Dual Enrollment Programs in Hawaii

Abstract

Dual enrollment programs have become mandatory in about half the states. Although Hawaii is not one of those 25 states with mandatory dual enrollment programs, the state does have some comprehensive solutions for providing all high school students with the benefits of dual enrollment programs. Through policies and programs like GEAR UP, Running Start, and Early College, the Department of Education of Hawaii has made dual enrollment a reality for many students. By opting out of some of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) provisions, the state Department of Education has also liberated resource for developing its own programs, which are much more relevant to the population of Hawaii. The Running Start is the most renowned of all the Hawaiian dual enrollment programs because it was jointly initiated by the University of Hawaii system. Moreover, all state universities in Hawaii participate in Running Start. Running Start mandates that the high school students receive their college credit classes at the university—rather than through their high school. This is the main difference between Running Start and Early College/Early Admission, and also between Running Start and Advanced Placement (AP) courses. As successful as Running Start has been in Hawaii, there are some drawbacks that need to be overcome. One is that rural residents of the state do not have access to the university courses, with limited transportation options. Another is that low-income residents do not have access to the university courses because students are actually required to pay for their tuition, books, and other costs. GEAR UP is a federally funded, state-run project that ameliorates the financial strain placed on low income families, but more work is needed. Teachers are not able or willing to offer the dual credit/dual enrollment classes at the rural schools for the Early College program. Finally, the success of Project Ho‘oku‘i. shows that dual enrollment programs need to be more culturally relevant. Suggestions for future educatonal policy are offered.
Introduction
Dual credit programs have been well established throughout United States public schools. According to Hodara & Wang (2015), 25 states now require all of their public school districts to offer some type of dual credit program. By 2011, as many as 82% of all American public schools had students enrolled in dual credit programs, not even including Advanced Placement (AP) course enrollment (Hodara & Wang, 2015). However, Hawaii is not one of the 25 states that requires school districts to offer dual credit programs. Whether Hawaii’s dual credit programs need to be strengthened or not is the subject of this research. Through policies other than mandated dual credit access, the state is “committed to the availability of dual credit through a number of statewide dual-credit programs,” (Hodara & Wang, 2015, p. 1). More importantly, Hawaii has reconsidered its approach towards funding dual enrollment programs. In 2013, the State of Hawaii received approval to waive certain provisions of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), a federal policy that was not specifically geared towards improving college preparedness. Instead, a team of Hawaiian stakeholders including educators, parents, community groups, and members of the state’s higher education network collaborated for a solution. The result was the Strive HI Performance System, which has an express goal of improving or assuring “readiness for community, college, and careers,” (Hawaii State Department of Education, 2017). These should be the goals of high school already. Hawaii has taken responsibility for student outcomes by rejecting unworkable federal education policies and adopting plans and programs that work to improve educational outcome for all residents of the state.
Access
Access issues entail cost accessibility, logistics issues such as transportation, admissions policies and barriers to enrollment, and possibly also linguistic and cultural barriers. Another important barrier in service delivery with regards to dual enrollment programs in Hawaiian public schools is information. Osumi (2010) reports that once school-based notifications were distributed throughout the state, counselors “relied on students to self-identify” as interested in Running Start (p. viii). Asking students to self-identify is not a culturally relevant or effective method of attracting attention and interest in dual enrollment programs. Students need more information about the programs, how to enroll, what the programs mean, and how dual enrollment fits into their lifestyle. The students also need to have a clear and easy pathway of enrollment, and understand the meaning of college education overall.
Economic Issues
The two most notable dual credit programs in Hawaii now are called Early College and Running Start. Running Start is a state-specific program, “a partnership between the Hawaii Department of Education (HIDOE) and University of Hawai‘i (UH) system that allows students to take college courses and earn college credit,” (Hodara & Wang, 2015, p. 1). Classes must be taken on the college campuses, taught by a college professor. However, sometimes the student is responsible for paying for these courses. This has been a major problem with Running Start, as it has the potential to isolate and marginalize students whose families cannot afford the cost of the program. In 2007, the Hawaii legislature officially recognized that its underserved communities were not participating in dual enrollment/dual credit courses due specifically to “perceived financial barriers,” (Osumi, 2010, p. 13). To mitigate the problems with financial accessibility, the government of Hawaii has received federal funding for a scholarship program called Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs (GEAR UP).
The provisions of GEAR UP are extensive, but focus on helping low-income students access funding that will assist their success in dual enrollment courses. GEAR UP “supports low-income students’ participation in the Running Start dual credit program by providing support for tuition and books,” (“Running Start,” n.d.). GEAR UP scholarships are not needs-based, but admissions policies do favor low-income students, assessed by their already participating in other needs-based programs like the National School Lunch Program, the Supplemental Assistance for Needy Families (SNAP), or the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program (“Running Start,” n.d.).
Unlike Running Start, Early College/Early Admissions courses are offered at the student’s high school, making these classes potentially more accessible than the Running Start programs (Dual Credit, 2017). However, there may be tuition and other cost impediments that reveal some of the problems with the way the state is increasing access to dual enrollment programs. The most notable state policy that supports dual credit programs directly is senate bill SB374, which “aims to broaden access and participation in all forms of dual credit,” (Hodara & Wang, 2015, p. 1). What SB734 effectively did was to open dual enrollment to a wide range of students previously excluded, including younger students (high school freshman), as well as home-schooled students. Moreover, SB734 ensured that access to dual enrollment programs would be expanded via different admissions methods. Whereas previous admissions into dual enrollment programs was achieved through standardized tests only, now the state requires multiple types of admissions assessment methods (Hodara & Wang, 2015). The SB734 does not, however, offer additional funding for students’ tuition or school fees (Hodara & Wang, 2015). To alleviate budget restrictions, the state of Hawaii’s Department of Education has been seeking additional federal funding (“Hawaii 'dual credit' high schoolers more likely to go to college,” 2016). Funding shortfalls are disproportionately affecting Hawaii’s rural residents. “Rural districts losing revenue due to waning K-12 student enrollment may be forced to choose between limiting dual enrollment course opportunities and making staffing reductions,” (Dournay, 2014, p. 1).
Geography (Rural vs Urban)
There are a number of access issues related to geography. Osumi (2010) found geographic distance from a postsecondary campus had a strong bearing on student participation in the dual enrollment programs, for obvious reasons. Students who live in remote and rural areas cannot reasonably attend the dual enrollment courses offered in the Running Start program. Running Start requires that the students make their own way to the college campuses, and also have to pay for the courses. As Dounay (2014) points out, rural dual enrollment looks better on paper than it is in practice. Osumi (2010) notes that one of the accessibility problems with dual enrollment has been the inability to effectively share information about these programs, or deliver program content to rural communities. Increasing the availability of technology might help rural students remotely access dual credit courses.
Other logistically issues are on the supply side of education. Rural school districts find it difficult to attract and retain qualified teachers who can offer the dual enrollment courses in the rural schools (Dounay, 2014). Geographic access is an issue even when the programs like Early Start, which allows the students to receive the college credit courses right from their local high school instead of on a remote college campus. Educators are unable o unwilling to drive to remote schools just to teach the dual enrollment courses because they lack financial incentives to do so (Dounay, 2014).
Culture
Cultural barriers to accessing dual-education programs must be taken into account when situating them within the Hawaiian public education system. About 30% of students enrolled in the state’s public schools are Hawaiian (Takayama, 2008). Another 22 percent or more are Filipino—meaning that together Hawaiian and Filipino students comprise half the student body in Hawaiian public schools (Halagao, n.d.). Native Hawaiians have “poorer educational achievement compared to their peers in public schools,” (Kana‘iaupuni & Ledward, 2013, p. 154). Likewise, Filipino students have poorer achievement compared with their peers from “dominant” ethnic groups including Japanese, Chinese, and white (Halagao, n.d). These differential achievement scores impact enrollment in dual credit programs. For example, Osumi (2010) found Hawaii‘s dual credit student participation rates differed by ethnic groups. The reasons for the differences in enrollment in dual credit courses has to do with the admissions requirements to these courses (which are often test-based), and also has to do with cultural relevance.
To reduce the achievement gap between Hawaiian and non-Hawaiian students, several researchers (Kana‘iaupuni & Ledward, 2013; Takayama, 2008) recommend creating culturally relevant course content both within the dual-enrollment programs and in the mainstream high school curriculum. “Teachers can and must make learning culturally meaningful to their students and families by honoring culture and place in teaching and learning with respect to the heritage language, family and community involvement, instructional content and context, and authentic assessment,” (Kana‘iaupuni & Ledward, 2013, p. 153). Hawaiian students are more likely to be inspired by the content of their classes and motivated to attend college when they recognize that they have a valuable role to play in their communities, and when they realize that college education may enhance their ability to perform that role. Moreover, Hawaiian students are more likely to perform well in dual enrollment programs, high school, and higher education when the curriculum and pedagogy are culturally relevant. Takayama (2008) also recommends that Hawaiian higher education and the private sector do more to lure students back to the island when they have pursued their higher education degree elsewhere. This would help strengthen the caliber of Hawaiian education overall by proving that it has value and worth for community enhancement and wellbeing. The success of Hawaiian language and culture-based (HLCB) schools in promoting the academic success among students in rural communities should be instructive in informing best practices with regards to implementing or modifying the dual enrollment programs in Hawaii (Takayama, 2008).
Intersections between culture and socio-economic class may also be important when analyzing access issues in dual enrollment programs in Hawaii. Halagao (n.d.) and Takayama (2008) both point to the unique experiences of significant ethnic minority groups in Hawaiian schools, such as Filipino. Like the Hawaiians, Filipinos along with Samoans are “considered subordinate” on the islands due to their lack of access to financial, political, and social power versus the “dominant” groups of Chinese, Japanese, and white (Halagao, n.d., p. 6). Yet Filipinos are also one of the largest ethnic groups represented in student populations in Hawaii, and also happen to have lower achievement scores versus members of the “dominant” social groups (Halagao, n.d., p. 6). Therefore, HLCB is only one solution to increasing cultural competency in the dual enrollment program model. The dual enrollment programs need to be made culturally relevant to all of Hawaii’s students. Given that almost half of all Hawaiian students are either Hawaiian or Filipino, it makes sense to create dual enrollment programs that are particularly relevant and accessible to these important communities. The dual enrollment programs are in fact needed by the underserved communities most of all, in order to reduce the long-term achievement gap. After all, one of the effects of attending dual enrollment courses is related to identity and self-perception. Research has shown that students participating in dual credit/dual enrollment courses are “more likely to see themselves pursuing higher education,” (“Hawaii 'dual credit' high schoolers more likely to go to college,” 2016).
Effectiveness
Strategies for Improving Enrollment: Project Ho‘oku‘i
Dual enrollment programs have been shown to improve access to and success in college for all groups regardless of ethnicity or socio-economic class. However, Hawaiian students remain critically under-represented in dual-enrollment programs. Native Hawaiians are the ethnic group most disproportionately underrepresented in dual enrollment (Roberts & Hitchcock, 2017). Project Ho‘oku‘i was introduced in 2014 to correct this problem. Meaning “to join things together,” Project Ho‘oku‘i was initiated and implemented by the University of Hawai‘i at M?noa Center on Disability Studies, and funded in part by the United States Department of Education Native Hawaiian Education Program. Project Ho‘oku‘i is specifically designed to promote dual enrollment among Hawaiian students. The program is designed to be culturally relevant, helping students to locate themselves within their greater social world and seeing how higher education might fit into that plan. Moreover, the Project was also designed to remove some of the financial barriers experienced by Hawaiian students and their families. The program also offered additional help with funding student transportation, which addresses the accessibility issue of geography and logistics. Finally, Project Ho‘oku‘i provided structural and institutional supports to promote student success in the dual enrollment program. Those supports included after-school tutoring and ongoing culturally relevant counseling, plus pairing with a Hawaiian mentor (Roberts & Hitchcock, 2017). In a survey of 103 Hawaiian students who participated in Project Ho‘oku‘i over a 12-month period, Roberts & Hitchcock (2017) found several promising results.
Themes that emerged were related to the students’ self-perception, the perception of dual-enrollment programs, and the perception of education and higher education in a more general sense. The results showed that the majority (95%) of Hawaiian students did think positively about their own future and career, expressing a strong recognition of their future goals, values, and dreams and how education would promote the fulfillment of those goals. The majority of the students (95%) had relatively clear career goals (Roberts & Hitchcock, 2017). Results also showed that students were more motivated to complete college. More importantly, the project results show how important cultural relevance is in dual enrollment programs in Hawaii. Almost all the students (95%) stated that their mentor was instrumental in helping them with concrete aspects of academic success such as time management, essay writing, math, and other essential survival skills (Roberts & Hitchcock, 2017). Other logistical supports provided by mentors included help with college applications, helping students and their families learn about the scholarships and financial aid programs available to them, and helping them figure out the red tape on financial aid forms. The participants also expressed a deepening of their sense of kuleana (responsibility) “to be positive role models for younger siblings, cousins, and community members,” (p. 8). Roberts & Hitchcock (2017) also found that the students reported “viewing academic journeys as collective endeavors,” (p. 8). The program also had some unintended positive results, such as enhancing cultural identity, helping “deepen students’ sense of ha‘aheo (pride) and pono?i (self and place)” (p. 9).
The results of Project Ho‘oku‘i show that effectiveness of dual enrollment programs has just as much to do with making school and college meaningful for students as it means offering students specific course-related knowledge that prepares them to succeed in higher education. Dual enrollment programs need to encourage all students to locate their goals within the higher education system, and to show them how setting goals and reaching them can be accomplished in culturally relevant ways. When students understand exactly what a college education means to their own goals, helping their family, and contributing to their community, they are also more likely to complete college once they have been enrolled. Effectiveness of dual enrollment must be measured not just in terms of college matriculation but also in terms of completion of programs.
Overall Effectiveness
The stated goal of dual enrollment programs in Hawaii has been to increase “readiness” for college, which tends to be one of the most commonly cited goals for the dual enrollment (Hodara & Wang, 2015, p. 2). Readiness means different things for different students, but generally readiness entails the cognitive and academic preparedness that comes from having prerequisite knowledge for navigating first-year college classes, as well as time management, study skills, writing skills, and test-taking skills. Other types of readiness include social and psychological readiness, which is not addressed through traditional dual enrollment but might be otherwise through programs like Project Ho‘oku‘i. It is therefore important that Hawaiian educators pay closer attention tot he success of Project Ho‘oku‘i and employ more of these programs throughout the state.
College readiness should be integrated directly into the mainstream curriculum at high schools, but it is not. As a result, dual-enrollment programs are picking up where schools leave off, taking up the slack. Research consistently reveals deplorable nationwide standards for college readiness. Upon high school graduation about 50% of whites and 80% of blacks and Hispanics in Texas were not “academically prepared” for college (Young, Slate, Moore, et al, 2014, p. 203). Dual enrollment programs are designed to remedy such problems, with a target audience of all students in state. In addition to Running Start and Early College/Early Admission, Hawaii also offers ancillary and integrated college preparatory tools like AP classes. Like Early College, AP classes remove the geographic and financial constraints presented by Running Start. Running Start has, however, been successful at increasing college admissions overall and increasing retention. Although not as relevant to Hawaii’s rural residents, Running Start does serve a significant number of students in more densely populated regions of the state.
Dual enrollment programs in Hawaii have been called a “game changer,” “Hawaii 'dual credit' high schoolers more likely to go to college,” 2016). College enrollment has gone up dramatically since the programs have been implemented statewide, with corresponding policy and funding changes. Recent studies show 81 percent of high school students who took dual enrollment courses enrolled in college, versus 53 percent of their non-dually enrolled counterparts (“Hawaii 'dual credit' high schoolers more likely to go to college,” 2016). These differences are striking, and should be celebrated, while also acknowledging the need to make dual enrollment more accessible to rural and other underserved Hawaiian students.
Effectiveness of dual enrollment also means students stay in college longer, and complete college. In fact, Running Start has been proven effective in this regard too. Osumi (2010) found that “Running Start participants entered postsecondary education and earned degrees at higher rates that statewide averages,” (viii). Running Start has also had the effect of improving Hawaiian students’ overall grades and academic performance in high school and college, with the majority of participants (86%) of Running Start participants earned grades of C or better. The results of dual enrollment programs have been particularly promising for low-income students in Hawaii. According to the Partnerships in Education analysis, 76 percent of economically disadvantaged students in Hawaii participating in dual enrollment courses went on to college; only 41% of economically disadvantaged students who did not participate in the dual-enrollment programs went to college (“Hawaii 'dual credit' high schoolers more likely to go to college,” 2016). That means low-income Hawaiians are almost twice as likely to attend college if they participate in dual enrollment programs. Dual enrollment also seems to have made a difference in overall retention numbers, with 80 percent of low-income students remaining in college past one year, versus 67 percent of those who did not participate in dual enrollment (“Hawaii 'dual credit' high schoolers more likely to go to college,” 2016). Given the potential for higher education to uplift individuals and communities, dual enrollment seems destined to become an integral part of Hawaiian public school systems.
Conclusion and Recommendations
As successful as Running Start, Early College/Early Admission, and GEAR UP have been on multiple levels, there is room for improvement. The Hawaiian Department of Education has done a good job in responding to the needs of underserved communities, especially with regards to the pilot program of Project Ho‘oku‘i. It is strongly recommended that Project Ho‘oku‘i continue as a permanent program. It is also recommended that the Project Ho‘oku‘i model be adapted to serve the Filipino and Samoan communities, if possible.
The future of Hawaii’s dual enrollment programs also depends on liberating resources to fund them. Funding may come from a variety of sources ranging from the federal government and the non-profit sector to the private sector. Regardless of where the funding comes from, it is important to allocate it so that rural residents have access to dual enrollment programs.
Finally, technology has the potential to improve accessibility of dual enrollment programs. The state should partner with the University of Hawaii system to provide rural regional schools with access to technology and digital coursework. Digital courses and remote learning could reduce some of the logistical problems with accessing dual enrollment courses.





References

Dounay, J. (2014). Dual Enrollment: A Strategy to Improve College-Going and College Completion among Rural Students. College and Career Readiness Center. 13 June, 2014. https://ccrscenter.org/blog/dual-enrollment-strategy-improve-college-going-and-college-completion-among-rural-students
Dual Credit (2017). Website: https://www.hawaii.edu/dualcredit/
Halagao, P.E. (n.d.). Exposing K–12 Filipino Achievement Gaps and Opportunities in Hawai‘i Public Schools. Educational Perspectives 48(1-2): https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1143598.pdf
“Hawaii 'dual credit' high schoolers more likely to go to college,” (2016). Hawaii News Now. 6 Sept 2016, http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/33054195/hawaii-high-schoolers-who-get-college-credit-more-likely-to-seek-higher-education
Hawaii State Department of Education (2017). Strive HI Performance System. http://www.hawaiipublicschools.org/VisionForSuccess/AdvancingEducation/StriveHIPerformanceSystem/Pages/home.aspx
Hodara, M. & Wang, C. (2015). Expanding Opportunities to Earn College Credit at Rural Title I High Schools in Hawai’i: A Case Study of Dual-Credit Programs. Education Northwest.
Kana‘iaupuni, S.M. & Ledward, B.C. (2013). Ho‘opilina: The Call for Cultural Relevance in Education. Hülili: Multidisciplinary Research on Hawaiian Well-Being 9 (2013): http://www.kpublishing.org/_assets/publishing/hulili/Hulili_Vol9_7.pdf
Osumi, J.M. (2010). The influence of counselors and high school organization on the selection of participants for a dual credit program. Dissertation for University of Southern California. https://search.proquest.com/openview/afd899fb14a0d88debedc31b34ee1417/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y
Roberts, K.D. & Hitchcock, C.H. (2017). Impact of Culturally Aligned Supports on Native Hawaiian High School Students’ College Attendance: A Qualitative Perspective. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, DOI: 10.1080/10668926.2017.1284698
“Running Start,” (n.d.). https://www.hawaii.edu/dualcredit/running-start/
Takayama, B. (2008). Academic Achievement Across School Types in Hawaii: Outcomes for Hawaiian and Non-Hawaiian Students in Conventional Public Schools, Western Focused Charters, and Hawaiian Language and Culture-Based Schools. Hulili 5(2008): http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.520.4101&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Young, R.D., Slate, J.R., Moore, G.W., et al (2014). Dual credit and non-dual credit college students: differences in GPAs after the second semester. Journal of Education and Human Development 3(2): 203-230.