From Black Box to Pandora's Box: Evaluating Remedial/Developmental Education. CCRC Brief Number 11.
Saved in:
| Title: | From Black Box to Pandora's Box: Evaluating Remedial/Developmental Education. CCRC Brief Number 11. |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Grubb, W. Norton, Columbia Univ., New York, NY. Community Coll. Research Center. |
| Peer Reviewed: | N |
| Page Count: | 6 |
| Publication Date: | 2001 |
| Sponsoring Agency: | Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, New York, NY. |
| Document Type: | Reports - Descriptive |
| Descriptors: | College Role, Community Colleges, Course Evaluation, Curriculum Evaluation, Developmental Studies Programs, Evaluation Methods, Evaluation Needs, Remedial Instruction, Two Year Colleges, Validated Programs |
| Geographic Terms: | U.S.; New York |
| ISSN: | 1526-2049 |
| Abstract: | The roster of developmental programs available to students in community colleges is expanding, though remedial education itself does remain a marginal aspect of higher education. The programs are usually under-funded, segregated from "regular" offerings, and taught by part-timers. This report suggests that the colleges are sending signals that developmental education is not "real" education. The author details the vast array of different approaches to developmental/remedial education available in institutions of higher education. These approaches range from Shaughnessy's student-centered approach to the more conventional "skills-and-drills" approach and the remedial education offered in the welfare-to-work programs. The author finds that most educators who have made the transition form didactic to constructivist teaching have done so on their own, and thus the teaching methods seem random and idiosyncratic. The author recommends an eclectic approach to the evaluation of remedial education, which includes six parts: (1) investigation of the drop-out rates in remedial education; (2) outcome measures that include more than test scores of basic skills; (3) use of comparison or control groups in order to better evaluate the impact of completion; (4) understanding of the program being evaluated; (5) comparisons of different approaches to teaching; and (6) better understanding of the "assignment" problem. The author concludes that a program of evaluation and improvement is central to improving the performances of developmental and remedial students. (NB) |
| Journal Code: | RIEJAN2002 |
| Entry Date: | 2002 |
| Accession Number: | ED455865 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| FullText | Text: Availability: 0 CustomLinks: – Url: https://eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED455865 Name: ERIC Full Text Category: fullText Text: Full Text from ERIC |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: eric DbLabel: ERIC An: ED455865 AccessLevel: 3 PubType: Report PubTypeId: report PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: From Black Box to Pandora's Box: Evaluating Remedial/Developmental Education. CCRC Brief Number 11. – Name: Language Label: Language Group: Lang Data: English – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Grubb%2C+W%2E+Norton%22">Grubb, W. Norton</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Columbia+Univ%2E%2C+New+York%2C+NY%2E+Community+Coll%2E+Research+Center%2E%22">Columbia Univ., New York, NY. Community Coll. Research Center.</searchLink> – Name: PeerReviewed Label: Peer Reviewed Group: SrcInfo Data: N – Name: Pages Label: Page Count Group: Src Data: 6 – Name: DatePubCY Label: Publication Date Group: Date Data: 2001 – Name: SourceSuprt Label: Sponsoring Agency Group: SrcSuprt Data: Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, New York, NY. – Name: TypeDocument Label: Document Type Group: TypDoc Data: Reports - Descriptive – Name: Subject Label: Descriptors Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22College+Role%22">College Role</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Community+Colleges%22">Community Colleges</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Course+Evaluation%22">Course Evaluation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Curriculum+Evaluation%22">Curriculum Evaluation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Developmental+Studies+Programs%22">Developmental Studies Programs</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Evaluation+Methods%22">Evaluation Methods</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Evaluation+Needs%22">Evaluation Needs</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Remedial+Instruction%22">Remedial Instruction</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Two+Year+Colleges%22">Two Year Colleges</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Validated+Programs%22">Validated Programs</searchLink> – Name: Subject Label: Geographic Terms Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22U%2ES%2E%3B+New+York%22">U.S.; New York</searchLink> – Name: ISSN Label: ISSN Group: ISSN Data: 1526-2049 – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: The roster of developmental programs available to students in community colleges is expanding, though remedial education itself does remain a marginal aspect of higher education. The programs are usually under-funded, segregated from "regular" offerings, and taught by part-timers. This report suggests that the colleges are sending signals that developmental education is not "real" education. The author details the vast array of different approaches to developmental/remedial education available in institutions of higher education. These approaches range from Shaughnessy's student-centered approach to the more conventional "skills-and-drills" approach and the remedial education offered in the welfare-to-work programs. The author finds that most educators who have made the transition form didactic to constructivist teaching have done so on their own, and thus the teaching methods seem random and idiosyncratic. The author recommends an eclectic approach to the evaluation of remedial education, which includes six parts: (1) investigation of the drop-out rates in remedial education; (2) outcome measures that include more than test scores of basic skills; (3) use of comparison or control groups in order to better evaluate the impact of completion; (4) understanding of the program being evaluated; (5) comparisons of different approaches to teaching; and (6) better understanding of the "assignment" problem. The author concludes that a program of evaluation and improvement is central to improving the performances of developmental and remedial students. (NB) – Name: CodeSource Label: Journal Code Group: SrcInfo Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JC" term="%22RIEJAN2002%22">RIEJAN2002</searchLink> – Name: DateEntry Label: Entry Date Group: Date Data: 2002 – Name: AN Label: Accession Number Group: ID Data: ED455865 |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=ED455865 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Languages: – Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 6 Subjects: – SubjectFull: College Role Type: general – SubjectFull: Community Colleges Type: general – SubjectFull: Course Evaluation Type: general – SubjectFull: Curriculum Evaluation Type: general – SubjectFull: Developmental Studies Programs Type: general – SubjectFull: Evaluation Methods Type: general – SubjectFull: Evaluation Needs Type: general – SubjectFull: Remedial Instruction Type: general – SubjectFull: Two Year Colleges Type: general – SubjectFull: Validated Programs Type: general – SubjectFull: U.S.; New York Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: From Black Box to Pandora's Box: Evaluating Remedial/Developmental Education. CCRC Brief Number 11. Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Columbia Univ., New York, NY. Community Coll. Research Center. – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Grubb, W. Norton IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 02 Type: published Y: 2001 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 1526-2049 |
| ResultId | 1 |
