Please don’t teach to the test

I would love to see one person teaching and a different one grading. Better yet, a panel of credentialed faculty grading assignments to ensure the student learning outcomes are met. This way, the same person teaching does not rate their own student’s learning success. Is the better teacher the one with all the A’s in class or the one with well-distributed grades? We can’t tell by just this information. Then, there is after the course. 

How do the students do after your class in another course? That’s more telling than grades. I have students in my quantitative analysis classes that sometimes cannot convert decimals to percentages. I mean, I am stopped in the middle of class when I say there is a 6% probability of xyz (wait, Dr. C. where did the 6% come from?).  So, I start with another problem and work it out and I get the same question. Eventually, I realize that I omitted the automatic step of .06 = 6% because to me that is common knowledge. 

Does that mean that their algebra teacher failed? What about their elementary school teacher? Well, probably not. These may be students that did not do well in these sorts of subjects to begin with. Maybe, they were barely passed with a C, which means they potentially do not understand 30% of the material (or even more).

The bottom line is that there should be a better system to ensure that all of the required objectives are met by the student and not just 70% of them. 

Mapping Demonstrated Competencies to Credit Hours

How about we create competency-based training that can be mapped to credit hours (although credit hours were created as a faculty load measuring tool and turned into a student learning number, so I don't think we ought to be bound to these hours, but that is the world we are in; therefore, fitting a new model into the current structure - like a the children's toy with the shapes to go into the cube).

We would have to break down each course and determine the concepts learned in each course and the contact hours required in each concept in order to map it back. Then, we will be able to have students learn what they need to learn. I am thinking of the retired military sergeant who is being required to take a management intro class or even a speech course. I understand that there is theory to test, but maybe s/he can focus his/her attention on the necessary items.

Many others can fit the made-up person above and figuring out what is in each course down to the concept can come in handy in better serving this student to maximize the learning experience. 

Going Beyond the Credit Hours

The conversations about direct assessments continue. Below is an article on going beyond the credit hour, which is a great thing to do. However, we should also stay focus on the other higher education mission, which is to provide a learning environment. Even those with previous experience can learn more and become even more of a well-rounded individual.

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/03/19/feds-give-nudge-competency-based-education

Re-Evals on Pre-reqs

Figure out how we can determine what content is actually needed prior to a course. For instance, those with a pre-req of English (what in the ENGL101 is exactly what you are looking for?). This will then help us create a structure of support for the students and possibly eliminate some of the pre-reqs that are preventing students from moving forward (because they may be able to master that one or two concepts in the pre-req course, but have to take the entire course to prove it).

In the end, there has to be a better way. Or we can do this: http://www.collegehumor.com/video/6406388/salting-the-road-the-hard-way. We have the equipment, so we just have to use it to work for our advantage. :)