I am getting out of my comfort zone here and will try to actually include a chart!
It is sometimes the case that when higher education gets blamed for poor graduation rates, the problem with remedial education, and the habits of our students we deflect the accusations towards the K-12 system. After all, if we got better prepared students who wanted to learn most of our problems would miraculously go away. Of course, there are those in the K-12 system who point to higher education and observe that out curriculum is outdated, that we have not adapted to the new learners, or that tuition dollars are misappropriated. The finger pointing doesn’t get us very far.
As someone who works in higher education, 1) I believe that if we could fix some of the problems in our K-12 schools, our country (and higher education) would be much better off, and 2) perhaps higher education has had a significant role in creating the myriad of issues of K-12 system faces.
A recent report may, in my mind, at least shed some light on how higher education may be contributing to the problems facing K-12. I encourage everyone to open the PDF and read the report (it is 5 pages and quick to read). “Grade inflation for education majors and low standards for teachers: When everyone makes the grade” uses data to suggest that students taking classes in colleges of education earn much higher grades than those in other colleges (see figure 1). The line that spikes up at the end represents the grades given in education classes. Within the PDF is another a similar, if even less flattering chart. I may not personally agree with the author’s interpretations and implications, but they do make a great deal of sense. My questions to you--- 1) how can we explain the data represented in the chart, 2) do you think the data illustrates a problematic situation, and if so 3) what would you propose to do about it?
DISTRIBUTIONS OF CLASSROOM GRADES FOR TWELVE MAJOR ACADEMIC DEPARTMENTS, PLUS THE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, 2007–2008 SCHOOL YEAR, NONFRESHMAN UNDERGRADUATE CLASSES AT INDIANA UNIVERSITY–BLOOMINGTON
SOURCE: Cory Koedel, “Grading Standards in Education Departments at Universities,” Education Policy Analysis
Archives 19 (2011). NOTE: The outlying distribution is for the education department. Other departments include math and science (dashed lines), social science (x’s), and humanities (circles).
There have been discussions about this in the counselor education (which are often housed in education departments) literature. I have also had conversations about this with colleagues and faculty, some of which may be relevant here.
ReplyDeleteWe take a very developmental approach, which educators often do as well. I think this leads people to the idea that students will develop and learn and 'get it' at some point. Maybe the student isn't doing that well right now, but they're growing, learning, and will reach their full developmental potential, just maybe not in this particular class. I think the developmental perspective is great, but there still needs to be a threshold students much reach.
Often, our also field struggles with 'nice counselor syndrome.' I'm not sure if this is the same in education. We are in a human service field and we want to help others. This can lead counselors, counselor educators, and maybe education departments to be "nice" to students and engage in grade inflation. However, this "niceness" does not help the student and is therefore not really very nice.
The final idea I have about this topic is the evaluation system. Until recently, it was difficult to find specific standards in the counseling field by which to devise a threshold for student evaluation. There are standards for training that are very clear. But, there are not a lot of standards for faculty to use to say "this is why you are not passing my class, or being asked to leave the program...."
Even now, it can be difficult to define concrete standards in the literature to pass, or more specifically fail, a student.
Failing a student now has many more legal implication than it has in the past. Students are not afraid to sue universities, professors, and even TAs if they don't pass. There was a legal case in Virginia a few years ago when a student was asked to leave the program. They sued everyone from the provost to the doctoral-level teacher. I absolutely believe students have the right to do that. I think it can make it more difficult for faculty to fail students or ask them to leave programs where they are clearly struggling. Even if the faculty member knows they are right, they have to have a lot of documentation and emotional energy to get through a legal case that may last several years.
There has been progress in our field to create those specific, measurable standards which has made it easier for faculty to evaluate at a deeper level. I would say that creating clearer standards across all areas of education can help grade inflation.
I also believe that more selective admission can help that process. This may be difficult to do at the undergraduate level. I'll admit I don't know a lot about undergraduate admission. I know, at the graduate level, counseling faculty tend to be very thoughtful in admission. The more prevention they can take to deselect students who are likely to struggle, the less potential for asking a student to leave. They are more likely to give honest grades at that point. Of course, you could also make the argument that being more selective at admission also increases the likelihood of grade inflation. But, that's another argument for another day! I just finished oral comps and I don't know if my brain is going to last much longer!
I think that Margaret has an interesting point about why the data may be the way it is - that as employees in human service fields, we want to help, encourage and not hold students back. Even when you see a student struggling, you hope that they're doing ok elsewhere. As a small example of this, I co-teach an FYE (First Year Experience)course at UNC and there is a student in our class who has yet to turn in any of three assignments that have been due this semester. While on one hand, this is really frustrating and discouraging, part of me asks questions like How are her other classes going? What's going on in life that these simple assignments aren't getting done? Is she struggling elsewhere? As frustrated as I am with her, part of me is giving her the benefit of the doubt and empatizing that there may be other things going on in her life.
ReplyDeleteWith that being said, I do think the data illustrates a very problematic situation. Much like Matt, I'm not sure I agree with the article but it does make sense and unfortunately, it describes a vicious cycle.
The third question, what would you propose is done about it? is an age-old question. The only thoughts I have take me back to assessment and we know there is a lot of controversy over assessment. With that, my mind goes to PLACE and PRAXIS exams that have to be taken for K-12 teachers to be certified to teach. Graduates of these education programs are obviously passing these tests or they wouldn't be able to teach in the classroom so perhaps a different form or extended version of assessment to test teaching methods would help.
I think both comments above are relevant to what could be the cause of the spike. Education falls under the umbrella of "helping professions." While vocations such as nursing, psychotherapy, medicine, social work and ministry also fall under this category, the same trends in grade inflation are not represented throughout the group. So why is this so?
ReplyDeleteWhat's interesting to me is this debate between higher education and K-12 systems. The "finger pointing" accusing higher ed of being at fault for poor graduation rates. With grade inflation like this in education, many students we are graduating, we are sending back to the K-12 system to teach. So what do K-12 professionals want from higher ed? More graduates? That doesn't seem to be an issue, in education at least. If educators at universities are using out-dated curriculum and failing to adapt to new learners, what would they suggest? Stricter grading requirements in education? Then wouldn't they be angry yet again if we fail to graduate as many students? It seems that this argument is in a double-bind.
What comes up for me here is my experiences in graduate school. I'm approaching a year and a half into a doctoral program, and prior that that I obtained a Master's degree. Throughout all of these credits, I have received one "B." Does that mean my education has been sub-par or that it's "too easy" for me? Um, no. Educators in these programs want students to succeed, and students learn that if they put in the dedicated time and energy, along with demonstrating acquisition of knowledge, they can.
What I see here is not a difference in grades assigned to students. I see a difference in vocational applicability. K-12 educators learn how to teach curriculum to children and adolescents. Most of these individuals have mastered these skills themselves (hopefully--and going back to the issue of receiving "well-prepared" students). They are not learning an entirely new set of skills and pathways to learning (i.e. the complete anatomy and function of the human body, macroeconomics of the business world, historical philosophers and their contributions to today's society, etc.) Many of these programs are preparing students for graduate programs, which may be a requirement for a career. This isn't so in education. These pre-educators engage in coursework just as any program, but the focus of material is more applicable and easily integrated than other vocations of choice. They study, they practice within a current school culture, they test, and they enter the field.
Do I see the spike as problematic? Unless there is a collection of data suggesting that higher education is producing poor quality or harmful teachers, I say no. If a majority of education students are "making the grade," and they are succeeding in the field, isn't this a good thing?