We put a lot of effort into evaluating students when they come to us, not
nearly as much into evelauating them when they leave us. That is certainly
true here at Jefferson CC; I suspect it is true also at the primary and
secondary levels.
The administration at this institution talks about academic standards, but
the data they collect is all about 'retention' (i.e. how many passed your
course?) and 'customer satisfaction' (e.g., student evaluations, graduate
follow-up questionnaires). I know of no effort to measure what the
students know and can apply. We have some departmental finals, but they
are graded by the teacher of the course. The pressure is all in one
direction -- pass more students.
Now, I am not asking to have some suit looking over my shoulder when I
teach; but if we are going to complain about the students' condition when
they get here, we had better be ready to certify their condition when they
leave. It strikes me that we could gain more public support for
remediation if we could demonstrate that it _is_ a remedy. Developmental
courses should _develop_ students; even those who do not meet exit
competency should have made demonstrable and sustainable progress during
the semester.
****************************************************************************
* 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/ *
****************************************************************************