Affirmative action and proposed watering down of curriculum

Parents Forum
1

<p>Here is a recent report on by the Chronicles of Higher Education in which colleges want to have even more diversity= more affirmative action. Even worse, it seems that college are considering watering down their curriculums to keep more minority applicants. </p>

<p>Now tell me again about the “wonderful” benefits of Affirmative Action!</p>

<hr>

<p>As more than a dozen college presidents gathered here on Tuesday to discuss how to make their institutions more racially and ethnically diverse, they quickly seemed to reach consensus on two points: Their institutions still had plenty of work to do, and making some major changes in undergraduate education might be a good start. </p>

<p>The colleges that the presidents represent all belong to the Leadership Alliance, a coalition of 29 higher-education institutions established in 1992 to bring more minority students into mathematics, science, engineering, and technology. </p>

<p>The group, comprising both minority-serving colleges and prestigious research universities interested in expanding their minority enrollments, had not convened a formal meeting of the presidents since its formation. It asked several of its members to take stock of its efforts before Tuesday’s meeting, at the National Academy of Sciences building, and, following a 90-minute public discussion of their findings, brought the presidents together in a private meeting to decide how to proceed. </p>

<p>“I don’t think any of us think we are anywhere near where we should have been by this date,” said Ruth J. Simmons, president of Brown University, where the alliance has its headquarters. </p>

<p>Several of the presidents blamed what they called “weed-out courses” in the early stages of undergraduate education for driving disproportionate numbers of minority students out of math- and science-related fields. Freeman A. Hrabowski, president of the University of Maryland-Baltimore County, said that even those minority students who go on to earn bachelor’s degrees in such fields often are too discouraged by the difficulty of the experience to consider pursuing a graduate education. </p>

<p>They “don’t go on, quite frankly, because they have not done well as undergraduates,” Mr. Hrabowski said. Colleges should do more to get such students “excited about the work,” he said, and should not be afraid to take steps such as urging students to repeat introductory courses in which they received grades of C or lower to ensure that more-advanced classes do not leave them feeling overwhelmed. </p>

<p>Amy Gutmann, president of the University of Pennsylvania, was among those who suggested that colleges should rethink their reliance on rigorous introductory courses to ensure that prospective science and mathematics students can handle work in those fields. “Just because we have always done it that way does not mean that is the way it has to be done,” she said. </p>

<p>Several college presidents and administrators on hand suggested that earning Advanced Placement credits in high school may have unintended negative consequences for students, minority and otherwise. The speakers said that, as a result of earning such credits, many students place out of introductory courses that they could handle easily, and go straight into more-advanced classes without adequate preparation, earning poor grades that leave them discouraged. </p>

<p>Shirley M. Tilghman, president of Princeton University, suggested that such students may be done “more harm than good” by earning AP credits. </p>

<p>Donna E. Shalala, president of the University of Miami, said she had seen students earn their undergraduate degrees early as a result of Advanced Placement credits but then go on to graduate or medical school without the maturity needed to handle it. “They are getting into trouble later on,” she said. </p>

<p>Participants in the meeting also cited a fear of high student-loan debt and inadequate minority representation on college faculties as factors discouraging minority students from pursuing doctorates in math- and science-related fields. Ms. Tilghman warned that colleges would suffer if they did not get more minority students to earn doctorates and go on to teach. </p>

<p>“If we do not diversify our faculty, we will look increasingly anachronistic,” she said. “Who wants to be part of something that looks like it is basically behind the times?” </p>

<p>The position papers drafted by various participants in Tuesday’s meeting are available at the alliance’s Web site. </p>

<hr>

<p>Background articles from The Chronicle</p>

2

<p>Actually, much of the discussion has nothing to do with AA. Many college profs have expressed concern about APs. I talked to one biology prof who told me that he was dismayed by the low level of preparation of students who had achieved high scores on APs. Caltech dismisses most if not all APs and makes students take its introductory courses.
The weedout courses are tough on all students. One young friend of mine who was a premed at Brown estimated that 1/3 dropped out of the program after freshman year. </p>

<br>

<br>

<p>Amy Gutmann, president of the University of Pennsylvania, was among those who suggested that colleges should rethink their reliance on rigorous introductory courses to ensure that prospective science and mathematics students can handle work in those fields. “Just because we have always done it that way does not mean that is the way it has to be done,” she said. >></p>

<p>I don’t see signs of a watered down curriculum. It is very possible that taking some so-called introductory courses later in one’s undergraduate career would be raise the odds of success. Pedagogy can also be rethought. My H, a Ph.D. in physics, was impressed by our S’s experience in his introductory, calculus-based physics course. The materials was just as challenging; but the presentation was far more appealing. Through interactive technology, the prof could learn quickly how many (and which) students were mastering the concepts presented in class, and how many had difficulty. </p>

<p>There’s nothing sacrosanct about the curriculum or pedagogy. If it is AA that induces such thoughtful consideration, all the better.</p>

3

<p>Marite, what does this quote from the article mean,“Amy Gutmann, president of the University of Pennsylvania, was among those who suggested that colleges should rethink their reliance on rigorous introductory courses to ensure that prospective science and mathematics students can handle work in those fields”</p>

<p>If we have less rigorous introductory courses, isn’t this a watering down of the curriculum!?</p>

4

<p>I want to withhold judgment on this issue b/c in my experience, “rigorous” can often mean “taught in a boring, unimaginative way” because that’s the way it has been done for a long time. My S’s experience in his introductory, very rigorous, physics course suggests that this need not be so. The prof has won two teaching awards. If Amy Gutman suggested loping off whole chunks of the curriculum, that would be a different matter. We need more details before drawing conclusions.</p>

5

<p>Actually, the article suggests just the opposite Taxguy. </p>

<p>The article suggests that students not try to rush through undergrad via AP classes…and that any student who passes one of those “weed out” classes with a C or below should be encouraged to REPEAT that class so that the foundation on which the undergrad experience will be built is stronger. How does that equate to watering down? </p>

<p>"students earn their undergraduate degrees early as a result of Advanced Placement credits but then go on to graduate or medical school without the maturity needed to handle it. “They are getting into trouble later on,” she said. </p>

<p>The article singles out URMs because they have typically steered away from math and sciences. The article suggests that the recent push of URMs into math and sciences should ensure that their foundation is strong enough to support grad school/med school…again, by having them retake classes where they scored a C or below. </p>

<p>Seems that the article is speaking broadly, and then pinpoints how this approach might be applied to URMs specifically, only as an example of an area where this will help (URMs and others). </p>

<p>Nice article…thanks for sharing.</p>

6

<p>I don’t see it as watering down. It’s not education, in my mind, to develop courses DESIGNED to make students fail. Either the course is being poorly taught, or the wrong students are enrolling in it. Either of those problems can be fixed without “watering down” the curriculum.</p>