Abstract
Gertrude Stein’s ironic aphorism “a rose is a rose is a rose” exemplifies the lessons of Mike Rose’s Back to School: Why Everyone Deserves a Second Chance at Education. Perhaps the most refreshing aspect of this book is that it is a bold attempt to reclaim the narrative of community colleges and the Deweyan aspects of their democratic mandate. For far too long, community colleges have been stigmatized by writers such as Brint and Karabel (1989) as squelching opportunity and social mobility. More recently, Carnevale and Strohl (2010) argue that community colleges are part of a higher education system that offers a “minimum of upward mobility” (p. 105) because “stratification and diversification have hardened institutional boundaries” (p. 106). In addition, Carnevale and Strohl argue that “improving quality from the bottom up is largely unexplored territory” (p. 89). Such a conclusion may seem logical given the limits of quantitative economic research; however, it only highlights the need for Rose’s ethnographic work.
Back to School makes an argument that can be understood by diverse audiences—change in American higher education needs to occur with “second-chance” students in mind. Rose (2012) tactfully addresses conditions within the institution that need to improve and identifies ways in which professors, institutional leaders, and society can create better environments for these students, arguing for the “need to take basic-skills instruction out of the hinterland of higher education, liberate it from the academic snobbery and bankrupt assumptions about teaching and learning that profoundly limit its effectiveness” (p. 186).
The narrative style and casual prose make Back to School an accessible and enjoyable read. Rose frames his discussion of adult schools and community colleges around “second-chance” students, that is, those who did not follow the “traditional” path (i.e., straight from high school to 4-year college) into higher education. Rose highlights both the unique challenges these students face and the gritty resolve that pulls them through. He deftly illustrates that, though college—in the traditional sense—may not be for all, these second-chance institutions provide non-traditional students with practical means of accessing post-secondary education.
Rose points out that non-traditional students are becoming the norm in American higher education; thus, community colleges are increasingly important. Although Rose lauds community colleges for the value they provide to individuals and society, he recognizes their shortcomings. A common theme throughout the work is the disconnect between academic and vocational courses. Rose explains that community colleges often struggle to find a balance between teaching practical skills and cultivating the mind, which can ultimately be detrimental to students. By integrating liberal subjects and vocational instruction, he says, instructors can create meaningful educative experiences that help to bridge this gap.
The book outlines lofty solutions for improving these second-chance institutions: an increase in governmental funding and support, a change in habits of thinking about community colleges and students, and a societal re-examination of American values. However, Rose also offers practical suggestions for improvement at the institutional level. He urges community college stakeholders to stop thinking of students as consumers and to instead take a human resources approach that focuses on fostering growth. This shift can be accomplished by streamlining student support services, improving orientations, creating welcoming spaces and environments, and enhancing counseling. The balance between philosophic and concrete recommendations provides the reader with hope for the future.
Many of the points made by Rose in Back to School will not surprise the seasoned community college researcher or practitioner. Still, it is a reminder of the aims and purposes that bring practitioners and researchers to work at the community college. It is also a primer for lay audiences who are being introduced to community colleges for the first time. Most of all, it should give pause to would-be reformers. Rose does not argue that community colleges should be left unchanged—far from it. However, the qualitative aspects of his work and the rich, compelling narratives he gathered from multiple sites illuminate what quantitative government and foundation reports cannot. Rose reminds us that all students succeed (or fail) course by course, but also term by term, finally at the broader program level. This similarity is parsed as we read about students who have been homeless, have been in the criminal justice system, or have overcome addiction. At the intersection of disadvantage and opportunity, we see lives turned around as students find mentors, engage with their courses, and develop new aspirations. Stein’s quote, “A rose is a rose is a rose,” reflects the way that Mike Rose shows that each community college student is similar to every other community college student, even as these students are also uniquely challenged, gifted, and motivated.
When we think about the impending wave of faculty and staff retirements from our nation’s community colleges, we should think about Rose’s work. Back to School gives us a sense of cautious optimism. Amid all the pressures community colleges are facing, they now have the opportunity to hire a new generation of faculty and staff with the heart, passion, and expertise to keep community colleges true to their democratic mission and striving toward excellence.