Posts
Nineteen eighty-nine is, in mathematics education, indelibly tied to the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics’ publication, Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for School Mathematics (1989), which downplayed pencil and paper computations and strongly suggested that calculators play an important role in K-12 mathematics education. My 2006 students would have been about two years old at the time of this very influential publication, and it could easily have affected the mathematical education many of them received. Certainly, one possibility is that mathematics preparation is down across the country, thus limiting the pool of well prepared college applicants.
There is nothing that universities can do to correct the lack of preparation of their applicants. However, it is difficult to believe that there are not enough students to fill our classes with 1989 quality students. One of the major gate-keepers, the SATM test, is oblivious to this significant shift in preparation. Universities can certainly demand a more effective SATM test.
To misquote Bob Dylan's Ballad of a Thin Man: "Something is happening, but you don't know what it is; do you, Mr. Fennell?"
3 comments:
fantastic post
incredible, too
I think it jibes with Michele Hernandez' observation that she's seen numerous students do better in AP calculus than on the SAT math. (I'll have to check that, but I'm pretty sure my memory is accurate.)
"There is nothing that universities can do to correct the lack of preparation of their applicants."
And that, my friends, is the most frustrating thing of all.
One explanation: SAT prep classes have changed the scoring patterns, leading to qualitative differences in the classrooms. I applied to college in 1982; at that time, only students who knew they were likely to bomb the SATs would sign up for prep classes. This year, though, I notice many schools explicitly recommending that all students take part in SAT prep. I have the impression that SAT prep is a growing business. I am assuming that there are tactics which will raise one's scores on the SAT, but which don't increase one's academic preparedness.
Colleges want to find the kid who can score at the top of the test without coaching, but with SAT coaching, and grade inflation, there's no way to sort out these kids. So the colleges look for long lists of extracurricular activities, assuming that only a naturally brilliant kid pulls down top grades, leads the state in karate, and does hundreds of hours of community service. This tactic, though, in my opinion, tends to sort for dilettantes, rather than the seriously brilliant. In other words, the colleges end up with people who have been trained to distinguish themselves outside the classroom. There's nothing wrong with that, if that's what colleges want, but it does cut into the number of natural students in the classrooms.
Post a Comment