Diversion, Advancement, and Math

Developmental education continues to be a subject of much research, and even more discussion.  A few studies on remediation have become the drum beat for some foundations and projects that call remediation a failure.  As is normal in scientific research on a human activity, the landscape is much less clear … and much more attractive … than the ‘failure’ studies imply.

A recent report authored by Judith Scott-Clayton and Olga Rodriguez for the National Bureau of Economic Research describes efforts to study a broader range of possible outcomes.  The report is titled Development, Discouragement, Or Diversion? New Evidence On The Effects Of College Remediation and available at http://www.nber.org/papers/w18328.  Statistically, this report uses a discontinuity (regression-discontinuity, or RD) approach  as did several other studies; they expanded the research by using high school records and other college records. 

The major findings of the study are:

We find that remediation does little to develop students’ skills.

We also find relatively little evidence that it discourages either initial enrollment or persistence, except for a subgroup we identify as potentially mis-assigned to remediation.

The primary effect of remediation appears to be diversionary: students simply take remedial courses instead of college-level courses.

The first finding is consistent with other RD reports.  My own explanation for this discouraging finding is that developmental courses focus more on ‘facts’ than ‘skills’ or understanding; our students experience a long sequence of tasks related to what they need, but we do not generally provide a cohesive treatment that addresses the need directly.  The second finding shows some differences with other studies, which suggest that developmental courses might lower persistence.

The third finding is the one that raises concerns for me.  In their report, the authors suggest that diverting students from college-level academics might be a valid approach for a group of students with a lowered probability of success.  While I agree that there are some parts of the ‘developmental population’ with such extreme learning challenges that diversion is best, I do not agree in general that diversion is healthy or desirable. 

Is developmental education about diversion, or are we about advancement?  For us as professionals, this is one of those fundamental questions that determines our classroom behavior and expectations of students.  I see myself as an ‘advancement fanatic’; not only do I see advancement as the fundamental goal of developmental education (even mathematics), I believe in the advancement goal for every single student in spite of the predominant temporary evidence that this might not be reasonable.

One of my students said “You believed in me when nobody else would”.  I do not know if this student will reach her goal of becoming an elementary teacher; I hope she does … children deserve to have a teacher like her.  Even if she does not make it there, I believe that she can.  Quite a few of our students are in our courses because other people gave up on them.  I will not give up.

Diversion for developmental math students is the last resort for us.  Advancement is the thing.

 Join Dev Math Revival on Facebook:

1 Comment

• 

  By Eliza, August 22, 2012 @ 12:40 pm

  Jack, I have also heard time and time again when students say that “you believed in me when no one did.” I have come to realize it makes a huge difference in the student’s success in the developmental class. I do plan on NOT giving up on my students, because checking in with them periodically and letting them know I am there for them makes a big difference.

Other Links to this Post

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.