A Literature Review and Analysis

of College Readiness in Practice

Background
Recent studies within education research have identified a disconnect between high
school and college as evidenced by data such as high level of remediation courses,
high college drop-out rate, and overall poor performance of first-year students in
post-secondary settings (Venezia, et al, 2003). The K-16 disconnect issue is even
more apparent among first-generation and minority college students (Kirst &
Venezia, 2004; Conley, 2005). Traditional programs that bridge the education
systems between K-12 and college such as AP, dual/concurrent enrollment, and IB
have only reached a minority of college bound students, leaving a number of
students ill-prepared for postsecondary learning (Conley, 2005). Regardless of
learner background and preparation, first year college students are not performing
at a ‘college level’ in their post-secondary endeavors with 61 percent of these
students in 2-year public schools taking at least one remedial course (NCES 2004-
010).

Framing the issue with the term ‘college readiness’, academics have produced
research literature describing the high school-college disconnect and have proposed
approaches to bridge the gap within the education system along two major veins.
One direction involves establishing college readiness standards on a subject-by-
subject level, while also embedding distinctive learning practices in the curriculum,
such as college level cognitive strategies and ‘habits of the mind’ (Conley, 2007).
Other solutions involve a more macro approach, informing state policy makers and
education administrators on ways to improve the alignment of education as a K-16
system (Venezia, et al, 2003).

Research questions
Drawing from the current college readiness research, this literature review involves
investigating college readiness and related terms to establish a conceptual
landscape of the college readiness discussion as it relates to the facilitation and
implementation of change for the K-12 and postsecondary system. The intention of
the review is to further define and disseminate the notion of college readiness to
the education community by attempting to answer the following questions:

• How is college readiness defined within the literature?

• What are the parallels and intersections amongst the literature?
• What criteria can be extracted from the literature to guide in the
analysis of college readiness initiatives?
 • What college readiness skills and curriculum standards does the
literature indicate?
• How can the college readiness landscape be used to inform
stakeholders on improving the education system?

Methodology
The primary task of this literature review is to initially define what college readiness
is and examine how this definition has guided educators, policymakers, and
stakeholders in developing instructional and informational solutions. To accomplish
this task, the facets of the definition are being used to establish a set of
comparative criteria which function as filters for an initial illustrative state-by-state
college readiness implementation analysis. Furthermore, as the literature reveals,
college readiness also involves defining student behaviors or ‘habits of the mind’,
and other skills needed to fill the K-16 disconnect. The parallels in the definitions
might also function as further curriculum guidelines.

Defining College Readiness

The principal definition of college readiness derives from the research of Conley
(2007) through the Educational Policy Improvement Center (EPIC). Conley (2007)
defined college readiness as a “multi-faceted concept compromising numerous
variables that include factors both internal and external to the school environment”
(p. 12). These variables are overlapping and interconnected skills and capabilities
students need to possess in order to be college ready. These include contextual
skills relating to college life, academic behaviors relating to study skills and
metacogntion, mastery of key curriculum content and academic skills, and most
fundamental, the knowledge required to master subjects defined as key cognitive
strategies, or habits of the mind.

Analyzing the Standards

The four variables in Conley’s definition each contain potential research directions
that can inform high school curriculum development and curriculum design. Of note,
Conley and EPIC have developed a comprehensive set of college readiness
standards titled, Standards for Success (S4S) which focus on disciplines of English,
Math, Natural and Social Sciences, Second Languages, and Arts. The standards
encompass content knowledge and are underlined with key cognitive strategies
(Conley, 2003; 2005). Other groups and states have established similar standards
related to college readiness such as the American Diploma Project (ADP), and
testing companies such as College Board (College Board Standards for College
Success), and ACT (College Readiness Standards for EXPLORE, PLAN, and the ACT).

To enhance the understanding of the standards within Conley’s model, part of this
research focuses on comparing the S4S standards with the ADP standards and
extracting the cognitive strategies from the analysis. Moving forward, the process
will consists of establishing a list of key cognitive strategies, summarizing the
standards from the literature, and identifying the intersections between the
standards and strategies.

Program analysis criteria

As indicated in the college readiness literature, part of the issue is framed within a
policy disconnect (Venezia, et al, 2003). When states adopt new policies on
implementing college readiness, policymakers may or may not be facilitating
change appropriately. Therefore, at this initial stage of our project, it is important to
identify and focus analysis also on these policy level implications. Thus far we have
extracted several analysis criteria to be used to evaluate state-based college
readiness initiatives (Conley, 2007; Callan et. al, 2006; Kirst & Venezia, 2005).
These include:

• K-16 alignment of coursework and assessment

• College ready knowledge and skills embedded in curriculum

• A comprehensive assessment system

• State college readiness budget

• Statewide data system

• State accountability system

• Student and teacher support

Further directions
Our process has just begun and begun to shape into three major elements, each of
which can potentially lead to other research directions. These include analyzing the
college readiness standards, defining the ‘habits’ of the mind’ required for
postsecondary success into curriculum guidelines, and establishing criterion to
evaluate state college readiness programs. The intention at this phase is to paint a
landscape of college readiness and follow the research threads as they reveal
themselves in the literature. In essence, this work might serve as a compendium on
college readiness, compiling a database of articles and reports – both theoretical
and prescriptive – which might serve as an instructional guide for the education
community.

Bibliography
Callan, P.M., Finnery, J.E., Kirst, M.W., Usdan, M.D., & Venezia, A. (2006). Claiming
Common Ground: State Policymaking for Improving College Readiness and Success.
The National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education. National Center Report
#06-1.

Conley, D. T. (2005). College Knowledge. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Conley, D. T. (2003). Understanding University Success: A Project of the Association

of American Universities and The Pew Charitable Trusts. Eugene: Center for
Educational Policy Research.

Conley, D. (2007). Towards a More Comprehensive Comprehension of College

Readiness. Eugene, OR: Educational Policy Improvement Center.

Kirst, M. V. (2004). From High School to College: Improving Opportunities for

Success in Postseconday Eudcation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES).

(2004). The Condition of Education (NCES 2004-077). Washington, DC: Government
Printing Office.

Venezia, A., Kirst, M.W., & Antonio, A.L. (2003). Betraying the college dream: How
disconnected K-12 and postsecondary education systems undermine student
aspirations. Final Policy Report from Stanford University’s Bridge Project.

Venezia, A. & Kirst, M.W. (2005). Inequitable opportunities: How current education
systems and policies undermine chances for student persistence and success in
college. Educational Policy, 19(2), 283-307.