Community Colleges and “Completion”

by Patrick O'Connor, Ph.D.

Many of the students I worked with as a counselor at a community college had a story like this one:

He took a job right out of high school with a small business run by a neighbor. That was ten years ago, and the time had come for the owner to retire, creating a shift in administration that left a need for a manager. The student had a track record of solid work and commitment, and the owner said the job was his to have, provided he could earn sixteen credits in business courses before the owner retired in fourteen months.

Since the sixteen credits could be from any business classes, this schedule wasn’t too hard to put together. We reviewed the catalog, found some classes specifically designed for small businesses, and threw in the general survey courses in business and accounting. Thirty weeks later—and five months ahead of time—the student got his promotion, and a hefty raise to boot.

If you’re thinking, how great, the student accomplished his goal, you’d be right—unless you are the federal government. For the better part of ten years, the government has been urging, nudging, and flat out questioning community colleges and their completion rates, or number of students who leave their community college experience without a degree, certificate, or other credential. The rationale for this concern seems legitimate enough at first, since there is ample data showing the average salaries of US workers as it relates to educational attainment.

But relying on averages is where this discussion also begins to fall apart. Our student realized everything without a degree or certificate that most students want who are pursuing some kind of credential. It’s just that, in this case, the student didn’t need to spend extra time and money taking classes he didn’t need. Still, according to most observers, this student is a failure because he is a non-completer, and that just doesn’t sit well with many government officials.

The completion argument also falls apart when one considers the origins of the community college system. Community colleges were created to meet the higher education needs of the local community, hence the name. While those needs could include credential completion—many nurses and first responders are trained by community colleges—it can also include students who need to start locally to improve their academic reputations to transfer to a four-year college. Since transfer requirements vary widely from one four-year college to another, most of the students I worked with who wanted to transfer were better off not completing a community college credential, taking individual courses that were sure to transfer.

Much more important, the mission of community colleges is to provide opportunities to learn, not to provide credentials. The nontraditional student returning to take a class or two in History, since they now have the time and genuine interest to study it. The mid-career student who needs to pick up some essential courses before admission to a graduate program. The computer programmer who needs to upgrade their skills after five years away from the field. Their goals can be met by taking courses; their time would be wasted by completing degrees.

I’m a big fan of accountability, but I’m a bigger fan of everyone playing to their strengths. Not everyone needs to go to college; not everyone needs to go to a four-year college, and not everyone needs to get a credential from a community college. Threatening community colleges with outcomes they were never meant to achieve only hurts the people they are meant to serve. It’s time to reconsider this credentialing movement.