non-traditional students and rural community … · non-traditional students and rural community...

Running head: NON-TRADITIONAL STUDENTS 1

Non-Traditional Students and Rural Community Colleges

Courtney Nikolay

Oregon State University

NON-TRADITIONAL STUDENTS 2

Abstract

Rural America has traditionally faced low per-capita income, low levels of educational attainment,

slow job growth, high poverty, and high unemployment (Gillett-Karam, 1995). As the job market

and economy have become more competitive and technology-based, rural America‟s economic

stagnation has become magnified. Citizens are now pressured more than ever to update their

knowledge and skills to compete in the changing job market. Therefore, rural community colleges

have been witnessing increasing enrollment for the last decade, especially of non-traditional

students. Unfortunately, rural community colleges are “fragile institutions serving fragile

communities” (Fluharty & Scaggs, 2007, p. 19), which does not facilitate a supportive learning

environment for students who face financial and social barriers within higher education. To

support this unique student population, student affairs professionals and policymakers must

address their many needs so that they can ultimately be competitive with their urban and/or four-

year peers.

Keywords: rural, community college, trends, non-traditional, first-generation, challenges,

student affairs, student development theory, support


Non-Traditional Students and Rural Community Colleges

Rural communities throughout the United States are facing significant issues and problems

exacerbated by the current economic recession, such as disappearing businesses, failing industries,

and declining educational systems. Historically, many jobs in rural areas did not require a post-

secondary education; however, advances in technology and globalization have made it difficult to

be financially successful without some level of higher education. Consequently, rural community

colleges are witnessing increasing enrollment of non-traditional students whether first-generation

or older adults. In fact, students who are considered to be non-traditional at four-year institutions

are becoming the traditional student at rural community colleges. Non-traditional students at rural

community colleges face many key barriers: (a) overall unfamiliarity with college; (b) low

education levels; (c) financial insecurity; (d) family responsibilities; and (e) distance, inadequate

transportation, and housing. As a result, rural student affairs administrators and policymakers must

fully support and address the needs of this increasing student population so that they can be

competitive with their urban and/or four-year counterparts.

What is Rural?

To fully recognize the challenges that rural community colleges face it is important to

understand the characteristics of a rural environment, especially considering 85 percent of the

nation‟s geography consists of rural areas where 65 million reside (Miller & Kissinger, 2007).

Rural America consists of “low population density, low total populations, low-per-capita income,

low levels of educational attainment, slow job growth, high poverty, high unemployment, and high

rates of illiteracy” (Gillett-Karam, 1995, p. 43). As defined by the U.S. Department of Agriculture

(2007), a rural area is considered to be “any unincorporated place…with fewer than 2,500

inhabitants.” Although rural areas share many commonalities, they vary in their geographic


locations. For example, rural areas can be on southern reservations, in Appalachian mining

communities, or next to affluent suburbs.

Many of the concerns and issues that rural residents face are a result of poor academic

preparation before and during high school, which can be seen in both high school graduation rates

and rural college enrollment rates. More than half of all school districts are in rural areas, while

enrollment at rural schools has increased to 10.6 million students, a six percent increase from 2007

(Mahaffey, 2009). Unfortunately, “more than one fifth of the nation‟s two thousand poorest-

performing high schools are located in rural areas” (Alliance for Excellent Education, 2010, p. 3).

Additionally, one in five rural children live in poverty, leading to higher high school drop-out rates

and lower college enrollment rates (Johnson & Strange, 2009). In fact, one out of every four rural

high school students fails to graduate (AEE, 2010). With far less Title I funding than urban

schools, shrinking local tax bases, ineffective teachers, and limited advanced placement and

college preparatory courses, rural schools are less able to prepare students for a future with

postsecondary education.

Rural parents often have conservative values, have lower educational expectations, and are

less supportive of their children in earning a college degree (Shamah, 2009). Since many rural

parents lack a college degree themselves, their children also hold lower educational and

occupational aspirations than their urban peers. “Most rural parents do not have parents with

college degrees to help them navigate the maze to college. Rural parents worry about the costs,

and some do not see the eventual payoff, so they sometimes push back at the idea” (Graves, 2011,

p. 4). If students do not have support from a mentor or do not feel comfortable discussing their

educational or career expectations with their parents, they are more likely to become discouraged

and drop out of high school or become involved with drugs and alcohol.


The students who do aspire to attend college after high school often face a „rural dilemma.‟

They must either move away from their community to experience upward mobility, or they must

lower their aspirations and stay home to work and save money or attend a local community college

(Hektner, 1995). Thus, the rural dilemma has caused some of the brightest students and workers to

leave their rural towns in hopes of finding better opportunities elsewhere, resulting in

outmigration, a small scale brain drain, and an elderly rural population. “Rural students either are

condemned to social failure or almost compelled to leave to find greater opportunities” (Graves,

2011, p. 2). Those who choose to stay in their rural communities usually find low-skilled, low-

wage work positions, or commute to the closest community college.

The Rural Community College

The rural community college is an integral part of the community. Since 1972, when the

first rural community college was built, community colleges have been and continue to be open to

anyone and everyone from all demographics. “No institution in our society cuts across race, class,

age, and gender lines like the community college” (Cavan, 1995, p. 15). In order to be able to train

America‟s rural work force, the community college must be accessible to the most remote and

disadvantaged populations (Hardy & Katsinas, 2007). Unlike students in heavily populated urban

and suburban areas who have the option of attending several public and private four-year

institutions and two-year community colleges, rural students often have only one accessible

option. “For millions of students, the choice is not between a community college and another

institution, „it's between a community college and nothing‟” (Katsinas, 2007, para 2). In order to

serve all populations, the rural community college has focused its mission on being all things to all

people, especially the underprepared, the underrepresented, and the underachieving student

(Blanchard, Casados, & Sheski, 2009). This results “in increasingly fragile institutions serving

increasingly fragile communities” (Fluharty & Scaggs, 2007, p. 19). Consequently, college


enrollment rates for students who are 18 to 29 years-old are lower in rural areas than in urban and

suburban settings (Provasnik, KewalRamani, McLaughlin-Coleman, Gilbertson, Herring, & Xie,

2007).

To be all things to all people, the rural community college has become the land-grant

college of the 21st century working to academically prepare students to transfer into a four-year

degree program or vocationally prepare them for a skilled profession (Katsinas, 2007). It has been

able to provide a practical and liberal education at a cost that even the working classes can afford.

Rural community colleges also emphasize their ability to focus on the student, be flexible and

accessible, provide remedial services, and adapt to their community‟s educational and economic

needs. Thus, the rural community college has become trusted by people across social classes.

Although rural community colleges have an open enrollment policy, students continue to face

enrollment barriers. For example, since rural colleges cover such a large service area, many

students cannot access transportation or afford to travel 25 miles to attend an hour-long class with

gasoline costing nearly four dollars a gallon.

Despite low per capita income, low population density, and low total population in rural

areas, “rural community colleges are the fastest-growing of all community colleges in the United

States” (Nelson, 2010, para 1). There are now 922 rural community college campuses,

representing 59 percent of all community colleges in the country (Hardy & Katsinas, 2007). In

fact, 3,213,977 students attend rural community colleges, which is nearly 35 percent of all

community college students in the United States (Hardy & Katsinas, 2007). A high school

diploma used to be enough to obtain a stable job with benefits; however, as businesses and

agricultural and extractive industries rapidly disappear, rural communities are being forced to

adapt to the new knowledge-based economy. “Between 1980 and 2000, for instance, the share of

rural workers in low-skill jobs fell from 47 to 42 percent” (Gibbs, 2005, p. 1). Consequently,


traditional agriculture and manufacturing-focused industries have been expanding their positions

to require higher-level skills and postsecondary education (AEE, 2010). “The steady erosion of

unskilled jobs negatively affects the educational environment of rural communities, and thus

creates greater poverty” (Murray, 2007, p. 58). Workers in rural communities must diversify and

update their skills in order to become competitive in the 21st century‟s knowledge and technology-

based economy. To gain new academic and vocational skills, adults are now enrolling or

reenrolling in classes at local community colleges while continuing to work full or part-time, with

hopes that they too can achieve the American dream. However, rural colleges have a difficult time

affording high-cost technical programs or the faculty to teach such classes, resulting in outdated

and incomprehensive curricula and less transferable credits to a four-year institution (Murray,

2007).

Non-Traditional Students

Three-fourths of college students today no longer graduate from high school, attend a four-

year institution immediately afterward, and graduate in four years; the traditional route (USA

Today, 2010). Instead, the majority of students are considered to be non-traditional. A non-

traditional student can be defined as one who: (a) delays postsecondary education after high

school; (b) attends school part-time; (c) works full-time while enrolled; (d) is a single parent; (e)

does not have a high school diploma; (f) is financially independent; (g) has dependents such as

children; or (h) is the first person in his or her immediate family to earn a college degree (NCES,

2002). The average age of a rural community college student is 29, increasing the likelihood that

he or she works full or part-time, is financially independent, and is a first-generation college

student (Smith, 2008). Consequently, the rural community college must diversify its staff and

services to support a non-traditional student population in an unstable economic and social

environment.


Non-traditional students tend to be older adults with far different needs than traditional 18-

24 year-olds who have entered higher education immediately after graduating from high school.

Non-traditional rural students also typically have different motivations for enrolling in classes at

their local community college: securing a job and income, advancing their career, and being able

to provide for themselves and family (Mott, 2008). However, non-traditional students at rural

community colleges experience many challenges including: (a) overall unfamiliarity with college;

(b) lower education levels; (c) financial insecurity; (d) family responsibilities; (e) and distance,

inadequate transportation, and housing. Although more adults are enrolling in rural community

colleges, motivated primarily by their potential economic mobility, they must overcome the many

economic, personal, interpersonal, community, and institutional challenges in their way. Such

challenges are not easy to overcome as can be seen by the 2000 statistic that “only 17 percent of

rural adults age twenty-five and older had completed college – half the percentage of urban adults”

(Whitener & McGranahan, 2003, p. 2).

Overall unfamiliarity.

First-generation students are more likely to begin their studies at a community college than

a four-year institution (Garcia, 2010). In 2003, 45 percent of students in community colleges were

considered to be first-generation college students (Jassal, 2008). While non-traditional students

may have previously attended some college in the past, the majority of enrolled students at rural

community colleges are unfamiliar with and unprepared for the many facets of higher education.

For example, a first-generation student and his or her family may have limited experience with

entrance applications, financial assistance, course registration, ACT or SAT preparation, and

general expectations of a college student. Parents‟ knowledge of higher education and its demands

can play a large role in the success of a student; therefore, first-generation students may already

feel a step or two behind non-first-generation students, sometimes leading to a sense of college


„culture shock‟ (Inkelas & McCarron, 2006). As a result, students are more likely to consider

themselves inferior in ability and potential when compared to their non-first-generation peers

(McMurray & Sorrells, 2009).

Lower education levels.

Many students are unprepared for higher education as a result of poor academic

preparation in their rural high schools. With little funding for college preparatory or advanced

placement courses, students graduate from high school unaware of and unprepared for the

academic rigor of college. Also, according to the National Coalition for Literacy (2009), adult

illiteracy is prevalent in rural America as adults living in poverty are much more likely to be

illiterate. As industries change and necessary qualifications to obtain good-paying work positions

increase, rural adults are starting to enroll in nearby community colleges to widen their skill set. In

fact, the community college may be the only location that offers literacy courses in rural areas, if

they are even offered at all. Illiterate adults with low paying, low-skilled positions are often

considered to be the rural „have-nots.‟ Being born into a „have-not‟ family decreases one‟s ability

to attend a top notch high school, to afford higher education, and to earn a high-skilled high-

paying position as an adult. As a result, students from „have not‟ families are typically non-

traditional students and have lower education levels than their peers.

The majority of non-traditional students have also been in the workforce for many years

prior to enrolling or reenrolling in a community college. After years outside of the classroom

setting, non-traditional students may be insecure about how little information they have retained or

may be slower to learn new knowledge or acquire new skills. With their open-enrollment policies,

rural community colleges must serve a diverse and shifting group of students with a wide range of

abilities in the classroom, which often includes providing remediation and literacy courses. “80

percent of community college faculty members believe that their students are less academically


prepared than they should be for the rigors of college-level work” (Murray, 2007, p. 60). Thus,

providing one-on-one remediation and literacy courses can be challenging for faculty at a rural

community college.

With less funding because of a low tax base and low-income communities that lack

disposable income for tuition, rural community colleges struggle to recruit and retain enough

faculty members to support all of its underprepared students. Most faculty teach five to six courses

a term, recruit and advise students, serve on committees, and are typically wearing many hats as a

one-person department (Murray, 2007). Although professors must make up for the faculty

shortage by carrying a heavier workload, they “tell researchers that it is the teaching of the

unprepared or underachieving student that is most satisfying” (Murray, 2007, p. 61). Despite this

satisfaction, professors must devote a large portion of their time helping remediate underprepared

students, thus, taking time away from their research or other academic interests. If faculty feel

professionally isolated at a rural community college, they are likely to find a position elsewhere,

leaving students with professors who are unprepared to provide remediation to such a large

percentage of the student population.

Financial insecurity.

Non-traditional students at rural community colleges face a plethora of financial

roadblocks. In 2005, 37% of rural high school graduates in Oregon did not attend any type of

college after graduating high school, many of them listing the financial aspect of higher education

as the major deterrent from enrolling (Oregon University System, 2009). A high school senior in

Port Oxford, Oregon said, “I‟d just rather work, have some money in my pocket and enjoy my life

without going to school…I will go to college a couple years from now, hopefully, when the

economy gets better” (Graves, 2011). Those who have chosen to attend college despite the

slumping economy and lack of high-paying jobs are surely taking a risk; to see if the high cost of


post-secondary education will pay off by providing a chance at social mobility through more

lucrative work opportunities, or to graduate with substantial student loans and to enter a stagnant

economy with few desirable jobs.

People living in rural America, especially the have-nots, often get stuck in a cycle of

poverty. “A good education is the key that unlocks and expands the cultural toolkits of the have-

nots, and thus gives them the potential to bring about lasting change in their persistently poor

communities” (Duncan, 1999, p. 208). The quality of local schools has a direct impact on a

community‟s ability to attract new industries, in turn bringing about economic growth (AEE,

2010). If a business is interested in building a facility in a rural location, they first consider in

which resources they can capitalize and diversify, as well as the quality of the workforce. If

current workers in that area are unskilled and uneducated, new businesses and industries are not

going to expand there. If these rural areas cannot attract new industries, they will continue to be

economically and socially vulnerable, thus, perpetuating un/underemployment, low-quality

schools, illiteracy, low graduation rates, and economic inequality between rural and urban areas

(AHE, 2010). Therefore, students attending rural community colleges are clearly at a disadvantage

in obtaining financial security.

In addition to being stuck in a cycle of poverty simply for living in a rural community,

non-traditional students typically attend school part-time while working full-time, are financially

independent, and have dependents for whom they are financially responsible. In order to afford

tuition, student fees, books, and living expenses like food and housing, non-traditional students

take out financial aid loans and work full or part-time jobs. Unlike a traditional student who has

recently graduated from high school and more often has the support of his or her family, non-

traditional students are less likely to be able to depend on their families to help cover their

academic expenses. Additionally, as more students are in need of federal aid in a sluggish


economy, the amount of aid per student decreases, resulting in more students struggling to afford

to attend an institution of higher education. Consequently, more than ever students are working

part or full-time. In fact, 41% of rural community college students work full-time, while 59% of

students work part-time, compared to urban community colleges where 31% of students work full-

time and 69% work part-time (Hardy & Katsinas 2007).

Shane Burrows, a full-time sales assistant working toward an associate‟s degree to become

a music teacher, shared his challenges as a non-traditional student at a community college with

USA Today (2010):

When I turned 18, I dropped out of college and worked two jobs because I just couldn't

afford to pay for my education, he says. I lost my mom when I was only 7. My dad could

only afford to provide a house over our heads, food, clothing, and basics to get by. I

needed to work to live and unfortunately I had to put school on the side. After taking five

years off school, I decided to go back part time at a junior college. I work full time and quit

my second job so I could have time for school. I would love to take more than four classes

a semester but I can barely afford to live let alone pay for classes and books. I'm drowning

in debt and on the verge of filing for bankruptcy. With rising tuition costs and budget cuts

cutting classes, I feel like I'll never finish. (para 10)

Shane Burrows‟ story is becoming very common as more students enroll in postsecondary

education and face increasing tuition and decreasing financial aid award amounts, resulting in the

necessity to work one or even two jobs while enrolled.

Family responsibilities.

Non-traditional students with dependents have responsibilities that can play a major role in

their overall success at a rural community college. Instead of being able to focus solely on school

and financially supporting themselves, students with families and children must learn how to


balance their roles as a student, parent, employee, and family member (McConnell, 2000).

Additionally, 13% of non-traditional students are single parents (Back to College, 2011), and

female students are more likely than men to be single parents by a margin of sixteen percent

versus nine percent (Cominole, Siegel, Dudley, Roe, & Gilligan, 2004). Without the personal and

financial support of a partner, single parent students must quickly learn how to balance their part-

time or full-time jobs and their credit load, while also caring for a family and adjusting to their

new collegiate lifestyle. Non-traditional students with family and work responsibilities are often

limited to part-time studies, requiring them to pay more tuition money and devote more of their

time to graduate from their programs.

Rural community college campuses have small budgets and lack funding to be able to

provide adequate services for student parents, such as on-site child care and weekend courses.

Although on-site child care can help student parents more effectively manage their personal,

professional, and academic responsibilities, as of 2001 only 47% of publicly controlled rural

community colleges provided child care, compared to 75% of urban community colleges (Hardy

& Katsinas, 2007). Also, “mass transit is often not available in rural areas, which makes off-

campus child care a less feasible alternative and compounds the problems caused by lack of on-

campus child care” (Hardy & Katsinas, 2007, p. 14). Weekend classes are also very important for

non-traditional students, especially student parents, who work during the week and may be unable

to make it to class during the evenings. Unfortunately, only 20% of rural community colleges offer

weekend classes, compared to 45% at urban community colleges (Hardy & Katsinas, 2007). If

non-traditional students are struggling to balance their many roles or believe their needs are not

being met by the institution, they are more likely to miss class, be less engaged in their academic

program, and drop out of school.


Distance, inadequate transportation, and housing.

Rural community colleges are geographically isolated, which forces students to commute

long distances from their homes, especially since public transportation is usually not an option.

Farming is still a major industry in rural America, thus, many rural students support the family

farm and “endure long commutes to campus (upwards of one hundred miles)” (Leist, 2007, p. 37).

Often in low-income and impoverished service areas, rural community colleges serve a population

that cannot afford a reliable mode of transportation. However, if one has access to a vehicle,

commuting long distances is expensive and time-consuming, which can make one reluctant to

even consider enrolling at the nearest community college. Non-traditional students already have to

balance busy schedules filled with academic, economic, and family responsibilities; an hour-long

drive to class and an hour drive back home is an additional responsibility and a major financial

deterrent for rural students.

To help students overcome these geographic barriers, rural community colleges have

increased their on-campus housing options for students. In fact, 190 rural colleges offered on-

campus housing as of 2005 (Moeck, Hardy, & Katsinas, 2007). Nonetheless, this is only 20% of

all rural community colleges, which means that a very large percentage of students do not have

access to the same on-campus housing opportunities as students located in suburban or urban

locations. “For students in rural areas who are trying to juggle work, family, and college

responsibilities, and who now also struggle with higher gas prices in areas where publicly

subsidized mass transportation rarely exists, on-campus housing may be particularly appealing”

(Moeck et al., 2007, p. 84). However, if a first-generation student lives at home for free and works

for his or her parents, or if a single mother owns a home and has a mortgage, on-campus housing

will not be a cost-effective option. Also, on-campus housing at rural community colleges is often


expensive and inadequately sized for non-traditional students and their families (Moeck et al.,

2007).

Retention Rates

The rural-urban college completion gap has historically been caused by lower attendance

rates among rural high school graduates as rural areas had a larger share of jobs that did not

require post-secondary degrees (Gibbs, 2005). However, as rural industries shift and work-skill

qualifications increase, more high school graduates and rural adults are enrolling in classes at the

nearby community college.

In 1970, 7 percent of rural adults had graduated from college, while 56 percent of the rural

adult population did not have a high school diploma. By 2000, 16 percent of rural adults

age 25 and older had completed college and more than 75 percent had finished high school.

(Gibbs, 2005, p. 1)

Additionally, the historic rural-urban gap for rural high school students and rural college

students has become slightly smaller in several regions of the United States over the years. “In

2003, about 65 percent of the nation‟s rural high school graduates attended college, compared with

75 percent of urban and suburban students” (Graves, 2011, p. 2). By 2008, the state of Oregon had

narrowed the gap to 52 percent and 58 percent, respectively (Graves, 2011). Despite the increasing

completion rates, rural American communities continue to struggle with and suffer from persistent

poverty, which negatively affects enrollment and retention rates. Only 20% of first-time students

at public community colleges currently get a degree or certificate within three years (USA Today,

2011). This is unsurprising when considering the numerous barriers that non-traditional students

must overcome in addition to poverty, whether unfamiliarity with college, low education levels,

financial insecurity, family responsibilities, or distance, inadequate transportation, and housing.


Current Issues

There are currently 922 rural community colleges in the United States, proving to rural

educators and students that they have an important role in higher education today. To be all things

to all people and to ensure that the underprepared, underrepresented, and underachieving student

has access to post-secondary education, student affairs administrators and faculty have identified

several concerns that need to be improved upon and addressed. The major issues currently

surround access for students in regard to distance education and decreasing institutional funding

and tightening budgets (Cejda, 2007).

Distance education.

As was previously discussed, non-traditional students must overcome many barriers to

earn a degree or certificate, such as distance and inadequate transportation. However, rural

students no longer need to travel fifty miles to attend a class or communicate with their professors.

Instead, students can take classes online from the comfort of their own homes or at the library.

During an era when seemingly everyone has access to a computer, distance education has become

a popular way to earn a degree. Despite 86 percent of rural community colleges offering distance

learning programs (Cejda, 2007), not all rural students have access to the necessary technological

resources to take an online course. Students living in desolate rural communities lack access to

high quality internet service, creating a digital divide between urban and rural communities, the

haves and the have-nots.

Despite this significant growth in computer ownership and usage overall, the growth has

occurred to a greater extent within some income levels, demographic groups, and

geographic areas, than in others. In fact, the „digital divide‟ between certain groups of

Americans has increased…so that there is now an even greater disparity in penetration

levels among some groups. (Katsinas & Moeck, 2002, p. 215)


Since 2002, overall internet penetration has increased, but fewer rural residents have broadband

connections due to high costs and fewer options of internet providers. Rural students are also less

likely than their urban counterparts to own a computer or to be technologically competent to

successfully complete an online course (Cedja, 2007). Plus, many programs at rural community

colleges are hands-on, making it difficult to offer such classes online. Nonetheless, many rural

institutions have made distance education a priority and are working to develop the necessary

infrastructure to provide distance programming, services, and support for its students.

Another challenge of distance education for rural community college students is the

limited quantity and scope of online courses that are offered. Many rural institutions use distance

education to deliver a few courses, not entire programs, which can be very problematic for

students who do not have transportation or do not want to drive long distances to attend class

(Cedja, 2007). These students are obligated to be physically present for the courses that are not

offered online if they are to earn a degree, which may require them to purchase a vehicle, find

child care on a more frequent basis, or work fewer hours per week. Unfortunately, rural

community colleges do not have enough personnel or the proper funding to implement a solid

technological infrastructure that will help to eliminate the digital divide (Cedja, 2007). Without

more fiscal resources from the state and federal government, rural students, staff, faculty, “and

their constituencies will not realize the full potential of distance education” (Cedja, 2007, p. 97).

Institutional funding.

Rural community colleges work to address a wide range of problems and issues that rural

citizens face, yet have their own dilemmas to manage such as diminishing public funding. As

more rural students enroll with hopes of increasing their chances of gaining economic security,

rural community colleges have a responsibility to increase access and create opportunities for

these students. Although they serve a larger service area, typically several counties, rural


institutions are at a disadvantage as they receive less federal funding as a result of fewer per capita

resources (Fluharty & Scaggs, 2007). During the past 24 years, state support has declined. In

2001, rural areas were at a $14.1 billion disadvantage, forcing students to pay “a larger share of

instruction costs” (Fluharty & Scaggs, 2007, p. 22). Rural colleges have less of a property base to

tax and are not able to tax their entire service areas. Plus, rural communities receive less

development money from corporations and foundations, demonstrating a lack of commitment to

serve rural communities from the federal government and private donors (Fluharty & Scaggs,

2007). Consequently, rural community colleges struggle to provide the same services and quality

education as urban institutions.

With less federal and donor funding, rural colleges often have a shortage of staff and

faculty, especially since rural colleges also have problems recruiting faculty to such isolated

locations. Administration and faculty must take on many roles to make up for their small-sized

staff, which is called “shallow-staff syndrome” (Leist, 2007, p. 37). Since non-traditional students

typically need more remediation and student-centered learning, a shallow staff can prove

problematic. Instead of being able to provide individualized attention to each student, faculty

members at rural community colleges are busy advising students, serving on committees, teaching

three to four classes, updating the curriculum, and recruiting new students (Murray, 2007).

Decreased institutional funding also results in narrow curricula, including fewer distance courses

and high-cost technical programs, which are both in high demand among rural college students. In

order to compete in an increasingly globalized and technological world, rural students must update

their skills and their knowledge base. However, if rural community colleges do not have the

funding to offer such opportunities, students will remain disadvantaged on many levels, causing

many to wonder whether rural community colleges are effectively responding to students‟ and the

community‟s needs. For example, if rural colleges cannot train students for the 21st century,


students will remain low-skilled workers in an increasingly high-skilled work environment, thus,

perpetuating the cycle of poverty in rural America.

Student Development Theories

A large reason why many non-traditional students struggle is that they feel as though they

do not belong in the traditional higher education environment. They are in an unfamiliar situation

with new people, new ways of thinking, and new and added responsibilities. There are numerous

student development theories that are very relevant to the struggle that non-traditional students

endure, such as Maslow‟s (1954) hierarchy of needs, Astin‟s (1984) student involvement

developmental theory, and Schlossberg‟s (1984, 1989) transition and marginality and mattering

theories.

Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory.

Since the majority of rural students are low-income, according to Abraham Maslow‟s

(1954) hierarchy of needs theory, their first priorities consist of meeting their physiological needs,

such as satisfying hunger pangs and securing a place to live. To meet these needs, a large number

of non-traditional students work full-time and go to school part-time to assure that their groceries

for themselves and their families will be covered. After their physiological needs are met they are

able to work on meeting other needs, such as safety, love, belonging, and self-esteem (Maslow,

1954). Traditional-aged students often live on campus, work fewer hours, and have more time to

become involved with campus extracurricular activities. Non-traditional students typically live off

campus, go to school part-time, work full-time, and engage in few on-campus activities, which

make it more difficult to meet one‟s psychological needs such as safety and belonging. If non-

traditional students cannot make connections or find a community within the campus, they are less

likely to become socially and academically integrated into the college culture (Collier & Morgan,

2007). As a result, they will continue to be motivated by their safety and belonging needs and will


have less motivation to satisfy their esteem needs or reach the peak of the hierarchy; self-

actualization (Maslow, 1954). An important aspect of higher education is having opportunities that

provide insight into one‟s values, identities, potential, and life purpose. Without the push to

become involved on campus, non-traditional students are less likely to become self-actualized.

Astin’s student involvement developmental theory.

Alexander Astin‟s (1984) student involvement developmental theory demonstrates the

importance of becoming engaged with on-campus activities, such as joining a student

organization, meeting up with peers and professors after class, partaking in research projects with

faculty, or joining a fraternity or sorority. Astin (1984) defined involvement as, “the amount of

physical and psychological energy that the student devotes to the academic experience” (p. 297).

Through involvement one is able to acclimate themselves to the new culture and create a sense of

belonging and acceptance. If a non-traditional student works 40 hours a week and never finds time

to join a club or make a friend in class, they are more likely to doubt their place and presence on

campus. Thus, more emphasis clearly needs to be placed on creating an inclusive and welcoming

environment for non-traditional students. Currently, rural community colleges lack the services

that non-traditional students need in order to be successful, such as on-site child care, evening and

weekend courses, distance learning degrees, and non-traditional office hours. If more services

were implemented to support non-traditional students, they would have the necessary resources,

and thus more time, to become involved with on-campus activities. Student involvement is an

extremely valuable aspect of the college experience, yet non-traditional students unfortunately

must overcome many barriers to become involved and are surely disadvantaged as a result.

Schlossberg’s transition and marginality and mattering theories.

Nancy Schlossberg‟s (1984) transition theory strongly relates to non-traditional students

and the many challenges they face within higher education. A transition is “any event, or non-


event, that results in changed relationships, routines, assumptions, and roles” (Evans, Forney,

Guido, Patton, & Renn, 2010, p. 215). For most non-traditional students, attending a rural

community college is an important transition that brings about unfamiliar situations in a new role.

To navigate the transition successfully, students must consider the situation, self, support, and

strategies (Evans et al., 2010). Most importantly, students must examine their support in regard to

their personal, demographic, and psychological characteristics. In order to succeed in their new

educational endeavors, non-traditional students will frequently refer to their social supports, such

as family units, friend networks, intimate relationships, institutions, and communities (Evans,

2010). Traditionally with dependents and spouses, non-traditional students‟ familial networks are

much stronger and more important than other support systems. However, students also want to

feel like they matter and are appreciated by the institution, which relates to Schlossberg‟s (1989)

marginality and mattering theory. When taking on a new and uncertain role, such as student,

people want to fit in to their new environments. An institution can play a major role in helping

students build self-worth and gain self-confidence. In fact, “the more students get validated, the

richer the academic and interpersonal experience” (Evans et al., 2010, p. 32).

Student Affairs Support

The rural community college is often the academic, cultural, economic, and entertainment

hub for the community. Therefore, it can serve as an economic catalyst and help its community

escape the cycle of poverty by introducing a higher quality of life through education and job

training. As rural high school dropout rates increase and college enrollment rates stay stagnant or

decrease, the role of student affairs professionals is becoming extremely important at rural

community colleges. If rural community colleges can build and nurture human and social capital

and promote a culture of entrepreneurship (Fluharty & Scaggs, 2007), the more likely residents

will feel engaged and, as a result, enhance their self-worth and self-esteem (Miller & Tuttle,


2007). Thus, residents and students feel a strong connection to the college, which must be

appreciated and fostered by college staff and faculty.

“By intentionally attending to the design of the environment, through implementation of

policy, creation of programs, and training and supervision of staff, educators can help to ensure

person-environment interaction that is healthy and contributes to development” (Evans et al.,

2010, p. 30). If student affairs professionals are going to attend to the educational environment,

they must first understand the student population that they currently serve and the many

challenges that students face in order to provide them a supportive learning environment.

“Because of the economic realities of rural life, students have less ability to pay tuition,

transportation, and child care costs – all needs associated with the adult learner” (Gillett-Karam,

1995, pp. 46-47). To support this population, which is often low-income, working class, and

academically underprepared, student affairs staff must provide a people-friendly environment

where non-traditional students feel comfortable and welcomed (Cavan, 1995). Unfortunately, this

is not an easy task as institutions of higher education are built for the traditional student in nearly

every way, including the curriculum, scheduling, services, staffing, and the facilities.

Non-traditional students have different needs than traditional students, which makes it

more difficult for student affairs professionals to meet their needs with minimal resources at their

disposal. Although non-traditional students would benefit from on-site child care, evening and

weekend courses, more online courses, and personalized remediation, rural community colleges

lack the staffing and the budget necessary to provide these services. However, to address the

budgetary issues, college leaders can learn more about grant-writing, marketing the college to gain

more corporate and private donor funding, and policy advocacy at the local, state, and federal level

to challenge the rural funding system that disadvantages the institution and the students (Clark &

Davis, 2007). If an institution can obtain more funding, students will have better access to


financial aid, scholarships, tax assistance, and tuition credits, helping to minimize the financial

barriers that so many non-traditional students in rural America must overcome.

Non-traditional students have responsibilities that often require them to miss class, such as

picking up their children from child care and school, or working a shift during a scheduled class.

With strict attendance policies in place, non-traditional students are subject to withdrawing or

missing a substantial amount of class points. Despite faculty and staff recommending that students

find balance in their lives, the current attendance policies do not match these recommendations.

When balancing a full-time job with part-time school, family responsibilities, and a long-distance

commute, non-traditional students rely on time management. If rural community colleges are to

provide resources and support to their diverse student population, they should first consider

modifying the attendance policy. To manage a busy schedule, students may need to miss class and

should not be penalized if they can make up their attendance with additional work outside of the

classroom. Although student service offices exist on campus to support non-traditional students

such as academic advising and multicultural centers, these students typically work off-campus and

are unable to utilize services that have traditional working hours. As a result, rural community

colleges should implement non-traditional hours several times a week so that all students can be

served as needed. Whether opening the office one hour late in the morning and staying one hour

later in the evening or being available during the weekend once a month, this schedule change will

convenience many students and build their sense of mattering. It would also be a great idea to

establish an advocacy and support group for non-traditional students, creating a network and an

opportunity to meet similar people. However, student affairs professionals should remember to

heavily publicize their services for students who may not be aware of such opportunities.

Educators must keep up with popular trends and changing learning methods. For example,

distance education has become a hot topic in higher education and students have requested more


online classes and degrees from which to choose. Unfortunately, rural America must still bridge

the digital divide and providing more distance classes will not necessarily increase access to

education for all rural citizens. Thus, rural colleges must help their communities get to the root of

their economic problems so that the cycle of poverty can finally be halted. Rural schools are

inadequate and businesses are hesitant to move into impoverished areas where the population is

predominantly low-skilled and uneducated. Education can clearly improve the standard of living

for rural citizens. While rural community colleges can provide remediation to students, K-12

schools must raise their expectations of and for their students. To do this, student affairs

professionals should partner with local schools to establish pre-college programs such as GEAR

UP, 4-H, SMILE, and Saturday Academy. The earlier rural youth are thinking about college, the

more likely they will continue their post-secondary education. Although budgets are tight,

institutions of higher education must make pre-college programs a priority for the future of their

students, local businesses, and communities. As rural community members and workers become

highly-skilled and educated, outside businesses will feel confident to invest in rural areas, thus,

providing job opportunities, more money to devote to education, and increased economic

development.

Conclusion

Non-traditional students at rural community colleges have a number of challenges that

must be addressed by student affairs professionals and faculty. Although retention rates have

increased in some areas of the United States, rural colleges continue to be economically and

socially behind urban community colleges and four-year universities. With a smaller service

population and tax base and less federal funding, rural community colleges cannot afford to have a

large faculty, extensive programming, or technology-focused curricula. This leads to underserved,

undertrained, and undereducated students who are unprepared for the globalized economy or the


increasingly competitive job market. However, if student affairs professionals can provide the

support that non-traditional students need and begin to focus on pre-college programs within the

local schools, rural America will have a much better chance of breaking the cycle of poverty.


References

Alliance for Excellent Education. (AEE). (2010). Current challenges and opportunities in

preparing rural high school students for success in college and careers: What federal

policymakers need to know. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from

http://www.all4ed.org/files/RuralHSReportChallengesOpps.pdf

Astin, A. W. (1984). Student involvement: A development theory for higher education. Journal of

College Student Personnel, 25, 297-308.

Back to Education. (2011). Going back to college: Frequently asked questions.

Retrieved from http://www.back2college.com/library/faq.htm

Blanchard, R. A., Casados, F., & Sheski, H. (2009). All things to all people: Challenges and

innovations in a rural community college. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education.

57, 22-28. DOI: 10.1080/07377360902804077

Cavan, J. (1995). The comprehensive mission of rural community colleges. In J. Killacky & J. R.

Valadez (Eds.), Portrait of the rural community college: New directions for community

colleges (pp. 9-16), no. 90, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Cejda, B. D. (2007). Connecting to the larger world: Distance education in rural community

colleges. In P. L. Eddy & J. P. Murray (Eds.), Rural community colleges: Teaching,

learning, and leading in the heartland: New directions for community colleges (pp. 87-98),

no. 137, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Center for Postsecondary and Economic Success. (2008). Community college students working

full-or part-time. Retrieved on May 22, 2011 from

http://www.clasp.org/postsecondary/did_you_know?id=0029

http://www.all4ed.org/files/RuralHSReportChallengesOpps.pdf

http://www.back2college.com/library/faq.htm

http://www.clasp.org/postsecondary/did_you_know?id=0029


Clark, M. M., & Davis, E. (2007). Engaging leaders as builders of sustainable rural communities:

A case study. In P. L. Eddy & J. P. Murray (Eds.), Rural community colleges: Teaching,



Cominole, M., Siegel, P., Dudley, K., Roe, D., & Gilligan, T. (2004). National postsecondary

student aid study. Retrieved May 22, 2011, from

http://nces.ed.gov/pubSearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2006180

Duncan, C. M. (1999). Worlds apart: Why poverty persists in rural America. New Haven, CT:

Yale University Press.

Evans, N. J., Forney, D. S., Guido, F. M., Patton, L. D., & Renn, K. A. (2010). Student

development in college: Theory, research and practice (2nd

ed.). San Francisco, CA:

Jossey–Bass.

Fluharty, C. & Scaggs, B. (2007). The rural differential: Bridging the resource gap. In P. L. Eddy

& J. P. Murray (Eds.), Rural community colleges: Teaching, learning, and leading in the

heartland: New directions for community colleges (pp. 19-26), no. 137, San Francisco,

CA: Jossey-Bass.

Garcia, M. (2010). When Hispanic students attempt to succeed in college, but do not. Community

College Journal of Research and Practice, 34(10), 839-847.

Doi: 10.1080/10668926.2010.485003

Gibbs, R. (2005). Education as a rural development strategy. Amber Waves, 3(5), 1.

http://www.ers.usda.gov/amberwaves/november05/pdf/FeatureEducationNovember2005.p

df

http://nces.ed.gov/pubSearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2006180

http://www.ers.usda.gov/amberwaves/november05/pdf/FeatureEducationNovember2005.pdf

http://www.ers.usda.gov/amberwaves/november05/pdf/FeatureEducationNovember2005.pdf


Gillett-Karam, R. (1995). Women and minorities in rural community colleges: Programs for

change. In J. Killacky & J. R. Valadez (Eds.), Portrait of the rural community college.

New directions for community colleges, no. 90. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Graves, B. (2011). Rural Oregon sending more high school graduates to college, despite the

rougher road. OregonLive.com. Retrieved on May 15, 2011 from

http://www.oregonlive.com/education/index.ssf/2011/03/rural_oregon_sending_more_hig

h.html

Hardy, D. E., & Katsinas, S. G. (2007). Classifying community colleges: How rural community

colleges fit. In P. L. Eddy & J. P. Murray (Eds.), Rural community colleges: Teaching,



Hektner, J. M. (1995). When moving up implies moving out: Rural adolescent conflict in the

transition to adulthood. Journal of Research in Rural Education. 11(1), 3-14.

Retrieved on May 22, 2011 from

http://www.jrre.psu.edu/articles/v11,n1,p3-14,Hektner.pdf

Inkelas, K. K., & McCarron, G. P. (2006). The gap between educational aspirations and

attainment for first-generation college students and the role of parental involvement.

Journal of College Student Development, 47(5), 534-549. Doi:10.1353/csd.2006.0059

Jassal, P. K. (2008). Predicting first generation college student success: Using Noel-Levitz CSI-B:

Impact of parental educational attainment on student retention after first year of college &

four year graduation rate at institution of matriculation. Saarbrucken, Germany: VDM

Verlag Dr. Muller Aktiengesellschaft & Co. KG, Dudweiler Landstr.

http://www.oregonlive.com/education/index.ssf/2011/03/rural_oregon_sending_more_high.html

http://www.oregonlive.com/education/index.ssf/2011/03/rural_oregon_sending_more_high.html

http://www.jrre.psu.edu/articles/v11,n1,p3-14,Hektner.pdf


Johnson, J. & Strange, M. (2009). Why rural matters 2009: State and regional challenges and

opportunities. A report of the rural school and community trust policy program. Retrieved

on May 22, 2011 from http://files.ruraledu.org/wrm09/WRM09.pdf

Katsinas, S. G. (2007, October). Rural community colleges are the land-grant institutions of this

century. The Chronicle of Higher Education. 26, 54, 9.

Katsinas, S. G., & Moeck, P. (2002). The digital divide and rural community colleges: Problems

and prospects. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 26, 207- 224.

Retrieved on May 22, 2011 from

http://pdfserve.informaworld.com/560121_731198593_713837902.pdf

Leist. J. (2007). Ruralizing presidential job advertisements. In P. L. Eddy & J. P. Murray (Eds.),

Rural community colleges: Teaching, learning, and leading in the heartland: New

directions for community colleges (pp. 35-46), no. 137, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Mahaffey, R. (2009). Unique challenges, opportunities, the reality for high-poverty rural schools.

Retrieved on May 22, 2011 from http://files.ruraledu.org/wrm09/WRM09_pressrelease.pdf

Maslow, A. H. (1954). A theory of human motivation. In Motivation and personality (pp. 35-58).

New York: Harper & Row.

McConnell, P. (2000). What community colleges should do to assist first-generation

students. Community College Review, 28, 75-87.

Miller, M. T., & Kissinger, D. B. (2007). Connecting rural community colleges to their

communities. In P. L. Eddy & J. P. Murray (Eds.), Rural community colleges: Teaching,

learning, and leading in the heartland: New directions for community colleges (pp. 27-

34), no. 137, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

http://files.ruraledu.org/wrm09/WRM09.pdf

http://pdfserve.informaworld.com/560121_731198593_713837902.pdf

http://files.ruraledu.org/wrm09/WRM09_pressrelease.pdf


Miller, M. T., & Tuttle, T. C. (2007). How rural community colleges develop their communities

and the people who live in them. Retrieved on May 21, 2011 from

http://ruralccalliance.com/docs/MSP_BRIEF_MILLER.pdf

Mott, V. W. (2008). Rural education for older adults. In J. A. Ritchey (Eds.), Administration of

urban planning and community and rural development: New directions for adults and

continuing education (pp. 47-57), no. 117, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. DOI:

10.1002/ace.285

Murray, J. P. (2007). Recruiting and retaining rural community college faculty. In P. L. Eddy & J.

P. Murray (Eds.), Rural community colleges: Teaching, learning, and leading in the

heartland: New directions for community colleges (pp. 57-64), no. 137, San Francisco,

CA: Jossey-Bass.

National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). (2002). Definitions and data. Retrieved on May

21, 2012 from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs/web/97578e.asp

National Coalition for Literacy. (2009). Adult literacy fact sheet 2009. Retrieved on May 22, 2011

from www.ncladvocacy.org/HealthLiteracyFactst2009/AdultLiteracyFacts2009.pdf

Nelson, L. (2010). More students and not enough space: Rural community colleges discuss

challenges. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved on May 21, 2011 from

http://chronicle.com/article/More-StudentsNot-Enough/64365/

Oregon University System (2009). Rural areas education issues and outreach: 2009 legislative

session. Retrieved on May 21, 2011 from

www.ous.edu/sites/default/files/about/legnote09/files/RuralIssues2009.pdf

Provasnik, S., KewalRamani, A., McLaughlin-Coleman, M., Gilbertson, L., Herring, W. & Xie,

Q. (2007). Status of education in rural America. Retrieved from National Center for

Education Statistics website: http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2007040

http://ruralccalliance.com/docs/MSP_BRIEF_MILLER.pdf

http://www.ncladvocacy.org/HealthLiteracyFactst2009/AdultLiteracyFacts2009.pdf

http://chronicle.com/article/More-StudentsNot-Enough/64365/

http://www.ous.edu/sites/default/files/about/legnote09/files/RuralIssues2009.pdf

http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2007040


Rubin, S. (2001). Rural colleges as catalysts for community change: The RCCI experience. Rural

America. 16, 2. Retrieved from

http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ruralamerica/ra162/ra162d.pdf

Rural Community College Initiative (RCCI). (2001). Expanding economic and educational

opportunity in distressed rural areas: A conceptual framework for the rural community

college initiative. Retrieved from http://www.mdcinc.org/rcci/conframe.pdf

Shamah, D. (2009). Looking toward the future: Examining aspirations and sense of purpose

among rural youth (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Oregon State University, Oregon.

Available from ScholarsArchive@OSU database. Retrieved on May 22, 2011 from

http://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/xmlui/handle/1957/12842

Smith, R. (2008). Challenges facing rural community colleges: Rural community college alliance.

Retrieved from

http://www.slcatlanta.org/meetings/OKC_08/presentations/ag/Smith_Tech_Colleges.pdf

USA Today. (2010). Degrees of difficulty: Non-traditional students struggle with schedules, loans.

USA Today. Retrieved from http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/degrees-of-

difficulty.htm

U.S. Department of Agriculture. (2007). Economic Research Service. Measuring Rurality: What

Is Rural 2007? Retrieved from http://www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/Rurality/WhatisRural/

Whitener, L. A. & McGranahan, D. A. (2003, February). Rural America: Opportunities and

challenges. Amber Waves. 2. Retrieved from

http://www.ers.usda.gov/AmberWaves/Feb03/features/ruralamerica.htm

http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/ruralamerica/ra162/ra162d.pdf

http://www.mdcinc.org/rcci/conframe.pdf

http://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/xmlui/handle/1957/12842

http://www.slcatlanta.org/meetings/OKC_08/presentations/ag/Smith_Tech_Colleges.pdf

http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/degrees-of-difficulty.htm

http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/degrees-of-difficulty.htm

http://www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/Rurality/WhatisRural/

http://www.ers.usda.gov/AmberWaves/Feb03/features/ruralamerica.htm

non-traditional students and rural community … · non-traditional students and rural community...

Documents