Students From Less Privileged Families Have the Potential to Pursue Four-Year Courses - Argumentative Essay

Introduction

The conventional four-year degree programs are, supposedly, not meant for everybody. Some students are unsure of the courses they intend to pursue while others have their study options limited due to affordability concerns. Community colleges provide a good opportunity for students experiencing such quandaries. However, ignorance by lawmakers on the importance of community colleges in providing less privileged Americans with affordable education has led to the failure of these colleges. In this line, Porter (par. 12) argues that lawmakers disregard the fact that most American students in the search for higher education lack the financial, cognitive and social preparedness to enroll in a four-year bachelor's program. Though the above claim sheds light on the reason why most students are not in a four-year degree program and the role played by community colleges in fostering an impartial society where every student can access higher learning, it seems to create an upper limit of education that less privileged Americans cannot break. In light of this shortcoming, this paper will counter Porter's claim by arguing that students from financially-stressed families also have the potential to pursue four-year courses, which can be realized by putting more emphasis on early childhood education, implementing the Common Core State Standards in all high schools and bolstering the capacity of community colleges to offer four-year programs.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Early childhood education is an important stage in the school system that prepares students cognitively and socially for more intensive learning experiences at high school and college levels. Bakken et al. (255) acknowledge that children develop regulatory, psychological, social, cognitive and communication skills at a tender age of between 1 and 5years. One early childhood development initiatives that focus on developing the above skills is "The Opportunity Project (TOP)", which also presents an opportunity for children from economically-stressed families to access an early stimulating learning environment. The TOP curriculum is formulated in a way that children learn about diversity, a sense of belonging, a sense of the self and develop active learning skills that foster their outlook towards education (Bakken et al. 257). In addition to cognitive development, behavioral and developmental sciences maintain that the provision of well-crafted early childhood programs enhances children's readiness for school, acts as the groundwork for future academic success and narrows the achievement gap between children from high-income households and those from low-income households (Rao et al. 6). Formal preschool programs facilitate a superior cognitive development compared to home-based or community-based programs. Nonetheless, the preschool experience is better than having none since, regardless of the resources used, it provides a good level of school readiness required to adapt to the more intensive learning in high school and eventually in bachelor's degree programs (Rao et al. 60). Therefore, State governments, as well as the Federal government, need to emphasize the need for a good childhood education for all children to ensure the development of vital social and cognitive skills, right from a young age, which would help students scale the heights of education.

Another approach to equipping more students from financially-stressed backgrounds for four-year courses is integrating the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) in high schools' curriculums across all States. Venezia and Laura (117) describe CSSS as a collection of objectives and expectations in Mathematics and English subjects that propel high school students towards ameliorating their university and vocational preparedness. Some States in the US are already embracing these standards. Of importance to note, however, is that to achieve the required level of college readiness among high school students from low-income families, the CSSS should be accompanied by a focus on advancing strong non-cognitive skills, professional development and knowledge that enables students to prepare and choose the most suitable institution of higher education. Rather than only teaching abstract concepts such as algebra that call for the application of predetermined algorithms or formulae, the CSSS engage students in critical thinking and problem-solving tasks that develop their understanding of concepts as well as improve their analytical thinking skills valued in four-year degree courses (Venezia & Laura 119). Centers (1) acknowledge that the establishment of the CSSS was a positive measure that depicts the Federal government's commitment toward enhancing students' preparedness for universities and careers. Furthermore, the CSSS have the ability to prepare students from all backgrounds to maneuver through postsecondary education challenges. This feat can only be achieved by implementing standards that constantly emphasize education equity. For that reason, high schools' management teams and teachers must espouse the CSSS and be ready to understand, support and engage underperforming students in more rigorous training activities to assist them in improving their grades.

In addition to the above two measures, bolstering the capacity of community colleges to offer four-year degree courses will also ensure that students from less privileged families do not limit their higher learning options to only two-year programs. As a strategy to solve affordability issues, facilitate access to higher education and fulfill labor force demands, 23 States in the US have permitted some of their community colleges to award degree programs (Fulton 2). These States include Utah, California, Arkansas, Florida and Georgia among others. Despite these State endorsements, some detractors assert that community college four-year courses overtax the institution's training resources, undermine cross-sector partnerships, compete with four-year institutions and assign additional roles that exceed the colleges' traditional duty. Nonetheless, by improving the capacity of community colleges to offer baccalaureate programs, the above shortcomings will have been effectively counteracted by potential benefits such as an expanded access to four-year courses for all students, the provision of more affordable bachelor's programs and preparing more students to meet career demands after graduating (Fulton 5). To further justify the need to build capacity, Carter (par. 1) mentions a case study of the effect that community colleges offering degree impose on neighboring four-year institutions in Florida. The results from this study showed no considerable effect on degree production in these institutions, a reduction in degree production in for-profit institutions. On the other hand, degree production increased in four-year public institutions (Carter par. 2). Based on the above findings, it can be inferred that private institutions did not gain from the expanded role of community colleges due to cost differences in the degree programs offered. All in all, since the study reveals more harm from private institutions than public institutions, improving the capacity of community colleges to offer two-year and four-year courses is, arguably, a twofold positive for higher education in the US.

Conclusion

The argument above has reiterated that students from all backgrounds can pursue four-year degree programs as long as the financial, cognitive and social constraints are addressed. This paper countered Porter's claim of the inability of less privileged students to enroll in bachelor's courses by arguing that they also have the potential to pursue these courses, a feat that can be realized by putting more emphasis on early childhood education, implementing the Common Core State Standards in all high schools and bolstering the capacity of community colleges to offer four-year programs. For that reason, there should be no pretext that four-year courses are only meant for a few able students with those from financially-stressed families restricted to pursuing two-year courses.

Works Cited

Bakken, Linda, Nola Brown, and Barry Downing. "Early childhood education: The long-term benefits." Journal of research in Childhood Education 31.2 (2017): 255-269.

Carter, Jarrett. "No, Community Colleges Offering 4-Year Degrees Does Not Hurt Neighboring 4-Year Campuses". Education Dive, 2018, https://www.educationdive.com/news/no-community-colleges-offering-4-year-degrees-does-not-hurt-neighboring-4-/521486/. Accessed 10 Nov 2018.

Centers, Regional Equity Assistance. "How the Common Core must ensure equity by fully preparing every student for postsecondary success: Recommendations from the Regional Equity Assistance Centers on implementation of the Common Core State Standards." San Francisco, CA: WestEd (2013).

Fulton, Mary. "Community Colleges Expanded Role into Awarding Bachelor's Degrees. ECS Education Policy Analysis." Education commission of the States (2015).

Porter, Eduardo. "The Promise and Failure of Community Colleges". Nytimes.Com, 2015, https://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/18/business/economy/the-promise-and-failure-of-community-colleges.html. Accessed 10 Nov 2018.

Rao, N., et al. "Early childhood development and cognitive development in developing countries: A rigorous literature review. Department for International Development." (2014).

Venezia, Andrea, and Laura Jaeger. "Transitions from high school to college." The future of children (2013): 117-136.