herself]" (Marshak, 1982, p. 48). Richardson (2005) noted that, during
CUNY's mission was "To meet the specialized needs of the urban constituency and prov
to the diverse New York City community" (p. 177).
In 1998, the lead policy actor driving the debate to abolish remediation was New Yo
Mayor Rudolph Giuliani who called for an end to open admissions at CUNY (Gum
Bastedo, 2001). During the CUNY controversy, Mayor Giuliani asserted that the "U
system currently devotes far too much money and effort to teaching skills that stude
have learned in high school" (Schmidt, 1998, p. A33). Perhaps most significant in the C
was the racial divide in the policy process. According to Marcus (2000), all of th
American and Hispanic Regents of CUNY voted against the plan, understanding the imp

510 ©The Journal of Negro Education, 2010 , Vol 79, No. 4

This content downloaded from 132.174.250.76 on Sat, 24 Aug 2019 22:56:25 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
this shift would have on students of color. Notwithstanding, the CUNY board approved the plan in
June 1998 and, soon thereafter, CUNY began eliminating remedial courses from all of its 1 1 four-
year institutions (Gumport & Bastedo, 2001).
A fundamental problem with the latter CUNY policy decision involves the transfer
requirements. More specifically, if students, who are admitted to CUNY, fail one placement test,
they will be redirected to a CUNY community college to enroll in remedial courses. De -admitting
students from a four-year school and asking them to begin their academic career at a two-year
school in which they had no desire to attend significantly decreases the likelihood of baccalaureate
degree completion (Deil-Amen & Rosenbaum, 2002). Furthermore, even if students pass the
developmental course at one of CUNY's two-year colleges, they are eligible for readmission only
if they pass another placement test (Marcus, 2000).
The long-term implications of this policy are of particular concern for students of color
because CUNY has been the country's leading producer of African American and Hispanic
engineers (Richardson, 2005). Richardson (2005) conducted a case study of the shift in CUNY's
remedial policy and posited that African American student enrollment at CUNY's four-year
colleges will likely decline over time. Parker and Richardson (2005) collected 2003 CUNY
enrollment data and found that 2,568 African American and Latino students who originally were
admitted to CUNY's four-year colleges were ultimately forced to begin at a CUNY two-year
college. More recent data illustrate there has been a slight, yet persistent decline in the number of
African American first-time freshmen enrolling in CUNY's four-year colleges over the last decade
(see Table 1).

Table 1

First-Time Freshmen Enrollment (in Percentages) at CUNY Four-Year Institutions, by

Race/Ethnicity and Year of Fall Term

American Asian
Indian/Native Americans/Pacific Black Hispanic White

2008 0.2 19.9 24.9 28.2 26.8

2007 0.1 19.1 24.9 27.4 28.5
2006 0.1 18.4 25.2 27.4 28.9
2005 0.1 17.9 25.3 26.5 30.1
2004 0.2 17.4 25.6 25.9 30.9
2003 0.2 16.3 25.5 25.1 32.9
2002 0.2 16.1 26.8 24.4 32.4
2001 0.1 16.5 27.4 24.3 31.7
2000 0.1 15.1 28.3 25.2 31.2
1999 0.2 14.9 29.8 25.5 29.7
1998 0.2 14.7 29.3 26.0 29.9
1997 0.2 14.0 30.3 26.3 29.2
1996 0.1 13.7 31.3 26.0 29.1

1995

Note. Data from t

http://owl.cuny.ed

© The Journal of Negro Education, 2010, Vol. 79, No . 4 511

This content downloaded from 132.174.250.76 on Sat, 24 Aug 2019 22:56:25 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Other states, such as Massachusetts and Indiana, have also adopted college admissions
policies to increase academic standards without enacting a policy that comprehensively addresses
academic underpreparation among students who require developmental assistance. In 1996, the
Massachusetts Board of Higher Education raised its admission standards to increase the academic
quality in the state at four-year colleges, and simply placed a cap of "one" on developmental
courses to be taken at institutions in the state (Institute for Higher Education Policy, 2002). More
recently, in 2007, the Indiana General Assembly enacted "Core 40" as a requirement for high
school graduation unless parents sign an "opt-out" provision for their child. The Core 40 is set to
become a college admissions requirement in Indiana in the fall of 201 1 and requires completion of
a "rigorous" high school curriculum. As an incentive, the policy offers free tuition and fees to
those who meet certain financial aid and grade requirements. Students who do not complete the
Core 40 or equivalent coursework will be denied access to Indiana's four-year colleges (For more
information, visit http://www.doe.in.gov/core40/overview.html). While Indiana's efforts to
increase college preparation and offer powerful incentives should be applauded, without
addressing the problems that exist in many urban schools, such a policy will likely restrict access
to higher education for many African American students. In other words, Indiana's plan to aid
underprepared and underrepresented students does not mirror their efforts underway to increase
academic quality.
Although the Florida state legislature does not permit remedial instruction at four-year state
colleges and universities (unless contracted through community colleges), the state adopted a bill
in 2008 that ensured greater collaboration between secondary and postsecondary education
systems to reduce the need for postsecondary remediation (Strong American Schools, 2008). The
bill requires high schools to administer a college readiness assessment prior to grade 12 to identify
academic deficiencies before high school graduation. Students who score below the cut-off will
have the opportunity to enroll in remedial courses that apply to high school graduation
requirements, be excused from taking the state exit exam, and become exempt from remedial
instruction at the college-level. The bill requires community colleges to supply high school
teachers with the types of curriculum used in remedial courses at the two-year college level to
ensure greater alignment between secondary and postsecondary education. Florida's policy efforts
reflect the initial steps necessary to reduce the need for postsecondary remediation for all students.
However, most states are behind in such initial efforts, and have adopted an approach that is far
"too simplistic" for a "multifaceted problem" (Parker, 2007).

Implications

This article reviewed research to understand the impact of postsecondary remediat

access and success for African American students. The review of the literature sugge
underpreparedness among African American students originates early in their scho
and is often the consequence of poorly funded schools and ineffective school offici
words, many African American students are adversely affected by the conditions und
learn and develop as children in elementary and secondary schools, especially those
income, urban school districts. These conditions include insufficient materials
teachers, poor facilities, low expectations, weak college preparatory curricula, stere
and systemic racism (Darling-Hammond, 2005; Kozol, 2005). Such conditions, in turn
disproportionate number of African American students from gaining access to hig
and persisting through college-level coursework to postsecondary degree attainmen
2007).
Postsecondary remediation has served as a means of intervention to resolve academic
deficiencies since the 1800s. During the middle of the 1900s, federal policies expanded access to
higher education and accommodated thousands of academically underprepared students
(Breneman & Merisotis, 2002). However, over the past two decades, many states and state higher

512 ©The Journal of Negro Education, 2010 , Vol. 79, No. 4

This content downloaded from 132.174.250.76 on Sat, 24 Aug 2019 22:56:25 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
education institutions tightened academic standards and reduced or eliminated remediation from
four-year colleges (Parker, 2007), generating much debate in recent years. The controversy has
also inspired education policy researchers to study the impact of postsecondary remediation.
However, many studies have not fully acknowledged the ways in which remediation effects
college access and success for African American students. Therefore, these authors parsed out the
ways in which the debates, policy enactments, and empirical evidence related to postsecondary
remediation has had an impact on Africans American students.
The review of research suggests that the growing body of empirical research on postsecondary
remediation has produced mixed findings. For example, some studies indicate that African
American students are most likely to require two or more postsecondary remedial courses and,
consequently, least likely to remediate successfully (Bahr, 2010; Bailey et al., 2008). These
students, who are most underprepared, incur the highest costs for tuition and fees and time spent in
college (Melguizo et al., 2008). However, while there are a few studies that suggest postsecondary
remediation has little or no impact, most of the research indicates that remedial programs increase
the likelihood of successful college-level course completion and persistence to degree attainment.
In terms of costs of postsecondary remediation to states and institutions, there is substantial
variation across states. Notwithstanding across-state differences, many policy analysts and
economists agree that postsecondary remediation comprises a relatively small portion of the total
higher education budget. Lastly, this review suggests that some state policy enactments may be
widening equity gaps, especially for African American students. More specifically, by simply
increasing academic standards, while failing to address the root causes of academic
underpreparation, only restricts access to higher education for the growing population of
underrepresented students with college-going aspirations.

Discussion

Policymakers and college leaders face tough choices pertaining to equity and excellen
education. Postsecondary remediation policy has been a critical element of such choic
left many policymakers unsure about how to address students' academic deficiencies
Phipps, 2000). Even during an era of fiscal turmoil, postsecondary remediation s
prudent investment for higher education leaders and policymakers to preserve colleg
success for African American students who require one or two remedial cour
substantially compromising academic standards at four-year institutions.
However, a few studies suggest that postsecondary remediation may not b
alternative for African American and other underrepresented students who require
remedial courses. In particular, some studies indicate that postsecondary remediation
no effect on students' successful completion a remedial course sequence. As su
alternatives become more complex for policymakers, and ways to increase or mainta
quality and institutional equity become more difficult for college leaders. Wh
policymakers have, in the past, simply eliminated or reduced postsecondary remedia
four-year institutions - making the process of educating students who require d
assistance the sole responsibility of community colleges - research has indicated that
institutions have not proven to be the best choice to increase baccalaureate degr
(Parker, 2007). More specifically, students who initially enroll in postsecondary educ
year colleges with the intention to transfer are significantly less likely to complete a
degree when compared to their peers who begin at four-year colleges (Long & Kurlae
Therefore, removing remediation from four-year colleges delimits access and opport
students who require just one or two remedial courses to transfer and persist towar
baccalaureate degree.

© The Journal of Negro Education, 2010, Vol. 79, No. 4 513

This content downloaded from 132.174.250.76 on Sat, 24 Aug 2019 22:56:25 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Recommendations

There are several policy alternatives that states and state higher education systems ca
will systematically reduce, but not eliminate, the need for postsecondary remediation
and state higher education systems should make a consistent and coordinated effort t
evaluate the impact of postsecondary remediation at representative colleges and unive
eliminating or reducing it from four-year institutions. Second, states and school di
invest in the most effective early intervention programs to address academic
immediately after students are diagnosed as being "below basic" levels of achievemen
and perhaps most importantly, states should implement policies that create addition
support quality teaching, and prepare more African American students for po
education. Each recommendation follows as discussed in greater depth.

Research

While a small body of research has documented the effects of postsecondary remediation on
African American students, additional research is needed to provide a more developed
understanding of the impact of postsecondary remediation. There is currently a paucity of rigorous
research that examines the conditions under which underrepresented and underprepared students
best learn and persist with regard to remedial courses and programs. Due to the fact that most
empirical evidence suggests postsecondary remediation positively influences academic success of
underprepared students, states and state higher education systems should focus on identifying
promising practices in postsecondary remedial education pedagogy and support services.
More rigorous research is also needed to understand the differences in remedial instruction
and services provided at two- and four-year institutions. Knowing that African American students
who begin higher education at two-year colleges are significantly less likely to complete a
baccalaureate degree program when compared to their peers who begin at a four-year institution, a
shift of all remedial responsibility to community colleges is unwise. Since most of the empirical
studies have examined postsecondary remediation at community colleges, studies that draw
comparisons between and within institutional types would help inform policymakers of the best
institutional environments for service.
Education policy researchers also need to continually evaluate the impact of state policy
enactments on educational equity and excellence. Since research on postsecondary remedial
outcomes is sparse, many states and state higher education systems have made critical policy
decisions based on little empirical data. Although many policy enactments have already moved to
the implementation phase, it is important to still assess the impact of these policy efforts on
students' experiences and outcomes.
Furthermore, additional research that disaggregates students' postsecondary remedial
experiences and outcomes by demographic characteristics, such as race, income, and gender, are
needed to develop a greater understanding of the ways in which postsecondary remediation
influences different types of students. Such research would better inform policymakers about how
access and equity are affected when certain policy choices are made. Research that disaggregates
findings by demographic characteristics should also seek to understand the conditions under which
different groups are (and are not) successful in remedial programs.
Researchers should engage in varied measures of assessment (i.e., quantitative, qualitative,
and mixed methods) to arrive at a clearer understanding of the impact of remediation programs.
Currently, most empirical evidence is based on large quantitative analyses of remedial programs
and students. More qualitative research would better inform policymakers of experiences and
outcomes that cannot be found and understood by quantitative approaches (Haiper & Museus,
2007). Accordingly, qualitative research may help illuminate how postsecondary remediation
affects particular groups of students, under what conditions, and in what contexts.

514 ©The Journal of Negro Education, 2010, Vol 79, No. 4

This content downloaded from 132.174.250.76 on Sat, 24 Aug 2019 22:56:25 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 While engaging in a variety of approaches to assess the impact of postsecondary remediation
is important, state and state higher education policy researchers should focus on using similar
assessment tools to draw across-state comparisons. This would require all states to use the same
metrics to engage in within and across state analyses. The Data Quality Campaign (DQC) is an
evolving effort that involves all 50 states invested in securing longitudinal data on student
outcomes (For more information visit http://www.dataqualitycampaign.org/). Endorsed by
Department of Education Secretary Arne Duncan and House Education and Labor Committee
Chairman George Miller, the DQC has secured the involvement of many governors and other state
legislators to develop an organized and unified approach of tracking student academic
performance from prekindergarten to postsecondary education. Two of the variables the DQC
tracks are enrollment in postsecondary remediation and persistence through college. While all
states are involved in some capacity, state policymakers should consider fully committing to the
information needed on all outcomes - in this case postsecondary remediation - to ensure the
collection and dissemination of quality data.

Policy

In addition to continually evaluating postsecondary remediation to understand promising practices

in postsecondary remedial education, states and school districts should invest in effective early
intervention programs that offer academic and social support services for students with academic
deficiencies at every level throughout the educational pipeline. In other words, immediately after
states and schools identify students who are behind, early intervention programs should be made
available for underserved and underperforming students to maintain "at proficient" levels of
academic achievement. The early intervention programs that prove to be most effective should be
extended to offer services beginning in early elementary school until at least the first year in
college. Examples of effective early outreach programs that should be extended and better funded
include Upward Bound, Educational Talent Search, and Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness
for Undergraduate Programs (GEAR UP, visit www2.ed.gov/programs/gearup/ for more
information). These interventions will help many African American and other undeirepresented
students become academically prepared for college who would otherwise require two or more
remedial courses without such support.
There are also state-funded programs that have demonstrated that their program services help
underprepared students gain access to college (Carey, 2008). For example, the College Reach-Out
Program (CROP, visit Website, http://studentservices.fgcu.edu/CROP/), enacted in 1983 by the
Florida legislature, serves educationally and economically disadvantaged middle and high school
students to motivate and prepare participants for postsecondary education. In the 2008-2009
academic year 72% of the CROP participants were African American students. The CROP works
closely with two- and four-year colleges and is a popular model for states interested in reducing
academic deficiencies and increasing preparation for postsecondary education among African
American students.
It is also critical that elementary and secondary school teachers, counselors, and
administrators focus more on encouraging African American students to enroll in college
preparatory courses because research has shown that college preparatory courses increase
preparedness for college (Hrabowski, 2003; Reid & Moore, 2008). Many schools, however, do not
offer a college preparatory curriculum due to having minimal resources. In this case, school
officials should consider working with the non-profit organizations that sponsor Early College
High Schools (ECHS, for more information visit http://www.earlycolleges.org/). These programs
provide intense academic and social support services in schools to help underrepresented students
earn a high school diploma and college credit.
Additionally, school districts should enact policies and institute practices that guide
improvement in teacher quality for African American students. Research has shown that a
disproportionate number of teachers in poor, urban school districts are novice and unqualified

© The Journal of Negro Education, 2010, Vol . 79, No. 4 515

This content downloaded from 132.174.250.76 on Sat, 24 Aug 2019 22:56:25 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
(Bell & Clark, 1998). With the lack of qualified teachers in low-income, urban schools, it is not
surprising that many African American students are academically underprepared for college,
thereby, prompting the need for postsecondary remediation. According to research, improving
teacher quality would have a strong impact on African American students' ability to access higher
education and greatly improve their college completion rates (Peske & Haycock, 2006). A
growing body of research (e.g., Ladson-Billings, 1995; Lewis et al., 2008) has offered ways in
which culturally relevant pedagogy and culturally responsible school environments can change
learning opportunities for African American students, especially in subjects that African
Americans generally require postsecondary remediation.
Finally, states should change the way elementary and secondary school districts are financed.
Currently, school districts are financed by local property taxes and this dynamic naturally
disadvantages schools in low-income, urban communities. It has been well-documented that
school districts where there are a disproportionate number of African American students receive
less adjusted state and local funds per pupil compared to districts with fewer students of color
(Green, 2008). Consequently, the disparity in how schools are funded greatly exacerbates the
achievement gap between African American and White students (Green, 2008). States should
enact policies that ensure an equitable distribution of funds. This would create an opportunity for
school officials to secure more qualified teachers, appropriate equipment, and educational
materials to facilitate the production of innovative, culturally relevant instruction and learning.

Conclusion

There will be students who are academically underprepared and therefore requ
remediation for a very long time because of the depth and breadth of inequit
education. However, the need for remediation in higher education can be reduce
education systems, and elementary and secondary schools work toward p
opportunities for academically underprepared African American students
deficiencies early in their educational journey. Meanwhile, in an era whe
secondary schools - especially in urban, predominantly African American scho
to provide their students with the college preparatory resources and skills
college access and opportunity compared to well-equipped schools, the wor
Harvard University President, Charles W. Eliot, seem to be more relevant today
"the American college is obliged to supplement the American school. Wh
instruction the schools fail to give, the college must supply" (Spann, 2000, p. 2).

The authors acknowledge Drs. Peter R. Bahr, Shaun R. Harper, Andrew H. Nichols, an
their comments on an earlier draft of the manuscript

References

Adelman, C. (2004). Principal indicators of student academic histories in pos

education, 1972-2000. Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences.
American Council on Education (2009). Minorities in higher education 2009: Twenty
report . Washington, DC: Author.
Attewell, P., Lavin, D., Domina, T., & Levey, T. (2006). New evidence on college
Journal of Higher Education, 77, 886-924.
Bahr, P. R. (2007). Double jeopardy: Testing the effects of multiple basic skill d
successful remediation. Research in Higher Education, 48 , 695-725.
Bahr, P. R. (2008a). Does mathematics remediation work? A comparative analys
attainment among community college students. Research in Higher Education, 4
Bahr, P. R. (2008b). Cooling out in the community college: What is the effect
advising on students' chances of success? Research in Higher Education, 49, 704-

516 ©The Journal of Negro Education, 2010, Vol. 79, No. 4

This content downloaded from 132.174.250.76 on Sat, 24 Aug 2019 22:56:25 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Bahr, P. R. (2009). Educational attainment as process: Using hierarchical discrete-time event
history analysis to model rate of progress. Research in Higher Education , 50 , 691-714.
Bahr, P. R. (2010). Preparing the underprepared: An analysis of racial disparities in
postsecondary mathematics remediation. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Bailey, T., Jeong, D., & Cho, S. (2008). Referral enrollment , and completion in developmental
education sequences in community colleges. New York: Community College Research
Center.
Bell, Y. R., & Clark, T. R. (1998). Culturally relevant reading material as related to
comprehension and recall in African American children. Journal of Black Psychology, 24 ,
455-475.
Bettinger, E. P., & Long, B. T. (2004). Shape up or ship out: The effects of remediation on
students at four-year colleges (Working Paper No. 10369). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau
of Economic Research.
Bettinger, E. P., & Long, B. T. (2005). Remediation at community colleges: Student participation
and outcomes .New Directions for Community Colleges, 129 , 17-26.
Bettinger, E. P., & Long, B. T. (2007). Remedial and developmental courses. In S. Dickert-Conlin
& R. Rubenstein (Eds.), Economic inequality and higher education: Access, persistence and
success (pp. 69-100). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Bettinger, E. P., & Long, B. T. (2009). Addressing the needs of under-prepared students in higher
education: Does college remediation work? Journal of Human Resources, 44 , 736-771.
Boylan, H. R., & Bonham, B. S. (2007). 30 years of developmental education: A retrospective.
Journal of Developmental Education, 30, 2-4.
Boylan, H., Bonham, В., & Tafari, G. (2005). Evaluating the outcomes of developmental
education. In G. Gaither (Ed.), Minority retention: What works? New Directions for
Institutional Research (No. 125, pp. 59-72). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Breneman, D. W. (1998). Remediation in higher education: Its extent and costs. In D. Ravitch
(Ed.), Brookings papers on education policy (pp. 359-382). Washington, DC: Brookings
Institute.
Breneman, D., & Haarlow, W. (1998). Remediation in higher education. Washington, DC:
Thomas B. Fordham Foundation.
Breneman, D. W., & Merisotis, J. P. (2002). Beyond money: Support strategies for disadvantaged
students. In D. E. Heller (Ed.), Conditions of access: Higher education for lower income
students (pp. 1 13-133). Westport, CT: Greenwood.
Brier, E. (1984). Bridging the academic preparation gap. Journal of Developmental Education, 8 ,
2-5.
Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U. S. 483 (1954).
Calcagno, J. C., & Long, В. T. (2008). The impact of postsecondary remediation using a
regression discontinuity approach: Addressing endogenous sorting and noncompliance
(Working Paper). New York: National Center for Postsecondary Research.
Callahan, M. K., & Chumney, D. (2009). Write like college: How remedial writing courses at a
community college and a research university position "at-risk" students in the field of higher
education. Teachers College Record, 111 , 1619-1664.
Callan, P. M. (2001). Refraining access and opportunity: Problematic state and federal higher
education policy in the 1990s. In D. E. Heller (Ed.), The states and public higher education
policy: Affordability, access and accountability, (pp. 83-99). Baltimore: John Hopkins
University Press.
Carey, K. (2008). Graduation rate watch : Making minority student success a priority.
Washington, DC: Education Sector.
City University of New York. (2008). Historical CUNY data book by subject : Race/ethnicity.
Retrieved from http://owl.cuny.edu:7778/portal/page/portal/oira/HIST_DATA_BOOK_
RACEETHNICITY
Civil Rights Act of 1964, Pub. L. No. 88-352, 78 Stat. 241 (1964).

© The Journal of Negro Education, 2010, Vol . 79, No. 4 517

This content downloaded from 132.174.250.76 on Sat, 24 Aug 2019 22:56:25 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Condron, D. J., & Roscigno, V. J. (2003). Disparities within: Unequal spending and achievement
in an urban school district. Sociology of Education, 76, 18-36.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2005). New standards and old inequalities: School reform and the
education of African American students. In J. E. King (Eds.), Black education : A
transformative research and action agenda for the new century (pp. 197-223). Mahwah, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Deil-Amen, R., & Rosenbaum, J. (2002). The unintended consequences of stigma-free
remediation. Sociology of Education, 75, 249-268.
Greene, J., & Foster, G. (2003). Public high school graduation and college readiness rates in the
United States. Education (Working Paper No. 3). New York: Manhattan Institute, Center for
Civic Information.
Green, P. C., III. (2008). The impact of laws on African American males. American Behavioral
Scientist , 51, 827-884.
Gumport, P. J., & Bastedo, M. N. (2001). Academic stratification and endemic conflict: Remedial
education policy at CUNY. Review of Higher Education, 24, 333-349.
Harper, S. R., & Museus, S. D. (Eds.). (2007). Using qualitative research methods in institutional
assessment: New Directions for Institutional Research, No. 136. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Harper, S. R., Patton, L. D., & Wooden, O. S. (2009). Access and equity for African American
students in higher education: A critical race historical analysis of policy efforts. Journal of
Higher Education, 80 , 389-414.
Higher Education Act of 1965, Pub. L. No. 89-329, 79 Stat. 1219 (1965).
Hoffman, J., & Lowitzki, K. (2005). Predicting college success with high school grades and test
scores: Limitations for minority students. Review of Higher Education, 28 , 455-474.
Hrabowski, F. (2003). Raising minority achievement in science and math. Educational
Leadership, 60, 44-48.
Ignash, J. M. (1997). Who should provide postsecondary remedial/developmental education? New
Directions for Community Colleges, 100, 5-20.
Institute for Higher Education Policy. (2002). Developmental education and college opportunity in
New England: Lessons for a national study of state and system policy impacts. Washington,
DC: Author.

Jackson, J. F. L. (2007). A systematic analysis of the African American educational pipeline to

inform research, policy, and practice. In J. F. L. Jackson (Ed.), Strengthening the educational
pipelines for African Americans: Informing policy and practice (pp. 1-14). New York: State
University of New York Press.
Jones, V. C. (2002). Institutional change and culturally relevant pedagogy. In S. J. Denbo & L. M.
Beaulieu (Eds.), Improving schools for African American students: A reader for educational
leaders (pp. vii-xii). Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
Kearns, T., Ford, L., & Linney, J. A. (2005). African American student representation in special
education programs. The Journal of Negro Education, 74, 297-310.
Kimbrough, W. M., & Harper, S. R. (2006). African American men at historically Black colleges
and universities: Different environments, similar challenges. In M. J. Cuyjet (Ed.), African
American men in college (Ъг>. 189-209). San Francisco: Jossev-Bass.
Kozol, J. (2005). The shame of the nation: The restoration of apartheid schooling in America.
New York: Three Rivers.
Kreysa, P. G. (2007). The impact of remediation on persistence of under-prepared college
students. Journal of College Student Retention: Research , Theory & Practice. 8. 251-270.
Ladson-Billings, G. J. (1995). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American
Educational Research Journal, 32, 465-491.
Lewis, C. W., James, M., Hancock, S., & Hill-Jackson, V. (2008). Framing African American
students' success and failure in urban settings: A typology for change. Urban Education, 43,
127-153.

518 ©The Journal of Negro Education, 2010, Vol . 79, No. 4

This content downloaded from 132.174.250.76 on Sat, 24 Aug 2019 22:56:25 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Long, В. T., & Kurlaender, M. (2009). Do community colleges provide a viable pathway to a
baccalaureate degree? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis , 31, 30-53.
Manno, В. (1996). The swamp of college remedial education. Academic Questions , 9, 78-82.
Marcus, J. (2000). Revamping remedial education: City University of New York grapples with a
complex web of issues surrounding programs for underprepared students. CrossTalk, 8 , 1-15.
Marshak, R. E. (1982). Academic renewal in the 1970s : Memoirs of a city college president
Washington, DC: University Press of America.
Maxwell, M. (1997). Improving student learning skills. Clearwater, FL: H&H Publishing.
Mazzeo, С. (2002). Stakes for students: Agenda setting and remedial education. Review of Higher
Education, 26 , 10-39.
Melguizo, T., Hagedorn, L. S., & Cypers, S. (2008). Remedial/developmental education and the
cost of community transfer: A Los Angeles county sample. Review of Higher Education, 31,
401-431.
Merisotis, J. P., & Phipps, R. A. (2000). Remedial education in colleges and universities: What's
really going on? Review of Higher Education, 24 , 67-85.
Moss, B. G., & Yeaton, W. H. (2006). Shaping policies related to developmental education: An
evaluation using the regression-discontinuity design. Educational Evaluation and Policy
Analysis, 28 , 215-229.
National Center for Education Statistics. (1996). Remedial education at higher education
institutions in fall 1995. Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement.
Osburne, J. W. (2001). Academic disidentification: Unraveling under achievement among Black
boys. In R. Majors (Ed.), Educating our Black children : New directions and radical
approaches (pp. 45-58). New York: RoutledgeFalmer.
Parker, T. L. (2007). Ending college remediation : Consequences for access and opportunity.
(ASHE/Lumina Policy Briefs and Critical Essays No. 2). Ames: Iowa State University,
Department of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies.
Parker, T. L., & Richardson, R. C. (2005). Ending remediation at CUNY: Implications for access
and excellence. Journal of Educational Research & Policy Studies, 5, 1-22.
Perin, D. (2006). Can community colleges protect both access and standards? The problem of
remediation. Teachers College Record, 108 , 339-373.
Peske, H. G., & Haycock, K. (2006). How poor and minority students are shortchanged on
teacher quality. Washington, DC: The Education Trust.
Presley, J. W. (2008). The political history of developmental studied in the University System of
Georgia. Community College Enterprise, 14 , 37-55.
Reid, M. J., & Moore, J. L., III. (2008). College readiness and academic preparation for
postsecondary education: Oral histories of first-generation urban college students. Urban
Education, 43, 240-261.
Richardson, J. W. (2005). "Who shall be educated?" The case of restricting remediation at the City
University of New York. Education and Urban Society, 37, 174-192.
Roueche, J., & Roueche, S. (1999). High stakes, high performance: Making remedial education
work. Washington, DC: American Association of Community Colleges.
Schmidt, P. (1998). A clash of values at CUNY over remedial education. The Chronicle of Higher
Education, 44, A33-A34.
Seidman, A. (Ed.). (2005). College student retention : Formula for success. Westport, CT:
Greenwood.
Soliday, M. (2002). The politics of remediation: Institutional and student needs in higher
education. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Spann, M. (2000). Remediation: A must for the 21st century. Denver, CO: Education Commission
of the States.
Steele, C. (1997). A threat in the air: How stereotypes shape intellectual identity and performance.
American Psychologist, 52, 613-629.
Strong American Schools. (2008). Diploma to nowhere. Washington, DC: Author.

© The Journal of Negro Education, 2010, Vol 79, No. 4 519

This content downloaded from 132.174.250.76 on Sat, 24 Aug 2019 22:56:25 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Terry, В. D. (2007). The cost of remedial education. Austin: Texas Public Policy Foundation.
Thernstrom, A., & Themstrom, S. (2003). No excuses: Closing the racial gap in learning. New
York: Simon & Schuster.

Authors
RYAN J. DAVIS is a doctoral student of Higher Education at the University of Ma
Park. ROBERT T. PALMER is Assistant Professor of Student Affairs, State Univers
Y ork-Binghamton.

All comments and queries regarding this article should be addressed to ijdavis@um

520 ©The Journal of Negro Education, 2010, Vol. 79, No. 4

This content downloaded from 132.174.250.76 on Sat, 24 Aug 2019 22:56:25 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms