Menu
Jump to content

What's with the ads?

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

G5052

Oh, community college teaching...

Recommended Posts

This isn't a unique problem for community colleges nor is it only present now.

 

The difference between highly challenging and 'get the grade you earned' schools and lower challenging and 'everyone passes' schools have been around for a long time. I went to a math science magnet school for high school. It was very much a highly challenging and there were no gift grades. I entered engineering school with that in mind. I knew how to study. I knew how to ask for help. And most important I knew that I needed to do those things. My roommate came from a rural school where she took the hardest classes possible but they weren't hard and everyone got good grades because that was the way things were. She had a really hard time.

 

All this to say, it isn't a problem only at community college. It is everywhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A little spin off here … are instructors even allowed to fail 1/3 - 1/2 half the class without it coming back as a ding against the teacher?  I'm just curious, because I hear a lot of "we aren't allowed to fail them."   

 

Where I work you can fail them and no it will not count against you. There are grading rubrics and systems in place to ensure that the curriculum is appropriate. The students would have to complain of the instructor diverging from the course outline for there to be action. Simply having standards the students couldn't manage would not be the issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really?  When I went to college (in the dark ages), I knew it was going to be different from high school.  College isn't called grade 13, and we got to pick majors and classes, and there were going to be all kinds of other differences.  I wasn't entirely sure what all those differences would be, but I was not surprised at all that it was different.

 

Back when I went to school (also many moons ago) kids failed in school if they didn't pass.  Now it's difficult to fail students, so they get used to doing next to nothing and still passing.  

 

When I went to school we had AP classes, but those were considered high school classes that offered college credit at many schools if one did well on a national test at the end of the course.  Now we (the school I work at) have DE classes that are taught in the high school in the same manner as high school classes.  Credit is given by the high school teacher.  There is no standard test.  There are no different rules or ways of doing things.

 

It's not really a great surprise that many kids expect college to be the same as the college classes they are already exposed to and put the same effort out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding not being able to fail many students, I wonder what effect the performance-based funding models being adopted by so many states will have on things. Dd just did a paper on this and one of the sources she used had this, "The centerpiece of Obama's 2020 Goals include increasing the number of college graduates with all Americans completing at least one year of college." I was rather shocked when she shared that. I guess I have been living under a rock or something. Funding tied to enrollment is problematic, but lowered standards are an unsurprising defect of the performance-based models that put such an emphasis on students graduated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it's any comfort, the older students seem to have better general skills, just by default.  Generally, they are more serious students, although not always.

I am a bit disillusioned by this thread.  I always hoped/dreamed that teaching and dealing with adult students would be different, better.  Sounds like they have the same juvenile attitude. <sigh>

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Obama proposed free college for all, although he was deceptive about the restrictions (no one earning over $200K is eligible, and it was contingent on having to pass an exam to take advantage of the offer).  But the problem with "merit" and payment of tuition by exam at uncompetitive colleges/low competitive colleges is that it leads to grade inflation, teaching to a test, and a dumbing down of entrance exams so that those colleges can boost their numbers, increase enrollment and play the game.  We've seen that with NCLB.  When the problem of grade inflation is solved, then I might consider free college to be a good thing.

But think about it this way: if you want a normal curve, you are going to have just 70% passing, right? That's how many people would pass in a normal distribution.

 

 

Why, who said anything about free college for all? Nobody does that. What some countries have is free competitive admission, in which the sole determining factor in admittance is your demonstrated ability through exams.

 

My heavens, free college for all would be insane.

 

College admittance based on merit rather than parental wealth, which can be inherited or even when entirely earned, totally unrelated to the students' academic capacity, is another thing entirely. I wish we had that. I know people who were National Merit Semi-Finalists who dropped out of uni due to inability to pay (I went to CC myself, one just never got back in--her parents were poorer than mine).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes... definitely. I agree completely. I guess I am just trying to gauge how much of a difference there would be.... in the SUNY flagship for engineering for 4 years, vs 2 years at the CC and transferring over. IF I thought that it would be SOOOO much better - that the kids would care A LOT more.... etc., etc.... it would be an easier decision. But I wonder. Maybe that's just what college is like now in general? (So hard to make generalizations, I know. And every kid is different. And every college is different.)

Some of the NY state CC programs are very good.  For example, Hudson Valley sends Engineering students to RPI and Cornell. I would look for those relationships with the private schools.  Don't guess ask questions.  One big plus is your student would be in smaller classes at the CC.  

 

All of college: You get out what you put into it.  Don't judge the school on the borderline students.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of the NY state CC programs are very good.  For example, Hudson Valley sends Engineering students to RPI and Cornell. I would look for those relationships with the private schools.  Don't guess ask questions.  One big plus is your student would be in smaller classes at the CC.  

 

All of college: You get out what you put into it.  Don't judge the school on the borderline students.

 

This!  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of the NY state CC programs are very good.  For example, Hudson Valley sends Engineering students to RPI and Cornell. I would look for those relationships with the private schools.  Don't guess ask questions.  One big plus is your student would be in smaller classes at the CC.  

 

All of college: You get out what you put into it.  Don't judge the school on the borderline students.

 

This is why my oldest will go to college this fall at the CC in the honors program.  Another way to bypass the downward pull is an honors program BTW.  Not every community college has one, but they can be a great way to meet other serious students and get to know some of the best professors.

 

He wants to start locally, and as I noted earlier in this thread, former students of mine have done very, very well.  With his current set of goals, there is no downside to that approach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had this very discussion a few months ago with another professor when I told him that I didn't think the local CC was rigorous enough for DD.  He responded with "It's up to the student to get the most out of college and work to their maximum level".  I told him that this was the college abdicating their responsibility to set a high standard for the class, and that it is up to the instructor (and by extension, the administration) to set standards for a college level course.  This is especially true when a student comes from a poor or average high school and doesn't really know what "maximum college effort" or "college level work" looks like.  Foisting standard-setting off on the student means the college is not doing their job for the community and for the money they are being given by the state to run an institution of higher education, IMO.  This does not excuse the student from working to their maximum effort level.  It means the college should not be allowing each student to determine what "college level" means individually. 

It's difficult for students (anyone really) to know anything different than what they have experienced.  They graduate from "average" high schools (like mine) and assume school will continue the same way in their next classes - cc or otherwise.

 

As long as the powers that be care more about success via passing vs success via knowledge learned, not much is going to change.  Both in high school and in college there needs to be the opportunity to fail in order to inspire some (many?) to actually work.  Some students have always been self motivated and would be even if grades weren't an issue, but that's not the majority IME.

 

It used to be mainly top academic students who headed off to college from average high schools.   These were often self-motivated already.  Now, like everywhere, college is being encouraged to the masses - esp community college.  Some sort of degree is needed for many, many jobs.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have all sorts of "success" programs and methods built into our classes.  In fact, we are required to include them and the links in our syllabus.  You name it - a required student success class, free tutoring, minimum mandatory office hours, disability services, etc...  The problem is that those students who really need it don't show up or participate, for a variety of reasons.  I do not hand out study guides for my classes because I really feel that pulling the main idea out of a paragraph or the main idea out of a lecture is an important part of the learning process and facilitates learning for the student.  Now if a student has trouble doing that, I will meet with them on a one-on-one basis and teach that skill, but that is really something every college student needs to do.

 

A sad and funny tale regarding motivation:  When discussing student success rates, the last provost we had told us in a meeting that *all* of our students were highly motivated, so that was not a factor that needed to be discussed or worked on.  It's tough to solve a problem when administrators have their heads that far in the sand and you can't even honestly discuss the issue.

I am conflicted on this topic.  Yes, I think students should receive the grades that they earned in a course.  Ones that are unwilling or unable to complete the necessary work should just not be given an undeserved passing grade.  But.....I do think that colleges should have stronger paths for success built into freshman core courses.  For example, not all students automatically make a smooth transition to the rigors of college coursework.  I like it when voluntary help labs or sessions (extra and separate from regular class times)  are built right into the syllabus that help the kids learn how to get over the hump......here's how you study for this particular test, let's review the complicated concepts together, any questions or areas that student needs clarifying, etc......I don't mean give the kids the questions and answers but rather facilitate success for the freshman that might be clueless about getting the proper studying system set up. Surely the freshman has met the qualifications to attend that college and the prerequisites for the course, but if so many students are failing or rec'ing low grades then perhaps it's not a function of low motiviation or low ability so  assistance in learning how to learn at the college level might have to be addressed.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am conflicted on this topic.  Yes, I think students should receive the grades that they earned in a course.  Ones that are unwilling or unable to complete the necessary work should just not be given an undeserved passing grade.  But.....I do think that colleges should have stronger paths for success built into freshman core courses.  For example, not all students automatically make a smooth transition to the rigors of college coursework.  I like it when voluntary help labs or sessions (extra and separate from regular class times)  are built right into the syllabus that help the kids learn how to get over the hump......here's how you study for this particular test, let's review the complicated concepts together, any questions or areas that student needs clarifying, etc......I don't mean give the kids the questions and answers but rather facilitate success for the freshman that might be clueless about getting the proper studying system set up. Surely the freshman has met the qualifications to attend that college and the prerequisites for the course, but if so many students are failing or rec'ing low grades then perhaps it's not a function of low motiviation or low ability so  assistance in learning how to learn at the college level might have to be addressed.

 

Myra, I'm a little curious about "built into the syllabus"? Information about accessing these is in our syllabus, but we can't really require them to do it or assign points for it if it's outside of class times, as it's considered unfair for students who have conflicts with those times. As regentrude said, the students who are genuinely failing do not take advantage of this help. Most of the students who take advantage of this are the A/B students.

 

It's rarely low ability, but it's more that they don't seem to really believe, deep down inside, that we really will fail them if they do not meet the course requirements, and that there is not going to be magical extra credit at the end of the semester to pull their grades up. Some of them get it after the first semester, but some of them really can't get it together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's rarely low ability, but it's more that they don't seem to really believe, deep down inside, that we really will fail them if they do not meet the course requirements, and that there is not going to be magical extra credit at the end of the semester to pull their grades up. Some of them get it after the first semester, but some of them really can't get it together.

 

I agree.  I updated my grades over the weekend, and now 1/3 of the class is failing.  By Wednesday I have to file an electronic report to that effect, and they'll get an email that they're failing.  And I guarantee that some of them will tell me they can pull it out in the last month of the semester.  Because I assign a lot of homework, it just isn't possible at this point.

 

Oh well.  My oldest is going to register shortly because it is required for one of the scholarships we're hoping for, so we were looking at ratemyprofessors.com.  Besides, if we're going to do CC, I want him to get the best professors.  So I looked myself up too.  One said that my class is easy if you follow the syllabus.  LOL!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Obama proposed free college for all, although he was deceptive about the restrictions (no one earning over $200K is eligible, and it was contingent on having to pass an exam to take advantage of the offer).  But the problem with "merit" and payment of tuition by exam at uncompetitive colleges/low competitive colleges is that it leads to grade inflation, teaching to a test, and a dumbing down of entrance exams so that those colleges can boost their numbers, increase enrollment and play the game.  We've seen that with NCLB.  When the problem of grade inflation is solved, then I might consider free college to be a good thing.

 

Obama did not propose that. He said that nobody should be denied access because they couldn't pay.

 

The actual proposal reflects that. People can be denied access because they can't do the work.

 

The entrance exams to community colleges already place most students in remedial math even though colleges get less funding for remediation and most students who start in remediation drop out because it's so flipping depressing.

 

Anyway, in our college it's like that.

 

I agree with your points on student success. Seriously. It is not that hard. You have to really not try to get a poor grade in community college. If you follow the instructions it's just not that hard. And there are TONS of programs, but students literally expect someone to come up and offer them to get paid to get tutored. It's really mind-blowing, the entitlement mentality of some people. "I'm paying for this!"

 

Which is why I support exam-based, and not fee-based, education.

 

Our college has a 2.5 average, but only after you take out those who drop the course on time--if you include those as "fails" then our average is 1.7, and the average for people in their first quarter is... bad. Those grades are not inflated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am having trouble linking here on my iPad, but Obama did indeed propose "free college for all". If you go to PBS.org, there is an article with quotation from Obama's SOTU address where he wants to "lower the cost of community college to zero"; that is an exact quote from the address. That quote included no qualifiers, but did say tuition would be zero as long as a 2.5 GPA was maintained. That means free for all if one maintains a 2.5 GPA and reads that in a straightforward manner. Although the qualifiers came out in the news the next day, they were not mentioned in the SOTU speech. NPR has a complete transcript of the SOTU, with the same verbiage and no qualifiers. So, a deceptive delivery, as well.

 

In theory, people can be denied access if they cannot do the work. I acknowledged that. However, in practice that looks very different from when college level work is dumbed down, and dumbed down exams means that virtually anyone with a pulse can pass them. But dumbed down exams and curricula doesn't demonstrate the ability to do college level work, especially if continued funding is dependent on the GPA, which is easily manipulated by administrators who are only concerned with hoovering up federal dollars and increasing their enrollment and graduation relates at the expense of actual rigorous learning. I've been around the college admin block far too often to even entertain the idea that it would play out in another way.

 

Two other relevant points and why "free" college for all is a wrong headed idea: Education is not a power reserved for the federal government, and so the federal government should have no role in education, as per the constitution. If that needs to be changed, then the constitution needs to be first changed to reflect that. In addition, I object to paying for remedial work at the college level. That expense should be on the public schools, which are charged with teaching pre-college knowledge. If a student did not have the common sense or ability to take advantage of their taxpayer-funded education on high school, why should taxpayers foot the bill twice for someone who couldn't get it together the first time? If someone needs remedial ed, that should be their private expense.

 

Obama did not propose that. He said that nobody should be denied access because they couldn't pay.

 

The actual proposal reflects that. People can be denied access because they can't do the work.

 

The entrance exams to community colleges already place most students in remedial math even though colleges get less funding for remediation and most students who start in remediation drop out because it's so flipping depressing.

 

Anyway, in our college it's like that.

 

I agree with your points on student success. Seriously. It is not that hard. You have to really not try to get a poor grade in community college. If you follow the instructions it's just not that hard. And there are TONS of programs, but students literally expect someone to come up and offer them to get paid to get tutored. It's really mind-blowing, the entitlement mentality of some people. "I'm paying for this!"

 

Which is why I support exam-based, and not fee-based, education.

 

Our college has a 2.5 average, but only after you take out those who drop the course on time--if you include those as "fails" then our average is 1.7, and the average for people in their first quarter is... bad. Those grades are not inflated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The average cost of tuition for community colleges is about 3K.  Families with income over 200K per year would have to shell out the full amount.  Really not seeing the problem ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm glad you've got a good dean there. The last time I taught, I had two males who skipped 50% of the classes, did less than half the assignments, and got D's on their mid-terms, and E's on their finals. So, I flunked them. They had a COW at the dean. I mean they practically birthed calves on the office floor, and the profanity slung my way was of drunken sailor quality. Thankfully, the dean threw them out of his office and never relented, then apologized to me for having to hear that and made sure I was okay. He also made sure that security had escorted the two bums off the campus before he would let me go to my car with escort.

 

A good dean is a prize. Bad deans....well, I better not start on that topic.

That is Atrocious! I Cannot imagine such horrid behavior in college!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

. In addition, I object to paying for remedial work at the college level. That expense should be on the public schools, which are charged with teaching pre-college knowledge. If a student did not have the common sense or ability to take advantage of their taxpayer-funded education on high school, why should taxpayers foot the bill twice for someone who couldn't get it together the first time? If someone needs remedial ed, that should be their private expense.

 

 

But what about when the high school didn't do their job?  How is that the student's fault?  People can't help where they live in many cases. If we really believed in the *consistent* quality of the public school system, we wouldn't be homeschooling.

 

And seriously, because he didn't list all the qualifiers in his speech, but they were released *the next day* that wasn't enough?  How many politicians EVER tell the whole story in a speech?

 

Regarding the other issues about student motivation, that is very real I think.  I have repeated to DD that no one in college cares how well she does.  That will be up to her.  If she is having problems, she needs to seek out the resources (because they are out there) and do what she needs to improve.  From what I have seen in our area, there are *plenty* of resources to help students succeed.   If you don't have the motivation to ask your teacher, what am I doing wrong and how can I fix it, then you don't need to be in college.  Maybe that's rough, but that's the way it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In addition, I object to paying for remedial work at the college level. That expense should be on the public schools, which are charged with teaching pre-college knowledge. If a student did not have the common sense or ability to take advantage of their taxpayer-funded education on high school, why should taxpayers foot the bill twice for someone who couldn't get it together the first time? If someone needs remedial ed, that should be their private expense.

 

I can't see what possible benefit it is, for society or anyone else, to require someone who likely already has a minimum-wage job or thereabouts to pay for their own remediation before they can pursue any education. All it's going to do is to lock them out completely. 

 

There are many reasons why someone might not have learned in high school -- some of the stories I've heard from students who went to high school near me are simply atrocious, with regards to teachers not teaching and merely assigning busywork. Expecting a 14 year old to have the gumption to go out and teach themselves what the teacher should be teaching them is pretty ridiculous. Furthermore, even if it was that they were taught and just didn't bother to learn, I find the idea of telling a 35 year old that they have to privately fund their own remediation before they go back to college because of what they didn't do twenty years ago frankly appalling. Many of my best students in the developmental classes are in their 30s or 40s and really buckle down hard and try. 

 

Now, if someone signs up for remedial courses and then messes around and doesn't learn, fine, lock them out. I think we're far too generous with probation or one-term suspensions in many cases when people just aren't bothering. But for someone who's hard-working and conscientious while they're there, there should be chances of redemption. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreeing with Kiana.  I find it appalling that someone wants an adult struggling with a minimum wage job to pay full freight for their remedial classes, but wants the child of parents earning 200K plus to attend for free. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Leaving aside the fact that (constitutionally) the federal government has no business meddling in education, I am uninclined to support throwing good money after bad.  If the high schools don't do their job, then fix the high schools; don't make community college 13th grade and devalue that degree as well.  But government at all levels has shown it is incapable of fixing education in this country, and I am skeptical that offering "free" (not really, someone pays) college will remedy a poor education.  If the school isn't the problem and the student didn't do their job while in high school, I am also skeptical that more money will produce better results down the road.  I understand some people mature and grow after high school, but the burden of demonstrating that growth needs to be on the student before more any more money is freely handed out.

 

I also don't expect every qualifier to be in a SOTU speech.  But...this didn't require a qualifier at all; it just required the elimination of the phrase "...for all".  How about "...for mid and low income students".

But what about when the high school didn't do their job?  How is that the student's fault?  People can't help where they live in many cases. If we really believed in the *consistent* quality of the public school system, we wouldn't be homeschooling.

 

And seriously, because he didn't list all the qualifiers in his speech, but they were released *the next day* that wasn't enough?  How many politicians EVER tell the whole story in a speech?

 

Regarding the other issues about student motivation, that is very real I think.  I have repeated to DD that no one in college cares how well she does.  That will be up to her.  If she is having problems, she needs to seek out the resources (because they are out there) and do what she needs to improve.  From what I have seen in our area, there are *plenty* of resources to help students succeed.   If you don't have the motivation to ask your teacher, what am I doing wrong and how can I fix it, then you don't need to be in college.  Maybe that's rough, but that's the way it is.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then you will have to be appalled at someone else, because I never said I expected someone with a $200K income to attend college for free.

Agreeing with Kiana.  I find it appalling that someone wants an adult struggling with a minimum wage job to pay full freight for their remedial classes, but wants the child of parents earning 200K plus to attend for free. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The mindset of "fix the high schools first" pretty much throws away everyone who's already left high school -- because high school is not a lifetime opportunity.

 

I'm really opposed to anything that says "you had your chance -- we're giving the money to people who had better schools/a family who pushed them more/whatever else the issues are" (because in my experience, one of the big issues people have is being raised in low-income homes where the only parent around is not really parenting).

 

I'm fine with making a waiting period for continued attempts if people aren't trying on the first attempt, and quite honestly we'd save a lot more money by tightening up on federal student aid for people on probation/suspension (i.e. requiring a couple of years off for the first suspension and increasing from there) than we would by eliminating developmental ed, we wouldn't be targeting the people who can least afford their own education, and we'd be targeting people who've already shown that they aren't prepared to work at college.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreeing with Kiana. I find it appalling that someone wants an adult struggling with a minimum wage job to pay full freight for their remedial classes, but wants the child of parents earning 200K plus to attend for free.

What people are saying is that they want value for their tax money. Instead of giving a truant or someone who took the easy way out more years at taxpayer expense, they would rather he works and come to see that more formal education is helpful to his life plans. Then, they want him to have skin in the game so he will be motivated to take it seriously from the start of the semester.

 

People also want to see academic effort and achievement rewarded. They dont care what the family income is...they want merit scholarships to reward those who did put in the work. It is an incentive for scholars, just as the big leagues are an incentive for athletes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The mindset of "fix the high schools first" pretty much throws away everyone who's already left high school .

Maybe in your area. In mine the GED classes are free, as are English lessons.

And students under 21 can attend high school for free if they havent earned a diploma.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe in your area. In mine the GED classes are free, as are English lessons.

And students under 21 can attend high school for free if they havent earned a diploma.

 

I think you are misunderstanding what I am saying. If they have left high school with a diploma but not having learned the required math and english, GED classes are not really suitable.

 

The problem is not really the dropouts -- it is the students who have been given diplomas without the requisite learning.

 

Edit: Also, if they graduated many years ago and forgot their math, or if they graduated under different requirements -- some of my students graduated when the only HS math requirement was algebra 1 -- GED classes are again not suitable (because they have a diploma) and yet they are not at all prepared for college math.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that is unique to your state.In my state a Regents Advanced Diploma is enough to begin and succeed in CC. The problem is that those who took the Regents Diploma and those that barely scored a pass in English on tne Adv. D. arent ready. In many cases, they were placed in the class and declined to do the work. If my kid had a dollar for every student in his AP English class who read sparknotes or schmoop instead of the lit, he would have enough to pay for his English at State U....which he doesnt want to test out of because he would like to have the discussions with people who actually read and thought about the material.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People who graduated long ago had the option to continue, in many cases. I dont feel sorry for someone who made middle class wages, didnt take advantage of his employer's heads up on the need for more math skills or education reimbursement policy and is now attempting to pass the hat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that is unique to your state.In my state a Regents Advanced Diploma is enough to begin and succeed in CC. The problem is that those who took the Regents Diploma and those that barely scored a pass in English on tne Adv. D. arent ready. In many cases, they were placed in the class and declined to do the work. If my kid had a dollar for every student in his AP English class who read sparknotes or scmoop instead of the lit, he would have enough to pay for his English at State U....which he doesnt want to test out of because he would like to have the discussions with people who actually read and thought about the material.

 

... this is exactly my point ... so I am not sure what is "unique to my state" since I can guarantee you that there are people with NY state diplomas who are not ready for college-level work, as I have friends who teach developmental classes there.

 

GED classes are still not suitable for those students who already have a Regents Diploma but did not do the Advanced Diploma.

 

Furthermore, people do move from state to state.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... this is exactly my point ... so I am not sure what is "unique to my state" since I can guarantee you that there are people with NY state diplomas who are not ready for college-level work, as I have friends who teach developmental classes there.

 

GED classes are still not suitable for those students who already have a Regents Diploma but did not do the Advanced Diploma.

 

NY state is addressing the gap in its remedial offerings at the CC, and with allowing more than 4 years in high school for nonsped students. But, they cant make students do the work, whether that is in ele., middle, or high school or CC. Those already through can engage tutors should they wish.The voters are not interested in supporting truants or do-nothings and they want the parents to have skin in the game to pay for do-overs and collateral damage.

The last fellow asking dh for a job needed math skills. He dropped out of remedial at the CC. His father and his wife had refused to support him any longer since he wasnt putting the work in anywhere. Some people have to fall before they realize there is no royal road and the lottery payout isnt likely.only then can they begin to invest in more skills for themselves than carrying a load from place to place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The state is addressing the gap. But, they cant make students do the work, whether that is in ele., middle, or high school or CC. Those already through can engage tutors should they wish.

The last fellow asking dh for a job needed math skills. He dropped out of remedial at the CC. His father and his wife had refused to support him any longer since he wasnt putting the work in anywhere. Some people have to fall before they realize there is no royal road and the lottery payout isnt likely.only then can they begin to invest in more skills for themselves than carrying a load from place to place.

 

How does someone who has a minimum wage job and isn't qualified for anything higher due to lack of education pay for tutors?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does someone who has a minimum wage job and isn't qualified for anything higher due to lack of education pay for tutors?

Let them eat cake

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am seeing some of these issue play out up close and personal.  My bonus child is 25 now and though he graduated from high school in Florida, he did not get a great education there and it's been several years now.  When the accuplacer put him in remedial, his first response was to attempt to take the test again (sans prep) because he did not think he was in that category.  Once I gave him the final from Lial's BCM and he only scored 50%, he was convinced that his math skills were not that close to pre-calculus.

 

I worked with him and taught him how to use Khan Academy, and while I was "babysitting" him he worked on it daily.  However, once I stopped prompting, he quickly stopped working on it. 

 

I think the reasons for this are deep.  Because of his upbringing, he does not value education, and in fact is suspicious of the wealthy and the educated.  He has no life experience with hard work of any kind.  He *always* looks for an easy way out of a situation. When there isn't one, he often just quits, rather than even try and risk failure.  But the bottom line is that I think he is like MANY people, whose life and school experiences leave them ill-equipped for the hard real world. 

 

So the biggest problem for many students out there is not just their poor academic preparation, it's their poor work habits, lack of self-discipline, inability to sacrifice for a longer-term goal.  Remedial classes don't even begin to address all of these problems...in fact, I don't know what does.  I think that supports for poorly prepared students are a good thing, and are important, but it doesn't surprise me at all that many students either don't take advantage of them, or can't benefit from them if they attempt to use them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that is unique to your state.In my state a Regents Advanced Diploma is enough to begin and succeed in CC. The problem is that those who took the Regents Diploma and those that barely scored a pass in English on tne Adv. D. arent ready.

This is so sad.  Back in my day the Regents Diploma meant ready for college. The other high school grads got local diplomas and hopefully studied a trade. We didn't have the Regents Advanced it wasn't needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is so sad.  Back in my day the Regents Diploma meant ready for college. The other high school grads got local diplomas and hopefully studied a trade. We didn't have the Regents Advanced it wasn't needed.

 

I agree. That's what my mother says about the Regents in her days. 

 

I do think there should be a qualification for students who aren't college-ready but for whom more time in high school is not productive, but a college prep diploma should mean ready for college classes. There should also be one that says that a student possesses basic 8th grade skills in math and english (pre-algebra and maybe the first half of algebra) so that employers can actually rely on a high school diploma as a guarantee of functional literacy and numeracy. And there should be a diploma for people who aren't going to get to 8th grade level -- attendance diploma -- certifying that they showed up and tried, which would be enough for me if I'm hiring someone to dig ditches or sweep the floor. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the biggest problem for many students out there is not just their poor academic preparation, it's their poor work habits, lack of self-discipline, inability to sacrifice for a longer-term goal.  Remedial classes don't even begin to address all of these problems...in fact, I don't know what does.  I think that supports for poorly prepared students are a good thing, and are important, but it doesn't surprise me at all that many students either don't take advantage of them, or can't benefit from them if they attempt to use them.

 

Yes, all of the studies I see point to personal issues in addition to academic preparation as the two major factors.  They feel that asking for help shows weakness, or they don't trust the sources of help. They can't balance all of the competing demands on their time.  They want college but don't want to sacrifice to get it.

 

The "student success" class that most students have to take in their first semester at the colleges I work for spends a lot of time acquainting them with the resources and giving them the basics of the skills they need.  But you can't make them do it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does someone who has a minimum wage job and isn't qualified for anything higher due to lack of education pay for tutors?

He takes remedial at the CC using his grant money and utilizes the tutoring center, unless he is btwn the ages of 16 and 21, in which case he goes to high school. His program will include 1:1 remediation until he is up to grade level, as well as free tutoring during his study halls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is so sad. Back in my day the Regents Diploma meant ready for college. The other high school grads got local diplomas and hopefully studied a trade. We didn't have the Regents Advanced it wasn't needed.

The sad thing I am seeing is that there arent enough seats in college prep due to disparate impact.

Eta: the Regents Advanced Diploma is the college prep diploma now.

The Regents Diploma is the replacement for the local diploma.it does not mean college ready, although students who omit one of the Regents Sciences reqd for the Regents Advanced D. Do successfully go on to college.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He takes remedial at the CC using his grant money and utilizes the tutoring center, unless he is btwn the ages of 16 and 21, in which case he goes to high school.

 

Maybe we are talking past each other. Grant money *is* us paying for it. I have no issue with requiring students to use grants to pay for remedial education, as long as the grants are available. 

 

What it sounded like you were saying is that they would have to hire a private tutor to prepare themselves for college-level work (which I *would* find unacceptable) but with your clarification I see no issue. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe we are talking past each other. Grant money *is* us paying for it. I have no issue with requiring students to use grants to pay for remedial education, as long as the grants are available.

 

What it sounded like you were saying is that they would have to hire a private tutor to prepare themselves for college-level work (which I *would* find unacceptable) but with your clarification I see no issue.

Parents of people that are not eligible for grant money do hire tutors. Most of them do so in elementary, as it is far easier to remediate a unit than it is to wait until the entire year has been lost. There is no tutoring here in elementary unless the child is at risk or ESL....everyone else has to wait to become eligible which occurs when the child is two years behind. Most middle class parents hire the tutor, or afterschool rather than go that route. Others homeschool and outsource. Parents of high school students here routinely pay for nonrequired high school classes, via the CC or an online provider....if they dont, their senior has only 3 reqd classes in a 9 period day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am seeing some of these issue play out up close and personal.  My bonus child is 25 now and though he graduated from high school in Florida, he did not get a great education there and it's been several years now.  When the accuplacer put him in remedial, his first response was to attempt to take the test again (sans prep) because he did not think he was in that category.  Once I gave him the final from Lial's BCM and he only scored 50%, he was convinced that his math skills were not that close to pre-calculus.

 

I worked with him and taught him how to use Khan Academy, and while I was "babysitting" him he worked on it daily.  However, once I stopped prompting, he quickly stopped working on it. 

 

I think the reasons for this are deep.  Because of his upbringing, he does not value education, and in fact is suspicious of the wealthy and the educated.  He has no life experience with hard work of any kind.  He *always* looks for an easy way out of a situation. When there isn't one, he often just quits, rather than even try and risk failure.  But the bottom line is that I think he is like MANY people, whose life and school experiences leave them ill-equipped for the hard real world. 

 

So the biggest problem for many students out there is not just their poor academic preparation, it's their poor work habits, lack of self-discipline, inability to sacrifice for a longer-term goal.  Remedial classes don't even begin to address all of these problems...in fact, I don't know what does.  I think that supports for poorly prepared students are a good thing, and are important, but it doesn't surprise me at all that many students either don't take advantage of them, or can't benefit from them if they attempt to use them.

 

My eldest took a CC precalc 1 class in California.  There were two sections taught by the same instructor.  About 60 students started the course.  There were rarely above 15 students present at any given class meeting (there were 30 per section enrolled).  Six students showed up to the class day of class, which was a specific review for the final.  The final was combined across the two sections and had about 17 students show up.  So around 66% of the students who enrolled, withdrew or dropped out before the final.

 

My son tested into the class directly from homeschool.  The homework and half the quizzes were done online.  The online program tracked time logged in.  He spent around 300 hours on the homework site, which doesn't include class time.  This was for a 3 credit class.  I think that there are quite a few students who are have learned or decided to be content with C's even though that lack of mastery will hurt them down the line.  And there are a bunch more students who attended schools that were not willing or able to give them the foundations needed to succeed in harder classes that require hard and consistent work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Parents of people that are not eligible for grant money do hire tutors. Most of them do so in elementary, as it is far easier to remediate a unit than it is to wait until the entire year has been lost. There is no tutoring here in elementary unless the child is at risk or ESL....everyone else has to wait to become eligible which occurs when the child is two years behind. Most middle class parents hire the tutor, or afterschool rather than go that route. Others homeschool and outsource. Parents of high school students here routinely pay for nonrequired high school classes, via the CC or an online provider....if they dont, their senior has only 3 reqd classes in a 9 period day.

 

I don't quite understand what this means.

 

Do you mean that because the graduation requirement is something like 3 math credits, there is no course offered for seniors who have already taken 3 courses and are ready for pre-calc or calculus?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just recognizing the reality the money is not unlimited, and our tax dollars have to be distributed in a fair way that benefits the most people. I am inclined to get that money to those people who have not had their chance at all yet; I.e., the high schools. Someone who wants a college education will get it by finding an employer who will pay for their tuition, will work a second job and save money to attend, or by taking out student loans. I have done all of these at various times in my life, so I know they work. We really need to recognize that money is not unlimited and the United States taxpayers can't fund every ideal wish we have.

 

The mindset of "fix the high schools first" pretty much throws away everyone who's already left high school -- because high school is not a lifetime opportunity.

 

I'm really opposed to anything that says "you had your chance -- we're giving the money to people who had better schools/a family who pushed them more/whatever else the issues are" (because in my experience, one of the big issues people have is being raised in low-income homes where the only parent around is not really parenting).

 

I'm fine with making a waiting period for continued attempts if people aren't trying on the first attempt, and quite honestly we'd save a lot more money by tightening up on federal student aid for people on probation/suspension (i.e. requiring a couple of years off for the first suspension and increasing from there) than we would by eliminating developmental ed, we wouldn't be targeting the people who can least afford their own education, and we'd be targeting people who've already shown that they aren't prepared to work at college.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't quite understand what this means.

 

Do you mean that because the graduation requirement is something like 3 math credits, there is no course offered for seniors who have already taken 3 courses and are ready for pre-calc or calculus?

There is a DE course offered, but is not funded by the district....the students not on free/reduced lunch have to pay a fee plus buy books. People that object are labeled 'elitists' and declared to be thieves, attempting to steal public funding from those who havent finished high school level coursework.. They believe no high school should offer college level courses using the public dime. And with common core, math for ex, is defined as college level after Algebra 2.Therefore, all students must pay for those courses, even those who are 16 or under and compelled to attend school.

 

The current push is for all accelerated students to go to CC on their own dime for senior year of high school...thus allowing the district to drop the remaining 4 AP courses. Trouble is, we are 45 minutes away from a CC on rural back roads, and most middle class and poor students either dont have a vehicle or arent old enough to drive solo or with multiple passengers due to graduated licensing restrictions. There is no discount in tuition, so they will be full pay...consequently if they are poor, they will grad high school early to get financial aid for CC. If they arent, they will remain in 12th grade, dual enroll, and pay full price, as they want some eligibility for freshman scholarships at the college where they find an academic fit.

 

The net is a middle class parent of an achieving child will pay at min, 2 AP fees and 1 DE fee plus books for senior year and at max, a full years tuition plus fees at the CC , app. $6K plus books and transport...still cheaper than private high school. Or their child can take the 3 reqd gen ed classes (SS, Engl, PE) for free, along with 5 study halls and lunch, at no cost. There are no electives available except for band and chorus since it is cheaper to have those students in one room with one teacher than split up into multiple study halls with several teachers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just recognizing the reality the money is not unlimited, and our tax dollars have to be distributed in a fair way that benefits the most people. I am inclined to get that money to those people who have not had their chance at all yet; I.e., the high schools. Someone who wants a college education will get it by finding an employer who will pay for their tuition, will work a second job and save money to attend, or by taking out student loans. I have done all of these at various times in my life, so I know they work. We really need to recognize that money is not unlimited and the United States taxpayers can't fund every ideal wish we have.

 

 

I actually agree with you about money not being unlimited, but someone who has already attended and graduated a craptastic high school can scarcely be said to have had a chance -- and even outside of that, someone who is at the lowest end of the socioeconomic ladder due to low english/math skills does not really have much chance of finding an employer who will pay or working a second job. The types of jobs available to these people have incredibly variable hours which makes it close to impossible to find a second, similar job. Yes, student loans are available, but the terms on these can be incredibly harsh, with no such thing as bankruptcy dismissal. 

 

Not funding multiple semesters of poor performance -- requiring much longer breaks for suspensions -- will save a lot more money and allow more deserving people to be reached than not paying for dev ed. For someone who comes in, places into dev ed, and plows through, the option should be available. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ftr, quite honestly, I'm not a fan of completely free CC -- but I'd like to peg the tuition rate to the minimum wage and make books included, so that 10 hours of a minimum wage job would pay for the CC -- leaving any time worked over that to pay for room, board, food, etc. I think they do need to have some buy-in. 

 

Again, tighten up on probation/suspension for people who just aren't trying, making them take more time off than they do now -- and make this track them across colleges, which would require keeping better records of students who have been suspended at one college. Currently someone can get suspended at one college for failing all classes due to lack of attendance, move to another college (as long as they are open-enrollment) and continue, until they run out of Pell eligibility. I find this an outrageous abuse of the system, and yet I've seen people who were obviously doing it. (I reported them to financial aid, as well, but they couldn't prove it with some of them). Saving the money here will allow us to put it where it's better needed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually agree with you about money not being unlimited, but someone who has already attended and graduated a craptastic high school can scarcely be said to have had a chance -- and even outside of that, someone who is at the lowest end of the socioeconomic ladder due to low english/math skills does not really have much chance of finding an employer who will pay or working a second job. The types of jobs available to these people have incredibly variable hours which makes it close to impossible to find a second, similar job. Yes, student loans are available, but the terms on these are incredibly harsh.

 

Not funding multiple semesters of poor performance -- requiring much longer breaks for suspensions -- will save a lot more money and allow more deserving people to be reached than not paying for dev ed. For someone who comes in, places into dev ed, and plows through, the option should be available.

CUNY (City U of NY) has a good plan for these types of students. If they have the ability to cooperate the first semester, they can get the ed before their Pell Grant runs out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a DE course offered, but is not funded by the district....the students not on free/reduced lunch have to pay a fee plus buy books. People that object are labeled 'elitists' and declared to be thieves, attempting to steal public funding from those who havent finished high school level coursework.. They believe no high school should offer college level courses using the public dime. And with common core, math for ex, is defined as college level after Algebra 2.Therefore, all students must pay for those courses, even those who are 16 or under and compelled to attend school.

 

The current push is for all accelerated students to go to CC on their own dime for senior year of high school...thus allowing the district to drop the remaining 4 AP courses. Trouble is, we are 45 minutes away from a CC on rural back roads, and most middle class and poor students either dont have a vehicle or arent old enough to drive solo or with multiple passengers due to graduated licensing restrictions. There is no discount in tuition, so they will be full pay...consequently if they are poor, they will grad high school early to get financial aid for CC. If they arent, they will remain in 12th grade, dual enroll, and pay full price, as they want some eligibility for freshman scholarships at the college where they find an academic fit.

 

The net is a middle class parent of an achieving child will pay at min, 2 AP fees and 1 DE fee plus books for senior year and at max, a full years tuition plus fees at the CC , app. $6K plus books and transport...still cheaper than private high school. Or their child can take the 3 reqd gen ed classes (SS, Engl, PE) for free, along with 5 study halls and lunch, at no cost. There are no electives available except for band and chorus since it is cheaper to have those students in one room with one teacher than split up into multiple study halls with several teachers.

Any public charter schools trying to fill this gap?  All the big "virtual" charters offer some AP classes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any public charter schools trying to fill this gap? All the big "virtual" charters offer some AP classes.

Yes!! NY has recently expanded the number of charters available, and some will be outside of disadvantaged urban areas. We will have a charter high school a vailable next year (my kid will have graduated) and it will be a STEM magnet with the AP Math and Science offerings that people seek. It will not be free to out of district residents, and transport will still be up to the family. It is an hour away. Frankly, what most people are doing is moving, but renting the house out. It is far cheaper to move in to a district that offers Calc and AP Physics than pay private high school tuition, or stay in a district where there are few businesses and very high school taxes. Home owners are not happy when their tax dollars pay more for security guards than AP Classes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...