Think [the box] ing discussion

So on the cover of Monday's Toronto Star is an interesting article based on the results of a survey of university professors and librarians that found that first-year students are "less mature, rely too much on Wikipedia and 'expect success without the requisite effort'".

"55% of Ontario's faculty and librarians surveyed believe students are less prepared for university than even three years ago. In fact, many post-secondary institutions have had to create catch-up courses to help those who are struggling."

The article continues:

"With the current focus on stemming high school dropouts, discipline and punctuality are no longer reinforced, and students come to university expecting to continue that..." One professor said that first-year students don't have "the needed critical thinking or math skills, and they lack the ability to learn independently."

In general, the students agree, although one fourth-year student said the problem lay with the universities who need to teach better.

Personally, I'd say it's a mix of both. Definitely there is a problem at the high school level in that students are too dependent on their teachers. Teachers in the TDSB aren't allowed to give out (or deduct) late marks, so work is sometimes never handed in at all. There's no incentive or motivation. When I was at uni (the first time around), I never dreamed of handing things in late.

I just spent four weeks at a high school as part of my teaching degree, and the students have to be constantly reminded of what's due and when, and even then they don't do the work. The lack of critical thinking ability the article mentioned worries me especially.

It's an important issue I think, and not just for those students who are planning to go on to university or college, but for those who will go straight into the work force. Do we have such low expectations of them?

Is this a wide-reaching problem and what do you think could be done about it? What, if anything, needs to change?

my brother in law has mentioned the same problem with having to constantly reminding his high school students when things are due.

My guess would be to solve what caused it. Is it lazy thinking? poor motivation? maybe there should be more incentives... ect?

It's becuase we reward behavior directly associated with failure. Schools are too consumed with the self esteem of students to actually educate them. It's the therapeutic society we're creating.

As a high school teacher (in the US), I can say that there aren't any sure-shot answers to why students are not prepared for college. I would agree with Not Bill that self esteem - feel-good school policies are a problem, but no more of a problem than learned helplessness among students and parents. There is also a large bloc of students who sincerely loathe education; they see it as a "sell out." Thug/rap culture drives their lives.

But I think the biggest problem with students being unprepared for uni is that, at least here in the US, politicians and others (many educators) hammer home the opinion that everyone should go to college. Indeed, "universal post-secondary education" is fervently preached as a cure-all for economic (and social?) woes. The kids absorb that. If I asked a class of senior English students which of them plans on going to college, 29 out of 30 kids would probably raise their hands. Yet perhaps 10 of those same 30 might be able to succeed. 30 of those 30 may very well believe that they need college to make a good living - they are told that repeatedly as well. And it will cost them dearly in time and treasure.

I could go on, but I'll close with the thought that money poured into the college "dream" is a perverse joke on many/most students in the US. It perpetuates a structure of universities and colleges which does not, in my mind, do the job that it should, which is teach hard sciences or educate through a liberal arts curriculum. Where exactly can one with a graduate degree in (insert group name here) "Studies" apply his knowledge? Answer: the college or university system. The whole system is government subsidized to the teeth as well. And as cries about costs continue, more and more students will take out more and more loans for an education which they cannot attain (through lack of preparation), need, and/or use. They've been sold a fraudulent bill of goods.

I cannot speak for the USA, but here in the UK, there is a real problem with male/female roles.

Intelligence, culture, the arts, thought, middle-class culture, the indoors: all seem to be associated with the female role. Unintelligence, sport, physicality, lower-class culture, the outdoors, on the contrary, have become associated with masculinity.

On top of this, to strive hard in school is to identify with parenthood, authority and with middle-class values. For boys it carries an implication of emasculation.

Girls, however, are generally happier identifying with parental values. Even girls, however, have to overcome the hurdle that, at the moment they are trying to detach themselves from parents/teachers, they are being invited nevertheless strive to adopt the parents' and their teachers' values.

The evidence for the devastating effect of these male/female stereotypes is to be seen in any soap opera or situation comedy. An American example is Lisa and Bart, or Marge and Homer. The female of the pair is responsible, hard-working and relatively clever. The male in the pair, on the contrary, is irresponsible, lazy and relatively stupid. But even Lisa has problems with authority.

That these opposed roles are not even slightly rooted in biology is of course transparent. Shakespeare, Beethoven, Walter Raleigh, Blake etc etc were not sissies in any sense at all.

Very interesting Bob - and much to what I've experienced.

Interesting, Anthoney. I've seen much the same here in the US. Not that outreach to girls wasn't /isnt' required, it was most definitely. But somehow, that came with addition that boys needed to be torn down somehow in order to level the playing field. Case in point: our local state university has an enrollment that is over 70% female, a situation that would be vociferously attacked if the situation were reversed. Yet, when questioned specifically on the imballance of the gender enrollment, the faculty president stated he had no intention of undertaking any programs that would seek to increase male enrollment and in fact would continue the current policy of only seeking to increase female student enrollment - most likely because there's no funding to be gained in doing otherwise.

The situation now stands that an increasing percentage of male high school graduates are simply choosing not to go to college altogether and instead are seeking vocational institute traning. Given the current ecomomy, probably not a bad idea but longterm effects on college enrollemnt funding has yet to even be explored.

I have heard - though I don't know much about it - that our school system typically fails boys. That it doesn't cater to their needs or learning styles.

It's a shame that university is considered a time of maturation in some places. I like the school system I went through, where high school ends at grade 10 and then, if you want to, you go to college for years 11 and 12 - two years of excellent education, some wild times, independence with support etc. Kind of like a halfway house. Then, if you do go to uni, you're generally a lot more mature than the kids from private schools which go from primary school right through. The stereotypes of U.S. university students is not something I'm personally familiar with.

I agree with Bob in that it's an absolute shame that so much emphasis is put on university. I see it here in Canada too, though people say it's a lot better. It's part of a class system, too. If you don't go to college or uni, then you're a failure. Back home in Australia, I have friends who got good jobs after grade 12 and owned two houses before they turned 30. You'd never hear of that here.

I think part of the problem is a lack of accountability amongst students, and a sense of entitlement. Removing the late marks as they did here, doesn't help that.

I've noticed that Charly, I just meant to say that where I'm from it happens a lot earlier, though not for everyone. Still, they tend to be in the minority. Of course, there's no actual ending to maturing, it's an on-going process, but at my uni students were, by and large, very mature in comparison to students in North America because of the different system of education they had come from.

That's my theory anyway - I have no proof but the observational kind!

Friends have told me that what I thought were stereotypes portrayed on American movies and TV shows (and advertising) are actually pretty accurate - I have to say I would never want to go to such a university. I was pretty mature going into uni and I went to learn more, not to be an idiot. Ugh that makes me sound pretty stuffy but you know what I mean!

I for one can't see paying $40K to party away your college life.

Boggles my mind, Charly :)

Having taught at the elementary level in the US, I have to agree that our system has major flaws. But at least we are still providing free education to the majority of our citizens through high school.
It always seems to me that the students who are unprepared at the elementary level are the ones whose parents don't take an interest in anything academic, or come from non-reading households. And trying to teach a large group of different skill levels at the same time means that the smart kids will succeed (academically), the average kids will get by, and the struggling kids get left behind. I also found that the kids were less concerned about grades than some parents. And let me tell you, it was much less stress to work with the "underprivileged" students than with the students who came from upper middle class families. It seemed as though the more the family started out with, the less they demanded of their children, both in manners and in learning.
As for college students - yes the average has fallen, but is it because of the students or because of the "everyone needs college" trend? Comparing to students from other decades is not a fair analysis because of the difference in populations - decades ago only the students from wealthier families had an opportunity to get into college. Today's colleges have more returning students and "non-traditional" students than before. Maybe we should start telling our HS students to work for a few years, then see if they want college. If their parents won't help them mature and prepare, maybe the real world will.