Monday, September 17, 2007

College Accountability Movement Moves Online

Original Article

Summary goes here!

Got to love this: “We’re in a very subjective, and claim-based marketing environment in which student traffic is driven in large part by who can spend the most on marketing,” which had been my point all these time. Their goal of placing focus on individual programs is a direct way of answering to the question.

Here are some of my thoughts in response to kgotthardt and Glen S. McGhee's comments:
For kgotthardt, it seems he have issues with some of the schools which no doubt could cast some doubts on their sincereness. But, in principle, I support the idea.
As for Glen, he has a lot of good points and are, like kgotthardt, questioning the sincereness of this group.

Personally, I understand that, to be truly accountable, added value is the thing that should be measured and be charged for by institutions. But there are reality settings that made this approach much more difficult. For example, if the incoming students are with variety background, in order to provide them the same added values, institutions will be forced to provide each of them individualized instructions, which is not likely and not efficient. My idea of how this can be accomadated by simply measure the outcome of exiting students. When the outcome of exiting students are measured and published, potential students are to look at those measure and pick the reasonably charged institution to go to. The other side of the equation is that if institutions allows waive of courses and fees. On the institutions' side, institutions are to look out for the capability of their incoming students and adjust their course layout and fees to charge. The contract is that in accepting a student, they are committed to bring the student to the stated level of achievement.
We all know that there can have all kinds of ways to measure success. Some of them are not objective and are, therefore, suffered by the
"uncertainty principle" as point out by T-bone.

I understand that objective measurements in social science or writing isn't easy to come by. But I like to point out a common mis-understanding of the objective measurement in science or engineer.

The science and engineer tests do not have to be tests of facts. The test can be constructed in such a way that sound logical reasoning have to take place first before answer can be constructed. There are even cases that sound arguments must be done in order to qualify answers.

There are times that we can even give students reading materials and testing how well they understand the paragraph.

No comments: