Monday, February 05, 2007

 

Testing Texans

According to IHE, the governor of Texas is proposing mandatory tests for graduating college students, with state aid to the colleges tied to how well the graduates do.

It's one of those ideas that sounds smart for about ten seconds, until you actually start to think it through. The more you think about it, the dumber it gets. It's almost as if now that Molly Ivins has passed, Texas has declared it safe for bad ideas to roam free.

The admirable impulse behind it is to create incentives for colleges to teach well. Taken simply at that level, it's hard to object. But the method is screwy, and would almost certainly defeat the goal.

These are just the issues I could think of off the top of my head. I'm sure there are plenty more – racial bias, ESL (a HUGE issue in Texas), the usual critiques of standardized tests, interdisciplinary programs, and the fundamental fact that American higher education is the envy of the world while our K-12 system is widely perceived as a joke, raising the question of who should be imitating whom, etc. -- and many I've never even thought of. (I'll leave it to my wise and worldly readers to pile on stuff I haven't covered here.)

I hope the Texas legislature has the brains to think of at least a few of these, and to put this idea out to pasture. It has “disaster” written all over it.


Comments:
Fantastic! Our generation is creating, through these $#@&^ end of course exams, a generation of students that will be world beaters at filling in circles and multiple choice tests. However, they won't be able to think and reason and question....the exact skills the world needs! Shame on us.
 
It is impossible to quantify critical thinking. The same critical thinking conspicuously absent in this latest rendition of No Pandering Politician Left Behind. Too many parents (i.e., voters) have a Pavlovian response to pretty numbers and consciously will themselves to believe these data mean something. A college education, especially a liberal arts education, defies such narrowmindedness. It embraces the uncountable and the abstract. This is what leads to innovation (good and bad) and challenges the feebleminded prescriptions of fools who have never faced the prospect of rewiring a gaggle of media-brainwashed frosh in a college classroom. College profs create independent thinkers -- the last thing a politician wishes to see.
 
Great post. The first three bullet-points, especially, struck me. Your third point about CCs can be extended, too, to 4-year schools with generous-admissions policies: "Either achieve absolute miracles in the classroom -- presumably, if they knew how to do that, they would have done it by now -- or become attrition machines." I know, it's implied in your remarks that we could extend this particular issue beyond CCs . . . yet this implication isn't going to be clear to certain kinds of legislators.
 
(1) There are currently exit exams in those areas where clear national standards exist and where common skills matter: nursing, radiology, medicine, engineering. These do provide a pretty clear measure of how effective a program is, and our CC is justifiably proud of our 100% pass rate on some of those exams.

(2) Florida has had a test of "college level" skills for decades that must be passed by any student who wants to matriculate past the sophomore year. [Hence it was originally taken by everyone getting an AA and everyone at a Uni, including athletes.] Reason for it was that a lawyer in the legislature got fed up with hiring new uni grads for his office who could not write a sentence. This test enforces a skill level that I would put at about the 11th grade level in both math and english across all majors.

This requirement has been watered down over the years so that students can exempt the exam by getting a 2.5 in designated courses in those areas (e.g. EN101 and EN102). The latest change is to drop the requirement that ed majors pass the written exam even if they make the exemption score, because the requirement was hurting retention among teaching majors across the state.

AFAIK, it was never a factor in funding, and (as DD anticipates) it could be gamed by going to a private college ... just as HS students in Florida transfer to a private HS if they find they cannot graduate from a public school due to their low FCAT scores.
 
re: professor meanypants

Measuring the presence of critical thinking is certainly possible. If you can't quantify it, how do you assign grades? (answer: "I use a rubric to group student work into A's B's etc.")

At my institution, our new program review protocol requires us to do just such an assessment. The "tests" we're using to assess student growth are home-grown and part of our existing program. Our department is trying to take the perspective that this is a chance to learn about our students and perhaps figure out how to improve our teaching.
 
What, like we didn't have bad ideas while Molly Ivins was alive?

The state has no way to enforce exit exams on the private schools. No state money, no state accreditation = no leverage. The state doesn't support community colleges here, either. They are strictly county. The only two-year state schools are senior colleges that offer the last two years as a counterpart to junior (community) colleges that offer the first two years.

As I was reading through your post all I was thinking was "test fraud, just like TAKS in K-12" so I'm glad you hit that point. In addition to scores of kids being classified as special ed or ESL right before test day, Texas also has a large number of low-income high schools with, gasp, NO dropouts. At all! Isn't that amazing? Yeah, we got the fraud down.

I expect this to be another bad idea that dies on the vine due to, if nothing else, lack of funding.

-I'm accounting as fast as I can
 
This comment has been removed by the author.
 
Re: midwestphysicist

Dear Learn'd Astronomer,

Sciences, meet Humanities. By our very nature, we traffic in the unknowable. Do we pass out grades? Sure. Should there be standards? Without question. The question is: who determines the rubric?

Every semester I encounter students who are passive, apathetic, blind to a world beyond cable TV, and downright delusional about the vagaries of the housing market, the limitations of a college degree, the extent to which Madison Avenue has made them indentured servants. It's safe to say students crowding my side of the campus differ from those enrolled in your physics course. Where is their sense of wonder? Curiosity? Intellectual rebellion that goes beyond mere posturing? Ask the HS teacher forced to teach to a test for the last three years.

The HS teacher should not bear all the blame, and these students will/may certainly evolve in four years. But what happens when profs are forced to account for the arbitrary precepts of a politician? Academic freedom is not just for Trotskyites. All profs need the freedom to adapt to the protean challenges of the modern college classroom. I say, butt out.

I submit that the governor of Florida has little desire to make the sunshine state a bastion of Philosopher Kings. He is a politician pandering to the lowest common denominator and using numbers (which are ultimately symbolic and orphic) to make his case.

Who will design this rubric for an entire state? A politician? A bureaucrat? English Profs? (Yikes!) What shall deemed worthwhile: facts or modes of inquiry? Do we take into account that some darlings of critical theory may be mocked tomorrow? How do we account for improvement over four years? As DD states, where were they intellectually as freshman? Can you factor that in your equation?

Doctors. Nurses. Attorneys. Engineers. By all means, test them. Credentials are quite relevant. Politicans? That test comes every few years. I have my doubts on their pass rate on this one.
 
Hmmm... DD and Professor Meanypants argues that what college should be about is creating graduates who are armed with critical thinking skills (and these cannot be measured).

Additionally, we have an argument put forward that if we actually hold schools with open/generous admissions to a standard, then they either will be expected to perform "miracles" or else become "attrition machines."

I take the second assertion as an admission, in part, of defeat. If students from such august institutions will be (en masse) unable to pass such exams without "miracles", should we conclude that these schools are simply "giving away" degrees?

By what measures should we determine these schools are "successful?" (or should we simply take the administration's word for it?)
 
Uh, Pseudonymous, I think the point is that if you compare institutions offering open / near-open admissions vs those offering competitive admissions, it's pretty clear who will come out on top. Comparing the two sets of institutions and rewarding the second set punishes the first set for trying to offer education to a broader crowd. Instead, we could try to measure improvement, though that is also going to be difficult / open to gaming.

It's fine to have a debate over whether we should have CCs offering education to people who probably aren't going to be able to transfer into a four year degree, but that is an orthogonal debate.

earl
 
earl -- thanks, and well said.

I never claimed that college is about ineffable critical thinking. (That's pm's view, not mine.) I claimed that colleges have lots of different programs/majors, and that different programs/majors develop different competencies. Which means you'd either have to come up statewide exams for each of the hundreds of different majors out there, or go to lowest-common-denominator skills. The former strikes me as an albatross, and the latter as defeating the purpose.

Am I admitting defeat in my line about attrition machines? I don't think so -- I'm saying that "the best of the best" will beat "the median of the entire population." The only way around that would be for cc's to limit testing to the best of the best, which, again, would defeat the purpose.

pseudonymous' last question, though, is both trenchant and difficult. How do we measure success, if not by standardized tests? It's a toughie, and one that I would say hasn't been satisfactorily answered from Harvard on down. Job placement rates tell you as much about market fluctuations as they do about teaching or learning. Grad school/Med school admissions rates are based, at least in part, on reputation.

I fully agree that disciplines with Board exams lend themselves to easy measurement, and my cc is justly proud of its pass rates in those areas. But those exist only in a few areas. In disciplines in which consensus is lacking, I don't see that happening.
 
Earl: Thanks for your comment.

I agree when you write "Comparing the two sets of institutions and rewarding the second set punishes the first set for trying to offer education to a broader crowd."

Are we aware of how the testing would be realized in implementation, or perhaps have certain assumptions been made in this rather quick and dirty analysis? Assuming that DD is correct, and that the plan is to compare all schools without discrimination to mission, it seems to me that we have an opportunity here.

Perhaps we should take the opportunity to influence the policy makers and improve the process, and help them understand how they can use this structure to make apple-apple and orange-orange comparisons, rather than assume they will only draw the apple/orange comparison.

Okay, enough fruit analogies. I see here two major issues. The first is providing a way of assessing if the various state-funded institutions are meeting the mandates given to those institutions. If we use the exam results as a means of comparing like-chartered schools, then we shouldn't have a problem--right? Surely there is no problem with using appropriately developed measures to assess if the Univ/Colleges are meeting the missions for which they receive funds!

The second problem is perhaps orthogonal, but since DD hinted at it here, it is fair game. Are CC's actually achieving their mission of educating their students? And if they are, how can cross-CC comparisons be made to allow for the rational allocation of state resources (since the "state" here used to mean governmental agency, provides the funding). I only target CC's specifically since DD, a proponent of CCs, seems to believe that miracles must take place for his students/graduates to "do well" in such an exam.
 
Pseudo, your attempts to cast DD as a snotty elitist ("...DD, a proponent of CCs, seems to believe that miracles must take place for his students/graduates to 'do well' in such an exam.") runs counter to your own posting and its recognition of the "apples to oranges" quality of comparing four year schools to CCs.

The Texas plan makes sense from an outside perspective and looks like madness from the inside. To the greater public, holding accountable the institutions that take in huge amounts of tax money and are supposed to educate the youth is a no-brainer. To the schools themselves, it's nuts for the reasons DD gives. ("We're going to punish you for reaching out to the community and trying to educate non-elite students! Silly school, you should stop that!")

Ugh. What a mess.
 
Dex:

Actually, I don't think these two are so contradictory--as you point out, if you were to define success in terms of apples to apples.

What makes a CC successful? What makes a 4 yr LA successful? Flagship U? I am actually quite curious about the answer to this set of questions...

I would think in general they all must have as a base some 'educational' component. Students who enter should be transformed in some way, upon departure. Yes, when you cannot control for the quality of the product entering the system, then there must be some acknowledgment that there will be an impact on the output.
 
umm... make that "NOT so contradictory"
 
Professor meanypants, meet lab reports that talk about the low quality of their data, which were characterized as "abdominal". For real. Last night. We share the challenge of reading that mountain, and of convincing my future engineers that their career may depend as much on their memo-writing skills as on their engineering skills, not to mention that they must be able to read with comprehension.

As for the comment "I submit that the governor of Florida has little desire to make the sunshine state a bastion of Philosopher Kings." directed at someone else, let me assure you that the test I referred to predates our ex-Gov Bush. And it would be unfair to the Democratic State Senator who started it, and the multitude of Governors and others who supported it, to fail to acknowledge that our grads today read and write and compute better than they did in 1980. A test that had consequences for the student but not for the institution had positive effects. There is plenty of improvement still needed, as well. My main point was to comment on how Reality eventually diluted its role, as DD anticipated.

I've run on too long already, but there is a difference between a test that is diagnostic and leads to remediation in cases where a passing grade does not equate to long-term learning of a key skill, and a test that is used for political (usually punitive) purposes.
 
As someone who taught in Texas high schools for four years and then worked as both full-time professional staff and adjunct faculty in Texas community colleges for seven years (most of that under the watch of Gov. George W. Bush), I can earnestly tell you that because an idea is lousy has never been reason enough for the Texas state lege to nix it.

Case in point: the TASP and the laws pertaining to students being in constant remediation until they passed all three sections of this assessment of basic skills. They finally did away with that one 'round about 2003 (well, replaced it with something very like it, actually), but up to that point, developmental education students were caught in a vicious cycle of testing, retesting, and testing again, taking their entire cycle of developmental education courses, still failing the test, then taking a non-course based developmental education program, and then still failing the test, then taking that non-course based program over and over and over again in order to mark time, keeping the students eligible for financial aid and enrollment and preparing them to take the test yet again to fail it yet again.

While students were waiting in academic limbo to pass all three sections of the test (with math usually being the stumper), students inevitably figured out the "catch." Private colleges and universities in Texas didn't have to abide by this rule. Their students didn't have to take and/or pass the TASP, so community college students would accumulate enough hours to transfer, apply to the private school of their choice, and off they would go, having never achieved college-level proficiency in either reading, writing, or (most often) mathematics.

In the end, what were we measuring? Was the TASP truly a measure of college readiness? No. Students could pass it, enter into college-level courses, and still be entirely unprepared for success in those classes. It was an imperfect instrument. Yet that instrument cost the state tens of millions of dollars each year.

Again, just because it was a bad idea didn't stop the state from putting it in place. I should note that when Bush Jr. ran for prez the first time around, he ran his campaign (in part) on the "miracle" he had performed on the educational system in Texas. Oh, it was a miracle alright. It's a miracle it's still functional at all.
 
ccphysicist: If the students in your class can't manage a memo, that is indeed a serious problem. If you're pointing fingers at an overextended adjunct given 16 weeks to remedy an 18+ years of nintendo, cable tv, Bud Light ads, and Donald Trump, you are barking up the wrong tree. Forget the idea that I am averse to either grading and/or failing students. I flunk students left and right. Step away from the phony image of me waving a checkered flag at every freshman in my Comp I course, urging them onward to Hampshire College. Read my original post. The blame falls squarely on parents (voters) who seek simple solutions from government instead of addressing the issue of their own accountability to their kids. Standardized testing is a failure. In Massachusetts, too many students pass the MCAS and show up in my classroom still lacking the fundamentals of critical reading and composition. Furthermore, they lack anything resembling creative thinking. But some politician, donkey or elephant, bloviates before the cameras about raising standards. Bull! You want to assess standards? Let's do it. But let's do it in-house. I have more infinitely more faith in DD than any politican.
 
You can pick whatever criteria you like and they will be imperfect. But why should the people of the state pay for schools with no outside control of what they teach or what benefits students get?

I submit that it should be the obligation of the DD's of this world to propose the right measures by which outsiders can gauge the success of their students. "Trust us..." is not a viable response.

A private college can give out useless degrees because the customers pay and take their chances. But CCs and state schools rely upon the generosity of strangers' taxes. They not only should show that students learn something, but they should also have to justify the existence of entire departments.

Don't like it? Don't ask for state money.

This isn't about not supporting education. It's about not letting educators go without accountability. After all, professors are also evaluated for tenure and promotion on a variety of objective and subjective measures which are highly imperfect.

I submit that the unwillingness of many profs to submit to outside evaluation, coupled with rampant grade inflation in some subjects guarantees still less support for higher education in the future and an even more vicious corporate mentality in our institutions of higher learning.
 
I hope the Texas legislature has the brains to think of at least a few of these, and to put this idea out to pasture. It has “disaster” written all over it.

Dear DD ---- Don't assume that the legislature will be able to figure this out on their own; you have written a great, persuasive explanation of the headaches they will have to deal with should they pass it. Please mail it off to some of the more sensible of the members or get someone in their neighborhood to write in a version of this as a letter to the editor. By blogging you already are behaving as a public intellectual; I urge you to take that another step further. Even if you are not a Texas resident, you will be doing educators all over the nation a service if you help to squash a terrible idea.
 
It's almost as if now that Molly Ivins has passed, Texas has declared it safe for bad ideas to roam free.

Best homage to Molly Ivins, ever. Thanks!
 
Currently, most of us are using mobile phones. True to our nature, we have used the different features of these

sophisticated gadgets to put a smile on our faces and that of others. We are sending text messages that are really humorous

and listening to ring tones that would tickle our funny bones, every time the phone rings.

At present, a multitude of ring tones are easily available and can be downloaded in different models of mobile phone

handsets. Mobile phone users can choose from monophonic ring tones, polyphonic ring tones, true tones, real tones, SMS ring

tones, buddy name tones, caller id tunes, etc., according to their specific requirements. With the technological advances

achieved in this sector, a high degree of customization of ring tones has also become possible. Users of mobile phones can

give vent to their creativity and design some witty and humorous ring tones in many of the latest models of handsets. For

instance, users are free to use their own voices or any other sound to create a number of personalized ring tones! Depending

on their intelligence, wit and comic timing, they would be able to create some hilarious ring tones that are guaranteed to

put a smile on the lips of anyone who happens to hear them.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?