Category Archives: Education

Confusing Articles About Young Women

Posted on by

George Will wrote an editorial about an ominous rise in dog ownership because an increasing number of women “are adopting dogs for security and/or companionship partly because of the great education divide.” Many more women than men are going to college. It was estimated that in 2013 there were 4.9 million more women age 25 or older with college degrees than men in that age group. Apparently women prefer to marry men who have educations at least similar to theirs, which translates to a shortage of suitable male partners. That leads to the women having a dog for companionship, and few would dispute that dogs are more dependable than men.

But that isn’t the end of the story. Amina Elahi writes that women represented 30 to 37 percent of computer science undergraduates in the 1980s. That number dipped to about 18 percent by 2010-2011. There are 75 percent of girls are interested in STEM in middle school, but apparently they then become more interested in makeup and having “the right body type.” There also continues to be a “nerdy” stigma with technology. Watching young girls and boys tells me they are all interested in technology, or at least they’re interested in the technology that keeps them texting each other as they gather for lunch.

It’s all very confusing. Why are many more women attending college but there are fewer of them in technology classes? I would think a young woman could fuss over her makeup and still attend a computer class. And why would they care about body type if they are going to opt for a dog as a companion?

 

Facing the Elephant in the Classroom

Posted on by

Tom Coyne had an excellent guest commentary article in the Denver Post about the status of education in Jefferson County, Colorado. The only complaint I have about the article is that it dances around defining the problem until page two. Taxpayers spend an enormous amount of money for education. In 2012-2013 Jeffco spent $10, 420 per student or over $260,000 per 25 student classroom. Denver metro expenditures on education were in the billions of dollars. All this spending is not resulting in decent educations for many of the students. “In 2014, only 46 percent of Jeffco students met the college and career ready… (requirements) in reading, only 47 percent in math, and only 45 percent in science.”  Sadly that means more than half the students were not adequately prepared to attend college or start any kind of career when they graduate from high school.

The school administrators and teachers union has a standard response to complaints students aren’t meeting standards. They first say they know what they are doing. They then will say something such as, “If you want better achievement results, you have to give us more money and trust us to use it wisely.” Does that mean the administrators and teachers are admitting they can work harder and smarter, but are holding back because they want more money. Everyone would always appreciate higher pay, but I think it would go over very poorly in a private business if a manager or employee said they will improve substandard performance only if they receive a raise Continue reading →

Confusion About Common Core

Posted on by

I happen to be the one who is confused by the debate over Common Core. I’ve read in an article by Michael J. Petrilli and Michael Brickman that “…educators have spent almost five years implementing Common Core in their classrooms.” The stated goal of the program is to prepare students for college and careers. It has milestones that “…students need to pass to reach those goals.” The program lays out standards for what students should know at the end of each school year. Teachers are accountable to see that their students learn what they are expected to learn.

None of that sounds bad to me, so what’s the problem? An article by Allie Bidwell says that support is waning for the academic benchmarks. Conservative critics are against the program as federal intrusion into what states should be controlling. Teachers are becoming more and more outspoken about opposition to the accountability measures that are part of the program. “Randy Weingarten, present of the American Federation of Teachers said in a statement the standards ‘must be guides, not straightjackets and they must be decoupled from testing.’” Continue reading →

Charter Schools Vs Public Schools

Posted on by

We have a friend who teaches at a charter school and is quite proud of the school and how well she thinks her students are performing. I open with that statement, because that undoubtedly has an influence on what I think of charter versus public schools. Reinforcing that is a Colorado report that documents charter schools generally outperform public schools at a significantly reduced cost for both teachers and administrators. Read on if you are interested in specific data. Continue reading →

Academically Adrift: Limited Learning on College Campuses

Posted on by

This book by Richard Arum and Josipa Roksa (and several coauthors of various chapters) was not much fun to read. The book is written in a “scholarly” style complete with numerous acronyms that probably would appeal to sociology majors, but not to me. It also uses interesting words such as “psychometricians. “However, the information in the book is disturbing. It does not paint a bright picture of what college students are getting for their tens of thousands in student loan debt. I will admit I did not do anything more than skim the final more than a hundred pages containing the “Methodological Appendix,” Notes, Bibliography, and Index.

The book begins with a comment from a former Harvard president saying, “Colleges and universities, for all the benefits they bring, accomplish far less for their students than they should.” That statement isn’t too alarming, but the words to follow are. He says that students graduate from college “…without being able to write well enough to satisfy their employers…reason clearly or perform competently in analyzing complex, non-technical problems.” That sounds bad enough, but the information presented in the book indicates the concerns are understated. Many students are portrayed as attending college with no intention of learning. They focus on enjoying the college experience to the maximum. They borrow large sums of money to be there and search for the classes that have no educational demands to maintain enough of a grade point average to remain in school, study very little, have fun, and eventually graduate. A significant portion of the borrowed money is spent on entertainment, socializing, and travel. Graduates enter the work force (if they are fortunate enough to find a job) with a large debt burden and little ability to succeed.

One basis of the problems with college education comes from the students and enablement from the colleges. A large number of the students are described as “drifting dreamers” who have “…high ambitions but no clear life plans…” They have no understanding about their chosen professions, the educational requirements of the professions, or even if there is even a market demand for the profession they chose. The book title derives from the belief of the authors that many students are “…largely academically adrift.” One student is quoted as saying, “I hate classes with a lot of reading that is tested on.” The student admits to doing “leisure pursuits” instead of doing reading assignments. Colleges have enabled students to stay in college and pay the rapidly inflating tuitions by providing classes that have few academic demands. The student acknowledges that he will be able to graduate with a 3.5 GPA “…but it doesn’t really matter if I don’t remember anything…It’s one thing to get the grade in a class and it’s another to actually take something from it, you know.”

It is disturbing to read that the quality of education has dropped markedly while costs have increased at twice the rate of inflation. Professors are increasingly concentrating on research and publication instead of teaching and the classes are often taught by graduate assistants. The students are encouraged to rate classes highly that have replaced rigorous education with entertaining activities. The average time spent by faculty in preparing and delivering instruction and meeting with students is eleven hours per week. Professors who go against this approach and spend more of their time teaching are not “significantly rewarded.” The net result is that a Secretary of Education Commission wrote that “…the quality of student learning at U.S. colleges and universities is inadequate, and in some cases, declining.”

The heart of the book comes from the testing of 2,322 students enrolled across a range of campuses. They were tested before college, after two years, and after graduation for critical thinking, analytical reasoning, problem solving and writing by something called the Collegiate Learning Assessment (CLA). The CLA is described as to test the ability to give the students descriptions of real life problems and test their ability to both solve the problems and clearly communicate their reasoning and approaches. The test is lauded by some experts and dismissed as flawed by others. I will editorialize that educators are almost certain to dismiss the results of the tests as flawed, because the results present a dismal picture of the quality of college education. One professor was quoted as saying the public is satisfied with what higher education is doing. “This is a market system, and the customers are buying.” The “customers” should read this book and decide whether they are getting the value they deserve in return for the tens of thousands of dollars and four years of investment.

The book identifies that the problems begin with inadequate education in high schools. Forty-six percent of students in Chicago agreed with the statement, “Even if I do not work hard in high school, I can still make my future plans come true.” Many students with an average grade of C or less in high school are being admitted into four-year colleges. Perhaps that is why such large numbers of students coming to college are required to take several remedial classes. The CLA finds that many college students continue to underperform. The book asks the question, “How much are students actually learning in contemporary education? The answer for many undergraduates, we have concluded, is not much.” The CLA finds “…no statistically significant gains in critical thinking, complex reasoning, and writing skill for at least 45 percent of the students in our study.” About the same number of students reported that they had not taken classes that required extensive reading or writing. Forty-eight percent of them were enrolled in humanities and social sciences, which are the fields of study that have been found to offer students higher grades for little effort.

There is a disturbing assessment that our current higher education system is a “…complicated sieve.” Its purpose is to sift “…the able from the dull.” However, the system is willing to accept tuition from all.

There is a posting on the blog link of this web site that gives some opinions about what students might want to consider in their search for higher education options.

Smart College Choices

Posted on by

I posted a review of the book “Academically Adrift” by Richard Arum and Josipa Roksa that paints a very bleak assessment of the quality of education in both our high schools and colleges. High schools are doing a poor job of preparing students for  life or further education and colleges are accepting more of them regardless of their high school grades. The colleges then, on the average, allow students to run up huge amounts of debt while they focus on enjoying their social lives and doing as little studying and attending class as little as possible to maximize the fun they are having. It seems many colleges enable this behavior by providing classes that require little studying, reading, or writing to attain high grades. The students want to live the good life and the colleges want them to continue paying tuition.

My first college class was English Literature taught by an eccentric female professor who would become one of my favorite professors. She opened the first class by telling us she had no intention of noting who was or was not in class. She also had no intention of calling on students with questions to determine who had or had not completed the assignments. She explained that we had paid to take the class, she appreciated that she had a good job as the result of those payments, and it was our choice whether to attend class or do the assignments. I had saved all of the money earned doing odd jobs that had been spent on tuition and books, and thought it would be a good idea to attend class, listen to the lectures, and do the assignments. I was suspicious that students who chose differently had parents paying the bills.

I’ve posted comments previously that it is time to rethink who should attend college. President Obama disagrees with me. He has said that “…we will provide the support necessary for you to complete college.” Consistent with that approach, 30 percent of high school graduates with a C grade average and 15 percent with a C- or less are admitted into four-year colleges. Many first year college students are required to take remedial classes to prepare them for college level classes. Many college professors agree with the statement “Most of the students I teach lack the basic skills for college level work.”

I question the “college for all” policy if it is automatically assumes the college is of the four-year variety. Community colleges offer two year degrees with tuition cost in the vicinity of $2000/year. I’ve seen data that the average cost at public four-year colleges is at or above $7000/year and more than $20,000 for tuition and fees at private four-year colleges. My suggestion is that those students who had low grades in high school but want to continue their education in a quest “to find themselves” research local community colleges or junior colleges. I know that some four-year colleges limit the classes that can transfer and be credited toward graduation requirements, but I would say that disadvantage is offset by the significantly lower cost.

Some students want to attend college with the primary purpose of socializing and having fun, and I understand  that those are high priorities for most if not all young people. However, it shouldn’t be difficult to find like-minded people who would be willing to share an apartment with someone near those community colleges or junior colleges. The savings in tuition would pay for significant amounts of fun activities. Perhaps the two years of exposure to education will even lead some students finding that, as is written in “Academically Adrift” that the real mission of schooling is “…developing a love of learning for learning sake.” I have personal knowledge of a student who was “academically adrift” until taking a class from a demanding professor. The professor was also an excellent teacher, the student became engaged, and was proud of the B from the class. The student learned to love learning and found it easy to earn high grades.