SUBJECT: Attrition rates in majors courses

DATE: 2/97

 

Hi, labbers:

 

Our administration is concerned over what they perceive as the hhigh

attrition rate in our general biology course. Over the last four

years, the average grade for the two semesters combined was 1.66 (the

fall average -- the course with mostly cell stuff -- was 1.35). The

grade distribtutions for all sections of both semesters combined were

17.35% Ds; 16.43% F's; 14.08% W (withdrawing before the deadline);

and 4.44% WF (withdrawing with a failing grade).

 

Having been appointed to the departmental committee that is supposed

to deal with this situation in some way, I'd *very* much appreciate

any data any of you could provide along these same lines. Ideally,

data would be from 2-semester majors courses at doctoral-granting

institutions -- but I'll take whatever I can get!

 

For the record, we in the department recognize that the attrition

rate really isn't all that high by comparison with other places, and

that a huge chunk of the problem lies with students who have

unrealistic expectations (themselves stemming from a number of

causes, including poor early advising) and who seem to have some

difficulty recognizing when they're in over their heads. Naturally,

we'd like the administration to understand this as well!

 

I'd be happy to compile the results and post them to the list.

 

Thanks!

Kerry

 

 

**********************

Kerry S. Kilburn, Ph.D.

Department of Biological Sciences

Old Dominion University

Norfolk, VA 23529

(757)683-5680 FAX 683-5283

 

http://www.odu.edu/~ksk/HOME.HTM

 

 

Kerry-

 

About the high attrition rate. A lot of the data collection nation wide

has been done by:

Hewitt, N.M. and E Seymour. April 1991. Factors contributing to high

attrition rates amoung science, mathematics and engineering undergraduate

majors. Report to the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation. Bureau of Sociological

Research, Boulder, CO: University of Colorado, Boulder.

 

There has been at least two articles in JCST that covered that report.

Right now I can only find the one. See Opening the Gates for Women in

Science. Vol 21 No 5 Mar/Apr 1992

 

This group looked at many attributes of students who started as math,

science or engineering (SME) majors and then switched as compared to those

who didn't.

 

A few quotes:

Switchers and nonswithing seniors did not appear to differ in attributes of

charater or ability.

Most switchers appeared to have worked hard, struggled to persevere, and had

spent approximately 2 years in their major before deciding to leave.

 

Most of the problems shared by switchers and nonswitchers arose from

structural and/or cultural sources, notably, poor teaching (88.5%), faculty

unapproachability, fast curriculum pace, work overload, insufficient faculty

help through periods of academic difficulty, inadequate high school

preparation, financial, and other problems created by the unexpected/growing

length of SME majors (programs).

 

Curriculm and assessment systems designed to 'weed out the weak' discouraged

those with insufficient interest, or those with more interest or aptitude

for other fields. Such systems were found in all the SME schools and

departments visted. Although benign in intent, they rest upon the untested

beliefs about switchers and switching, and fuction both to exacerbate and

divert attention from structural problems of these majors.

 

Conclusion

Our experience to date in analyzing the reports of the educational

experience of current and former SME majors, whether men or women, inclines

us to the following view:

- that some, possibly large, proportion of SME attrition reflects a

wastage of students with good potential;

- the important contributors to such wastage are institutional

factors which, if adressed as a matter of priority, would

significantly inprove retention; and,

-that commomly expressed, but untested theories about the causes of

switching have limited validity, and may serve to divert

attention away from effective institutional interventions.

 

My Concluding thoughts:

Kerry in no way do I attack your search for appropriate data. However, the

data may be applied to the wrong model. To me this discussion of majors vs

nonmajors courses is symptom of a basic problem. Basically, its not always

THEM with the problem, it is us. Maybe its time to concern ourselves with

the log in our eye.

 

Patricia (Pat) Hauslein, Ph.D. The greatest danger for those of us

trying to

Dept. of Biological Sciences bring about change is to be afraid to

St Cloud State University speak out. Carolyn Heilburn

St Cloud, MN 56301

 

 

I find myself agreeing with virtually all of Pat's message.

 

Kerry, I was dismayed when you noted that your average grade in the

introductory biology sequence was under 2.0 (out of a 4.0, right?). If so,

you clearly have a problem at your institution.

 

I wish to offer a few pithy comments, that I would be happy to elaborate

for anybody interested.

 

First, I tell my students in my introductory majors biology course that

they must set their sights high in terms of the grade that they hope to

receive. I note that if they receive a grade lower than a 2.5, they have

essentially failed the course. Graduate schools and professional schools

really have a problem with students who earned grades lower than 2.5 in

intro bio.

 

Second, I have developed a philosophy (thanks in part stuff that I heard at

a few Sigma Xi meetings in the late '80s) that it is our ethical

responsibility to actively motivate our students to excel in our courses,

and to become as genuinely interested in the material as possible. If I

have a large number of students who receive grades of <2.5, I take that as

a failure on my part to: (1) motivate my students, (2) provide them a clear

explanation of the material, and (3) test them in an appropriate manner.

On that basis, my students generally bust their humps to learn the stuff,

and my average grade is about 3.0-3.2. Of course, there are a few slackers,

to whom I have no problem assigning grades of 1.5 or lower.

 

Grade inflation?? Nah! Performance inflation?? You bet!

 

Third, remember that every time a student drops out of biology, we have two

concurrent negative outcomes. First, that person remains ignorant of

biology because they despair of taking additional courses. Second, that

person generally develops a HOSTILITY toward biology, that can come back to

bite us down the road. To pick on somebody who has faded from the

limelight, I can only wonder how Dan Quayle did in his biology courses. He

certainly created a mess pertaining to wetlands issues, thanks to his

ignorance of biology.

 

Ultimately, our job as educators should be to cultivate, not to weed out.

 

Ken K.

 

 

Kenneth M Klemow, Ph.D.

Department of Biology

Wilkes University

Wilkes-Barre, PA 18766

(717) 831-4758

kklemow@wilkes1.wilkes.edu

http://wilkes1.wilkes.edu:80/~kklemow

 

 

I really agree with Ken's note about consistent low grades being OUR

problem. If the students are not sufficiently able when they get to us,

giving them low grades is punishing them for the administrative problems

of our institution. If they are not sufficiently motivated to work hard,

we must claim part (most?) of that blame. If they work hard and do not

learn the material, then we must surely try to figure out ways to help

them be more productive with their efforts. In those last two contexts,

this list is most helpful.

 

This problem reminds me of a sincere comment made by a colleague "I gave a

great lecture today, but I'm not sure any of the students understood it."

Subsitute "course" for "lecture" and see what we have.

 

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

Jean DeSaix, Ph.D.

Department of Biology Coker Hall CB#3280

University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3280

Work Phone: 919-962-1068 Home Phone 919-929-1580

FAX 919-962-1625 email jdesaix@email.unc.edu

 

 

Those rates of failures Kerry quoted seem high to me. We start with

about 106 and by spring term have about 80 registered. A chunk of those

missing ones are clinical lab science students who do not take the spring

term, and some of the numbers are transfers into the major, inflating the

retention numbers. Overall, I think we lose about 20% the first year, but

only about a 5% loss seems to be academic. The other 15% is for a variety

of personal reasons beyond our control. On the other hand, we have high

admission standards and roughly half our students (more?) are in the upper

10% of their high school classes.

I think part of the problem with our perception that our students are

not as good as they were 20 years ago, and that they are not working as

hard, is that biology is harder now. As this and other threads have made

quite clear recently, most texts begin with cell biology. That is a

difficult set of concepts for students dealing with roommate problems,

being away from home, new climate, new food, and a need for self-

discipline and motivation that has not been expected before. Cell biology

did not even exist as a discipline when I took biology. The DNA structure

was just beginning to unfold. We learned organismal biology, which was

much easier conceptually and with which we had some familiarity. Now we

expect our students to do as well as our classmates with conceptually much

more difficult biology. Those of us in my age category don't even have

role models for teaching such difficult concepts to such young scientists

and must therefore stumble through and learn from our own errors, and

from this wonderful biolab group.

Janice

***********************************

Janice M. Glime, Professor

Department of Biological Sciences

Michigan Technological University

Houghton, MI 49931-1295

jmglime@mtu.edu

906-487-2546

FAX 906-487-3167

 

 

Hello Labbers. I have thoroughly enjoyed the discussion about "attrition"

and "majors" vs. "non-majors". However, I am dismayed that we give so much

mileage to "attrition" rather than academic persistence (success in student

learning and students' decisions to take other biology courses.) By the

way, is there some genetic or taxonomic difference between a "biomajor" and

a "nonmajor" of which I am unaware? I thought there were simply people (who

for some reason) chose to take a particular course. And WHO were their

major advisors? WHO predected WHO would be successful in a "biology-related

career" the PSAT or SAT tests? Their parents?

 

As a result of my focus on the Department of Labor's TECHPREP and

CAREERLINK programs, my focus for my biology classes has shifted from

"classical" to "practical" and "applicable." Our CAREERLINK team at Golden

West College includes high school teachers (where our students learn their

basics) and community employers. In the Southern California area, 85% of

our new college graduates will be employed in small business entrapeneurial

occupations.

Just what will your "biomajors" do with their degrees? One biomajor

I know very well is now selling Kirby vacuum cleaners with his degree in

computerized plant materials design. Do any of you academics have any idea

how your "majors" will be employed? Could someone please furnish this group

with some statistics about how many biomajors are or will be needed

needed/year in the US, or even the world? Also, how their introductory

salaries compare with those kids who complete their 4 yr bio major, MS, and

PhD?

 

The Chronicle of Higher Education, just last summer, published some

interesting data listing the popularity of academic majors at 4-yr +

institutions. Business was #1. Therefore, WHY are bioacademics so

concerned with the biomajors? What I would like to see are more courses for

our general population. And what about your returning or retiring adults?

Done any market research lately?

Another question about "attrition": how do people learn biology?

Surely some of you teach in research institutions that have neuroscience

facilities. I'll bet biologists know more about how planaria regenerate

than they do how their clients "learn" what they are trying to disseminate

by their antiquated lecture strategies.

 

ALso--do any of you have 55+% of your clients who do not speak English as a

primary language or hearing-impaired students? HOw do you serve them?

 

What about kinesthetic learners? How many of you learned how to tie

your shoes by reading a book about tying shoes? Do any of you incorporate

kinesthetic (active-learning or formerly known as "hands-on") activities

into your introductory lecture component of your courses? If any of you

teach large-enrollment lecture sessions (100+) how do you keep them excited

about your subject and actively participating?

 

I'd love to hear from you and how you reach the visual, auditory, inter- and

intrapersonal learners.

 

Take good care of yourselves.

Sharron Clark,

Professor of Biology/Life Sciences

15744 Golden West St.,

Golden WEst College, Huntington Beach, CA 92647

Voice Mail: (714) 892-7711 x 51110

 

 

Hi, labbers:

Jean DeSaix provided some comments that have been rumbling around in

the back of my mind all day. I actually agree with all of them to

some extent, but would like to play devil's advocate for a bit -- so

please bear with me :) I'd very much like to hear what y'all have to

say about this!

 

> I really agree with Ken's note about consistent low grades being OUR

> problem. If the students are not sufficiently able when they get to us,

> giving them low grades is punishing them for the administrative problems

> of our institution.

 

First, I would argue that students are *earning* low grades -- for a

number of reasons, of course. But is it really

punishment when a student is told that s/he is enrolled in a majors

course, reminded that failing the first test is a pretty strong

indication that something's wrong, when the student fails to take

advantage of any of the help available, when the student persists

with the course, and earns a failing grade?

 

> If they are not sufficiently motivated to work hard,

> we must claim part (most?) of that blame.

 

Why? Why does at least a large measure of the "blame" (or

responsibility) for motivation not belong with the student?

 

> If they work hard and do not

> learn the material, then we must surely try to figure out ways to help

> them be more productive with their efforts.

 

But can we not do this only if/when the students are willing to make

a like effort? And can we legitimately expect that, with sufficient

help, all students will be academically successful in their chosen

fields? That doesn't seem very realistic to me!

 

As I said, I actually agree with much of what Jean and others have

written -- but I'm a bit troubled by what I perceive as a willingness

to absolve the students themselves of some responsibility in all of

this. Am I just missing something?

 

Thanks for letting me play :)

 

Best,

Kerry

 

**********************

Kerry S. Kilburn, Ph.D.

Department of Biological Sciences

Old Dominion University

Norfolk, VA 23529

(757)683-5680 FAX 683-5283

http://www.odu.edu/~ksk/HOME.HTM

 

Sharron Clark said:

"The Chronicle of Higher Education, just last summer, published some

interesting data listing the popularity of academic majors at 4-yr +

institutions. Business was #1. Therefore, WHY are bioacademics so

concerned with the biomajors? What I would like to see are more courses for

our general population."

 

I am concerned with biomajors because (1) it is my job as a biology professor

and (2) there are and will be jobs in biology-related fields. If we as

biologists don't promote biology and nurture majors, where will the mext

generation of biologists, K-12 science teachers, and health-care professionals

come from?

 

We ask students to check a majors box on their application for college. This

might be too early to establish a plan for the rest of your life. During that

first year of GE classes, students are exploring possible majors. When I ask Bus

majors "Why business?" They all answer so I can get a job. I've never heard the

recruiters ask for bus majors, they all ask for competencies in reading,

writing, computers, math, and oral communications-skills that college graduates

develop regardless of major. aI like to ask the business majors in my nonmajors

class "What business?" Citing examples of business people, entrepeneurs, and

others - I try to show them they need to be familiar with content (i.e., have

knowledge) to be successful. Biotech companies are started by scientists; books

are written by med and law school graduates... Of course there are exceptions

but I offer to the student that the odds are against being the exception.

 

As Skyline, we have classes for the general population (AKA nonmajors)- these

won't replace courses for majors afterall, some one has to "grow-up" to develop

and teach these courses.

 

Yes, Sharron we have done follow-ups on our bio majors and 99% of them are

working in science-related fields.

 

Christine Case

Skyline College

case@smcccd.cc.ca.us

 

 

Well, Sharron started me thinking. I'm still working on the persistance

versus retention notion, but I can comment immediately about some of the

"mechanical" questions she asked. I teach non-majors courses in sections

of 180-270. I have worked with vision and hearing impaired students. I

have had a sign language interpreter stand next to me for a semester. I

allow tape recordings and note-takers. I enlarge exams. I make special

arrangements for use of video microscopes and models for vision impaired

students. I could use some more suggestions for working in the laboratory

with the blind.

We work very hard with our special needs students. All that we ask

of them is that they bring a desire to learn and a willingness to work with

us to find a mechanism to help them. More often than not, it seems to

work. We try to learn from each case. Fortunately for me, we have great

people working in the disability resource office (I can't remember the real

name) that facilitate these interactions. I've found that it is possible

to work with any student who wants to learn. The others, well, I'm sure we

all have our stories about the ones who don't want to learn but expect to

be given the grade. I try to ignore them and focus on the positives.

 

I look forward to reading the posts from others about meeting the

needs of non-majors, alternate learning styles, and students in large

sections. I have a lot to learn here. --cmw

 

Charlene M. Waggoner, Ph.D. "Great art is eternal;

Department of Biological Sciences great science tends to be

Bowling Green, State University replaced by greater science."

Bowling Green, OH 43403

-- John A. Moore

cwaggon@bgnet.bgsu.edu

 

 

 

Sharron Clark got me to thinking about something with this persistence idea!

 

I taught the science and math courses at a small seminary college a few

years ago (oh gosh, has it been 11 years?). We had an enrollment of 100+

male students who were there for their undergraduate course of study and

to pass through a growth and self-assessment process in deciding whether

they wished to become priests or not.

 

We viewed the success rate of 13% of the graduates going on for further

study for the priesthood as excellent. We viewed the 87% who decided to

go into other endeavors as likewise excellent. The logic: these young men

were exploring their options to decide their paths in life... we felt we

had helped them decide on the proper path for them, not the path WE

wanted them to follow.

 

Many students may start as undecided or biology majors and explore our

area but soon determine that what they are getting into is not what they

thought (I feel especially sorry for students who thought that science

was doing rather than sitting and listening... I know that is not the

case everywhere, but it is too many wheres!) and decide to go into

something they find more compatible with their abilities and life goals.

I believe that is part of the process that the intro bio/zoo/bot courses

should be about... letting students see what biology really is (having

them do things biological and scientific) so they can tell if it matches

them or not. Those that "bail out" or "aren't retained" could very well

have been helped to make an important decision in their lives.

 

Best wishes,

Bill

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

William A. Hayes, II, Ph.D.

Professor of Biology

P.O.Box 3234

Delta State University

Cleveland, MS 38733

ph: 601-846-4247

fax: 601-846-4016

email: bhayes@dsu.deltast.edu

 

 

Sharon Clark of Golden West College wrote:

 

> Hello Labbers. I have thoroughly enjoyed the discussion about "attrition"

> and "majors" vs. "non-majors". However, I am dismayed that we give so much

> mileage to "attrition" rather than academic persistence (success in student

> learning and students' decisions to take other biology courses.)

 

I (I can't speak for others) give so much attention to attrition because

the students who fail to continue in a course or fail to go on to the

next course are students who will learn less biology than the others.

I'd like to find a way to help them stay with it if THAT'S WHAT IS

APPROPRIATE FOR THEM, and to help them FIND OUT if that's what's

appropriate for them.

 

And just because a student enrolled as a biology major and didn't

continue doesn't mean that we have failed that student. We may have

been a great help to that student to (1) learn a good deal of biology

and (2) find her or his academic and career directions. Remember, most

of these students (despite all the noise about older students and second

career students) are still under 20 years old. They've got a lot to

learn about themselves as well as a lot of academic material to learn.

 

So our responsibility to some of them may be to provide as realistic a

picture as possible of what the content they'll be dealing with if they

continue as biology majors is, and at the same time provide extra and

co-curricular opportunities for exploration of the discipline and its

career opportunities.

 

> By the

> way, is there some genetic or taxonomic difference between a "biomajor" and

> a "nonmajor" of which I am unaware? I thought there were simply people (who

> for some reason) chose to take a particular course. And WHO were their

> major advisors? WHO predected WHO would be successful in a "biology-related

> career"

 

Who claimed all the students majoring in biology were seeking to be

biologists or were seeking some other biology related career? The last

I looked, biology was a legitimate member of the liberal arts and

sciences. I've known a poet, a number of business people (some who

studied for an MBA and some who went directly into business) a good many

lawyers and literally hundreds of parents and spouses who chose no

profession other than that of caregiver and helpmete, all who majored in

biology. All benefitted from their education and are proud of their

accomplishments. Data support that students majoring in the arts and

sciences who enter business exceed their classmates who majored in

business in salary and position status after five years.

 

>the PSAT or SAT tests? Their parents?

>

> As a result of my focus on the Department of Labor's TECHPREP and

> CAREERLINK programs, my focus for my biology classes has shifted from

> "classical" to "practical" and "applicable." Our CAREERLINK team at

 

What is the "classical" content you've shifted from and what is the

"practical" and "applicable" content you've shifted to? I hesitate to

assume anything about the content, but I have found over the years that

one can only apply what one knows, and legitimate application of a piece

of information requires broad and deep knowledge, knowledge that

includes other information and that includes context. As "Blystone in

Texas" pointed out, most students DO change majors at least one time.

Perhaps we have a responsibility to provide freshman courses that give

students options. I submit that those are NOT courses that focus on the

"practical" and the "applicable, but courses that provide substance in

the fundamentals that can then be applied broadly. But in open

admissions and community colleges, it still is the case that many of the

students won't take ANY courses beyond the freshman level.

 

 

>Golden

> West College includes high school teachers (where our students learn their

> basics) and community employers. In the Southern California area, 85% of

> our new college graduates will be employed in small business entrapeneurial

> occupations.

> Just what will your "biomajors" do with their degrees? One biomajor

> I know very well is now selling Kirby vacuum cleaners with his degree in

> computerized plant materials design.

 

A degree in WHAT? Surely there is academic specialization that is

beyond reason. Did this person expect to get a job doing "computerized

plant materials design?" Where was the degree taken? Perhaps we should

remember that the major distinction between the college graduate and the

high school graduate is supposed to be a greater facility and

flexibility in thinking and reasoning in the former. If I WANTED or

NEEDED to sell vacuum cleaners, then I'd try to do it and do it

proudly. If I wanted to design plant materials, perhaps I'd study in

some broader field. How exactly is "computerized plant materials

design" a "biomajor," anyway?

 

>Do any of you academics have any idea

> how your "majors" will be employed? Could someone please furnish this group

> with some statistics about how many biomajors are or will be needed

> needed/year in the US, or even the world? Also, how their introductory

> salaries compare with those kids who complete their 4 yr bio major, MS, and

> PhD?

 

Biology majors salaries are below those of engineers, accountants,

computer scientists but above those of liberal arts, education and

social work graduates. Students majoring in environmental sciences

(including biological specializations) have salaries comparable to those

in engineering, but still below those of computer science and

accounting. These data were reported in THE CHRONICLE OF HIGHER

EDUCATION in fall 1995 or spring 1996. I don't have the reference at

hand. Similar results were reported at all three degree levels. In

engineering and computer science an advanced degree actually increases

lifetime earnings, taking into account lost earning years. In biology

it doesn't, on average.

 

 

Predicting job markets has proven famously innacurate, and majors

outside the traditional arts and sciences, engineering, the professions

have been in and out of fashion over the years. A few years back a

geography major couldn't buy a job in her field. Today geography majors

in the few programs left command top salaries and jobs go begging, if

the graduate has the right skills. New doctoral progams in geography

are being approved in state universities. In a few years I suppose

those programs will be asking the same questions that ecology programs

are asking today about creative ways to find employment for their

graduates.

 

>

> The Chronicle of Higher Education, just last summer, published some

> interesting data listing the popularity of academic majors at 4-yr +

> institutions. Business was #1. Therefore, WHY are bioacademics so

> concerned with the biomajors?

 

Who else will be concerned with them? the Business Administration

department? The English Department? In fact, Biology (and variations)

IS one of the most popular majors in 4-year institutions, as reflected

year-in and year-out, last year included, in THE CHRONICLE OF HIGHER

EDUCATION surveys.

 

>What I would like to see are more courses for

> our general population.

 

Would you provide a way for them to apply the courses to their degrees,

with the usual limit of 128 semester credit hours and little room for

electives? Would these be general education courses (by whatever name)?

When I was an undergraduate, and wanted to take French beyond the

sophomore level courses I discovered that the only courses available

were those for French majors. That hasn't changed in most fields

(French included). I took some, and learned a little more French (but

not enough, and I've since lost it, but still benefitted). Given the

nature of most of your other comments and questions, would these courses

be specialized courses for training people in aspects of biology they

need for particular career tracks (maybe future lawyers need to know a

little ecology if they are going to practice environmental law, but to

heck with it if they will be involved only in family law :-}).

 

> And what about your returning or retiring adults?

 

Can a state institution in Texas or California where the public colleges

and universities are bulging at the seams with adolescents and young

adults afford to provide special opportunities for these people? I'm 52

years old, have done reasonably well in my career of ecology and

teaching and am generally satisfied with life. Suppose I decide I'd

like to be a librarian, or an accountant or zoo keeper, out of boredom,

failure or just desire to change? Higher education provides education

and training relevant to each of these in Texas. But Texas provided my

opportunity long ago. I took advantage (or maybe I didn't - I could

have chosen librarianship, or accountancy or zookeeping 34 years ago).

Maybe Texas fulfilled its obligation to educate me in the 1960s.

 

Now, what about the person who at age 18 really wasn't provided an

opportunity, because of racism, poverty, sex discrimination and so on?

There are no simple answers, are there? But how many times can one be a

"returning older student," or a "non-traditional" student? Let's

provide all the child-care, transportation, housing, special class

meeting times and places and so on that are needed to make sure that

everyone has opportunity, but surely there's not a lot we can do about

the content of a general biology course to make it more meaningful for a

40 year old mother of three than for an 18 year old sorority

sweetheart. After all, red blood cells still contain hemoglobin, which

still has two alpha and two beta chains in most vertebrates

.............

 

Texas has recently been considering credit-hour limitations after which

Texas residents would have to pay tuition at the (still less than the

real cost) non-resident tuition rate.

 

> Done any market research lately?

>

> Another question about "attrition": how do people learn biology?

> Surely some of you teach in research institutions that have neuroscience

> facilities. I'll bet biologists know more about how planaria regenerate

> than they do how their clients "learn" what they are trying to disseminate

> by their antiquated lecture strategies.

 

Why is neuroscience any more relevant than behavioral or educational

psychology, learning theory and other disciplines offered in colleges of

education? But a responsibility we have to our students is to be well

prepared, knowledgeable in our disciplines, organized, reasonably

rigorous and to expect similar behavior from our students. And

regardless of what motivational stragegies or tricks up our sleeves we

have, most of what students learn they learn outside of our presence

while they are working on assignments or studying. The single most

important predictive variable of student success is spent in study

outside of class.

 

Who said we are using "antiquated lecture strategies?" "Blystone in

Texas" uses a lot of high - tech classroom presentation apparatus. I

don't have, and can't afford on my budget, that equipment. But I do the

best I can. Whether we lecture (high tech or not) or whether we offer

other ways for students to be introduced to content (and the lecture

cannot provide all the information it is important for students to study

in most disciplines) the main point is that students have to study and

learn SOMETHING. They can't study and learn a lot of motivational

tricks and group learning strategies without STUFF to learn. It becomes

like the Texas Rangers in one of Larry McMurtry's novels observed about

eating fish when they wanted beefsteak, -"It's like eating air." (I

like fish).

 

>

> ALso--do any of you have 55+% of your clients who do not speak English as a

> primary language

 

I don't know the percent who spoke a language other than English as

their first childhood language, but 82% of my students have Hispanic

surnames, my university is ONE BLOCK from the international border

crossing to Matamoros, Tm., Mexico.

 

>HOw do you serve them?

 

By teaching biology to the best of my ability. Again, the content

doesn't change. It can't change.

 

>or hearing impaired students?

 

Most colleges and universities today have offices set up to work with

handicapped students and the faculty who teach them. We have to adapt

for each different handicap. I had a blind student who was trying to

learn general biology once. Kind of hard to use a microscope. But we

did find some special materials. That was 20 years ago at another

institution. There probably are better things available now. Why would

you think or imply in your writing that we are poorer at these things or

care less about them because we teach in universities and four-year

colleges than those who teach in community colleges?

 

>

> What about kinesthetic learners? How many of you learned how to tie

> your shoes by reading a book about tying shoes? Do any of you incorporate

> kinesthetic (active-learning or formerly known as "hands-on") activities

> into your introductory lecture component of your courses? If any of you

> teach large-enrollment lecture sessions (100+) how do you keep them excited

> about your subject and actively participating?

>

> I'd love to hear from you and how you reach the visual, auditory, inter- and

> intrapersonal learners.

>

 

I really don't need new jargon to make my teaching strategies work.

Whether you call them "kinesthetic" or "active learning" or "hands-on"

activities, science IS a process. One only learns science by

participating in the process. If science instructors are left free to do

what comes naturally to them, and are allowed the budgets and time

allotments to teach in an active mode, they will do it. There is a move

away from laboratory instruction (administator's push this move, not

faculty), while at the same time people preach "active learning." When

you preach active learning to scientists, you're "preaching to the

choir." But again, the students do need to participate. You can lead

a horse............

 

> Take good care of yourselves.

 

You too.

 

> Sharron Clark,

> Professor of Biology/Life Sciences

> 15744 Golden West St.,

> Golden WEst College, Huntington Beach, CA 92647

> Voice Mail: (714) 892-7711 x 51110

>

>

Dave McNeely, Biology, University of Texas at Brownsville AND Texas

Southmost College, 80 Fort Brown, Brownsville, TX 78520;

mcneely@utb1.utb.edu

 

 

Labbers,

Attrition/retention are big issues here. I can appreciate the

concerns although it seems to me that from an administrative standpoint the

concerns are financial. (Yes, I know, students pay our salaries. No

students = No faculty....) I have to agree with the people who have spoken

up to say what is so bad about a student taking Biology and deciding that

it isn't for them? Aren't we doing the student who thinks he wants to be a

doctor a greater service by allowing him to discover that he can't stand

the sight of muscles and bones than by finding ways to keep in in the

program until he has committed even more years of his life to an

unfortunate career choice? Many students are exploring the possibilities.

Some come to Biology and stay, some come to Biology and decide it isn't for

them. Isn't that the point?

 

Kerry, I share your concerns about letting students avoid taking

responsiblity for their own learning. We can beat ourselves up endlessly

over the problem. There is no change that I can make in class that will

improve the learning of the student who doesn't attend or who reads the

paper in the back of the room. If they don't want to learn, I can't make

them. I'm begining to wonder why I should use up valuable energy trying so

hard. In fact, I know the answer to that... teaching evaluations. Even

so, I am really begining to wonder why I should be forced to try and cater

to the surly student who doesn't want to be there.

I'm sure that I could learn to be entertaining and make sure that

everyone gets a good grade, but I don't want to. I want to be sure that

every student develops the skills to ask and answer questions. It's not

easy for any of us, but I think that it is critically important.

 

Here's another one to think about. Imagine the situation if

Congress passes the tax break for college students who maintain a B

average. Put this another way... Mom and Dad won't get their $5,000 if Jr.

doesn't get at least a B in your class. (I won't dare answer my phone.)

What do you think that will do to grade inflation and the quality of

education? Won't have to worry much about attrition rates if we must give

every fresh and soph. student B's. We get their $$ for 2 years. They get

their tax break. The flunk out courses start Jr. year. Probably will make

the first half of my comments irrelevant. (Better practice that song and

dance. If only I was a better teacher, Jr. would get a B.)

I'd love to hear what everyone else does to cope with

absentee/attitude students. --cmw

 

Charlene M. Waggoner, Ph.D. "Great art is eternal;

Department of Biological Sciences great science tends to be

Bowling Green, State University replaced by greater science."

Bowling Green, OH 43403

-- John A. Moore

cwaggon@bgnet.bgsu.edu

 

 

Hi, labbers:

For those who haven't seen it yet, I thought you might enjoy the

following from Neil Rudenstine's Point of View in the latest

_Chronicle of Higher Ed_ (Rudenstine is President of Harvard, the

editorial is titled "The Internet and Education, a Close Fit."

 

Rudenstine, Neil L. 1997. The internet and education: a close fit.

The Chronicle of Higher Education, XLIII(24) 21 February 1997, p. A48.

 

"For a century or more, evolving theories of education have stressed

the role of the student as an active learner -- someone who asks

questions, searches for relevant information, discusses ideas with

others, and generally moves ahead as an investigator, discoverer, or

adventurous scholar-in-the-making. Faculty members play a vital role

in the process, stimulating students to ask the right questions, to

seek answers in rigorous and imaginative ways, to re-examine their

assumptions and provisional conclusions, and to connect their thoughts

to a larger set of principles and ideas. But an essential part of the

driving force is expected to come from the students."

 

I dunno -- it seemed kinda relevant to the discussions we've been

having lately!

 

Enjoy,

Kerry

 

**********************

Kerry S. Kilburn, Ph.D.

Department of Biological Sciences

Old Dominion University

Norfolk, VA 23529

(757)683-5680 FAX 683-5283

 

http://www.odu.edu/~ksk/HOME.HTM

 

 

Below is a comment that Joy Perry (on biolab) received from a colleague in

the Math dept. at our 2-yr. institution after I forwarded some of our

interesting "attrition" messages to our campus.

 

What do you all think of this?

 

 

>>

>>I wish to offer a few pithy comments, that I would be happy to elaborate

>>for anybody interested.

>>

>>First, I tell my students in my introductory majors biology course that

>>they must set their sights high in terms of the grade that they hope to

>>receive. I note that if they receive a grade lower than a 2.5, they have

>>essentially failed the course. Graduate schools and professional schools

>>really have a problem with students who earned grades lower than 2.5 in

>>intro bio.

>>

>>Second, I have developed a philosophy (thanks in part stuff that I heard at

>>a few Sigma Xi meetings in the late '80s) that it is our ethical

>>responsibility to actively motivate our students to excel in our courses,

>>and to become as genuinely interested in the material as possible. If I

>>have a large number of students who receive grades of <2.5, I take that as

>>a failure on my part to: (1) motivate my students, (2) provide them a clear

>>explanation of the material, and (3) test them in an appropriate manner.

>>On that basis, my students generally bust their humps to learn the stuff,

>>and my average grade is about 3.0-3.2. Of course, there are a few slackers,

>>to whom I have no problem assigning grades of 1.5 or lower.

>>

 

I have big problems with that paragraph.

 

First, people who claim to be great teachers, as this person is claiming,

have the burden of proof on their shoulders. While I'm not likely to

challenge an acquaintance who makes such a claim, I'm also not going to

believe it without a lot of evidence.

 

Second, what might well be appropriate at an exclusive school (and I include

Madison; possibly a few of the 4-years [baccaluareate campuses of the Univ.

of WI System]) isn't appropriate at a Center [Centers are the 2-yr.

transfer institutions].

Since our student body includes a lot of people who aren't good students,

yet those whom we pass should be able to compete head to head with Madison

students, I'd expect a lot fewer passing grades here than, e.g. at Madison.

In fact (this should be good for a continuing argument!) I'd say the Centers

faculty member who regularly gives very high grades is probably failing in

their duty to evaluate their students.

 

Finally, the paragraph invites discussion about what testing "in an

appropriate manner" means, but if a test, and the tester, are to be judged

based on how many passed rather than on the content of the test and how much

time the students had and whether students might reasonably have expected to

be tested on that material, then standards are on a very slippery slope

downhill!

 

>>Grade inflation?? Nah! Performance inflation?? You bet!

>>

>>Third, remember that every time a student drops out of biology, we have two

>>concurrent negative outcomes. First, that person remains ignorant of

>>biology because they despair of taking additional courses. Second, that

>>person generally develops a HOSTILITY toward biology, that can come back to

>>bite us down the road. To pick on somebody who has faded from the

>>limelight, I can only wonder how Dan Quayle did in his biology courses. He

>>certainly created a mess pertaining to wetlands issues, thanks to his

>>ignorance of biology.

>>

 

I tend to agree with a lot of that, but I don't think it implies biology (or

discipline X) majors courses should be made non-rigorous in order that

everyone will love biology (or discipline X).

 

To get to my discipline, I think our service courses, such as most math

courses, need to prepare those who pass to use that material. If we can

also help them love it, more power to us, but that's not our first priority.

If we pass someone who has little chance of successfully using the material

in the course we've lied to our employer and we've harmed the student.

 

>>Ultimately, our job as educators should be to cultivate, not to weed out.

>>

 

We clearly have a duty to try to cultivate, but we also have a duty to

evaluate and sometimes that amounts to weeding out.

 

Neil Stahl

Math

Fox

----------------

Neil Stahl nstahl@uwc.edu

UW Center-Fox Valley (414)832-2630

Midway Road Fax 832-2674

Menasha, Wi. 54952-8002

 

 

Charlene wrote: I'd love to hear what everyone else does to cope with

absentee/attitude students. --cmw

 

First, my thanks to Charlene for her comments on attrition. While I would

really like all my students to succeed, you may place me squarely on the

side of the fence that maintains that learning is a student-driven

activity. I don't take credit for my successful students (the credit is

theirs) so I am also unwilling to take the blame for my unsuccessful

students. I'm not God's gift to teaching but I try to improve some aspect

of it every year based on the student evaluations. We all know what

factors contribute to the problem, but I don't know that we gain anything

by casting the blame around. I can't study for my students, but here's

what assistance we provide for introductory lab students:

 

1. 16 hours of graduate TA office hours per week.

2. 2 hours of open lab, staffed by TAs, 3 nights per week, more if there is an

upcoming exam.

3. a departmentally run assisted learning center, staffed by upper division

majors, and completely free.

4. set and walk-in office hours with the lab coordinator.

5. a campus-wide learning center that tests for learning disabilities, helps

students figure out how to study, gives test anxiety workshops, and a myriad

of other services.

6. study guides for each lab manual chapter outlining the important material to

know for exams.

7. old exams available on the web site.

 

Other than #7, I think all of these things are underutilized by the

students who need help. They still want to spend as little time in lab as

humanly possible and they can't understand why they do poorly on the exams

when they have spent a whole 3 hours the night before the test cramming.

 

Getting off my soapbox now....

 

But, to say *something* about Charlene's query, we take attendance every

lab period. I keep this around for folks who are complaining about their

grade- often they're the ones not showing up. There is a 10 point quiz at

the beginning of lab which motivates a lot of them to come in. That, plus

considerable group work.

 

I don't actively try to change the bad attitude students. The only

attitude I have control over is my own. So I try to stay positive, to

reflect an enthusiasm for biology, and to help students to the best of my

ability.

 

Mary

 

Mary H. Gray D.V.M.

Department of Biological Sciences

Lilly Hall of Life Science

Purdue University

West Lafayette, IN 47907

(765)-494-8185

FAX (765)-494-0876

 

 

I agree that we should help our students develop an interest in

biology. Any experienced teacher knows that students respond

much better if you show some interest in their world, rather than

just being a resource. However, I think it is very important

that we present them with exciting and interesting biology so

that any interest that develops is primarily in response to

biology. Teachers who offer watered down fun courses where the

main stimulus for interest is good jokes and simple content with

easy rewards are short changing their students. I took intro

chem from one of the most popular teachers on campus and spent

half the next semester learning what was skipped in the first

course. I've also taught at night when there were several

sections and realized that to a considerable degree, one's grade

was determined by which door the student walked through. I'm sure

we can all tell similar stories.

 

Don Igelsrud

deigelsr@acs.ucalgary.ca

 

 

Hi Y'all,

 

Charlene brought up an intersting point:

 

> Here's another one to think about. Imagine the situation if

>Congress passes the tax break for college students who maintain a B

>average. Put this another way... Mom and Dad won't get their $5,000 if Jr.

>doesn't get at least a B in your class. (I won't dare answer my phone.)

>What do you think that will do to grade inflation and the quality of

>education?

 

I understand the fears -- we had them, too, when Georgia went with

the Hope Scholarship. But, to my amazement, I have had very little of this

in my classes -- and I work largely with the first-year and non-major

students. And in terms of the school's financial concerns, it means that

more students can afford to attend.

This, of course, is short term. We have been warned that there are

folks on the horizon who will be publishing the grading record of faculty

(how many A's, B's, etc.). It will be interesting to see what happens in

the long term.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Gail Schiffer

Department of Biological and Physical Sciences

Kennesaw State University

1000 Chastain Road

Kennesaw, GA 30144

 

 

Group:

 

Last week I had two "X-generation" students get angry because I refused to

give them credit for answers where the information they had given me was

CORRECT but they had failed to answer the question!! In other words, they

dumbed their brains of some facts and hoped I would think they knew

something. One student got especially mad since what she had put on her test

as an answer was "in the book!"

 

I have students tell me they are getting a D- because "We haven't covered

anything I am interested in yet." I have students tell me they are getting a

D- because " I don't care anything about all this biology stuff; I just want

to be a doctor." So when I heard about the linking of "free tuition" to

grades of B or higher I had the same "blood run cold" reaction as Charlene at

Bowling Green.

 

I am on the "student takes responsibility for their learning " side of the

argument. I give it my all in the classroom and I assume the student can

choose whether to study or not. After 15 years of teaching freshman bio

majors I know that there are some I can "save" and some that are not meant to

be in biology.

 

Emily Rock

Wayne College

Orrville, Ohio

 

 

Emily,

 

This sounds familiar. At various times when I've taught A&P to pre-nursing

students, I've had them complain "Why do we have to know all these muscles,

bones ....?"; or "I don't see why we have to learn about all these

bacteria/diseases." They've also been overheard in the washroom (BTW a

great place to find out what students are really saying about your class)

"I don't see why we have to learn all this physiology stuff, it's too hard.

I just want to get a job where I can make $XXX a week like

so-and-so-does." Grade inflation literally makes me afraid of going to an

emergency room.

 

Liane Cochran-Stafira

Dept. of Ecology and Evolution

The University of Chicago

1101 East 57th Street

Chicago, Illinois 60637-5415

phone: 773-702-1930

fax: 773-702-9740

e-mail: lcochran@midway.uchicago.edu

 

 

 

I'd like to add one provision to what I said yesterday: If

courses are taught in mastery style so students can be said to

have mastered a core of basic material, that might bring some

standard to the problem of what a grade means. However, if

teachers spend all their class time preparing students for

standarized exams that produces a whole new set of problems.

I'll end with a Peter Ustinov comment I heard recently that goes

something like this: "This student has extremely low standards

of achievement and has failed to meet them."

 

Don Igelsrud

deigelsr@acs.ucalgary.ca

 

---

Return to Biolab Home Page