|
|
Most College-Bound Students Underprepared, Studies SaySeveral research reports have emerged this fall that highlight the underpreparedness of most college-bound students. An annual report from ACT says that only about a quarter of the students who graduated from high school this year are adequately prepared for college-level work in English, math, science, and reading comprehension, the four subject areas the ACT college admission exam tests. ACT defines preparation in this case as the point at which a student’s skills indicate he or she has a 70 percent chance of earning a C or better in a first-year college course. By analyzing the scores of 1.2 million exam takers who graduated high school in 2005, ACT found that 68 percent of students met college-readiness benchmarks in English. However, only 51 percent did so in reading comprehension, and students did even worse in math and science, subjects in which only 41 percent and 26 percent respectively hit preparedness benchmarks. In addition, ACT found that slightly over half (56 percent) of this year’s test-takers had completed the core curriculum recommended for college-bound students. A study of high school juniors recently conducted by California State University found that a higher proportion of the state’s students are prepared for college-level math (56 percent) than are prepared for college-level English (26 percent). Juniors can volunteer to take the test to determine in which subjects they need more academic work if they plan on entering college. A new National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) publication reports that more than 60 percent of senior high school students in 2004 said they would attend a four-year college. Another 22.5 percent said they would attend a community college. However, only a third of the students planning to earn a bachelor’s degree could solve math problems involving intermediate-level math skills. Colleges and universities contribute to the preparation problem by not clearly communicating to college-bound students the academic preparation they will need in order to avoid taking remedial or developmental courses in college, says Michael Kirst, a professor of education at Stanford University. Since 1997, Kirst has studied how well high school students, parents, teachers, and administrators understand college policies and practices. In the most recent report to emerge from this research, “Separation of K–12 and Postsecondary Education Governance and Policymaking: Evolution and Impact” (available at www.stanford.edu/group/bridgeproject/publications.html), Kirst and coauthor Andrea Venezia, senior policy analyst at the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education, assert that the most pronounced policy disconnect is between first-generation college goers and the open- or broad-access institutions they are likely to attend. For these students, the real issue is not whether they will be admitted, but whether they can pass a placement exam to exempt them from remedial courses, Kirst said. They do not receive clear, adequate information from teachers and counselors about what they need to know and do to succeed in college. They also are not told by anyone—including colleges themselves— that there will be a placement test once they get there, much less what the exam consists of. In addition, many students who plan to attend less-selective institutions avoid rigorous courses their senior year, mistakenly believing that they are adequately prepared for college, Kirst said. One answer to the college preparedness issue, Kirst suggests, lies in better communication and coordination between the governing boards of high school and broad-access institutions in each state. In the 1990s, all but one state established K–12 standards and tests, Kirst said. However, only Oregon consulted postsecondary systems on what those standards should be. Kirst also suggests creating financial aid policies that reward students for completing college preparation courses. |
|