This paper investigates the accessibility of dual credit (dual enrollment) programs in Hawaii — including Running Start, Early College, and GEAR UP — for underserved student populations such as English language learners (ELLs), new immigrants, and economically disadvantaged youth. Drawing on a review of existing literature, the paper identifies three central barriers: inadequate promotion of programs to target populations, financial costs, and cultural and linguistic obstacles. The paper then proposes a large-scale quantitative survey research design modeled after the Hawaii School Quality Survey to assess perceptions of dual credit accessibility. Ethical and financial considerations related to conducting research with vulnerable populations are also addressed.
Dual credit (dual enrollment) programs have met with tremendous success in the state of Hawaii and elsewhere. These programs — which include GEAR UP, Running Start, and Early College — allow high school students to earn college credit, thereby easing the financial burden they will face in university. Moreover, dual credit programs have also increased college enrollment rates among Hawaii students (Inefuku, 2017). Not only do dual credit programs improve college readiness and admission rates, they also help prepare students for a more successful college career, with higher rates of graduation and thus improved overall educational and career outcomes.
While dual credit programs are designed for all students, they can be of particular help to disadvantaged and underserved populations. The problem is that not all underrepresented students have access to dual credit programs, and not all dual credit programs are adaptable to suit English language learners.
This research is motivated by several interrelated issues, all of which will help improve overall accountability and ethical integrity in education. Accountability is a primary rationale. The United States Department of Education (2017) claims that dual credit programs "are designed to boost college access and degree attainment, especially for students typically underrepresented in higher education" (p. 1). If students who are typically underrepresented in higher education — such as English language learners (ELLs) and economically disadvantaged students — are not benefitting enough from dual credit programs, then educators have a professional and ethical obligation to review how those programs are designed, how they are promoted, and how students and their parents perceive their accessibility, efficacy, and applicability to their own needs.
Furthermore, the first principle in the State of Hawaii's Teacher Standards Board (2018) Code of Ethics is responsibility to the profession. Responsibility to the profession means taking responsibility and actively participating in research that will positively impact the profession and help educators reach their goals in helping students. The second principle in the Teacher Standards Board (2018) Code of Ethics specifically mentions the ethical importance of conducting education research to inform practice.
The second reason for this research relates to social justice and equity. Teachers have a responsibility to their students and to the profession as a whole to "understand students' educational, academic, personal and social needs" (State of Hawaiʻi, Hawaiʻi Teacher Standards Board, 2018, III.11). Research in education should be designed with social justice aims in mind, helping students who are economically disadvantaged or who are underrepresented in dual credit programs to achieve their goals.
Finally, it is also important to mention finances as part of the research rationale. Dual credit programs should be constructed with maximum cost-effectiveness in mind, to avoid wastefulness in limited state education budgets. If there are inefficiencies in service delivery, then educators have an obligation to improve the nature of special programs like dual credit so that they maximize value.
With a special focus on English language learners, new immigrants, and economically disadvantaged students, this research will help the Hawaii State Board of Education (2018) fulfill its mission "to promote excellence and equity in Hawaii's public schools and enable all students to meet their own unique and varied potentials" (p. 1).
A review of the literature reveals several themes related to how well dual credit programs serve Hawaii students. Themes that emerge include financial constraints, limitations in how well dual credit programs are promoted to underserved students, and cultural and linguistic barriers.
For dual credit programs to be effective, students have to learn about them. Formal points of access include teachers and school counselors, while informal points of access include hearing about the programs from peers and other parents. New immigrants, ELLs, and economically disadvantaged students may not learn about dual credit programs from either formal or informal sources. For example, research shows that school counselors in the State of Hawaii have "relied on students to self-identify" as interested in Running Start (Osumi, 2010, p. viii). Students who do not yet know about Running Start and other dual credit programs cannot self-identify.
The research reveals that one of the most important methods of improving the equitability of dual credit is by promoting these programs more effectively. Admissions criteria must also be taken into account and possibly changed to reflect the differential needs of students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds or students who are ELLs. Standardized tests can especially disadvantage ELLs. The research shows that the state requires multiple types of admissions assessment methods for entry to dual credit programs (Hodara & Wang, 2015). However, educators and school counselors need to play a more active role in reaching out to ELLs and their families, as well as to economically disadvantaged students and their families.
"Running Start costs limit access for low-income families"
"Ethnic minority gaps widen without culturally relevant programs"
"Large-scale multilingual survey modeled on Hawaii SQS"
You’re 40% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 3 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.