There was a little girl, who had a little curl,
Right in the middle of her forehead.
And when she was good,
she was very, very good,
But when she was bad she was horrid!

By the words "image" and "perception" I refer to the "mental conception" of the community college in the minds of stakeholders that determines their attitudes toward the college. For example, one recent college graduate reported that, while she would never have considered attending a community college herself, she did think that the dual credits earned by her two younger brothers from the community college were an asset, as was the lower tuition rate. She felt that her initial perception of the community college as "less appealing" had softened somewhat as she grew older. Occasionally, however, regrettable references to the community college as the "Losers' Last Chance College" are still heard among certain sectors of the public.

In my on-going effort to educate and inform stakeholders that the community college can be an equal choice rather than a last chance, I consider my first task to be to convince community college leaders that the issue of image must not be ignored.

Background

As early as 1947 the President's Commission on Higher Education acknowledged that part of the community college mission was to arouse public opinion to "an awareness of the transcendent importance of education" (Zook, 1947, p. 44) so that not only would the public support increase in appropriations for higher education, but demand them. John Lombardi, in his foreword to The American Community College, wrote that

'identity' or 'image' remains one of the most serious concerns of community college educators—a concern that has been with them almost from the beginning. It will, the authors imply, remain with them as long as the community college remains for students a second or lower choice than an equal choice with other higher education institution. (Cohen & Brawer, 1996, p. xiv)

Other community college scholars have also been concerned with the issue of image. Thomas L. Hardin attributes the accreditation process with helping establish a solid academic reputation for community colleges. First and foremost, however, the Illinois community college "must fight to make its unique contribution known and felt throughout the state" (Hardin, 1975, p. 302). This need to promote a positive image continues to be felt among community college leaders today. Joseph J. Cipfl CEO of the Illinois Community College Board states, "The public doesn't realize the great asset that exists here in the community colleges. We've got to tell our story much better" (Scism, 1998, p. 9).

The image of the community college is contradictory at best. Duvall (1987) says that research must be done to find out about a college's real and perceived image. The problem of public perception of the community college is a perennial one that has not changed with maturity of the institution (Cohen & Brawer, 1996). High school teachers with negative perceptions of the community college, for example, have still been known to ask students disparagingly why they would want to attend the community college instead of a more prestigious college. The logic of confidence theory (Meyer & Rowan, 1977, 1983), on the other hand, suggests that key stakeholders will take for granted in good faith, or in other words perceive, that the community college is faithfully executing its mission.

Thus, it becomes an urgent responsibility of the community college to understand and to narrow the gap between perception and reality. The image of a school can be changed through systematic efforts to communicate with key constituents, but it takes time and hard work for a college to project a new image that will dissipate negative opinions (Ashby, 1983).

A critical revelation in the Lincoln Land Community College district has shown that constituents in regions far removed from the main campus in Springfield are not as knowledgeable about the college as they should be. Our district is the largest district in the state geographically, and is comprised of all or parts of 15 counties, serving over 30,000 students annually from a 4,115-square-mile area. Stakeholders from the more remote corners of this region do not really know what Lincoln Land Community College can offer them. These outlying stakeholders believe that Lincoln Land representatives "didn't get out much!"

I define stakeholders as those "individuals or groups who have a direct interest in and may be affected by the program" (Worthen, Sanders, & Kirkpatrick, 1997, p. 56), and these may include students and parents, business leaders, policy-makers (legislators or governing board members), high school teachers and counselors, and patrons at large, who support our endeavors with their taxes.

Lincoln Land Community College holds Regional Forums to target invited stakeholders, including:

• members of trade and labor unions
  
  
• school district superintendents, principals and counselors
  
  
• local and regional education for employment specialists
  
  
• representatives from the healthcare industry, leisure industry
  
  
• manufacturing companies with over 50 employees
  
  
• program advisory council members
  
  
• local and regional Chambers of Commerce, economic development councils
  
  
• regional advisory committees
  
  
• representatives of state and local government

Lincoln Land's philosophy of institutional leadership considers the needs of district stakeholders to be the cornerstone on which to build educational programs. With this in mind, the LLCC Board of Trustees conceived the plan to host Regional Forums with the intent to listen and learn from constituents. In 1999 the first regional forums for LLCC were held. In an effort to become more responsive to these constituents, the board secured a marketing consultant and a new Director of Public Information.

Each forum since 1999 has allotted time on the program for stakeholders to bring their concerns to the attention of the Board of Trustees and key college leaders. This aspect of the public meetings gave those stakeholders not typically heard a chance to reveal their "image" perceptions.

For example, during the Taylorville Regional Forum the mayor asked the assembled body, "What is the perception of Lincoln Land now?" A student in attendance responded that students say they are attending Lincoln Land. On the other hand, during one-on-one interviews with key constituents, it was reported that the positive attributes of the college are simply not being communicated: "There are just not enough people saying it in enough places and enough ways." These comments suggest that changes in stakeholder perceptions of the community college vary from group to group.

Faculty

One way colleges can communicate positive attributes is by consciously working to heighten stakeholder awareness of the institution's mission. At Lincoln Land Community College faculty play a key role in this communication because LLCC places student learning as its highest priority. It follows, therefore, that teaching is also of utmost importance, especially teaching by dedicated, caring faculty.

Through my interviews it became apparent that the community college faculty is a perceived strength among stakeholders. Former students identified teachers as a vital source of support. When comparing her community college teachers to her university teachers, one student emphatically stressed that the community college teachers had a more caring attitude: "I remember my professors from the community college and what I learned from them. I don't remember them in the university."

Furthermore, "Faculty are incredible ambassadors," professed an administrator in yet another interview. She explained, "College and university faculty members are important in the hierarchy of citizens of the United States and particularly in the Midwest, [and] I think that our faculty are one of our best kept secrets!"

Likewise, class size and teacher-student ratios make the community college environment more learner-centered, thus creating a more personal rapport between the students and teachers. These positive attributes need to be touted!

Conclusions

The observations of stakeholders gleaned from my interviews suggest that their perceptions of the community college are indeed affected by their points of reference. Their opinions have been formulated from ideas spread by word of mouth, public advertising, or adverse or positive news headlines. Each constituent has his or her own version of the story to tell. It is these stories that inspire flexibility in the college's mission statement from year to year, as LLCC seeks to address the perceived needs of the public.

Recommendations

Based on the observations derived from my research, two basic recommendations present themselves:

First, because of the dynamic nature of a public image, the college leadership should adopt a philosophy of public relations and marketing that places a higher priority on image. A system needs to be in place that, like a revolving door in colder climates, will analyze in-coming information and, in a timely manner, follow up with out-going responses that counteract negative factors and advance positive ones in the broader community.

Second, the duties of the Director of PIO should be divided between a marketing and a public relations specialist. When I served on the search committee to hire a new PIO Director at LLCC, applicants demonstrated either a strong proficiency in marketing or in public relations, but not both. In order for the college to do the best possible job with image, human resources should include two individuals with diverse, but complementary job skills in the areas of public relations and marketing.

These basic changes in the community college's approach to the issue of image will go far in creating a more positive public image among key stakeholders. ?

References

Ashby, R. (1983). The public image of a small college. New Directions for Higher Education, 11, 41-47. Boston: Pine Manor College.

Cohen, A. M., & Brawer, F. B. (1996). The American community college (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc.

Duvall, J. (1987). Recruitment of students at the community college. Policy issues at the community college. Princeton University, NJ: Mid-Career Fellowship Program.

Hardin, T. L. (1975). A history of the community junior college in Illinois: 1901-1972. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340-363.

Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1983). The structure of educational organizations. In J.V. Baldridge & T. Deal (Eds.), The Dynamics of Organizational Change in Education (pp. 60-87). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.

Scism, B. (1998). Community college mission – the perspective of Illinois leaders. Interview with Joseph J. Cipfl, president/chief executive officer, Illinois community college board. Update on Research and Leadership, 9(2), 2-3, 8-9.

Worthen, B. R., Sanders, J. R., & Fitzpatrick, J. L. (1997). Program evaluation: Alternative approaches and practical guidelines. New York: Longman.

Zook, G. (1947). Higher education for American democracy: A report to the president's commission on higher education. New York: Harper and Brothers.