University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Improving graduation equity in community colleges: a study on California Assembly Bill 705 policy implementation

(USC Thesis Other)

Improving graduation equity in community colleges: a study on California Assembly Bill 705 policy implementation

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Improving Graduation Equity in Community Colleges: A Study on California Assembly
Bill 705 Policy Implementation
by
Gohar Momjian
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education
December 2021

© Copyright by Gohar Momjian 2021
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Gohar Momjian certifies the approval of this Dissertation

Briana Hinga
Esther Kim
Patricia Tobey, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2021

iv
Abstract
The study focused on institutional efforts to retain and support racially minoritized students in
higher education. The purpose of the study was to explore the experience of faculty and staff
implementing California Assembly Bill 705 (AB 705), a legislative mandate intended to increase
student achievement and close equity gaps among Black and Latinx students in California’s
community colleges. The qualitative research design focused on three case studies and utilized
semi-structured interviews to understand 29 faculty and staff perceptions and beliefs related to
policy implementation of AB 705. Six key findings emerged: external political, social, economic,
and environmental factors can play a significant role in facilitating change; examination of
equity data is a critical component to motivate faculty and staff to make changes to their teaching
practices and policies; professional development focused on topics of diversity, equity, and
inclusion provides critical opportunities to facilitate self-reflection and promote change;
inclusive communities of practice enable peers to more effectively advance equity work;
engaging part-time faculty in a consistent manner in departmental discussions, decision making,
and professional development, alongside their full-time colleagues, is critical for making
institutional progress in equity work; and leadership at every level of the organization is required
to effectively implement policies intended to improve equitable outcomes for Black and Latinx
students. The study offers four recommendations that suggest that institutional leaders have the
opportunity to improve equity outcomes for Black and Latinx students by holding their
organizations accountable by examining equity data, investing in professional development
focused on equity issues, establishing inclusive communities of practice focused on equity
issues, and including part-time faculty in these endeavors.
Keywords: community college, educational equity, policy, completion, AB 705

v
Dedication
To my husband, Raffi. I could not have achieved this without your love and support.

To my children, Sevag and Hratch. I thank you for your patience and hope to inspire a
continuous love for learning.

vi
Acknowledgements
This study was conducted during one of the most emotionally challenging periods I have
experienced, from Black Lives Matters, targeted hate crimes at the Krouzian Zekarian
Vasbouragan Armenian School and arson at St. Gregory’s Armenian Apostolic Church in San
Francisco, coupled with the devastating Artsakh War and its aftermath, and all during the
COVID-19 pandemic.
Special thanks to the faculty in the program who facilitated difficult conversations and
guided me through this intellectual, personal, and professional journey of learning. To my
classmates, study buddies, and colleagues, this journey was endurable because of your support
and belief in my potential contributions to improve educational equity and contribute to the field.
To those who came before me and influenced my career in higher education, Dr. Lyudmila
Harutyunyan, Dr. Theony Condos, and Dr. Thelma Scott-Skillman. To my parents, brothers,
sisters, nieces and nephews, extended family and friends, thank you for all the good times in
between my studies making this educational endeavor possible with laughter and life
celebrations. To the community college students with whom I’ve interacted over the years, you
served as a constant source of inspiration!
I am particularly grateful to Dr. Sonya Christian, Dr. Pamila Fisher, and Dr. Richard
Winn who opened this educational door for me. To my colleagues who opened their college
doors and welcomed me to conduct this study, and to the study participants who shared their
candid thoughts, feelings, and personal stories working tirelessly and with such love to improve
outcomes for all students and advocating for educational equity, thank you!

vii
Table of Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Dedication ....................................................................................................................................... v
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ vi
List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. x
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ xi
List of Abbreviations .................................................................................................................... xii
Chapter One: Overview of the Study .............................................................................................. 1
Background of the Problem ................................................................................................ 1
Statement of the Problem .................................................................................................... 2
Purpose of the Study ........................................................................................................... 2
Conceptual Framework ....................................................................................................... 4
Research Questions ............................................................................................................. 5
Significance of the Study .................................................................................................... 6
Definition of Terms............................................................................................................. 7
Organization of the Study ................................................................................................... 8
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature .......................................................................................... 9
Cultural Shifts in Higher Education .................................................................................... 9
Describing the Macrosystem: Institutional Racism and Systems Thinking ..................... 12
Education Systems as Learning Organizations: Improving Outcomes............................. 21
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 36
Chapter Three: Methodology ........................................................................................................ 38
Research Questions ........................................................................................................... 38

viii
Method of Study ............................................................................................................... 38
Theory of Change and Paradigm of Inquiry ..................................................................... 39
Sample and Population ..................................................................................................... 40
Instrumentation ................................................................................................................. 42
Data Collection ................................................................................................................. 43
Data Analysis .................................................................................................................... 44
Limitations and Delimitations ........................................................................................... 45
Credibility and Trustworthiness ........................................................................................ 46
Ethics and Positionality..................................................................................................... 47
Chapter Four: Results ................................................................................................................... 49
Participants ........................................................................................................................ 49
Research Question One Results ........................................................................................ 52
Research Question Two Results ....................................................................................... 69
Research Question Three Results ..................................................................................... 84
Summary of Results .......................................................................................................... 93
Chapter Five: Discussion .............................................................................................................. 98
Findings............................................................................................................................. 99
Implications for Practice ................................................................................................. 106
Recommendations ........................................................................................................... 106
Implementation Model .................................................................................................... 110
Evaluation Model ............................................................................................................ 112
Future Research .............................................................................................................. 113
Conclusions ..................................................................................................................... 113

ix
References ................................................................................................................................... 116
Appendix A: Consent to Participate ........................................................................................... 128
Appendix B: Interview Protocol ................................................................................................. 130
Appendix C: Coding Sheet ......................................................................................................... 136
Appendix D: Theoretical Alignment Matrix............................................................................... 137

x
List of Tables
Table 1: AB 705 Implementation Timeline 35
Table 2: Overview of Sample College Population 41
Table 3: Sociodemographic Characteristics of Participants 51
Table 4: Stone View College Participants’ Reflective Examples Supporting AB 705 Changes 75
Table 5: Farlay Grove College Participants’ Reflective Examples Supporting AB 705 Changes 76
Table 6: Orange Moon College Participants’ Reflective Examples on Challenges to AB 705
Changes 79
Table 7: Similar Policy Implementation Reflections from Stone View College and Farlay Grove
College 89
Table 8: Participant Suggestions for Improving the Policy Implementation Process 92
Table 9: Summary of Results for Research Question One 94
Table 10: Summary of Results for Research Question Two 96
Table 11: Summary of Results for Research Question Three 97
Table 12: Eight Themes That Emerged in Response to Research Questions 98
Table B1: Interview Question Alignment 131

xi
List of Figures
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework 5
Figure 2: Demographic Background of Students and Annual Headcount 29
Figure 3: Increasing Trend of Degree Completion 30
Figure 4: Growth Required to Close Equity Gaps in Degree Completion 31
Figure 5: Overall Increasing Trend of Student Completion of Transfer-Level Math and English 32
Figure 6: Slightly Increasing Trend of Black or African American Student Completion of
Transfer-Level Math and English 33
Figure 7: Slightly Increasing Trend of Hispanic Student Completion of Transfer-Level Math and
English 34
Figure 8: Word Cloud of Stone View College Mission 82
Figure 9: Word Cloud of Farlay Grove College Mission 83
Figure 10: Word Cloud of Orange Moon College Mission 83

xii
List of Abbreviations
AB 705 Assembly Bill 705

ACCJC Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges

BLM Black Lives Matter

CAP California Acceleration Project

CCCCO California Community College Chancellor’s Office

3CSN California Community College Success Network

ED United States Education Department

MMAP Multiple Measures Assessment Project

1

Chapter One: Overview of the Study
This study focused on institutional efforts to retain and support racially minoritized
1

students in higher education and explored the experience of faculty and staff implementing
policies intended to improve equitable student outcomes. According to the National Center for
Education Statistics (NCES, 2019a), only 24% of first-time, full-time students who sought an
associate’s degree at a public community college graduated within three years. The NCES
(2019a) highlighted that the 3-year graduation rate for associate’s degree-seeking students was
lowest for Black students (10%) and graduation rates ranged from 14% to 23% for students in
other racial and ethnic minority groups. This problem is important to address because the
research demonstrates that improved community college graduation rates have a positive effect
on the U.S. economy and a particularly significant impact on the country’s short- and medium-
term economic growth (Tyndorf & Martin, 2018). Further, students who graduate with an
associate’s degree will earn over $300,000 more in their lifetime than those with only high
school degrees, and they will contribute significantly more of their income to society through tax
revenue (Levin & García, 2018).
Background of the Problem
A significant portion of the literature related to understanding factors associated with
graduation rates focuses on student characteristics or college characteristics, or their interaction
such as student engagement (Bers & Schuetz, 2014; Crisp et al., 2018; Hatch, 2017; Johnson &

1
This study uses the term “racially minoritized students” when referring to African American,
Black, Latinx, Native American, Pacific Islander, and Southeast Asian students rather than a
“minority” group. The author believes it is important to note that the groups themselves
oftentimes do not necessarily represent a minority of the student population, and acknowledges
that the dominant culture has labeled these student populations in education through
marginalization, discrimination, and institutionalized racism (Ching et al., 2020).
2

Stage, 2018; Kurlaender et al., 2016; Ober et al., 2018; Price & Tovar, 2014; Urias & Wood,
2014; Yu et al., 2015). However, higher education institutions must focus on the institutional
policies and practices that may be producing equity gaps to determine areas in need of
improvement and guide interventions for increased educational outcomes (Darling-Hammond et
al., 2014; Dowd & Bensimon, 2014).
Statement of the Problem
In the California community college system, historical achievement gaps persist and
reflect the low national graduation rates for minority students. As part of its new strategic plan
called Vision for Success, in 2017–18, the California Chancellor’s Office challenged colleges
with a mandate to reduce equity gaps among underrepresented students by 40% over 5 years and
eliminate them in 10 years (California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office, 2019). The
problem of historical and persistent equity gaps in California’s community colleges is important
to address because approximately 75% of community college students represent minority
populations, and approximately 25% are White (California Community Colleges Chancellor’s
Office, 2019). Community colleges play an important role in preparing California’s diverse
workforce, which is integral to building a strong economy (Kerby & Burns, 2012). Some of the
economic benefits to workplace diversity are increased human capital production, the ability to
capture a greater share of the consumer market, a more innovative and creative workforce, and a
more competitive environment in the global market (Kerby & Burns, 2012).
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to explore the faculty and staff experience in the
implementation of higher education policies intended to improve graduation rates for racially
minoritized students. Faculty play a significant role in ensuring the success of initiatives intended
3

to improve graduation rates, particularly to increase underrepresented students’ graduation rates
(Benito-Capa et al., 2017; Levin et al., 2010). This study focused on faculty and staff perceptions
of implementing Assembly Bill (AB) 705, which mandates that colleges maximize the
probability for students to complete English and math in 1 year and use multiple measures for
placing students into courses rather than the standardized exam.
Ecological model theory (Bronfenbrenner, 1979) considers human development
occurring in a multi-layered system of settings and cultures, whereby each layer, from the most
immediate environment to the most removed, influences human development. Bronfenbrenner
describes the ecological model as a series of expanded environments where the individual resides
first in a microsystem, which reflects the individual’s immediate environment filled with strong
personal connections to others, such as family members and friends. The next two layers are the
mesosystem and exosystem, each reflecting an environment that is more distant from the
individual’s immediate environment and may directly or indirectly influence the individual. The
mesosystem might include the social and educational institutions in which the individual
participates, and the exosystem might include the greater at-large community, such as
governmental systems, social environments, and mass media. The macrosystem is the outermost
layer representing society’s political, sociological, or cultural norms. Bronfenbrenner’s (1992)
theoretical framework emphasizes a bi-directional influence, relationship, and connection
between the system layers. Simultaneously, the theory recognizes the importance of the
individual’s perception of what is occurring within each system beyond objective reality, which
impacts human development and behavior. According to Bronfenbrenner’s model, what occurs
in the macrosystem may be driving what is occurring in the exosystem, such as statewide
4

legislation and system policy changes, which in turn could directly impact graduation rates of
minority community college students who reside in the microsystem.
Conceptual Framework
The conceptual framework uses Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model as the backdrop for
describing the layered and complex environmental systems which impact graduation rates for
minority students. The framework emphasizes the macrosystem at the outermost level of society
and culture, which is filled with structural racism, prejudice, and discrimination. Institutions of
higher education reside one layer below in the exosystem. This paper focused on examining the
policies and structures within the exosystem which may play a significant role in graduation
rates. Accountability for improving graduation rates is directed from the highest levels of the
ecological model toward the institutions of higher education, which have the opportunity to view
themselves as learning organizations and can change their systems and remove barriers for
success. In this conceptual framework, the individual’s role as a minority student is de-
emphasized in the microsystem, which represents the individual’s immediate surroundings and
placement in society.

5

Figure 1
Conceptual Framework

Research Questions
1. What aspects in the exosystem help to facilitate implementation of higher education
policies intended to positively impact minoritized student graduation rates?
2. What are characteristics of an institution that enable policies, such as AB 705, to be
implemented successfully in achieving intended outcomes to increase graduation rates for
Black and Latinx
2
students?

2
This study uses the term “Latinx” as a gender-neutral term that replaces “Latina/o” and
acknowledges the fluidity of gender identities (Ching et al., 2020).
6

3. What are the perceptions and experiences of employees on the policy implementation and
impact of AB 705 on Black and Latinx students?
Significance of the Study
Inequity is an institutional problem, not a student issue, and practitioners should
investigate organizational learning processes to understand and address the policies and practices
that prevent colleges and universities from producing equitable educational outcomes
(Bensimon, 2005). Bronfenbrenner’s (1992) ecological model is an appropriate theoretical
framework for this study because it acknowledges that there are multiple, complex
environmental systems within which students reside. The ecological model supports examining
factors in the exosystem and macrosystems to determine their influence and impact on
individuals who reside in the microsystem. A theory of change is an explanation of one’s
underlying assumptions and beliefs that define a problem and, consequently, one’s approach to
solving a problem (Tuck & Yang, 2014). It is embedded in the philosophy and worldview one
subscribes to, which consequently impacts the research one undertakes (Saunders, 2019).
This study investigated the structural forces, such as institutional racism and community
colleges’ organizational systems and practices, that impact racial equity in graduation rates,
rather than students’ individual agency, motivation, and preparation. This research may aid in
exposing and changing issues of power and marginalization embedded in existing policies or
structures and help redefine more equitable policies that lead to improved outcomes. The
research explored aspects of the macrosystem (in society) and exosystem (in the school system)
to better understand how policies intended to improve graduation rates are implemented and
ultimately impact students. The study contributed to the growing body of literature from a
7

critical and transformative paradigm of inquiry, and the research may inform legislators and
leaders as they continue to grapple with long-standing inequitable graduation outcomes.
Definition of Terms
The study will rely on the following key concepts: accountability, learning organization,
prejudice and discrimination, and structural racism.
Accountability is both a cultural phenomenon and an instrument to bring about change or
compliance or to improve performance (Dubnick, 2014). The concept of accountability in
education is defined by a relationship between providers of services and directors who may
reward or sanction providers for their performance (Hentschke & Wohlstetter, 2004).
Latinx: This study uses the term “Latinx” as a gender-neutral term that replaces
“Latina/o” and acknowledges the fluidity of gender identities (Ching et al., 2020).
Learning organization: The paper will draw upon Senge’s (1990) concept of a learning
organization, which focuses on the need to analyze systems that influence outcomes and to look
at the world in innovative ways to generate new operational models to close gaps between an
organization’s vision for itself and its current reality (Senge, 1990).
Prejudice: Prejudice can be defined by the differing assumptions people have about the
abilities, motives, and intentions of others according to their race, and discrimination is more
focused on the different actions one takes toward others according to their race (Jones, 2000).
Racially Minoritized Student: This study uses the term “racially minoritized students”
when referring to African American, Black, Latinx, Native American, Pacific Islander, and
Southeast Asian students typically discussed as a “minority” group. I believe it is important to
note that the groups themselves may not, in fact, represent a minority of students in terms of
numbers and acknowledges that the dominant culture has labeled these student populations in
8

education through marginalization, discrimination, and institutionalized racism (Ching et al.,
2020).
Structural Racism: Structural racism encompasses the practices and policies designed
around socially constructed categories of race intended to benefit Whites and to reproduce racial
privilege (Bonilla-Silva, 2014). In the structural racism construct, Whites belong to the dominant
race and receive or pass on all their privileges to Whites through codified practices, laws, and
customs. In addition, these policies and practices result in advantages for Whites and
disadvantages for people of color (Rose, 2015).
Organization of the Study
This dissertation was organized and presented in five chapters. Chapter One introduced
the problem of practice as minoritized students’ low graduation rates in community colleges,
described the importance of institutional efforts to improve these rates, and defined the
conceptual framework underpinning three research questions. Chapter Two describes the cultural
shifts in higher education moving from a focus on access to completion, explores motivating
factors and applies a structurally racist construct to understand the problem of inequitable and
low graduation rates of minoritized students, and considers educational systems as learning
organizations to distill potential approaches to improve student outcomes. Chapter Three
discusses the methodology for conducting this qualitative study and considers ethical issues,
credibility, and trustworthiness of the study. Chapter Four describes eight themes that emerged
as a result of each research question. Chapter Five interprets the results and identifies six
findings, offers four recommendations to address the problem of practice, including an
implementation and evaluation model, and concludes by considering four areas for future
research.
9

Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
The literature review provides important context for understanding the historical and
cultural shifts in higher education related to community colleges and institutional and
instructional motivating factors that must be understood when colleges implement changes to
increase graduation rates for minoritized students.
Cultural Shifts in Higher Education
The history of higher education development and expansion in western civilization began
with the monastic model, followed by the rise of the modern university, which focused on
developing new knowledge and applied technologies (Shugart, 2013). In the post-war industrial
model of higher education, the exponential growth of state universities and community colleges
scaled up the number of institutions providing access to education to the masses (Shugart, 2013).
More recently, in 2009, moving away from the concept of access, President Barack Obama set a
goal to increase the number of certificates and degrees that community colleges award by an
additional five million by 2020. The president’s completion agenda created a sense of urgency
for improving student outcomes in community colleges (O’Banion, 2010; Rhoades, 2012).
The completion agenda also reinvigorated a second wave of performance-based funding
models in 2009 and 2010, which provided an incentive for colleges to make changes to improve
outcomes and realize greater efficiencies in their educational models to produce graduates
(Dougherty et al., 2014). More recently, Kilgore and Wilson (2017) identified, in survey research
of 97 community colleges across the nation, that 95 of them were actively engaged in at least one
or more college completion initiatives and that most institutions were participating in multiple
initiatives. This involvement and focus on completion initiatives align with the national
10

completion agenda, indicating a formalized shift in culture to emphasize higher education
completion rather than access.
Institutional Motivating Factors
Higher education, which has a long and rich past embedded in historical traditions, faces
several challenges in its pursuit to produce better outcomes with fewer resources and high
resistance among faculty and staff to change practices and policies (Shugart, 2013). As labor
market projections show that the U.S. economy faces a major shortfall in an educated and skilled
workforce to meet labor demands, community colleges are poised to meet those needs if they can
increase graduation rates (Kilgore & Wilson, 2017). Harbour and Wolgemuth (2015) contended
that the philosophical principles that underpin an American democracy can motivate the
implementation of institutional reforms and policies in community colleges. They offer several
perspectives to inform community colleges’ reform agendas to address society’s inequities and
promote democracy. Harbour and Wolgemuth (2015) propose that institutional reforms should
focus on preparing students for employment and solving problems grounded in students’
experiences, rejecting distinctions between liberal and vocational education, developing within
students a democratic character, promoting individual student growth, and ensuring that
vocational education programs serve as pathways to social transformation. However, institutions
are composed of multiple stakeholders, and carrying out their missions relies on the faculty, who
may have multiple motives in the work they conduct.
Instructional Motivating Factors
The faculty’s role and their intrinsic motivation to improve graduation rates is key to
success beyond policy measures or other extrinsic motivating factors such as performance-based
funding initiatives. Drawing on social network theory, communities of practice that combine the
11

scholarship of teaching and learning can serve as a means to motivate faculty to make
institutional changes to improve student outcomes (Williams et al., 2013). Faculty networks
enable a cross-fertilization of ideas drawing among a diverse group of people from varying
disciplines. When the networks are formalized as a community of practice, and the institution
empowers the community of practice with data and support for problem solving and sharing
knowledge, then the community of practice is capable of influencing organizational culture and
coordinating a reform agenda that could not have been achieved by any one faculty member
(Williams et al., 2013). The researchers acknowledge that, in order for communities of practice
to be influential in institutional change, the institution must provide avenues for the community
of practice to disseminate information and communicate, must cultivate leadership within the
social network, and must provide sustained support to the community of practice for effective
culture change (Williams et al., 2013).
In a study of promising practices in California’s community colleges to increase students’
achievement, Levin et al. (2010) conducted a series of interviews and focus groups and analyzed
key planning documents at five colleges to determine the processes the colleges used to
implement and sustain their successful programs. Their study revealed four common
characteristics: connection, cohesion, cooperation, and consistency. Connection is the ability of
program personnel to maintain relationships with external organizations, cohesion is the ability
of the program to act rationally as a cohesive unit with consistent actions, cooperation is the
ability of faculty and staff to work together to achieve common goals, and consistency is the
stable pattern of actions (Levin et al., 2010).
It is important to understand community college faculty’s intrinsic and extrinsic
motivational factors to assist administrators and policymakers improve organizational
12

performance to increase completion rates. In a study of 55 faculty members across several
departments in one community college, Hardré (2012) revealed that community college faculty
are more intrinsically motivated to teach, conduct basic or applied research, and engage in
professional development activities. The study also examined the relationship between
motivations across the three activities and discovered that faculty valued teaching over the other
activities. In addition, Pons et al. (2017) identified in their study of motivational factors that part-
time faculty in community colleges are most motivated by teaching students, followed by
working in their field of discipline, and then personal satisfaction, which outweighed the
disadvantages of being part-time.
There are complex, multiple motivating factors at the institutional and instructional levels
that affect an institution’s ability to improve graduation rates (Kezar, 2001). For example,
Willcox et al. (2018) conducted a case study of Bergen Community College where graduation
rates improved from 16.5% to 21.8% in 3 years after implementing a series of change initiatives.
Their analysis revealed that change was motivated partly by external necessity, such as an
impending shift to performance-based funding. In addition, the initiatives were successful due to
a combination of faculty engagement and a focus on culture change to make the initiatives part
of the institution’s regular practices and norms. While colleges continue their work to improve
student graduation rates as part of the completion agenda, researchers can help advance the work
of colleges by illuminating the cultural and institutional factors that impact successful college
initiatives.
Describing the Macrosystem: Institutional Racism and Systems Thinking
The literature review revealed that institutional racism is a factor in low graduation rates
among minority students in community colleges, that faculty play a critical role in either
13

maintaining White privilege or addressing institutional racism, and that colleges have the
opportunity to improve graduation rates of minorities. However, changes must occur beyond the
classroom environment.
Structural Racism in Community Colleges
Structural racism encompasses the practices and policies designed around socially
constructed categories of race intended to benefit Whites and reproduce racial privilege (Bonilla-
Silva, 2014). In the structural racism construct, Whites belong to the dominant race and receive
or pass on all their privileges to Whites through codified practices, laws, and customs. In
addition, these policies and practices result in advantages for Whites and disadvantages for
people of color (Rose, 2015). Evidence of structural racism exists in society in several areas,
including housing, education, wealth, criminal justice, and mass media, and these aspects of life
are interrelated and reinforce each other (Rose, 2015).
Minoritized students represent a significant portion of California’s community colleges,
as 75% of students are persons of color, and approximately 25% are White (California
Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office, 2019). The structural racism framework is an
appropriate lens to examine the low graduation rates of community colleges in two ways. First,
the framework can be applied to analyze equity gaps within the community college system,
where Whites have higher graduation rates than minoritized students. In California’s stratified
and tiered higher education system, one may also apply the structural racism framework at an
organizational level in that the community college, an open-access institution, is a minoritized
entity compared to the more selective 4-year universities.
As part of its new strategic plan, in 2017–18, the California community college system
office challenged colleges with a mandate to reduce equity gaps among underrepresented
14

students by 40% over 5 years and eliminate them in 10 years. Further, the system office
implemented a performance-based funding formula that incentivizes and rewards colleges for
improving completion outcomes, including graduation, and provides additional funding to
colleges with higher proportions of low-income students (California Community Colleges
Chancellor’s Office, 2019). From a critical race theory perspective, implementing a
performance-based funding policy is an example of interest convergence, as the policy works to
align the dominant group’s perspective with those of marginalized groups, thus providing
colleges with a financial benefit to improving educational outcomes for minority populations
(Ladson-Billings, 2013). However, Hillman and Corral (2018) identified that over 21 states have
implemented performance-based funding policies and found that minority-serving institutions
significantly lose funding compared to non-minority-serving institutions when funding is tied to
performance outcomes. In addition, minority-serving institutions in 2-year degree-granting
institutions received less funding when performance metrics were tied to completion and
graduation (Li et al., 2018).
Ironically, when one examines the diversity of the community colleges workforce, the
proportion of faculty and staff is significantly less diverse than the student population. According
to the California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office’s (2017) equal employment
opportunity report, in 2016, the percentage of underrepresented populations in community
colleges was more than 55%, while the percentage of full-time tenured faculty representing
underrepresented minorities was only about 23%. The data also show that the percentage of
diverse students has increased over the last 5 years, while the percentage for faculty has
remained relatively flat. To what extent does having a mostly White cadre of faculty in
educational institutions serving a large percentage of minority students play a role in the low
15

graduation rates of minority students? While individual racism is commonly understood in terms
of individual acts of prejudice and discrimination, institutional racism is a form of racism
whereby policies, practices, and structures unfairly elevate the dominant White group and
suppress the advancement of people of color (Sue, 2005). In an educational institution, there is a
power hierarchy where the school administration and faculty influence students’ fate in terms of
the teaching and learning exchanges. In Freire’s (1993) terms, one could argue that the dominant
White group in the faculty ranks is the oppressor, and the students of color are the oppressed
group. Students of color experience a low sense of worth, having internalized what the dominant
group of White faculty believes (Freire, 1993). This concept is also consistent with DiAngelo’s
(2011) model of Whiteness and a White-dominated society’s perpetuation of practices and
policies that benefit Whites. At its core, institutions must first understand and acknowledge the
institutional racism found within their organizations to provide effective solutions to minority
students’ low community college graduation rates.
Institutional racism and White privilege are pervasive in higher education, including
community colleges which are open-access institutions (Bonilla-Silva, 2014; Rose, 2015; Sue,
2005). From a sociological perspective, community colleges represent one segment of
differentiated education in the United States and exemplify the underlying assumption about
education that expanded opportunity provides the possibility of attainment for the most
socioeconomically disadvantaged (Schudde & Goldrick-Rab, 2015). Shudde and Goldrick-Rab’s
(2015) study noted the quantitative and qualitative differences between 2-year and 4-year degree-
granting institutions and explored whether community colleges are meant to lower students’
educational expectations by providing a vocational alternative or improve students’ expectations
by preparing them for a 4-year degree. While community colleges have open-access policies and
16

demonstrate increased enrollment for those who could not be admitted elsewhere, persistent
equity gaps in graduation rates serve as evidence that community colleges as a system maintain
inequality and uphold White privilege (Bonilla-Silva, 2014; Schudde & Goldrick-Rab, 2015;
Sue, 2005).
Official discourse may lead the public to believe that there are gains in terms of access to
educational opportunities for minorities; however, a closer review of evidence revealed that
gains are noted at the policy level and not effectively implemented or realized in the workplace.
Bonilla-Silva’s (2014) concept of abstract liberalism supports the rhetoric that, as open-access
institutions, community colleges provide equal opportunities for all students. The concept is also
consistent with Liu’s (2011) research, whereby Whites proclaim students have an equal
opportunity to obtain a 4-year degree by beginning their educational journey at a community
college and transferring to a university, therefore ignoring or minimizing the educational
structures that continue to benefit Whites. In a case study of a public England university,
Pilkington (2013) examined 10 components of institutional racism, such as outcomes on students
graduation rates, promotions for minority faculty and staff, percentage of minorities in senior
positions, and found that in a 10-year period, outcomes had not improved despite significant
efforts in planning and training opportunities on the importance of diversity.
Classroom education can create opportunities for students to become aware of
institutional racism in society. Learning how the structures and systems in housing, education,
wealth, criminal justice, and mass media are interrelated and reinforce racism can also motivate
students to take action in support of equity (Rose, 2015). In a study of 43 interviews at Western
University and 21 interviews at Southwestern University (two predominantly White institutions),
Cabrera (2012) explored what White male undergraduates learn about racism and White
17

privilege and how they take action against racism. Cabrera used Freire’s concept of liberation
praxis to understand White students as racial justice allies, and he found that college education
played a role in students’ racial awareness prompted through cross-racial contact and
multicultural education. Cabrera (2012) also identified that when students had another
marginalized experience, such as being gay or Jewish, they were more likely to empathize with
racial struggles. However, the universities did not play a significant role; rather, specific
professors engaged the topics through content and style, further demonstrating the complexity of
addressing institutional norms and practices that maintain White privilege and advantage (Jones,
2000; Sue, 2005).
Faculty Role
Nevertheless, it is critical to understand the interaction between faculty and students to
address institutionalized racism in higher education (Fiske, 1993; Freire, 1993; Tatum, 2001).
With an instructor of color, minoritized students do better in the classroom, receive better grades,
and are less likely to drop out. Fairlie et al. (2011) produced the first empirical study of minority
interactions between students and instructors in community colleges. Based on data from 2002 to
2017 from De Anza Community College, which included 446,225 student-class observations,
their research revealed that when students and professors were from the same race or ethnicity,
equity gaps were reduced by 20% to 50%. However, it is important to note that faculty of color
may pass on their internalized sense of racism and feelings of being an imposter to students.
Dancy and Jean-Marie (2014) identified that faculty of color in higher education internalize
racism due to being undervalued by their institution, poor mentoring, evidence of more teaching,
and greater workloads. In addition, faculty of color are more likely to experience imposter
syndrome as a symptom of internalized racism of White supremacy, where one questions one’s
18

abilities and merits, feels like a fake, attributes success to luck, and downplays achievements
(Dancy & Jean-Marie, 2014; Tatum, 2001). Institutions can provide specific professional
development and mentoring programs for faculty of color to address internalized racism and the
consequences of the myth of meritocracy in faculty hiring practices (McNamee & Miller, 2018).
In addition, faculty can build racial awareness in education and training using a
framework of critical race theory to help students reflect on the system of advantage afforded to
Whites and reframe individual racism from a critically conscious lens (Diggles, 2014; Tatum,
2001). Further, faculty must be willing to question their positionality and assumptions as well as
familiarize themselves with their students’ backgrounds to provide them a culturally competent
educational experience (Usher, 2018). To effectively increase racial awareness education,
coursework should be practical and be based on students’ experiences; professors should seek
out expertise in teaching critical race theory if they do not have the expertise; and schools should
recruit faculty with pedagogy and experience to create a climate of antiracism (Diggles, 2014).
Institutional Approaches
What occurs in any specific classroom is an isolated unit of analysis; practitioners must
consider institutional approaches to explicitly address equity gaps and develop effective
interventions and support mechanisms for students. At the organizational level, one can study
marginalized majority institutions, such as Hispanic-serving institutions, to get beyond individual
units of analysis in research (Núñez, 2017). There are varying lenses through which one can
evaluate what it means to be a Hispanic-serving institution (HSI), a definition that goes beyond
the federal definition of HIS, which is designated for institutions enrolling 25% or more of a
Hispanic population. Based on a case study of a university with a growing Latinx population and
minority white population, García (2017) created a typology of organizational identity, which
19

could be useful to compare HSI institutions to improve student outcomes and develop a
supportive culture for students. The typology included four categories. The first is Latinx
enrolling, meaning at least 25% of the population is Hispanic, but the institution does not
produce equitable outcomes or have a supportive culture. The second is Latinx producing,
meaning 25% Hispanic with equitable outcomes but almost no supportive culture. The third is
Latinx enhancing, meaning 25% Hispanic with no equitable outcomes but with a supportive
culture. Last is Latinx serving, which refers to 25% Hispanic with equitable outcomes and a
supportive culture.
At the organizational level, planning tools and external policies may not always lead to
expected outcomes, even when intended to improve equity gaps. Felix and Castro (2018) applied
critical policy analysis to explore how formal planning as a policy tool was implemented to
improve educational inequities. They considered concepts of equity-mindedness and cultural
relevancy in reviewing the ways community colleges developed and implemented equity plans to
address educational inequities facing Black and Latinx students. They analyzed nine community
college equity plans from the Los Angeles Community College District, representing 178 total
activities and $12.9M funds to support activities. Their analysis identified that while colleges
identified specific inequities, most of the plans did not explicitly address activities focused on
Black and Latinx equity. Only 28 (16%) activities explicitly addressed the groups, while the
other activities were general improvements for all students (Felix & Castro, 2018). The majority
of plans also indicated a lack of equity-mindedness and a lack of race-consciousness, which is
necessary for meaningful interventions. It may be possible to conclude that institutions were not
willing to address structural or institutional issues since most plans focused on expanding
20

programs or professional capacity to support students. It would be interesting to know the
proportion of minority faculty or staff, or even students, who participated in the planning phase.
Freire (1993) contended that success is only possible when the oppressed are engaged
and involved in developing the pedagogy for critical interventions to improve the condition of
the oppressed. If the oppressors, White faculty and staff, in this case, are acting out of generosity,
then the act itself, to develop interventions and pedagogy to help the oppressed, is not authentic
and simply reinforces the oppression. For example, Liu (2011) explored the concepts of merit,
distributive justice, equality of opportunity, and social mobility, to better understand the myth of
meritocracy and how those concepts maintain structural racism in higher education, specifically
within the University of California system. Similarly, community colleges as open-access
institutions are supposed to be a place of opportunity for social mobility; however, California’s
public system of higher education provides opportunity while also maintaining the status quo of
social classes and access to different types of education, which promote disparate levels of social
mobility (Liu, 2011). These concepts are in line with structural racism such that there is an
appearance of educational opportunities for people of color, but the system of higher education,
in fact, benefits Whites in a legitimate way.
The literature reveals that at its core, institutions must first understand and acknowledge
the institutional racism found within their organizations. With training, faculty can help facilitate
these conversations in their classrooms and in their ongoing work in the colleges. Minority
students, faculty, and staff must be engaged and included in the institutional conversations to
determine the policies and practices that systematically create barriers and continue to
disadvantage them. Simultaneously, the community college system office and the legislature
responsible for setting laws for community colleges must continue to pressure and provide
21

incentives for colleges as a means of interest convergence so that colleges will be motivated to
question and dismantle the policies and practices which are associated with the low graduation
rates of minority students in California’s community colleges.
Education Systems as Learning Organizations: Improving Outcomes
Learning Organizations for Change
Senge’s (1990) model of a learning organization focuses on five components: personal
mastery, mental models, shared vision, team learning, and systems thinking. His model
emphasizes the need for organizations, as a system, to learn and create new ways to produce
outcomes. In a learning organization, leaders must build a shared vision, test employees’ existing
mental models of how an organization runs, and assist employees in understanding the
interdependence and interrelationships of their units so they can develop solutions with long-
lasting, system-wide impact (Evans et al., 2012). In addition, leadership is critical to nurture
cultural norms, values, and skills, such as anticipation to change, a climate that is open to
change, risk taking, con fi dence, and collaborative action planning and execution, that enable
organizations to adapt and change (Costanza et al., 2016). Further, Senge distinguishes two types
of learning that occur in organizations: adaptive learning and generative learning. Adaptive
learning is a means by which organizations adapt or change in response to external conditions,
and this process typically occurs slowly. Generative learning goes a step further and requires
organizations to proactively consider new ways of conducting business, anticipating needs, and
innovating to achieve desired outcomes.
Senge’s (1990) learning organization model can be applied to analyze low graduation
rates in community colleges and offers an approach to a decades-old problem. Community
colleges are complex institutions with multiple units, departments, and governing structures.
22

They include diverse constituencies representing the employees’ positions, roles, and
departments. A significant portion of the literature related to low graduation rates in community
colleges focuses on individual parts of the system, such as specific institutional or student
characteristics, as well as a focus on specific interventions that portray an institution’s adaptive
learning approach (Bers & Schuetz, 2014; Crisp et al., 2018; Hatch, 2017; Johnson & Stage,
2018; Kurlaender et al., 2016; Ober et al., 2018; Price & Tovar, 2014; Urias & Wood, 2014; Yu
et al., 2015). There is a need to better understand community colleges from a learning
organization and systems thinking framework, which reflects generative learning, in order to
help colleges consider new intervention models and solutions to improve graduation rates.
Accountability
Accountability is both a cultural phenomenon and an instrument to bring about change or
compliance or to improve performance (Dubnick, 2014). The concept of accountability in
education is defined by a relationship between providers of services and directors who have the
power to reward or sanction providers for their performance (Hentschke & Wohlstetter, 2004).
Stecher and Kirby (2004) further elaborated on this accountability relationship by identifying key
questions one must analyze: Who is accountable to whom? Accountable for what? What are the
consequences of failure or incentives for success? There are multiple accountability models, such
as political, bureaucratic, professional, moral, and market. Each kind is defined by conflicting
goals and expectations (Burke, 2004; Firestone & Shipps, 2005).
In terms of inequitable graduation rates and accountability roles, the United States
Department of Education (ED) authorizes accrediting agencies to establish criteria for quality
education and to regularly evaluate and monitor school performance against those criteria. The
Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC) is one of seven regional
23

accrediting agencies in the United States and the only agency responsible for accrediting
primarily associate-degree-granting institutions. The accountability relationship can be
characterized by the ED holding a director’s role over the ACCJC, which provides services on
behalf of the ED to ensure that institutions deliver quality education and meet accreditation
standards (Hentschke & Wohlstetter, 2004). A significant proportion of ACCJC’s 134 member
institutions in the western region, including California, have graduation rates lower than 40%,
and the majority of students who attend a community college in the region do not complete an
associate’s degree in less than 3 years (National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality
and Integrity [NACIQI], 2017). The low graduation rates are a significant concern for the ED
since accredited institutions are deemed to provide quality education and, therefore, have access
to millions of dollars in federal financial aid. This accountability problem should be viewed in
light of the inherent tensions in higher education between professional and political
accountability. The professional accountability model describes the work of ACCJC, which
relies on peer review and a focus on processes, and the political accountability model describes
the ED, which relies on external regulation and a focus on outcomes (Burke, 2004).
Burke’s (2004) models of professional and bureaucratic accountability best describe the
functioning and relationships within ACCJC. In the professional accountability model, ACCJC
serves as the director who holds institutions responsible for meeting accreditation standards. The
ACCJC relies on academics and administrators’ expertise in the form of peer review teams to
make judgements on ACCJC member institutions’ quality according to accreditation standards.
The ACCJC developed the accreditation standards in a collegial manner with the collaboration of
and consultation of academics and administrators from member institutions. In addition, the
standards are focused on processes of continuous improvement, not actual measurements of
24

outcomes. For example, colleges are required by the standards to assess achievement and
learning outcomes data, disaggregate their data, and use their analysis of the data to make
improvements. These accountability features focus on collegiality and autonomy in the process
of self-regulation and are indicative of the professional accountability model (Burke, 2004).
Further, the ACCJC’s accreditation standards are reviewed in the context of a college’s mission.
For example, an accreditation standard requires that colleges establish benchmarks for student
achievement, such as a graduation rate or transfer rate. Colleges have the freedom to define for
themselves what those rates should be, how to measure whether they are meeting those
benchmarks, and how to engage in processes for improving these rates. If the ACCJC finds that
accreditation standards are not met, such as not having established student success benchmarks
and not using data to improve outcomes, the agency has the power to sanction colleges and
ultimately deny accreditation. Loss of accreditation and sanctions can have a negative impact on
the institution and its students because colleges must be accredited for students to access federal
financial aid and transfer to 4-year institutions.
The ACCJC is simultaneously engaged in a bureaucratic accountability model, which
features rules, regulations, and bureaucrats as the agents for monitoring compliance (Burke,
2004). In the bureaucratic model, the ED takes on the role of director, and ACCJC is the provider
of services. The ED holds ACCJC accountable for ensuring institutions meet quality standards
because the ED is responsible for protecting federal financial aid funding and disbursement on
behalf of the public. The ED sets forth a series of federal regulations and criteria for accrediting
agencies to be authorized in their capacity to review institutions. The government, embodied in
the ED, is an external and centralized entity that applies standardized federal regulations and
25

policies uniformly across all accrediting agencies and institutions. The ED has the power to
sanction or eliminate ACCJC’s authority to operate.
On the one hand, the agency successfully facilitates a collegial peer review process to
determine whether colleges are meeting accreditation standards and assists institutions in
strengthening their alignment to accreditation standards to improve outcomes. In this sense,
ACCJC successfully holds colleges accountable to accreditation standards and takes necessary
actions on institutions in the form of sanctions when colleges do not meet standards. On the other
hand, while the ACCJC meets federal recognition criteria to operate as an accrediting agency, the
ED pressures agencies to improve institutional outcomes through accreditation processes. There
is an information asymmetry problem since there seems to be an imbalance of information
(Hentschke & Wohlstetter, 2004). The ED does not consider other important factors that are not
in the accreditor’s purview, such as state priorities and market factors, in holding colleges
accountable to improving outcomes (Burke, 2004; Hentschke & Wohlstetter, 2004).
This information asymmetry problem is most apparent with the ED advocating that
accrediting agencies establish bright lines for achievement, such as setting a quantitative
graduation rate to be accredited. The ACCJC is opposed to this viewpoint because the ED’s
approach to valuing graduation as the ultimate positive outcome of a community college
education is faulty. In fact, community colleges serve multiple purposes, such as transferring
students to 4-year-degree-granting institutions and providing career and technical education for
workforce development. The ACCJC is cognizant of the consequences of setting a bright line for
graduation rates since many community colleges would likely fall below the bright line. The
ACCJC is also aware that many colleges with low rates operate with unique missions in wide-
ranging geographic locations, serving communities with vastly different demographics,
26

socioeconomic statuses, and funding levels. The ED, as director, does not have all the
information needed to determine the appropriateness of setting bright lines. In addition, there is a
difference between what the ED and the ACCJC value. The ED seems to value a more binary
definition of student outcomes, and the ACCJC values the institution’s autonomy in improving
outcomes in the context of an institution’s mission. In this analysis of professional and
bureaucratic accountability, accreditation seems to demonstrate the complexity of multiple
accountability relationships among and between organizations and the tensions between
institutional autonomy and external accountability (Burke, 2004).
American higher education currently places great weight on performance-based
accountability, and, thus, institutions must regularly engage in internal continuous improvement
processes to make organizational changes to improve outcomes (Elmore, 2002). All institutions
have access to multiple forms of raw data, but an effective process to collect and analyze various
types of data, including input, process, outcome, and satisfaction data, to guide a range of
decisions will help improve student and school success (Marsh & Farrell, 2015). Increasing
internal accountability will facilitate improvements in processes and ultimately increase external
accountability measures such as college graduation rates (Elmore, 2002). It is important to note
that there may be resistance to transformative efforts, even when relying on data-informed
decisions. Tate and Bagguley (2017) called for a decolonization of higher education institutions
and focus on the power of Whiteness, a culture of blame, and refusal of institutional
accountability because of the strong attachment to privilege and Whites’ conscious use of
ignorance as an excuse for innocence from racism. Institutions can benefit from using an equity
scorecard to reinforce accountability by focusing attention on agreed-upon measures of equity
27

outcomes and sharing this knowledge with all stakeholders to address the structural elements
causing the unequal outcomes (Harris & Bensimon, 2007).
The accountability relationship between the U.S. Department of Education and ACCJC,
whether in the role of director or provider, is also marked by weak incentives and a lack of
capacity for enforcement on institutions to ultimately increase graduation rates. Even when states
have tied funding formulas and resources by implementing performance-based funding models
to incentivize completion rate improvement, outcomes were not significantly better (Hillman et
al., 2015; Rabovsky, 2012). Ultimately, schools need the appropriate internal processes, human
capital, and fiscal resources to change their teaching and learning environments to improve a
range of outcomes reflective of their mission (Darling-Hammond et al., 2014).
It is essential that plans for equity performance goals include a discussion of incentives to
deconstruct and reconstruct the educational systems that reproduce racial inequities (Dowd &
Bensimon, 2014). Further, the political framework from which the ED operates, essentially
policymakers who focus on educational outcomes and performance reporting to protect and
inform the public of quality education, must balance political accountability with the value-
adding peer-review accreditation processes that strengthen community colleges mission
accomplishment but do not necessarily increase graduation rates (Burke, 2004). Organizations
must articulate shared values for improving external accountability and offer opportunities to
share viewpoints in an open exchange (Wallis & Gregory, 2009). This kind of interaction will
enable a better understanding of the accountability issues that are important for the public, such
as accounting for federal financial aid funding, and a means for discussing alternate ways of
measuring the value of a community college education with relevant outcome measures and
student equity goals, rather than solely graduation rates. A collaborative relationship in the
28

political accountability framework will enable both organizations to identify performance
measures grounded in a culture of ensuring quality education and establish a framework for
effective strategies to increase student achievement and equity (Childress et al., 2006). Drawing
on Caldwell and Bledsoe’s (2019) analysis of the professional evaluation field, an accrediting
body can similarly use the power of peer review to disrupt structural racism by creating
standards that will positively reinforce the advancement of social equity and disruption of
structural racism.
California Community College Vision and Goals
The following section describes background information on the California community
college and progress in its strategic plan pertaining to closing equity gaps for students seeking a
degree. In a state of the system report, the California Community College Chancellor’s Office
(2021) emphasized the 20% increase in the number of students who have achieved degrees and
certificates compared to the 2016–17 term. He credits policy mandates like AB 705, citing the
importance of the “ongoing implementation of a new system for placement of incoming students
that ended flawed standardized testing that inaccurately placed many students in remedial rather
than transfer-level coursework” (p. 4). This study focused on various aspects of implementing
AB 705. Figures 2 through 6 provide an aggregate picture of the overall positive trends of
community colleges increasing the number of degrees granted and demonstrate progress towards
closing equity gaps.
Figure 2 shows that in 2019–20, more than 45% of the students in California’s
community colleges identified as Hispanic, close to 6% of the student population is African
American, and about 11% is Asian. Approximately 24% of the population is White Non-
Hispanic. The figure also includes lesser represented ethnic populations, including American
29

Indian, Alaskan Native, Filipino, Pacific Islander, and Multi-Ethnicity. While serving over 2
million students in 2019–20, the enrollment over the last 10 years has been slowly, steadily
declining (Figure 2).

Figure 2
Demographic Background of Students and Annual Headcount

Note. From California Community College Chancellor’s Office State of System Report, July
2021. (https://www.cccco.edu/About-Us/Vision-for-Success/sos-reports). In the public domain.

30

Figure 3 shows that the aggregate number of degrees granted each year for the last 5
years has steadily increased, with the system surpassing its goal of 141,248 degrees. However,
Figure 4 shows persistent equity gaps for degree completion disaggregated by ethnicity and
identifies goals for closing gaps for each ethnic group. In particular, in the next 10 years, the
number of degrees needs to increase by more than 13% for Hispanic students to achieve parity
with White Non-Hispanic students. Similarly, the community college system needs to increase
the degrees it grants by more than 12% for African American students to achieve parity with
White Non-Hispanic students.

Figure 3
Increasing Trend of Degree Completion

Note. From California Community College Chancellor’s Office State of System Report, July
2021. (https://www.cccco.edu/About-Us/Vision-for-Success/sos-reports). In the public domain.

31

Figure 4
Growth Required to Close Equity Gaps in Degree Completion

Note. From California Community College Chancellor’s Office State of System Report, July
2021. (https://www.cccco.edu/About-Us/Vision-for-Success/sos-reports). In the public domain.

Figures 5, 6, and 7 demonstrate the steady increase of students completing transfer-level
English and math in one year over the last 3 years. Students are required to complete these
courses to earn an associate’s degree and to transfer to a 4-year university. The trend for students
completing transfer-level English in 1 year is slightly higher than for math; the trend for
completing both is only slightly increased over the last three years. The trends for African
American and Hispanic students are also increasing, but there remain gaps between their overall
32

completion percentages compared to the overall population. Additional research studies show
that AB 705 led to greater access for all students to complete math and English in a year and
stronger success rates across the board for all student groups; however, equity gaps for Black and
Latinx students persist (Mejia et al., 2020; The RP Group, 2019).

Figure 5
Overall Increasing Trend of Student Completion of Transfer-Level Math and English

Note. From California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office student success metrics website.
(https://www.calpassplus.org/LaunchBoard/Student-Success-Metrics). In the public domain.

33

Figure 6
Slightly Increasing Trend of Black or African American Student Completion of Transfer-Level
Math and English

Note. From California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office student success metrics website.
(https://www.calpassplus.org/LaunchBoard/Student-Success-Metrics). In the public domain.

34

Figure 7
Slightly Increasing Trend of Hispanic Student Completion of Transfer-Level Math and English

Note. From California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office student success metrics website.
(https://www.calpassplus.org/LaunchBoard/Student-Success-Metrics). In the public domain.

Policy Review: Assembly Bill 705
In October 2017, the California governor signed a bill requiring that community colleges
maximize the probability that students will complete transfer-level English and math coursework
within a year and use high school coursework, grades, and grade point average to place them in
these courses. As stated on the California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office website,
AB 705 was written to clarify existing regulation and ensure that students are not placed
into remedial courses that may delay or deter their educational progress unless evidence
suggests they are highly unlikely to succeed in the college-level course. Assessment
instruments and placement policies have serious implications for equity, as students of
35

color are far more likely to be placed into remedial courses; students placed into
remediation are much less likely to reach their educational goals. (para. 5)
The legislation required that all community colleges comply with AB 705 by the fall of 2019.
Table 1 depicts the 2-year implementation plan shown on the California Community Colleges
Chancellor’s website.

Table 1
AB 705 Implementation Timeline
Fall 2017
• Gather information and engage stakeholders regarding current assessment practices
including discipline faculty, counselors, institutional research and assessment staff
• Review the legal requirements of AB 705

Spring 2018
• Develop methods to make high school data central in the assessment and placement
process.
• Begin curricular exploration and development consistent with the law.
• Engage professional learning to support curricular shifts in math, English and ESL.

Fall 2018
• Shift local assessment and placement practices to include high school data as a primary
predictor for all students in spring 2019
• Submit locally developed curriculum changes for approval

Spring 2019
• Approve locally developed curriculum in math and English
• Connect new assessment and placement rules with curriculum
• Publish new structures in college materials

36

I also scanned the California Community College Chancellor’s Office website to examine
the breadth and depth of guidance they provided. Beginning in December 2017, the chancellor’s
office issued more than 20 guidance memos to all community college chief executive officers,
chief instructional officers, chief student services officers, and academic senate presidents. The
guidance memos explain the policy’s purpose, provide an interpretation of the law, and provide
working examples from colleges on how they are implementing co-requisite support classes.
They also provide links to curricula and course outlines of record, data templates for reporting to
the chancellor’s office on progress, mechanisms to validate self-placement methods, evaluation
templates and instructions, and information related to apportionment for tutoring and non-credit,
co-requisite support courses.
If implemented well, this policy might have a positive impact on racially minoritized
students’ graduation rates and educational trajectory, as nearly half of University of California
(UC) bachelor’s degree graduates in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics
transferred from a California community college. Also, 29% of UC graduates and 51% of
California State University graduates started at a community college (California Community
Colleges Chancellor’s Office, n.d.).
Conclusion
The literature review revealed that over the last 2 decades, there was a philosophical shift
in higher education that places greater emphasis on ensuring students complete an education
rather than simply have access to education. Institutions recognize the need for students to
graduate given the projected skilled workforce shortages in the United States, and institutions
have demonstrated a willingness to implement initiatives explicitly to increase graduation rates.
However, institutional racism is a factor in low graduation rates among racially minoritized
37

students in community colleges, and faculty play a critical role in either maintaining White
privilege or addressing institutional racism. From an accountability and learning organization
perspective, institutions have the opportunity to make long-term impacts in improving graduation
rates. In California’s community college system, institutions are implementing legislative policy
mandates intended to improve graduation rates for students and address equity gaps.
Nevertheless, the literature revealed that institutional leaders must first understand and
acknowledge institutional racism in their organizations to effectively implement change
initiatives to close equity gaps. This study aimed to understand the experience of faculty and
staff implementing AB 705 and explore factors that facilitate implementation to improve
graduation rates for racially minoritized students.
38

Chapter Three: Methodology
The purpose of this study was to explore the faculty and staff experience in the
implementation of AB 705, a higher education policy mandate intended to improve graduation
rates for minority community college students.
Research Questions
1. What aspects in the exosystem help to facilitate implementation of higher education
policies intended to positively impact minoritized student graduation rates?
2. What are the characteristics of an institution that enable policies such as AB 705 to be
implemented successfully in achieving intended outcomes to increase graduation rates for
Black and Latinx students?
3. What are the perceptions and experience of employees on the policy implementation and
impact of AB705 on Black and Latinx students?
Method of Study
The study relied on a qualitative research design focused on understanding the
experiences of college employees involved in policy implementation (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
The study design also incorporated the hallmarks of qualitative research whereby the researcher
collects data, uses an inductive approach for interpretation and analysis, and writes a document
providing rich descriptions of the cases (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Specifically, the qualitative
research design focused on three case studies to explore and understand faculty and staff
opinions, perceptions, and beliefs related to policy implementation intended to increase student
achievement and close equity gaps among Black and Latinx students. The qualitative method of
study, aligned with the transformative world view, blends research inquiry with politics and a
political change agenda intended to address social and educational inequities (Creswell &
39

Creswell, 2018). The first phase of the study focused on conducting interviews to explore the
perceptions and experiences of faculty and staff implementing the AB 705 policy. I augmented
this phase by reviewing secondary data to explore the policy’s impact on student graduation
outcomes and to triangulate findings. Secondary data consisted of reports on student outcomes
publicly available on the California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office, the timeline for
AB 705 policy implementation, and a review of each college’s mission.
Theory of Change and Paradigm of Inquiry
The qualitative research plan for this study considered my worldview, which influenced
the study’s design and methodology (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). A theory of change is an
explanation of one’s underlying assumptions and beliefs that define a problem and,
consequently, one’s approach to solving that problem (Tuck & Yang, 2014). The theory is
embedded in the philosophy and worldview to which one subscribes that consequently impact
the research one undertakes (Saunders, 2019). The literature review on graduations rates revealed
a significant focus on students and their background information, quantitative characteristics of
the institution, and student engagement.
This research contributes to the growing body of literature from a pragmatic paradigm of
inquiry. The pragmatic world view advances the idea that the research occurs in social, political,
and historical contexts, and one must consider many approaches to understanding a problem. The
qualitative component of the study is embedded in a more transformative worldview to expose
underlying power structures and promote an action agenda to empower the marginalized and
move towards social justice (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). In the research process, axiology
concerns the values and ethics of the researcher that influence their methodology and
relationship to what is being researched (Saunders, 2019; Wilson, 2008). Ontology is the
40

philosophical study of existence and the nature of reality (Aliyu et al., 2015; Saunders, 2019).
This study intended to bring a questioning perspective to institutions’ organizational policies and
practices by bringing to light the perspectives and experiences of the faculty and administrators
responsible for implementing the new state policy. In bringing their voice into this study, I was
mindful of positionality and accountability to the research and exercised care to not marginalize
anyone (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Wilson, 2008).
In the critical and transformative paradigm, one must acknowledge historical power
structures that impact minoritized students’ low graduation. In framing this study, the research
sought to investigate these historical power structures embedded in an institution’s admissions
and placement processes, governance processes, student support mechanisms, and faculty units
responsible for curriculum and pedagogy in the educational delivery models. Epistemology is the
study of knowledge, meaning what constitutes acceptable, valid, and legitimate knowledge
(Saunders, 2019). Because of the asymmetrical power relationship between oppressor and
oppressed, knowledge is subjective, political, and held or maintained by the oppressor to ensure
their dominant power structure. From the pragmatic viewpoint, research must also consider
secondary data consisting of quantitative data reports and college artifacts and documents to
better understand the research problem from multiple perspectives.
Sample and Population
Purposeful sampling is a type of nonprobability sampling whereby the researcher wants
to learn and gain a deep understanding of a particular phenomenon by finding information-rich
sources (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This type of sampling includes the people involved in the
study and the actual setting and processes which the researcher deliberately chooses because of
their relevance to the study (Maxwell, 2013). I chose three colleges based on convenience and
41

access to the population and because they represent various types of the 116 colleges in the
California community college system (Table 2). I assigned pseudonyms for the colleges and all
participants to retain their anonymity and confidentiality. Further, I considered my positionality
as an employee of the ACCJC and ensured that the colleges were outside the portfolio of
colleges I support as part of my professional duties. The selection decision also took into account
my access to all three colleges and support from senior administrator contacts to conduct the
study, making it a feasible process (Maxwell, 2013). Table 2 presents the college pseudonyms
and relevant characteristics.

Table 2
Overview of Sample College Population
College Type 2018–19 annual
student
enrollment
Black or
African
American
Hispanic
Stone View College Rural,
Single College District

Less than 10,000 4% 21%
Farlay Grove College Suburban,
Multi-College District

10,000 – 20,000 5% 32%
Orange Moon College Urban,
Multi-College District
More than 20,000 6% 57%

Note. I assigned pseudonyms to the colleges in this study.

42

The target population for the study consisted of faculty and administrators from Stone
View College, Farlay Grove College, and Orange Moon College, particularly those persons who
have or had a role in implementing AB 705, such as math and English faculty and department
chairs, deans, and other employees from the counseling, recruitment, and admissions
departments. I deliberately chose these employees for their relevance to this study and because
they were in the best position to answer the interview questions (Maxwell, 2013). I determined
that interviewing approximately 10 faculty and staff members from each college was an adequate
target sample size to yield rich data from multiple perspectives and was feasible given the time
constraints for this study. I assigned pseudonyms to all participants in this study to protect their
anonymity and confidentiality.
Instrumentation
This qualitative study utilized semi-structured interviews as the source of data. The study
proposed a set of open-ended interview questions related to the research questions and included
potential probes to implement as follow-up questions to gain deeper information from interview
participants based on their initial responses (Crawford & Lynn, 2019). In a semi-structured
interview, questions are guided to explore issues, ask about specific kinds of information, and the
researcher has flexibility in how they order and pose questions (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The
interview questions explored issues related to understanding the exosystem, including the
cultures and diversity/equity climate within which each community college operates, issues
around accountability in implementing policy, and perceptions on improving outcomes for Black
and Latinx students.
The interview protocol allowed participants to tell about themselves, how they feel about
their work in community colleges, how long they have been in their positions, and the kinds of
43

training related to equity and diversity they participated in at the college. These kinds of opening
questions helped warm up the interview at the beginning and establish rapport. They also
provided rich descriptions and context for participants’ work environments and their level of
engagement or involvement with equity issues at the college (Krueger & Casey, 2009).
According to Patton (2002), questions about the past are harder to respond to compared to
questions about the present; thus, the interview protocol sequencing began with items related to
the present and then probed into the past. A closing question provided the opportunity for the
participant to share anything they needed to add so they could make concluding remarks in the
interview, which also validated the value of their participation (Patton, 2002). The protocol used
was grounded in Merriam and Tisdell’s (2016) opinion and values questions, feeling questions,
knowledge questions, and some relevant background and demographic questions.
I tested the protocol during two mock interviews with community college personnel to
identify how respondents would understand the questions, determine whether the questions
would yield rich information, and learn how long the average interview would last based on the
initial protocol. The mock interviews informed the second draft of the protocol and helped
identify confusing questions as well as decide on a series of probes to yield a more fruitful
discussion. For each question, I utilized a matrix to identify the associated research question and
key concept explored to assist with data analysis.
Data Collection
The interview protocol anticipated a 45-minute interview that occurred online via a Zoom
video-conference platform. The Zoom video-conference call was appropriate given the current
state and county public health guidelines regarding social distancing due to the pandemic, which
remained in place in spring 2021. I conducted 29 interviews that ranged in length from 27
44

minutes to 58 minutes. The average length of all interviews was approximately 43 minutes. The
Zoom platform captured the audio transcript, which helped me better focus on listening to the
participant rather than relying on research notes since it is important for the validity of the study
to capture the conversation in full (Crawford & Lynn, 2019). Each audio transcript generated a
10- to 15-page single-spaced document. In addition, carefully planning the informed consent
process added to the credibility and trustworthiness of the study, and included appropriate
language to consistently read to each of the participants, asked permission to record the
interview, and acknowledged that the participant has the right to withdraw or not answer
questions if they so choose (Crawford & Lynn, 2019).
I communicated with the key contact at each college to gather a list of potential
interviewees. The key contact first introduced the opportunity to participate in the study to the
potential interviewees. I followed up and emailed each participant to more formally introduce
them to the study, provide the consent form, and identify a mutually convenient time for the
interview. When there were difficulties in reaching the participants, I sought the help of the key
contact to follow up with a reminder about the study, encouraging potential interviewees to
participate and reiterating the nature and importance of the study.
Data Analysis
I conducted data analysis according to the steps detailed by Creswell and Creswell
(2018). These steps entailed sifting through the rich information collected to identify the useful
parts. I also selected NVIVO, a computer software program to assist with data analysis and
coding per my specifications. I followed these sequential steps: organized the transcribed
interviews, read completely through each transcript to gain a comprehensive overview of
information and jot pertinent notes in the margins, and coded the data by focusing on key
45

concepts and words to categorize issues. The coding process included expected codes, surprise
codes, and codes of special interest, followed by a grouping activity to assist with the analysis
(Creswell & Creswell, 2018). I described the settings and themes which emerged from the
analysis of the codes. The themes formed the basis for subheadings to help organize the narrative
components for each case study and across the three institutions in this study. Per Creswell and
Creswell (2018), interpretation of the qualitative data is based on a deep discussion of the overall
findings and themes, comparisons and reflections on the literature, and the researcher’s views on
the themes and their implications for future research. I organized the analysis according to each
research question and identified potential problems with the data analysis.
Limitations and Delimitations
As Creswell and Creswell (2018) noted, there are several limitations to information
obtained through interviews. These include the possibility that participants provide biased
information in response to the researcher’s position and presence; that information is subjective
reflecting the views of the participants, compared to direct observation; and that participants’
knowledge and views, and ability to express and synthesize those views may vary greatly across
the study, yielding inconsistent quality of information. In addition, in qualitative research, it is
important to acknowledge that findings are not generalizable. On the contrary, its strength lies in
the new knowledge that the research generated through specific case studies (Creswell &
Creswell, 2018).
Also, the COVID-19 pandemic began in spring 2020, which was the semester
immediately following the mandated legislation implementation start time of fall 2019. The
interviews occurred in spring 2021 during the pandemic. While there may be general limitations
given the 1-year timeframe from the legislation’s enactment to the time of the interviews, one
46

must also consider the impact of the pandemic on participant experiences and perceptions of the
effectiveness of the policy and the disrupted implementation process. Along with the pandemic,
there was a heightened awareness of racial inequality due to police brutality against Black and
African Americans. In the California community college system, there was a loud call for racial
and social justice. These events were followed by an insurrection at the nation’s Capitol building
after the 2020 presidential election. These historical events provide context for the interviews,
which explored participants’ experiences implementing a policy intended to improve educational
outcomes for Black and Latinx students and engaged participants in a conversation about
diversity, inclusion, and equity.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
There are several ways to increase the credibility of one’s research, including using
multiple methods, using multiple sources of data to triangulate information, and conducting
member checks (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). To increase this study’s credibility, I triangulated
data by interviewing persons from various constituencies who would have different perspectives.
Further, I relied on several examples that participants shared to improve the written descriptions
and clarify the narrative. Finally, it is important to triangulate with other secondary data to
further learn and expand understanding of the policy’s implementation and identify conflicting
issues (Maxwell, 2013). I reviewed each college’s mission and augmented the qualitative
component with a review of secondary data in the form of quantitative outcomes data to compare
student outcomes before and after implementation of AB 705.
Creswell and Creswell (2018) suggested that a researcher can increase a study’s validity
by providing rich, thick descriptions of the settings to provide a realistic basis for analysis. I was
47

mindful of presenting contradictory evidence in the rich description since that can also increase
the study’s validity and clarified biases I brought to the study (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
I took steps to increase the study’s reliability or trustworthiness by documenting all the
steps to the study in the methods sections so that others could replicate the study. I checked the
Zoom transcripts for accuracy and corrected obvious mistakes, and I periodically revisited the
codes to make sure there was not a change in their application or meaning during coding
(Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
Ethics and Positionality
One of the key issues I had to mitigate was my positionality and perceived power as vice
president of the ACCJC. The ACCJC accredits community colleges and assures the public of a
quality education. This position and power may have influenced how open and comfortable
participants were in speaking honestly about their experiences. This position may also have
biased participants who wanted to present their college positively or, if they had grievances,
purposefully provide a negative viewpoint. Merriam and Tisdell (2016) argued that a study’s
trustworthiness depends on whether the researcher demonstrated competence and conducted their
work ethically. While I considered utilizing a proxy to conduct the interviews to minimize this
bias, I decided that knowledge of the study and issues was essential in conducting the interviews
to yield rich information (Crawford & Lynn, 2019). To reduce bias through purposeful sampling,
I chose colleges outside of my portfolio. This means that there was no ongoing, direct
relationship with the college president or senior leadership team. Further, I confirmed with my
supervisor at the ACCJC to ensure there was no conflict of interest with the study.
Merriam and Tisdell (2016) suggested several strategies that I followed to ensure an
ethical study. These included articulating a clear purpose for the study, emphasizing that the
48

information would only be used for the study, letting participants know that the college would
not be named, and clarifying and maintaining participant confidentiality. In addition, it is
important to understand the institution’s culture, particularly as several questions touch on issues
of diversity and equity. Therefore, I spoke with the key contacts in advance to be thoughtful
about the questions and be generally aware of any cues from participants in case they expressed
discomfort or seemed to customize their responses to what they thought I wanted to hear
(Crawford & Lynn, 2019).

49

Chapter Four: Results
The purpose of this study was to explore faculty and staff experience in the implementation
of the California Community College Chancellors Office’s higher education policies and to
examine the policy impact on racially minoritized community college students’ graduation rates.
Three key research questions guided the study:
1. What aspects in the exosystem help to facilitate implementation of higher education
policies intended to positively impact minoritized student graduation rates?
2. What are the characteristics of an institution that enable policies such as AB 705 to be
implemented successfully in achieving intended outcomes to increase graduation rates for
Black and Latinx students?
3. What are the perceptions and experience of employees on the policy implementation and
impact of AB705 on Black and Latinx students?
Participants
Participants were 21 faculty members from math and English departments and eight
administrators who played a role in implementing AB 705. Eleven participants were employed at
Stone View College, nine at Farlay Grove College, and nine at Orange Moon College. At all
three colleges, I interviewed more faculty than administrators, and the faculty were almost
evenly divided across math and English departments. Of the 21 faculty participants, four were
non-tenured adjunct or part-time associate faculty members. All participants identified their age
as over 30 years old. Most interviewees at Stone View College were older than those at Farlay
Grove College and Orange Moon College and generally had more years of service at their
college. The majority of participants from Stone View College identified themselves as male and
as White. At Farlay Grove College, all participants identified themselves as female, and
50

approximately half identified their race/ethnicity as other than White. At Orange Moon College,
approximately half of the participants identified as female and the other half male, and
approximately half of all participants identified with diverse racial categories. Table 3 provides a
summary of the sociodemographic characteristics of the research participants.

51

Table 3
Sociodemographic Characteristics of Participants

Stone View
College
Farlay Grove
College
Orange Moon
College
Total
Preferred gender

Female 3 9 4 16
Male 8 0 5 13
Racial/Ethnic identity
a

White 10 5 4 19
Latinx 0 2 0 2
Asian 0 0 3 3
Black 1 1 2 4
Middle Eastern 0 1 0 1
Age Range

31–45 3 5 4 12
46–59 6 3 3 12
60+ 2 1 2 5
Position

Faculty
b
8 7 6 21
Staff/Administrator 3 2 3 8
Years of Service

0–5 years 2 3 2 7
6–10 years 3 2 1 6
11–19 years 0 2 2 4
20–30 years 6 2 4 12
Department

Math 4 3 3 10
English 4 4 4 12
Other
c
3 2 2 7

a
Six participants identified a secondary ethnic or mixed-race identity, including Armenian,
Chinese, Greek, Hong Kong, Native American, White
b
Includes four non-tenured faculty (adjunct/associate)
c
Other departments include counseling, research, student services, professional development
52

Research Question One Results
Three major themes emerged based on the interview protocol questions related to
Research Question 1. The following three themes, level of equity involvement, beliefs about
inclusion and diversity, and racial tension impact, represent general aspects in the system that
appeared to play a role in facilitating the implementation of AB 705. These three themes
influenced the findings discussed in Chapter Five, particularly pertaining to the critical role of
professional development focused on equity issues, advantage to engaging part-time faculty,
positive influence of inclusive communities of practice, and the significant role of external
factors in facilitating change.
Level of Equity Involvement
I asked each participant to describe their role in the college and discuss their involvement
in activities, committees, or other professional development opportunities focused on improving
student equity. Based on the participants’ responses, there appeared to be varying levels of
involvement and equity engagement at each college. Stone View College could be characterized
as having medium-level involvement. Farlay Grove College participants expressed a high level
of involvement, and Orange Moon College had a lower level of active engagement. I identified
the level of involvement as high when most participants described their engagement with equity
activities or committees using words related to equity, such as prejudice, racism, discrimination,
bias, or White fragility. Involvement was also considered high if they mentioned other
contemporary issues related to closing equity gaps. A medium level of involvement indicates that
several participants, but not the majority, discussed their engagement according to this definition,
and a low level of involvement indicates that only a few participants mentioned words and
specific issues related to equity according to the definition.
53

Stone View College
At Stone View College, several participants described having some role or participation
in equity-related activities or initiatives. Three participants described their involvement in a
multicultural/diversity committee and the college’s development of a multicultural/diversity
center. For example, Connor mentioned, “I was pretty influential in getting multiculturalism
back into our curriculum.” Jennifer discussed that she has worked with the center “to host some
workshops, but they weren’t specific to equity.” She explained that faculty are available at the
center to provide additional support to students. Anna described that “I think we have several
different professional developments around equity. There’s been some implicit bias training, and
I don’t know whether everybody’s gone to that, seems like I see the same people.” Mike
described his work advocating for the “rights of all students with disabilities.” Zack described
that everybody is involved with equity “because our program review requires reflection on
equity data.”
Participants also mentioned their involvement with the student equity plan and
“convocation workshops around equity-related issues.” Alec discussed that “there’s been a focus
at my college on equity from faculty who are doing reading groups on certain books like White
Fragility. Things like that.” In describing his involvement in equity-related activity, Alec shared,
I also think my college is kind of forcing me to think about that because there’s definitely
this kind of staff development. You know, I’m not quite there yet, but I’m coming
around. I would say that, from the top down, I would say our President’s extremely
committed for sure to improving our equity.
At Stone View College, while the theme of equity engagement emerged out of questions
related to the participants’ role at the college and implementing AB 705, it is worth noting that
54

several participants mentioned their involvement with the California Acceleration Project (CAP),
or Multiple Measures Assessment Project (MMAP), or California Community Colleges Success
Network (3CSN). These affiliate organizations held regular conferences and workshops and
conducted research related to placement policies and their impact on student success.
Participants’ involvement with those groups can be considered equity work leading up to the
implementation of AB 705. Zoe summarized this concept in her remarks when describing her
engagement:
Well, I think it’s worth noting that I don’t recall the word equity as a word being used in
which professional learning and support was talked about as extensively as it was with
3CSN. I mean, that’s been part of the gift of AB 705, is this collapse of suggesting the
equity work is one thing, and everything else is something else. It has been the reframing
of the vision for success.
Farlay Grove College
The majority of participants at Farlay Grove College spoke of their participation in a
college-organized professional development program focused on equity teaching and learning. A
few research participants also mentioned the value the college places on the training
demonstrated by compensating part-time faculty. Tina described the professional development
program as follows:
A process of intentional focus on multiple things from teaching philosophies to what’s
your grading policy, how is that viewed by students, how do we have the students
internalize it, looking at literally systemic racism and how it’s embedded in pretty much
every fabric of our institution. Really understanding the history of education. Critical race
theory, taking a look at the pedagogical approaches. The policies that we hold in our
55

classrooms. The mindset that we foster in our classrooms, but also the mindset that we
have as faculty when structuring our courses.
Sandra mentioned her involvement in obtaining a grant while she was a part-time faculty
member for part-time faculty “to analyze equity data in our own classes to see where those gaps
were and then designed specific interventions to mitigate those equity gaps.” Stephanie
participated in that program and shared,
We reviewed our individual classroom data disaggregated by ethnicity for each of our
faculty members in English, and then we invited a bunch of experts in different areas of
equity to campus to help us learn. It was like an inquiry program. The goal was to learn
how to be better equity-minded practitioners.
Stephanie also mentioned that faculty organized an ongoing community of practice to
share and dialogue on such topics after they completed their participation in the grant-funded
project. Abigail mentioned her attendance at many workshops, webinars, and presentations over
the last 5 years as well as a “racial justice and equity taskforce” that was started a year ago.
Christine described the college’s proactive nature over the last 5 years to seek out external equity
training, and similar to Stone View College, their involvement with the CAP, which “has always
had an equity focus.” She has also attended many local university training sessions and forums
and acknowledged that “the college has, at least until COVID, heavily participated in external
equity training sending cohorts of faculty and administrators.” She also described efforts to
redefine the purpose of professional development to be “equity-focused and anti-racist.” Becky
discussed being part of a community of practice, and the purpose of their discussion is “not just
having a more equitable course…more equitable content. The teachers identify when they’re
committing micro-aggressions in class or how to handle when other students do micro-
56

aggressions.” She also reflected on her own equity data, particularly “how my Black and Latinx
students were doing. I pick on those most for me because those were the numbers that were
lowest compared to the standard group, the White group for me.”
There were other examples of active participation in equity-related initiatives. Patricia
mentioned sitting on a technology committee that focuses on equity, “ensuring that we have
equitable access to technology across our campuses.” Ella teaches a course at a 4-year institution
with an equity focus and serves on a racial and social justice taskforce at Farlay Grove College.
Orange Moon College
Only some research participants described previous work in equity-related initiatives,
projects, or committees. A few also acknowledged that equity work began more recently in the
last 2 to 3 years. Barbara described her involvement with formerly incarcerated students and the
project’s focus on “heavily male, which is a kind of equity issue. “ She expressed excitement
about expanding on their [ethnic] studies program and described that as work “in social justice
areas.” She elaborated that the college president pushed managers during the last 2 years to get
involved in equity issues. Max discussed his involvement with increasing open educational
resources for students and “just coming up with best practices for faculty when building courses
and updating their courses, in terms of equity issues.” Arthur, a newer employee, observed that
“so much of the equity work is actually starting now.” He discussed supporting specific
academic and support programs for African American and Latinx students and elaborated,
We’re having equity conversations as it relates to the way in which we are teaching. So,
what does optimal teaching look like, with an equity focus, so whether it’s your syllabus,
coming from a specific place to be more inclusive of students, the languages we use, the
examples that we use, and all of this is in the program development.
57

Max described his work on a student success committee focused on data and shared his
knowledge of equity gaps. He stated that “they’ve been pretty much steady throughout the entire
five years.” Marina described her involvement related to attendance at AB 705 workshops to
learn “how we may help students, how we may support students.” In contrast to the few
members who relayed some of their involvement in equity-related work, Catherine provided a
rich description and impact of her engagement with the 3CSN, which she was exposed to many
years ago. She said,
It was very eye-opening for me because I got to see a different perspective of something I
wasn’t taking into consideration in my teaching, and then we were exposed to more data
regarding these equitable practices that are not implemented.
She described that, after a few years,
I felt that I was on a path of trying to, you know, my objectives changed, so what can I do
to get more students, my success rates, my retention rates to improve because they were
just not good over the years. This is multifactorial. What’s contributing to the problems
that we still face presently? How individuals from marginalized groups are not even
treated regularly in society, but then how is that impacting them at our institutions? So,
conversations like implicit bias, communication, and these kinds of things have been
brought by experts to come and talk on campus.
Beliefs About Inclusion and Diversity
I asked participants to describe their college’s climate in terms of diversity and inclusion,
their own sense of belonging, and their perspectives on the college’s commitment to diversity.
Participants’ responses were very personal and at times garnered what appeared to be triggering
defensiveness or emotional release that required brief pauses. For example, one participant, after
58

sharing his comments on students’ lack of preparedness asked out loud, “Was there anything
racist in that? I don’t think so, no.” One participant reflecting on her sense of belonging stated
expressively, “It’s home. Like, I’m going to tear up. I mean, the personal growth I get from being
at that college and the continual evolution as a teacher, it’s just home, you know.”
Stone View College
Participants at Stone View College overwhelmingly shared their positive sense of
belonging at the college. The majority of faculty and staff also acknowledged their long-time
association with the college, either as former students or beginning their positions in associate
faculty roles, or mentioned being from the local area. They used phrases such as “I am
comfortable at the college,” “I’ve never felt not included at Stone View College, even when I
was an associate faculty,” and “I feel very comfortable, I mean I’ve been there a long time.”
Participants also acknowledged that the college has work to do in creating an inclusive
environment. Anna said, “I wouldn’t say that we are not inclusive. I don’t think we’re aware of
things that may be done unintentionally that can lead to some exclusion.” She noted some
struggles in this area due to the college’s rural environment and “sort of conservative enclaves
around in this community.” She also brought up that the college still needs to work on gender
diversity and increase the number of women in leadership roles. Anna described her longevity at
the college as “a woman who’s had enough experience to be taken seriously” and that she tries to
“to elevate some of our younger voices, particularly men and women who have ideas, who are
from different backgrounds…and underrepresented.” While Zoe described her positive working
relationship with the college and colleagues, she added, “but I also know that I am not
considered from here and from the institution.” She also spoke of her responsibility to create an
inclusive environment: “Given my protected status as a tenured full-time faculty member and
59

being White. Like, if I don’t use it, then other people with less power and privilege are going to
have put more at risk than I do.” Matthew’s perspective was that some people might call the area
“backwards,” but he clarified that “I don’t see it quite backwards. It is just kind of a live and let
live mentality, so I feel like people are generally pretty inclusive.”
Almost all the participants acknowledged the college’s desire for a more diverse
workforce and shared their recruitment challenges. All the participants remarked in some way
“we need more diversity,” and their belief that “the college has a very strong intent on trying to
recruit and retain a diverse faculty, but it’s been tough.” Martin noted, “We’ve struggled with
diversity and faculty. It’s just a hard place for people to come to and say, oh, I feel at home in
this predominantly White community.” Jennifer noted, “we do have a bit of diversity within our
faculty and administration, always something we’re working to improve.” Zoe stated, “We aren’t
where we need to be. Our student population is not reflected in our faculty.” Mike described his
involvement on a committee to make recommendations on a hiring plan several years ago and
reflected with some regret, “I notice this year the recent committee made its own set of
recommendations for 2020–21, and I looked at them, and they’re the same essential
recommendations that were delivered in 2016–17.” He shared his frustration,
And at this point, I would say that I can’t really answer the question why we have not
diversified our faculty to the extent that we have been trying. I can say that, this year, it’s
been made very clear by the board of trustees that the board is committed to diversifying
our faculty by actively monitoring hiring practices and seeking representation from
marginalized groups in the faculty as much as possible. The board has made that
commitment clear.
60

Farlay Grove College
Participants at Farlay Grove College spoke about how they felt comfortable and belonged
at the college, although they acknowledged that their colleagues of color likely do not feel that
way. For example, Tina said she felt “very comfortable, and I think within the group that’s really
pushing for equity.” Sandra recollected her start at the college as an adjunct faculty and
commented, “I never felt like an adjunct while I was a part-timer at Farlay Grove, and there are
faculty members who I thought were full-time who ended up being part-timers because of how
equal our department treats part-timers and full-timers.” However, she mentioned that she has
colleagues “who are not White who do not feel that same sense of welcome or belonging” and
attributed that sense to “micro-aggressions” they experience. She added that those colleagues
“have definitely felt oppressed, tokenized, [and] interrupted while they’re trying to speak.”
Christine described her high sense of belonging and attributed that to the college
fostering her growth and success. She noted that “I feel like the college has taken great care to
just foster my growth, and just facilitated a lot of leadership for me.” Christine additionally
noted, though, that “there’s still major cultural problems around equity, particularly when you
hear about the experiences of my Black and Latinx colleagues.” She concluded that “the culture
is also a racist culture,” though she admitted it is improving. Ella, a participant of color, stated, “I
haven’t felt very welcomed. What I have is a strong group of colleagues that I’ve built up a lot of
capital with and then support me on the campus.”
Patricia discussed her sense of belonging related to gender leadership roles:
I think it helps a lot to have a lot of women in leadership positions as well. Because I was
mostly in colleges where it was dominated by White males and, so, it’s a lot easier. So, I
do feel more included in conversations, and it’s gotten easier the longer I’ve been here.
61

Farlay Grove College participants generally provided very strong examples describing
their culture and specific work they needed to do to make it more inclusive. For example, Becky
stated,
I don’t think you can truly be inclusive and truly embrace diversity until, this is going to
sound a little racist, until you take all the folks like me who are White and have had
White privilege and really expose us to how that enters into our classroom, how our
assumptions based on all the privileges that we’re not even aware of, you know, such as
the ability to be on time to class, just based on the neighborhood we were raised in, not
necessarily wealth, focused intently on helping us all develop those skills to recognize
our own biases and make it a very safe place to explore how biases, particularly our
White privilege, is coming into our teaching.
Conversations with interviewees revealed that the college is making it a priority to hire a
more diverse workforce, but recognize that they “have a long way to go,” “still in the beginning
stages of mimicking our student population,” and are making efforts to “be more intentional
about reaching out.” Ella noted that “we verbalize a commitment, but we haven’t realized it.”
Participants discussed that a college taskforce is developing recommendations regarding hiring
practices and policies for the president’s consideration. Ella spoke to the challenges and
“struggle to get movement with our faculty to really represent, they don’t look like what our
student population looks like.” She brought up that there’s “pushback” from faculty who have
been at the college for many years and “really have control over who ends up on a hiring
committee, who’s going to be able to influence who’s hired.” Ella described the hiring process:
62

So, we have a lot of more of the same because the committees are formed in a way that
they continue to hire people that they’re comfortable with, and those people don’t look
like me. And, so, it’s been a challenge. The culture is challenging.
Orange Moon College
Research participants’ responses varied greatly in describing their college’s climate in
terms of diversity and inclusiveness. It appeared to me that the terms themselves meant different
things to the participants, and when one or two asked what was meant by the term, I allowed
them to interpret the words for themselves. The majority of participants responded to the
question in simple terms by describing the diversity of their students who come from “all walks
of life.” Another participant described how diversity is celebrated and “part of the fabric of the
college,” and another stated that “we’re incredibly diversified and amazingly inclusive. I mean
really everybody is represented at that school.” Vivian said, “We’re very understanding. We’re
very accepting, each and every [person] the way that they are.” Marina discussed the “very
diverse, different cultures” within her department and shared how the recent town halls have
provided opportunities for “sharing experiences” and “bonding.” Arthur commented that it is
hard to determine during the pandemic but commented on the different types of events that were
taking place and how the climate “seems very inclusive.” He said he felt like he belongs and
stated, “I feel valued. I feel like I have something to contribute.” Thomas also commented that
“now I think there’s more of an understanding of what diversity will take, cultural diversity on
the campus for gender and race.”
Catherine shared a counter-perspective as a “minority voice.” She described her
experience in the department as “just cold, no matter what setting. I don’t get the warm
63

welcoming, inviting feelings, and I think that contributes…how it’s impacting our students.”
Catherine described what it felt like to be in disagreement with her department:
I just didn’t know what it was at that time, but I know I just strongly disagreed with our
approach. I just didn’t know how to vocalize it, but at the end of the day, my voice is the
minority voice. I’m struggling. We need more opportunities for awareness, equity,
implicit-explicit bias, micro-macro aggressions. We need tools for engagement. We need
to get re-centered because we’re all stressed.
Orange Moon College participants spoke of the college’s commitment to increase the
diversity of its workforce and how it seems to be more of a priority now compared to previous
times. Max remarked on the college’s commitment, “It is at least verbally. It appears to be more
important to the college. I mean, it’s something that we’re starting to talk about more now than
we have in the past.” He describes how, several years ago, he was part of discussions on faculty
diversity, and the data showed that they had an “overwhelmingly a non-diverse faculty, that it
was not representative.” Max acknowledged, though, that the faculty “still continues to be not
representative of our community and the students who are at the college.” He described the
hiring process as “limited in what we can do” since “it has to go through the district.” He
believed the district has not adequately advertised positions and not gotten “the word out to a
diverse enough group of applicants.” Barbara noted one of the challenges the college faces is that
“faculty who consciously or subconsciously are bringing in people like themselves.” Thomas
described his college’s progress in hiring diverse faculty and recalled,
When I first came to Orange Moon, there weren’t any female math professors. I was
struggling that the entire department was male, and I thought that’s a discrimination suit.
64

So, in the last 5 years or so, they’ve gotten quite a bit of female faculty in the math
department.
Arthur was hopeful that the current hiring process would yield better results moving
forward. He explained he had positions he needed to fill and described his president’s approach
in the following manner:
We finished recruitment, and the college president flat out said, they might be the best
people, but if you send me three White people, I’m not hiring. I said okay to a certain
extent because I’ve been in the district for a [long time]. I understand how our processes
can benefit people that have a leg up because they know somebody in the district.
Two participants discussed their college’s commitment in terms of ensuring fairness in
the hiring process. Marina stated, “We have a [hiring] representative just to make sure the
process is fair.” Vivian, who has participated as the [hiring] representative on hiring committees,
stated that “we don’t discriminate. We always look, how many female, how many male
[applicants] do we have, what nationalities, what is it that this department needs, so they’re very
careful to make sure they keep that balance.”
Racial Tension Impact
The study was conducted in the aftermath of major national and state political and social
events, underpinned by the backdrop of the impact of COVID-19. This included the murder of
George Floyd and subsequent mass protests in support of Black Lives Matter, increased incidents
of hate crimes and violence against Asian Americans, and the insurrection of the Capitol
Building after the 2020 presidential election. I asked participants about the impact of these
events on their campus climate and culture to ascertain what kind of influence, if any, these
events had on their college climate. The majority of respondents spoke of the increased number
65

of professional development opportunities, town halls, webinars, and workshops geared toward
increasing dialogue and understanding on issues of race and equity. Interview participants at all
three colleges spoke about how the events empowered their colleges to further spotlight race and
equity and more formally and unequivocally express their positions and priorities to increase and
improve diversity, equity, and inclusion at their colleges. Some respondents also noted that much
work remains to be done and alluded to undercurrents of continued disagreements on the topic
and climate tensions while acknowledging the difficulty in coming to conclusions on the topic
considering their remote work environments during the height of the pandemic.
Stone View College
At Stone View College, participants varied in their personal perceptions of the impact of
the larger racial tensions and focused their remarks on the increased professional development
programming, as well as the spectrum of opinions they have observed. Martin acknowledged that
“it’s tough now because of the pandemic, and you don’t have those kinds of hallway
conversations.” He described some of the additional facilitated dialogues focused on “just
looking at equity and how we interact with each other. And very honest discussions with the
members of the board of trustees, as well as faculty and staff.” He brought up that there “seems
to be a traditional sort of equity lens, and the other, like all lives matter, so I feel like we’re sort
of grappling with that.” Anna and Zack highlighted that there is a relatively conservative
community within which the college resides and that they are working through the challenges.
Anna stated, “I think the recent events have opened the eyes of a lot of people,” and Zack
brought up that there is “a more conservative position. Like this stuff is going overboard. It’s like
McCarthyism from the left that’s under the surface, so there’s the sense that possibly people
don’t have people’s backs anymore.” Zoe acknowledged that “many people on the college
66

campus want to know how to get from where we are to something better, something more
equitable. There’s an interest in that I’m not sure that I had seen.” However, her perception was
more critical when describing that the college’s messaging has been of “valuing of all
messages…all lives matter, and that’s not the same.” Many of the participants spoke highly of
the multicultural/diversity center’s active role, along with a few committees, that have
proactively organized. “Excellent programming that’s been responsive,” as Mike described,
although he admitted, “We haven’t had yet a comprehensive engagement of everyone in the
dialogue. It’s sort of isolated in pockets.”
Farlay Grove College
At Farlay Grove College, participants focused on the increased dialogue on race and
equity, tensions that caused, and concrete statements related to anti-racism and in support of
Black Lives Matter from various campus leadership constituencies, such as the academic senate,
board of trustees, and president. Tina described how “there was a lot of statements supporting
Black Lives Matter and the Asian American Pacific Islander movement.” However, she noted
with frustration that there were some tensions around the listing of names in BLM statements:
We got to comment on it and then literally having to have a conversation where there
were arguments or comments to remove certain names like Breonna Taylor. Like, oh, she
isn’t a victim, but I’m here advocating for somebody else’s life.
Sandra, commenting on the communications, said, “That was important to me that
students know where we stood unequivocally because, in my experience, our students of color
don’t automatically assume that we are on that side of things.” Patricia described the changes she
perceived:
67

I think our campus has been moving forward to being able to have more open
conversations of race and equity. I think more so in the last year than they have been
before and in light of national events that have been happening over the last year
surrounding that. So I think the conversations are easier to have now in terms of we can’t
ignore it anymore, and we can’t hide it under the other things because we want to make it
palatable for people.
Abigail similarly said, “I think it has helped propel the college along…how having these
conversations brought it front and center. As a result, it has made it now the elephant in the room
that you can’t ignore anymore.” Christine reaffirmed that “our worlds were rocked. That
provided some momentum. I hear the college administration and more from high-level
administrators that this is a priority. And there’s also these levels of institutionalization of
diversity and inclusion work.” She further remarked that “it’s also making it harder for the very
minority of openly racist vocal faculty to show up in meetings and fight this because, from their
perspective, they’re fighting a losing battle.” She went on to describe how institutional barriers
were being cleared for faculty like herself working on equity-related projects. In their comments
on the impact of the racial tensions, other participants used phrases such as “sense of urgency to
the blossoming,” “intensified efforts to combat systemic racism,” “positive impact,” “light bulb
going off for some people.” Ella explained that “White faculty will speak up, but that wasn’t the
case just a year ago, but now there’s a choir of people seeing equity, and that’s really different
from how things were before.”
Orange Moon College
At Orange Moon College, one of the participants informed the researcher that in addition
to town halls and speakers, that they’ve recently hired a position “that’s looking at equity issues,
68

social justice issues, and that there’s been a real push on that recently.” Max also reiterated the
significant impact of the racial tensions indicating that “it is a priority of the college” and
reflected on the relevance of the professional development opportunities by saying, “just having
these discussions and being able to share, opening up has been healthy for the college and
certainly spurred on by these horrible events that are continuing to take place.” Arthur also added
that “it’s been great to create that underlying support system and venue where we can have those
race and equity conversations.” He also commented,
You have leaders in the college really saying to the college community, this is who we
are, this is what we stand for, and this is how we will support you in creating a more
racially diverse community. But also meet all of our equity goals now, like it or not. That
now becomes part of your ethos.
Acknowledging similar sentiments, Thomas added, “but it really should be a working
group so that they can address issues like this,” asserting the need to review “systemic policies.”
There were a few participants who expressed discomfort that the tensions have caused. For
example, Luke said,
I think we are all very sensitive. It’s sort of a sixth sense. You know what you can talk
about, what you can’t, although I’m not saying that I have been walking on eggshells all
the time, I just think it’s not an issue that I’ve had to deal with, really.
While expressing appreciation for the town halls and meetings to share experiences and
how faculty can support students, Marina seemed to be referring to herself and said, “I think the
increased discussion is a very crucial step, and not everyone feels comfortable to speak of these
type of experiences.” She also emphasized the discomforts of online meetings as “this is the
degree of difficulty we are facing with these town hall meetings.” There was one participant who
69

expressed an alternate viewpoint and said, “I understand, I feel bad, but I personally think they
are just overdoing it, and this really has to stop because it’s constantly reminding Whites and
Blacks that hey, look, you hate us, we hate you, but enough.”
Research Question Two Results
I strove to identify the characteristics of an institution that enable policies such as AB 705
to be implemented successfully. Based on data, three themes emerged as participants discussed
their experiences and challenges in implementing AB 705: data reflection, change culture, and
leadership. These three themes influenced the findings discussed in Chapter Five, particularly
pertaining to the importance of examining equity data as motivating factor to consider making
changes, and the necessity of leadership at every level of the institution to effectively implement
policies intended to improve equitable outcomes.
Data Reflection
While I did not explicitly ask any questions about data or even use the word “data” in
questions, participants, particularly from Stone View College and Farlay Grove College,
gravitated towards a discussion on equity data and the critical role it played in the
implementation process. They shared their perspectives on the critical role of data in supporting
changes to implement AB 705, such as reducing and eliminating remedial courses in English and
math and eliminating the use of the traditional Accuplacer standardized placement exam.
Participants from Orange Moon College also reflected on the role of data, but they had more
skeptical views of the data that they reviewed to lend support of AB 705 and more often
questioned the policy’s potential impact on Black and Latinx students.
70

Stone View College
At Stone View College, Jennifer reflected in particular on the need to “be mindful of our
equity data.” Martin discussed that “the reason we’re doing this is because, if you look at the
numbers, disproportionately the people who are being trapped in these remedial levels and not
being able to go forward are students of color.” One of the participants, Anna, expressed hope
for the future in reference to the data, stating that “we’ve seen them already…made a real,
significant dent, and I think we’re going to start to see more students being able to complete their
program and reach their educational goals.” Zack described, “our equity gaps that existed just
evaporated when we placed everyone in the [transfer-level course]. I had a 70%–75% success
rate.” In order to combat arguments others had made that students were just being passed through
and not college-ready, Zack checked with the research staff to determine how students persisted
and succeeded in following semesters in other courses, and they did well. He said, “it hit our
whole place like a ton of bricks…we really should have gotten rid of this stuff a long time ago.”
Another participant, Justin, said,
You could see the data and how it hit, how the remedial ladder was really affecting
marginalized groups. Minorities were getting the raw end of the deal being forced to go
through the ladder of remediation when it was clear the data was showing that they
weren’t going to be successful.
Zoe spoke about how they had to “bring in the data” to show that the placement test was
part of a larger set of decisions the college made “that made us complicit with institutional
racism. The idea of filtering and tracking students is at its heart, racist in its frame.” Matthew
reaffirmed that many people wanted to see the “empirical evidence,” and that also helped
develop buy-in for making changes, even after colleagues who were initially resistant. Connor
71

also admitted that “the data says that we’re not doing it. We’re failing our students.” Mike talked
about “throughput” and the “horrendous” low percentage of students who made it through the
remedial levels to transfer-level courses.
Farlay Grove College
Participants from Farlay Grove College expressed similar viewpoints as Stone View
College participants. However, they spoke of the critical role of the data in implementing
changes and focused more purposefully on the continued need to revisit the data since equity
gaps have not been eliminated, though more students are successful overall. For example,
Stephanie emphasized that, at her department meetings, “we would always bring and talk about
the data and after enough of that people really came around.” She stated that the data helped her
also see that the remedial courses, which were intended to help students, were “putting up more
barriers.” She continues to review the data on their minority populations and spoke to the
increased success of African American and Latinx students noting that “all boats are rising, but
not equitably.” Ella also described her personal experience and change of opinion on
implementing AB 705: “When they showed us the data, it was alarming. My thought was we
can’t possibly do worse than what we are doing, so why not try something different.” Sandra
commented that “throughput rates across the board have increased, and our equity gaps have
decreased slightly. That’s why we wanted to follow up with our anti-racism work because there’s
still something missing.”
Orange Moon College
At Orange Moon College, participants mentioned the role of data in terms of what
information they receive while conducting program reviews. For example, Barbara mentioned,
“[through] our program review process, we were definitely looking at some of the gaps.” She
72

acknowledged that more students are completing and “so just meeting that milestone is fantastic,
then I think what we haven’t looked at yet that we’ll roll out over the years is the students
transfer.” She indicated an interest in learning more about how students with a B or C grade have
shifted over time and how well they are doing in their other classes. She also shared that other
faculty do not trust the impact of the policy, stating, “I hear from faculty and again this
anecdotal, is that they feel like students are less prepared and that there’s things that they are
trying to find a way to go back and re-teach, as well as meet the requirements.” Thomas’
comments affirm Barbara’s as he shared his reflection on the data:
I’m skeptical of it because, obviously, if you push everyone into the [transfer-level]
course, course complete rates didn’t increase. It was basically steady. I don’t take into
account those who dropped, withdrew, so I still think that I’m not convinced that it really
made an impact, and we have to do a better job of preparing students.
Marina commented that the data is missing a lot, and there are implications because “it
simply just shows us a risk success rate.” According to her, the success rate is based on students
who were counted at census and does not account for the number of students who dropped or
withdrew prior to that date which would reflect a more accurate picture of how well students are
proceeding and the effectiveness of AB 705. Catherine alluded to her department’s justifying that
the changes in alignment with AB 705 are not necessary because the data did not indicate
success immediately. She said, “I just feel our department wasn’t really committed. [They said]
oh the data came, and it’s not what we want, so in the discussion, that to me shows something is
deep-rooted.”
73

Change Culture
The researcher asked participants to describe their colleges’ culture in two separate
questions, first in terms of curricular and administrative change and, second, in terms of diversity
and inclusion. Participants at Stone View College generally felt that they had a culture that
valued and supported change due to the open-minded nature of colleagues. Participants at Farlay
Grove College described their college culture as one that actively embraces change, and Orange
Moon College participants’ responses focused on the challenges of their college’s change
culture. In addition, two related sub-themes emerged from the interviews, which helped to
provide concrete examples demonstrating alignment with the cultures as described by
participants at each college: teaching practices and participant perspectives on their students’
backgrounds and academic abilities.
Stone View College
Many participants used the word “innovative” and mentioned their involvement in
piloting of programs in advance of AB 705. Alec stated that his department has always been
innovative and shared appreciation for his “open-minded and creative” colleagues. Jennifer
described, in particular, the faculty in the English and math departments as “very receptive, you
know, to innovation, very receptive to student-driven data…to what’s working for students.” She
described it seemed as though “everyone’s on board” while acknowledging that likely not
everyone is happy that the college removed all of the prerequisites. She noted effective efforts to
engage with other departments to explain “what we are going to do to support your students.” On
AB 705 in particular, Zoe said, “we were quite expedient and cutting edge on our willingness to
embrace AB 705.” She acknowledged,
74

Having worked in rural places before, in that if the status quo is going to be shifted on
something, that shift, whether it happens or not, is going to probably come down to a
question of maybe one or two individuals who might be sitting in a number of different
roles.
Two participants referred to leadership changes in the past. Mike mentioned a previous
“legacy culture of resistance,” which led to problems that were ultimately resolved and “came
out in many ways a stronger institution because of the work we had to do together to get through
it all.” He also stated the “college became more alert to respond to initiatives.” Alec noted the
importance of stable leadership “because you can form relationships with them and start to build
trust.” There were a few slightly alternate viewpoints. For example, Matthew said, “we’ve got an
even tempered administration that wants to evaluate the ideas before reacting, so perhaps we’ve
taken a slower approach…but it has worked to our benefit to evaluate, plan, and then move
rather than just react.” Table 4 summarizes the topics.

75

Table 4
Stone View College Participants’ Reflective Examples Supporting AB 705 Changes
Reflective topic Example quotes
Recognition that
curriculum is not
working
“What I discovered my first year, the English curriculum was a
couple decades behind the curve, in terms of equitable models
of instruction, cultural responsiveness.” (Mike)

Recognition that
placement test is unfair
“I certainly saw the advantage and disproportionately the people
who would take these placement tests who were from different
cultural backgrounds…I went through some of the questions
and I was a little appalled…what is says like sort of
mainstream White culture that is infused in here just doesn’t
seem to measure a student’s ability to critically think.” (Martin)

Recognition that students
are capable of college-
level work despite
placement exam result
“I had a student in my [subject] class that was able to write really
well and they were able to read really complicated stuff. And I
would ask them which course and they’re like well I’m in
[remedial English level course]…just doesn’t make sense…and
they said well I placed there. All along the years, I had a sense
people were being misplaced.” (Zack)

Farlay Grove College
Participants shared their perspectives on their college, describing a “strong culture for
change” generally. Stephanie called her college “a little speed boat” compared to another larger
college in the district. She said, “if we want to make a change, it’s much easier for us because we
don’t have as many layers of bureaucracy.” Alice noted that “we want our students to be
successful, and we find so many different ways to make that happen, and it’s a continuous
process that we’re still working on so that we can make our systems better.” Others described the
college using terms such as “cohesive,” “can-do spirit,” “nimble” and “embrace change.”
Christine explicitly stated that “we’re pretty lean, and we pivot on things and try things and pilot
things all the time…” Many participants mentioned changes in their teaching practices and
76

mindset. For example, Alice remarked that “we have to change the way we teach to make that
[policy] effective.” There was a strong alternative viewpoint from a participant who stated in
reference to their culture as being “very difficult, particularly if you’re talking about change that
has anything to do with equity or anti-racism or diversity, inclusion.” However, she
acknowledged the ability of the college to move forward quickly with AB 705 implementation
and noted had the college slowed down to get everyone on board, it “would have significantly
delayed the positive impact.”

Table 5
Farlay Grove College Participants’ Reflective Examples Supporting AB 705 Changes
Reflective topic Example quotes
Recognition of teaching
practices which can be
changed
“So I think the connectivity between departments and
conversations are vital, it does take a collective revision of
curriculum, policy, there needs to be an intentional focus for
profession development, especially this idea of just
grading…what are we actually measuring, privilege or the
learning that takes place.” (Tina)

Recognition of placement
test as barrier
“I know that a lot of students already feel defeated by a lot of the
processes that we have just to get into a community college…a
lot of anxiety comes into it and I think just removing that type
of formality and allowing the students to see success in their
[course] placement based off their experiences is a huge win.”
(Patricia)

Recognition that students
are capable of college-
level work despite
placement exam result
“What is it that our Black, African American students need that
we’re not providing for them, by doing focus groups and
talking with them, by getting us trained…these kinds of things
have been the impetus to work with and try to understand what
is it that’s happening, how we can help those students succeed,
because we know and we believe that they can succeed.”
(Abigail)

77

Orange Moon College
In general, participants at Orange Moon College described the challenges to change and
focused on the difficulties they have observed when change is initiated or mandated. For
example, Max stated, “I think at our college, and maybe this is universal, we fear change, and
English and math was no exception.” He added how the “noble over-riding concepts become
less” when you “get down to the nuts and bolts” and the “impact it has on faculty,” citing their
concerns:
From the philosophical side of it, to that we’re dumbing down our courses, you’re
expecting us to lower our standards, and you know we can’t do that, and we’re going to
end up transferring and having students out there who are not prepared. This might
potentially impact my teaching load, and the number of students we’re teaching and the
types of courses we used to teach, certain faculty eligible to teach and now they don’t get
any more, so people lose jobs over it.
Another participant, Arthur, felt that describing the culture depends on the various
departments or constituencies being considered, despite an “egalitarian president” who brings
“the people to the table, the right people at the table,” yet proposed changes take a long time. “I
honestly feel like sometimes what actually holds us back is our unions. Is that sometimes they
want to do the change, but they’re like, okay wait, it’s going to affect how we bargain about A,
B, C.” Arthur concluded, expressing his frustration, that “sometimes, it’s not in the best interest
of the students.” Thomas also shared his frustration: “Some people don’t like to change at all.
Why change something that they didn’t think was doing any harm.” He commented, however,
that new faculty are more supportive of changes. Marina described how faculty in her
department reacted at the beginning of the AB 705 related changes: “They were like we’re not
78

going to do it. We can’t do it, how can we do it, then with more workshops, discussion, we
collaboratively together saw what we could do.” She noted the continued present talk among
colleagues: “It is a challenge teaching in a class because you have a large range of knowledge
from students. Like, I’m one of them, I feel that, yes, we really want to offer support to
students.” Catherine described generational and cultural challenges in her department in terms of
making change, particularly in the use of technology. For example, she referenced a technology-
based program:
You couldn’t necessarily give partial credit to the homework. It was your choice, so a lot
of faculty were adopting this. Students were failing, and students are not going to even
know where to fight for points, so they were putting that burden on them. If you want
your points, you come to us to get it.
Catherine also raised that new faculty “don’t have a voice yet because they’re
probationary. Even if you have a different way, you’re going to go with whatever the majority is
because you typically don’t want to stand out. That was my experience.” Similarly, Vivian
shared, “A lot of people are retiring. Too much change, and the new ones are new. They’re afraid
to say anything.” A few participants mentioned they adopted specific changes in their teaching,
such as culturally relevant reading material or more group work and active engagement of
students in math. However, most comments and examples seemed focused on relaying the
difficulties of change.

79

Table 6
Orange Moon College Participants’ Reflective Examples on Challenges to AB 705 Changes
Reflective topic Example quotes
Focus on challenge to
maintain teaching
practices and high
standards
“I’m in the position of trying to decide, do I go on trying to teach
the [transfer] course the way it’s supposed to be taught when a
big bunch of people in the class have no idea what I’m talking
about or do I take the time to teach them things they already
should have known about…” (Luke)

“We have degrees in technical fields and we lack teaching
method experience...let alone teaching students from
marginalized groups.” (Catherine)

Reflection on students
under-preparedness for
transfer-level
coursework
“I now have students who have no clue what I’m talking
about…they don’t have the basic foundation to start at college
level, and I understand that we have boot camps that help them
for a week or so to refresh their memory, but it’s not about
refreshing their memory, it’s about teaching them what they
didn’t learn when they were in high school.” (Vivian)

Reflection on colleagues’
perspectives on
students’ backgrounds
“I think that’s still part of our culture, a lack of our culture is this
acceptance and awareness and sensitivity and empathy to those
students who come in having really very low social capital,
cultural capital…students who just tend to still be
marginalized.” (Max)

Leadership
Participants at all three colleges indicated their administration’s support for the
implementation of AB 705. Stone View College emphasized the faculty role in driving changes
related to implementing AB 705, followed by support from the administration. Farlay Grove
College, which is part of a multi-college district, commented on support not only from their
president but also the chancellor. Orange Moon College participants also expressed support from
their leadership in terms of supporting faculty’s concern with fully eliminating the remedial
80

courses. Participants also touched upon the lack of clear direction from their Chancellor and
conflicting messages they perceived from the district.
Stone View College
At Stone View College, faculty were the primary driving force behind the significant
work and advocacy needed to make changes to placement testing practices and the curriculum to
ensure access to transfer-level courses in math and English. Stone View College participants
attested to the administration’s support of these faculty-led changes. Matthew summarized “the
perfect storm” by describing the willingness on the part of faculty who “were willing to put
themselves out to try and institute change” and the “administrative support to actually make
those changes happen.” Connor also described administrative support to the departments, stating,
“We’ve never had to fight about it. Ee usually got very good support.” The types of support
participants mentioned included funding for conference attendance, speakers to the college on
the topic, and providing college-wide opportunities to showcase the faculty leaders’ work
intended to eliminate equity gaps. One participant said that the administration did not need to
push too hard since it was already “bulldogged” through the departments.
Farlay Grove College
At Farlay Grove College, since it is a multi-district college, participants expressed
support for the chancellor’s role as well as their president. Patricia mentioned that “there’s a lot
of back-end stuff that I never realized, and they were kind of being slow, but then the chancellor
stepped in and was, like, no. This is a priority. You have to work on this.” Becky expressed that
administrators demonstrated their support by making it a focus of many activities, such as the
state of the college address. In reference to administrative support, she stated, “They do it
financially, they do it with their hearts, and they do it with their personal value system.” Ella
81

expressed the importance of leadership on these issues. She said, “It takes the administration
kind of having a hard line and saying this is where we’re going, this is our focus. Now, there’s
that verbalized commitment.”
Orange Moon College
In the interviews at Orange Moon College, participants also expressed support from their
college administration and president. However, this support was described as flexibility for the
departments and faculty to work through the policy implementation issues and concerns. Thomas
said, “I think the college is pretty supportive of whatever we want to do, we could do.” He
commented that the college administration allowed them to offer a few classes one level below
the transfer-level course, which was not widely advertised, yet students “found their way into it,
which demonstrates they still had anxiety about taking the gateway course.” Thomas’ point was
that the administration had to advocate for the college’s position to offer those classes, despite
messages from the district which were “muddied and very unsure” as they were “trying to figure
out exactly what the district would and wouldn’t allow us to do.” Barbara also commented,
Our current president and vice president are people who want to get things done. I think
both of them are frustrated by just the way the district operates. Having problems with the
district fixation on process makes it difficult to be somewhat innovative and responsive.
Emma also raised concerns about mixed messages she had heard from the chancellor, “I
mean, I don’t know, what is their real concern? For students and education as opposed to what is
the concern about funding.” Marina expressed that they need more help from the administration
“in offering more support classes and highly encourage students to enroll in support classes
versus the regular course.”
82

Document Analysis
I scanned each college’s mission, values, and associated vision and philosophy
statements available on their websites to determine if there were any unique attributes that may
illuminate the college’s approach to policy implementation. Figures 8, 9, and 10 are word clouds
generated by an online word cloud generator. By default, the more frequently a word is found,
the larger it becomes in the word cloud. I restricted the number of words in the cloud to 15. The
word clouds provide a brief visualization of each college’s mission as documented on their
websites. The word clouds demonstrate that the colleges’ missions are similar in their primary
focus on students.

Figure 8
Word Cloud of Stone View College Mission

83

Figure 9
Word Cloud of Farlay Grove College Mission

Figure 10
Word Cloud of Orange Moon College Mission

84

Research Question Three Results
I asked several questions about the policy implementation process to understand
participant experiences and perceptions. I asked participants to explain in their own words the
purpose of the policy and what impact they believed it would have on completion rates for Black
and Latinx students. I also asked how they learned about the policy, the roll-out process at their
college, and what they think the college should have done differently. Two major themes
emerged which provide insights to understanding participants’ experiences at each college.
These include their beliefs in the policy efficacy, coupled with their thoughts on the proactive or
reactive nature of the policy implementation process. These two areas also led to the findings in
Chapter Five pertaining to the critical role of leadership, equity-focused professional
development, and examination of equity data.
Belief in Policy Efficacy
Participants from Stone View College and Farlay Grove College consistently described
positive views in support of AB 705, accurately articulated the policy’s purpose, and generally
expressed confidence that the policy will lead to more equitable outcomes for student success. At
Orange Moon College, participants also demonstrated their understanding of the intention of AB
705, but there were mixed opinions on whether AB 705 related changes would lead to more
equitable outcomes for students.
Stone View College
Participant descriptions on the purpose of AB 705 were internally consistent at Stone
View College and included a spectrum of focus from needing to remove barriers and enable
students to complete transfer-level coursework as soon as they can to more complex ideas related
to dismantling institutional racism. Mike stated that he recognizes that “we would get nowhere
85

without a structural intervention. I’m talking about the placement practices that were absolutely
arbitrary and unfair and resulted in what seemed to be racially differentiated placement results.”
Jennifer similarly described “removing these levels” which acted as barriers for students to
complete their degree. Zoe discussed the “old model” and how the policy opened a dialogue at
her college. She said “it created chaos that was beautiful…pushed a dialogue for the college”
about how they are using “flawed data” in reference to the placement exam. She elaborated on
that concept by stating,
One of the things that was really pernicious about that system is that the way in which
labeled students became the burden everyone carried on their back, so students named
themselves by where they placed. And faculty talked about classes and curriculum and
curriculum design by thinking about which level the student came in, what did that level
student need. Those designs and labels of students were really racist. They were racist
without ever having to say that out loud, and the placement test allowed colleges to not
name their own racist practices to themselves or to anybody else.
Every participant who expressed their views on the potential impact of AB 705 on Latinx
and African American students made a positive statement while acknowledging more research
and work need to be done. Martin, reflecting on the data, said, “I’m convinced it will have that
outcome in terms of giving a student a chance to get a college degree without that roadblock of
‘I’ve got everything else done, but they keep putting me in remedial math.’” Justin stated, “It is
amazing. I think it’s worked out exactly the way the legislation, the legislators had hoped, at
least at our college.” Anna reflected on the prior practice: “We had so many students that were in
one of those developmental courses. The likelihood of you getting out was so small” and shared
that “the research indicated from other states gone before us here in California that students
86

didn’t need those [remedial courses] to be successful and just-in-time remediation was much
better.”
Farlay Grove College
Participants at Farlay Grove College also used terms like “breaking down barriers” for
students to succeed. Christine summarized the purpose of AB 705 as “educational rights, access
to college-level education, and creating equal opportunity” and continued to say, “Students were
wholesaled locked out of transfer-level courses based on flawed metrics. It was truly an
institutionalized form of discrimination and racism.” The majority of participants expressed
similar viewpoints on the purpose of the policy and felt that the policy is having a positive
impact and will continue to do so. Ella said,
I think it will have a tremendous impact, a positive impact on our students persisting from
one semester to the next. Also, their success in getting through those courses, even if it
requires support. In the long run, we’re going to look at increased graduation rates.
One participant shared her thoughts on two elements necessary to ensure a positive impact.
Stephanie stated,
There’s the structural elements, which is what AB 705 addresses, but then there’s also the
cultural element, you know, within departments, within the classes, within the college.
And both of those things really have to work together if we are going to see kind of
meaningful equity gains, and I don’t think it’s going to be either on their own.
Orange Moon College
At Orange Moon College, participants also described in their own words the purpose of
the policy: “for students to have the opportunity to get into [transfer-level course] within one
year.” Barbara acknowledged thinking that “Orange Moon had gone overboard in terms of
87

making the students take too many classes before they could take the [transfer-level course].”
Max also stated, “it was an equity issue, and we knew that there were students several levels
placed below transfer, and it just took them forever. It was a stumbling block, and it prevented
graduation.” One participant even stated, “It’s just ludicrous thing…to think that it’s acceptable
for students to get through community college in 6 years. Six years should have never been a
benchmark.” A few others also commented that the policy has “good intentions” and an
opportunity to “reduce barriers.” However, Marina commented on the negative message she
believed the policy is sending to students: “I think they wanted to shorten the path, so the student
can enroll in transfer-level classes, but at the same time this policy is also sending a message
[that] it is not necessary to take foundational classes.”
Despite participants’ demonstrated understanding of the purpose of the policy and
statements indicating a strong desire to serve and support students, their perceptions on policy
efficacy varied widely. Many participants indicated their colleagues’ concerns about the efficacy
of the policy, and a few participants expressed doubts about a positive impact. For example,
Barbara explained faculty concerns about the level of student learning:
I think it’s been a challenge for faculty who are worried about our students to feel that
this AB 705 is a net positive. For the majority of English faculty, I think AB 705 is
probably more seen as a negative than positive. They recognize more students are passing
at the [transfer course]. That’s positive, but I think that they look at what they’re seeing,
the students, how they’re writing, and how they’re doing in classes, and they’re
concerned about the students. They would want just to kind of get some additional
information, feedback from the Cal State and UC once we get to the point where students
are transferring.
88

Similar to Barbara, Max expressed colleagues’ concerns over the initial findings: “The numbers
were not promising. There was hesitancy, and the belief was that this wasn’t necessarily
beneficial to our students. Whether that has held up data-wise since then, frankly, I don’t know.”
A few participants shared their doubts on the efficacy of the policy. Luke stated, “I don’t
see how this is going to translate into higher graduation rates now. I haven’t read the research,
but I find that hard to believe based on my experience. I’m failing a lot of people.” He spoke of
students regretting taking his transfer-level course due to the difficulty. Two other participants
referred to the negative impact of the policy and made statements such as “closing equity gaps
does not mean taking away students’ rights to take some courses to strengthen their skills” and
how the policy “doesn’t give the students the opportunity to learn.” A minority of the
participants from Orange Moon College expressed positive perceptions. Arthur noted that “the
students are doing well” based on the evidence he reviewed, and Thomas described how “this
will help us reduce the time to completion,” though he acknowledged not having “seen any
improvement yet.”
Policy Implementation Process
Stone View College and Farlay Grove College participant responses were similar in
many ways as they described their colleges’ implementation process. Participants from both
colleges indicated their early involvement in experimenting with making changes to the
curriculum, accelerating courses, removing remedial courses. Participants from Stone View
College additionally emphasized their early critical view of the standardized placement exam and
exploration of the use of other measures for placing students in courses. These early activities
were occurring several years prior to the AB 705 mandate. Zoe at Stone View College remarked,
“It was a really collaborative effort. Folks were ready, and I mean probably because of having
89

such a long consciousness learning and talking about wanting to move the department forward.”
Patricia at Farlay Grove College noted, “I felt like overall, it was an effective process because we
had buy-in from both instructional and student services.” Faculty at both colleges reflected on
many of the professional development opportunities related to these activities. Connor at Stone
View College mentioned, “We were early adopters, and I think almost every person in our
English department, full-time and part-time faculty went through the acceleration program
training, so we were very well prepared for AB 705.” They noted common challenges and
elaborated on the multiple discussions that occurred a few years prior to the AB 705 mandate.
The following table provides some example quotes demonstrating Stone View College’s and
Farlay Grove college’s overall experience.

Table 7
Similar Policy Implementation Reflections from Stone View College and Farlay Grove College
Aspect of policy
implementation
Stone View College Farlay Grove College
Early involvement with
acceleration and removal of
remedial courses
“He came into our college in
2002 already knowing that
it was stupid to have this
all, these pre-collegiate
courses and had been
saying this all along…pre-
collegiate courses were tied
to writing center and we
didn’t have the FTES to
justify it, so she was
starting to hack and whack
the hours back which had
an influence on the pre-
collegiate structure, so it
was already kind of being
taken apart before AB 705
came around.” (Zack)
“For us it was really some
kind of a slow build and we
started with acceleration in
2011 and that’s when we
implemented our
accelerated one level below
class.” (Stephanie)

“We were already removing
basic skills classes, this is
in 2016 obviously before
the legislation passed.”
(Christine)

90

Aspect of policy
implementation
Stone View College Farlay Grove College
Early consideration on the
utility of the placement
exam
“We were one of the schools
involved in multiple
measures placement. We
had recognized the
assessment tool…was not
accurate, it was placing
students lower than they
needed to be…so we
started all that before AB
705 really came out.”
(Matthew)

“We made the placement
changes kind of in concert
with the co-requisite
support and we did this
before AB 705.” (Abigail)

Examples of challenges

“I do recall there was some
resistance from people in
places like financial aid…I
do recall there was a little
bit of, maybe not fair to
say, stonewalling, but there
was some.” (Alec)

“Difficult thing was getting
the message out to
counselors and advising.”
(Anna)

“When we said we’re going
to get rid of the math
pipeline of doom…there’s
not going to be any
remedial math, he said well
we can phase out that old
program and possibly
phase in the new program.”
(Becky)

“I think that the darker kind
of side that struggles with
equity, for lack of a better
word, racist side of the
college, shows up in our
implementation as
well…the fact that our
outcomes are probably
good according to how all
the college are doing it, but
probably quote unquote
standard outcomes, that are
racist outcomes.”
(Christine)

91

In contrast, according to the participants, it appears that Orange Moon College’s work on
implementing AB 705 began once the law was enacted. Max described, “We had the guidelines
from the state, the memos, and we sat down with the representatives from English and math and
tried to facilitate what the campus approach should be.” Catherine recalled learning about the
policy “at the departmental level, in a department meeting or some passing in conversation.”
Participants who supported the policy were glad it became law. Some acknowledged that the
college was not adequately prepared. Vivian recalled, “I’m thinking that we were just notified
that this is how it’s going to be. This is something that our college decided which came from the
higher-ups. We were never given the opportunity to speak about it or voice our opinions.”
Orange Moon College and Farlay Grove College participants touched upon the
complexities of their experience in a multi-college district, such as working with district
committees. Barbara, from Orange Moon College, noted, “This is faculty-driven, so most of the
developments of the policy and how to implement it happen through our district discipline
committees.” Max, also from Orange Moon College, noted how their college went in a different
direction compared to other colleges in the district: “Orange Moon College was an anomaly
against the rest of the district in terms of the number of units and expectations of the students. It
didn’t feel right. We should have gone along with what the other colleges were doing.” At Farlay
Grove College, Ella similarly commented on different directions colleges took within the same
district. She noted,
Just in our district, our colleges could have worked with each other. They really didn’t.
[Another college] was not on board. Farlay Grove College just charged ahead, so we
were on different islands. Collaboration could have been encouraged, and we can move
forward as a district, as opposed to what we did.
92

Only a few participants provided concrete suggestions for improving the implementation
process. Table 8 provides a snapshot of participants’ varied suggestions for improving the policy
implementation process at their college. These suggestions did not fall into any thematic
categories per se but do provide additional insight into participants’ concerns.

Table 8
Participant Suggestions for Improving the Policy Implementation Process
College Suggestions for improvement
Stone View College “It would have been nice if we had a full team going in. It’s
really hard to coordinate and organize, you know English
has their thing going on and Math had their thing going
on...would have been nice to have a team whose sole
purpose is to get this initiative up and running.”
(Jennifer)

“I think the only thing is we should have done this on our
own, way back. And, if enough places did that then
maybe the legislature wouldn’t have felt compelled to get
involved.” (Zack)

Farlay Grove College “I think that what we didn’t include, which is what has been
a big push at our college…is the culture of care. Ensuring
that we’re guiding students through processes rather than
pushing them through processes.” (Patricia)

Orange Moon College “I think the faculty would like to have had more ways to
incorporate into the process a little more reflection for the
students, about whether they’re fully ready for the
freshman [subject] class.” (Barbara)

“I mentioned that the [subject] department increased the
units and I would have done that differently, I would
have decreased the units.” (Max)

93

Summary of Results
Eight themes appeared in response to the three research questions to ascertain aspects in
the exosystem and institutional characteristics that affected the colleges’ implementation of AB
705 and to understand employees’ perceptions and beliefs in that implementation process. Based
on 29 interviews with participants from Stone View College, Farlay Grove College, and Orange
Moon College, it appears that participants’ level of equity involvement at the college, their
beliefs about their colleges’ approach to inclusion and diversity, and the impact of national racial
tensions, are factors in the exosystem that played a role in facilitating their college’s
implementation of AB 705. In this study, three major institutional characteristics arose that
factored into the institutions’ ability to implement AB 705 related changes. These characteristics
include an institution’s level of data reflection, culture of change, and leadership. Regarding
faculty and staff’s perceptions about their college’s implementation process, two major themes
emerged: their belief in the efficacy of AB 705 and explanations on the proactive and reactive
nature of the implementation process.
Tables 9, 10, and 11 summarize the results for each research question, organized by
theme per college. The purpose of the tables is to compare the case studies and showcase
similarities and differences in each theme.

94

Table 9
Summary of Results for Research Question One
Themes Stone View College Farlay Grove College Orange Moon College
Level of equity
involvement
Medium level
Generally focused on
pedagogy, policy,
data
Long, ongoing
involvement
All participants
generally were
involved (specific
mentions of part-time
faculty engagement)
High level
More specific on equity,
pedagogy, policy, data
Long, ongoing
involvement
All participants
generally were involved
(specific mentions of
part-time faculty
engagement)
Low level
Involvement appeared
primarily in response
to policy mandates
More recent
involvement
No mention of part-
time faculty
engagement in equity
work
Beliefs about
inclusion and
diversity
Acknowledged high
sense of belonging
Awareness of rural
environment,
importance of
regional origins, more
White/conservative
groups and potential
impact on “outsiders”
Majority spoke of
diversity in terms of
multiculturalism
Acknowledge hiring
work in progress to
increase diversity
Blame external
conditions/location of
college
Aware of own high
sense of belonging
Consistently mentioned
alternate perspective on
colleagues of color
Almost all have
sophisticated and
common language for
equity, diversity
Acknowledge hiring
work in progress to
increase diversity
Specific ideas on hiring,
what needs to happen,
why not working
Blame internal policies
and practices
More regularly
focused on the
diversity of students
and representation of
ethnicities at the
college
Most expressed that
they feel like they
belong
Most believed college
is making progress in
hiring diverse
workforce
Acknowledgement of
hiring challenges in
multi-college district

95

Themes Stone View College Farlay Grove College Orange Moon College
Racial tension
impact
Propelling and
spotlighting race and
equity issues
Increased dialogue
and meetings
Provided sense of
urgency and priority
Propelling and
spotlighting race and
equity issues
Increased dialogue and
meetings
Provided sense of
urgency and priority
Propelling and
spotlighting race and
equity issues
Increased dialogue and
meetings
Provided sense of
urgency and priority

96

Table 10
Summary of Results for Research Question Two
Themes Stone View College Farlay Grove College Orange Moon College
Data reflection Critical role leading to
buy-in to make
changes and
supporting
implementation
process
Equity data improved
according to
participants
Critical role leading
to buy-in to make
changes and
supporting
implementation
process
Equity data improved
according to
participants,
emphasizing need
to still make
changes to address
equity gaps

Those who spoke of
data did so in more
general aggregate
terms
Comments that focused
on data tended to
question data
accuracy or
interpretation
There did not appear to
be an overwhelming
sense of whether
participants felt data
showed equity
improvements or not

Change culture Participants described
colleagues as
innovative and
willing to change
Supportive of AB 705
related changes and
recognize barriers
which existed for
students
Participants described
college as actively
embracing change
Supportive of AB 705
related changes and
recognize barriers
which existed for
students
Most participants
tended to focus on
the challenges to
change
Reflections focused on
perceived negative
impact of AB705,
particularly related to
pedagogy

Leadership Participants felt
supported by
administration
Primarily faculty
driven process to
institute change
Participants felt
supported by
administration
Participants perceived
clarity in direction
of making changes
and prioritization
by district

Participants felt
supported by
administration
(including college
desire to keep a level
below transfer-level
class)
Participants did not
perceive clear
direction from
district leadership,
and potentially in
conflict with college
direction
97

Table 11
Summary of Results for Research Question Three
Themes Stone View College Farlay Grove College Orange Moon College
Belief in policy
efficacy
Positive views in
support of AB 705
Clearly articulated the
purpose of the
policy

Generally expressed
confidence that the
policy will lead to
more equitable
outcomes for student
success
Positive views in
support of AB 705
Clearly articulated the
purpose of the
policy

Generally expressed
confidence that the
policy will lead to
more equitable
outcomes for student
success

Participants
demonstrated strong
understanding of the
intention of AB 705
Mixed opinions on
whether AB 705
related changes would
actually lead to more
equitable outcomes for
students
Policy
implementation
Early involvement
experimenting with
making changes to
the curriculum,
accelerating courses,
removing remedial
courses

Early critical view of
the standardized
placement exam
Early involvement
experimenting with
making changes to
the curriculum,
accelerating courses,
removing remedial
courses

Complexity of multi-
college district
coordination
Appears that work on
implementing AB 705
began once the law
was put into motion
Complexity of multi-
college district
coordination

98

Chapter Five: Discussion
The purpose of this study was to explore faculty and staff opinions, perceptions, and
beliefs related to policy implementation of AB 705, which is intended to increase student
achievement and close equity gaps among Black and Latinx students. The law requires
community colleges to increase the likelihood of students completing transfer-level English and
math courses within a year. It also requires campuses to use students’ high school records to
place them into these courses instead of a standardized placement exam. I analyzed data from 29
interviews with faculty and staff from three different California community colleges to
understand their experience implementing AB 705. Table 12 provides an overview of the eight
themes that emerged in response to the research questions.

Table 12
Eight Themes That Emerged in Response to Research Questions
Research questions Themes
Research Question 1: What aspects in the
exosystem help to facilitate implementation of
higher education policies intended to positively
impact minority student graduation rates?

Level of Equity Involvement
Beliefs about Inclusion and Diversity
Racial Tensions Impact
Research Question 2: What are the characteristics
of an institution that enable policies such as AB
705 to be implemented successfully in achieving
intended outcomes to increase graduation rates
for Black and Latinx students?

Data Reflection
Change Culture
Leadership
Research Question 3: What are the perceptions and
experience of employees on the policy
implementation and impact of AB705 on Black
and Latinx students?
Belief in Policy Efficacy
Policy Implementation Process

99

Findings
In the section below, I identify and discuss findings based on the results, reflecting on the
relevant supporting literature. Six key findings emerged:
1. External political, social, economic, and environmental factors can play a significant role
in facilitating change.
2. Examination of equity data is a critical component to motivate faculty and staff to make
changes to their teaching practices and policies.
3. Professional development focused on topics of diversity, equity, and inclusion provides
critical opportunities to facilitate self-reflection and promote change.
4. Inclusive communities of practice enable peers to more effectively advance equity work.
5. Engaging part-time faculty in a consistent manner in departmental discussions, decision
making, and professional development, alongside their full-time colleagues, is critical for
making institutional progress in equity work.
6. Leadership at every level of the organization is required to effectively implement policies
intended to improve equitable outcomes for Black and Latinx students.
Finding 1: External Political, Social, Economic, and Environmental Factors Can Play a
Significant Role in Facilitating Change.
The study’s results were that the events occurring in the macrosystem considerably
influenced what was occurring in the exosystem. The national racial tensions and political
discourse that served as the backdrop for all colleges working to improve completion outcomes
for Black and Latinx students played a major role in facilitating dialogue on race, diversity,
equity, inclusion, and cultural understanding. The external environment exerted additional
pressure on colleges spotlighting the need for institutions of higher education to change by
100

addressing structurally racist policies and practices in their institutions (Williams et al., 2005).
According to the study results, the national discourse and discord that unfolded during the
COVID-19 pandemic intensified the spotlight on inequity as colleges needed to quickly
transform their standard mode of operations. Bronfenbrenner’s (1992) ecological model asserts
there are multiple, expanding environments to describe certain phenomena, from the most
immediate environment at the individual and familial level (microsystem) to the outermost level
where societal political and cultural norms exist (macrosystem) and that there is a bi-directional
relationship between levels. According to this model, one would expect that what occurs in the
macrosystem can impact what occurs in the exosystem. Further, Bronfenbrenner’s (1979)
ecological model notes that “public policy is a part of the macrosystem determining the specific
properties of exo-, meso-, and microsystems that occur at the level of everyday life and steer the
course of behavior and development.” While two colleges in this study had begun change
processes in alignment with AB 705 mandates prior to the implementation date, all colleges
acknowledged that the mandate guaranteed that changes would have to occur. These findings are
also consistent with the Burke-Litwin model of organizational change, which asserts that
external factors are the most important inducement to instigating organizational change
compared to any other type of factor (Burke, 2018).
Finding 2: Examination of Equity Data Is a Critical Component to Motivate Faculty and
Staff to Make Changes to Their Teaching Practices and Policies.
The majority of participants who seemed to embrace the changes required by AB 705
spoke of how the data influenced their motivation to make changes. Those participants either
examined their own student completion data, institutional data related to testing and placement of
Black and Latinx students, throughput data, and other assessment data that convinced them of the
101

existence of institutional barriers and motivated them to modify and remove those barriers.
Participants’ review of the data occurred during departmental meetings, college conversations,
and various workshops, affirming that the examination of data and its interpretation in the
context of external accountability must occur in an open exchange and dialogue so the
organization can articulate its shared values and goals towards improvement (Wallis & Gregory,
2009). However, it is important to note that, even when one makes policy changes intended to
improve equity outcomes, the results may not be as expected. For example, in García’s (2017)
study with a typology of HSIs, the author noted that it is not enough to provide a supportive
culture, and one cannot claim to be truly serving if the outcomes remain inequitable. Felix and
Castro (2018) demonstrated that cultural relevancy and an equity-minded approach are necessary
for institutions to successfully undertake policy-driven initiatives. In the Stone View College and
Farlay Grove College case, it appeared that their approach to the problem of inequitable
outcomes and review of the data had a race-conscious approach to ensure meaningful outcomes
for Black and Latinx students (Harris & Bensimon, 2007). In contrast, some of Orange Moon
College’s participants relied on a culture of blame when discussing their Black and Latinx
students’ educational outcomes, which could be interpreted as a refusal of institutional
accountability and their strong attachment to privilege (Tate & Bagguley, 2017).
Finding 3: Professional Development Focused on Topics of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
Provide Critical Opportunities to Facilitate Self-reflection and Promote Change.
The study’s results showed that participants who were convinced of the harm being done
to students under the status quo were those who were willing to make changes to their teaching
practices and approaches. In contrast, faculty and staff who shared doubts regarding the efficacy
of the policy seemed to place blame on the students’ lack of preparation and questioned students’
102

ability to succeed in the transfer-level courses. Usher’s (as cited in Kumar et al., 2018) study
suggested that “culturally competent teachers will be familiar with the history, customs, and
values of the cultural groups represented in their school and show awareness of how culture
informs their own and others’ thoughts, emotions, and behaviors” (p. 140). Usher stated that “the
antidote to cultural incompetence is critical self-reflection, which involves questioning one’s
own values, assumptions, and ways of understanding the world” (as cited in Kumar et al., 2018,
p. 140). In Sue’s (2005) description of institutional racism, there are structures, policies, and
practices that unfairly elevate the White group and hold back minoritized groups. With the
majority of faculty at community colleges being White, while the majority of students are from
minoritized communities, it seems that the faculty participants who participated in initiatives that
dealt with diversity, equity, and inclusion topics were able to articulate more clearly the
institutionally racist structures within their institutions and more willing to make a change to
them.
The policy reforms and discussions regarding placement and potential academic success
of minoritized students must be grounded in their experiences to foster an institutional
transformation (Harbour & Wolgemuth, 2015). Faculty who described lower levels of
involvement and engagement with equity training seemed to focus more on students’ abilities,
backgrounds, and under-preparedness to take on transfer-level math and English courses.
Therefore, it seemed to those faculty that the problem of inequity lies within the student
population’s characteristics rather than in their own teaching methods and practices. This kind of
thinking, in effect, maintains a model of Whiteness and perpetuates the institutionally racist
policies that benefit Whites (DiAngelo, 2011). To address institutional racism in higher
education, institutions must examine the interactions of faculty and students (Fiske, 1993; Freire,
103

1993; Tatum, 2001). Professional development opportunities can help reflect on the system of
advantage to Whites, reframe racism, and assist with pedagogy and classroom practices that
promote a climate of anti-racism (Diggles, 2014).
Finding 4: Inclusive Communities of Practice Enable Peers to More Effectively Advance
Equity Work.
The majority of participants from Stone View College and Farlay Grove College spoke of
their involvement in professional development activities with their colleagues and commented on
the collaborative efforts they engaged in within their departments. Their active engagement in
collegial groups demonstrates Williams et al.’s (2013) assertion that when networks are
formalized as a community of practice and the institution empowers this community with data
and support for problem solving and sharing knowledge, the group is capable of influencing
organizational culture and coordinating a reform agenda, which could not have been achieved by
any one faculty member. Communities of practice also become key focal points for bringing
leadership across various segments of the institution to build inclusive environments to review
equity data and engage in addressing disparities to explore, experiment, and learn from each
other (Harris & Bensimon, 2007). In fact, it seems from the participants’ responses, particularly
from Farlay Grove College, that their engagement in the community of practice focused on their
teaching pedagogy and students’ learning experiences motivated them to try new approaches and
change institutional practice. In general, a few of the faculty of color from the three colleges
spoke of their experience of “not feeling included” or that their opinions seemed to be
disregarded as a minority voice. Therefore, great effort needs to be made to ensure communities
of practice are inclusive groups to advance educational equity to dismantle structural racism
(Freire, 1993; Sue, 2005).
104

Finding 5: Engaging Part-time Faculty in a Consistent Manner in Departmental
Discussions, Decision Making, and Professional Development, Alongside Their Full-time
Colleagues, Is Critical for Making Institutional Progress in Equity Work.
Participants at both Stone View College and Farlay Grove College consistently
mentioned their own active engagement in professional development activities while they were
faculty members and the involvement of part-time, adjunct, or associate faculty colleagues’
involvement. The activities to which they referred included participating in conferences,
workshops, and department meetings. At Stone View College and Farlay Grove College, tenured
faculty reflecting on their prior part-time status and current part-time employees referred to their
strong sense of belonging at the college and feeling included in departmental conversations.
More participants from Orange Moon Grove College spoke about the challenges for part-time
faculty to speak openly about their opinions. In addition, they did not mention active
involvement of part-time faculty in professional development or equity work.
According to the literature review on faculty motivation, it appears that the experience of
part-time faculty at Orange Moon Grove College is likely the norm, and the part-time
experiences participants expressed at Stone View College and Farlay Grove College were the
exception to the norm. The literature review revealed that community college faculty are more
intrinsically motivated to teach over other kinds of activities, such as engaging in professional
development, and that part-time faculty are most motivated by teaching followed by working in
their field of discipline (Hardré, 2012; Pons et al., 2017). This finding must also be coupled with
consideration for organizational support, or lack thereof, for part-time employees to engage in
professional development.
105

Finding 6: Leadership at Every Level of the Organization Is Required to Effectively
Implement Policies Intended to Improve Equitable Outcomes for Black and Latinx
Students.
The results of the study were that leadership at the faculty level, coupled with
administrative leadership, facilitated the institutional changes at Stone View College and Farlay
Grove College in alignment with AB 705. Responses from faculty and administrators at each
college were generally very similar, demonstrating a common vision on the cause of the
inequities, a focus on their own college practices and policies, and forward movement in making
changes and accepting responsibility when the student outcomes still showed inequities. At
Orange Moon College, faculty responses greatly varied, though there were more commonalities
among administrators. Nevertheless, it appeared that there was not a shared vision from faculty
leadership or administration on how best to address the implementation of AB 705.
In Levin et al.’s (2013) study of promising practices in California’s community colleges,
the authors identified that programs’ ability to act as a cohesive unit with consistent actions and
work collaboratively to achieve common goals was critical to implementing programs to increase
student achievement. Leadership plays a central role in building that shared vision in Senge’s
(1990) learning organization model and can help test faculty mental models to tackle institutional
system issues that will have a long-term impact. Applying Senge’s learning organizational
model, it appears that Stone View College and Farlay Grove College demonstrated generative
learning whereby the organization proactively sought out new solutions leading to more
equitable outcomes for their students, whereas Orange Moon College displayed an adaptive
learning process in response to external conditions in which change tends to occur more slowly.
Leadership is critical to building and nurturing cultural norms, values, and skills, such as
106

anticipation to change, a climate that is open to change, risk taking, con fi de nce, and collaborative
action planning and execution, that enable organizations to adapt and change (Costanza et al.,
2016).
Implications for Practice
The six findings demonstrate that institutions must inclusively engage faculty in the
change process while focusing on culture change to sustain improvements to generate more
equitable graduation outcomes for Black and Latinx students. This combination of effort is
closely aligned with Willcox et al.’s (2018) case study of a community college where graduation
rates improved by more than five percentage points 3 years after implementing change
initiatives. The research findings further demonstrate that the culture change that must occur
requires an ongoing dialogue and focus on addressing issues of structural racism. Higher
education leadership must develop a systematic process for implementing changes, working with
individuals in recognition that it is a “human process,” and be ready to work within the specific
context and parameters of higher education (Kezar, 2001).
Recommendations
The following four recommendations are based on the findings. These recommendations
are intended for college leadership, administration, faculty, and staff. Ultimately those are the
key stakeholders responsible for implementing mandates. The recommendations will also be
useful for the California Community College Chancellor’s Office employees and other
policymakers involved in developing legislative mandates. The purpose of the recommendations
is to increase the use of data to make change, support self-reflection and professional growth,
and engage staff and all faculty in the equity dialogue to change their pedagogy and curriculum
to eliminate racist institutional policies and practices.
107

Recommendation 1: Leadership Should Hold Their Organizations Accountable by
Examining Equity Data
The majority of participants from all three colleges who expressed support for making
changes per AB 705 indicated their support was based on their critical review of relevant data.
Further, those who expressed initial concerns, even opposition to the policy, changed their minds
after reviewing data that led them to believe that their current practice was ineffective. All
institutions have access to multiple forms of raw data. However, effective processes for
collecting and analyzing input, process, and outcome data to guide a range of decisions will help
improve students’ and schools’ success (Marsh & Farrell, 2015). Increasing internal
accountability will improve processes and ultimately increase external accountability measures
like college graduation rates (Elmore, 2002).
Colleges are already required by accreditation agencies to assess their achievement and
learning outcomes data, disaggregate their data, and conduct this work. These accountability
features focus on collegiality and autonomy in self-regulation and are indicative of the
professional accountability model (Burke, 2004). Further, considering the California Community
College Chancellor’s Office’s new performance-based funding model currently in the early
stages of implementation, institutions must engage in continuous improvement processes at the
organizational level to positively impact graduation outcomes for Black and Latinx students
(Elmore, 2002). This acute focus on data to eliminate gaps also promotes interest convergence
whereby the dominant group’s perspective aligns with the minoritized groups’ and the state
system provides institutions a financial benefit to improve outcomes (Ladson-Billings, 2013).

108

Recommendation 2: Invest in Professional Development Focused on Equity Issues
Two of the three colleges in this study were leaders in implementing AB 705 and
regularly referred to their early involvement in accelerating English and math curricular tracks as
well changes to placement processes. The majority of interview participants from those two
colleges spoke of their extensive participation in equity-related projects and reflected on the role
of professional development, including for adjunct faculty, in moving their colleges forward in
those acceleration efforts. They also cited their involvement in professional development on
equity topics as the foundational groundwork to question the status quo, including placement
policies and practices and the many years of remedial education.
Institutions of higher education must focus on the institutional policies and practices that
may be producing equity gaps to determine areas in need of improvement and guide
interventions for increased educational outcomes (Darling-Hammond et al., 2014; Dowd &
Bensimon, 2014). California community colleges fall under the state chancellor’s office, which
put forth a strategic plan and goals for eliminating equity gaps in 10 years. In alignment with that
plan, institutions should prioritize providing and mandating professional development activities
focused on equity issues. Professional development efforts should also include discussion on the
concepts of merit, equality of opportunity, and social mobility to better understand the myth of
meritocracy and how those concepts maintain structural racism (Liu, 2011).
Recommendation 3: Colleges Should Establish Inclusive Communities of Practice Focused
on Equity Issues
Communities of practice provide many opportunities to emulate systems thinking and
testing mental models, as described in Senge’s (1990) model of a learning organization.
Participants from Farlay Grove College, in particular, described the “safe space” that the learning
109

community provided for members to discuss data, ask questions, and learn from each other. In
Senge’s model, this practice of balancing inquiry and advocacy is a healthy way to take
responsibility for outcomes and eliminate blame on outside forces. Further, using a systems
thinking approach will enable faculty to consider underlying causes of problems to proactively
generate new solutions with a system-wide impact (Evans et al., 2012). Ultimately, faculty must
be able to work through the creative tension between their goals for improving educational
equity and the reality of what the data shows (Senge, 1990). Inclusive communities of practice
may enable changes that could not occur with the leadership of any one individual and facilitate
a movement of change within the college (Williams et al., 2013). To address structural racism,
the communities of practice must provide an inclusive environment and engage faculty of color
to be successful. Without their participation, the act of generating pedagogical interventions is
not authentic and reinforces minoritized student oppression (Freire, 1993). Further, the
communities of practice may provide opportunities for White faculty to understand their
potential role as racial justice allies (Cabrera, 2012).
Recommendation 4: Institutions Should Include Part-Time Faculty in Equity-Focused
Professional Development and Communities of Practice
According to the California Community College Chancellor’s Office (2021), the state’s
community colleges employed over 85,000 individuals, of whom approximately 21% (17,958)
were in tenured academic positions and 43% (36,768) were in temporary academic positions.
Classified staff and administrators accounted for about 33% and 2.5% of employees,
respectively. It is incumbent upon the institution to ensure that part-time faculty are fully
immersed in the college conversation on equity and included in the decision-making processes
and professional development activities, given that the majority of academic employees are part-
110

time faculty. These employees are engaging with students and are primarily responsible for
delivering the institution’s academic programs. This sense of connection, cohesion, and
consistency creates a more inclusive environment, will help the institution achieve its equity
goals, and increases the likelihood that program initiatives will succeed (Benito-Capa et al.,
2017; Levin et al., 2010).
Implementation Model
The recommendations are supported by the Burke-Litwin (Burke, 2018) Causal Model of
Organization Performance and Change because the model emphasizes that change is driven by
the external environment, which impacts an organization’s mission, leadership, and culture. In
the case of California community colleges, there are 116 colleges situated within unique
geographic locations, varied demographic populations, and varied economic and workforce
needs. Because the colleges are governed by locally elected boards, transformational change
across the community college system is most likely to occur in response to external forces. In
this model, success is possible by aligning transformational leadership, an organizational mission
and strategy internalized by the leadership, and an organizational culture that supports the
transformation that responds to the external environment. Burke’s (2018) model asserts that
transactional factors are also required to sustain change through continuous improvement
processes, management practices, structures, policies, and procedures, all of which assist in
institutionalizing changes over time.
The recommendations are also aligned with Burke’s (2018) phases to lead organizational
change. First, there is a prelaunch phase which sets the vision and provides clarity in the
organization. Recommendation 1 includes a focus on the equity data and holding organizations
accountable to their equity goals. The examination of data will help strengthen faculty and staff
111

members’ sense of purpose to make change. Second, there is a launch phase focused on
communicating the need, engaging in the initial activities, and dealing with resistance. Requiring
faculty and staff to attend professional development workshops will assist with developing
strategies for improving equity and provide opportunities for leadership to understand and
counter-balance resistance. Third, in the post-launch phase, organizations must persevere, allow
for new forms of change, and repeat the message. Establishing communities of practice will help
with messaging and addressing individual and personal factors such as skills, motivation, and
values people bring to their colleges and into the classrooms. The communities of practice also
provide an opportunity to create a more inclusive environment by engaging part-time faculty.
Fourth, in the last phase of change, there is the process of sustaining change. Regular
examination of the equity data will ensure that the change process is continuous in pursuit of
educational equity.
During economic downturns, it will be difficult to identify new resources. Colleges will
need to creatively rethink how they can build these activities into existing committee structures
and initiatives. Therefore, the implementation plan also draws on a Program Logic Model
(Kellogg Foundation, 2004). In this model, given the time, resources, and institutional
commitment to implement the recommendations, certain activities will lead to measurable
outputs. In this case, outputs are defined as the changes in teaching practices and policies, more
confidence in holding equity conversations, data reports on outcomes, and evidence of dialogue
on equity matters. These activities lead to short-term and long-term outcomes. Short-term
outcomes include evidence of closing equity gaps at the course level. Longer-term outcomes
include closing equity gaps at the program level. The ultimate impact in this logic model
112

prescribes equity at the institutional level where a student’s chance to graduate cannot be
predicted by race or ethnicity.
Evaluation Model
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s (2016) four levels of training evaluation model is
appropriate to assess the effectiveness of the proposed recommendations, particularly those that
require participation in training and utilize communities of practice as a means for continued
dialogue to support ongoing professional growth. In this model, there are various stages of
evaluating programs that one can measure, beginning with the most superficial Level 1
reactionary stage, which assesses program participants’ satisfaction, to the most complex Level 4
where the impact of training can be measured with demonstrable results. Starting at Evaluating
Level 2, learning, of Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s (2016) model, one can check the extent to
which faculty and staff have learned from the training and activities by organizing focus group
interviews, asking participants to conduct presentations, and providing opportunities for faculty
to teach back to colleagues to demonstrate their acquired skills from the equity training.
At evaluating Level 3, behavior, peers in the communities of practice can help each other
monitor their activity, reinforce what they learned, and encourage each other as they change
teaching practices and policies. Leadership should reward progress, too, in the form of publicly
praising faculty and staff efforts and success. At Level 4, results, evaluation will require
embedding the evaluation mechanism within the existing college infrastructure to institutionalize
it. Colleges typically rely on a program review process to improve student learning and
outcomes. Program reviews should be focused on equity-specific data, holding conversations and
dialogue, and creating actions plans to improve pedagogy, communication, and classroom
policies.
113

Future Research
This study was intended to contribute to the literature from a transformative and critical
paradigm of inquiry and to understand how AB 705 was implemented to improve graduation
outcomes for racially minoritized students. I suggest the following areas for continued study:
1. How participating in professional development focused on equity issues affects faculty
and staff in terms of their motivation to make concrete changes to their pedagogical
approaches, classroom policies, and curriculum;
2. The role of one’s world view and theory of change in teaching students who are from
minoritized communities and how professional development focused on equity issues
influences that world view.
3. Further examination on the experience of part-time faculty. Research on part-time
faculty, in particular, is important because the percentage of part-time faculty is rapidly
growing at higher education institutions, and they are responsible for the delivery of
academic programs.
4. An examination of colleges with more similar characteristics, such as large urban
colleges, to ascertain a more nuanced understanding of their experiences.
Conclusions
Students of color are far more likely to be placed into remedial courses, and students
placed into remediation are much less likely to reach their educational goals. Because placement
policies have serious implications for equity, the purpose of this study was to explore faculty and
staff perceptions of implementing AB 705 to ensure students are not placed into remedial courses
that may delay or deter their educational progress. The study relied on a conceptual framework
grounded in Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) ecological model describing the layered and complex
114

environmental systems which impact graduation rates for minoritized students. Rather than focus
on students’ individual agency, motivation, and preparation, this study investigated structural
forces, such as institutional racism and organizational systems and policies, that impact racial
equity in graduation rates. Because faculty play a significant role in implementing policies, the
research questions for this study explored their perceptions and experiences implementing AB
705.
The study included colleges representing three types of colleges in the California
community college system. Eight themes emerged to answer the research questions and formed
the basis of the findings. Three factors appeared to play a role in the exosystem: participants’
level of equity involvement at the college, their beliefs about their colleges’ approach to
inclusion and diversity, and the impact of national racial tensions. Three major institutional
characteristics arose that seemed to factor into the institutions’ ability to implement AB 705
related changes. These characteristics are an institution’s level of data reflection, their culture of
change, and institutional leadership.
Regarding perceptions about colleges’ implementation process, two major themes
emerged: participants’ belief in the efficacy of AB 705 and explanations on the proactive or
reactive nature of the implementation process. Findings focused on the significant role of
external political, social, economic, and environmental factors, equity data, equity-focused
professional development, communities of practice, engagement of part-time faculty, and
leadership factors to facilitate effective change processes. Based on the findings, four key
recommendations emerged. The first is to increase the use of equity data to make change. The
second is to support self-reflection and professional growth through training and participation in
inclusive communities of practice. The third is to engage all faculty and staff in the equity
115

dialogue to make appropriate changes in pedagogy and curriculum to eliminate racist
institutional policies and practices. The findings and recommendations assert that institutions
must engage all faculty in the dialogue on equity, diversity, and inclusion. They must also focus
on culture change grounded in an examination of equity data and build a more inclusive
environment to yield equitable graduation outcomes for Black and Latinx students.

116

References
Aliyu, A. A., Singhry, I. M., Adamu, H., & Abubakar, M. M. (2015, December). Ontology,
epistemology and axiology in quantitative and qualitative research: Elucidation of the
research philophical misconception. In Proceedings of the Academic Conference:
Mediterranean Publications & Research International on New Direction and
Uncommon, 2(1).
Benito-Capa, Á., Green, N. A., Popely, D. R., Schneiderheinze, A. T., & Thai-García, P. M.
(2017). Developing faculty to provide university students with improved learning
experiences: The role of centers for teaching and learning. Higher Learning Research
Communications, 7(2), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.18870/hlrc.v7i2.385
Bensimon, E. M. (2005). Closing the achievement gap in higher education: An organizational
learning perspective. New Directions for Higher Education, 2005(131), 99–111.
https://doi.org/10.1002/he.190
Bers, T., & Schuetz, P. (2014). Nearbies: A missing piece of the college completion conundrum.
Community College Review, 42(3), 167–183. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091552114525834
Bonilla-Silva, E. (2014). Racism without racists. Rowman & Littlefield.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development. Harvard University Press.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1992). Ecological systems theory. Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
Burke, J. C. (2004). Achieving accountability in higher education: Balancing public, academic,
and market demands. In J. C. Burke (Ed.), The many faces of accountability (pp. 1–24).
Jossey-Bass.
Burke, W. W. (2018). Organization change: Theory and practice. Sage Publications.
117

Cabrera, N. L. (2012). Working through Whiteness: White, male college students challenging
racism. Review of Higher Education, 35(3), 375–401.
https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2012.0020
Caldwell, L. D., & Bledsoe, K. L. (2019). Can social justice live in a house of structural racism?
A question for the field of evaluation. The American Journal of Evaluation, 40(1), 6–18.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214018815772
California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office. (2021). Assessment and Placement.
https://assessment.cccco.edu/ab-705-implementation
California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office. (2017). Equal employment opportunity
report. http://californiacommunitycolleges.cccco.edu/Portals/0/Reports/2017-EEO-
Report-Final-ADA.pdf
California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office. (2021). Key facts.
https://www.cccco.edu/About-Us/Key-Facts
California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office. (2021). Management information systems
data mart. https://datamart.cccco.edu/Faculty-Staff/Staff_Demo.aspx
California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office. (2019). State of system report.
https://www.cccco.edu/-/media/CCCCO-Website/About-Us/State-of-the-
System/Files/2019-sos-final-web.pdf?la=en&hash=C037EB2219343CEDEF2
CF08485AC6911839129A6
California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office. (2021). State of system report.
https://www.cccco.edu/-/media/CCCCO-Website/Reports/2021-sosreport-final-
a11y.pdf?la=en&hash=3BE193227EBC64C5FD666A0D9C8F6DC40F599E49
118

California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office. (2021). Student success metrics.
https://www.calpassplus.org/LaunchBoard/Student-Success-Metrics
California Office of Legislative Counsel. Assembly Bill 705 Seymour-Campbell Student Success
Act of 2012: matriculation: assessment (2017–2018).
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180AB705
Childress, S., Elmore, R., & Grossman, A. (2006). How to manage urban school districts.
Harvard Business Review, 84(11), 55–68.
Ching, C., Felix, E. R., Castro, M. F., & Trinidad, A. (2020). Achieving racial equity from the
bottom-up? The student equity policy in the California community colleges. Educational
Policy, 34(6), 819–863. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904818802092
Costanza, D. P., Blacksmith, N., Coats, M. R., Severt, J. B., & DeCostanza, A. H. (2016). The
effect of adaptive organizational culture on long-term survival. Journal of Business and
Psychology, 31, 361–381. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-015-9420-y
Crawford, L. M., & Lynn, L. K. (2019). Interviewing essentials for new researchers. In G. J.
Burkholder, K. A. Cox, L. M. Crawford, & J. H. Hitchcock (Eds.), Research design and
methods: An applied guide for the scholar-practitioner (pp. 147–159). Sage.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. Sage Publications.
Crisp, G., Doran, E., & Salis Reyes, N. A. (2018). Predicting graduation rates at 4-year broad
access institutions using a Bayesian modeling approach. Research in Higher Education,
59(2), 133–155. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-017-9459-x
119

Dancy, T. E., II, & Jean-Marie, G. (2014). Faculty of color in higher education: Exploring the
intersections of identity, impostorship, and internalized racism. Mentoring & Tutoring,
22(4), 354–372. libproxy1.usc.edu/. https://doi.org/10.1080/13611267.2014.945736
Darling-Hammond, L., Wilhoit, G., & Pittenger, L. (2014). Accountability for college and career
readiness: Developing a new paradigm. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 22(86), 1.
http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/1724
DiAngelo, R. (2011). White fragility. The International Journal of Critical Pedagogy, 3(3), 54–
70.
Diggles, K. (2014). Addressing racial awareness and color-blindness in higher education. New
Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2014(140), 31–44.
https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.20111
Dougherty, K. J., Jones, S. M., Lahr, H., Natow, R. S., Pheatt, L., & Reddy, V. (2014).
Performance funding for higher education: Forms, origins, impacts, and futures. The
Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 655(1), 163–184.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716214541042
Dowd, A. C., & Bensimon, E. M. (2014). Engaging the “race question”: Accountability and
equity in US higher education. Teachers College Press.
Dubnick, M. (2014). Accountability as cultural keyword. In M. Bovens, R. E. Goodin, & T.
Schillemans (Eds.), Oxford handbook of public accountability (pp. 23–28). Oxford
University Press.
Elmore, R. F. (2002). Bridging the gap between standards and achievement. Albert Shanker
Institute. http://www.shankerinstitute.org/resource/bridging-gapbetween-standards-and-
achievement
120

Evans, L., Thornton, B., & Usinger, J. (2012). Theoretical frameworks to guide school
improvement. National Association of Secondary School Principals. NASSP Bulletin,
96(2), 154–171. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192636512444714
Fairlie, R., Hoffmann, F., & Oreopoulos, P. (2011). A community college instructor like me:
Race and ethnicity interactions in the classroom (NBER Working Paper No. 17381).
National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.104.8.2567
Felix, E. R., & Castro, M. F. (2018). Planning as strategy for improving black and Latinx student
equity: Lessons from nine California community colleges. Education Policy Analysis
Archives, 26(56), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.26.3223
Firestone, W. A., & Shipps, D. (2005). How do leaders interpret conflicting accountabilities to
improve student learning? In W. A. Firestone & C. Riehl (Eds.), A new agenda for
research in educational leadership (pp. 81–91). Teachers College Press.
Fiske, S. T. (1993). Controlling other people: The impact of power on stereotyping. The
American Psychologist, 48(6), 621–628. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.48.6.621
Freire, P. (1993). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Continuum.
Garcia, G. A. (2017). Defined by outcomes or culture? Constructing an organizational identity
for Hispanic-serving institutions. American Educational Research Association, 54(1S),
111S-134S. https://doi:10.3102/0002831216669779
Harbour, C. P., & Wolgemuth, J. R. (2015). The reconstruction of community college vocational
education: A vision for renewing American democracy. Community College Review,
43(4), 315–328. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091552115580391
121

Hardré, P. L. (2012). Community college faculty motivation for basic research, teaching
research, and professional development. Community College Journal of Research and
Practice, 36(8), 539–561. https://doi.org/10.1080/10668920902973362
Harris, F., & Bensimon, E. (2007). The equity scorecard: A collaborative approach to assess and
respond to racial/ethnic disparities in student outcomes. New Directions for Student
Services, 2007, 120, 77–84. https://doi.org/10.1002/ss.259
Hatch, D. K. (2017). The structure of student engagement in community college student success
programs: A quantitative activity systems analysis. AERA Open, 3(4), 1–14.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858417732744
Hentschke, G. C., & Wohlstetter, P. (2004). Cracking the code of accountability. Urban
Education, Spring/Summer, 17–19.
Hillman, N., & Corral, D. (2018). The equity implications of paying for performance in higher
education. The American Behavioral Scientist, 61(14), 1757–1772.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764217744834
Hillman, N. W., Tandberg, D. A., & Fryar, A. H. (2015). Evaluating the impacts of “new”
performance funding in higher education. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis,
37, 501–519. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373714560224
Johnson, S. R., & Stage, F. K. (2018). Academic engagement and student success: Do high-
impact practices mean higher graduation rates? The Journal of Higher Education, 89(5),
753–781. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2018.1441107
Jones, C. P. (2000). Levels of racism: A theoretic framework and a gardener’s tale. American
Journal of Public Health, 90(8), 1212–1215. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.90.8.1212
122

Kellogg Foundation. (2004). Using logic models to bring together planning, evaluation, and
Action: Logic model development guide.
Kerby, S., & Burns, C. (2012). The top 10 economic facts of diversity in the workplace. Center
for American Progress Report. http://cdn.americanprogress.org/wp-
content/uploads/issues/2012/07/pdf/diverse_workplace.pdf
Kezar, A. (2001). Research-based principles of change. Understanding and facilitating
organizational change in the 21st century: Recent research and conceptualizations.
ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, 28(4), 113–123.
Kilgore, W., & Wilson, J. I. (2017, September). The state of college completion initiatives at
U.S. community colleges. American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions
Officers
Kirkpatrick, J., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick’s four levels of training evaluation.
ATD press.
Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2009). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research
(4th ed.). Sage.
Kumar, R., Zusho, A., & Bondie, R. (2018). Weaving cultural relevance and achievement
motivation into inclusive classroom cultures. Educational Psychologist, 53(2), 78–96.
Kurlaender, M., Carrell, S., & Jackson, J. (2016). The promises and pitfalls of measuring
community college quality. The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences :
RSF, 2(1), 174–190. https://doi.org/10.1353/rus.2016.0009
Ladson-Billings, G. (2013). Critical race theory—What it is not! In M. Lynn & A. D. Dixson
(Eds.), Handbook of critical race theory in education (pp. 37–47). Routledge.
123

Levin, H. M., & García, E. (2018). Accelerating community college graduation rates: A Benefit–
Cost analysis. The Journal of Higher Education, 89(1), 1–27.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2017.1313087
Levin, J. S., Cox, E. M., Cerven, C., & Haberler, Z. (2010). The recipe for promising practices in
community colleges. Community College Review, 38(1), 31–58.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0091552110374505
Li, A. Y., Gándara, D., & Assalone, A. (2018). Equity or disparity: Do performance funding
policies disadvantage 2-year minority-serving institutions? Community College Review,
46(3), 288–315. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091552118778776
Liu, A. (2011). Unraveling the myth of meritocracy within the context of US higher education.
Higher Education, 62(4), 383–397. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-010-9394-7
Marsh, J. A., & Farrell, C. C. (2015). How leaders can support teachers with data-driven decision
making: A framework for understanding capacity building. Educational Management
Administration & Leadership, 43(2), 269–289.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143214537229
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design. Sage.
McNamee, S. J., & Miller, R. K. (2018). The meritocracy myth (4th ed.). Rowman & Littlefield.
Mejia, M. C., Rodriguez, O., & Johnson, H. (2020). A new era of student access at California’s
Commmunity Colleges. Public Policy Institute of California. https://www.ppic.org/wp-
content/uploads/a-new-era-of-student-access-at-californias-community-colleges-
november-2020.pdf
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
124

National Center for Education Statistics. (2019a). Status and trends in the education of racial
and ethnic groups. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/raceindicators/indicator_red.asp
National Center for Education Statistics. (2019b). Undergraduate retention and graduation
rates. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_ctr.asp
Núñez, A. (2017). Centering the “marginalized majority:” How Hispanic-serving institutions
advance postsecondary attainment. American Educational Research Journal, 54(1),
135S–139S. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831216678075
O’Banion, T. (2010). The completion agenda: To what end? Emerging philosophy shifts focus
from student access to success. Community College Journal, 81(2), 44–47.
Ober, D. R., Beekman, J. A., & Pierce, R. L. (2018). Analyzing four-year public university and
two-year college graduation rates. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 6(4), 221–
247. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v6i4.3129
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Sage.
Pilkington, A. (2013). The interacting dynamics of institutional racism in higher education. Race,
Ethnicity and Education, 16(2), 225–245. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2011.646255
Pons, P. E., Burnett, D. D., Williams, M. R., & Paredes, T. M. (2017). Why do they do it? A case
study of factors influencing part-time faculty to seek employment at a community
college. Community College Enterprise, 23(1), 43–59.
Price, D. V., & Tovar, E. (2014). Student engagement and institutional graduation rates:
Identifying high-impact educational practices for community colleges. Community
College Journal of Research and Practice, 38(9), 766–782.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10668926.2012.719481
125

Rabovsky, T. M. (2012). Accountability in higher education: Exploring impacts on state budgets
and institutional spending patterns. Journal of Public Administration: Research and
Theory, 22(4), 675–700. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mur069
Rhoades, G. (2012). The incomplete completion agenda: Implications for academe and the
academy. Liberal Education, 98(1), 18–25. https://www.aacu.org/publications-
research/periodicals/incomplete-completion-agenda-implications-academe-and-academy
Rose, T. (2015, December 21). How structural racism works [Video]. YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5b3DJMBmic
The RP Group. (2019). Access, enrollment, and success in transfer-level English and math in the
California community college system.
https://rpgroup.org/Portals/0/Documents/Projects/MultipleMeasures/Publications/Access
EnrollmentSuccess.pdf?ver=2019-10-07-074817-793
Saunders, M. N. (2019). Research methods for business students (5th ed). Pearson Education.
Schudde, L., & Goldrick-Rab, S. (2015). On second chances and stratification: How sociologists
think about community colleges. Community College Review, 43(1), 27–45.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0091552114553296
Senge, P. (1990). The leader’s new work: Building learning organizations. Sloan Management
Review, 32(1), 7–23.
Shugart, S. (2013). The challenge to deep change: A brief cultural history of higher education.
Planning for Higher Education, 41(2), 7–17.
Stecher, B., & Kirby, S. N. (2004). Introduction. In B. Stecher & S. N. Kirby (Eds).,
Organizational improvement and accountability: Lessons for education from other
sectors (pp. 1–7). Rand Corporation. http://www.rand.org/publications/MG/MG136/
126

Sue, D. W. (2005). Racism and the conspiracy of silence: Presidential address. The Counseling
Psychologist, 33(1), 100–114. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000004270686
Tate, S. A., & Bagguley, P. (2017). Building the anti-racist university: Next steps. Race,
Ethnicity and Education, 20(3), 289–299.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2016.1260227
Tatum, B. D. (2001). Defining racism: Can we talk. In P. Rothenberg & K. Mayhew (Eds.),
Race, class, and gender in the United States: An integrated study (pp. 100–107). Worth
Publishers.
Tuck, E., & Yang, K. W. (2014). R-words: Refusing research. In D. Paris & M. T. Winn (Eds.),
Humanizing research: Decolonizing qualitative inquiry for youth and communities (pp.
223– 247). Sage.
Tyndorf, D., & Martin, H. (2018). Reconsidering our graduation efforts: The economic impact of
certificates, associate’s, and bachelor’s degrees. Community College Journal of Research
and Practice, 42(7-8), 489–503. https://doi.org/10.1080/10668926.2018.1429963
Urias, M. V., & Wood, J. L. (2014). Black male graduation rates in community colleges: Do
institutional characteristics make a difference? Community College Journal of Research
and Practice, 38(12), 1112–1124. https://doi.org/10.1080/10668926.2012.745101
U.S. Department of Education, National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and
Integrity. (2017). Accreditor dashboard.
https://www2.ed.gov/admins/finaid/accred/accreditor-dashboards.pdf
Usher, E. L. (2018). Acknowledging the Whiteness of motivation research: Seeking cultural
relevance. Educational Psychologist, 53(2), 131–144.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2018.1442220
127

Wallis, J., & Gregory, R. (2009). Leadership, accountability and public value: Resolving a
problem in “new governance”? International Journal of Public Administration, 32(3–4),
250–273. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900690902732608
Willcox, A., Liguori, D., & Postle, M. (2018). A community college approach to increase student
completion: A case study of change initiatives at Bergen Community College.
Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 42(9), 591–598.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10668926.2018.1480982
Williams, A. L., Verwoord, R., Beery, T. A., Dalton, H., McKinnon, J., Strickland, K., Pace, J.,
& Poole, G. (2013). The power of social networks: A model for weaving the scholarship
of teaching and learning into institutional culture. Teaching & Learning Inquiry, 1(2),
49–62. https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.1.2.49
Williams, D., Berger, J., & McClendon, S. (2005). Toward a model of inclusive excellence and
change in postsecondary institutions. Association of American Colleges and Universities.
Wilson, S. (2008). Research is ceremony. Fernwood Publishing.
Yu, H., Campbell, D., & Mendoza, P. (2015). The relationship between the employment of part-
time faculty and student degree and/or certificate completion in two-year community
colleges. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 39(11), 986–1006.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10668926.2014.918910

128

Appendix A: Consent to Participate
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
Waite Phillips Hall
3470 Trousdale Parkway
Los Angeles, CA 90089

INFORMATION SHEET FOR EXEMPT RESEARCH
STUDY TITLE: A Study of Policy Impact: Improving Graduation Equity in Community
Colleges
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: Gohar Momjian
FACULTY ADVISOR: Patricia Tobey, PhD
You are invited to participate in a research study. Your participation is voluntary. This document
explains information about this study. You should ask questions about anything that is unclear to
you.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this study is to explore the experience of faculty and staff implementing policies
intended to improve equitable student outcomes in California’s community colleges. We hope to
learn about your involvement, views, and experience related to the implementation of Assembly
Bill (AB) 705. You are invited as a possible participant because you have held a position which
likely required a role and engagement in implementing AB 705.
PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
If you decide to take part, you will be asked to take part in a one-hour interview with the
researcher. The interview will be conducted by video-conference call via the Zoom platform.
Please keep your video camera on to ensure an engaged and interactive session. The researcher
will ask open-ended questions about your campus climate and culture, as well as to share your
129

opinions and views related to the college’s implementation of AB 705. The interview will be
recorded and transcripts analyzed for the researcher’s records only, and expressly for the
purposes of this study. The researcher may contact you a few weeks after the interview to share
draft portions of the study and check whether your opinions and views were appropriately
interpreted and expressed.
CONFIDENTIALITY
The members of the research team, and the University of Southern California Institutional
Review Board (IRB) may access the data. The IRB reviews and monitors research studies to
protect the rights and welfare of research subjects. When the results of the research are published
or discussed in conferences, no identifiable information will be used. The research study will use
pseudonyms for the colleges under study, as well as pseudonyms for participants. Transcribed
data will be kept indefinitely on the researcher’s private cloud server which is password
protected and encrypted. You have the right to review and edit the transcripts which will be
recorded from the Zoom online platform. The audio/video recordings will be deleted after three
years. Information will not be released to any other party for any reason.
INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions about this study, please contact the investigator, Gohar Momjian
(gmomjian@usc.edu), and faculty advisor, Patricia Tobey, PhD (tobey@usc.edu).
IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions about your rights as a research participant, please contact the
University of Southern California Institutional Review Board at (323) 442-0114 or email
irb@usc.edu. Version Date: 3-3-2021

130

Appendix B: Interview Protocol
Research Questions:
1. What aspects in the exosystem help to facilitate implementation of higher education
policies intended to positively impact minority student graduation rates?
2. What are characteristics of an institution that enable policies such as AB705 to be
implemented successfully in achieving intended outcomes to increase graduation rates for
Black and Latinx students?
3. What are the perceptions and experience of employees on the policy implementation and
impact of AB705 on Black and Latinx students?
4. How do state adopted policy changes in higher education impact graduation rates for
minority students compared to White students in California’s community colleges?
Respondent Type: Faculty and administrators in community colleges.
Introduction to the Interview:
Thank you very much for meeting with me today; I truly appreciate your time to
participate in this study. A little about myself, I’m a doctoral student at USC, and my study is on
understanding policy impacts on educational outcomes for students of color. Please know that
while I work for the accrediting commission as a vice president, this study and work is solely
related to my dissertation study as a student at USC and has no bearing on the accreditation work
or status of your college.
The purpose of this study is to learn more about your experience implementing policies
intended to improve student outcomes for Black and Latinx students. This interview is
confidential and no one will have access to your individual interview data and no identifying
information about you will be shared. If you wish to skip any questions or stop the interview at
131

any moment, please let me know. There is no obligation. We can also pause when you need it. I
will be audio recording this interview, which will be transcribed for my secured records. Do I
have your permission to record?
My policy focus is on AB 705 which is a bill signed by the Governor that took effect in
January 2018. The bill requires that a community college district or college maximize the
probability that a student will enter and complete transfer-level coursework in English and math
within a one year timeframe and use, in the placement of students into English and math courses,
one or more of the following: high school coursework, high school grades, and high school grade
point average. My questions refer to the AB 705 policy.

Table B1
Interview Question Alignment
Interview questions Potential probes Research
question
number
Key concept
Please tell me about your
current role at the college.

How long have you
worked here?
Please describe the
kinds of college
sponsored equity
related activities or
efforts have you
been involved in, if
at all.
How many years in
this role?
How many years in
higher education?

2, 3 -Accountability
-Learning
Organization
Please describe your
involvement with AB 705
implementation.

3 -Accountability

132

Interview questions Potential probes Research
question
number
Key concept
What do you think is the
purpose of the policy that went
into effect?
3, 4 -Structural
Racism
-Prejudice
What impact do you think this
policy will have on Black and
Latinex students?

3, 4 -Structural
Racism
-Prejudice
How did you first learn about
the policy that went into effect
by legislation?

2 -Accountability
-Learning
Organization
To what extent do you think the
policy aligns with your college’s
values and mission to serve
students?

2, 3, 4 -Learning
Organization
-Structural
Raciscm
Please describe how the
administration communicated
about the policy after it went
into effect.
To what extent was
their explanation
related to the
proposed impact on
Black and Latinx
student outcomes?

2, 3 -Accountability
-Learning
Organization
To what extent was their
explanation related to the
proposed impact on Black and
Latinx student outcomes?
How did they work
with your constituent
group, or other
stakeholder groups?

1, 2 -Structural
Racism
-Accountability
What steps did your college
administration take to
implement the policy?
How do you think
they could have done
a better job regarding
implementation?
What factors do you
think they took into
consideration, or
what do you think
concerned them the
most?

2 -Accountability
-Learning
Organization
What do you think of how your
college administration
implemented the policy?

3 -Accountability
-Learning
Organization
133

Interview questions Potential probes Research
question
number
Key concept
How do you think the
administration could have done
a better job regarding
implementation?

3 -Accountability
-Learning
Organization
What factors do you think the
administration took into
consideration, or what do you
think concerned them the most?
1, 2, 3 -Structural
Racism
-Prejudice
-Accountability
-Learning
Organization

What steps did your faculty
senate take related to policy
implementation?

3 -Accountability
-Learning
Organization
Please describe how
successfully (or not) you think
the policy was implemented at
your college?

Could you provide
an example.
Tell me more about
that.
2, 3 -Learning
Organization
What do you think should have
been done differently in terms of
the implementation, if anything
at all?

2, 3 -Learning
Organization
What victories or barriers do
you believe your college has
faced in implementation?

2, 3, 4 -Learning
Organization
What is your college’s culture in
terms of making curricular and
administrative changes to
processes?
Tell me more about
that.
Describe the
college’s
responsiveness to
required changes.

2, 3 -Accountability
-Learning
Organization

134

Interview questions Potential probes Research
question
number
Key concept
Please describe your college’s
culture in terms of diversity and
inclusion.
What has been your
personal sense of
belonging at the
college? How do you
think other
community members
feel about
belonging?

1, 2, 3 -Structural
Racism
-Prejudice
Please describe your college’s
commitment to recruiting and
retaining students, faculty, staff
from historically marginalized
communities?
What kinds of
examples do you
have in mind when
you think of this
commitment (or lack
of)?
1, 2, 3 -Structural
Raciscm
-Prejudice
-Acountability
What impacts do you feel the
racial tensions and heightened
awareness of Black Lives
Matters has had on the campus
climate and culture?

1, 3 -Structural
Racism
-Prejudice
How comfortable are you
sharing your views on diversity
and equity?

Tell me more about
that.
2 -Structural
Raciscm
What influence do you believe
your college’s campus climate
and culture around diversity and
equity have had on the
effectiveness of policies
intended to increase graduation
outcomes for Black and Latinx
students?

1, 3 -Structural
Racism
-Prejudice
-Learning
Organization
Is there anything you would like
to add or think I should know as
we conclude this interview?

135

Interview questions Potential probes Research
question
number
Key concept
Before ending, I’d like to ask
you three quick demographic
questions:
A. What race/ethnicity do
you identify with
B. Preferred gender
C. Age range – under 30,
between 31-45, 46-59,
over 60

Conclusion to the Interview:
Thank you so much for participating in this interview and sharing your valuable insights and
perspectives.

136

Appendix C: Coding Sheet
Name Description
Belief in policy efficacy How participants describe whether they believe the policy will
lead to improved outcomes
Change culture Descriptions about the culture of change of the institution
Communication from
academic senate
Perception of communications from academic senate
Communication from
administration
Perception of communications from administration
COVID impact How COVID-19 impacted college, students, work
Data reflection Descriptions on value or role of data
Equity involvement Any types of committees, initiatives, activities or events, or
professional development persons have participated in
intended to discuss/improve equity
ESL complications Mention of ESL sequencing in policy implementation
Inclusion & diversity Perceptions on college commitment to inclusion and diversity;
and feelings of belonging (inclusion)
Perception on Faculty What participant believes about other faculty or their
impressions/reflection on colleagues
Perceptions on
administration
What they believe about administration and role in policy
implementation
Policy implementation
process
Perceptions on effectiveness of policy implementation process,
successes and barriers/challenges, suggestions for
improvement
Purpose of AB705 How participants articulate the purpose of the policy
Racial tensions impact Perceptions on role of Black Lives Matter, anti-Asian hate
events on students, faculty, policy roll-out
Role in college How the person defines their role at the college, e.g. instruction,
tutoring, administrative, dean, etc
Student academic
qualifications
How participants describe their students in terms of
qualifications
Student background How participants describe their students backgrounds, what
they think of their students
Teaching practice How participants describe their teaching practice, what they
teach, how they teach it

137

Appendix D: Theoretical Alignment Matrix
Research question Theoretical framework Data instrument questions
What aspects in the exosystem
help to facilitate
implementation of higher
education policies intended
to positively impact
minority student graduation
rates?
-Bronfenbrenner’s
Ecological Model
-Prejudice
-Structural Racism
Interview Questions 8, 12, 18,
19, 20, 22

What are characteristics of an
institution that enable
policies such as AB705 to
be implemented
successfully in achieving
intended outcomes to
increase graduation rates for
Black and Latinx students?
-Accountability
-Learning Organization
-Structural Racism
-Prejudice
Interview Questions 1, 5, 6, 7, 8,
9, 12, 14, 1516, 17, 18, 19, 21

What are the perceptions and
experience of employees on
the policy implementation
and impact of AB705 on
Black and Latinx students?
-Accountability
-Learning Organization
-Structural Racism
-Prejudice
Interview Questions 1, 2, 3, 4, 6,
7, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16,
17 ,18,19, 20, 22
Demographic information Interview Questions 1, 24

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

AB 705: the equity policy – race and power in the implementation of a developmental education reform

PDF

Black male experience on a community college campus: a study on sense of belonging

PDF

State policy as an opportunity to address Latinx transfer inequity in community college

PDF

A phenomenological study on cultural taxation and racially minoritized students in graduate postsecondary education

PDF

Concurrent enrollment in English support classes for community college students

PDF

College-educated older adults and information and communications technology

PDF

Black leaders: the unicorns of the biopharmaceutical industry

PDF

The case for leader self-reflection in the workplace

PDF

Equity and access for veteran's students in the California community colleges

PDF

Addressing financial barriers to college completion through community cultural wealth

PDF

Equity and access: meeting the needs of diverse learners with UDL in elementary general education

PDF

Making equity & student success work: practice change in higher education

PDF

(Re)Imagining STEM instruction: an examination of culturally relevant andragogical practices to eradicate STEM inequities among racially minoritized students in community colleges

PDF

Factors related to transfer and graduation in Latinx community college students

PDF

The influence of organizational learning on inquiry group participants in promoting equity at a community college

PDF

Academic department chair readiness to lead toward equity: a gap analysis

PDF

Inclusion of adjunct faculty in the community college culture

PDF

Addressing the education debt: how community college educators utilize culturally relevant pedagogy to support Black and Latinx student success

PDF

The development of change leadership skills in aspiring community college leaders

PDF

Building capital: supporting students of color in STEM degree attainment

Asset Metadata

Creator Momjian, Gohar (author)

Core Title Improving graduation equity in community colleges: a study on California Assembly Bill 705 policy implementation

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2021-12

Publication Date 09/27/2021

Defense Date 09/01/2021

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag AB 705,community college,completion,educational equity,OAI-PMH Harvest,Policy

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Tobey, Patricia (committee chair), Hinga, Briana (committee member), Kim, Esther (committee member)

Creator Email gmomjian@usc.edu,goharmomjian@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC15961507

Unique identifier UC15961507

Legacy Identifier etd-MomjianGoh-10104

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Momjian, Gohar

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright. The original signature page accompanying the original submission of the work to the USC Libraries is retained by the USC Libraries and a copy of it may be obtained by authorized requesters contacting the repository e-mail address given.

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu