Dual Credit Programs and the Educational Achievement Gap

Introduction: The Promise and Problem of Dual Credit

Dual credit and dual enrollment programs "are designed to boost college access and degree attainment, especially for students typically underrepresented in higher education" (United States Department of Education, 2017, p. 1). With this lofty goal established, one might expect dual credit programs to be reducing the educational achievement gap. By definition, dual credit programs allow all students the opportunity to potentially shorten the time they spend in college, thereby reducing the tuition costs that can otherwise prevent degree completion. Yet recent research shows that college enrollment and completion gaps may be getting wider, based on both ethnicity and socioeconomic class (Gewertz, 2017). The results of the RAND study reported by Gewertz (2017) may not be directly applicable to the state of Hawaii; nevertheless, educational attainment disparities do persist, and it is the role of the state's Department of Education to make dual credit programs more effective and cost-effective.

Framing the Research Questions

Research questions could therefore focus on several aspects of the problem. The first set of questions might address how to operationalize success rates and how to determine whether dual credit is actually increasing disparities in educational attainment. A second set could explore perceptions of dual credit programs among students, parents, and educators, in order to determine whether there are reasons why disadvantaged students might be (a) using dual enrollment less often than their more privileged peers, and/or (b) not entering or completing a college degree program after participating in dual credit successfully.

Survey research might also help policymakers in Hawaii determine what interventions are most needed. For example, is it more important to improve the visibility and accessibility of dual credit programs among specific populations — such as new immigrants and English language learners — or is it more pressing to provide structural supports for disadvantaged students during their dual enrollment courses? Alternatively, perhaps dual credit itself is not the core issue, and it is rather higher education culture and climate that prevents disadvantaged students from achieving desired outcomes. The precise research questions will then determine the appropriate research design and whether qualitative or quantitative methods would be more effective.

The Case for Qualitative and Phenomenological Methods

In deciding on a research design, the researcher's philosophical goal is also a determining factor: to influence public policy and educational practice. Because the purpose of this research is to make dual credit programs more effective and relevant for specific underserved populations — particularly low-income students and English language learners — phenomenological research is the most appropriate choice.

Qualitative and phenomenological research has distinct advantages over quantitative designs, especially for a proposal of this nature. Camburn, Goldring, Sebastian, et al. (2016) offer insight into why certain types of quantitative research fail to change real-world behaviors or outcomes. Quantitative research can demonstrate that something is not working but cannot fully illuminate exactly why or how (Camburn, Goldring, Sebastian, et al., 2016). The primary reason is that there are multiple complex variables which an experimental design cannot comprehensively account for while still maintaining validity and reliability. As both Camburn, Goldring, Sebastian, et al. (2016) and Muijs (n.d.) note, the results of quantitative research are not necessarily generalizable even when they are internally valid.

This proposal therefore calls for a systematic and in-depth use of qualitative methods to explore the attitudes, perceptions, and lived experiences of low-income students, students who are new immigrants or English language learners, and their families. The population would be narrowed to those who are currently in high school and therefore eligible for dual credit enrollment. In-depth interviews would then be conducted with those same families several years later, following successful or unsuccessful degree completion. Surveying the same families over time would constitute a longitudinal study, thereby increasing internal validity and allowing for the measurement of meaningful variables that affect dual credit program design and implementation. This research would illuminate why not all students from disadvantaged backgrounds in Hawaii are benefitting as fully as they could, and should, from dual credit programs.

Camburn, E. M., Goldring, E., Sebastian, J., et al. (2016). An examination of the benefits, limitations, and challenges of conducting randomized controlled experiments with principals. Education Administration Quarterly, 52(2), 187–220.

Gewertz, C. (2017, August 29). Dual credit: Race and income gaps are getting wider, study finds. Education Week. http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/high_school_and_beyond/2017/08/dual_credit_race_and_income_gaps_getting_wider.html

Lopez-Alvarado, J. (2017). Educational research.