I have been thinking for some time about using testing on a continual basis
(not just with placement exams) for diagnosis to prescribe remediation,
instead of our more traditional use of tests for success/failure
measurements. It seems that a student can go into a Basic Math class, for
example, and know how to add, subtract, multiply, and can even add negative
numbers, but fall into the large hole of misunderstanding when subtracting
a negative number. The student can pass the test on the subject because
their weak area is only a small part of the test. Therefore we pass them
on without ever addressing what they do not know. It would seem to make a
lot more sense to find out what they do not know, require remediation, and
do not let other easier concepts "balance out" the weak areas.
Does anyone have a good model for using testing for the purpose of
diagnosis and remediation?
Martha
>A comment and a few questions (which you may or may not consider rhetorical)
>about retention.
>
>Comment:
>
>There is a figure being thrown around at our school: We have a 13%
>completion rate in our developmental math program. (Ever hear the one about
>"figures don't lie, but liars can figure"?) This number is based on the
>number of students who enroll in our 00122 or 0024 course divided into the
>number of those same students who successfully pass 0024 within two years.
>So, if you take 0012 make an A an never take 0024 you are not a completer.
>(We have several AS programs, i.e. Nursing, that only requires 0012.) If
>you take 0012, pass it and transfer to another school and pass 0024, you are
>a non-completer. Etc, etc.
>
>We asked for the following data (and have finally been given it): For the
>past three semesters, what is our grade distribution for 0012 and 0024. We
>were told that 61% of the students who enroll in a developmental course at
>LSCC receive a grade of C or higher.
>
>Questions:
>
>Is it not obvious that 61% is a more meaningful figure than 13% ? (We may
>debate how meaningful the 61% figure really is, but in comparison to the 13%
>figure, isn't that a no-brainer?)
>
>How does 61% C or higher compare to other institutions? (Public, private,
>university, CC, open enrollment, competitive enrollment, etc.)
>
>We were also told today that our Board of Trustees thinks that 61% is too low.
>(We are an open enrollment state CC who uses the state-mandated placement
>scores from the CPT.)
>
>In closing:
>
>On a lighter note, do you think Tiger Woods made the right decision leaving
>Stanford before getting his degree? ;-)
>
>bret
>
>bret@iag.net (I haven't loaded a signature on this computer yet)
>Lake-Sumter CC
>Leesburg, FL
>
>****************************************************************************
>* To post to the list: email mathedcc@archives.math.utk.edu *
>* To unsubscribe, send mail to: majordomo@archives.math.utk.edu *
>* In the mail message, enter ONLY the words: unsubscribe mathedcc *
>* Words in the Subject: line are NOT processed! *
>* Archives at http://archives.math.utk.edu/hypermail/mathedcc/ *
>****************************************************************************
Martha Haehl
Maple Woods Community College
2601 N. E. Barry Rd.
Kansas City, Missouri 64156
(816)437-3147
****************************************************************************
* To post to the list: email mathedcc@archives.math.utk.edu *
* To unsubscribe, send mail to: majordomo@archives.math.utk.edu *
* In the mail message, enter ONLY the words: unsubscribe mathedcc *
* Words in the Subject: line are NOT processed! *
* Archives at http://archives.math.utk.edu/hypermail/mathedcc/ *
****************************************************************************