Employment Question. What Would You Do?

[ktgrok]

45 minutes ago, creekland said:

 

With this post you and I agree on the main points, but... yes... that's a tangent and none of it will help the OP with her here and now problem.  Some (not all) students can do better with different methods. This is proven. That could help.  Whether the OP is interested in any specific option or not is entirely up to her, but the topic is WWYD and what I would do is document for those who aren't making an effort and see what I could do differently to help the most I could - without dumbing down or eliminating a thing.  As I said before, I ADD things to classes because I feel there is a lot more relevant out there to daily life than our curricula includes.  I don't add much to math (aside from Life Lessons as they come up), but science can add a ton with new discoveries.

The chem teacher who I loved, where I got an A in the class after failing it the first time with a different teacher, did this. He brought in real world examples from magazines or newspapers to show us "chemistry in action". It really did help cement the ideas in my brain (but I'm a whole to parts person, a concept person, so that may be why. I need to know the why to understand the how.)  I was tested on the exact same material as the first time I took the class, but went from nearly zero understanding to a high A. Just from a different teacher. And yet it sounds like a lot of people think that oh well, I just shouldn't have passed chemistry, it isn't up to the teacher or their methods, it is up to the student. And sometimes, often probably, it is the student not trying. But I think there are a lot of students that could do well if we really worked to make that happen, rather than having gerneral ed science requirements that are failing large numbers of students.(the OP said they do not have a separate class for non- majors, so there are plenty of people not majoring in chemistry or whatever taking this course I imagine.)

[Bluegoat]

11 minutes ago, moonflower said:

I get that it works pretty well in a high school setting, where kids are there whether they want to be or not, are not paying for the course, and part of your mandate as their teacher is to ensure their success in the class including finding ways to motivate them to do the reading.

I just think college at least used to be different: students aren't required to be there - there's an assumed minimum level of competence, maybe demonstrated through prior testing or completion of prior courses as prerequisites.  Ideally you wouldn't have to motivate college students to do the reading for class - they've paid for the class and part of what they're paying for isn't your motivation to capitalize on their monetary investment but guidance on what readings will help them understand the material.  They (ideally) shouldn't need to do memory work in class because (ideally) they will have done that outside of class if it is something they need to do to master the material - again, because they're paying for your time not as a high school teacher, which is part babysitter (I did teacher training and the babysitter part was not my forte) and part instructor, but as a college professor, which should be 99% instructor.  Ideally.

 

This is what gets me I think.  It just isn't up to a university instructor to "motivate" in that way.  Now, someone who really is a terrible or lazy teacher can demotivate even diligent students, and that is bad.  But the assumption in adult learning is that the students are self-motivated and will do what they need to to learn the material.  That's the point of entrance requirements and such, isn't it?

If a lot of students are struggling with things like study habits, I think the thing to do is offer some kind of instruction or guidance - outside the classes themselves.  Encourage kids to get together.  But the teacher should not be required to whip up the desire to know the subject.

[creekland]

1 minute ago, Ktgrok said:

The chem teacher who I loved, where I got an A in the class after failing it the first time with a different teacher, did this. He brought in real world examples from magazines or newspapers to show us "chemistry in action". It really did help cement the ideas in my brain (but I'm a whole to parts person, a concept person, so that may be why. I need to know the why to understand the how.)  I was tested on the exact same material as the first time I took the class, but went from nearly zero understanding to a high A. Just from a different teacher. And yet it sounds like a lot of people think that oh well, I just shouldn't have passed chemistry, it isn't up to the teacher or their methods, it is up to the student. And sometimes, often probably, it is the student not trying. But I think there are a lot of students that could do well if we really worked to make that happen, rather than having gerneral ed science requirements that are failing large numbers of students.(the OP said they do not have a separate class for non- majors, so there are plenty of people not majoring in chemistry or whatever taking this course I imagine.)

 

Yes this.  The more real life I can make things - show how it works, why it works, using terminology or whatever in action IRL outside of "classwork" the more kids can envision it and understand it.  They may or may not like science, but at least it's not a simple memorization puzzle.  Some kids learn well merely by reading or listening to a basic lecture, but many more get it by doing or showing.

[Bluegoat]

2 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

The chem teacher who I loved, where I got an A in the class after failing it the first time with a different teacher, did this. He brought in real world examples from magazines or newspapers to show us "chemistry in action". It really did help cement the ideas in my brain (but I'm a whole to parts person, a concept person, so that may be why. I need to know the why to understand the how.)  I was tested on the exact same material as the first time I took the class, but went from nearly zero understanding to a high A. Just from a different teacher. And yet it sounds like a lot of people think that oh well, I just shouldn't have passed chemistry, it isn't up to the teacher or their methods, it is up to the student. And sometimes, often probably, it is the student not trying. But I think there are a lot of students that could do well if we really worked to make that happen, rather than having gerneral ed science requirements that are failing large numbers of students.(the OP said they do not have a separate class for non- majors, so there are plenty of people not majoring in chemistry or whatever taking this course I imagine.)

 

I don't think that is what people are saying.  There are absolutely people who are better and worse teachers, who can communicate the concepts in a clearer and more engaging way.  And good teachers will do things like make sure they are seeking to different kinds of learners or giving students some feedback earlier in the class so they don't realize they have the wrong end of the stick only at the last moment.  I doubt that people would disagree with the idea of helping the teachers become better at these things, as long as it was actually helpful (and paid!)

But things like little quizzes or counting class attendance, grading on a curve, these things just seem like they are ways to game the grading system and artificially inflate marks.

[Bluegoat]

3 hours ago, EmseB said:

No, I'm saying that usually there are avenues that a student can pursue (tutoring labs, office hours, etc.) that don't involve hoop jumping for other students or the professors.

I am not a college professor so my advice to the OP was limited. My concern in this thread was that university administrations are prioritizing pass rates in hard sciences over learning the material and that there is an idea that college science teachers should be forced to add in additional graded items to bolster grades or to leave out material (I can't get over the post about unit conversions!!) to make sure students can pass the class. I think we're already at a point where college students expect to be spoon-fed a lot of stuff. My DH taught classes for recent college grads for the military. These were students who made it through four years of university and were learning their profession as officers. The amount of students who thought my DH was a hard or unfair teacher because he did not tell him what was going to be on the tests was astounding. These people were gobsmacked that they had to learn all the material that was being taught and then be tested on some selection of it and they did not know what that selection of questions would be in advance. They wanted to be given what would be on the test, cram it in, test on it, and then dump it before the next unit began. That was the primary college experience they had. My comments on this thread are as someone who is concerned that college is becoming more like public k-12 and not actually imparting learning or an education, but becoming a hugely expensive mechanism for someone to prove they are qualified for a job because they can manage to game a system for four years, and that system should be bending over backward to make sure that they get a degree for a job that they need to survive.

Whew, sorry, that was a tangent from what we were talking about.

I have a friend who took Anatomy and Physiology three times with three different professors and availed herself of a lot of available help through the community college and outside sources. She couldn't pass the class. She couldn't understand the material. She is not a dumb person and worked extremely hard. A lot of people couldn't pass this class because it fed into an extremely competitive nursing program. You could say that the CC said, "Tough to be you," to her, but they really didn't. The nursing program just wasn't for her because A+P is a hard class that fed into even harder classes, clinicals, and licensing exams. She went on to do something else and was successful at other things. Just because someone can't pass a college level science class does not mean there is something wrong with the class or the college or the professor. A lot of people don't pass those classes. I didn't even attempt those classes (even though science and math interest me) because when I was going through college I had small children and could not devote the proper time or resources to them in order to pass. Not everyone who attempts a college class will be able to master it. That is not necessarily a fault of anyone or a bad thing.

 

It seems that in a lot of universities now, the professors are required to be extremely specific about these things - not only how many tests and when, but what they will cover, what format - they have to lay it all out for the beginning of the year.  If they don't, or they deviate, they can get i trouble - plus the students will give a bad review.

[creekland]

At least in our area the real world and ideal world in cc is completely different.

Allowing students to fail is one option - not necessarily a bad one TBH - BUT, it's not going to be helpful to the OP. 

At the higher level school my med school lad attended doing anything of this sort certainly wouldn't be needed. There's a different caliber of "typical" student in a school with a 30% acceptance rate and a higher cost vs one that accepts pretty much everyone and can be paid for by loans if need be. It could still be helpful if anyone wanted to do it to help their students (similar to my personal experience in college), but it's not needed.

Everyone being accepted also can lead to poor foundational knowledge making it even potentially more important for the professor to know about or encourage filling in gaps.

[Bootsie]

4 hours ago, creekland said:

ps to all:  I should have done a better job explaining what these quizzes are like earlier in the thread.  That's my fault for knowing exactly what I was talking about and not realizing that others wouldn't.  All of us know what a "quiz" is, but these "daily quizzes" are a different beast.  It's a way to start classes by focusing in on the topic with a mental recall exercise.  If the question came from the assigned reading, then it was a reminder to students that these readings were important and they'd be behind the rest of the class if they didn't do them.  Both types of questions work well to train the brain and keeping it lighthearted keeps it fun rather than a chore - giving fun motivation vs "have to" or "should" motivation which don't work as well for most humans.  I've had students come into class late for whatever reason upset that they missed the quiz for that day - certainly not due to the grade, esp since there usually wasn't one.

I see this as a teaching method rather than a quiz.  In some classes, I have done something similar, but not called it a "quiz."  In a finance class where it was important that students practice problems and come to class prepared to learn (paper, pencil, and calculator out and ready), I would have a daily warm-up.  These would be problems that reviewed material and that got students mind on finance.  I would have them on a powerpoint at the beginning of class for students to work on as class began.  This was to motivate them to come to class and be prepared.  I even put some of the EXACT same problems on exams--a large number of students would still miss the questions on an exam.  

What I found was that, for the most part, the students who came to class prepared and made good grades came and did this.  The students who missed class, still missed class.  Those who were late just came latter and just played on their phones for longer at the beginning of the class.  Those who signed up at the beginning of the semester, and after receiving financial aid, dropped still did that.  These are the types of problems I thought OP was discussing.  There is a big difference in "how can I help the students who want to learn but are not being successful?" and "how can I motivate (be responsible for) a student who doesn't come to class, doesn't come prepared, doesn't pay attention, doesn't want to be there... to learn?"

[moonflower]

18 minutes ago, creekland said:

At least in our area the real world and ideal world in cc is completely different.

Allowing students to fail is one option - not necessarily a bad one TBH - BUT, it's not going to be helpful to the OP. 

At the higher level school my med school lad attended doing anything of this sort certainly wouldn't be needed. There's a different caliber of "typical" student in a school with a 30% acceptance rate and a higher cost vs one that accepts pretty much everyone and can be paid for by loans if need be. It could still be helpful if anyone wanted to do it to help their students (similar to my personal experience in college), but it's not needed.

Everyone being accepted also can lead to poor foundational knowledge making it even potentially more important for the professor to know about or encourage filling in gaps.

 

I agree with you that CC is a strange medium between high school and college, although that is dependent on the CC.  4 year universities are also like this more and more, though, because more people feel compelled to get a 4 year degree for employment reasons (or for social pressure reasons) even if they are neither prepared academically nor suited mentally.  I don't know that graduating more unprepared students is the right solution to the problem.  But I also don't know what the right solution is.

[creekland]

48 minutes ago, jdahlquist said:

I see this as a teaching method rather than a quiz.  In some classes, I have done something similar, but not called it a "quiz."  In a finance class where it was important that students practice problems and come to class prepared to learn (paper, pencil, and calculator out and ready), I would have a daily warm-up.  These would be problems that reviewed material and that got students mind on finance.  I would have them on a powerpoint at the beginning of class for students to work on as class began.  This was to motivate them to come to class and be prepared.  I even put some of the EXACT same problems on exams--a large number of students would still miss the questions on an exam.  

What I found was that, for the most part, the students who came to class prepared and made good grades came and did this.  The students who missed class, still missed class.  Those who were late just came latter and just played on their phones for longer at the beginning of the class.  Those who signed up at the beginning of the semester, and after receiving financial aid, dropped still did that.  These are the types of problems I thought OP was discussing.  There is a big difference in "how can I help the students who want to learn but are not being successful?" and "how can I motivate (be responsible for) a student who doesn't come to class, doesn't come prepared, doesn't pay attention, doesn't want to be there... to learn?"

 

For those latter ones the only thing I can think of is to document what is going on.  It's why I split my suggestions.  I suspect many people come in contact with both groups.  I know at work when we find a tactic that works we share it.  That's what I've been doing.  Truancy for us goes to guidance and Powers That Be, but yes, when the "one day a week plan" student shows up it's impossible for anything to fill in all they've missed enough to get a decent grade.  No teacher I know will give it to them.  We document absences and work not done instead.  There have been threats to tie teachers to pass rates and state test scores and we do have moments when we discuss what will happen to differentiate between the teacher with mainly Level 1 classes vs Level 3... We're not at all sure.  Those are the times I'm glad I'm part time with plans on fully retiring relatively soon.

Otherwise, I suspect I'm back off for a while... I've had extra time at my mom's while she's been dealing with chemo, so being social when she's able and on my computer when not busy.  It's a bit more computer time than I normally have so... but we're soon to do dinner, play games, vacuum her house, and head back home tomorrow - resuming my now "sort of normal" life for a couple of weeks.

Best wishes to the OP...

[Ravin]

That is completely asinine. I think I would get a hold of whatever union or faculty association or whatever and start advocating to insist on grading on a bell curve. The purpose of grades is to hold the STUDENT accountable, not the instructors. I mean, I could see looking to the teacher as part of the problem if the curve gets too steep--if the raw scores of the students deviate too far from a bell curve. That could be in the direction of too many A's--making the exams too easy to just pass people along--or too many D's and F's--actually not doing a good job teaching. But not ALL D's and F's are an instructor's fault. That is utterly ridiculous. C will be the new F. Grade inflation here they come!

Edited October 30, 2018 by Ravin

[Ravin]

On 10/27/2018 at 3:37 PM, Ktgrok said:

Ugh, my thoughts are all over the place. To start with, I actually DID fail a chemistry class in college. I failed my second semester, like..if there was such thing as an F- I would have had it. I didn't understand a darned thing, and when I tried going to office hours for help the professor was just hanging out with the advanced students, and made no time for me. I retook it the next semester and got an A. A high A, nearly 100 percent. Only difference was I had a much better isntructor who actually taught the concepts well. I actually could understand all of it, and enjoyed it even!! In that situation, the pass rate of the two instructors probably DID reflect on their ability to teach. It wasn't that I lacked effort, or that I wasn't smart enough it was that I didn't have a strong enough background to overcome a complete lack of teaching. (my high school chem teacher hated chemistry and was supposed to teach biology. He got stuck with one period of it and just talked fishing with the boys in the front row. He did throw up an overhead every day for us to copy, that was it. 

On the other hand, my husband teaches at the college level and has kids who do 0 assignments the whole semester. One kid failed the class 4 times! My husband will do pretty much anything to help them pass, but they have to put the time and effort in. He can't do it for them. So in his case, those that are not doing anything and failing do not reflect on him. He actually has mostly either A's or F's, depending on if they do the work. 

 

I failed a chemistry class in college. I couldn't drop because I'd have lost my GI Bill for the semester and needed it to live as well as pay tuition. I happily took an F, knowing I'd be transferring and the grade would not be reflected in my GPA when I eventually graduated. I didn't even show up for the labs because I didn't want to deal with the chemicals (while pregnant with DD). That was in no way, shape, or form the instructor's fault. Now, the C I got the semester before, that set me up to do so badly? That I blame on that professor, at least in part. He treated the course as an opportunity to weed out the unworthy (in his view). That kind of attitude sucks. But, thanks to him, I'm a lawyer, not a geneticist!

[moonflower]

I think grading on a bell curve is beyond stupid.  In something like chemistry, either you've mastered the material to a certain level (completely=A quite well but not perfectly=B adequately=C not really=D not at all=F) or you haven't.  It doesn't matter what other people in your class have done.  You can all fail or all master completely, it's not like a secret or a particularly subjective thing, esp. with the hard sciences.

[Bluegoat]

11 minutes ago, Eliana said:

There is research which shows that brief quizzes, similar to those described by Creekland,  significantly improve learning and retention - and not just for remedial students.  I'm heading out the door to a vigil for Pittsburgh, but if someone else doesn't share a citation, I will try to get back here tomorrow night to do so.   

I oppose watering down the quality of academics, but feel strongly that using tools that research has shown improves learning is the opposite of watering down and improves the quality and rigor of a course.

 

But students can do this for themselves if it is useful to them. That I think is the basic problem.  You can set this kind of thing up really easily even alone, but especially if you have a friend or study group.  IME, setting it up is often as helpful as doing it.

[Reefgazer]

I've been really busy, so I am just getting back to this and haven't yet read all the recent responses.  But I do want to comment on the idea of low-level quizzes.  Low-level quizzes may very well improve learning, but every low-level task I spend class time on is less content and challenge I deliver to students who are able and willing to handle the class on level.  Also, the publishers text has a course code that is a portal to self-quizzes that they can self-test independently, so anyone who wishes to use quizzes as a learning tool can do so without me spending class time on them.  That said, I already offer take home, open-book/open-notes quizzes that are worth very little.  The goal with them is to get students to think about the topics and study as they complete the quizzes.  The problem here is that the students who need these quizzes don't take the initiative to do them. 

[moonflower]

Yes, the idea of grading on a bell curve is so that you can say, out of this class (or group of classes if you curve many sections together), these 10% of students were the excellent ones, these further 15% (making up the percentages as I have no idea) were really good, these 59% were averagish, etc.  There are some situations in which this makes sense, I guess, but I dislike it as a grading tool.  I prefer to say, this is the standard of excellence (with relatively objective criteria). x% of students met the standard.

For a nationally normed thing it might make more sense to do a bell curve - so that you can see, I guess, where the majority of the population falls in regards to this criteria and who is doing exceptionally well or exceptionally poorly.  But I don't like it in classrooms.

[Reefgazer]

9 hours ago, unsinkable said:

Students don't "bag a 95 on the Regents" bc they go the extra mile with a prep book. The exams are curved so they are passable by many but also so they are very difficult to get higher grades, especially in the math and science classes not required for a diploma.

It is very much like the advice a previous poster gave (I can't remember who it was) to curve the classes so lots of people get Cs but it is much harder to Bs and As.

A 95 on the physics, chem or trig exams mean the taker knows the material.

 

This is what I have decided to do.  I am in the process of switching my strictly written exams to multiple choice format so that I can manipulate the final grades in this manner without being accused of favoritism.  My current class is now the test run for this scheme, and I'll see how many more truly tough questions I need to put on the exam to ensure that only the top students earn the A or B, while most get a C.  Grade inflation for sure, and morally bankrupt on top of that, but I decided I am not sacrificing my paycheck for unmotivated students (these are the source of most failures the science department has).  starting next semester, I am eliminating my study quizzes and extra credit options because they won't matter (X % of students *will* pass), and those additional assessments just make manufacturing a pre-determined passing percentage more difficult to engineer.  I'm very angry about being put in this position, and I flat-out refuse to spend additional time and effort babysitting students who are unmotivated, don't show up for class, don't read the text, and don't turn in assignments.

Edited October 30, 2018 by Reefgazer

[creekland]

4 hours ago, Reefgazer said:

I've been really busy, so I am just getting back to this and haven't yet read all the recent responses.  But I do want to comment on the idea of low-level quizzes.  Low-level quizzes may very well improve learning, but every low-level task I spend class time on is less content and challenge I deliver to students who are able and willing to handle the class on level.  Also, the publishers text has a course code that is a portal to self-quizzes that they can self-test independently, so anyone who wishes to use quizzes as a learning tool can do so without me spending class time on them.  That said, I already offer take home, open-book/open-notes quizzes that are worth very little.  The goal with them is to get students to think about the topics and study as they complete the quizzes.  The problem here is that the students who need these quizzes don't take the initiative to do them. 

 

I would be documenting this - and showing what you offer - and if anyone had a problem with it, asking them what they suggest you should do.

But again, the quizzes I was talking about aren't traditional quizzes... 

[creekland]

10 hours ago, Bluegoat said:

But students can do this for themselves if it is useful to them. That I think is the basic problem.  You can set this kind of thing up really easily even alone, but especially if you have a friend or study group.  IME, setting it up is often as helpful as doing it.

 

Technically in this day and age one doesn't even need class and a professor (or teacher) to learn anything either. Everything one needs to know (except perhaps hands on labs with expensive equipment) can be learned from a book or video and this could be done by anyone, anytime.  They just need initiative.  All one would need for a basic bottom line is to pass the tests required for a profession and those are given outside of college (or any school).  Where is the line drawn between what is "correct" for a class and what isn't?  For me, it's being as helpful as I can to enhance the most learning I can among the greatest number of students.  I've adjusted my style a bit over my 19 years as I've aligned to studies related to learning and have no regrets at all.  I like seeing results and well educated youngsters.  I like hearing stories when they return.  I hate it when a youngster fails, and there are some I can't reach (most always due to drug use or severe family problems at home).

But I digress... back to real life as soon as I add my well wishes for today to Quill on a different thread.

[Bluegoat]

2 hours ago, creekland said:

 

Technically in this day and age one doesn't even need class and a professor (or teacher) to learn anything either. Everything one needs to know (except perhaps hands on labs with expensive equipment) can be learned from a book or video and this could be done by anyone, anytime.  They just need initiative.  All one would need for a basic bottom line is to pass the tests required for a profession and those are given outside of college (or any school).  Where is the line drawn between what is "correct" for a class and what isn't?  For me, it's being as helpful as I can to enhance the most learning I can among the greatest number of students.  I've adjusted my style a bit over my 19 years as I've aligned to studies related to learning and have no regrets at all.  I like seeing results and well educated youngsters.  I like hearing stories when they return.  I hate it when a youngster fails, and there are some I can't reach (most always due to drug use or severe family problems at home).

But I digress... back to real life as soon as I add my well wishes for today to Quill on a different thread.

 

I don't really think that is true - I don't think most people can learn alone the same way they can with someone who is a responsive teacher.  And that's for fairly basic level adult learning - once you are getting to less clear, basic topics, it's simply not possible.  You cannot explore ideas and solutions alone the same as with others, and especially with someone who grasps the area of study in a deeper way.

But that's part of the reason its such a shame to have students using class time for things they should be doing on their own or with their peers.  You might as well have the teacher reading the text aloud in class, like my dd13's middle school English teacher does.

Edited October 30, 2018 by Bluegoat

[Bootsie]

41 minutes ago, HeighHo said:

 

This is part of the Thayer method.  My U used these components, very very helpful to the student as the student can now plan his time, which includes accessing resources that have limited availability and utilizing study groups.  My son's high school used the boardwork component for DE Calc, very helpful since we are rural and its impossible to find classmates in the evening to have a study group.

  Part of Thayer is that the student accepts responsibility for his own learning and comes to class prepared.  

 

 

I understood what the poster was talking about to be very different from the Thayer method (or at least my understanding of it).  My understanding of the Thayer method is that it puts it places the task of learning on the student; the student is challenged to come to class prepared, having engaged with the material.  That is different than the pressure to tell students.  There will be 20 multiple choice questions on the exam--one will be about Chapter 1:  the colors of the American flag; one will come from Chapter 2:  the first President; a third will be the what state is Boston in...  So that testing turns into a test of a students ability to perform a predescribed task, not a meaasure of how a student can use and apply information in various settings, sometimes new and unexpected.

[Bluegoat]

1 minute ago, jdahlquist said:

I understood what the poster was talking about to be very different from the Thayer method (or at least my understanding of it).  My understanding of the Thayer method is that it puts it places the task of learning on the student; the student is challenged to come to class prepared, having engaged with the material.  That is different than the pressure to tell students.  There will be 20 multiple choice questions on the exam--one will be about Chapter 1:  the colors of the American flag; one will come from Chapter 2:  the first President; a third will be the what state is Boston in...  So that testing turns into a test of a students ability to perform a predescribed task, not a meaasure of how a student can use and apply information in various settings, sometimes new and unexpected.

 

Yes, exactally.  I find it kind of bizarre that people expect to know what will be on the test, because it isn't "fair" otherwise  I've encountered it though, interestingly also teaching university kids in the army.  The army was pretty clear that they were meant to know it all and what was on the test was a random sample to make sure they did.

[Bootsie]

7 hours ago, Patty Joanna said:

But a bell curve assumes a lot.  Please correct me if I am wrong.  Truly.

it seems to me...and I'm fuzzy on this...that a bell curve assumes that the population as a whole is seeking excellence in accomplishment, not a grade?

I'm not asking for correction in a fake humble way.  I've had statistics, I have an MBA, and I am still having trouble with this BECAUSE the students' goal is a GRADE not the grade as a measure of achievement.  So I really don't understand this.  

 

Statistically, grading on a bell curve would not have an assumption that the population as a how is seeking excellence.  It would simply be a way of highlighting outliers (both on the top end and the low end of the distribution).  Often the problem in a college classroom setting is that the bulk of the students are not really in the middle with a few high and a few lows scores.  Often, you will have a bimodal distribution--a clump of high grades of students who understand the material and do the work and a clump of low grades of students who don't understand the material, didn't do the work, and didn't come to class. 

[Scarlett]

On 10/28/2018 at 7:48 PM, EmseB said:

My perspective is as someone who made it through high school without learning and retaining much of anything precisely because my teachers gave extra credit assignments and low-stakes quizzes for grades and exam retakes and participation grades and group projects. A person can get by without learning much of anything that way and retaining even less. I don't find it acceptable for high school, so I can home educate and try to head it off, but that's not possible for university.

Yes this is how I got through high school too.  I retained so very very little it is scary.  Once I got to the  real world I leanrned what I needed to learn on my own.  I figured out my learning style is I have to understand where we are going with this particular set of learning goals.  

[Bootsie]

15 hours ago, Eliana said:

I oppose watering down the quality of academics, but feel strongly that using tools that research has shown improves learning is the opposite of watering down and improves the quality and rigor of a course.

I think there is a basic problem when we measure the success of an education as the performance on particular activities associated with that class.  Much of the research on how effective specific tools are is based upon the ability to perform on a pre-determined test.  Very little of the research measures long-term retention.  Also, little of the research measures how well the student can transfer the knowledge, apply it to new situations, etc.  Much of an education, IMO, should be training the student how to learn.  When teachers in high school are pressured for students to pass a particular exam, the teachers can devise all types of exercises, quizzes, homework problems, and other activities that help reinforce the facts on that exam.  But, the students are often ill-prepared to take initiative and learn on their own.  

[EmseB]

2 hours ago, Bluegoat said:

 

Yes, exactally.  I find it kind of bizarre that people expect to know what will be on the test, because it isn't "fair" otherwise  I've encountered it though, interestingly also teaching university kids in the army.  The army was pretty clear that they were meant to know it all and what was on the test was a random sample to make sure they did.

When I took course exams in the military they were some of the most difficult tests I'd ever taken. First of all, they were all self-study. We were just handed a couple of volumes and told to learn it. Secondly, you had to learn the whole text with no indications of what the test questions would be. Some of the text was technical information and some was more about the structure of different organizations, so it wasn't just one concept that you could learn and apply broadly to test questions.  Secondly, on the exam, you could get questions worded very similarly to the text but changed to the negative or just slightly so that it made the multiple choice test pretty difficult unless you actually understood what you read and could work through it logically in your head.

When I write this now, that seems pretty standard if you're trying to test someone's knowledge and mastery of a subject, but the prevailing idea amongst all of us was that the exam was written to trick people taking it or to kind of try to get one over on us and make us fail. But the reality was that most of us were used to a style of testing where our teachers "foot stomped" during class so that we knew what to study. Or we zoned out if we asked, "Is this going to be on the final?" and the answer was no.

[Pen]

I would like to see this approached by looking at the science.  There are quite a lot of studies now, such as

 

 

Daily Online Testing in Large Classes: Boosting College Performance while Reducing ... - PLOS

 

---

by JW Pennebaker · 2013 · Cited by 81 · Related articles

Nov 20, 2013 · Citation: Pennebaker JW, Gosling SD, Ferrell JD (2013) Daily Online Testing in Large ... One challenge colleges and universities face is efficiently training students to ..... View Article; Google  ...

Small-Group Learning in an Upper-Level University Biology Class Enhances Academic ...

 

---

by AD Gaudet · 2010 · Cited by 46 · Related articles

Dec 29, 2010 · SGL students had significantly higher final exam grades than ... Additionally, entrance and exit surveys demonstrated student ... with the material, and classroom discussions were lively and frequent

[Bootsie]

13 minutes ago, Pen said:

I would like to see this approached by looking at the science.  There are quite a lot of studies now, such as

 

 

Daily Online Testing in Large Classes: Boosting College Performance while Reducing ... - PLOS

 

From this study: "Of the 901 students who did not drop the course or did not take the course pass/fail, their final course grades were A (14.4%), B (39.3%), C (29.1%), D (10.0%), F (5.9%)."  In addition 12% of the students dropped the course.  For the OP, these results would count as 28% course failure rate.  OP did not state what the exact requirement would be for the maximum number of "non-passing" but this is probably likely beyond what would be considered acceptable under that type of system.  When you are teaching in an environment where a large number of students drop, it is very difficult to get your "pass" rates up.   

[Bluegoat]

1 hour ago, jdahlquist said:

I think there is a basic problem when we measure the success of an education as the performance on particular activities associated with that class.  Much of the research on how effective specific tools are is based upon the ability to perform on a pre-determined test.  Very little of the research measures long-term retention.  Also, little of the research measures how well the student can transfer the knowledge, apply it to new situations, etc.  Much of an education, IMO, should be training the student how to learn.  When teachers in high school are pressured for students to pass a particular exam, the teachers can devise all types of exercises, quizzes, homework problems, and other activities that help reinforce the facts on that exam.  But, the students are often ill-prepared to take initiative and learn on their own.  

 

Yes, this is what gets me, when they say various methods improve learning, they seem to mean they improve test scores.  And I always have a sneaking suspicion they are mostly on fairly straightforward kinds of information real or possibly specific but simple skills.  I one ad a test asking me to explain the structure and rationale of the last 18 chapters of the Proslogion. Or why units in a particular foreign army structure their patrols in urban areas a particular way. I very much suspect that this are not the kind of retention they are talking about.

[TCB]

I would have been outraged at this and still am really, however I've seen a few things going on at my dd's university that have given me pause. There is a Chem 1 prof there with a class of 800 students and virtually none of them pass the tests. He tells them that if they do well on the homework and labs then they should pass anyway, and apparently he curves it a significant amount at the end. The students say that he is difficult to understand, doesn't test on material the class covers ( I don't really understand that) etc. I really don't see the point of giving tests that virtually no-one passes and then curving hugely so most end up with a C. I think that is really demoralising for the students, and to what end? I definitely don't think they shouldn't have to work hard, but what is the point of an entry level course, taken by freshman, that is so crazy? Some of them are also worried about taking higher level courses in the subject with such poor teaching on the entry level section.

[Murphy101]

On 10/27/2018 at 1:01 PM, Reefgazer said:

The college has been up the ass of the science department for a while to increase their pass rates.  They seem to want pass rates in chemistry that are comparable to pass rates in history courses.

 

Being devil advocate here...

Why would that be bad?

Is there a way to keep content and better facilitate absorption of that content to raise the pass rates?

I would suspect that to be the goal of these changes.

Also, are the requirement to get into the class an accurate predictor of ability to pass the class? If not, is the school or staff addressing that aspect at all?

[EmseB]

48 minutes ago, Pen said:

I would like to see this approached by looking at the science.  There are quite a lot of studies now, such as

 

 

Daily Online Testing in Large Classes: Boosting College Performance while Reducing ... - PLOS

 

---

by JW Pennebaker · 2013 · Cited by 81 · Related articles

Nov 20, 2013 · Citation: Pennebaker JW, Gosling SD, Ferrell JD (2013) Daily Online Testing in Large ... One challenge colleges and universities face is efficiently training students to ..... View Article; Google  ...

Small-Group Learning in an Upper-Level University Biology Class Enhances Academic ...

 

---

by AD Gaudet · 2010 · Cited by 46 · Related articles

Dec 29, 2010 · SGL students had significantly higher final exam grades than ... Additionally, entrance and exit surveys demonstrated student ... with the material, and classroom discussions were lively and frequent

 

When I read that first one it seems like just standard advocacy for more online learning and a lot of resources to make it possible (proctors for daily quizzes in a lecture section?). But then I read this:

"Recent figures regarding graduation rates at U.S. colleges have sounded widespread alarm about the level of college preparation provided by high schools, especially for students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds [1]–[3]. On entering college, many students lack the basic content knowledge that is needed for the mastery of courses in math, science, and other disciplines [4]. In other cases, students have deficits in procedural knowledge – the how of learning – which some have called self-regulated learning [5]–[6]. This procedural know-how underlies the skills students must develop to acquire content knowledge, including the basic ability to take notes, to study, to monitor their performance, and to think critically in ways that optimally prepare them for exams and other assessments [7].

One challenge colleges and universities face is efficiently training students to learn these basic self-regulatory skills ."

 

And I just think...no, no no. This is not what university is for. It's just not and it's a huge waste and the people graduating kids from high school without these skills and the universities admitting them are just defrauding them wholesale. For what? What is the point? You graduate them for the sake of it, tell them they are college ready when they are not, you've watered down their education And then the answer seems to be watering it down further at the university level so that they can cope.

And then people say that this use of resources doesn't take away from the content of the class or anything else, that it's just seamless, but how can it not? How can the resources spent on this program to quiz students daily on course content to develop study skills not take dollars from elsewhere? How can it not take time from elsewhere? The bottom line seems to be saying here that kids aren't learning this in high school (we've dumbed down high school) so now we need to dumb down college to compensate. Ugh.

[EmseB]

13 minutes ago, Murphy101 said:

 

Being devil advocate here...

Why would that be bad?

Is there a way to keep content and better facilitate absorption of that content to raise the pass rates?

I would suspect that to be the goal of these changes.

Also, are the requirement to get into the class an accurate predictor of ability to pass the class? If not, is the school or staff addressing that aspect at all?

It's not bad to want more students to learn the material to a level of mastery that they would pass the class.

If the administration is saying that <individual professor> is a bad teacher and can't teach chemistry well enough and so students are failing then that's an issue that they need to address with individual profs and fire them or whatever else is necessary. They aren't saying that. They are telling the professors that they must pass X% of students per class, regardless of the students' work ethic, withdrawals from the class, or whatever else.

[Murphy101]

18 minutes ago, TCB said:

I would have been outraged at this and still am really, however I've seen a few things going on at my dd's university that have given me pause. There is a Chem 1 prof there with a class of 800 students and virtually none of them pass the tests. He tells them that if they do well on the homework and labs then they should pass anyway, and apparently he curves it a significant amount at the end. The students say that he is difficult to understand, doesn't test on material the class covers ( I don't really understand that) etc. I really don't see the point of giving tests that virtually no-one passes and then curving hugely so most end up with a C. I think that is really demoralising for the students, and to what end? I definitely don't think they shouldn't have to work hard, but what is the point of an entry level course, taken by freshman, that is so crazy? Some of them are also worried about taking higher level courses in the subject with such poor teaching on the entry level section.

 

Me too. I get the outrage and would have shared it at one point. But 6 years of having kids/spouse being in classes or being in them myself lately as dramatically tempered my outrage meter. 

I’ve just seen too dadblum many bad classes/profs who think failing students over stupid crap is some kind of ego boost for themselves.  While we talk on here about being devoted to doing what it takes to impart learning to students, the reality is many professors don’t care and many professors seem to think that if only 10% of their class passes, it somehow means they must have taught a rigorous class. No. It just means they didn’t teach anything to 90% of their class. 

I’m now of the stance that if the student is truly ready for the content and is putting in the effort, they should be learning it if that’s the case and they should be passing. If they aren’t ready for the class? If they aren’t doing the work? Okay. Of course they likely can’t and shouldn’t pass. But then, I’d argue they shouldn’t have been allowed to take the class to begin with either. 

And keep in mind that all my kids/dh are A/B students, excepting a random semester for each of them. If this is how we feel about it, I imagine that view gets stronger the worse the grades are. We have developed a fine tuned crap teacher radar to know when to drop within the first couple days, but sometimes a class can’t be dropped.  And wow do those classes make a semester and GPA tank.  

And there are a LOT of colleges that know damn good and well all those thousands of dollars students are racking up in debt to attend are likely students that won’t make it to sophomore. But it’s free easy money for the school. I don’t think it should be. If they know the students are likely going to fail, their should be some burden on them to either not take the student or meet the student needs for success at their college. 

[EmseB]

12 minutes ago, Murphy101 said:

 

Me too. I get the outrage and would have shared it at one point. But 6 years of having kids/spouse being in classes or being in them myself lately as dramatically tempered my outrage meter. 

I’ve just seen too dadblum many bad classes/profs who think failing students over stupid crap is some kind of ego boost for themselves.  While we talk on here about being devoted to doing what it takes to impart learning to students, the reality is many professors don’t care and many professors seem to think that if only 10% of their class passes, it somehow means they must have taught a rigorous class. No. It just means they didn’t teach anything to 90% of their class. 

I’m now of the stance that if the student is truly ready for the content and is putting in the effort, they should be learning it if that’s the case and they should be passing. If they aren’t ready for the class? If they aren’t doing the work? Okay. Of course they likely can’t and shouldn’t pass. But then, I’d argue they shouldn’t have been allowed to take the class to begin with either. 

And keep in mind that all my kids/dh are A/B students, excepting a random semester for each of them. If this is how we feel about it, I imagine that view gets stronger the worse the grades are. We have developed a fine tuned crap teacher radar to know when to drop within the first couple days, but sometimes a class can’t be dropped.  And wow do those classes make a semester and GPA tank.  

And there are a LOT of colleges that know damn good and well all those thousands of dollars students are racking up in debt to attend are likely students that won’t make it to sophomore. But it’s free easy money for the school. I don’t think it should be. If they know the students are likely going to fail, their should be some burden on them to either not take the student or meet the student needs for success at their college. 

7

How do you measure this part? Or what do you do when high schools are making it so a lot of students aren't ready for the content because they have not been taught how to really learn something?

I listened to SWB talk, maybe over 5 years ago now, and she said something like 1 or maybe 2 kids per section coming into W&M were really prepared for college writing, basic freshman comp. What do we do with that? That is less than 90% of a class coming into it ready for the content. Posted above you have a large-scale online learning system designed and implemented and studied with significantly educational resources with the stated reason being that kids didn't have study skills to pass courses.

I have had bad profs and bad teachers and teachers with ridiculous standards. I've heard horror stories about law schools in particular. But I think we're really seeing an awful lot of kids coming out of high school falling into the "not ready for content" or at the very least not knowing how to do the work. And having a college prof having to compensate for basic study skills seems a huge waste of $$$ especially considering college prices these days.

 

Edited October 30, 2018 by EmseB

[Bootsie]

12 minutes ago, Murphy101 said:

I’ve just seen too dadblum many bad classes/profs who think failing students over stupid crap is some kind of ego boost for themselves.  While we talk on here about being devoted to doing what it takes to impart learning to students, the reality is many professors don’t care and many professors seem to think that if only 10% of their class passes, it somehow means they must have taught a rigorous class. No. It just means they didn’t teach anything to 90% of their class. 

I have been a college professor for over 30 years, as has DH.  We have taught at a wide-range of schools, both in the US and abroad.  Neither of us can think of a single instance where a professor thinks it would be 10% pass rate in a class would be acceptable or a sign that they taught a rigorous class.  Yes, there are bad professors and some who don't care (just as there is in any profession) but IME those tends to be the ones who have extremely HIGH grades in their classes, not lower grades.

[forty-two]

8 minutes ago, EmseB said:

How do you measure this part? Or what do you do when high schools are making it so a lot of students aren't ready for the content because they have not been taught how to really learn something?

I listened to SWB talk, maybe over 5 years ago now, and she said something like 1 or maybe 2 kids per section coming into W&M were really prepared for college writing, basic freshman comp. What do we do with that? That is less than 90% of a class coming into it ready for the content. Posted above you have a large-scale online learning system designed and implemented and studied with significantly educational resources with the stated reason being that kids didn't have study skills to pass courses.

I have had bad profs and bad teachers and teachers with ridiculous standards. I've heard horror stories about law schools in particular. But I think we're really seeing an awful lot of kids coming out of high school falling into the "not ready for content" or at the very least not knowing how to do the work. And having a college prof having to compensate for basic study skills seems a huge waste of $$$ especially considering college prices these days.

 

The whole situation really burns me.  It's not fair to high school graduates who successfully did everything they were told to do, and yet are still left unprepared for college.  And it's not fair to those who are prepared for (increasingly expensive) college to have their classes spend substantial time teaching what ought to have been mastered in high school.  And it's not fair that jobs that don't require college skills nevertheless require college as an easy means to guarantee the high school skills the job does require.  Especially because of how dang expensive college is.

But I have no idea what *individual* people and businesses and professors can do to effectively push back against this systemic problem, when the system as a whole isn't going to make the drastic changes necessary.  Colleges aren't going to refuse to admit unqualified high school graduates en masse, or flunk them out en masse in freshman weed-out classes (which, as I understand it, is what used to happen in easy-admit schools).  A large number of businesses aren't going to take chances on hiring high school graduates with a high likelihood of being unprepared for jobs requiring high school skills if they can find enough people with college credits to hire instead.  And high schools aren't going to refuse to graduate everyone who is unprepared and admit they are incapable of preparing a large number of their students.  So what can individuals do to resist the counterproductive-to-true-learning pressures inherent in the system?  *Are* there things good teachers can do to genuinely educate willing but underprepared students without dumbing down the standards for success?  Or is the system just too broken to do good by your students and do good by your educational standards?

[moonflower]

I do think the NZ system has an advantage here (although I also think there is no universe in which the US will adopt it).  leaving hs for a job or a trade school or internship, usually at 15/16 after 10th grade (wait is it 9th grade?) carries no stigma. college is more restricted to people who need it.

[regentrude]

10 minutes ago, forty-two said:

  *Are* there things good teachers can do to genuinely educate willing but underprepared students without dumbing down the standards for success? 

Yes, but it requires more than implementing online quizzes. At our school, the math department instituted a very successful program that identified students in calculus 1 who were likely to fail; they were offered the option of switching into a remedial module that let them keep the credit hours (thus not jeopardizing full time student status) and that was ungraded (thus not ruining the GPA). The students in this module receive both math remediation and basic study skill training. They repeat calculus 1 in the following semester and have a higher success rate than students who simply dropped or failed the class. 

[Murphy101]

29 minutes ago, EmseB said:

How do you measure this part? Or what do you do when high schools are making it so a lot of students aren't ready for the content because they have not been taught how to really learn something?

I listened to SWB talk, maybe over 5 years ago now, and she said something like 1 or maybe 2 kids per section coming into W&M were really prepared for college writing, basic freshman comp. What do we do with that? That is less than 90% of a class coming into it ready for the content. Posted above you have a large-scale online learning system designed and implemented and studied with significantly educational resources with the stated reason being that kids didn't have study skills to pass courses.

I have had bad profs and bad teachers and teachers with ridiculous standards. I've heard horror stories about law schools in particular. But I think we're really seeing an awful lot of kids coming out of high school falling into the "not ready for content" or at the very least not knowing how to do the work. And having a college prof having to compensate for basic study skills seems a huge waste of $$$ especially considering college prices these days.

 

 

It’s hard. >60% of recent high school graduates in my state have to take both remedial English and remedial maths at community college for an average of 2.5 semesters before they can even start taking college level courses.  That’s expensive for everyone. Some of these kids got great grades at their high school but mediocre to decent ACT scores. For example, you can have a 4.0 in high school with low level classes with high level esteem boosting class titles.  The parents don’t have a clue and often the student doesn’t have much more of a clue. They know enough to know they aren’t some prodigy, but they think “hey I’m an A student in “basic college mathematics” so I can’t be that bad.  I do all my home work and my teacher likes me!”

So they get the student loans and they buy the $300 books and then realize they got a crap education and now they have to play catch up while also sinking deeper and deeper into debt. 

Personally I think the college system or the social system is going to bottom out.  At some point, a majority is going to say F it all and to hell with paying for this and decide not to do it anymore.

oh can’t file bankruptcy on college debt? Yeah  well it’s not like they can get a job to pay it or buy a house to put a lien on either so good luck collecting on it.  Guess they could bring back debtors prison.

I’m not sure what to do to bridge this gap. I just know it’s not sustainable or ethical. 

 

[regentrude]

55 minutes ago, Murphy101 said:

I’ve just seen too dadblum many bad classes/profs who think failing students over stupid crap is some kind of ego boost for themselves.  While we talk on here about being devoted to doing what it takes to impart learning to students, the reality is many professors don’t care and many professors seem to think that if only 10% of their class passes, it somehow means they must have taught a rigorous class. No. It just means they didn’t teach anything to 90% of their class. 

I am a college professor and have never seen or heard of a class with a 10% pass rate.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 30, 2018 by regentrude

[Murphy101]

36 minutes ago, jdahlquist said:

I have been a college professor for over 30 years, as has DH.  We have taught at a wide-range of schools, both in the US and abroad.  Neither of us can think of a single instance where a professor thinks it would be 10% pass rate in a class would be acceptable or a sign that they taught a rigorous class.  Yes, there are bad professors and some who don't care (just as there is in any profession) but IME those tends to be the ones who have extremely HIGH grades in their classes, not lower grades.

 

It can be a bad thing at either end. But I’ve met them and seen them. I do not think all prof are bad. But there’s enough of them at less expensive schools to be a huge problem. I do think this might be less of an issue as you climb the dollar chart for colleges. Online teachers seem to have a higher issue with this than in classroom. 

[regentrude]

56 minutes ago, Murphy101 said:

I’m now of the stance that if the student is truly ready for the content and is putting in the effort, they should be learning it if that’s the case and they should be passing. If they aren’t ready for the class? If they aren’t doing the work? Okay. Of course they likely can’t and shouldn’t pass. But then, I’d argue they shouldn’t have been allowed to take the class to begin with either. 

and how would "allowed" be accomplished? The only preequisite for introductory biology or chemistry is a high school education. What's the college supposed to do to decide who is "allowed" into the class?

[Bootsie]

18 minutes ago, forty-two said:

The whole situation really burns me.  It's not fair to high school graduates who successfully did everything they were told to do, and yet are still left unprepared for college.  And it's not fair to those who are prepared for (increasingly expensive) college to have their classes spend substantial time teaching what ought to have been mastered in high school.  And it's not fair that jobs that don't require college skills nevertheless require college as an easy means to guarantee the high school skills the job does require.  Especially because of how dang expensive college is.

But I have no idea what *individual* people and businesses and professors can do to effectively push back against this systemic problem, when the system as a whole isn't going to make the drastic changes necessary.  Colleges aren't going to refuse to admit unqualified high school graduates en masse, or flunk them out en masse in freshman weed-out classes (which, as I understand it, is what used to happen in easy-admit schools).  A large number of businesses aren't going to take chances on hiring high school graduates with a high likelihood of being unprepared for jobs requiring high school skills if they can find enough people with college credits to hire instead.  And high schools aren't going to refuse to graduate everyone who is unprepared and admit they are incapable of preparing a large number of their students.  So what can individuals do to resist the counterproductive-to-true-learning pressures inherent in the system?  *Are* there things good teachers can do to genuinely educate willing but underprepared students without dumbing down the standards for success?  Or is the system just too broken to do good by your students and do good by your educational standards?

Another part of this problem is that college professors were generally not trained in remedial teaching methods.  They are trained to be specialists in their field.  The university model was that students came prepared to learn, knew basic math, knew how to read, wanted to learn, etc.  The professor was supposed to engage students in the field of study the professor specialized in.  For the most part, professors have had little experience with remedial learning; not only do they not have time for it in their classes, it is not what they are equipped to do.

[Pen]

https://www.insidehighered.com/digital-learning/article/2017/05/10/trial-and-error-lehman-and-hunter-colleges-boost-chemistry

[Murphy101]

7 minutes ago, regentrude said:

and how would "allowed" be accomplished? The only preequisite for introductory biology or chemistry is a high school education. What's the college supposed to do to decide who is "allowed" into the class?

That’s not true at our colleges/community college. 

They have to have a minimum score in maths on the ACT or SAT to take any science course at all and higher scores to take higher science classes. They also have to have a minimum score in language arts to take all other courses.

I’d argue they need to raise the minimum. For a starter effort anyways. 

[Murphy101]

14 minutes ago, regentrude said:

I am a college professor and have never seen or heard of a class with a 10% pass rate.

 

 

 

 

 

 To be fair I meant to hit the “2” button. 

But still I’d think a class full of ready and studying students should be a majority pass - would you agree?

eta: and I’m thinking of pass as A or B. So my margin is skewed. Apologies. 

Edited October 30, 2018 by Murphy101

[regentrude]

1 minute ago, Murphy101 said:

 But still I’d think a class full of ready and studying students should be a majority pass - would you agree?

absolutely.

I have analyzed all my students' grades over the years when I was the only instructor for the course and never had a student fail who completed all assignments and attended all classes. Every single student who failed had multiple missed assignments. Showing up and doing the required work was enough to pass.

[Bootsie]

3 minutes ago, Murphy101 said:

That’s not true at our colleges/community college. 

They have to have a minimum score in maths on the ACT or SAT to take any science course at all and higher scores to take higher science classes. They also have to have a minimum score in language arts to take all other courses.

I’d argue they need to raise the minimum. For a starter effort anyways. 

For state schools, these requirements are often set by a governing body far removed from the professor, the department, or even the college.  I worked in a state in which there was pressure to increase college pass rates, similar to OP, and this was exacerbated by the fact that we had to accept all high school graduates and could not require remedial work, because it would increase time to graduation.  The state legislature found that students who didn't take remedial work, made As and Bs, and didn't drop classes graduated on time and got jobs.  So, the solution was not dealing with why students needed remedial work, why students failed, and why students dropped classes.  Instead, they thought if you just gave the poorer students As and Bs and penalized faculty when they dropped, then those students would be as successful as the good students.  

[Bootsie]

6 minutes ago, Murphy101 said:

 To be fair I meant to hit the “2” button. 

But still I’d think a class full of ready and studying students should be a majority pass - would you agree?

In all of my years of teaching, I can't point to an example of a class where a majority of the students in a class did not pass.  DH was in an administrative position for a number of years, and as such, saw all course grade distributions, he never saw anything even beginning to approach a class where the majority did not pass. 

[regentrude]

6 minutes ago, jdahlquist said:

In all of my years of teaching, I can't point to an example of a class where a majority of the students in a class did not pass.  DH was in an administrative position for a number of years, and as such, saw all course grade distributions, he never saw anything even beginning to approach a class where the majority did not pass. 

Me neither.

But it is important to look at the actual numbers and not go by the students' perception. I had multiple conversations with students over the years who were under the wrong impression that only a small portion of students ever pass my class. In reality, my pass rate (C or better) is 80%.