AP: Student tracking finds limited learning in college

[SkinsHokieFan]

After being in the work force and running my own business the past few years, I tend to agree partially.

College is great for seeing real competition and networking and meeting motivated people.

Learning? I dunno, I think you get a lot more out of running your own business. To be honest, I think its one hell of an over priced racket with students ending up in 6 figure debt after college

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ihzU805is7Y-Mov3q1He2zx12lHQ?docId=7e6fdb1d813e4debbb327e4ad3cd707c

Student tracking finds limited learning in college

(AP) – 4 hours ago

You are told that to make it life, you must go to college. You work hard to get there. You or your parents drain savings or take out huge loans to pay for it all.

And you end up learning ... not much.

A study of more than 2,300 undergraduates found 45 percent of students show no significant improvement in the key measures of critical thinking, complex reasoning and writing by the end of their sophomore years.

Not much is asked of students, either. Half did not take a single course requiring 20 pages of writing during their prior semester, and one-third did not take a single course requiring even 40 pages of reading per week.

The findings are in a new book, "Academically Adrift: Limited Learning on College Campuses," by sociologists Richard Arum of New York University and Josipa Roksa of the University of Virginia. An accompanying report argues against federal mandates holding schools accountable, a prospect long feared in American higher education.

"The great thing — if you can call it that — is that it's going to spark a dialogue and focus on the actual learning issue," said David Paris, president of the New Leadership Alliance for Student Learning and Accountability, which is pressing the cause in higher education. "What kind of intellectual growth are we seeing in college?"

The study, an unusually large-scale effort to track student learning over time, comes as the federal government, reformers and others argue that the U.S. must produce more college graduates to remain competitive globally. But if students aren't learning much, that calls into question whether boosting graduation rates will provide that edge.

"It's not the case that giving out more credentials is going to make the U.S. more economically competitive," Arum said in an interview. "It requires academic rigor ... You can't just get it through osmosis at these institutions."

Click link for rest

[TD_washingtonredskins]

I definitely learned plenty in college. I'm not sure if I was better prepared for my career, but I certainly learned and retained information.

I think learning on the job is the only way you can be prepared for most careers, though I think I was much more well-informed coming out of college than I was going into it.

[ibarramedia]

I learned a great deal in college. Lawyers and Doctors need to go to college before law school and med school. Most good jobs also require a college degree.

[DjTj]

A study of more than 2,300 undergraduates found 45 percent of students show no significant improvement in the key measures of critical thinking, complex reasoning and writing by the end of their sophomore years.

So they're saying that 55% do show improvement? That actually sounds pretty good to me.

The college graduation rate is only around 50%.

http://www.examiner.com/education-in-national/college-graduation-rates-average-53-percent

50% of people go to college, screw around, and drop out. That is no surprise. But the other 50% who take it seriously can learn a lot, gain valuable skills, and earn diplomas. That's on the students, not the schools.

[Darth Tater]

As far as knowledge that is not directly applicable to ones social value, college at best provides a structure where gaining that knowledge is considered productive. It also usually provides a "safer" atmosphere to practice social networking. Anything you learn in college you can learn on your own but unless that knowledge clearly relates to your social value, its usually not considered very valuable. A college degree acts more as a signal than anything else.

[PeterMP]

So they're saying that 55% do show improvement? That actually sounds pretty good to me.

The college graduation rate is only around 50%.

http://www.examiner.com/education-in-national/college-graduation-rates-average-53-percent

50% of people go to college, screw around, and drop out. That is no surprise. But the other 50% who take it seriously can learn a lot, gain valuable skills, and earn diplomas. That's on the students, not the schools.

Yeah, anybody that knows much about college knows the 1st 2 years aren't high impact, which is why most 4 year institutions allow you to pretty easily transfer in credits, even from much more inexpensive community colleges for the first 2 years.

For most students, the first year is just trying to make sure people really knew the stuff they should have learned in high school.

Sophomore year is when you are really just starting to be exposed to new information, and you really see the first round of "weed" out classes.

The other thing I have an issue with is, what is so big about 20 written pages?

I can easily assess, comment, and help a student with their writing skills given 2 or 3 pages.

Generally, college is what you put into it. If you want to be a C/D student that has to retake classes to graduate, then the college is going to take your money, but I doubt anybody ever said that was a good use of your money (and I've told students it wasn't).

[Riggo-toni]

I learned quite a bit in college, but wish I had picked my courses differently..20-20 hindsight. Still, I can't say anything I learned in college found any useful application career-wise.

[RansomthePasserby]

Huh, as an engineering student, I've definitely learned a lot and realized how much I don't know, haha!

[TD_washingtonredskins]

I learned quite a bit in college, but wish I had picked my courses differently..20-20 hindsight. Still, I can't say anything I learned in college found any useful application career-wise.

Same here. I was able to apply two or three of my major courses to my current career. Even with that, only parts of those courses were applicable and useful. But, technically, I learned something in school that I didn't have to learn in the real world.

Overall, I learned far more from my liberal arts classes...I learned much more about history than I ever did in high school. It's probably because I was actually interested in history and soaked up anything new I could find.

[Predicto]

Depends on what you are studying, and where you are studying it.

If you are going to college to learn how to run a small business, you are correct - it would probably be better to just start a business and learn that way.

For what I do, college was an absolutely necessary step. My writing and thinking was so much better after college than before... orders of magnitude better.

[TheLongshot]

I think college did do a lot to improve my work habits. I also think it helped me deal with with work world: unreasonable expectations by higher ups, politics, etc.

[Prosperity]

All in all, taking classes, reading books, meeting new people, gaining a degree of independence... area really useful things

the problem is the sky rocketing costs

[adam@section118]

A college degree acts more as a signal than anything else.

:yes:

I agree for the most part with what everone else has said, though I do agree with the OP as well.

Granted I had a libral arts major as well as a business major, so having that mix of classes was amazing for me.

[jpillian]

All in all, taking classes, reading books, meeting new people, gaining a degree of independence... area really useful things

the problem is the sky rocketing costs

Yep. It's definitely a useful endeavor. I don't know if for most careers it is worth the debt incurred. The average amount of debt a college undergad graduates with today is just shy of $25k. (http://www.finaid.org/loans/)

For those on the low side of that number, it's probably worth it. For those on the high side of that number, unless it's a profession that requires it -- I'm not so sure it's worth the money.

If you did need a 4-year degree for your career path, then the community college - to big brand school seems like the most cost effective way to go.

[PokerPacker]

It depends on what you go in to study. You go in for Comm or Poli-sci, yeah you've earned a piece of paper and had a college experience. I'm studying Computer Engineering. That's not stuff you can just pick up as you go.

[RansomthePasserby]

It depends on what you go in to study. You go in for Comm or Poli-sci, yeah you've earned a piece of paper and had a college experience. I'm studying Computer Engineering. That's not stuff you can just pick up as you go.

Yeah, that's hxc.

[Pwyl]

If you are going to college to learn how to run a small business, you are correct - it would probably be better to just start a business and learn that way.

I would actually disagree. I personally know people who have failed at small business who would have succeeded had they taken some business classes in college.

And for me, I learned a lot in my undergrad degree that translated directly into productivity in my job, both in directly technical and applied theory, and in basic business. I've found that many of the subjects that corporations want to cover in in-house training I have already seen in the basic business portions of my college curriculum.

I think that DJTJ is most correct, and this is akin to managers complaining that 30% of sick days are used on mondays and fridays

[Predicto]

It depends on what you go in to study. You go in for Comm or Poli-sci, yeah you've earned a piece of paper and had a college experience. I'm studying Computer Engineering. That's not stuff you can just pick up as you go.

LOL. I love the arrogance of engineering and science students. They are sure they are the only "real" students.

In many places, you go in for Poli-Sci, and you work just as hard and learn just as much as any engineer. It's just different stuff. I wrote at least a hundred papers in college, and my writing and analytical skills got honed in the process.

I used to help math and physics majors with their writing assignments, and they would be in tears, asking "what do you mean I'm not making any sense? Math problems have formulas and answers, period. I just want to find the answer and be done. What's the ANSWER?"

[RansomthePasserby]

LOL. I love the arrogance of engineering and science students. They are sure they are the only "real" students.

In many places, you go in for Poli-Sci, and you work just as hard and learn just as much as any engineer. It's just different stuff. I wrote at least a hundred papers in college, and my writing and analytical skills got honed in the process.

I used to help math and physics majors with their writing assignments, and they would be in tears, asking "what do you mean I'm not making any sense? Math problems have formulas and answers, period. I just want to find the answer and be done. What's the ANSWER?"

Mhmm, both poli-sci and engineering majors have to write papers (and yes, poli-sci are generally better at it)... but do they both have to solve engineering problems?

Yeaahhh... math and physics majors are a little... "different"...

[No Excuses]

I wish they would get rid of general curriculum requirements in the future. Besides my religious and cultural study courses, I've hated every elective I've had to take. They make you waste brain power, time and energy on so many useless courses.

[MattFancy]

I wish they would get rid of general curriculum requirements in the future. Besides my religious and cultural study courses, I've hated every elective I've had to take. They make you waste brain power, time and energy on so many useless courses.

That's what I've been saying. I majored in Business, why did I need to take Chemistry? It would've been more beneficial to me to take more business related classes and less filler classes.

[jpillian]

It depends on what you go in to study. You go in for Comm or Poli-sci, yeah you've earned a piece of paper and had a college experience. I'm studying Computer Engineering. That's not stuff you can just pick up as you go.

If you're referring to the Electrical Engineering side, I definitely agree.

If you're referring to CompSci, I don't know if I'd agree.

Most of the best programmers I know either didn't go to college or didn't major in CompSci.

[Predicto]

Mhmm, both poli-sci and engineering majors have to write papers (and yes, poli-sci are generally better at it)... but do they both have to solve engineering problems?

Yeaahhh... math and physics majors are a little... "different"...

Of course they are different. I would have been a lousy engineer, I suspect. But I wrote ten times as much as they do, and it was hard work too.

Not knocking guys who do that stuff - I'm just responding to the idea that liberal arts is just "picking up a piece of paper and having a college experience."

[bcl05]

I think having general curriculum requirements is generally good. I'm a physician now, but I think the most useful undergraduate classes for me were probably the film studies classes I took. Granted, all the biochemistry/etc was important to get into medical school, but the critical thinking, analytical skills, and work habits I learned in film studies probably made the most impact. I likely wouldn't have taken them without the general requirements. On the other hand, their success has everything to do with having a phenomenally dynamic and inspiring professor, not the material itself...

[adam@section118]

That's what I've been saying. I majored in Business, why did I need to take Chemistry? It would've been more beneficial to me to take more business related classes and less filler classes.

I see both sides.

I hated some gen ed classes (mostly math, I do not do anything math related) but at the same time I loved some of my history clases and my english classes have proved incredibly important. I had to wake some WI (writing intensive) classes in school, but nothing helped me out as much as english 110-114

That said, I am also biased because I was a fine arts major (who switched to a theatre and film minor my senior year) so a lot of my "acting, film, writing, directing" etc classes were not clases but instead a boatload of fun for me.

---------- Post added January-18th-2011 at 04:40 PM ----------

I think having general curriculum requirements is generally good. I'm a physician now, but I think the most useful undergraduate classes for me were probably the film studies classes I took. Granted, all the biochemistry/etc was important to get into medical school, but the critical thinking, analytical skills, and work habits I learned in film studies probably made the most impact. I likely wouldn't have taken them without the general requirements. On the other hand, their success has everything to do with having a phenomenally dynamic and inspiring professor, not the material itself...

Well said