Re: Distance learning and developmental studies

Donald T. Belmont (don_belmont@AKAMAIL.COM)
Tue, 22 Oct 1996 19:54:47 -0400

Sam Evers wrote:
>
> I wanted to address the first issue. I am all for NOT spoon feeding
> students. Developmental studies has it's place, but at the university
> level, students should be expected to perform at the university level.
> I was told once (though I don't know it for certain) that Georgia Tech
> offers Calculus 1 as their first available math class. If you can't
> pass Calc 1, you can go home. I'm not saying all colleges should
> abandon anything below Calculus (after all, GT is a fairly prestigious
> school), but I think College Algebra is a good cutoff point. The
> problem you might find is that if the developmental classes are
> dropped, then the developmental students will find themselves doing
> poorly in Algebra. Then pressure will be brought on by administrators
> to "dumb down" the course to get a better percentage of students
> passing. If you do this, then you have just made your Algebra course
> a developmental math course. This must not be allowed.
>
> Just my opinion, I could be wrong.
>
> Sam Evers
> University of Alabama
>
> ps. At the U of A we do have a developmental math course (no credit),
> but it has long been my opinion that it should be removed.

Since I have been directly involved in this issue of so-called
developmental courses in the last four years there are several points
that I see as important.

When I made the decision to return to school at age 40 my math skills
were most generously decribed as rusty. Without the presence of some
entry point that was accessable as a starting point my academic
adventure would have been short and painful. As it was the availability
of what I recognized then and now as really not university level courses
made it possible for me to get my math legs. None of those courses were
countable towards my degree (nor should they be) but there is no doubt
that without them higher education would have been beyond my reach.

Also I believed then and continue to believe that an institution has
both a moral and legal commitment to provide for every student they are
willing to take a check from. To complain about students needing basic
level course work after accepting them and taking their money seems at
least intellectually dishonest if not worse. Of course if a prestigious
university doesn't want or need that type of student then the time to
deal with it is before they're admitted. I mean they wouldn't want
patent clerks trying to become mathematicians at such prestigious places
.

At our humble little corner of academe the best students in any given
discipline are usually the non-traditional students who have returned to
school after considerable time in the real world. At least 3/4 of these
over-achievers will start their learning careers by camping in the Math
Activity Center because they can't remember what to do with a radical.
Yet in fairly short order they find their pace and go on to graduate
with GPA's a few 10ths short of 4. Of course without some entry point
and a support system these folks probably wouldn't even enroll in the
first place. Since they comprise 30% of the student body I wonder how
many professors would be seeking employment because their classrooms
were empty.

As a math educator I agree completely that courses should never be
diluted to accomodate the unprepared. Yet I see nothing inconsistent in
recognizing that every student comes with their own set of needs. Some
of those students need a starting point that admittedly may be high
school level. But as I have seen and experienced that same behind the
curve student will often become the best as long as they have a place to
start.

Just the opinion of someone who has been there

Donald Belmont
Plymouth State College
don_belmont@akamail.com