From: greis@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Gayla Ann Greis)
Newsgroups: misc.education
Subject: Re: Duty to graduate ?
Date: 6 Apr 92 21:38:18 GMT
Article-I.D.: uwm.1992Apr6.213818.11145
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee

In article <29DC983C.10570@orion.oac.uci.edu> cedman@golem.ps.uci.edu (Carl Edman) writes:
>And another educationist discovers net-news.....

:-)

>This is part of the attitude in the group which has controlled  
>education in america for such a long time and has made american primary  
>and secondary education the laughing stock of the western world (and  
>much of the rest of the world, too). At least you have the courage to  
>admit that you are part of it.

No, I don't think so. I find it hard to believe that you believe that
one first grader should be separated out from the others because he or
she may not be able to spell, yet may be brilliant in Math. I don't
admit that I am part of a stale organization, and I do believe that there
is much stagnacity (Is that even a word?) that remains, but I will admit
that I have commited my life to at least trying to work in, and improve
the educational system - rather than just sitting back and being a
fatalist.

>A test is a measurement of skill at any one moment in time. As you know  
>and might even understand to allow endless repetition on any one test  
>allows you to achieve any desired result and destroys the integrity of  
>the concept. 

I am not talking about "Teaching To The Tests" and yes, I remember that
thread a few years ago... (3 maybe?) I am talking about Mastery Learning,
which need not only be semantic data, but can be process learning as
well. But since you brought it up, are you sure there is no place for
Teaching To the Test? In a primary and even into secondary ed systems,
there are many concepts that must be rote learned... Your multiplication
facts for instance.

>That is not to say that a student may not learn after the test and  
>achieve a level of skill which would have enabled him to do better on  
>the test or that that shouldn't be noted. Just give the student another  
>test on the same subject and note both grades and their chronological  
>order. That ought to make it clear to whoever reads the transcript what  
>happened without violating the integrity of the test.

Well, OK. Although I don't know if I agree with the time limitations.
If the student has the skill, what difference does it make? Perhaps
someone who graduated 10 years before me is going to be held up as
a model, because they obviously learned the skill before I did? That
does not mean we are not both equally talented.

>> so does the school make a committment[sic] to that student.

We all make mistakes, and the [sic] is implied by nature of the ">".
Try hanging around third graders all day, and see what *YOU* can
spell at the end of the day!

>The commitment the student makes to the school is to perform at levels  
>appropriate to that school. If he violates that commitment, the school  
>is not bound by any commitment either. This may sound harsh, but it is  
>the only way to keep up the standards of quality. i can think of no  
>better testament to that fact than the decline of these standards over  
>the years in which people like you were in control of the schools.

Hmmm, this sounds like a personal flame... :-) Grrr. I might tend to
agree with you in part, but perhaps the severity of the action, and
the surrounding circumstances should be taken into account - as well
as the student's track record.

According to you, there are no standards of quality as it is... (Well,
it sure sounds that way.) And it also seems that most schools already
practice this policy. The reason MIT was brought up, was it's
straying from conventional thought by making a commitment to it's
students. Therefore, who is the sayer of conventional non-wisdom here?

>> I believe that given time, most of the tasks required of an
>> undergraduate, (and of course high schools on down)
>> could be performed by at least 80% of the population given
>> the resources, and the time. Please remember that 68% of

>I believe you are correct. People with an IQ of 85 could pass through  
>most american colleges and apparently do. If you don't think that this  
>is an indictment of the quality of education, I'm afraid we live in  
>different worlds.

I think that this means that we do have a quality system. I am not saying
the fact that many of these students slip through and graduate without
having done a darn thing is a positive sign, but that a student with an
85 IQ could work hard, go to class, learn what is to be learned, and
graduate *IS* a positive sign of the quality of education.

>are. Those which are of course produce the best results and get most  
>publicity.

RE: selectivity. Oh? I think there are many smaller private schools
which provide excellent educations that don't have the money to
advertise like you say.

>You appear to believe that an educational system which does not end up  
>giving a PhD in mathematics to any one who enters kindergarten is a  
>failure. This is not so. You may be surprised to find out that only a  

I don't think so. What is required of a PhD and even a Masters is a
completely different ballgame. In today's society it is hard to
survive without a college education, no matter how bright you are.
I have a friend who is *Brilliant* in many areas, but is dyslexic, and
since he is in his 40s, had been passed over by many of the programs
now available. As a result, he supports his wife and son on only $16K/
year, because he doesn't have that degree. He could have functioned
very normally otherwise, although it takes him quite a while to read.
Many more students fail because of personal problems, instant parenthood,
or running out of money. Of course, since you are not there, I wouldn't
expect you to understand.

Life does not need to be a cut-throat competition. We can work together,
and I don't believe I am dreaming. (Maybe I'll go watch ST:TNG some
more... :-)

>the most talented and most effective people for those tasks. And by the  
>same logic it goes on from there on down, selecting the best at every  
>level. This is a fact which you can not alter. All you can do (and have  

Well, this is wrong. I guess the fact is where we draw the "line" for
success, and if time is the major requirement. (I would suppose that the
returning student's degree is not as valid as the conventional 4 year
student's either?) And, while I alone can not alter it, I can work to
convince you to help me to... (Who is of the old school that is in
power Carl? It sure sounds like you!) I intend to make sure those students
I have in the elementary, and middle grades have success by meeting
the requirements, even if it takes time. And if it starts there, it
hopefully will work its way up!