CATALYST V21N3 - The Catalyst and Community Services and Continuing Education: Lessons from 20 Years

Volume XXI, Number 3
Summer 1991

Thomas Lachowicz
Virginia Western Community College

Darrel A. Clowes
Virginia Tech

The development of the community services function in the community college as traced through an analysis of the articles in the Catalyst shows remarkably distinct roles for the community services function. There is, by no means, unanimous agreement on what the roles for community services and continuing education (CS/CE) should be. In fact, at times, there is conflict. Yet in spite of this conflict, and in spite of the fact that there is no clear-cut definition of the CS/CE function, several relevant points can be made.

One of the first points is that there are several continuing threads or roles that appear in the first issues of the Catalyst and continue until 1990. These threads include funding problems, adult learning needs, lifelong learning, lack of a clear definition of CS/CE, community needs, and economic development. In the first several issues, the overall role of the community services function in the community college is perceived to be broad. Soon afterwards, it becomes broader. This broadening continues until the issue of funding becomes a recognized problem. Immediately afterwards, there is a temporary restriction on broadening the role. After a brief respite, the CS/CE function broadens again and includes a number of new roles such as workforce training; rehabilitation; and serving needs of handicapped, women, and minorities. There is also a movement to take the CS/CE function international.

The Policy Statement of the National Council on Community Services and Continuing Education in 1988 helped to bring the role of CS/CE into perspective. The Statement authors advocated three principal objectives: (a) provide education to meet the information needs of the 21st century; (b) become a discrete, major community college function; and (c) receive a stable source of funds.

The Catalyst provides an historical overview of the development of the community services function in the community college. Points and counterpoints are presented-- although that might not have been the intention. Certainly there is a fair and impartial inclusion of articles that represent many excellent thoughts and points of view. The challenge is to put into action those that will best serve the community through the community services function.

In the Beginning: 1971-1976

From the first issue of the Catalyst there was a distinct recognition of the importance of the community services function in a community college. Early issues of the Catalyst clearly suggest a broad definition and mission for community services that encompassed the other community college functions: collegiate, career, and remedial education. It was argued that the main purpose of a community college was to serve the community and the community services function would address this purpose.

In the first issue (1971, p. ii), then editor Cummiskey outlined the broad scope of the community services function through the statement of the National Council on Community Colleges:

  • Encourage community involvement as a total college effort.
  • Foster a coordinated attack onpressing community problems by all elements of the community.
  • Stimulate discussion and interchange among community services practitioners.
  • Work closely withexisting organizations committed to community education and services.

In that same inaugural issue Traicoff (1971) mentioned that community services had existed for several decades on community and junior college campuses, but there was no unifying voice, no national director, and no direction. In 1967, the Adult Education Association had stirred interest in establishing a voice for community services. This led to the initiative at the 1969 annual convention of the American Association of Junior Colleges (AAJC) to establish a council as part of the AAJC to become the unified voice for community services. Carnahan (1971) suggested that the community services function would be broad based, encompassing all other functions when he suggested that "Community Services be established and recognized as the basic program of all community colleges" (p. 16). Although he attempted a definition, he asked more questions in trying to form the definition than he answered. This broad-based function was given more status by Donnelly (1971) when he commented that there should not be community services administrators, but rather community services deans.

Some of the continuing threads of community services appear as early as 1972. One of the most important threads was lifelong learning. Boyer mentioned lifelong learning in 1972 and considered it the next assignment for two-year colleges. In addition, the broad-based function of community services (CS) that started with the National Council continued. Welch (1972) said that while transfer courses enable one to go on for a BA or BS, and occupational courses enable one to find a job, CS courses enable one to live and maximize life. Cohen (1972) saw the entire college as a community service activity much as Carnahan did in 1971. Cohen also touched on several other issues such as a lack of a clear definition for CS and the problems with CS trying to be all things to all people. Cohen mentioned that it is not only difficult to define CS, but it is almost impossible to define a community since there are so many communities. What is significant is that in a nationwide survey of presidents of community colleges, the needs of the local community were 4th in importance, while the specific community service goals to meet those needs were near the bottom of a list of 26 items. Thus, some of the important concepts, issues, and the need for an acceptable definition for CS are introduced very early in the literature. These early concepts were lifelong learning--which meant opportunities for continuing education throughout one's lifetime; and the broad-based function--which meant being all things to all people; issues were what constitutes a community.

In addition to the broad-based function of community services, other roles were assigned. Myran and MacLeod (1972) mentioned that everything that falls between the cracks of the other functions is part of CS. One of these included theater courses (Wyman, 1972). Other concerns and interests of the community services function appear early in the literature such as adults and senior citizens as clients (Taylor, 1973; Trout, 1973), continuing education units (CEUs) for noncredit courses (Keim, 1973), and funding for CS not part of mainstream community college funding (Evans, 1973; Groth, 1973). During this early period in the literature, Harlacher (1973) summarized a number of other concerns as follows:

  • Expand the CS function to a community renewal college.
  • Help adultslearn rather than emphasize a degree. Personal growth is what counts; the degree is irrelevant.
  • Reemphasize the individual in the community rather than the community itself.
  • Since cultural and recreational attainments may already be offered by other community agencies, CS should emphasize education.

As early as 1973, there were several attempts to describe and define the community services function. These early attempts were important because they show that the CS function is both general and particular, that is, it is all encompassing and it is also individualized by region and by state. Welch (1973) emphasized the community services function as what the regional accrediting agencies say it is under the standards set by the Accrediting Commission for Junior Colleges (ACJC). According to Welch, the standards of the Northwest Association were the most complete; they included activities and characteristics such as branches, centers, extension classes, correspondence courses, home study, foreign study, travel, and the list goes on. The function was so broad and so powerful that is should lead the community college to a new renaissance (Communius, 1973). The unidentified author of Communius criticized the headlong rush into a broad-brush definition of community services and replaced community services with a new name-- human renewal.

Coming back to tangibles, Chase (1973) analyzed the community services function as particular to an individual community college. Since there were no agreed upon definitions of the CS function, it was only relevant at a particular institution. Donnelly (1973) followed up with this theme and analyzed 11 state CS plans and arranged a typology of CS characteristics, traits, and contributions. Colafella (1973) suggested that CS be a part of continuing education (later, community services and continuing education were linked together with the name change of the NCCS to NCCSCE in 1975).

Perhaps the dissension, disagreement, and ambiguity up through 1973 called for a respite since the articles in 1974 are "softer" and deal primarily with leadership, teamwork, and cooperation. The leadership role of the CS director (Gianopulos, 1974), through teamwork with his staff (Cavan, 1974) and cooperation with community schools and advisory councils (Geier, 1974; Weiss, 1974), paved the way for the community services function being all things to all people. Welch (1974) gave an interesting analogy of CS offering something to everyone--breadth instead of depth--quoting what one critic said of the writing of H. G. Wells "acres and acres of water three inches deep" (p. 34).

In 1975, the broad-based community services function gets even broader with CS "reaching out" into the community, for which there is no adequate or agreed-upon definition. Indicative of this is Turnage and Gilley's (1975) suggestion that synergism through CS encompassed the total college that reached out to the entire community in community development. Fey (1975) indicated that the CS function fully integrated the community college with the community. He also pointed out that with the evolution of the community college through analysis of the primary functions, that is, transfer, occupational, and community services, the community college was in the final stage of development, and its transition from a junior college to a community college was complete with the CS function. Although there is no clear distinction made on who has the primary responsibility to take the college to the community, there is no question that it should be taken. Romney (1975) advocated that the community college needs to develop programs for human services and the helping professions by combining academic services through the Division of Continuing Education and Community Services. Likewise, Doubleday and Murphy (1975) said this division needs to promote cultural programs, lectures, art exhibitions, films, great artists, and music programs.

Certainly the emphasis was broadened in 1975 as indicated by the increasingly proactive role of community services.

The Middle Years: 1977-1986

Beginning in 1977 and continuing through 1980, the emphasis of articles in the Catalyst moved from general to particular aspects of CS. Earlier the primary issues were the meaning of the CS function and what activities it encompassed; the period from 1977 to 1980 dealt with the broadening role of CS. It almost appears that the Catalyst authors assumed CS to be defined or understood (taken for granted). The articles emphasized CS serving communities in cultural, educational, and developmental aspects.

The lifelong learning role first mentioned in 1972 by Boyer is discussed again by DeSanctis (1977) who viewed it as instrumental for a better educated citizenry, and by Vanover and Tolle (1978) who surveyed adults and found that the majority did not even know what lifelong learning meant. Funding problems first mentioned in 1973 by Evans and Groth are discussed again by Atwell and Sullins (1977) who complained about the irony that with increased community needs, funding for community services was being decreased. DeLellis (1977) and Cavan (1977) both emphasized the role of the CS administrator in developing cooperation among all constituents in meeting increased community needs. Shoop (1978) encouraged the CS administrator to involve the community through community councils. Anderson (1978) went one step further and encouraged community colleges to find new ways to serve the community by utilizing community facilities in delivering programs. Cavan also emphasized that if a community demands something, render it. He mentioned the major goal of the NCCSCE is to become truly responsible to the community by reaching the neglected, the poor, the misfit, and the forgotten through the open-door policy.

Pausing to retrace the community services movement, Lombardi (1978) summarized the developments that led from a narrow role for CS to a much broader role. He cited the efforts of Myran, Harlacher, Gleazer, Yarrington, and others who advocated a much broader role for community services, but he cautioned that a multiplicity of definitions continues to be a problem. On the other hand, Riesman (1978) cautioned that a community college cannot be everything to everybody and called for a narrower role for community colleges and community services by finding market niches (as businesses do) and then serving them. What is especially interesting is that this is one of the first times in this literature that there is a call for a focused community college.

By 1979 there still was no agreed upon definition of community services but the role was expanding. Clowes and Nix (1979) stated that "community services is a concept in search of a definition" (p. 8). They favored a broad definition and discussed a "brokerage model" whereby professionals in the community delivered course offerings. Without a definition, CS is viewed as a "stepchild" compared with other community college functions (Glass, 1979; Kavanaugh, 1979). Johnson and Yelvington (1979) and Scigliano and Scigliano (1979) viewed the role of community services as reaching out to communities through the use of other agencies, programs, and schools to meet community needs. While Cohen (1979) presented the merit of lifelong learning again, Creamer (1979) advocated meeting the counseling needs of these lifelong learners through effective community services management strategies--a first call for this role. By 1980 community services had progressed from a broad to an even broader function, but all this was to change with the passage of Proposition 13 in California. Ireland (1980) indicated the great decline in CS participation as a result of California's funding changes. For example, participation in CS activities and courses declined by 6,448,683 students for a loss of 36%, with a decrease in funds of $23,881,009 for a loss of 62%. Karvelis (1980) explained that California's CS function was tied to a 5% property tax; when the tax was killed by Proposition 13, so was much of the CS function. Thus, there was a need for a new statement of purpose. With rising costs and decreasing enrollments, there was a movement away from the all things to all people philosophy, to being many things to many people--perhaps the first real narrowing of the CS function (Robertson, 1980). Ironically, the National Committee on Non-Traditional study reported the most explosive growth would be in CS/CE with older, nontraditional, and part-time students (Rosser, 1980). With increased growth and lower funding projected, there was added pressure for change and redefinition. Sullins (1980) called for collaboration rather than duplication of services; Claunch and Miller (1980) advocated accountability.

With every major upheaval such as Proposition 13, there appears to be a need for a clarification of CS role and place. Vaughan (1981) agreed with Myran and Harlacher in stating that although CS should play a central role in a community college, it does not. Vaughan placed the blame on the failure of educators to establish the central role of CS in the community college mission. Although there is a need for a redefinition, according to Vaughan, the definition is murkier today than it was in 1969. Raines (1981) also commented on the central and important role that CS should play, but failed to play. Although he conceded that the definition is broad enough to make it important, it is not important. Citing a study of randomly selected community colleges, Raines determined that the CS function, in rank order of importance, rated 16th of 20 items in actual importance, and 18th of 20 in preferred importance. Wygal (1981) related the status of community services to other community college functions and found it wanting. Status was next related to the step up to the presidency. Young and Rue (1981) found that only 4.8% of community service deans ascended directly to the presidency. Thus, the latest upheaval seemed to have little positive influence upon CS/CE. The same themes from years past, that is, lifelong learning, adult education, funding problems, cooperation, and collaboration continued to reappear, but with focus on retrenchment rather than upon a central role.

Retrenchment brings a new emphasis on planning, implementing, and assessing where a community college is and where it is going. During retrenchment, our authors argue, the community college can no longer be all things to all people. Ratcliff (1982) called for needs assessment to help educators cope with retrenchment and to preserve and enhance the vitality of the community college. Parnell (1982) said to leave belly dancing, macrame classes, and others of this genre to associations better equipped to handle them such as YMCAs. He emphasized that a community college should stick to the bread and butter items of solving community educational needs. This is important for CS, for as Ireland (1982) pointed out, CS must be defined in relation to the total community college mission in times of fiscal constraints. Thus, the funding decline affects community colleges in general, and CS in particular.

As concern over declining funds increased, the community services function began to take a more focused role. Gollattscheck (1983) pointed out that although CS cannot be all things to all people, it should be many things to many people. How is this going to happen? One of the best ways is to plan for it. And this is exactly what started to happen in the early 1980s. Strategic planning became the key issue in 1983 (Bevelacqua, 1983; Eisenstein, 1983; Kelley, 1983; Puyear & Vaughan, 1983). Strategic planning for noncredit continuing education extended to businesses and to staff development. Myran (1983) emphasized that the CS/CE manager must be a strategic manager first and an operating manager second. In doing so, the strategic manager realizes that CS cannot be all things to all people. With CS having lower status because of decreased funding, Parson (1983) suggested that the CS/CE manager be sure that the CS programs offered are relevant to community needs. Adams (1983) suggested that the CS/CE manager match revenues and expenses for off-campus programs. With the admonition to match revenues and expenses to meet relevant community needs, the CS programs become more focused.

In helping to focus, Atwell (1983) wove an interesting tale from Charles Dickens' A Tale of Two Cities stating that these are the best of times and the worst of times, and CS/CE practitioners must know where they are going before they can get there. Knowles (1983) and Clements (1983) pursued meeting adult needs--a continuing thread throughout CS's brief history. But new needs began to surface such as agricultural education (Arman, 1983), military education (Harbert & Koehler, 1983), and economic development (Owen, 1983). While agricultural and military educational needs did not last in the literature, economic development began to mushroom.

The year 1984 brought a blend of old themes (funding problems, adult needs, lifelong learning, and economic development) with new themes (workers' needs, women's needs, and credit for life's experiences). In the midst of this, Vaughan (1984) gave an historical account of community services and complained that there was still no agreed upon definition of community services. Ireland and Simpson (1984) addressed the funding problem by analyzing the increased emphasis on fee-based CS and the difficulty with measuring costs. Williams (1984) offered a model to use for designing learning activities for meeting adult needs. Williams and Atwell (1984) defended the role of CS/CE meeting adult needs and lifelong learning. Vogler (1984) spoke of mission expansion in meeting business and industry needs, another attempt to focus on economic development. McDowell (1984) hoped that CS could help in economic recovery by developing and training workers for business. Perhaps a better measure of mission expansion was the focus on new themes in the literature. Atwell (1984) advocated the CS/CE function meeting the changing needs of American workers. Ireland (1984) encouraged CS meeting women's needs by assisting in their upward mobility. And brand new for community colleges and community services was awarding credit for life's experiences (Savitz, 1984).

While 1985 was a lackluster year in terms of new community services developments, there were several key themes that begin to emerge and set a tone for renewal in CS. Early in the literature, CS was hailed as being all things to all people. Later it was many things to many people. Gollattscheck (1985) now said that it should be certain things to certain people. He added that CS/CE must be part of the community college mission--one of the first times that mission enters the literature. But the question remains: how is this to happen? Some past practices did change. For example, while CS had offered the latest courses to meet the latest crazes, funding decreases forced a change. Rushing (1985) pointed out that of 900 noncredit courses in CS in the past, 85% are still on the program even though there may not be a demand for them. He urged that rather than jump on and off the bandwagon, CS must take a close look at its offerings. In many states, CS was forced to be self-supporting due to budget cuts. Harris (1985) and Cotoia (1985) praised the states of Massachusetts and Texas for developing self-supporting CS programs. With CS part of the mainstream, CS directors must manage scarce resources very carefully through planning, marketing, and management techniques similar to, but not quite the same as, private industry (Bazik, 1985; Hoffman, 1985; Shulman, 1985; Thomas, 1985).

In pursuit of excellence through planning, the increased role of part-time faculty due to budget constraints is questioned. Thomas (1985) evaluated part-time faculty and found that they had neither positive nor negative influence on excellence. Tucker (1985) found that part-time faculty are interested in greater participation. Other familiar themes occurring at the same time were taking CS/CE to the community (Smith, 1985) and stronger CS links within community services, the college, and the community (Mays & Vogler, 1985; Pietak & Kinsey, 1985). But just as 1985 came in like a lamb, it appeared to go out like a lion with Feuers (1985) calling for CS/CE to be absorbed into the very fibre of the community college. Feuers outlined three scenarios for CS/CE: (a) stay the same, (b) disappear, or (c) be absorbed by the community college. While this sounds exciting, there may be a distinct role for CS/CE to play within the community college without being absorbed by it.

Beginning with 1986, one of the "firsts" that occurs in the literature is for CS/CE to collaborate with higher education in providing education for business and industry (Foster, 1986). Past themes of CS/CE providing training, education, and services for business, industry, and economic development continued (Borquist, 1986; Israel & Custer, 1986; Tatro,1986). Reflecting previous concerns over declining enrollments and funding, Taylor (1986) advocated that CS/CE actively market its courses to students. One of the unique ways to do this is to motivate staff through financial rewards (Calhoun & Lestina, 1986), and by developing volunteers (Pillsworth, 1986). Marketing became a strong theme with new market "niches" proclaimed: meeting the needs of the unemployed and handicapped (Crossland, 1986; Cunningham, 1986), and training nannies (Dailey, 1986). In the midst of both old and new themes, the definition of CS/CE was still unsettled, and there was a feeling that perhaps there was none (Moss, 1986). Moss urged that CS become the aim of the community college rather than an arm. While it cannot be all things to all people, it should be many things to many people (Haynes & Polk, 1986).

Recent Times: 1987-1990

The year 1987 appeared to ring in a combination of old and new themes. The irony was that funding was still a problem, the CS/CE function was still undefined, the mission was still in question; yet there was a movement towards broadening the role of CS/CE. Old themes continued: business and economic development (Charner & Gold, 1987; Drea & Armistead, 1987; Heath, 1987; Knox & Lorenzo, 1987; Tully, 1987); adult education and lifelong learning (Cross, 1987); staff development and evaluation (Andrews, 1987; Hoerner, 1987); and strategic planning and marketing (Broomall, 1987). Even the relative unimportance of CS/CE as a pathway to the presidency continued; Vaughan (1987) reported only 5% of presidents coming from a CS background, which compared with an earlier 4.8% reported by Young & Rue (1981). Tucker (1987) called for an increased organizational effort to focus on new identity and renewed mission.

To aid in the identity and mission, Ireland and Brown (1987) wanted a new definition for CS/CE with increased networking between the community college and CS/CE. They joined Gollattscheck (1987) in calling for a broader role for CS. The broader role and changing mission were seen to include agricultural workers (Gordon, 1987), and integrated credit and noncredit courses for funding purposes (Maradian, 1987). While some of these could be described as new themes, others including international education (Grote, 1987), entrepreneurial activities (Bender, 1987), help for recovering addicts (Weitzman & Glynn, 1987), and attention to ethics by judging quality and results through outcomes (Mezack, 1987) were definitely new themes. Thus, in the midst of declining funds, lack of definition, and calls for a renewed mission, there was an interest in new programs and an emerging concern for assessment of existing programs.

The articles in 1988 expanded upon the themes begun in 1987. For example, funding for credit and noncredit courses became an issue for the American Council on Education, which established new guidelines (1988). International education was given a strong push by Tsunoda (1988), who recommended taking CS international. She emphasized that the CS/CE function was the "glue" that binds the community college system together. The expanded role was given further impetus by Harlacher and Ireland's 1987 survey, which showed that, relative to 1984, 69% of community college presidents and practitioners felt that the CS/CE function had increased in status (1988). With increasing status, Gollattscheck (1988) and Maradian (1988) attempted to further define and broaden the role. Gollattscheck and Maradian felt that CS should be in the forefront of the community college's effort to build communities. Gollattscheck defined a community not only as a region to be served, but also as a climate to be created. As the roles were expanded, old themes were reemphasized and new themes were identified.

Although Harlacher and Ireland discussed increased status, they also were concerned about decreased funding. Since status increased because of workforce training and economic development, they advocated doing more of these. At the same time, although funding was a threat, Gray (1988) sought increased funds through auxiliary services, and Spaid and Parsons (1988) strongly advocated lobbying external sources. Increased funds would serve new activities such as children's theater and writer's conferences (Harris, 1988), teachers' education (Kerekgyarto, 1988), and education in correctional facilities (Levin & Turnage, 1988). Old activities would continue to be served as before. Keim (1988) and Ashworth (1988) recommended faculty improvement; Harlacher, Cross, Dejardin, and Puryear (1988) continued to clamor for lifelong learning and adult education. It seemed that throughout 1987 and 1988, there was a revival of interest in a broadened role of CS/CE, an awareness of the need for finding new sources of funds, and the necessity for collaboration.

The broadened role for CS/CE, the awareness of the funding problem, and the necessity for collaboration came to a head with the Policy Statement of the National Council on Community Services and Continuing Education in July, 1988. Before this statement, the existing roles of adult education, lifelong learning, and economic development were still prevalent in the Catalyst . Of the three, economic development took center stage and became the most important. Lemke and Wismer (1989), Maiuri (1989), and Peterson (1989) focused on the impact that CS/CE can make in economic development by training workers, establishing partnerships, and meeting other business and industry needs. While Cavan (1989) urged broadening the role for CS to be all things for all people once again, Tsunoda (1989) extended this even further with an emphasis on international education. Cavan called for community colleges " be community services and continuing education institutions" (p. 11). Tsunoda picked up on Gollattscheck's emphasis on the community as a climate and quoted the Epilogue to the Futures Commission report. "In the end, community must be defined not only as a region to be served, but also as a climate to be created in the classroom, on the campus, and around the world" (p. 8).

However, not all saw CS/CE in such an all encompassing role. Myran (1989) came back to the theme that the CS/CE cannot be all things to all people and issued a call for a back to basics approach through centricity, instructional effectiveness, and institutional outcomes. Mora and Giovannini (1989) tried to address mission ambiguity by emphasizing that the CS/CE function should be particularized to the district and not generalized to the entire community college system. Amidst this diversity, the Policy Statement served as an anchor to help clarify the CS/CE mission.

A Policy Statement of the National Council on Community Services and Continuing Education: The Continuing Mission and Future Role of Community Services and Continuing Education in Community, Technical, and Junior Colleges , authored by Jackie Ireland, Martha Smydra, and Norma S. Tucker, July 1988, appeared in the 1989 Catalyst , XIX(3) as an insert. After a brief history of CS/CE, the authors presented their statement of objectives as follows:

The National Council on Community Services and Continuing Education advocates a new scenario that asserts that community services and continuing education (a) be defined in terms of the approach to education necessary to enter the information age of the 21st century, (b) be a major distinct institutional function, and (c) be provided a stable funding base (p. 4).

What is especially noteworthy is that the authors made a number of recommendations to help accomplish the objectives outlined above. There was a call for leadership; in fact, leadership assumed a distinct and important role. Nakamura (1989) and Andrews (1989) emphasized the importance of practical leadership. In 1989 and 1990, the emphasis on leadership increased compared to some of the old roles, although economic development, adult education, and lifelong learning continued to appear.

With 1990, the roles of economic development and leadership are loud and clear, although, at times, there does not appear to be a clear distinction between the community college and community services. Katsinas and Lacey (1990) emphasized the role that the community college plays in economic development in the community. Fortunately, students are not forgotten. Tyree (1990) emphasized it is "through our students we are building the healthiest possible relationship with our communities" (p. 5). Maxwell (1990) also focused on the role of the community college in the community and felt that the community college, more than any other institution, had the greatest potential for economic development. The role of economic development continued throughout 1990, along with past roles such as leadership, adult education, and lifelong learning.

Spaid and Parsons (1990) called for a broad and diversified leadership role for CS/CE. To accomplish this, training and education for CS/CE managers were of prime importance. Desmarais and White (1990) focused on a case study of how a strong leader was able to take the CS/CE division from red to black in six years. Although Johnson (1990) did not focus exclusively on CS/CE in his article on "Reinventing the Community College," the emphasis was on renewal.

So 20 years after it began the Catalyst still is exploring the meaning and practice of community services and continuing education. The role of CS/CE is now well established in the community college, the formal definition of CS/CE is established if not finished, and the actual practice of CS/CE continues to shift and emerge over time.

The Council that supports the Catalyst continues and flourishes as an integral part of the community college movement. The next 20 years have begun with a stable base but with the probability of continued change and refinement.

Copyright 1992 by the National Council on Community Services & Continuing Education. Permission is given to copy any article provided credit is given and the copies are not intended for sale

by Sarah Ryan