This morning's paper includes an interesting column by David Brooks of the New York Times. Brooks is fairly conservative, but not extremely so. He surveys a number of revealing studies which suggest that although students are spending more and more for college, they aren't learning much. Reformers suggest that we should address this problem by more closely measuring what students are supposed to learn in a given course or course of study. In fact I've been working on this very endeavor at Portland State over the past few months. As a result, my courses have much more detailed rubrics or goals, as well as assignments tailored to strengthen student performance in particular areas. The hope is that an outside evaluator could come along and assess student's capacity to, say, address both sides of a complex question. This would be done at the outset and close of one of my courses to see if students are actually getting better at what I want them to learn.
Many academics dismiss such efforts as a waste of time and energy--in part, I think, because many of us are inclined to dismiss out of hand any idea that comes from an administrator, especially if it has a lot of jargon from education professionals. I think there is also something to be said for the idea that not all aspects of education can be measured; wisdom and insight are difficult to quantify. In general, though, I think that colleges and professors should be much more accountable for what we do--and don't do--with our students. But I think that this reform will face a great deal of resistance from academics.
No comments:
Post a Comment