Antos/What Is None of the Hollering About

Rural youth are as likely to graduate from high school as their urban peers; about 85% of each group will acquire a high school diploma or a General Educational Development (GED) diploma. However, the difference in college attendance is the cause for concern. While 65% of urban high school graduates reported attending college, only 56% of rural high school graduates had done the same (Gibbs, 1995). A similar study found only 45% of rural youth would attend college, while 67% of suburban youth would pursue postsecondary education (Smith, Beaulieu, & Seraphine, 1995). Although there is a discrepancy between the percentage of rural youth reportedly attending college, both studies support the trend that rural youth are less likely than their peers to pursue higher education. "For more than 40 years, studies have consistently demonstrated that rural students have lower educational and occupational aspirations and expectations than small-town and urban students" (Smith et al., p. 364).

Despite this difference in college attendance, education research continues to primarily focus on the plight of the urban schools (DeYoung, 1993). Rural schools are often neglected for two reasons. First, the condition of the urban school is more visible. Second, a larger percentage of America’s schoolchildren are enrolled in urban or suburban schools (Ballou & Podgursky, 1995, p. 6). For too long an eerie silence has surrounded the plight of rural schoolchildren and their educational aspirations. Attention must be turned to the condition of rural youth without belittling the crisis facing either urban or suburban youth or pitting rural, urban, and suburban schools against one another.

Because of changes in the economy and the increasing importance of postsecondary education for economic viability, maximizing achievement for all of America’s youth is crucial. What once was considered an opportunity is essentially a requirement in today’s economy; higher education is becoming necessary as many jobs once requiring a high school diploma or successful completion of an equivalency exam now require a college degree (Cowher, 1994). Furthermore, the income gap between those with a high school degree and those having completed a bachelor’s degree is more distinct than ever (D. Honeman, personal communication, January 27, 1998).

Recognizing the unique challenges facing all students is important for student affairs professionals for reasons beyond the economic implications. Because practitioners value equal access to education, are concerned with student development, and are committed to educating the whole person (National Association of Student Personnel Administrators [NASPA], 1989), the higher education community should join K-12 educators and administrators in analyzing how to better serve rural youth. In doing so, some tough questions must be asked. Why are rural students less likely to pursue higher education? What unique barriers do they face, and what motivates those who pursue postsecondary education? How can committed educators better ensure equal opportunities for rural youth? What do college and university educators need to know about rural youth to better serve them? This article seeks to increase the student affairs professional’s understanding of the factors influencing rural youths’ aspirations. Furthermore, suggestions for the Academy’s response will be made.

Varying definitions of the term "rural" beg for clarification. For the purpose of this paper, the Census Bureau’s definition of rural areas "as communities with less than 2,500 inhabitants or less than 1,000 inhabitants per square mile" will be used (Herzog & Pittman, 1995, p. 2). Interestingly, however, the United States Government’s definition of rural is "nonmetropolitan" (Herzog & Pittman, p. 2). Reference to metropolitan as the norm, or the gauge with which to name or describe all others, assumes the rural classification holds a secondary or inferior status.

Assumptions that rural areas are inferior do not seem far-fetched when one considers the language and stereotypes used to describe rural people. Despite heightened sensitivity relating to multiculturalism, "it is still considered socially and politically correct to poke fun at ‘rednecks,’ ‘hillbillies,’ and ‘hicks’" (Herzog & Pittman, 1995, p. 3). Stereotypes of the "country bumpkin" conjure images of "the healthy, naive, slow-witted, unsophisticated, ignorant, ultra-conservative, penniless soul from beyond the outer fringe of the interstate" (Herzog & Pittman, p. 3).

Such prejudices may not only influence rural youths’ self-concepts and aspirations, but the perpetuation and glorification of these negative images also influence the way K-12 teachers, college faculty, and student affairs professionals interact with adolescents from the rural enclaves of America. Because of these negative and simplified stereotypes, it is important that all educators better understand the factors that contribute to many rural youth having lower educational and career aspirations.

For rural high school students with high grade point averages and highly educated families, rural living fails to affect college attendance (Edwards, P., Abel, F. J., Easton, S. E., Herbster, D., & Sparapani, E. F., 1996; Gibbs, 1995; Grant, D. F., Heggoy, S. J., & Battle, D. A., 1995). Such news is encouraging for educators, but equally puzzling. Once student achievement and parent-education levels are removed from the equation, rural living still equates to lower levels of college attendance. Why, then, does such a low percentage of rural youth pursue postsecondary education? Rural youth face unique barriers including a lack of financial resources, isolation from a college, cultural centers and other highly educated individuals, and a decreased likelihood of encouragement from family and community members. These barriers will be explored in the following section.

Failure to see education as an investment. Education is not a measure of success for many rural youth. It has not had to be. Ambivalence to higher education seems logical to many students, especially to those for whom the only college graduates they know are their teachers. When their teachers do not earn as much as their parents, who, as factory workers or laborers can earn upwards of $10,000 to $20,000 more a year than their teachers, the benefits of higher education are less pronounced (Dalton & Erdmann, 1990). Postponing an income for four years, making tuition payments for the same duration, and assuming loan-payments on top of everything else seems illogical. One rural teacher simply asks: How do you raise

However, new environmental regulations, international trade policies, and changes in American manufacturing are lessening the quality and quantity of job opportunities for rural workers. This decline in the economy is exacerbating an already alarming trend as most of the newly created jobs are minimum-wage paying positions that neither require an advanced education nor inspire increased career aspirations (DeYoung, 1993).

Limited resources for the rural school. Small schools located in rural regions are different from large schools located in urban or suburban areas (Raven & Barrick, 1992). The declining rural economy has contributed to the shortage of resources for residents of these areas, and these worsening conditions affect schools in rural communities. Rural schools are likely to have a "more limited curriculum than metropolitan schools" (Raven & Barrick, p. 10). This leaves rural students with fewer college preparatory or accelerated courses from which to choose (Dalton & Erdmann, 1990, p. xi). For example, in 1992 only 61% of students in schools with fewer than 400 students had the opportunity to take calculus, compared to 94% of students attending schools with 1,000 or more students (Greenberg & Teixeira, 1995). Although small school size alone does not automatically infer ruralness, such a correlation is high.

Limited family resources. The declining rural economy and greater likelihood of rural students to live in poverty affects their college attendance compared to students from urban or suburban areas. Despite the existence of financial aid, "the long-standing gap between rural and urban incomes may be the most powerful constraint on college attendance" (Gibbs, 1995, p. 37). Because many rural students and families simply do not know about or understand the federal financial aid process and the equalizing of opportunity it offers, many rural youth fail to collect the financial support they are qualified to receive. The perceived high cost of college makes postsecondary education appear unattainable to many.

Isolation from cultural centers. Rural youth are isolated from many opportunities of American life as a result of their distance from population centers. Rural students are less likely to have regular access to good libraries, bookstores, ballets, symphonies, and museums that could encourage their pursuit and appreciation of the liberal arts. Whereas some rural students may have regular opportunities to travel to their state’s largest cities, geographic isolation negates the opportunity for many to travel to these cities and experience opportunities not frequently found in rural areas. Indeed, "the cultural, social, and economic factors prevalent in urban and suburban communities that serve to push students toward higher education may be weaker or lacking in rural communities" (Smith et al., 1995, p. 365). ?

Isolation from educational centers. Being isolated can contribute to students having lower academic aspirations, especially if there is no college or university in their town or in their immediate area. Approximately 50% of rural youth live in counties without a college, compared to 11% of urban students (Gibbs, 1995). Because of their lack of access to a campus, rural youth are less likely to know or interact with college students, faculty and staff. They are also less likely to take college-level courses while in high school or acquire information about the opportunities available in college. Furthermore, the campus environment continues to remain unknown to them and such foreignness causes angst for many isolated students as they wonder if they would be able to adjust to this unfamiliar environment.

Isolation from a highly educated populace and job market. The concentration of quality, high-paying jobs in urban and suburban areas also perpetuates the negative cycle of lessened educational aspirations of rural youth. First, the lack of college graduates living in rural areas affords rural students few opportunities to become acquainted with people with high-paying employment that requires postsecondary education. Because rural youth are likely to have few liberally educated adults serving influential roles in their lives, they are also less likely to associate education with success. Second, this dearth of college-educated citizens living in rural areas is a natural consequence of few professional employment opportunities there. As a result, rural students who do persevere and achieve higher education simply must migrate to urban or suburban areas to put their degrees to work--perpetuating the negative consequences of the cyclical "brain drain" (Smith et al., 1995) from rural America.

Isolation from cultural centers, colleges, universities, a highly educated populace, and a job market demanding postsecondary education serves to deter rural students’ pursuit of college. Furthermore, rural students are more likely to live close to extended family, have a tradition of living in the area, and have a strong attachment to their natural surroundings. A rural youth’s own community is comfortable and known, and many rural students see no immediate gratification for leaving their home area (Rendon, 1994). The belief that rural youth have everything they need in their area has kept generation after generation there, said one rural high school teacher. It is also one reason students have so little exposure to the outside world. "Most of the travel children do is to see grandparents and other relatives. When [their] kin live nearby, [they] don't get those opportunities [to see what is out there]" (Dalton & Erdmann, 1990, p. 6).

Rural students are more often "allowed by their parents, teachers, and communities to ‘buy down’ in their educational aspirations" (Dalton & Erdmann, 1990, p. xi). Like many first-generation college students whose families do not see the value of higher education or its investment qualities, many rural students will not be encouraged by those influential in their lives to pursue postsecondary education. As a result, these students may be less likely to have high expectations of their own. They may neglect to pursue a strong college preparatory curriculum and/or be more prone to deviant behavior, including drug and alcohol abuse. Increased sexual activity may more directly affect the aspirations of rural females. For a rural female, pregnancy could halt her educational pursuits altogether (Rendon, 1994).

Research done by sociologists, rural economists, psychologists, and an increasing number of educators is contributing to the information available about rural students’ aspirations and the barriers to their achievement. Higher education and student affairs literature, although varied and usually comprehensive, still generally overlooks the unique situation of rural high school graduates attending our universities. The urban-disadvantaged-student-bias of educational literature perpetuates the neglected status many rural students face on our campuses. Yet for many of our rural students, "going to college is [still] like traveling to the moon--they are clueless about how to get there and see no reason for the trip" (Dalton & Erdmann, 1990, p. x). However, the changing workforce is forcing many of these students to take this "trip"—or resign to working in jobs that pay minimum wage with few or no benefits.

Considering the factors that hinder or squelch rural students’ career and educational aspirations is not only timely, it is the ethical thing to do. The following twelve recommendations for the higher education community, although not inclusive, are made:

Analyze the campus climate from rural youths’ perspectives. Is the campus population larger than many rural youths’ high schools, towns, and/or counties? How big are the class sizes in relation to a rural student’s high school, for example? How are new issues such as campus safety going to affect rural students? Because many rural students often have not had immediate neighbors, how will they adjust to living in the residence halls? Will rural students be considered "a number" on campus? Because they have lived in a community where everyone knew them before, how will this anonymity affect them? Do rural students "stick out like a sore thumb" on campus? Is there an unspoken or spoken division of students by socioeconomic class? If so, how do the lower-income students find "their niche"? Such questions should be considered.

Examine one’s own biases. Does the thought of rural students automatically conjure images of the "hick" or "bumpkin"? Do faculty, student affairs professionals, and other students on campus generally accept these negative stereotypes? Are assumptions made that rural students' greater propensity to place into remedial math and writing courses is because they are not as intellectual or as competent as other youth? Or is it recognized that they are affected by their school's limited curriculum? An educator's own recognition of his or her bias will not only make his or her work with rural youth more effective and genuine in the future; such action will also contribute to halting such stereotypes.

Establish partnerships. Higher education leaders should consider what types of activities or experiences would warrant the creation of a mutually beneficial partnership with a rural school. Anything that presents college as a viable option to these rural students will work to increase their career and educational aspirations. Can a partnership be created that will enhance a rural school’s college and financial aid counseling program? Could an academic department or student affairs division sponsor a class of rural students to visit campus for a day? Would a faculty member be willing to guest lecture at a rural school?

Incorporate rural values into one’s pedagogy and educational philosophy. Rural students are likely to have a strong preference for working collaboratively, having information transmitted orally and in social settings, and exhibit a tendency toward relativistic conclusions based on personal experiences (Bloodsworth & Fitzgerald, 1994, p. 4-5). As a result, rural students may feel more alienated when expected to be competitive, or when information is transmitted using the "banking concept" (Freire, 1993). Therefore, educators should rethink and/or reconstruct their pedagogy and/or personal educational philosophy with consideration for the rural learners who favor collaborative learning.

Assist rural students with the financial aid process. Because of the greater likelihood that rural students come from families in poverty, it makes common sense for colleges and universities to ensure that prospective and current rural students have assistance completing the complicated federal financial aid forms. Furthermore, committing to help rural students financially with the backing of grants and scholarships is of utmost importance as the threat of excessive student loans may be a burden these students find unworthy of carrying.

Work to alleviate financial concerns. The financial implications of higher education can be daunting for students whose families are making large sacrifices for their children to attend college. As a result of family sacrifices, rural students may continue to struggle to see their educational expenses as a legitimate investment and not simply a frivolous desire to learn for learning’s sake. Educators should support these students by showing them how higher education can positively influence their lives, financially, professionally, and personally.

Promote equal access to student activities by removing financial barriers. Due to financial constraints, rural students may feel the stress of being a burden on their families, especially if the declining economy affects a parent’s employment status. As a result, these students may not have additional resources to be able to partake in "typical" college student activities: going to movies, attending concerts, or participating in alternative spring break or study abroad excursions. Appropriate student activities should be subsidized or scholarships should be offered by the institution, offering students opportunities to participate in such events without concern for cost.

Recognize that rural youths’ ties to family and community are very important. Educators should be sensitive to the stress that school breaks could instigate. Vacations from school, including Thanksgiving and winter break, offer students an opportunity to leave school and return home. Many could be eager to leave the campus environment because they have not yet adjusted successfully and are at risk for stopping out. Others may fear going back to a home environment that may not be sensitive to the growth the student has experienced. A student may be perceived as forgetting where he or she has come from and those he or she has left behind may feel betrayed. For a student with close familial and community ties, alienation is highly undesirable. Such feelings could leave rural students confused: they may perceive they do not "fit in" with the more sophisticated college adolescents while they also no longer see themselves as a part of their home community. Such an experience is heightened if the students’ parents have not attended college and the difference in perceived sophistication causes noticeable tension (Sidel, 1994). Students should be encouraged to view their pursuit of education as a positive achievement, despite the other messages with which they could be struggling.

Be sensitive to rural students’ likelihood of feeling academically inferior. Having had access to fewer advanced academic course offerings, rural students may feel as though they are academically inferior. Classroom performance for rural youth, however, is typically strong (Ballou & Podgursky, 1995; Greenberg & Teixeira, 1995). Nevertheless, normalizing their possible need for remedial education and/or campus tutoring will help alleviate feelings of academic inferiority.

Encourage rural students to get involved on campus. Most of the rural students who attend college have been exceptional leaders in their school and community. They are used to working collaboratively and enjoy working with other people. They may feel intimidated by the size of the institution, feel their own skills are not as savvy as those of urban or suburban youth, and/or be unaware of opportunities for involvement. Having someone offer information and encouragement will transmit the message of perceived ability, making the student more likely to engage in student activities. As a result, a student’s level of commitment to the institution will rise, decreasing likelihood of withdrawing from school (Astin, 1993).

Support rural students’ development of a healthy sexual identity. Because many heterosexual, rural women may feel greater societal pressure to pursue marriage and begin a family, all educators should be important role models. These women should come to know and understand the options they have. In addition to facing the pressure of heterosexual marriage, student affairs professionals should recognize that rural women and men are highly likely to come from a heterosexist and homophobic environment. Students who find themselves questioning their sexual identity may not have interacted with openly gay, lesbian or bisexual individuals to counteract the heterosexist and homophobic messages they have been socialized to accept as the norm. As a result, recognizing that these questioning students' development of a healthy gay, lesbian or bisexual identity may be further complicated is critical.

Rural living does not preclude high academic and career aspirations. However, some of the characteristics of rural living, including isolation, lack of financial resources, and the potential for decreased family and community support, contribute to lower the likelihood of rural youth pursuing and completing postsecondary education. Higher education administrators and student affairs professionals can work to minimize these barriers to higher education by becoming more aware of rural students’ characteristics and experiences. Such knowledge should then be put to use in the application of policy and programs that are increasingly sensitive to the needs of rural students. Because there is no simple formula, however, the overriding question still remains: How can committed educators better ensure opportunities to increase rural youths’ educational and occupational aspirations? It is imperative this question is asked and its implications further explored.

Ballou, D. & Podgursky, M. (1995). Rural schools—fewer highly trained teachers and special programs, but better learning environment. Rural Development Perspectives, 10 (3), 6-15.

Bloodsworth, G. & Fitzgerald, D. (1994). Addressing the neglected needs of rural learners. SC: (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 371 913)

Cowher, S. J. (1994). Rural education initiatives: Preparation for a changing workforce. Human Services in the Rural Environment, 18(2), 18-20.

Dalton, H. F. & Erdmann, D. G. (1990). The chance to dream: A community success story. NY: Plan for Social Excellence, Inc. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 353 921)

DeYoung, A. J. (1993). Children at risk in America’s rural schools: Economic and cultural dimensions. Palo Alto, CA: American Institute for Research in the Behavioral Sciences. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 362 339)

Edwards, P., Abel, F. J., Easton, S. E., Herbster, D., & Sparapani, E. F. (1996). Disadvantaged rural students: Five models of school university collaboration. NY: Association of Teacher Educators. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No: ED 395 904)

Gibbs, R. M. (1995). Going away to college and wider urban job opportunities take highly educated youth away from rural areas. Rural Development Perspectives, 10(3), 35-43.

Grant, D. F., Heggoy, S. J., & Battle, D. A. (1995). Cases of rural gifted college females: Socialization barriers and career choices. Statesboro, GA: Faculty Research Committee. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No: ED 387 730)

Greenberg, E. J. & Teixeira, R. A. (1995). Nonmetro student achievement on par with metro. Rural Development Perspectives, 10(3), 17-23.

Herzog, M. J. & Pittman, R. B. (1995). Home, family and community: Ingredients in the rural education equation. Cullowhee, NC: Department of Administration, Curriculum, and Instruction. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No: ED 388 463)

National Association of Student Personnel Administrators. (1989). Points of view. Washington, D.C.: Publisher.

Newlin, J. (1993, Fall). Rural school concerns get attention of congress. State Education Leader Newsletter, 12 (2), 1-6.

Raven, M. R. & Barrick, R. K. (1993). The academic preparation of rural and non-rural students prior to enrollment in a college of agriculture. Journal of Agriculture Education, 33 (2), 10-18.

Rendon, L. I. (1994). A systemic view of minority students in educational institutions. Austin, TX: National Center on Postsecondary Teaching, Learning, and Assessment. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No: ED 368 267)

Sidel, R. (1994). Battling bias: The struggle for identity and community on college campuses. New York: Penguin.

Smith, M. H., Beaulieu, L. J., & Seraphine, A. (1995). Social capital, place of residence, and college attendance. Rural Sociology, 60 (3), 363-380.