In reading W.E. Sedlacek's Beyond the Big Test (2004), I was driven to consider what the purpose of college is. The book focuses on the inadequacy of admissions test such at the SAT and the ACT which focus on cognitive variables (verbal and math) in order to predict college success. His argument is basically two-fold. First, the test is inadequate because it is biased toward white male cognitive patterns and measures only componential ability (i.e., ability to interpret experience in a static environment), thus unfairly relegating non-white male thinkers to lower status. Second, the test is a poor predictor of grades (beyond the first year) or retention or graduation.
Under the circumstances, he suggest replacing traditional entrance exams with assessment tools that measure also noncognitive variables that he says are better predictors of success: e.g., positive self concept, realistic self-appraisal, successfully handling the system, a preference for long-term goals, availability of strong support persons, leadership experience, community involvement (having to do with support community), and knowledge acquired in a field. His research shows that these are better predictors of success and are valid across racial groups.
My question is, how do you experience the college environment? Does it seem to be slanted toward success as defined by the white male ideal? What other models of success might there be? And finally, what is the purpose of the college? Is it there to redress civil woes?
This is your first post. I await your riposte ; )
John
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Uncle John, it's your nephew Mark. I was interested in this Prof. from Maryland, so I checked out an online paper of his. My only question is, how can you measure "noncognitive variables" in such a way that creates more egalitarian admissions and doesn't create an even more "affirmative" action-plan? How would you be improving the quality of higher education for students who have earned such a privilege through hard work by replacing the basic cognitive measurements of math and verbal skills? It is wrong and tragic that African American teenagers don't do well on the SAT because they are told they probably won't beforehand. But is it fair to give them a "leg-up" on other applicants because they experienced less traditional forms of successful leadership? (Sedlacek includes gang leadership, p. 3 http://www.youthbuild.org/atf/cf/%7B22B5F680-2AF9-4ED2-B948-40C4B32E6198%7D/4%5B1%5D.2%20NoncognitiveMeasuresSedlacek.pdf)
ReplyDeleteAny help explaining how this helps and doesn't hurt minority college students? Thanks
Mark
I have found college to be a place where I can explore my options and find my place in this society. I do think it is true that what our place in society might be is more oriented towards an ideal that is typically represented by the white male community. I don't believe that African Americans cannot fit into this role, but I think it is true that they are perhaps encouraged to fit a certain profile that distances them from their culture. I think college is aimed at a place where we can seriously explore our options as to what we might do in this society, while gaining the necessary education to fulfill this role. Although it may appeal to a particular image, I don't think it seriously limits our options.
ReplyDeleteI don't think it is any secret that the SAT and ACT exams are not adequate measures of a student's ability or knowledge. I also don't think it is any secret that minority students struggle in college and even in high school. Our country has a long and difficult history of racism, and although we have certainly come a long way, the effects of our history regrettably remain. College has been a wonderful experience for me--a chance to explore my strengths and interests, as well as shape friendships and skills. For many of my black and hispanic friends, however, it has been a trying time as they struggle financially and academically in an environment which is hostile to their culture and an atmosphere which is foreign to them. Obviously my knowledge on the subject is limited, but as far as experience goes, it seems to me that American colleges are a hostile environment for minority students, but I'm not sure what to do about it.
ReplyDeleteSelf esteem and positive self image doesn't necessarily result in better performance. I can't remember the study but I'll send it along if I can find it. This was especially true when it came to testing of any type.
ReplyDeleteI also remember that the more you let individual admissions officers make decisions on soft skills they display similar biases to the test choosing students much like themselves in terms of background. Tests have lots of issues but putting more soft human judgement into the mix seems to present similar problems.
Hey, Mark. Thanks for the post! Those are good questions. In reading over your post I realized that I may have misrepresented Sedlacek. Sedlacek is not suggesting that we admit students who do not have the intellectual capabilities to withstand the rigors of college education, he is arguing that the standardized tests alone to not measure intellectual potential. They measure intellectual achievement. The question becomes, how do we detect those students graduating from the nation's high schools who in spite of their academically poor surroundings have the intellectual potential not only to survive at college but to actually thrive? They are currently falling through the cracks due to their lack of academic preparation and lack of skill in maneuvering standardized testing. That does not mean that they are not intelligent. I think all of us who have worked with youth from blighted school systems understand that neither grades nor starndardized tests tell the whole story. Some of the most intellectually gifted people I know underachieved in high school. What Sedlacek is asking is whether there isn't some way to detect intellectual potential in situations in which standardized testing is not an accurate measure. He has come up with a list of skills and behavior which, when taken together, do a fairly good job of detecting potential where standardized testing is indicating low achievment. For the literally hundreds of thousands of students who have been sentenced to sub-standard public education and who, by virtue of their upbringing and educational deprivation, have been left utterly unprepared to compete on achievement tests, this is a sign of hope. The other alternative is to relegate these very bright, very gifted students to a life of underachievement and never tap the potential of some of the brightest and best students that we might have. In reflecting on what I just wrote, I guess a related question is whether the educational system is a system of rewards or a system of opportunity.
ReplyDeleteHey, Billy (it's hard for me to call you that ;). Thanks for the post! Again, those are good thoughts. I believe that anyone with adequate intellectual ability has potential to succeed in the current system. It probably requires some form of sacrifice and surrender for everyone. I am sure that there are those who are simply fitted for the current system, in fact, I think I may have met a few of them. Nevertheless, for most of us, finding success in the academic/professional pipeline means surrendering certain parts of our habits, our personality, and our culture. I came out of highschool as a first-rate goof-off. When I hit college it required a complete change of habits and personality (it's hard to be the class clown in college ;). I think you are right in pointing out that that sacrifice is greater for some than for others. African American students frequently come from communities where relationships and community solidarity trump achievement. Put into a competitive college environment, it causes a major culture clash.
ReplyDeleteThe question for me becomes whether the current system is the way it is because it was built by white males who constructed it around their own values and so, in that sense, has built into it the means of their own success, or whether this is in fact the best system for success, generally speaking. Let me try to illustrate that. Let's say that I am four feet tall and rather rotund. I am an utter failure at basketball but let's say that I invent a game that rewards being short and plump, a game where you compete to get through wickets that are, coincidentally, four feet two inches tall. The tall guys can't compete because they have to get on their knees to get through. The skinny guys can't compete because they get bowled over by their more substantial counterparts. In other words, the game was designed to give advantage to all my unique qualities. In basketball I am an utter failure, but in "wicket bashing" I am a first-rate success. What if the entire collegiate system were designed to award white male patterns of thought and conduct? In order to test that hypothesis, it seems to me, it would have to be demonstrated that there are other forms of thought and conduct that are equally valid and produce equal levels of success. I know that such a suggestion is fraught with ambiguities, not to mention that it would call into question whether the entire definition of post-college success isn't constructed around the same values (e.g., is the system of success also designed to favor white males?), nevertheless, these are the questions that would have to be answered before we could say that the system is designed to favor white males and not simply designed to provide the highest measures of success generally. Does that make sense?
Hi, Pastor's Kid. Maybe you need to change your moniker to "Kid of a Restless Wanderer," although, it occurs to me that that was the attribution given to Cain after he killed Abel. Maybe not a great fit. Let's stick with this one until I land some where ;)
ReplyDeleteYes, it is clear that the current climate on most campuses is fraught with friction for minority students. I say fraught with friction rather than hostile because although there is no doubt that minority students often perceive the environment as hostile, it is not hostile by design or intent. It seems to be a by-product of the culture clash I described above. Like you, I am not sure what to do about it. It seems clear that unless minority students make the cultural adjustment, they will not succeed in college. Adjusting is not the same as surrendering. I think that many minority students feel pressure to surrender their culture rather than adujusting to the foreign culture of which they are a part at college.
In fact, I think that "foreign culture" is a good analogy. On many occassions, as you know, I have lived in a foreign environment. On each occassion I had to go through a process of preparation and adaptation. That process included doing some reading about the new culture, learning the language, adjusting my expectations, making adjustments as I moved into the culture, and constantly learning how to survive and thrive in my new environment. At no point did I lose my native culture (I am sure it also underwent adjustments as I was exposed to new paradigms). I continued to be an American, I embraced that identity, I went home on occassion and reafirmed by ties to the culture. But in the foreign environment, I lived under a different set of rules that were needed in order to live successfully in that environment. It seems to me that in order to prepare minority students for college, it would be important to go through a similar process of preparation and adaptation to a foreign environment. As more and more minority students successfully make the cultural transition, the more the college culture that currently looks so foreign will look more like them.
Thanks, Vansaj, for that comment. I am not sure whether we have met, but welcome to the blog. I would be interested in seeing that article if you can find it. I think what you are saying is that self-esteem and self-image alone are not predicters of success. With that I think Sedlacek would agree. For that reason he came up with a more ample, complex paradigm for predicting college success. What Sedlacek is trying to show is that there are non-cognative variables that demonstrate laten cognitive ability. I don't think he would advocate substituting soft skills, as you describe them, for cognitive ability. I think he is trying to create a system that is capable of detecting congitive ability where standardized testing does not tell the whole story. I should have added that Sedlacek is not advocating substituting non-cognitive variables for standardized testing. He is suggesting that these non-cognitive variables can be used to recognize those students who might have cognitive ability that is not revealed by standardized test results. Mark mentioned above, for example, that gang leadership would be one of the areas that might be taken into account. Even though we would never recommend that someone undertake gang leadership to demonstrate college worthiness, nevertheless, leading a gang requires advanced organizational and leadership abilities that could very likely predict strong intellectual potential. When accompanied by the other variables mentioned by Sedlacek, as a matrix, they produce some reliable predictors of college success.
ReplyDelete