Published: May 1, 1995
Cost-Effective Education: When it comes to cognitive growth, students
at two-year colleges get as much out of their freshman year as their
peers at pricier four-year institutions, according to a report
published in the March issue of Educational Evaluation and Policy
Analysis. The study, which was prepared under the auspices of the
National Center on Postsecondary Teaching, Learning, and Assessment, a
federally financed research center at Pennsylvania State University,
tracked 2,685 freshmen at 23 colleges and universities in 16 states. In
the fall of 1992, the researchers paid random samples of first-year
students at each of the selected institutions a $25 stipend to take a
three-hour battery of tests and complete background questionnaires. The
tests were designed to measure reading comprehension, mathematical
ability, and critical-thinking skills. That spring, after the students
had been in college for nearly an entire academic year, they were paid
an additional $35 to take the tests again. Researchers compared the
scores for students at the five two-year colleges in the sample with
scores for students at four-year institutions that had similar
demographic makeups. Regardless of the type of institution, the
researchers discovered "general parity'' in the adjusted, end-of-year
test scores. "If you take a look at the research, we're getting more
and more evidence that there's parity, and two-year colleges are
cheaper and more convenient,'' says Ernest Pascarella, a professor of
higher education at the University of Illinois at Chicago and the lead
researcher for the project. "For students with limited financial
resources, these schools might offer a cost-beneficial way of getting
their first year or two of postsecondary education.'' Pascarella said
the researchers do not know why the two-year colleges seem to be doing
as good a job as more prestigious four-year institutions. He
speculated, however, that the two-year colleges may focus more on
teaching than do major universities where professors are also expected
to conduct and publish research.
Reforms Take Hold: A new nationwide study of middle-level education has
found that the schools serving young adolescents are gradually changing
for the better. Over the past four years, Jerry Valentine, a professor
of education at the University of Missouri, and a small team of
researchers analyzed millions of pieces of data from some 500 of the
nation's 12,000 junior high and middle schools. The team found that a
growing number are using interdisciplinary and team-teaching techniques
recommended by reformers. The percentage of schools trying out these
methods rose from 33 percent in 1989 to 57 percent in 1992. Valentine
notes, however, that some of these schools are only using the
techniques with one or two teams of students per grade level, not the
entire student body. The study, which was supported by the National
Association of Secondary School Principals, also found that an
increasing number of schools are offering "exploratory courses,''
required classes that expand students' horizons beyond the traditional
core curriculum. Participation in school clubs and other co-curricular
activities are on the rise, as well. "We find that if children are not
exposed to a variety of things early on,'' Valentine says, "they will
not venture out later on in high school.'' But the news was not all
upbeat. The researchers also discovered that vestiges of traditional
junior high schools remain stubbornly intact. Most middle-level
schools, for example, continue to group or track students by ability,
despite persistent calls by researchers and policymakers to abandon the
practice. Only 18 percent of the schools studied said they no longer
group students this way. Most of the others said they were planning to
eliminate tracking or were studying the possibility.
--Gregory Byrne and Debra Viadero
Web Only
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
TM Archive