Remediation Defined
I just wanted to perform a sort of public service and define the term “remediation” for folks who aren’t quite clear on what it means or the impact it has on all levels of education. This urge to serve was generated by a recent reading of Michael Lafferty’s “Right Hook” column in the Reno News & Review who, while summing up a very contentious debate about gender, biology, and equity that ocurred after some controversial statements made by then-Harvard President Lawrence Summers, said this:
Oh that’s right. Harvard isn’t run like a business anymore than Nevada’s university system is. That would perhaps help explain why fully one-third of Nevada students on the Millennium Scholarship program require remedial classes.
Of course, your average business person might suggest that the target market for the “education business” might actually be “qualified” college applicants.
Then again, the intelligentsia aren’t interested in the business of educating students. It’s about all those tax dollars they can suck up. Which perhaps leads us back to Twain’s admonition.
So, the simple definition of remediation is: The act or process of correcting a fault or deficiency. You can interpret this in two ways. First, when students enter college with a deficiency, the institution must take steps to correct the deficiency. Second, you can remediate a disability which is something of a more permanent state. In the first case, you can in no way lay the blame at the feet of higher education because, as the term remediation implies, there is a problem when students enter the institution. I think if you ask anyone associated with higher ed anywhere in the country, you will find that they would much rather not have to remediate any student. Its intensive and costly to the institution. It would be much better for all if students (beneficiaries of the Millenium Scholarship or not) came to a college or university performing at the appropriate academic level.
So, remediation is most definitely not a strategy for higher ed to “suck up” more tax dollars. Rather, it is about bringing college students up to speed and helping them earn the college degree they desire. Let me just add that it is the traditional role of community colleges to take on more of the remediation task than universities. This has been going on for decades and should not be a new concept for anyone.
But Mr. Lafferty’s comments beg the question–does he think that students who require remediation as part of their college education should not be in college because they are not “qaulified applicants?” Would he rather that one third of Nevada’s entering college freshman drop out and not persue a degree? What other choice does the state have except remediation? I guess Mr. Lafferty’s other choice would be to not have those students go to college at all. Such high expectations for the youth of Nevada–his concern is heartwarming isn’t it? And people wonder why Nevada has a shortage of well educated people.
Similar Posts:
Enjoy this post? Leave a comment below or subscribe to my feed. You also can sign up for email delivery by clicking here.
yes that guy sounded like these students shouldn’t even be given a shot at college.
I don’t know how he tied Mark Twain, the Harvard President’s “mini-scandal”, and the Milllineum scholarships together.
A+B+C= X
as ted Knight said in Caddyshack: “The world needs ditchdiggers too”!
You made me laugh out loud! Thanks. When in doubt, quote Caddyshack.
Well, I’m pretty sure he meant to say that those people were not qualified, based on the fact that they don’t meet what is basically entry-level college classes. The one I noticed stood out the most was english, but that’s beside the point. I believe he would absolutely advocate them not going to college. He would instead advocate an increase in vocational training - something that has declined recently.
I honestly believe the Millenium Scholarship has been tough for the Nevada higher ed system. First off, it has increased class sizes. I never, ever had a class with more than 75-100 people in it. I don’t know firsthand, but I hear that there are routinely 300 kids in entry level required classes. Second, I think it puts kids in school that have no business being there to begin with. Sure, maybe they should be afforded the opportunity, but maybe they just get in the way. And even if they lose the scholarship and drop out after a year, they were there for a year and got in the way of everyone else.
Lafferty’s point is that businesses have to have standards. Banks don’t just loan out cash to everyone that walks in because, by golly, everyone deserves to own a home. And colleges need to have high standards for admission because it only hurts the school overall when someone who shouldn’t be there eventually drops out. And a good way to measure who shouldn’t be there is whether or not they require classes that are remedial.
Just because you need remediation doesnt mean you need to go into a vocational field….its certainly a choice but you dont have to limit people to one or the other–thats exactly why remediation exists.
Lafferty’s point is that he’s choosing to be a goofball and not think things through. Its easier to blame the “intelligensia” whatever that is—its a term I havent heard since, like, the 1930s.
Remediation should not preclude education. It would be nice if students came out of k-12 performing at the college level, but until that happens, colleges and universities will remediate because every one who wants one deserves a college education.
Nevada has one of the worst repuations in the nation for its k-12 system and one of the lowest college capture rates in the nation. Gee–I wonder if that has anything to do with the fact that not many Nevada students actually attend college? What does the Millenium Scholarship do? It inspires many students who would not or could not otherwise go to college, to go to college. Is this a bad thing for Nevada? Absolutely not. We are in the beggar’s position, as in beggars cannot be choosers. This state needs as many college educated people as possible–remediation or no remediation. The situation is desperate.
When more than a third of all higher ed students need remediation, you cannot possibly believe that they should be kept out of college. And uh, there are some faily tough standards that must be met to get a Millenium Scholarship….and they are getting tougher.
I’m simply speaking form the experience of seeing somewhere around 10 English 100 classes in my first yoear of college to seeing over 30 sections now. And enrollment has increased somewhere around 50% or less in that time. Show me the numbers that say all these kids are using remedial courses and that’s helping them graduate, and I’ll back off. But we’re probably still having a 1/3 dropout rate or whatever it was when all my professors told me on the first day how many of us would bail. It might even be more than that. And I’d be willing to bet, on anecdotal evidence, that kids who are close to qualifying for the Millenium Scholarship are given a break by high school teachers who also just want them to have that opportunity.
I can see that you’re very for having kids get the opportunity, and I don’t see fault in that. My point about Lafferty is that he’s actually willing to offer a solution. Currently, it’s go to college or be faced with a life at McDonalds. Well, by offering more comprehensive vocational training, earlier, which I failed to add before, a third option opens up.
I can provide you with all sorts of data, but its really beside the point. Kids who want to go to college should be able to. His solution is to offer vocational training to kids who need remediation rather than let them get some remediation and actual do what they set out wanting to do. We might as well send them to Japan cause that’s what they do there if you don’t get the right score on college entrance tests. You spend the rest of your life training for and doing something you never really wanted to do–how is that a solution? The solution is remediation, but perhaps at the community college rather than at a university. Anyway, since fall 2005, remedial courses are not even an eligible expense for the mill scholar program so he’s completely mis-informed.
Remember that kids on the mill scholarship who get into UNR for instance, have made the admissions standards. Its only after they are tested that you find out they need remediation. Again, problem begins before college. Its too simplistic to lay it at the feet of k-12 too. Its an issue for the educational system at the state level.