The good, the bad, and the struggling: Beliefs about student preparedness among teachers in an adult learner college

Increasing reliance on open-enrollment policies by postsecondary educational institutions has further diversified the level of preparedness among incoming college students. Colleges and universities nationwide are admitting students whose academic preparation is perceived to be less than adequate for college-level work. Estimates suggest that more that one-third to one-half of all newly entering college and university enrollees are not sufficiently prepared to succeed in the college context, rendering them at-risk for educational failure. Scholars have used various labels to characterize this group of adult learners, including underprepared, low-functioning, marginal, disadvantaged, learning disabled, at-risk, low-achieving, and unmotivated. These labels reflect the status of students' prior educational experiences, innate abilities, and attitudes toward college (Grubb, 1996; Dunn, 1995; Astin, 1993; Mealey, 1990).;Relatively little is know, however, about how teachers in these institutions make sense of these widely varying levels of diversity in their classrooms, or how they accommodate these differences within their teaching practices. Despite curricular innovations and college policies intended to improve student achievement and the overall quality of education, it is the classroom teacher who is ultimately responsible for directly addressing the needs of these students. Research studies suggest that teachers hold distinct sets of beliefs regarding student potential, subject matter, teaching strategies, and subsequent learning outcomes that are reciprocated in an on going reformulation of beliefs and practices (Dirkx, Amey, & Haston, 1999; Pitts, White, & Harrison, 1999; Fang, 1996; Dirkx & Spurgin, 1992; Pratt, 1992; Clark & Peterson, 1986; Shulman, 1986a).;Given these assumptions, a qualitative case study of five teachers in an adult learning college was undertaken to explore how they think about and respond to the diversity of preparedness among their adult learners. In depth interview were conducted with each teacher; transcripts were subjected to phenomenological analysis Moustakas, 1994).;The teachers described a wide range of abilities among their students, indicating a clear sense among these teachers of the "kinds" of students that they work with---the "good" student, the "struggling" student, and the "failing" student. Preparedness was defined largely in attitudinal and motivational, rather than academic terms.;While the teachers' ideals for teaching---the transmission of knowledge and content mastery---are supported by the objectives of the Institution, they are widely challenged by the abilities of the student body (Pitts, et al., 1999). In an effort to cope with the tension generated by the academic and psychosocial diversity in the classroom, they ultimately defined they work in terms of subject matter expertise and institutional mandates regarding academic achievement. Descriptions of classroom practices emphasized the importance of content mastery and motivational strategies to help maintain these standards. The resulting theory-in-use reflects a strategy of mediation among the teachers' ideals for teaching, the objectives of the institution, and the norms of social accountability. Implications for the relationship between beliefs about student preparedness and the future of classroom practice and enrollment policies are discussed.