Features

Home

ThinkTanks

Introduction

 

Why a journal of promising practices and what, by the way, does the term “promising practices” mean?

 

 

 

 

 

The term “promising practices” has been used by various institutions since the early 90s, often replacing the phrase “best practices,” which may be more familiar to you, but which suggests that there is a best way to achieve a goal when it is more likely that there are many good ways.  Parsing the term “promising practices” suggests it simply refers to methods, habits, or strategies that are likely to yield good outcomes; often, however, it means something more specific.

 

 

We, of course, are using the term because it is the one used by the Achieving the Dream initiative.  Yet, we may need to define it differently than they do.  “In Achieving the Dream,” Margaret Rivera, Vice President of the American Association of Community Colleges explains: “We are fairly specific about what we mean by the term.  Promising practices are those strategies that colleges have implemented to help students be more successful, and that the college has data that shows that, for at least one term, students who went through that program/strategy were more successful than others who did not.”  That is, for Achieving the Dream, in order for any practice to be considered a “’promising practice,’ there has to be before and after data—and the after data indicates some rate of improvement.”

 

 

The articles in this edition describe activities shaped in the spirit of those practices, such as active, student-centered, collaborative learning, that are considered promising in current educational literature.  This may not be strictly in line with how “Achieving the Dream” defines the term in that we may not have data specific to our college that indicates a quantifiable net gain.  Therefore, the need to define, clearly, what we mean by “promising practices” when we call this a promising practices journal arises.  We hope—as we work on this journal, modifying it to best serve our needs as educators and the specific needs of our students—to engage the campus community in on-going conversations about what constitutes a promising practice here at CCP and how its impact is measured.

 

 

For now at least, we will borrow the habits of the semanticist and begin defining the phrase as it is currently being used in this e-volume.  We can also take a cue from the way the Center for Youth Development and Policy Research uses the term in their Promising Practices in Afterschool Systems (PPAS).  For them, as for Achieving the Dream, “Promising practices … have indicators or evidence of positive results.”  Yet what constitutes those indicators at PPAS is seemingly quite subjective: “Key people—such as parents, children and youth, program staff, educators, community members, and funders—have determined that these practices are contributing to the quality of programming and the well-being of children, youth, families, and communities.”  In this case, the data valued is the impression of those involved.  So too for us; we will rely to an extent on our impression of how well our strategies work for our students as well as the impression of our students and others who are clearly “key players.”  It is important, however, that we pick up the current trend in higher education and shift from a “culture of anecdote” to a “culture of evidence” (Bailey and Alfonso).  This journal is a step in that direction. 

 

 

The desire to measure and monitor student success may strike some of us more romantic types as being counter to the deeper aims of education—how can one measure enlightenment?  How can one really know the nature of the soul, after all?  Moreover, there are known limitations to “data-driven” policies because quantifying effectiveness is bedeviled by issues of causality and the difficulty of comparing like-cohort with like-cohort.  In “Paths to Persistence: An Analysis of Research on Program Effectiveness in Community Colleges” conducted by the Community College Research Center, Thomas R. Bailey and Mariana Alfonso acknowledge these difficulties: “It is hard to identify a causal relationship between remedial education and subsequent educational attainment.”  In short what determines “promising” depends on defining innumerable abstractions—the more fundamental, the stickier: education, success, results….  It may be that these words, “promising” and “practices,” can‘t be fixed into a formula with x always related to y with a ratio of z.  But we should at least try to pin down what we mean and how this should be measured for the conversation borne of that attempt will keep us honest.

 

 

            Therefore, in some ways, this e-journal is more about the conversation that arises when we conduct classroom research than about the research itself.  That is, what we talk about when we talk about teaching (a nod here, of course, to Ned Bachus’s recent refashioning of Raymond Carver’s story title, “What We Talk About When We Talk About Love”)—what happens when we share what we believe works well in the classroom—may be where the benefit lies. Thus, while the Achieving the Dream initiative is based in the idea of using evidence to direct policy, programs, and practices, we must accept a certain kind of uncertainty. Acknowledging this, Bailey and Alfonso conclude: “The interaction between research and practice should not be seen as a search by experts for the final and definitive answer to the question ‘What works?’ Rather, it is a constant and continuous process—a conversation within and among the colleges and with outside researchers and policy-makers, using the best possible data and the most appropriate methodologies, as practitioners try to improve their practice in a constantly changing environment” (29).

 

 

This conversation about teaching and learning, however, will not matter unless we have the chance to listen and respond.  In their recent literature review of the state of research at community colleges, Bailey and Alfonso found “the dissemination and discussion of research” on community colleges currently inadequate.  The authors mandate the following amends, which we have kept foremost in mind in building this web-site:

 

 

  •  
  • Colleges, states and college associations must provide more opportunities for faculty and administrators to engage in the research process and to discuss evidence about student outcomes.
  •  
  • Colleges and states must develop more systematic methods to publicize and disseminate research findings.
  •  
  • Collaboration among institutional researchers at different colleges and between college-level and state-level researchers. (3)

 

 

 

Gains in any field of study are made when research is conducted, disseminated, compiled, critiqued and tested in the crucible of the real world.  This e-journal is designed to facilitate conversation about teaching and learning in such a way that we can make gains in our persistence and retention rates and do more each educational cycle than “re-invent the wheel.”  It’s title, Praktikos, which is the Greek antecedent to our practical, points to this e-journal’s focus on well-advised and useful classroom practices.  We hope this e-journal becomes a place where we can build on our collective wisdom and improve institutional memory by keeping the conversations had during Professional Development Week dynamic and by making them easily retrievable. 

 

 

We invite all of you in the CCP community to make use of this resource and contribute to future renditions. 

 

 

 

 

 

References

 

Bailey, Thomas R. and Mariana Alfonso (2005, January). Paths to persistence: An analysis of research on program effectiveness in community colleges.  New York, NY: Columbia University, Community College Research Center.

 

 

 

“What’s a promising practice?”  Promising Practices in Afterschool Systems.  AED Center for Youth Development and Policy Research. 19 September 2007. <http://www.afterschool.org/about_ppas.cfm>.

 

 

 

Rivera, Margaret.  “Re: AACC Web Site Comment: promising practices.”  Email to the author.  30 Aug 2007.