What grades are for

Aren't CU's basic skills tests a bit redundant?

Monday, August 20, 2007

In a way, it's heartening that the University of Colorado system might soon begin testing the basic skills of third-year undergraduate students - skills like writing and critical thinking. But mostly it's horribly dispiriting.

It is heartening in the sense that CU President Hank Brown recognizes that public confidence in higher education has waned and is contemplating this step as a means of resurrecting that trust (and the funding that might go with it). At the same time, it is an indictment of the preparation that too many students receive before they arrive on campus, as well as an admission that two years of university study do not necessarily correct these shortcomings.

Basic skills should be in place by the time students ever set foot on campus. Or, at the least, such weaknesses should have been ferreted out long before the junior year.

The idea for the testing comes from a program initiated at the school's Colorado Springs campus in 2002. There, a cross-section of students are plied with one of two tests: one measures student-faculty interaction and the other assesses such abilities as writing and analytical skills. The program came into being, in part, after numerous complaints from faculty that students in upper-echelon courses weren't writing as well as they should.

The tests, which are viewed as assessments only and hold no consequences for those taking them, are so far used by the school to adjust their programs.

If that remains the extent of their use, we're fine with it. Unfortunately, more than one CU official has suggested in recent months that such tests could be used to prove to the public the effectiveness of various programs. We're simply not sure how such exams, which everyone concedes would be tied to broad skills, would prove any such thing.

As described, for example, they would hardly demonstrate that an economics major had mastered key economic concepts. The tests could be fine-tuned to do so, of course, but wouldn't they then be redundant? Aren't grades supposed to provide evidence of subject mastery - not only in economics but in every academic discipline? And if they don't, isn't that a scandal in itself?

If current testing is ultimately implemented on the rest of CU's campuses, it might be better to survey students earlier in their collegiate careers - or even at the beginning - so they can have a greater chance at success. CU Vice President Ken McConnellogue suggests that waiting until the third year of college provides "a reference point partway along the journey," but in our view it also carries the aroma of too-little-too-late.

Meanwhile, the university should continue its push to reverse some of the grade inflation of recent decades. If the campaign succeeds, students won't need a test of basic skills to learn that they're falling short. They'll already have been told - and will either have done something about it or have moved on to some other pursuit.