Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by dmoy 19 days ago
This sounds like the real underlying problem then
3 comments

It's kind of like how if you owe the bank $1000, you have a problem, but if you owe a bank $100M, they have a problem. You just can't reasonably ignore a huge portion of the class as a professor without a serious amount of documentation, and proof that you've tried to escalate and solve the issue. Ultimately, people are paying for these courses, and it's probably better to teach something rather than nothing.
Sounds like people are paying for these courses is part of the actual problem, then? Students should not have any kind of entitlement whatsoever to pass classes other than merit.
Well... Maybe. From a customer point of view, they are paying for education. If they aren't getting education that's a problem.

From a future employer point of view, they are looking for credentials. But the future employer isn't paying for it.

Do we just admit that the purpose of school is to provide credentials, and that's what the students are actually paying for?

Framing it as a transaction is part of the problem IMHO. We have a collective interest that the majority of the population gets the best education possible. Turning universities into credential stores leads to all the negative side effects we're dealing with - pay to play schemes, dubious credential mills, rich families bribing universities, and so on.
You do still actually need the credential process though, in order to demonstrate that a person has in fact received that education.
They should not admit students who have little chance of success
Sure, but these students are likely two groups; those who are never going to be good at math, and those who were never really taught math.

The latter may need an opportunity to succeed.

I agree, but they should be admitted into some special program. Like, turn up in July for 3 months of catch-up instruction 4 hrs a day.
That's exactly what they did at my college (non-California state school) 20 years ago. Special program for students from poor high schools who otherwise wouldn't be admitted, where they came in the summer before freshman year and had to pass some prep classes first. IDK what the actual long term results were, but seems like a better idea than nothing.
If nothing else they could flame out of the pre-freshman classes before wasting too much time and $
At the university level it should be up to the student to ensure that they learn what they need.
Under the circumstance that the primary and secondary education levels have failed to adequately prepare a student for tertiary level, I think your idea would be unfair.
The university teaches what it teaches; it exists as a place of higher learning. If the student is unprepared for that, they are unprepared to attend. It's not university's job to fix shitty high schools' teachings and redo lower learning. Go get a highschool tutor if you need that.
If you were never taught math, that sucks, but you shouldn't be admitted to a university. That's just not what needs to be happening. Go catch up on math at your own and reapply when ready.
It's difficult to assess which students have a chance of success without standardized testing.

"In 2024, over 25% of the students in Math 2 had a math grade average of 4.0".

Math 2 is the remedial elementary and middle school math course at UC SD. Lack of standardized testing plus grade inflation contributes to this outcome.

There are several interrelated problems.
A particular historical virus comes to mind