kayf

Tiger, so many people here think the European educational system is better, yet there children are moved to a vocational track well before 18. I think the solution is better and more GCs (althought they are excellent at my Ds school) to better identify kids. The end of tracking has resulted in large numbers of NYC kids unprepared for anything.

The cutoff for ANY college is pretty reasonable. Yes I realize many kids get SAT tutoring etc, but how much of that is to get into IVIEs, not into just any college.

thinker88

I do agree that the SAT can be taught, but only at the lower levels. I would be weary of saying that a student could be "taught" to get an 800, 700s, or even high 600s for that matter. To get to these higher levels you have to have the proper ability to think. In other words, you have to be intelligent.

liufulan2238

want to know something about chinese education?I will tell you some truthes.In china, education is divided into three partsrimary school,middle school,colledge school.We go to school in the order above.I don't think i have got any trouble while go to next stage of education,cause the education itself is not continuous.It sounds like one game,when you finish one ,you go to another one.Independence.However ,i don't understand the importance of remedial courses. looking forward to explanation in more detail.

Plainsman

Some comments to this thread are horrifically short-sighted and elitist. To create an "us" versus "them" or "Smart" versus "dumb" environment is a negative thing to do and not helpful for building a sense of community within a school. What about late bloomers?

I was in a CP track 30 years ago and did nothing with it. I graduated in the bottom 20% of my middling public high school. My HS gpa was below 2.0. Shockingly, there were dozens of kids with LOWER gpas than mine and we all graduated. Still, I benefitted from the CP track.

I managed to find a third-tier college a thousand miles from home that would accept me. Once out of my inner city environment, I flourished. I was a straight A student as a freshman and used that success to transfer back to the NYC area to a more challenging, respected private university where I contined to be an A student, despite the stiffer competition. I went on to become an MBA-JD and pass the Bar Exam. Had I been automatically excluded from such classes based solely on academic performance, with no consideration to less fortunate circumstances, I don't know where I'd be now.

I believe there are a lot of kids today who are just like I was--late bloomers, kids who are not dazzling their teachers for reasons unrelated to actual ability. I also remember kids who hit their peaks in high school, i.e., were the golden boys and golden girls, and became janitors and security guards later in life.

Who is to play God and say because of a test score or a GPA that a kid is pre-destined for vocational school vs. college? I think every kid in public school should be given equal opportunity for a CP diploma.

BCEagle91

Colleges teach college level courses as they should but they also have students that aren't ready for college level courses so colleges (not all) provide courses at the elementary, middle and high school level to try to get students to the point where they can take college level courses. If this sounds crazy, it is. But that is what we have.

It's one thing to provide remedial instruction in on small area where a student may be slightly weak but a student requiring remedial instruction across the board shouldn't be in college. You might have a student that is exceptionally strong in mathematics and science with weak writing skills.

There are kids at the college that my daughter attends that are taking courses at elementary school level. Their courses are subsidized by the state (maybe the Feds too). These kids sat through 12 years of public primary and secondary schools at a current cost of about $120,000 and really didn't come out with much. We really need to fix things at a lower age - we've just been pushing the problem upwards and the costs in time and money are now unaffordable.

BCEagle91

We play God with whatever approach we take. If we don't filter, then we subject some number of students to courses that they don't need or want at taxpayer expense that can't be used for other purposes. It is possible to self-study or take courses later in life - perhaps the money should follow the student for when the student is ready.

kayf

plansman, my concern is that for every student like you, there are 10 who recieve no vocational training and do not go to college. How do we deal with that?

Take3

A student who doesn't get vocational training in high school but wants to go into the trades still has options. Vocational courses are readily available at community colleges. Also, many trades can also be learned by completing an apprenticeship. In an apprenticeship, one is actually paid to learn the skills required to join the trade. It is simply not the case that failing to offer vocational training in high school prevents someone from entering the trades.

A student who doesn't get a college-prep education in high school but wants to go to college is going to have extreme difficulty doing so. The skills one never learned but that one needs to succeed in college take a great deal of effort to acquire later. And if developmental (remedial) courses at the college level were eliminated, I'm not even sure how someone could learn the skills which are missing.

In any case, a college-prep education is worthwhile for its own sake even if one chooses a career which doesn't inherently require it.

kayf

Yes of course the student can obtain vocational training elsewhere, but how many due? Hard to beleive in CC world, but there are kids who do not particularly like school, and if we don't make the most of their HS experience, they may be left up the river without a paddle.

toadstool

The Naval Academy has an interesting approach. It does not offer remedial classes. However, for those they see as developmental prospects, they send a recommendation and the application over to the Naval Academy Foundation. Selected applicants will be offered scholarships to a list of schools (small or community colleges, or Prep School PG year) where the applicants can get their academic house in order. They then reapply through a streamlined process, with near universal acceptance.

thinker88

First, I think the term "play God" is thrown around a bit loosely (and not just in this example). Unless we live passive lives and submit ourselves to fate, everything that we do is "playing God."

That comment aside, I don't think that it is too much to say that a student receiving a low SAT score should be excluded from college. A student receiving such a low score is not ready for college (as the score on the SAT measures college readiness) Perhaps I was unclear in stating that the exclusion was not permanent (students should be able to retake the SAT and enter college at any stage in their lives), but the core message remains the same: If we let students into college who then have to play catch up in order to understand the material properly, we are just wasting our time. In my opinion, these students are more well suited for vocational type jobs. Of course if they want to, they can simply learn more material and improve their ability to comprehend knowledge and try the academic route at any time.

On a last note, I wouldn't say that the comments on this thread are elitist. In my case, I suggested setting an SAT bar near 1550 for students wishing to attend college. That's a pretty low bar. An elitist would set the bar higher; for instance at 2100. That would be truly elitist as it would exclude most of the population.

FindAPlace

BTW, IIRC, the 50-55% bar for the SAT is now right around 1500, give or take. Or rather, based on 2008 test figures.

kayf

I am not an elitist -- I think that those that want to preserve college for everyone are. Because our present system just isnt working for the kids who dont go to college. They deserve better. Of course every child deserves an opportunity for a CP diploma -- but at some point we have to offer alternatives to others. In NY all we will be offering is GED.

~Tigerlily~

On college confidential the view of SAT scores is terribly skewed compared to most of the high school population. For example, according to college board, the high school class of 2008 had an average math score of 515, an average critical reading score of 502, and an average writing score of 494. Just looking at percentiles, a critical reading score of 500 was better than 49% of the nation. Add together the averages, and you get a 1511 (and those are just the students who consider themselves college-bound, so it’s already excluding those that have already decided to not to attend college). So theoretically, a student who scores just average on test would not be able to attend college. There’s something wrong with that.

You can say that someone can retake the test and enter college at any time, but as people grow older and start having families, this becomes more and more difficult. It’s far easier to complete college at a younger age, especially when the knowledge from high school is still fresh.

Why would we use the SAT to decide anyway? I know many people disagree that the SAT can be taught, however, most agree that with practice, students could perform better. For example, imagine a student scores a 500 in each section and been unable to attend college. If a student could have done a few practice tests on their own and learned a few extra vocabulary words, maybe they could have scored a 550 in each section and are now eligible. In one instance the student is considered ready, and in the other, they’re not. Can you honestly say that the student is any more qualified though? That’s what’s wrong with using the SAT as a cutoff.

BCEagle91

"but as people grow older and start having families, this becomes more and more difficult. It’s far easier to complete college at a younger age, especially when the knowledge from high school is still fresh."

I received my BA at 31 and MS at 35, almost all of that paid for by my employers over the years. In many cases, my life and work experience were a big advantage in classes over younger students. There isn't as much support these days from employers as there was a few decades ago so it certainly is harder today.

There is a huge amount of waste in students that aren't ready for college and the most efficient solution would be to fix K12.