income, Hispanic students. The college’s outreach strategies have included a concertedmarketing campaign, college admissions days, opportunities <strong>for</strong> early assessment, andhands-on financial aid workshops.Multi-year college readiness programs provide students with sustained supportand may offer a variety of services during high school. Project GRAD — a collaborationbetween a nonprofit organization, the Houston <strong>School</strong> District, and several colleges anduniversities — offers both academic and social supports to help students prepare <strong>for</strong>college. Its primary emphasis is on helping students to view college-going as a realisticoption by providing counseling, support, and collegiate-type experiences, such asparticipation in a range of summer bridge programs.In embedded college counseling programs, colleges provide college counselingwithin a high school setting. For example, Lone Star <strong>College</strong>–CyFair places advisors inlocal high schools. The advisors focus on helping students navigate the college admissionsand financial aid processes. They describe the main goal of the program as helping students“realize that they can go to college” and promoting a “college going atmosphere” amonghigh school students.<strong>College</strong> readiness lessons supply students with in<strong>for</strong>mation about college andattempt to foster a college-going culture. For instance, the K-16 Bridge program,sponsored by San Jacinto <strong>College</strong> in Houston, includes six to eight classroom lessons persemester taught by high school teachers during the regular school day. These lessons aresupplemented by self-directed assignments that students access online. <strong>Students</strong> in the K-16 bridge program learn about colleges, academic programs, financial aid, and careers,among other topics.Program TypologyWe observed that college readiness partnership programs could often be classifiedas academic-focused or college knowledge–focused. In academic-focused programs,students primarily studied academic subjects (most often reading, writing, andmathematics); in college knowledge–focused programs, students learned about collegeplanning, applying to college, financial aid, and navigating college life. Further, theprograms fell on a series of continua of the type described in Figure ES.1. While programsoften included a blend of features, there was a tendency <strong>for</strong> academic-focused programs toinclude the features found on the left side and <strong>for</strong> college knowledge–focused programs toinclude those on the right.ES-4
Figure ES.1<strong>College</strong> Readiness Partnership Program TypologyIntensiveLight touchShort termLong termSmall groups,targeted studentsMany students,not/loosely targetedMore directexperience of collegeLittle directexperience of collegeKey Findings on <strong>College</strong> Readiness PartnershipsThe most common partnerships we observed were between school districts andpostsecondary institutions, followed by those involving multiple partners in a region. Weexamined how partners engage with one another to assist high school students in enteringcollege prepared to take college-level courses. Our major observations fall into threecategories: key characteristics of partnerships, potential benefits, and barriers and challenges.Key CharacteristicsIntensityThe partnerships we observed varied in the intensity of their relationships. The lessintense relationships involved coordination, or networking and sharing in<strong>for</strong>mation. Themore intense relationships involved collaboration, with joint planning and power sharing.CommitmentProgram observations and interviews conducted during our site visits suggest thatcollege readiness partnerships require institutional commitment <strong>for</strong> strong programES-5
- Page 1: Preparing High SchoolStudents for C
- Page 4 and 5: The National Center for Postseconda
- Page 7 and 8: ContentsOverviewList of ExhibitsPre
- Page 9: List of ExhibitsTable3.1 Number of
- Page 13 and 14: AcknowledgmentsThe authors of this
- Page 15 and 16: Executive SummaryIn his 2009 State
- Page 17: Summer bridge programs, generally o
- Page 21 and 22: lack of funding streams that reward
- Page 23 and 24: Chapter 1IntroductionIn his 2009 St
- Page 25 and 26: partnerships formed by K-12 school
- Page 27 and 28: There is some evidence in the liter
- Page 29 and 30: In addition, the Texas legislature
- Page 31 and 32: Chapter 2Research Design and Method
- Page 33: The goal of the site visits was to
- Page 36 and 37: Program CategoryTexas College Readi
- Page 38 and 39: Key Characteristics of State and Lo
- Page 40 and 41: equired by state law, 8 and incorpo
- Page 42 and 43: ensure that every high school senio
- Page 44 and 45: the summer. Staff members at some o
- Page 46 and 47: these situations, a community-based
- Page 48 and 49: easons to work together, policy cha
- Page 50 and 51: Lack of Incentives for Community Co
- Page 52 and 53: Implications for College Readiness
- Page 54 and 55: programming and create a more cost-
- Page 57 and 58: This appendix includes a short desc
- Page 59 and 60: Length/duration: Approximately 20 s
- Page 61 and 62: campus resources (including the lib
- Page 63 and 64: College Connection Advisors Program
- Page 65 and 66: Length/duration: The program runs f
- Page 67 and 68: their personal online portfolios, w
- Page 69 and 70:
program are that at least 80 percen
- Page 71:
Appendix BScan Summary of LocalColl
- Page 74 and 75:
Appendix Table B.1 (continued)Progr
- Page 76 and 77:
Appendix Table B.1 (continued)Progr
- Page 79 and 80:
ReferencesAchieve, Inc. (2006). Clo
- Page 81 and 82:
Kirst, M., & Venezia, A. (2001). Br
- Page 83:
Texas Higher Education Coordinating
Change language