There are numerous roadblocks that can deter students’ participation in dual-enrollment programs, which allow them to earn college credit while completing high school graduation requirements. A lack of prerequisite courses, scheduling difficulties, and transportation hurdles are frequently cited examples. A new report indicates that the most basic barrier, however, remains a lack of knowledge about the available opportunities. The data come from Minnesota, but the issues are likely more universal.
Minnesota established its first dual-enrollment programs in 1985. They include Concurrent Enrollment, which are college credit bearing courses generally aimed at grades 7–9, taught by high school teachers, and typically held in high school buildings, as well as Postsecondary Education Options (PSEO), which allow older high school students to attend credit bearing courses taught by college professors on campus. State policymakers have been aware of knowledge barriers regarding these programs for years, and have attempted to address those barriers in law. For example, since 2014, the state has required all public schools to annually “provide up-to-date information on the district’s website and in materials that are distributed to parents and students” about dual-enrollment opportunities, including when and how to apply.
Unfortunately, the new data, compiled by a youth-led nonprofit called People for PSEO, finds a widespread and troubling lack of compliance with this informational requirement. Current undergraduates and People for PSEO staffers Katyanna Taylor and Zeke Jackson reviewed all 390 district and charter high school websites across Minnesota in early 2023 to see whether their information on dual-enrollment options met the state requirements. The numbers aren’t pretty. Nearly 57 percent of high schools do not provide the complete and up-to-date PSEO information as required by state law. (To be fair, this is actually an overall improvement from the group’s first such review in 2022, when the number was closer to 60 percent, but not exactly cause for celebration.) Areas of non-compliance include dead or broken links (e.g. no information at all), incomplete information, out-of-date information, and factual errors. Charter schools perform better than their traditional district counterparts, with nearly 70 percent of charters having complete and up-to-date PSEO information available, as compared to just over 37 percent of district high schools.
Among the information most frequently missing from websites are several important updates to PSEO law made in 2019. They include statements about “reasonable access” requirements to school buildings, equipment, and resources that must be met (think library or Wi-Fi availability outside of traditional school hours), as well as the availability of transportation funds for qualifying students to travel to and from college campuses. Without knowledge of these accommodations, students could readily conclude that their family’s lack of home broadband service or reliable transportation are insurmountable barriers to participation.
But even more problematic is the inaccurate information, as it almost seems designed to depress participation. Such errors include overstating the minimum GPA level required of participants, neglecting to inform tenth graders of PSEO eligibility, and inaccurate registration dates or other timeline requirements. Additionally, seven websites were observed to have inaccurate information regarding high school activities as related to PSEO participation. One specific example was a school that stated, “students who fail a PSEO or online class will not be eligible to participate in athletics for 2 weeks or 2 events.”
Taylor and Jackson don’t discuss the very real possibility that the school in question was putting a self-determined penalty onto PSEO participation students as a means to depress interest, only that such a statement is “potentially in conflict” with state law on PSEO and thus inaccurate. Even if we assume they are inadvertent, these informational errors and omissions add unnecessary complications to dual-enrollment access—especially for the state’s least-advantaged students—and fly directly in the face of the years-long state effort to eliminate such barriers.
Taylor and Jackson offer three sound recommendations focused on enforcement and information sharing by the state. Other states would be wise to heed these recommendations, and to learn from both the good and the bad of dual enrollment policies in the North Star State. However, it would perhaps be quicker and more efficient if the energies of non-profits like People for PSEO could be channeled into becoming the main source of information for students and families about what is available and how to access those opportunities. After all, most of the students in the organization benefitted from—and know the tremendous academic boost of—successful dual-enrollment participation. And since they only wish to expand the number and diversity of students following in their footsteps, they have every incentive to provide the most complete and up-to-date information with no inaccuracies. Power to the People (for PSEO)!
SOURCE: Katyanna Taylor and Zeke Jackson, “A 2023 PSEO Information Gap Report: A second analysis of Minnesota’s statewide PSEO Information Gap,” People for PSEO (April 2023).
