Cut remedial ed, trustees say

Administrators, faculty members and students gathered in Hayward Tuesday to voice their opposition to a CSU proposal to bar incoming freshmen who require remedial classes from admission to CSU campuses after the year 2001.

Trustee members, in turn, pointed the finger of blame at California high schools for producing students poorly prepared in English and math.

"The fundamental idea is to improve the preparation of students in the K-12, so when they enter the university, or the college of their choice, they will become more successful," said Bernard Goldstein, SF State biology professor and CSU Board of Trustees member.

Representatives from Bay Area high schools, community colleges and the CSU institutions SF State, San Jose State, Humboldt, Stanislaus and Hayward converged at CSU Hayward's Centennial Hall for the third of five hearings the CSU Trustees' Committee on Educational Policy is conducting around the state to solicit public opinion on remedial education at CSU campuses.

"The proposal is not in concrete. The input that we are receiving from people -- all excellent input, much of it in writing -- will influence us in the final decision in how we write this proposal," said Goldstein, who is on the committee.

On Oct. 31, the committee will meet with the State Board of Education, Board of Governors of the Community Colleges and UC representatives in Sacramento to coordinate a unified plan to address California's education problems and needs.

The committee is charged with submitting a proposal in January to the CSU Board of Trustees to revamp English and math proficiency criteria for admittance to CSU campuses. The current proposal, besides requiring incoming freshmen to achieve SAT or ACT test scores demonstrating college level ability, would limit CSU remedial and developmental programs to re-entry students, who would be required to show English and math proficiency by the end of their first term.

"Currently 300,000 students graduate from California's high schools each year. CSU must accept the top one-third of those students. Ninety percent of that third have to take diagnostic testing, and of those that do take the testing, 43 percent fail," said Ralph Pesqueira, chairman of the committee.

A combination of good grade point averages and high SAT or ACT scores allows students to forego having to take the diagnostic tests. For example, a student with a GPA of 2.5 would need a score of 800 to avoid taking the diagnostic tests.

In the fall of 1993, the most recent year for which figures were available, about one-fourth of the 22,000 first-time freshman coming into the CSU system were exempted from taking the tests.

"Students come into the CSU system thinking they are prepared because their high schools have given them a diploma. They're not prepared. If the high schools can't prepare these students, what magic wand does CSU have?" Pasqueira said.

Students who fail the diagnostic tests -- the Entry Level Mathematics and the English Placement Test -- are required to enroll in basic remedial classes without credit toward graduation.

Proponents said the current proposal will put pressure on high schools and community colleges to better prepare their students in math and English, and curtail the need for learning resource centers on CSU campuses.

But opponents said it would increase the difficulties of the poor and minorities to enter the CSU system.

"Adding yet another testing requirement prior to admission would eliminate students who do have the potential for success at the Cal State system. The university has a duty as a public university of the state to be accessible to as broad a range of the California society as possible," said Anamaria Loya, staff attorney for Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund. Loya was one of 48 people to address the committee.

Minorities already face problems in high school, said San Jose State student Adrian Rodriquez. "About 30 percent of Chicano students are dropping out by grade 10. In the high school, one out of 18 Asian Americans, African Americans, Chicano, Latino or Native Americans are even qualified to enter the CSU system now. The K-12 system needs help," Rodriquez said.

But eliminating remedial education would make it even more difficult for those who graduate from high school to continue their education, said SF State graduate student Tharon Weighill. "I don't think anyone here will argue we've got to strengthen our academic affairs and our academic realities, or our skills, but we can't be alienating people in the process -- which is exactly the problem with this document," he said. "Sixty-seven percent of my people (American Indians) drop out before they even get out of high school."

Of the 222 American Indians who were first-time freshman at CSU in 1993, 42 percent were required to take remedial math courses after taking the ELM. That compares to 65 percent of African Americans, 60 percent of Mexican Americans and 37 percent of white students who failed to pass the ELM that fall.

"That's where the legislature has got to demand, the State Board of Education has got to demand, that the high school, in this community, teaches as quality an education as the high school in that community," Pesqueira said. "If we've got a school district out there that is not doing the job, then why aren't we taking action to correct it? Why do we continue to let it not do the job?"

But some questioned whether the tests were valid indicators of a student's potential to succeed in college.

"The use of standardized tests, the use of English and math as a prerequisite in terms of admissions, rather than determining what sort of remedial assistance a student might need, will severely hinder the university's ability to meet its requirements of seeking a diverse student body," Loya said.

"Students of color should have a choice, a right of access, to which public institutions they would like to attend -- that we shouldn't have as our only choice the community college system. While the community college system is an important choice that we will take, it shouldn't be the only option available," Loya said.

Pesqueira was unmoved by such arguments.

"The comments that we're hearing today, quite frankly, are not really addressing what the document (the Trustee's remedial education proposal) is addressing. They may criticize the document, but it's not addressing the document. They all said about the same thing," Pesqueira said.

"Almost everyone has said that we (CSU) has to accept them whether they're prepared or not, which is another way of saying they're not going to be prepared."

[ Golden Gater Online October 26, 1995 ]

[ back to top ]