The “Geography of Opportunity” in Community Colleges: The Role of the Local Labor Market in Students’ Decisions to Persist and Succeed

Literature Review

Historically, community colleges were created to democratize U.S. higher education for low-income groups and students of color (Rhoads & Valadez, 1996). These groups of students continue to be unrepresented in 4-year institutions and overrepresented in community colleges. Community colleges currently enroll close to 12 million of all U.S. undergraduate students (AACC, 2010) and 57% of all first-year college students (Deil-Amen, 2015). Despite increased access, community colleges are struggling to graduate students. The AACC (2016) reports the most recent cohort of degree seekers attending a 2-year public institution had a graduation rate of 21.8%. This number is almost unchanged from the previous year’s rate of 21.2%. In an effort to address low graduation rates in higher education, scholars (Tinto, 1975, 1993) have theorized that students who are well integrated into the academic and social realms of college are more likely to persist. As a result, the focus of many college success initiatives centers on integrating students into campus life and culture. However, these integration-focused efforts have overlooked the dynamic influence of job markets and of the geography of opportunity (Galster & Killen, 1995; Tate, 2008) for community college students.

For example, Stuart et al. (2014) argue that job markets served by community colleges are different from those served by 4-year institutions. Part of the reason may be that the pre-baccalaureate labor market is inherently unstable (Kolesnikova, 2009; Van Noy, 2011) due to the level of work experience and employment opportunities for community college students. Kolesnikova’s (2009) study found a shocking wage gap between people with an associate degree earning US$3,854 less on an annual basis than their counterparts without an associate degree. The study attributes this finding to a lack of professional work development and community college graduates taking longer to complete their course work in comparison to those who graduate with a bachelor’s degree (Kolesnikova, 2009). In addition, family and work obligations (Grubb & Lazerson, 2004) and students’ on-campus socioacademic experiences (Deil-Amen, 2011) may influence goal commitment in ways not previously explored among community colleges and 4-year institutions. One possibility that has not been considered by researchers is that community college students may adjust their goals in response to the local labor market and the opportunities and educational requirements of the jobs for which they are preparing (Stuart et al., 2014). For example, if students see that their prospective job requires moving to another location, more credentialing, and a longer time investment than originally expected, they may choose to drop out or delay their studies. For this reason, the geography of opportunity and the incentives confronting students who enroll at community colleges may greatly differ, depending on the structure of the job market locally and of the type of major and degree they are pursuing.

Exploring the impact space and geography may have on student outcomes has been previously studied by DeOliver (1998) at 4-year institutions of higher education. DeOliver (1998) conducted a case study that explored the role of geography in race and class inequalities among University of Texas at San Antonio (UTSA) university students. Applying geographic and spatial analysis to illustrate income levels, racial segregation, public transportation access, access to public services, and UTSA access and proximity, he argues that the spatial location of the school contributes to disparities among students (DeOliver, 1998). Similarly, Card (1993) discusses college proximity as a determinant of returns on schooling. Card argues that geographic differences are important to acknowledge when accessibility to higher education is impaired (Card, 1993). The accessibility of higher education institutions, or lack thereof, is a factor to consider when students are applying to college (Card, 1993). Using data from the National Longitudinal Survey (NLS) Young Men cohort, his findings reveal that men who grew up in local labor markets with a nearby college have significantly higher levels of education and earnings in comparison to other men. He further states that college proximity is an instrumental variable demonstrating a return on schooling 25% to 60% higher than other conventional estimates (Card, 1993). Card’s findings align with research that explores commuting costs, transportation access, and college proximity to explore student success (Alm & Winters, 2009; Do, 2004; Rephann, 2007). This study hopes to further this scholarship by exploring the interaction between community colleges, geography, and the structure of the job market as it pertains to community college student persistence.

Conceptual Framework

The main conceptual framework used in this article is grounded in the construct of the geography of opportunity. This concept was originally presented by Galster and Killen (1995) and is largely linked to the work of Xavier de Souza Briggs (2005), who was interested in examining the relationship between housing and race. This concept indicates that individuals’ opportunities—educational and occupational—are influenced by geography (Briggs, 2005; Galster & Killen, 1995; Rosenbaum, 1995; Rosenbaum, Reynolds, & Deluca, 2002). The concept of geography of opportunity aligns with Harvey’s (2005) concept of uneven geographic development in urban areas stemming from capitalism and the neoliberalization of the public sector. This is closely related to how community colleges allow class reproduction to thrive within urban areas (Dougherty, 1994). Dougherty (1994) states, that when viewed through this theoretical lens, it is evident that “community colleges maintain class inequality over generations by ensuring that working-class children inherit their parents’ social class position” (p. 19). Therefore, this article interprets the geography of opportunity within urban uneven geographical developments as contributing to the immobility of working-class students. This article also argues that this immobility is reflected in community college student decision making to attend a community college in proximity, which also closely aligns with the labor market in proximity.

Our framework of geography of opportunity is informed by college proximity theories that argue that student college choices are influenced by their proximity to colleges (Dache-Gerbino, 2018; López Turley, 2009) and college institutional types (Kane & Rouse, 1995). The closer you live to a community college increases your chances of applying to that community college (Kane & Rouse, 1995). Dache-Gerbino (2018), employing a critical geographic college access framework via conducting proximity analyses, describes how an urban area in the Northeast United States emerged either as a college desert or oasis. As the terms indicate, the former has less college options in proximity to working-class communities, and the latter has more college options yet is farther from working-class communities. This study was informed by López Turley (2009) which describes two mechanisms that contribute to college proximity and assist in the creation of said deserts and oasis within this uneven urban geographical development (Harvey, 2005). The first mechanism is the predisposition mechanism, which is the visual influence that local colleges have on communities in proximity. The second mechanism is the convenience mechanism, which is the physical accessibility of colleges that are closer to where communities are located. Just as college proximity influences student college choice discourses, this article argues that both community college proximity and the local labor market in proximity contribute to community college student decision making and persistence.

Stuart et al.’s (2014) alternative model of persistence in community colleges suggests that students’ academic trajectories are based on a process that considers their initial goals but change as a result of their lived experiences. When considering the history of urbanization and class segregation in major cities (Gordon, 2008), the migration of the working class in pursuit of employment, housing, and educational opportunities is set within local conditions.

For example, community college’s workforce-centered curriculum and policies (Rhoads & Valadez, 1996) may also influence student decision making based on gainful employment after graduation and supports the focus on the geographic influence of the local job market. Moreover, we can also begin to conceptualize urban community college student persistence through an urban spatial lens.

A student’s social and economic mobility is limited by the social and economic conditions that surround community colleges. This may be due to poor neighborhoods or a geographically desolate location. Regardless of the neighborhood conditions, students’ perceptions of these conditions must also be considered when making choices about his or her life. How students perceive themselves within a particular, geographic location has a real impact on the sense of control they have over the events in their lives (Rosenbaum et al., 2002). Therefore, decision making is a result not only of a student’s personal characteristics but also of the local opportunity structure of which the local labor market and the educational system are important components. The framework of geography of opportunity, when applied to community college student decision making, is appropriate because commuting and living off campus are a large part of community college students’ lives and experiences (Rhoads & Valadez, 1996). The geography of opportunity centers the external campus environment as a factor in economic and educational opportunities for students living in particular areas and neighborhoods. ¹

Defining a Local Labor Market

Community college students are more likely to seek an occupational credential and work full- or part-time while enrolled in school (Belfield & Bailey, 2011). Moreover, upon graduation or completion of a degree, community colleges students tend to seek employment within these same communities (Belfield et al., 2011). Researchers, such as Grubb (2002), state that individuals who function within local labor markets are less likely to have a postsecondary education. This is primarily due to employers searching for workers that are local and meet the criteria for specific skill sets. In return, pre-baccalaureate individuals also seek employment from local industries that have specific credential requirements that may be more attainable than a baccalaureate degree (Grubb & Lazerson, 2004). A study conducted by Kienzl, Alfonso, and Melguizo (2007) explored the effects of local labor market conditions on the likelihood of community college students’ persistence and attainment during the 1990s. Their analysis highlights that research, which measures labor market conditions, at a national or state level were limited and failed to capture the minutiae of information that influences local labor markets (Kienzl et al., 2007). To capture local labor market activity, they applied Tolbert and Sizer’s (1996) commuting zones because the geographic units were large enough to capture labor market data within acceptable distances (Kienzl et al., 2007). Tolbert and Sizer (1996) analyzed 1990 Census data on commuter flows between counties using a hierarchical clustering framework. The overall analysis demonstrated geographic commuting zones into labor market areas that met the Bureau of the Census’ criteria of a 100,000-population minimum.

Similarly, the data for this study applied U.S. Census Data for 2010 derived from SimplyMap. SimplyMap is a repository of consumer behavior and demographic data provided by location in the United States. The labor market data (i.e., percent occupation by county) is derived from the Bureau of the Census and is not limited to a single county border but is instead representative of the geographic space of an entire city. As the commuter flows presented by Tolbert and Sizer (1996), this analysis also relies on a geographic space that allows for a realistic presentation of the labor markets that are in reasonable proximity to the students who actively engage within them.

Methods and Data

The data for this study are part of a larger study funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to examine issues of persistence and success at nine community colleges across the United States. Data for this study come from three primary sources: (a) institutional data, (b) U.S. Census Data for 2010, and (c) interview data. For this study, the focus of the analyses is on describing the geography of opportunity of one community college, Houston Area Community College (HACC), located in Houston, Texas. HACC was selected for various reasons. First, it is located in a large metropolitan area and serves a large proportion of students (close to 30,000 students enrolled in HACC) who are primarily underrepresented minorities (41% are Latinas/os, 38% are White, 10% are African American, and the rest are Native and Asian American students). HACC also exhibits very low graduation rates, compared with other community colleges in the area and the state. In fact, in 2011, only 10% of students at HACC graduated in 3 years (Complete College America, 2011). Second, most recent data (i.e., Chetty, Hendren, Kline, & Saez, 2014) show that many regions in Texas, including the city of Houston, exhibit relatively high rates of upward mobility, unlike other areas in the United States. High mobility areas are defined by Chetty et al. (2014) as places with (a) less residential segregation, (b) less income inequality, (c) better primary schools, (d) greater social capital, and (e) greater family stability. However, no data is available regarding the geography of opportunity in relation to access, persistence, and success in college, and the types of jobs available in this particular location.

The institutional data included geo-coded data such as the name of the high school from which students graduated, the zip codes, and the county and state in which students reside. Additional institutional data included students’ background information (e.g., gender, race, ethnicity, and age) and students’ institutional status (e.g., degree goal, major, and GPA). To describe the geography of opportunity, geo-coded data were merged with U.S. Census data. Specifically, the aim is to better understand income and employment data for the state of Texas at the county level. The first step in the analyses included creating maps with ArcView. Using latitude and longitude coordinates of the centroid or central point of the zip code areas, students’ high schools were mapped and the location of the college campuses. The analytic sample is comprised of 26,157 students in 169 zip codes. Each map consists of different layers, which hold a variety of variables from the data and are presented as one image. The maps each contain a gray scale base map as the background (first layer), student zip location (second layer), the average household income, per capita (third layer), educational attainment data (fourth layer), and employment data (fifth layer).

The analyses also included qualitative analyses of interviews conducted for the larger study in the spring of 2012 and 2013 with 93 students who were enrolled in HACC. Students were recruited for interviews through emails sent to all students, flyers posted physically on campus, and through direct face-to-face solicitation, including particular efforts to recruit students enrolled in remedial level classes. The total interview sample reflects the demographics of HACC as a whole, with just over half of the interview participants being Latino, just under 20% African American, and almost half were of nontraditional age.

Interview questions focused on students’ reasons for attending, challenges they face, and their attempts to navigate college and strategize success. The interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, then coded and analyzed in NVivo, where patterns were identified. Through grounded theory (Corbin & Strauss, 2008), the authors used open coding to analyze student responses. For the purposes of this particular article, we examined the codes that related specifically to students’ educational experiences before attending HACC, their college experiences at HACC, the majors and degrees students pursue, their career aspirations or desired jobs, and the perceived opportunities that the local labor market offers. The interviews allowed for more in-depth analyses of the perceived geography of opportunity and how it related to students’ decisions to persist and succeed in college.

Results and Discussion

Describing the “Geography of Opportunity” for Community College Students in Houston, Texas

Figure 1 plots the location of the high schools attended by the current HACC students. Each high school is represented by a dot. The size of the dot indicates the number of students who attended that particular high school; the larger the dot, the greater the number of students, the smaller the dot, the lesser number of students. The map also displays the three main campus locations, using an asterisk, and their respective location to that of the student data. Surrounding each main campus location, the density of students who graduated from a high school near the community college is greater, compared with the areas further away from the campus locations. To determine the percentage of students who graduated high school near a community college campus, a 10-mile radius buffer was placed around each dot and illustrates that about 85% of the students who currently attend HACC graduated from a high school near or around one of the community college campus locations. These data support previous research (i.e., López Turley, 2009) that finds students with lower parental incomes are especially likely to attend a nearby college.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 1.

Current distribution of community college students—greater Houston area.

Figure 2 shows the average household income per capita at the county level surrounding the college campus locations. In this instance, the light areas represent a lower average household income per capita and the darker area a higher income per capita value. Once again, this map highlights that the community college locations and a majority of the student data is concentrated in an area where the average income per capita lands between US$16,475 and US$28,639, the lower classification levels. In other words, HACC students tend to live in very poor areas.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 2.

Average household income per capita in the greater Houston area.

Figure 3 illustrates the concentrations of residents within the Houston area that have earned some college, community college, and bachelor’s degree attainment. These data are critical to describing the geography of opportunity because the framework suggests how income and educational resources within the local area may shape student decision making. Furthermore, it also suggests that areas on the map with low levels of college attainment are also areas with low levels of income.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 3.

Educational attainment in the greater Houston area.

Figures 4 to 7 focus on employment data. Figure 4 is a graphic representation of one specific occupational industry within the greater Houston area. Much of the student population and campus location fall within an area where 2.94% to 11.56% of the population is employed in a business or financial occupation, indicating that the larger portion of the population in the area is employed in different industries, whereas Figure 5 shows that the student population and campus locations fall within an area where .58% to 10.63% (10.63% equaling the highest percentage) of the population is employed in the agriculture industry. Similarly, in Figure 6, the population employed in the construction industry reveals that the areas surrounding the student and campus points have high resident employment in construction at 8.18% to 45.42%. Figure 7, the final employment map, follows a similar trend as the agriculture and construction maps, areas with high concentrations of service employment surround the student-campus points. This illustrates that the area where most community college students attended school and college had 3.9% to 16.66% of employment in the service sector, 16.66% being the highest percentage across census tracts.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 4.

Percent occupied in business and financial sectors, 2010 in the greater Houston area.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 5.

Percent occupied in agriculture sector, 2010, in the greater Houston area.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 6.

Percent occupied in construction, 2010, in the greater Houston area.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 7.

Percent occupied in the service sector, 2010, in the greater Houston area.

From the data examined, results suggest that the geography of opportunity for HACC students is unsteady. Students at HACC come from very poor areas with low educational attainment. These places also provide limited opportunities for students to work in occupations that are associated with higher wages and prestige (i.e., business), thus limiting the social and economic mobility for community college students. The greater Houston area is 10,062 sq. miles and accounts for over 14 major institutions of higher learning (Greater Houston Partnership, 2013). The assumption is that access to higher education institutions would be highly feasible within this area, that there is geography of opportunity; however, for 2012, the Greater Houston Partnership reported that only 6.1% of the population of residents (age 25 or older) held an associate’s degree and only 19% held a bachelor’s degree. The overall unemployment rate was 5.3%, with an unemployed population of over 236,176 individuals. This information falls in line with the overall economic recession the United States has been experiencing since 2007 (Wiseman, 2014). More college students find themselves entering an unsteady job market after graduation or dropping out of school entirely and settling for low-paying jobs (Wiseman, 2014).

Nevertheless, the maps also illustrate other available data on employment growth in the area. The Greater Houston Partnership (2013) estimated that more than one in five jobs created since January 2010 has been in the energy sector. The ongoing energy boom has fed employment growth in the following areas: engineering services, architecture, computer systems design, management consulting, geophysical surveying, testing labs, and other miscellaneous services. In addition to the structure of the labor market, HACC also adds another layer to the geography of opportunity for its students. In 2011, of all the 4,160 degrees and certificates awarded to students, 5% of them were associate of science degrees, 21% were associate of applied science degrees, and 28% were certificates of technology (Complete College America, 2011). With these degrees, students would be able to find jobs in certain areas including, for example, early childhood education, automotive technology, hospitality management and tourism, medical sonographer, and dental hygienist. These data illustrate that a perceived employment benefit in the labor market has resulted in an increase of students attaining degrees or certificates within that specific field.

Conclusion and Future Steps

This study foregrounds the job market as an important element in the decisions community college students make about whether or not to enroll in college, pursue particular credentials, and persist. Living in a low-income area that consists of low educational attainment prospects may contribute to students enrolling in local community colleges. Having community colleges within proximity to these neighborhoods may increase the likelihood that students living within these areas will enroll in programs or courses (Kane & Rouse, 1995).

Furthermore, this analysis contributes to the knowledge of the geographic context in which students make decisions to persist and succeed in college. Findings suggest that although perceptions of the job market inform students’ decision to attend community college and pursue particular career paths, the local job market in proximity to their high schools and community colleges is not reflective of these business-related job prospects; rather, the local job market reflects higher employment in construction and the service sector. Hence, a spatial mismatch of opportunity exists between where students live and attend college and where their desired employment opportunities are located, typically outside of their residential areas (Sanchez, Stolz, & Ma, 2003).

Pursuing the American Dream ideology, which includes securing a college education and a well-paying job, has also created an American Nightmare. The American Nightmare has emerged as a high concentration of minorities in poverty-impacted, revenue-strapped, low-paying jobs that are isolated from the educational and occupational opportunities generated in wealthier vigorously growing outer communities. To design a new and more equitable geography of opportunity for community college student’s demands there needs to be a different set of actions and tools. To start, there is a need for community colleges to provide more information to students about careers, availability of jobs, degree requirements, and salaries.

In addition, the analyses suggest that perspectives on careers are potentially central and pervasive in the college-going pursuits of community college students, not only as a motivating force, but also as a reality shaping their daily experiences. Therefore, colleges must start to recognize and potentially foster opportunities for developing students’ career capital, which is a concept describing the value of competencies, knowledge, and personality attributes individuals possess to produce economic value (D’Amico et al., 2012). With such a high proportion of students working and studying simultaneously, community college students’ concurrent employment could potentially be strategic and purposeful, perhaps providing structured opportunities for them to build further awareness of available jobs in the area as well. In addition, the influence of college faculty, staff, and other sources of information on student career direction need to be examined and purposefully enhanced for the benefit of students.

In an era when the student success conversation has moved beyond merely calculating graduation rates, multiple measures of institutional success may include transition to desired employment of graduates, regardless of degree attainment in some cases. Research must continue to engage in efforts that will better describe the geography of opportunity for community students. One way is to use existing data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics to examine the demand for specific jobs in areas surrounding community colleges, as well as job and salary growth in specific local labor markets. This information will help researchers and college leaders design better programs and services that aim to align students’ career goals with actual employment opportunities.

Furthermore, there is need to expand the notion of geography of opportunity and incorporate other information into this definition. This study raises questions that future research can address such as the specific distance students are traveling between home, college, and work, paying particular attention to commuting and transportation needs. Mapping info on public transportation and availability of other public services (such as day care centers, health clinics, etc.) can help colleges identify local resources that community college students should have equitable access to. Future research may also address relevant questions that explore the impact of internships on student employment after graduation, enrollment, and dropout rates based on specific majors and industry needs, and a comparative analysis between two or more institutions. In doing so, geography of opportunity will expand and allow for alternative explanations to emerge as we seek to increase student persistence and success within higher education. Let us not forget that we must pay attention to the vast diversity of needs of community college students, particularly those who are at higher risk of not completing their certificates or degrees and not transitioning to successful employment.