Rhetoric or Change? The Role of State Policies and Conditions in Shaping Postsecondary Education Access and Success for Rural Students

'41%@=-80@/-?;='41%@=-80@/-?;=

);8@91 #@9.1= =?5/81

&@991=

%41?;=5/;=4-:31'41%;81;2&?-?1$;85/51>-:0;:05?5;:>5:%41?;=5/;=4-:31'41%;81;2&?-?1$;85/51>-:0;:05?5;:>5:

&4-<5:3$;>?>1/;:0-=D0@/-?5;://1>>-:0&@//1>>2;=%@=-8&4-<5:3$;>?>1/;:0-=D0@/-?5;://1>>-:0&@//1>>2;=%@=-8

&?@01:?>&?@01:?>

-==5>%"1-:>

(:5A1=>5?D;2$5??>.@=34

0-==5>91-:><5??10@

1:-D*5885>

'1C->4=5>?5-:(:5A1=>5?D

61:-DB5885>39-58/;9

591?F180

'41&?-?1(:5A1=>5?D;2#1B+;=7;88131;23=5/@8?@=1-:0'1/4:;8;3D-?;.81>7588



731?F18039-58/;9

1A;:;801:

1;=35-&;@?41=:(:5A1=>5?D

0331;=35->;@?41=:10@

=D>;:1:=5;??

(:5A1=>5?D;21;=35-

.=D>;:41:=5;??@3-10@

&11:1C?<-312;=-005?5;:-8-@?4;=>

;88;B?45>-:0-005?5;:-8B;=7>-?4??<>>/4;8-=>6@:/?5;:9>>?-?110@=@=-810@/-?;=

$-=?;2?415341=0@/-?5;:;99;:>

%1/;991:0105?-?5;:%1/;991:0105?-?5;:

"1-:>%*5885>1?F180 ;801:1:=5;??!11"105:-%15881D'@:>?-88! 

,4;@+%41?;=5/;=4-:31'41%;81;2&?-?1$;85/51>-:0;:05?5;:>5:&4-<5:3$;>?>1/;:0-=D

0@/-?5;://1>>-:0&@//1>>2;=%@=-8&?@01:?>

'41%@=-80@/-?;=

4??<>0;5;=3



'45>%1>1-=/4=?5/815>.=;@34??;D;@2;=2=11-:0;<1:-//1>>.D&/4;8-=>@:/?5;:?4->.11:-//1<?102;=

5:/8@>5;:5:'41%@=-80@/-?;=.D-:-@?4;=5E10105?;=;2&/4;8-=>@:/?5;:;=9;=15:2;=9-?5;:<81->1/;:?-/?

>/4;8/;999>>?-?185.-:>B1=>/;9

%41?;=5/;=4-:31'41%;81;2&?-?1$;85/51>-:0;:05?5;:>5:&4-<5:3%41?;=5/;=4-:31'41%;81;2&?-?1$;85/51>-:0;:05?5;:>5:&4-<5:3

$;>?>1/;:0-=D0@/-?5;://1>>-:0&@//1>>2;=%@=-8&?@01:?>$;>?>1/;:0-=D0@/-?5;://1>>-:0&@//1>>2;=%@=-8&?@01:?>

;A1=$-31;;?:;?1;A1=$-31;;?:;?1

'4181-0-@?4;=;2?41-=?5/811:3-3105:?45>>/4;8-=>45<0@=5:345>?591->-%5/4-=0$#-?4-:[email protected]/

$;85/D188;B-??41%;/7121881=:>?5?@?1;2;A1=:91:?'41A51B>1C<=1>>10-=1?4;>1;2?41-@?4;=>

-:00;:;?:1/1>>-=58D=1G1/??41A51B>;2?41%;/7121881=:>?5?@?1;2;A1=:91:?

@?4;=>@?4;=>

-==5>%"1-:>1:-D*5885> 591?F1801A;:;801:=D>;:1:=5;??=-:0;:!11816-:0=-

"105:--::-4%15881D!58D '@:>?-88-:0+5:3,4;@

'45>=1>1-=/4-=?5/815>-A-58-.815:'41%@=-80@/-?;=4??<>>/4;8-=>6@:/?5;:9>>?-?110@=@=-810@/-?;=A;8

5>>

Vol. 45, No. 3 The Rural Educator, journal of the National Rural Education Association 1

Research Article

Rhetoric or Change? The Role of State Policies and Conditions in Shaping

Postsecondary Education Access and Success for Rural Students

Darris R. Means

Jenay F. E. Willis

Kim Getfield

Devon Golden

Bryson Henriott

Brandon Lee

Alejandra Medina

Hannah Reilley

Lily K. Tunstall

Ying Zhou

Since the 2016 U.S. presidential election, increasing attention has been paid to rural communities. For our study,

we used a multicase study approach that included five states to study the difference between the rhetoric about the

need to focus more attention on rural communities soon after the 2016 election and the practiced reality of state

conditions (e.g., policies, practices, constraints) changing to support postsecondary education outcomes (e.g.,

enrollment, retention, and graduation) for rural students between 2017 and 2021. We collected and analyzed two

forms of data for our study, legislative records and newspaper articles. We noted inequitable funding for rural K–12

education in several states. While some state policymakers responded to these inequities, their responses raised

questions about the unintended consequences for some of the decisions. In addition, we found state policymakers

and leaders have placed increased attention on postsecondary education enrollment and affordability, but we found

limited evidence that attention was paid to rural students and rural-serving higher education institutions and to

postsecondary education retention and graduation for rural students.

But the real work of making opportunities available

to people in tiny communities and isolated spots

across the land doesn’t get much traction when

priorities are set in the halls of power.

—Rex Smith, Editor of The Times Union

(2019, p. B1)

For too long, rural communities and rural

education often have been overlooked by federal and

state policymakers, which is surprising given that

more than one in five public school students in the

US attends a rural school (Brenner, 2023; Johnson &

Zoellner, 2016; Showalter et al., 2023; Tieken, 2014;

Williams & Grooms, 2016). However, after the 2016

U.S. presidential election, the media and pundits

noted a potential shift in political capital of rural

communities as more candidates and elected officials

began discussing and highlighting challenges and

opportunities in rural communities (Shearer, 2016).

As argued by the media and pundits, federal and state

policymakers had to start paying attention to rural

constituents and communities to garner more political

support (Kurtzleben, 2016).

Soon after the 2016 election, mainstream media

increased their coverage about rural students and

postsecondary education trajectories (e.g., Marcus &

Krupnick, 2017; Pappano, 2017); stories about

colleges and universities offering programs, services,

and outreach to rural students and communities (e.g.,

Anderson, 2019); and state policymakers and leaders’

attention to the need to focus on rural students and

postsecondary education affordability, enrollment,

and graduation (e.g., Anderson, 2019). In light of

these notable stories and attention, our team used a

multicase study approach (Yin, 2014), relying on

legislative records and newspaper articles, to study

the difference between the rhetoric about the need to

focus more attention on rural communities soon after

the 2016 U.S. presidential election and the practiced

reality of changes to state conditions (e.g., policies,

practices, constraints) to support postsecondary

education outcomes (e.g., enrollment, retention, and

Vol. 45, No. 3 The Rural Educator, journal of the National Rural Education Association 2

graduation) and more equitable postsecondary

education trajectories for rural students. We chose

between 2017 and 2021 for the time period of this

study because it covered the entire Trump presidency

and soon after the Trump presidency, which was a

time during which the media, pundits, and lawmakers

paid heightened attention to rural communities and

constituents. Given that much of “education remains

the responsibility of states” in the US, we focused our

analysis at the state level (St. John et al., 2013, p. 46).

We were guided by two questions.

1. What are the state conditions (e.g., policies,

practices, constraints) that shaped

postsecondary education opportunity (e.g.,

resources) for rural students since the 2016

U.S. presidential election through 2021?

2. What state conditions (e.g., policies,

practices, constraints), if any, have changed

since the 2016 U.S. presidential election

through 2021 that reflect rural students and

postsecondary education outcomes

(enrollment, retention, and graduation)?

Literature Review

Rural students are less likely than their nonrural

peers to: (a) enroll in postsecondary education, (b) be

continuously enrolled in postsecondary education,

and (c) attain a postsecondary education degree

(Byun et al., 2012, 2015; Koricich et al., 2018;

Schmitt-Wilson & Byun, 2022; Wells et al., 2019).

These disparities are related to systemic challenges,

such as economic considerations, that lead to

inequitable postsecondary education trajectories for

rural students (Koricich et al., 2018; Wells et al.,

2019). Researchers have often examined how

individual, K–12, college/university, and community

factors have shaped postsecondary education access,

transition, enrollment, and attainment for rural

students (Boettcher et al., 2022; Crumb et al., 2021;

Grant & Kniess, 2023; Hudacs, 2020; Kryst et al.,

2018; Means, 2019; Means et al., 2016; I. A. Nelson,

2016; Roberts & Grant, 2021; Schmitt-Wilson &

Byun, 2022). However, less attention has been paid

to how state policies and conditions shape

postsecondary education opportunity for rural

students.

While the impact of state-level contexts on

postsecondary education opportunity for rural

students is understudied, researchers have found that

state policies, conditions, and political cultures shape

postsecondary education costs and affordability and

outcomes (enrollment, retention, and graduation;

Doyle, 2023; Febey & Louis, 2008; Heck et al., 2014;

Li, 2017; Rine & Brown, 2023; Tandberg &

Gándara; 2023). Additionally, states play a role in

“funding institutions, providing financial aid to

students, providing oversight of institutions, holding

institutions accountable for specific outcomes, and

implementing policies to address state goals”

(Tandberg & Gándara, 2023, pp. 279–280). However,

each state in the US has a different approach to its

oversight and support of higher education (Heck et

al., 2014; Tandberg & Gándara; 2023). For example,

Heck and colleagues (2014) found that political

culture shapes approaches to state appropriations for

higher education funding, which influences student

graduation rates.

State policy and conditions have a direct impact

on rural education (Johnson & Zoellner, 2016).

Current research has primarily focused on how state

policy and conditions shape rural K–12 education.

Researchers have highlighted how state policy does

not take into consideration how policies may

differently impact urban, suburban, and rural K–12

schools and districts, treating all schools and districts

as a monolith (Johnson & Zoellner, 2016; Tieken,

2014; Williams & Grooms, 2016). Researchers have

also emphasized the importance of understanding

how circumstances across rural schools and districts

in the same state can vary drastically based on several

conditions, such as local labor markets and district

revenues (Burrola et al., 2023).

However, limited literature exists that focuses on

postsecondary education enrollment, retention, and

graduation for rural students. For example,

researchers have examined how state policies and

programs related to dual enrollment have supported

rural students’ enrollment in higher education (Cain,

2021; Rivera et al., 2019; Zinth, 2014). Additionally,

Collins and Rockey (2024) examined how state

policy in Illinois impacted postsecondary opportunity

for rural communities of color in the state, finding

that Illinois state policymakers overlooked the

intersection of rurality and race/racism when

developing and implementing policies related to

postsecondary education opportunity. More

scholarship is needed to understand how state

policymakers consider rurality when developing and

implementing policies to improve postsecondary

education opportunity and outcomes in their states.

Vol. 45, No. 3 The Rural Educator, journal of the National Rural Education Association 3

Theoretical Framework

We employed rural critical policy analysis as our

study’s theoretical framework. Building upon critical

policy analysis (Diem et al., 2014), Brenner (2022)

positioned the rural critical policy analysis

framework as needed for advancing equity and

justice in rural places. The rural critical policy

analysis framework is important to counter deficit

framing of rural places, interrogate structural

inequities in rural communities, and center rurality in

analysis vs. an urban-centric analysis (Brenner, 2022,

2023; Crain & Newlin, 2021; Johnson & Zoellner,

2016; Sutherland & Seelig, 2022). Brenner (2022)

argued for more rural policy scholarship “that is both

critical and place-focused” and that “moves beyond a

functionalist focus (i.e., does the policy work?)

toward a critical frame by interrogating the power

structures and moral stances from within which

educational policy is conceived and enacted” (p. 37).

Brenner (2022) focused on three elements of the

rural critical policy analysis framework: assumption

of neutrality, distributive analysis, and rural salience.

Assumption of neutrality examines how, if at all,

differences across places are considered in education

policy “but also examines which rural places and

which students and communities within rural

contexts may be disadvantaged by the facade of place

neutrality” (Brenner, 2022, p. 37). Distributive

analysis examines “whether resources, benefits, or

burdens of a particular policy are equitably

distributed across places or types of places” and how

this distribution reproduces or reinforces current and

historical inequities (Brenner, 2022, p. 32). Rural

salience focuses on if the policy considers rurality,

and if the focus draws upon assets or assumptions

that perpetuate a deficit framing of rural (Brenner,

2022; Wrathall, 2017). We used rural critical policy

analysis to critically examine how state conditions

are shaping postsecondary education opportunity for

rural students and examine the difference between

rhetoric and change since the 2016 U.S. presidential

election at the state level related to policies and

programs that support postsecondary education

outcomes for rural students.

Methodology

Our study is grounded in a transformative

paradigm. A transformative paradigm is “rooted in a

critique of power relationships, with emancipatory

goals of individuals and transformative goals for

institutions and systems of oppression” (Hurtado,

2015, p. 286). Scholars who use a transformative

paradigm recognize how power, privilege, and

oppression shape experiences, outcomes, and

opportunities and center the knowledge of

marginalized communities (Hurtado, 2015). Our

study reflects a transformative paradigm in two ways.

First, we centered the knowledge of students from

rural communities by using a participatory

approach—a partnership between researchers and

individuals who were potential beneficiaries of the

research—to study and address social issues

(Cammarota & Fine, 2008; McIntyre, 2008).

Specifically, our team was comprised of researchers

and undergraduate students from rural communities

and/or who attended a rural-serving postsecondary

education institution (Koricich, 2022). Our team

worked together as coresearchers on the project. By

including individuals who were directly impacted by

how state policy and context shape postsecondary

education opportunities and outcomes (enrollment,

retention, and graduation), our team was enriched by

learning from their critical lived experiences and

expertise and by beginning to collectively envision

how state policymakers and leaders could advance

postsecondary education opportunity for rural

students. Second, drawing upon our theoretical

framework, we interrogated how power structures

(e.g., state policy) promote and/or hinder (or remain

silent about) postsecondary education opportunity

and outcomes for rural students.

Research Design, Data Collection, and Data

Analysis

Our research team used a multiple case study

approach (Yin, 2014). A case study approach focuses

on the in-depth investigation of a phenomenon within

and across real-world, bounded contexts (Yin, 2014).

For our study, we focused on five states as our

bounded contexts: Georgia, New York, North

Carolina, Pennsylvania, and South Carolina. Georgia,

New York, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania are in

the top 10 states with the largest population of rural

public K–12 school students, and Georgia, North

Carolina, and South Carolina were identified as three

of 10 highest priority states in needing to address

rural education challenges (Showalter et al., 2019).

Each state has a different political context related to

which political party had control of the governor’s

office and legislative branch (see Table 1, online only

https://scholarsjunction.msstate.edu/ruraleducator/vol

Vol. 45, No. 3 The Rural Educator, journal of the National Rural Education Association 4

45/iss3/). Each state was represented by at least one

student undergraduate coresearcher.

For our data collection and analysis, we relied on

document analysis, a process for selecting, reviewing,

and interpreting documents to examine a

phenomenon (Bowen, 2009). Document analysis can

be used in combination with other research methods

(e.g., interviews, observations) or as a stand-alone

method in a research study (Bowen, 2009). We chose

to use document analysis as a stand-alone method to

track “change and development” related to how state

policy and context shaped postsecondary education

opportunities and outcomes for rural students over a

five-year period (Bowen, 2009, p. 30).

We collected two forms of documents,

legislative records and newspaper articles, during fall

2022. We chose between 2017 and 2021 to examine

how state context and policy shaped postsecondary

education opportunity and outcomes for rural

students. To gather legislative records, we used Open

States (now Plural), a database that tracks legislation

for each state. We also gathered newspaper articles

by selecting the two largest newspapers by

circulation in each state to track what was happening

statewide related to postsecondary education

opportunity and outcomes for rural students (see

Table 2, online only https://scholarsjunction.msstate.

edu/ruraleducator/vol45/iss3). We chose to exclude

newspapers that had more of a national vs. state focus

(e.g., The New York Times). We used the following

key search terms to identify legislative records and

newspaper articles: “rural students,” “rural” and

“education”, “college enrollment”, “college

graduation”, “college completion”, “higher education

enrollment”, and “higher education graduation.” Each

document was then evaluated for its relevancy to

rural students and/or higher education. Across the

five states, we identified a total of 236 documents.

For data analysis, we assigned two members

from the team to conduct document analysis for each

state, treating each state as a case (Yin, 2014).

Everyone was asked to review each article and

legislative record for their assigned state and

document any significant statements and pertinent

information related to how state policies and context

were shaping postsecondary education enrollment,

graduation, and retention for rural students between

2017 and 2021. During spring 2022, each state

analysis team met to discuss and finalize themes for

their state based on their individual data analysis. We

then engaged in a cross-case analysis to identify key

themes across the five states (Yin, 2014).

Trustworthiness

At the time of data collection and analysis, our

team consisted of nine undergraduate and graduate

students who either grew up in a rural community or

attended a rural-serving college or university. While

the faculty researcher on the team did not grow up in

a rural community, he has had a strong commitment

to rural education for over a decade; most of his

interest in rural education stems from being raised by

grandparents who were born and raised in the rural

U.S. South during the 1930s and 1940s and whose

educational opportunities were limited because of the

intersection of anti-black racism (e.g., Jim Crow

laws), classism, and placed-based inequities. As a

research team, we worked together to learn more

about each other’s positionality and engage in critical

reflection throughout the course of the project. In

addition, at least two research team members

analyzed the data sources, establishing researcher

triangulation (Merriam, 2002).

Study Parameters

We identified four study parameters. First, while

we relied on two forms of documents (i.e., legislative

records and newspaper articles), we did not use other

forms of qualitative data, such as interviews or

observations. Nevertheless, our findings provide

some critical insights into how state policy and

context are shaping postsecondary education

opportunity and outcomes for rural students and

changes over the course of five years. Second, stories

and topics do not always receive coverage due to a

variety of reasons (e.g., public interest, a shrinking

staff that makes coverage of a wide range of topics

more difficult, unconscious bias that leads to topics

not receiving coverage). Thus, newspapers may not

fully capture all the emerging state policies and

initiatives that address postsecondary education

enrollment, retention, and graduation for rural

students. Third, we focused only on five states to

compare across the cases more successfully. We

recognize that our findings are shaped by the states

we chose for the study. Fourth, we collected

documents across two years during which the

COVID-19 pandemic was dominant in newspaper

articles, including newspaper articles focused on rural

students and/or higher education. The COVID-19

pandemic shaped many of our study findings.

Vol. 45, No. 3 The Rural Educator, journal of the National Rural Education Association 5

Findings

We have identified the following themes across

our five state cases: (a) inequitable resources and

opportunities for rural students and (b) postsecondary

education enrollment declines and responses from

state policymakers and educational leaders.

Inequitable Resources and Opportunities for

Rural Students

Rural schools and students experience

inequitable access to resources and opportunities,

which impacts their postsecondary education

trajectories. Across our data sources, we found

evidence of inequities related to rural school district

funding, academic resources, postsecondary

education opportunities, and broadband access. In

this section, we present two subthemes: (a) academic

resources and opportunities and (b) broadband

access.

Academic Resources and Opportunities for Rural

Students

Rural students’ postsecondary education

trajectories can be hindered by limited access to

academic resources and opportunities in K–12

education. In our analysis, we noted inequitable

funding for rural K–12 education in several states,

including Georgia, New York, Pennsylvania, and

South Carolina (Bump, 2017b; Hanna et al., 2021;

Salzer, 2020). These funding inequities can have

larger implications for rural school districts’ ability to

provide adequate personnel support (teachers and

staff) and academic resources (academic course

offerings, such as Advanced Placement [AP]

courses), especially for school districts that must turn

to local property tax revenue when faced with state

spending reductions (e.g., Bump, 2017b; Salzer,

2020). For example, 34 poor, rural school districts

that serve a significant population of Black students

in South Carolina sued the state for lack of financial

resources, and the state supreme court sided with the

school districts, ordering state legislators to improve

conditions and opportunities for the districts (Adcox,

2018). In response, South Carolina policymakers

established the South Carolina Promise Scholarship,

which covers up to $2,000 per year for students from

the 34 districts to pursue a technical degree (Adcox,

2018). However, the South Carolina Promise

Scholarship is only applicable for technical and

community colleges, which may signal to students

across these 34 rural South Carolina school districts

that these postsecondary education institutions are

what policymakers believe are “right/possible for

them” (Adcox, 2018; Iloh, 2018, p. 238).

Policymakers or educators’ signals about which

higher education institutions are “right/possible” for

rural students can perpetuate spatial inequities in

higher education. For example, Stirgus (2018)

reported on how many prominent colleges and

universities are recognizing their low enrollment of

rural students, but many institutions continue to have

too few rural college students compared to the rural

student population in their states.

Based on our data, Georgia policymakers in

particular responded to inequitable higher education

opportunities for K–12 rural students by focusing on

AP courses and exams and dual enrollment. For

example, Georgia policymakers focused on

increasing the number of Georgia students who took

AP exams in science, technology, engineering, and

mathematics (STEM). If students score high enough

on AP exams, they might earn college credit. In

2017, Georgia policymakers passed legislation that

would subsidize the cost of any STEM AP exams for

every Georgia student (Tagami, 2017). However, the

decision to only include STEM AP exams may

contribute to the undervaluing of liberal arts and the

humanities (Tagami, 2017). Georgia state

policymakers included $600,000 in the budget to

“help poor, rural school districts add AP STEM

courses” (Tagami, 2017, p. 1A).

In addition to support for AP courses, Georgia

policymakers have focused on dual enrollment. Dual

enrollment in Georgia previously provided an

opportunity for any high school student to take as

many college courses as possible at no cost to

students and families. Over time, the number of

Georgia students taking dual enrollment courses

increased significantly, expanding the budget for dual

enrollment from $48 million and a student enrollment

of approximately 36,000 in 2016 to a budget of $104

million and a student enrollment of approximately

52,000 in 2019 (Stirgus, 2020). The increasing costs

of dual enrollment led to the passing of House Bill

444 in Georgia, which restricted dual enrollment only

to 10th graders who are taking classes at technical

colleges, to 11th and 12th graders in high school

taking classes at technical colleges and/or

universities, and to a total of 30 college credit hours

at no cost to students and their families (Augusta

Chronicle, 2020; Stirgus, 2020). The change was

critiqued due to the likelihood of impacting “rural

Vol. 45, No. 3 The Rural Educator, journal of the National Rural Education Association 6

students most, since rural school districts have a

harder time recruiting teachers for Advanced

Placement courses. That causes more students to seek

dual enrollment courses at local colleges” (Stirgus,

2020, p. 1B).

“Broadband Deserts”: Implications for Rural

Student Success

Across the five states, lack of broadband access

has created and perpetuated educational inequities for

rural schools and students (Barton, 2019; Cueto,

2020; Daprile, 2020; Hinchey, 2020; Ninan, 2021;

Schiferl, 2020a, 2020b; Sheinin, 2017). These rural

areas that lack high-quality broadband access for

homes, schools, and businesses are described as

“broadband deserts” (Sheinin, 2017, para. 4). While

in some states all public schools may have high-

quality broadband access, many rural homes continue

to lack broadband access (Barton, 2019; Sheinin,

2017). For example, Sheinin (2017) reported that

only 63% of rural Americans have broadband access.

While access was a challenge prior to the COVID-19

pandemic, the pandemic exacerbated educational

inequities for rural students in K–12 and

postsecondary education due to limited or no

broadband access (Augusta Chronicle, 2020; Cueto,

2020; Daprile, 2020; Schiferl, 2020b). At the start of

the pandemic when schools and colleges and

universities moved to remote learning, some rural

students had limited or no broadband access to

engage in remote instruction, complete assignments,

or communicate with teachers and professors (Cueto,

2020; Daprile, 2020; Hinchey, 2020; Schiferl,

2020b). For example, in one article from The State in

South Carolina, Cueto (2020) reported that over

16,000 South Carolina public-school students could

not be reached upon moving to remote learning in

March 2020.

In response to inadequate broadband access in

rural communities, K–12 districts and postsecondary

education institutions, as well as state policymakers,

have called for and attempted to address broadband

access challenges (Nussbaum & Cline, 2020;

Schiferl, 2020a). One approach has been for some

university systems and colleges and universities to be

more flexible (e.g., Hans, 2021). For example,

University of North Carolina System colleges and

universities allowed students to remain on campus

during the transition to remote learning, recognizing

some students could not return home or lacked the

resources, such as broadband access, to continue to

engage in coursework (Hans, 2021). However, wide-

reaching infrastructure change is required to address

and hopefully eradicate broadband deserts.

Some state legislatures have taken steps to

address broadband deserts (Nussbaum & Cline,

2020). For instance, over 500,000 Georgia

households lack reliable broadband access, and 70%

of these homes are in rural Georgia (Nussbaum &

Cline, 2020). In response to this challenge, the

Georgia General Assembly passed and Governor

Brian Kemp signed the Broadband Opportunity Act,

which went into effect January 1, 2021 (Nussbaum &

Cline, 2020). The Broadband Opportunity Act

requires Georgia utility companies “to charge fair and

reasonable pole attachment rates to broadband

competitors, such as Comcast, AT&T and others,”

with the goal of increasing high-quality broadband

access for homes and business across Georgia,

especially rural Georgia (Nussbaum & Cline, 2020,

p. A5). On a federal level, President Joe Biden signed

into law the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act in

November 2021; the package included funding to

address broadband access across the country. While it

is too early to understand the impact of this funding

on broadband access in rural America, the funding

holds promise for addressing broadband deserts that

disproportionately affect rural communities, families,

and students.

Considering Rurality? Declining Postsecondary

Education Enrollment and State Policy

State policymakers and leaders increased their

attention on postsecondary education enrollment and

affordability. However, we found little attention to

rural students and rural-serving higher education

institutions and to postsecondary education retention

and graduation. In this section, we present two

subthemes: (a) postsecondary education enrollment

declines and (b) state responses to postsecondary

education declines that center rural students and

rural-serving institutions.

Postsecondary Education Enrollment Declines

We found evidence of concerns about

postsecondary education enrollment declines (Bump,

2017a; Hamilton, 2017; P. Nelson, 2021; Silberstein,

2021; Snyder, 2019, 2021; Stirgus, 2020; Taber-

Thomas, 2020). This topic was particularly noted in

New York and Pennsylvania before the COVID-19

pandemic (Bump, 2017a; Hamilton, 2017; P. Nelson,

2021; Silberstein, 2021; Snyder, 2019), with citations

Vol. 45, No. 3 The Rural Educator, journal of the National Rural Education Association 7

of decreasing birth rates in these states and increasing

postsecondary education costs as culprits for

postsecondary education enrollment declines (Bump,

2017a; P. Nelson, 2021; Silberstein, 2021; Snyder,

2019). For example, articles highlighted how the

State University of New York (SUNY) System

enrollment and student enrollment at private colleges

and universities in New York had started to decline

prior to the COVID-19 pandemic (Hamilton, 2017; P.

Nelson, 2021). Additionally, newspaper articles

discussed how the 14 institutions in the Pennsylvania

State System of Higher Education (PASSHE) had a

declining student enrollment for over a decade

(Snyder, 2019, 2020, 2021), reporting that enrollment

declined by about 26% since 2010 and “about a $36

million loss in revenue” due to declining student

enrollment (Snyder, 2021, p. 10).

The postsecondary education enrollment declines

were exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic (P.

Nelson, 2021; Silberstein, 2021; Snyder, 2020, 2021;

Stirgus, 2020). We found in our newspaper data

sources heightened concerns about the impact of the

COVID-19 pandemic on postsecondary education

enrollment for New York and Pennsylvania and for

community colleges (P. Nelson, 2021; Silberstein,

2021; Synder, 2020; Stirgus, 2020). For example, in

one source, the authors discussed how enrollment at

community colleges had declined nearly 23% during

the height of the COVID-19 pandemic (Stirgus,

2020). In New York, the “state’s 31 community

colleges lost an average 23 percent of enrolled

students between 2010 to 2019” and community

college enrollment in New York continued to decline

during the COVID-19 pandemic (P. Nelson, 2021,

para. 7). Additionally, SUNY System enrollment had

declined by 40,000 students between fall 2019 and

fall 2021 (Silberstein, 2021).

While data indicated postsecondary education

enrollment declines overall, little attention was paid

to postsecondary education enrollment declines at

rural-serving institutions even though rural-serving

institutions were particularly impacted by the

COVID-19 pandemic (Snyder, 2021; Stirgus, 2020).

Even more importantly, postsecondary education

enrollment and affordability often overshadowed

postsecondary education retention and graduation in

state policies, initiatives, and programs. We did

document a few examples of postsecondary

education enrollment declines at rural-serving

institutions. For example, the nine state colleges in

Georgia that are primarily rural-serving and located

in South Georgia saw a 7% student enrollment

decline in fall 2020 although the overall University

System of Georgia saw a 2.4% increase in student

enrollment (Stirgus, 2020). A few articles focused on

declining enrollment, including declining enrollment

at public rural-serving institutions in North Carolina

and Pennsylvania (Snyder, 2021; Stancill, 2017).

While the focus on postsecondary education declines

overall is an important policy issue, state

policymakers and educational leaders must also pay

close attention to how declines in enrollment may

materialize differently across institutions based on

location and pay attention to postsecondary education

retention and graduation alongside enrollment.

State Responses to Postsecondary Education

Enrollment Declines

State policymakers and educational leaders had a

range of responses to declining postsecondary

education enrollment and postsecondary education

affordability issues, including increasing funding for

state scholarship opportunities, decreasing tuition at

public and private colleges and universities, and

consolidating institutions (e.g., Blanchard &

Winograd, 2017; Stancill, 2017, Snyder, 2021;

Tokasz, 2017). While most of the state policy

responses to postsecondary education enrollment

declines did not center rurality, we did document a

few policy responses that had specific implications

for rural students and rural-serving institutions.

NC Promise. In North Carolina, the University

of North Carolina (UNC) Board of Governors

approved a strategic plan in 2017 to “increase

enrollment of rural students by 11 percent, and grow

graduates from rural counties by 20 percent” and

“increase enrollment of low-income students by 13

percent, and grow low-income graduates by 32

percent” (Stancill, 2017, para. 5). One initiative to

address these goals is NC Promise. This program,

funded by the state legislature, dropped tuition to

$500 per semester and was first implemented at three

rural-serving institutions in 2018: Elizabeth City

State University, a historically Black university;

University of North Carolina at Pembroke, a Native

American-serving institution; and Western Carolina

University, a historically White university (Farmer,

2022; Spellings, 2017; Stancill, 2017). The aim of the

initiative is to increase undergraduate student

enrollment, lower student debt, increase graduation

rates, and support the local economy (Brown, 2022).

However, some higher education leaders, especially

historically Black university leaders, feared the

Vol. 45, No. 3 The Rural Educator, journal of the National Rural Education Association 8

initiative “would lead to a revenue crisis despite the

state Legislature promising to make up for lost tuition

dollars,” leading two historically Black universities to

decline to participate in the initiative (Farmer, 2022,

para. 2).

Since 2018, the three NC Promise postsecondary

education institutions have seen an increase in

undergraduate student enrollment, including

Elizabeth City State University, with a 50%

enrollment increase since becoming a NC Promise

institution (Brown, 2022; Farmer, 2022), but NC

Promise has not been around long enough to give an

indication into the other aims and outcomes of the

initiative, including “lowering student debt,

increasing graduation rates, and spurring local

economic growth” (Brown, 2022, para. 11). Recently,

Fayetteville State University, a nonrural historically

Black university, became the fourth NC Promise

institution (Brown, 2022; Farmer, 2022). While the

outcomes of NC Promise have been encouraging,

questions have been raised about the longevity of the

program (Brown, 2022).

Pennsylvania Higher Education

Consolidation. The PASSHE system has

experienced postsecondary student enrollment

declines for over a decade, leading to significant loss

of revenue in the system and financial implications

for many PASSHE institutions (Snyder, 2019, 2020,

2021). The declines in the PASSHE system were

exacerbated during the COVID-19 pandemic

(Snyder, 2020, 2021). In addition to the pandemic,

state system officials pointed to factors responsible

for postsecondary education enrollment declines in

PASSHE system: postsecondary education costs;

dismal state funding per full-time student compared

to other states; and fewer high school students

nationally and shrinking populations in Pennsylvania,

especially rural Pennsylvania (Knox, 2023a; Mamula,

2018; Snyder, 2019, 2021). State leaders have

expressed concerns about how financial challenges

facing PASSHE would disproportionately impact

rural students, students of color, and low-income

students (Knox, 2023a; Snyder, 2020).

Due to enrollment declines and shrinking

revenues, the PASSHE Board of Governors

announced and approved a merger of three

institutions (Bloomsburg, Lock Haven, and

Mansfield) to form Commonwealth University of

Pennsylvania and another three institutions

(California, Clarion, and Edinboro) to form

Pennsylvania Western University beginning the

2022–2023 academic year (Parish, 2022); most of

these institutions are rural-serving institutions. While

each campus was told it would be able to maintain its

identity (Parish, 2022), there was reported fallout

from students, faculty, and alumni about the planned

merger, and the mergers were cited as a culprit in

continuing enrollment declines at four of the

PASSHE institutions slated for merger (Snyder,

2021). For the newly formed Commonwealth

University of Pennsylvania, campuses initially saw

enrollment decreases but more recently have seen

increases in graduate student enrollment and first-

time enrollment (Knox, 2023b). However, questions

remain about how the mergers will have a long-term

impact on student enrollment given continued

challenges related to postsecondary education costs

and state funding (Knox, 2023a).

Discussion

The findings within our study support previous

research and extend existing research. First, our

findings extend previous literature by further

documenting inequitable postsecondary education

resources and opportunities for rural students.

Researchers have identified individual, K–12 school,

college/university, and community-level factors that

have shaped postsecondary education access,

transition, enrollment, and attainment for rural

students (e.g., Boettcher et al., 2022; Crumb et al.,

2021; Grant & Kniess, 2023; Hudacs, 2020; Kryst et

al., 2018; Means, 2019; Means et al., 2016; I. A.

Nelson, 2016; Roberts & Grant, 2021; Schmitt-

Wilson & Byun, 2022). For our study, we focused on

state-level conditions that shaped postsecondary

education outcomes for rural students. In our

analysis, we noted inequitable funding for rural K–12

education in several states, which can have larger

implications for rural school districts’ ability to

provide adequate personnel support and academic

resources. While some state policymakers responded

to these inequities, their responses raised questions

about the unintended consequences for some of the

decisions. For example, Georgia state policymakers

have invested heavily in dual enrollment, providing

an opportunity for high school students to take

college courses at no cost to students and their

families. However, due to costs of the dual

enrollment program, state policymakers restricted

dual enrollment only to 10th graders who are taking

classes at technical colleges, to 11th and 12th graders

in high school taking classes at technical colleges

and/or universities, and to a total of 30 college credit

Vol. 45, No. 3 The Rural Educator, journal of the National Rural Education Association 9

hours at no cost to students and their families. The

change raised concerns about rural students’

opportunities for postsecondary education

preparation.

Second, mainstream media have increased their

coverage about rural students and postsecondary

education trajectories, and state policymakers and

leaders have placed more attention on rural students

and postsecondary education affordability,

enrollment, and graduation (e.g., Anderson, 2019;

Marcus & Krupnick, 2017; Pappano, 2017). We set

out to understand how, if at all, the attention on rural

communities and rural students and postsecondary

education trajectories after the 2016 U.S. presidential

election led to changes in state policies, initiatives,

and practices that better support postsecondary

education outcomes for rural students, recognizing

that state policies, conditions, and political cultures

shape postsecondary education costs and affordability

and outcomes (enrollment, retention, and graduation;

Doyle, 2023; Febey & Louis, 2008; Heck et al., 2014;

Li, 2017; Rine & Brown, 2023; Tandberg &

Gándara; 2023). We found state policymakers and

leaders have placed more attention on postsecondary

education enrollment and affordability, but we did

not find evidence of sweeping legislative changes and

initiatives centered on rural postsecondary education

students and rural-serving higher education

institutions. While most of the state policy responses

about postsecondary education enrollment declines

and affordability did not center rurality, we did

document a few policy responses that had specific

implications for rural-serving institutions, such as the

NC Promise initiative and the consolidation of public

universities in Pennsylvania. However, the

consolidation of public universities in Pennsylvania

may have larger unintended or unexpected

consequences, especially given the continuing

challenges related to postsecondary education costs

and state funding.

Third, prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, rural

students faced barriers to enroll in a postsecondary

education institution and attain a postsecondary

education degree (Byun et al., 2015; Byun et al.,

2012; Koricich et al., 2018; Schmitt-Wilson & Byun,

2022). In our analysis, we found that the COVID-19

pandemic further exacerbated inequities in

postsecondary education outcomes for rural students.

For instance, while the COVID-19 pandemic

impacted students from various geographic locales

(i.e., urban, suburban, rural), rural students often

contended with living in “broadband deserts,” which

caused heightened disparities with the move to

remote education during the initial years of the

pandemic (Sheinin, 2017). While some states, such as

New York and Pennsylvania, already faced

challenges with declining postsecondary education

enrollment, the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated

these challenges with public rural-serving institutions

seeing greater declines in their enrollment.

Implications

As a result of our study, we offer implications

for policy and research. First, we encourage state

legislators to consider how implementation and

realities of policies will vary based on geographic

context. Thus, we caution state legislators against

one-size-fits-all educational policy approaches and

encourage them to consider how the implications of

policy decisions will differently impact rural,

suburban, and urban communities. Second, we

encourage state legislators to consider how to provide

more postsecondary education resources and

opportunities for rural students. For example, a state-

sponsored dual enrollment program may be a viable

option to increase students’ postsecondary education

enrollment. Additionally, state legislators should

continue to investigate and implement interventions

that could decrease postsecondary education costs for

rural students; policy interventions that address

postsecondary education affordability could increase

enrollment, retention, and graduation for rural

students. Our analysis also highlighted that

policymakers and higher education leaders discussed

postsecondary education enrollment a significant

amount between 2016 and 2021, but they discussed

postsecondary education retention and attainment less

often. While postsecondary enrollment is critical to

addressing educational equity, we encourage

policymakers and higher education leaders to focus

even more on postsecondary education retention and

attainment.

We offer two implications for future research.

First, for our study we used document analysis to

examine how state policy and context shaped

postsecondary education opportunities and outcomes

for rural students over a five-year period. We

encourage future researchers to consider interviewing

state policymakers and leaders to gain a more

nuanced understanding of how state policy and

context are shaping postsecondary education

opportunities and outcomes for rural students.

Second, due to our analysis approach, we did not

Vol. 45, No. 3 The Rural Educator, journal of the National Rural Education Association 10

uncover as much about how intersecting forms of

oppression (e.g., spatial inequities, racism, classism,

sexism) were materializing in state policies or how

state policies were exacerbating inequities at the

intersection of multiple forms of oppression. We

encourage researchers to examine how state policies

are perpetuating and/or addressing intersecting forms

of oppression in postsecondary education

opportunities and outcomes for minoritized rural

students.

References

Adcox, S. (2018, September 4). Graduates of 34

districts can get college costs. The Post and

Courier, 4.

Anderson, G. (2019, August 11). Recruiting in rural

America. Inside Higher Ed. https://www.inside

highered.com/admissions/article/2019/08/12/coll

eges-and-universities-red-states-prioritize-rural-

student

Augusta Chronicle Editorial Staff. (2020, May 7).

New law spares dual enrollment. The Augusta

Chronicle, A8.

Barton, T. (2019, March 10). SC lawmakers work to

fix digital divide. The State, 1.

Blanchard, J., & Winograd, M. (2017, June 9). Kudos

to Cuomo for making college affordable to more.

The Times Union, A10.

Boettcher, M. L., Lange, A., Hanks, S., & Means, D.

R. (2022). Rural Black and Latinx students:

Engaging community cultural wealth in higher

education. Journal of Research in Rural

Education, 38(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.

26209/jrre3801

Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a

qualitative research method. Qualitative

Research Journal, 9(2), 27–40. https://doi.org/

10.3316/QRJ0902027

Brenner, D. (2022). Toward a rural critical policy

analysis. In A. P. Azano, K. Eppley, & C. Biddle

(Eds.), The Bloomsbury handbook of rural

education in the United States (pp. 30–42).

Bloomsbury.

Brenner, D. (2023). Rural critical policy analysis: A

framework for examining policy through a rural

lens. The Rural Educator, 44(1), 71–73.

https://doi.org/10.55533/2643-9662.1393

Brown, S. (2022, January 13). Model or fluke? The

Chronicle of Higher Education, 68(11), 32.

Bump, B. (2017a, November 15). Enrollments take

big dive. The Times Union, A1.

Bump, B. (2017b, August 2017). Rural schools

taking big hits. The Times Union, A1.

Burrola, A., Rohde-Collins, D., & Anglum, J. (2023).

Conceptualizing rurality in education policy:

Comparative evidence from Missouri. The Rural

Educator, 44(3), 17–33. https://doi.org/10.

55533/2643-9662.1389

Byun, S., Irvin, M. J., & Meece, J. L. (2015). Rural-

nonrural differences in college attendance

patterns. Peabody Journal of Education, 90(2),

263–279. https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.

2015.1022384

Byun, S., Meece, J. L., & Irvin, M. J. (2012). Rural-

nonrural disparities in postsecondary educational

attainment revisited. American Educational

Research Journal, 49(3), 412–437. https://doi.

org/10.3102/0002831211416344

Cain, E. J. (2021). Rural students' college choice and

the impact of dual enrollment programs and

college cost. New York Journal of Student

Affairs, 21(1), 4–21. https://files.eric.ed.gov/

fulltext/EJ1367235.pdf

Cammarota, J., & Fine, M. (2008). Youth

participatory action research: A pedagogy for

transformational resistance. In J. Cammarota &

M. Fine (Eds.), Revolutionizing education: Youth

participatory action research in motion (pp. 1–

11). Routledge.

Collins, J. D., & Rockey, M. (2024). Higher

education access and attainment for rural

communities of color in Illinois: A critical policy

analysis. In T. Hallmark, S. Ardoin, & D. R.

Means (Eds.), Race and rurality: Considerations

for advancing higher education equity (pp. 115–

129). Routledge.

Crain, A. M., & Newlin, M. (2021). Rural first-

generation students: A practical reflection on

urbanormative ideology. Journal of First-

Generation Student Success, 1(1), 57–69.

https://doi.org/10.1080/26906015.2021.1891822

Crumb, L., Chambers, C. R., & Chittum, J. (2021).

#Black boy joy: The college aspirations of rural

Black male students. The Rural Educator, 42(1),

1–19. https://doi.org/10.35608/ruraled.v42i1.969

Cueto, I. (2020, July 6). 16,000 students off grid in

SC amid pandemic. The State, 1A.

Daprile, L. (2020, April 5). Rural students with slow

Internet struggle to e-learn. The State, 1A.

Vol. 45, No. 3 The Rural Educator, journal of the National Rural Education Association 11

Diem, S., Young, M. D., Welton, A. D., Mansfield,

K. C., & Lee, P-L. (2014). The intellectual

landscape of critical policy analysis.

International Journal of Qualitative Studies in

Education, 27(9), 1068–1090. https://doi.org/10.

35608/ruraled.v42i1.969

Doyle, W. R. (2023). Improving college completion:

What have we learned about “policy levers”? In

R. D. Reason & J. M. Braxton (Eds.), Improving

college student retention: New developments in

theory, research, and practice (pp. 305–323).

Stylus.

Farmer, L. (2022, March 15). North Carolina expands

its $500 tuition program. Will it keep paying for

it? Higher Ed Dive.

https://www.highereddive.com/news/north-

carolina-expands-its-500-tuition-program-will-it-

keep-paying-for-it/620355/

Febey, K. S., & Louis K. S. (2008). Political cultures

in education at the state and local levels: Views

from three states. In B. S. Cooper, J. G. Cibulka,

& L. D. Gusarelli (Eds.), Handbook of education

politics and policy (pp. 52–72). Routledge.

Grant, P. D., & Kniess, D. (2023). “I just kind of felt

like country come to town”: College student

experiences for rural students at one flagship

university. The Rural Educator, 44(3), 1–16.

https://doi.org/10.3102/1887482

Hamilton, M. (2017, November 15). Enrollment at

private colleges down as free tuition program

goes live. The Times Union. https://blog.times

union.com/capitol/archives/278702/enrollment-

at-private-colleges-down-as-free-tuition-

program-goes-live/

Hanna, M., Graham, K. A., & McCoy, C. R. (2021,

November 12). Pa. school funding trial set to

begin. The Philadelphia Inquirer, A1.

Hans, P. (2021, January 14). UNC campuses can’t

wait on the pandemic. Learning will go on. The

News & Observer, 7A.

Heck, R. H., Lam, W. S., & Thomas, S. L. (2014).

State political culture, higher education spending

indicators, and undergraduate graduation

outcomes. Educational Policy, 28(1), 3–39.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904812453996

Hinchey, M. (2020, April 15). The digital divide

hurts children and the elderly. The Times Union,

A6.

Hudacs, A. (2020). An examination of college

persistence factors for students from different

rural communities: A multilevel analysis.

Journal of Research in Rural Education, 36(2),

1–21. https://doi.org/10.26209/jrre3602

Hurtado, S. (2015). The transformative paradigm:

Principles and challenges. In A. M. Martínez-

Alemán, B. Pusser, & E. M. Bensimon (Eds.),

Critical approaches to the study of higher

education: A practical introduction (pp. 285–

307). Johns Hopkins University Press.

Iloh, C. (2018). Toward a new model of college

“choice” for a twenty-first-century context.

Harvard Educational Review, 88(2), 227–244.

https://doi.org/10.17763/1943-5045-88.2.227

Johnson, J. D., & Zoellner, B. P. (2016). School

funding and rural districts. In S. M. Williams &

A. A. Grooms (Eds.), Educational opportunity in

rural contexts: The politics of place (pp. 3–20).

Information Age.

Knox, L. (2023a, July 12). Fighting for scraps in

Pennsylvania. Inside Higher Ed.

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/admission

s/traditional-age/2023/07/12/pa-public-colleges-

battle-students-and-funding

Knox, L. (2023b, September 1). Praying for a merger

miracle. Inside Higher Ed. https://www.inside

highered.com/news/business/mergers-

collaboration/2023/09/01/can-consolidation-

save-vermonts-public-four-year

Koricich, A. (2022). Crafting better rural-focused

postsecondary policy by identifying rural-serving

institutions. The Rural Educator, 43(4), 67–70.

https://doi.org/10.55533/2643-9662.1374

Koricich, A., Chen, X., & Hughes, R. P. (2018).

Understanding the effects of rurality and

socioeconomic status on college attendance and

institutional choice in the United States. Review

of Higher Education, 41(2), 281–305.

https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2018.0004

Kryst, E., Kotok, S., & Hagedorn, A. (2018).

Pursuing higher education in rural Pennsylvania

schools: Shaping the college path. The Rural

Educator, 39(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.35608/

ruraled.v39i1.211

Kurtzleben, D. (2016, November 14). Rural voters

played a big part in helping Trump defeat

Clinton [Radio broadcast]. NPR.

https://www.npr.org/2016/11/14/501737150/rura

l-voters-played-a-big-part-in-helping-trump-

defeat-clinton

Li, A. Y. (2017). Dramatic declines in higher

education appropriations: State conditions for

budget punctuations. Research in Higher

Vol. 45, No. 3 The Rural Educator, journal of the National Rural Education Association 12

Education, 58(4), 395–429. https://doi.org/10.

1007/s11162-016-9432-0

Mamula, K. B. (2018, July 19). Vanishing rural

workforce Fayette County employers struggle to

fill jobs. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, D1.

Marcus, J., & Krupnick, M. (2017, September 27).

The rural higher-education crisis. The Atlantic.

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2

017/09/the-rural-higher-education-crisis/541188/

McIntyre, A. (2008). Participatory action research

(Vol. 52). Sage.

Means, D. R. (2019). Crucial support, vital

aspirations: The college and career aspirations of

rural Black and Latinx middle school students in

a community-and youth-based leadership

program. Journal of Research in Rural

Education, 35(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.

18113/P8JRRE3501

Means, D. R., Clayton, A. B., Conzelmann, J. G.,

Baynes, P., & Umbach, P. D. (2016). Bounded

aspirations: Rural, African American high school

students and college access. Review of Higher

Education, 39(4), 543–569. https://doi.org/10.

1353/rhe.2016.0035

Merriam, S. B. (2002). Assessing and evaluating

qualitative research. In S. B. Merriam &

Associates (Eds.), Qualitative research in

practice: Examples for discussion and analysis

(pp. 18–33). Jossey-Bass.

Nelson, I. A. (2016). Rural students’ social capital in

the college search and application process. Rural

Sociology, 81(2), 249–281. https://doi.org/10.

1111/ruso.12095

Nelson, P. (2021, April 27). Steep student enrollment

declines hit HVCC, SUNY Schenectady amid

coronavirus. The Times Union.

https://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Despit

e-slump-community-college-leaders-remain-

16124345.php

Ninan, J. (2021, September 5). Another voice/

education closing ECC South would deprive

rural college students. The Buffalo News, 8.

Nussbaum, K., & Cline, D. (2020, September 13).

Half a million in Georgia don’t have decent

internet. The Augusta Chronicle, 1.

Pappano, L. (2017, January 31). Colleges discover

the rural student. The New York Times.

Parish, M. (2022, March 2). Three consolidating state

schools to become “Commonwealth University

of Pennsylvania.” Pennsylvania Capital-Star.

https://www.penncapital-star.com/blog/three-

consolidating-state-schools-to-become-

commonwealth-university-of-pennsylvania/

Rine, P. J., & Brown, J. T. (2023). Shifting

environments, emerging norms: How changes in

policy, technology, data, and market competition

affect enrollment management processes. In R.

D. Reason & J. M. Braxton (Eds.), Improving

college student retention: New developments in

theory, research, and practice (pp. 258–283).

Stylus.

Rivera, L. E., Kotok, S., & Ashby, N. (2019). Access

to dual enrollment in the United States:

Implications for equity and stratification. Texas

Education Review, 7(2), 14–29. http://dx.doi.org/

10.26153/tsw/2282

Roberts, J., & Grant, P. (2021). What we know and

where to go: A systematic review of the rural

student college and career readiness literature

and future directions for the field. The Rural

Educator, 42(2), 72–94. https://doi.org/10.

35608/ruraled.v42i2.1244

Salzer, J. (2020, May 10). AJC top story:

Coronavirus outbreak great recession; taking

lessons from our history. The Atlanta Journal-

Constitution, 1A.

Schiferl, J. (2020a, April 30). Access to Wi-Fi a

challenge for Charleston-area rural students amid

school closures. The Post and Courier, 001.

Schiferl, J. (2020b, August 5). COVID-19 upended

SC schools. $15 million in new federal aid aims

to help. The Post and Courier, 001.

Schmitt-Wilson, S., & Byun, S. (2022).

Postsecondary transitions and attainment. In A.

P. Azano, K. Eppley, & C. Biddle (Eds.), The

Bloomsbury handbook of rural education in the

United States (pp. 157–164). Bloomsbury.

Shearer, C. (2016, November 11). The small town–

big city split that elected Donald Trump. The

Avenue. Brookings Institution.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-

avenue/2016/11/11/the-small-town-big-city-

split-that-elected-donald-trump/

Sheinin, A. G. (2017, June 10). “Broadband deserts”

hinder growth in rural Georgia. The Atlanta

Journal-Constitution.

Showalter, D., Hartman, S. L., Johnson, J., & Klein,

B. (2019). Why rural matters 2018-2019: The

time is now. Rural School and Community Trust.

https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED604580

Showalter, D., Hartman, S. L., Eppley, K., Johnson,

J., & Klein, B. (2023). Why rural matters.

National Rural Education Association. https://

Vol. 45, No. 3 The Rural Educator, journal of the National Rural Education Association 13

wsos-cdn.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/uploads/

sites/18/WRMReport2023_DIGITAL.pdf

Silberstein, R. (2021, September 30). Fewer students

at SUNY schools. The Times Union, A3.

Smith, R. (2019, November 23). Rural areas need

more than words. The Times Union, B1.

Snyder, S. (2019, May 30). Decline in college

students affects PA. The Philadelphia Inquirer,

A2.

Snyder, S. (2020, April 30). Colleges: Schools in the

Pa. system agree to a tuition freeze, but much is

still uncertain. The Philadelphia Inquirer, B1.

Snyder, S. (2021, October 12). Pa. universities see

big decline in enrollment. Philadelphia Daily

News, 10.

Spellings, M. (2017, July 22). UNC president: State

funding at best in a decade. The Charlotte

Observer.

St. John, E. P., Daun-Barnett, N., & Moronski-

Chapman, K. (2013). Public policy and higher

education: Reframing strategies for preparation,

access, and college success. Routledge.

Stancill, J. (2017, January 13). UNC OKs major plan

to improve higher education in North Carolina.

The News & Observer. https://www.news

observer.com/news/local/education/article12650

5559.html

Stirgus, E. (2018, June 10). Top Georgia universities

seek more rural students. The Atlanta Journal-

Constitution, 1B.

Stirgus, E. (2020, November 12). Pandemic fails to

curtail enrollment at USG schools. The Atlanta

Journal-Constitution, 1B.

Sutherland, D. H., & Seelig, J. (2022). Educational

governance and contemporary policy in rural

America. In A. P. Azano, K. Eppley, & C.

Biddle (Eds.), The Bloomsbury handbook of

rural education in the United States (pp. 95–

107). Bloomsbury.

Taber-Thomas, B. (2020, August 13). Another voice:

Campus preparedness requires faculty contracts.

The Buffalo News.

Tagami, T. (2017, August 14). AP exam subsidy

supports only STEM students. The Atlanta

Journal-Constitution, 1A.

Tandberg, D. A., & Gándara, D. (2023). The states

and higher education. In M. N. Bastedo, P. G.

Altbach, & P. J. Gumport (Eds.), American

higher education in the 21st century: Social,

political, and economic challenges (5th ed., pp.

260–288). Johns Hopkins University Press.

Tieken, M. C. (2014). Why rural schools matter.

University of North Carolina Press.

Tokasz, J. (2017, November 15). There are fewer

students of college age each year. The Buffalo

News, 10.

Wells, R. S., Manly, C. A., Kommers, S., & Kimball,

E. (2019). Narrowed gaps and persistent

challenges: Examining rural-nonrural disparities

in postsecondary outcomes over time. American

Journal of Education, 126(1), 1–31.

https://doi.org/10.1086/705498

Williams, S. M., & Grooms, A. A. (2016).

Educational opportunity in rural contexts: The

politics of place. Information Age.

Wrathall, M. (2017, May 11). We can build on this:

Discovering community capitals. Rural

Development Institute. https://medium.com

/@rdi_77976/we-can-build-on-this-discovering-

community-capitals-da1a9edd5101

Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and

methods (5th ed.). Sage.

Zinth, J. D. (2014). Dual enrollment: A strategy to

improve college-going and college completion

among rural students. Education Commission of

the States. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/

ED561909.pdf

Acknowledgments:

The lead author of the article engaged in this scholarship during his time as a Richard P. Nathan Public Policy

Fellow at the Rockefeller Institute of Government. The views expressed are those of the authors and do not

necessarily reflect the views of the Rockefeller Institute of Government.

Authors:

Darris R. Means is a Professor of Educational Leadership at Clemson University. Contact: [email protected]

Jenay F. E. Willis is an Assistant Professor of Higher Education at the University of Mississippi. Contact:

jenay.w[email protected]m

Vol. 45, No. 3 The Rural Educator, journal of the National Rural Education Association 14

Kim Getfield is a graduate of SUNY Cobleskill. Contact:kgetfield2023@gmail.com

Devon Golden is a graduate of Georgia Southern University.

Bryson Henriott is a graduate of the University of Georgia. Contact: brysonhenriott@gmail.com

Brandon Lee is the Manager of Career and Professional Development at the University of Pittsburgh’s Graduate

School of Public & International Affairs. Contact: bml62@pitt.edu

Alejandra Medina is a graduate of Dominican University New York and an incoming PhD student at Georgia

Institute of Technology. Contact: Alimedina0129@gmail.com

Hannah Reilley is a student at Clemson University. Contact: [email protected]

Lily K. Tunstall is an undergraduate graduate of and a current graduate student at Appalachian State University.

Contact: lilyktunstall@gmail.com

Ying Zhou is a graduate of the University of Pittsburgh.

Suggested Citation:

Means, D. R., Willis, J. F. E., Getfield, K., Golden, D., Henriott, B., Lee, B., Medina, A., Reilley, H., Tunstall, L.

K., & Zhou, Y. (2024). Rhetoric or change? The role of state policies and conditions in shaping postsecondary

education access and success for rural students. The Rural Educator, 45(3), 1–14.