Louis J. Kotnik
Cuyohogo Community College 2900 Community College Ave. Cleveland, Ohio 441 15
What Is Being Done to Help the Underprepared Student? A survey
This survey was sent out as a function of the ACS Chemical Education Division Subcommittee on Underprepared Students. It dealt with the needs of the underprepared students and the programs dealing with the problem undertaken a t various institutions. One thousand questionnaires were mailed out and about 400 replies were received. Responses were received from all states but one. Schools answering the questionnaire ranged in size from less than 300 to those over 25,000. Both private and public institutions were contacted and replied. The data collated in subsequent tables is based upon 391 replies, 125 from two-year schools and 266 from four-year schools. The data collected, for the most part, was independent of the size of the school or the type, i.e., two-year or four-year. Tahle 1 tabulates the response to the question: "What is the dominant culture of the student body in your school?" Unfortunately, the question was apparently interpreted in one way by some and in another way by others, viz., literally by some and as "What is the dominant culture of your underprepared students'' by others. Even though the exactness of numbers is questionable this data gives some indication of the variety of cultures in schools across the country. It also seems to indicate that minorities produce the greatest portion of the underprepared students. The apparent sources of weakness of the students, as seen by the respondents, are listed in Tahle 2. If one studies this table he can see that a larger number of four-year schools than two-year schools indicate that they have little or no prohlems. In addition, a lower percentage of four-year schools indicate weaknesses in each category. This can he explained by the fact that two-year schools almost universally have open admission policies whereas many of the senior institutions (particularly private) have high entrance requirements. The most common weaknesses listed are poor math preparation, poor reading ability, lack of inductive and deductive reasoning, and communication deficiencies. In plain English, the underprepared student cannot read or write properly and his math training is poor. He cannot handle algebra or word prohlems. Often he even has diffi' culty with handling fractions and decimals. In addition to the poor scholastic preparation this type of student quite often has psychological problems. Many have a low self-concept (see Table 2) and some even have an extremely antisocial outlook. A perusal of the question-
naires showed a t least two thirds of those having a low self-concept were from such minority groups. The other third (or less) showing this lack of self-esteem were in such categories as housewives and first-generation collegegoers. Many respondents added bther weaknesses such as lack Table 1. Dominant Culture of the Student Body Number Respondents
Percent
'Many listed several cultures.
Table 2. Question: Assuming you have problems dealing with underprepared students, please identify the apparent sources of weaknesses LrY
2 2
rwu-."-a.
rsr2vvra ,o,,u>.usu
(1. 6'/") stated they had no underprepared students 116'/,1 stated the" had onlv a alieht oroblem
NO.
Schools Aeknowledging
%
Two-Year Schools Math Preparation High School Chemistry communication Ileficrency Poor Heading Ability Lack of Inductive m d Deductive Reasoning Antimrial Oullook L o w Self concept Fear of Course" Lack of Motivalion" Poor Study Ilabits" Too Much Work" Lack of Ability" Others"
"Not Listed on questionnnires: added by respondent..
Volume 57. Number 3.March 7974
/
165
of motivation, fear of the course, lack of effort, etc. Although the numbers reporting these were not large, the response is significant when one corisiders the fact that these weaknesses were not listed, hut added by the respondents. In addition, I believe it takes little imagination t o relate lack of motivation, lack of effort, and fear of the course, to low self-concept. A person with a low opinion of himself tends to fear new courses, be poorly motivated, and put forth little effort. "Why work if you are going to fail anyway?" unified proAbout 37% of the respondents reported gram of counseling and remediation for the underprepared students. Many of these programs were financed by outside agencies, and, in some cases, the help extended was only to groups defined as minorities by the Federal government. In addition, over two-thirds of the schools did have counselors and/or faculty advisors for each student. In spite of this, many respondents expressed dissatisfaction with their counseling programs. A majority of schools have remedial programs, some more complete than others. It should come as no surprise Table 3.
Remedial Programs
2-Year Schools
Math Rendlng English Chemistry Others
Table 4.
4-Year Schools
NO.
'/a
No.
$7,
114
91.2
141 110 1111 79 37
53.0 41.4 41.4 29.7
104 106 54 21
83.2
84.8
43.2 16.8
13.9
Approaches Used to Solve Problem of the Underoreoared Student NO.
Approach Self-Paced Instruction Single-Concept Slides Special Texts Open Lab Computer-Asristed Instruction Extra Faculty Helpa Tutorinxu Special Courses" S r n d Claa='' Preliminary Programs" o ~ b ~ ~ ~ None
126 113 105 93 34 77 70 16 3 4
~
~
az
57
Schools
% 32.2 28.9 26.9
23.8
1R.7 19.7
17.9 4.1 2.0
1.0 8.2 14.0
Approaches added hy respondents
that math, reading and English lead the list of remedial courses. (Compare Tables 2 and 3.) Table 4 includes the approaches used by various schools to help.solve the problems of the underprepared students. Most institutions use several methods. There were relatively few schools relying on small class size to do the job. Some institutions had preliminary programs, i.e., preentry studies in the summer before or an entire year of preparatory courses. It is interesting to note that less than one-third of the schools materials to follow ~ - relied ~ ~ solelv on ourchased these special programs. There was a great deal of criticism of marketed materials (texts, A-V material, etc.). Fundamentally, the critique amounted to this: very little of the material for sale is applicable and much of that is not .. very good. Of the 3M) schools that evaluated their own programs, only 30% felt that they had successful programs. Some of those that were dissatisfied felt it was due to lack of funds, too large classes, lack of materials, etc. Most, however, simply did not know why their programs (or courses) were not more successful. Table 5 covers the responses to the question: "Would your school he interested in a workshop or training program for the faculty?'' As can he seen, a majority of those answering were interested in a workshop. Those who answered "maybe" did so on the basis of: 1) content of workshop, 2) cost, 3) time.
Many people made i t clear that they were only interested in a workshop in which techniques and useful ideas could he learned and/or exchanged. They were not interested in dialectical discussions. The issue of cost was raised because many schools give little or no money for travel or workshops. Timing is important for some because of summer school, vacations, etc. Another question asked on the survey was: "What are your suggestions for dealing with the problems of the underprepared student?" The number one suggestion (by far) is the use of remedial courses and/or programs. The comments that went along with this indicated that the respondents meant carefully planned courses and/or programs, not simply new course(s). They also felt that better counselling (or advising) of these students by both counselors and faculty was needed. Many indicated that more and better diagnostic testing is needed. Not only were tests needed to indicate stages of preparedness but also some were needed to evaluate degrees of motivation and low self-concept. Such techniques as self-paced programs, audio-tutorial programs, tutoring, etc., were suggested. Last, hut not least, it was pointed out that the school systems improve their programs from kindergarten through the twelfth grade. There were a number of people who felt that remediation (hence underprepared students) had no place in college. They indicated that the job should he done elsewhere (primary and secondary schools) and.felt that it was too late to deal with the problem a t age 18. In plain English, this group of respondents indicated they could not and should not have to deal with this problem. Table 6 gives the responses to the question: "We of the Underprepared Student Subcommittee of the ACS are attempting to deal with the situation (underprepared student). What do you think we can do to help?" The question and responses, of course, overlap the previous question. The respondents, in many cases, are asking the help of the subcommittee in their performance of what they think they should do to deal with the problems of the underprepared student. Fundamentally they are asking the subcommittee to 1) Help
identify sources of difficulty of this type of student (psychological as well as preparational).They feel this can be done by developing diagnostic tests (or publicizing goad tests that are available). 2) Organize studies of the problem. Many felt this questionnaire was a eaod heeinnina. (This is balanced to a certain extent bv those who we~'eritka1because thev felt the auestions were ambiguous.) Table 5. Question: Would Your School be Interested in a Workshoo or Training Program for the Faculty
~~~
166
/ Journal of Chemical Education
Table 6. Question: We of the Underprepared Student Subcommittee of the ACS are Attempting to Deal with this Situation (Underoreoared Studontl. What do You
3) Help prepare effective and inexpensive materials and programs. 4) Provide a clearing house for successful programs, materials, tests, etc. They felt this committee should publicize what they developed and what they have learned of successful programs and materials. This could be done in several Gays, viz., a) a monthly column in the Journal of Chemical Education; b) organize and hold workshops and training programs; c ) organize and bold national and regional symposia dealing with the problem. The Dallas symposium was pointed out as a goodexample of this.
In addition t o the above, some respondents felt t h a t t h e ACS should work more with t h e high schools in improving their programs. A few of those answering t h e questionnaire felt t h a t smaller class size would solve t h e problem. I n many cases large class size was given a s one of t h e reasons why their programs failed. It was also felt by some that many of t h e suggested approaches t o the problem (?pen lah, self-paced instruction, etc.) were not viable unless t h e class size was cut.
Conclusions 1) The problem of dealing with the underprepared student in American colleges is serious. The excellent returns on the questionnaire (40%) and the answers to the questions support this. 2) In a majority of the cases in which programs have been devised to combat the problem, only a limited success bas been achieved. Less than one-third of the respondents felt that their programs were very successful. Most of the respondents asked for help in this matter. 3) Do members of many minority groups (Blacks, Chicanos, Appalachian, etc.) tend to be underprepared simply because they
come from poor school systems (or schools) or far other reasons as well? Often they come to college with a defeatist attitude expecting to fail. They haue lived with failure all their liues. We need methods to determine the extent of such problems (tests?). 4) There was a feeling among some of the respondents that smaller class sizes are needed to solve this problem. I am sure that smaller class size would help but where does the money come from? For example, Cuyahoga Community College has a budget of $20,000,000 for the 1973-74 school year. 58,200,OW (41%) of this is for faculty salaries. If the average class size were cut one-third, this cost would go up to $12,3MJ,000 (61.5%). Get more money? Where? State legislatures are already bilking at what they consider exbarbitant costs of education. Also, there are very few private schools that can afford this luxury. Thus, although a smaller class size would be nice, it is an impractical suggestion. 5) More experimentation must be done. School administrations must be willing to finance this but faculty must do their part by doing the experimentation and looking after the infinitesimal details. Both groups must be realistic. All experiments do not succeed. Why should educational experimentation be expected to be 100%successful whereas chemical studies are not? 6) Last, but not least, a coordinating body is needed. This was expressed loud and clear by the answers to this questionnaire. Even those who felt they had programs of unqualified success indicated this.
If t h e Subcommittee o n Underprepared Students undertook this task they would need help from t h e ACS. The problem exists a n d many a r e aware of it. Over one half of t h e respondents (ZOO+) indicated they were interested in working with the committee. Many have already proved this by submitting course outlines and/or descriptions of their programs. T h e time t o act is now!
Volume 51. Number 3, March 1974
/
167
