ws
250
AGUS

 

VOLUME XIV, NUMBER 22

INNOVATION ABSTRACTS

PUBLISHED BY THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR STAFF AND ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT (NISOD), COLLEGE OF EDUCATION,

THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN + WITH SUPPORT FROM THE W. K. KELLOGG FOUNDATION AND THE SID W. RICHARDSON FOUNDATION

 

Between Scylla and Charybdis

Student retention and the emphasis placed on it by my
new employer was giving me the jitters. I had recently
been hired at the community college, and, although I had
taught for several years, both at my alma mater, and
elsewhere, none of those institutions had even hinted at
trying to retain students. They had all, of course, exhorted
me to uphold high standards, and, to the best of my
knowledge, I had. It was not unusual to see several
students “drop” after the first exam.

had never given any thought to the “dropouts,” let
alone worry about “retaining” them. In my experience,
after one tough exam, the “weak” got going. I was left
with strong, well-motivated students, and things worked
out. | wasa strong believer in making the students think
and apply what was taught, rather than simply recognize
sentences from the textbook. This method ensured
learning, but, also ensured a high dropout rate.

How could I stop the exodus? I could, of course, have
made the exams easier. I could have dropped their lowest
grade or curved their exams. I could have discarded some
questions which the majority thought were tricky, but that
went against my grain. Not that I have never resorted to
such practices; but, when I did, it bothered me enough to
take away my job satisfaction.

Such strategies are commonly employed, and I learned
under several professors who regularly used all or most of
the above. However, when I looked back at my own
education, I realized that I had retained what had been
taught by those teachers who were considered “hard,”
“tough,” or “too demanding.” Because of their uncom-
promising attitude, their students had to buckle down and
learn, or drop and run!

Some of my students, and not just those at the commu-
nity college, had high school diplomas but were unable to
write one good short paragraph. They either made gross
grammatical errors, spelling mistakes, or compositional
errors. Yet some said that I was a hard teacher and that
they had made As and Bs throughout high school, or in
other courses they had taken. So, I had come to the
conclusion that their school system had indeed let them
down and given them a false impression of their capabili-
ties. I had no desire to add to that. I could not bury my
head in the sand either. This was a community college,

and it was the mission of our institution to educate the
community. So it was essential to reach out to students
and retain them.

SUE

After much thought, I took the only option available to
me. I told my students they could take re-exams if they
felt they did poorly. I assured them that the tests would
cover only the material covered in class. I took the
responsibility of covering everything that was essential at
the level being offered. The exam would have one
compulsory essay question and 50 objective questions.
The objective questions were mostly multiple choice;
however, the wording was not the same as in the text-
book, or as in the transparencies used in class. They were
allowed to leave five objective questions blank, without
penalty. If they chose to answer them, they would be
counted. (I was not about to forgive them their mistakes,
only the opportunity to bank on what they knew for sure.)

I repeatedly told my students that if they knew the
important points and had understood what was presented
in class, I saw no reason why they could not earn a full
100% on my tests.

After I shared the grades on the first exam, I went over
the exam in class, explained why the correct answers were
correct, and why the incorrect answers were incorrect. I
also displayed the best essays on the notice board (with
the permission of the authors). I wrote what made me
single out those essays as excellent.

While going over the exam, some students would
interject as I spoke and say, “But I thought you
meant...”. I would respond, “Yes, sometimes we do not
quite understand the concepts as the conveyor wants us
to. That is precisely why I allow re-exams. I give you the
opportunity to re-learn the material correctly. Demon-
strate to me that you have, and I will gladly give you the
A you will then deserve.”

Even with this generous offer, very few students
ventured to take re-exams. Some students did drop the
course. I repeated the procedure after the second exam;
and this time to encourage more of the students to try
again, I announced that I would set aside one class period

 

   

oP

THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR STAFF AND ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT (NISOD)
Community College Leadership Program, Department of Educational Administration
ass College of Education, The University of Texas at Austin, EDB 348, Austin, Texas 78712