One proposed remedy is to reward "success" with revenue (but please see this post). Another is to stipulate that college leaders improve their numbers or else (ditto). It's hard to tell how popular the second alternative will become, but it certainly signifies a mood of desperation.
A third approach involves exclusion—though the term is never used officially. Simply put, if unprepared students fall off the radar, they do not reduce the graduation and completion rates.
As reported in U.S. News by Joanne Jacobs, universities around the country are being directed by law and policy not to admit students who score below a particular level, pushing down all developmental studies to a local community college. Hence the graduation rates (of the university) rise. Mission accomplished!
Ms. Jacobs writes Community College Spotlight for The Hechinger Report, an independent nonprofit education news site. The site is highly recommended.
Also, as reported in the article, some states are shunting students with extremely low scores from two-year colleges to adult basic education or other community-based programs, which are generally not funded through the same instructional formula as higher education. In fact, Texas policy makers have recommended such an approach here. Advocates for this alternative say it would be a more expedient and less expensive way for these individuals to acquire employable skills.
Hunter Boylan, probably the foremost expert on developmental education in the U.S., is concerned, however.
First, regarding the increased absence of developmental studies at universities:
The policy will hit hardest at low-income and minority students and graduates of low-performing high schools, critics charge. Disadvantaged students are the most likely to be assigned to remedial classes.
Pushing "developmental education to community colleges may contribute to a higher education caste system where upper income students go to universities and lower income students go to community colleges," says Hunter R. Boylan, an Appalachian State University higher education professor who directs the National Center for Developmental Education. It could become "the 21st century version of 'separate but equal,'" Boylan warns.
…There's no reason to think universities are better than community colleges at teaching basic skills, says Boylan. However, universities have more funding than community colleges. Universities can integrate developmental education with counseling, academic advising, tutoring, and other support services that help students succeed.
In addition, universities typically have "a higher proportion of better prepared students than community colleges and it is possible that being surrounded by better students has a positive impact on the performance of weaker students," says Boylan.
As for the other trend, according to the article:
While universities are sending unprepared students to community colleges, some community colleges are sending unprepared students to adult education or community-based programs.
Starting in fall 2012, Pima Community College in Tucson, Ariz., will restrict admission to high school graduates or GED holders with at least seventh-grade proficiency in reading, writing, and math.
"Students who test below this level have little chance of succeeding in a college environment, wrote Roy Flores, the college president, in the Arizona Daily Star. Only 5 percent of Pima's remedial students advance to college-level work.
In Michigan, Jackson Community College's leaders decided in 2010 that they would no longer admit students who test below a seventh-grade level, reports the Lansing State Journal.
"We have the data. They're not successful, no matter how much we try to help them," said Cindy Allen, Jackson Community College's executive director of community relations.
Elsewhere in Michigan, Kalamazoo Valley, Lansing, and Washtenaw community colleges also are referring would-be students with below-middle-school skills to alternative programs.