New realities in post secondary education are prompting educators, students, legislators and taxpayers to question the appropriateness and efficacy of remediation or “developmental education” at four year colleges and universities throughout America. The catalyst for the debate on remediation in the college setting was the decision by the Board of Trustees at CUNY to phase out remedial course work in the four year colleges in New York, limiting students in need of developmental education to the area’s community college system. Many colleges and four year institutions throughout the country are now considering joining CUNY, opting to either refuse to accept students who meet minimal criteria or by making admission conditional upon meeting certain requirements in a timely manner. I will argue that limiting educational avenues compromises educational equity which is promoted by the American ideals of equality and self improvement through education.
The rhetorical arguments to preserve the integrity of the university as an elite enclave of higher learning are many and faceted. Defenders of this policy shift employ a mixture of rhetorical appeals – focusing mainly upon logos or the scientific proof of statistics which illustrate the state of need for remediation and the discouraging long term educational outcomes of students who receive such services in a university setting. The statistics also evidence the assertion that time and resources are diverted from other college ready students in the learning environment – reframing the question of education equity and the societal implications. Another factor which can be quantified is the burdensome tuition costs for remediation at the university level, both for taxpayers, students and their families. As a nation, currently under extreme budgetary constraints, we must determine at what cost we will continue to subsidize the education of people who are statistically unlikely to succeed.
While I agree that the University is not intended to be a haven for substandard students, statistics reveal that students may arrive unprepared to perform college level work for various reasons. Students who experience language barriers, returning adult students and those with disabilities (both learning and physical) often require some level of remediation, but this necessity does not conclusively prove that they are incompetent college students incapable of mastering the curriculum. Many of the issues facing these students may be adequately addressed through appropriate counseling and support services. To deny these students entrance to the University would deprive the institution of the diversity of student population which is often sought. Additionally the increased time, cost and difficulty of pursuing remedial education prior to university admission may serve as a deterrent to reaching long-term educational goals. Unable to improve their job prospects, some of these students will become a financial burden to society.
Students transitioning from high school to college may also require some level of remediation, but the statistics fails to take into account overall individual performance and strength of skill sets. Most students who transition directly from high school to a four year institution have performed well (sometimes completing honors level classes), earned their diploma and met the basic college entrance requirements (including grade point average and SAT scores) – as determined by the college. Relegating the unprepared high school students to remediation at community colleges superficially addresses the issue, but will perpetuate a cycle of exclusion and elitism in four year colleges and universities.
The implications for the decision to completely eliminate remediation from the university setting are broad and profound for the individual, the educational institution and society. Individuals who require additional preparation must choose to accept limited academic choice or refrain from pursuing higher learning. The educational system must scrutinize how K-12 programs are failing and explore what changes need to be made to produce students who are prepared to compete and produce on the college level – a goal that will require the collaborative effort of all levels of the educational system.
Annotated Bibliography
Diploma to Nowhere. Rep. Strong American Schools. Web. 25 Oct. 2009..
This report offers thorough and current statistics on national rates for remediation and the costs involved. It explores the experience of high school students transitioning to college, including polling on their perceived level of preparedness before and after beginning college courses. The objective of this report is to be the impetus for school reform, so it uses information that puts the effectiveness of high school education and college preparation completely ineffective. This report is cited in several of the other articles in this bibliography, so although it is not a journal article I felt it was important to include it.
Hamilton, Kendra. "Rhetoric Vs. Reality." Black Issues in Higher Education 18.21 (2001): 31-34. EBSCOhost. Web. 25 Oct. 2009..
Hamilton’s article attempts to correct misperceptions in the debate about developmental education, putting into perspective the total cost of remediation in higher education. She also explores the stigma associated with remediation and challenges the ideas that minorities require more remediation than whites, or that students who are accepted into Ivy League Institutions do not require remediation. This article offers answers to several of the assertions made in the case for eliminating remediation, and stresses the positive outcome of students who receive developmental education.
Hollis, Leah P. "Academic Advising in the Wonderland of College for Developmental Students." College Student Journal 43.1 (2009): 31-35. EBSCOhost. Web. 25 Oct. 2009..
Hollis articulates the belief that many developmental students are often plagued by poor preparation and difficult socioeconomic situations which make attaining success in a university setting near impossible. She suggests an advisement model designed to help support and encourage these high risk students by assisting them become familiar with campus expectations and encouraging their strengths. The interaction of counselors offers guidance, but also an increased sense of belonging on a campus which can help the student to become more invested in their program of study and more likely to succeed.
Perkins- Gough, D. "Unprepared for College." Educational Leadership 66.3 (2008): 88-89. Wilson Web. Web. 25 Oct. 2009..
This article citing many statistics in the report “Diploma to Nowhere” emphasizes the experience of high school education and the student’s perception that they had not been adequately prepared for college curriculum. The article suggests collaboration between secondary and postsecondary instiutions to better design programs of study that would benefit the students and lessen the need for remediation.
Richardson, Jeanita W. ""Who Shall be Educated?": The case for Restricting Remediation at the City University of New York." Education and Urban Society 37.2 (2005): 174-92. Http://eus.sagepub.com. Web. 25 Oct. 2009.
This article chronicles the history of CUNY, providing background and reasoning for the decision by the Board of Regents to become the first university system in the nation to eliminate remedial course work. The article offers counter arguments to the reasons offered for the policy shift specific to CUNY. Richardson also discusses the impact on the Urban and minority students who typically make up the CUNY student population.
The rhetorical arguments to preserve the integrity of the university as an elite enclave of higher learning are many and faceted. Defenders of this policy shift employ a mixture of rhetorical appeals – focusing mainly upon logos or the scientific proof of statistics which illustrate the state of need for remediation and the discouraging long term educational outcomes of students who receive such services in a university setting. The statistics also evidence the assertion that time and resources are diverted from other college ready students in the learning environment – reframing the question of education equity and the societal implications. Another factor which can be quantified is the burdensome tuition costs for remediation at the university level, both for taxpayers, students and their families. As a nation, currently under extreme budgetary constraints, we must determine at what cost we will continue to subsidize the education of people who are statistically unlikely to succeed.
While I agree that the University is not intended to be a haven for substandard students, statistics reveal that students may arrive unprepared to perform college level work for various reasons. Students who experience language barriers, returning adult students and those with disabilities (both learning and physical) often require some level of remediation, but this necessity does not conclusively prove that they are incompetent college students incapable of mastering the curriculum. Many of the issues facing these students may be adequately addressed through appropriate counseling and support services. To deny these students entrance to the University would deprive the institution of the diversity of student population which is often sought. Additionally the increased time, cost and difficulty of pursuing remedial education prior to university admission may serve as a deterrent to reaching long-term educational goals. Unable to improve their job prospects, some of these students will become a financial burden to society.
Students transitioning from high school to college may also require some level of remediation, but the statistics fails to take into account overall individual performance and strength of skill sets. Most students who transition directly from high school to a four year institution have performed well (sometimes completing honors level classes), earned their diploma and met the basic college entrance requirements (including grade point average and SAT scores) – as determined by the college. Relegating the unprepared high school students to remediation at community colleges superficially addresses the issue, but will perpetuate a cycle of exclusion and elitism in four year colleges and universities.
The implications for the decision to completely eliminate remediation from the university setting are broad and profound for the individual, the educational institution and society. Individuals who require additional preparation must choose to accept limited academic choice or refrain from pursuing higher learning. The educational system must scrutinize how K-12 programs are failing and explore what changes need to be made to produce students who are prepared to compete and produce on the college level – a goal that will require the collaborative effort of all levels of the educational system.
Annotated Bibliography
Diploma to Nowhere. Rep. Strong American Schools. Web. 25 Oct. 2009.
This report offers thorough and current statistics on national rates for remediation and the costs involved. It explores the experience of high school students transitioning to college, including polling on their perceived level of preparedness before and after beginning college courses. The objective of this report is to be the impetus for school reform, so it uses information that puts the effectiveness of high school education and college preparation completely ineffective. This report is cited in several of the other articles in this bibliography, so although it is not a journal article I felt it was important to include it.
Hamilton, Kendra. "Rhetoric Vs. Reality." Black Issues in Higher Education 18.21 (2001): 31-34. EBSCOhost. Web. 25 Oct. 2009.
Hamilton’s article attempts to correct misperceptions in the debate about developmental education, putting into perspective the total cost of remediation in higher education. She also explores the stigma associated with remediation and challenges the ideas that minorities require more remediation than whites, or that students who are accepted into Ivy League Institutions do not require remediation. This article offers answers to several of the assertions made in the case for eliminating remediation, and stresses the positive outcome of students who receive developmental education.
Hollis, Leah P. "Academic Advising in the Wonderland of College for Developmental Students." College Student Journal 43.1 (2009): 31-35. EBSCOhost. Web. 25 Oct. 2009.
Hollis articulates the belief that many developmental students are often plagued by poor preparation and difficult socioeconomic situations which make attaining success in a university setting near impossible. She suggests an advisement model designed to help support and encourage these high risk students by assisting them become familiar with campus expectations and encouraging their strengths. The interaction of counselors offers guidance, but also an increased sense of belonging on a campus which can help the student to become more invested in their program of study and more likely to succeed.
Perkins- Gough, D. "Unprepared for College." Educational Leadership 66.3 (2008): 88-89. Wilson Web. Web. 25 Oct. 2009.
This article citing many statistics in the report “Diploma to Nowhere” emphasizes the experience of high school education and the student’s perception that they had not been adequately prepared for college curriculum. The article suggests collaboration between secondary and postsecondary instiutions to better design programs of study that would benefit the students and lessen the need for remediation.
Richardson, Jeanita W. ""Who Shall be Educated?": The case for Restricting Remediation at the City University of New York." Education and Urban Society 37.2 (2005): 174-92. Http://eus.sagepub.com. Web. 25 Oct. 2009.
This article chronicles the history of CUNY, providing background and reasoning for the decision by the Board of Regents to become the first university system in the nation to eliminate remedial course work. The article offers counter arguments to the reasons offered for the policy shift specific to CUNY. Richardson also discusses the impact on the Urban and minority students who typically make up the CUNY student population.
No comments:
Post a Comment