|
|
|
|
Dear Colleagues, the certification a information and application packet has
good ideas for training topics at each level included with provision for
your own unique requirements. Actually will answer most of your questions
about training for Peer Mentors or Peer Tutors.
I did a survey for NADE over the past 4-5 years re salary,status and
prof.preparation. The data is currently being analyzed at the National
Center for Dev. Educ. Do not know yet just what we will find, but we will
share it asap.
At 12:01 AM 3/25/00 -0700, you wrote:
>There are 5 messages totalling 247 lines in this issue.
>
>Topics of the day:
>
> 1. Why I use CL responses - Garyh Probst comments
> 2. midterm report system
> 3. Structuring the Learning Experience
> 4. Salary Database?
> 5. Traditional vs. reform math
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 08:23:06 -0500
>From: Craig Andres <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: Why I use CL responses - Garyh Probst comments
>
>I never said not to teach the other 80%, they will
>still learn. But if you don't meet the needs of
>the 10-15%, then you won't have as competent group
>of mathematicians and scientists in the future.
>It is that group that decides to go into
>Engineering, for instance, because they understand
>they have that math ability. Now some have a
>misplaced sense of accomplishment, and may waste
>their time going into a field that doesn't suit
>them.
>
>It seems to me 80-85% of the students were not
>failing when I was in school, it seems to me most
>did. I was a merely average student in math. Yet
>it was still strong enough of a background for me
>to get my Master's in mathematics. Many of the
>students I see have A's in high school math, yet
>have much more difficulty with math than I did at
>the undergraduate level.
>
>Ask the English teachers to loosen up what they
>teach since not everyone is going to write a
>book. Ask the history teachers to lighten up
>since not everyone is going to be a historian.
>Ask the Gym teachers to take it easy on everyone
>since most won't become professional athletes.
>Tell the music teacher that the students only have
>to play the song once, and then assume they know
>it well enough to play it any time in the future.
>
>The math being taught out there in the public
>schools is not strong enough. Eight years ago we
>started offering Pre-Calculus for students with
>weak backgrounds. Forty students out of 600 would
>take this course. Now using the same placement
>exams, having mostly students from the same high
>schools that we did then, we should be placing 300
>out of the 600 into Pre-Calculus (Instead they
>lowered the standard to be placed into Calculus
>and only 240 end up in Pre-Calc).
>
>I am not against everything about reform. I am
>against removing the elements of memorization and
>practice that are crucial to mastering
>mathematics. Much of reform tends to eliminate
>those.
>
>
>Eric Kaljumagi wrote:
>>
>> > I just wish that the "Math Education" people, who
>> > ultimately make the decisions on how best to teach
>> > pre-college students, would listen to
>> > "Mathematicians" who know what level of math
>> > understanding is necessary for students to succeed
>> > in math, science, and engineering degrees.
>> Roughly 25% of high school juniors go on to earn bachelor's degrees.
>> I'm guessing that at most half of these are in the sciences.
>> Mathematicians (of which I am one) without an educational
>> background only understand the needs of 10 - 15% of
>> students. Why not teach the other 80+% too?
>>
>> Prof. Eric Kaljumagi
>> LAC/Math
>> Mt. San Antonio College
>
>--
>Craig Andres
>Director, Study Abroad and Tutor Program
>Kettering University
>(Continuing the GMI heritage)
>
>email: [log in to unmask]
>Phone: (810)-762-9642
>Fax: (810)-762-9505
>
>
>"We must look forward to the future as that is
>where most of us will be spending the rest of our
>lives." Charles Kettering.
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 08:31:05 -0600
>From: Elizabeth Bergman <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: midterm report system
>
>We encourage our professors to send them out after about four weeks. At
>the learning center, we don't address attendance problems, but the advisors
>and others on campus do. Our warning reports also check off "poor test
>results," "poor or late assignments," and "inadequate daily preparation."
>We respond to these (esp. poor test results) by sending these students
>reminders of our services and sometimes calling them if we know them.
>Students may know their grades are suffering, but others on campus need to
>know as well in order to provide a safety net.
>
>At 01:19 PM 3/22/2000 -0500, you wrote:
>>I work for a small school that collects midterm reports and then distributes
>>the deficiencies to the students and advisors. Usually when the students
>>receive the message, there are only 6-5 weeks left in the semester.
Students
>>can still withdraw from courses and a large number do so at that time. We
>>are trying to put into place an earlier warning based strictly on attendance
>>at the five week mark.
>> My question for other members of this list - is there any
information
>>showing a correlation between early warnings on grades and retention? Are
>>there other warning systems that work differently? better?
>>
>> I also teach General Studies classes and I emphasize that being
aware
>>of your grade is part of your job as a student. If your grades are ok, you
>>probably do not have to change your study habits...however it they are not
>>ok, well "don't expect different results from the same behavior." When I
>>poll my classes, many of the students have no idea of their current standing
>>in any given class.
>>
>>Do other developmental educators see this as a problem for students?
>>
>>Thank you for your time.
>>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 12:16:26 -0500
>From: "Colgan, Ann" <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Structuring the Learning Experience
>
>This is the title of a higher level training on the CRLA certification list.
>Have you conducted this training? What content did you include? What
>issues did you address?
>
>Information would be appreciated. You can reply off the list. Thanks.
>
>Ann Colgan
>English Tutor Coordinator
>Learning Assistance and Resource Center
>West Chester University
>West Chester, PA 19383
>[log in to unmask]
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 13:05:55 -0500
>From: "Evans, Linda" <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Salary Database?
>
>Some time ago, I remember that someone mentioned compiling a database of
>salaries for learning assistance professionals. Once again, I find myself
>in a position to give market data to the powers-that-be at my university and
>I'm grasping for data. I have data from the Oklahoma State University study
>that is conducted annually, so we're using equivalent data from reading
>education (our degrees are in reading). However, I don't have data for
>program directors, and I'm also open for a better equivalency than reading
>education. I called and left a message with the National Center for
>Developmental Education to see if they had any data, but I don't know if
>there's a better source. Any help would be appreciated.
>
>------------------------------
>
>Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 16:52:09 -0800
>From: Eric Kaljumagi <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Traditional vs. reform math
>
>> I never said not to teach the other 80%, they will still learn.
>
>They never did before. Your median high school graduate
>took two years of "consumer" or general math and never
>touched it again. The majority of American adults couldn't
>calculate the interest on a loan if their lives depended on it.
>A sizeable minority can't calculate a tip.
>
>
>>But if you don't meet the needs of the 10-15%, then you
>>won't have as competent group of mathematicians and scientists
>>in the future.
>
>True enough. If the reform movement takes over, I do wonder
>how we'll serve the needs of graduate schools.
>
>What I found using CPM was that my top students suffered little.
>They seemed to adapt by concentrating on the challenge problems
>others wouldn't touch. As for their overall mathematical skills,.
>perhaps they suffered a slight drop, but it certainly wasn't much, if
>it existed at all. On the other hand, I did find the number of
>students succeeding in class increase dramatically, and over 50% of
>my high school's graduates took Algebra II while in high school.
>Our average SAT scores went up slightly, yet far more students
>took the test. More students also achieved recognition on the
>Golden State Exam. To me, that's success.
>
>My hypothesis:
>
>Traditional math instruction has evolved to become the best and
>most efficient means of educating those destined to become the
>scientists and engineers of the next generation. Traditional
>instruction is simultaneously a frustrating nightmare for most other
>students.
>
>The reform movement of the 1980s and 1990s has attempted to
>bring in other methodologies so as to serve other learning modalities.
>The resultant body of curriculum is not as efficient a means of
>transmission of knowledge, but appeals to a far wider range of students.
>
>Overall, I think that if reform math takes over, we will have a
>significantly
>better educated populace. The challenge is in preventing the elite from
>receiving a weaker education.
>
>
>> The math being taught out there in the public schools is not strong
>enough.
>
>It never is, is it? Seriously, however, this is another issue entirely.
>If you
>surveyed your feeder schools I'd be quite surprised if even 100 of your
>600
>students was in a reform math program. Good teaching requires well
>educated, well trained individuals with dedication to their profession
>and
>a good deal of autonomy to allow for innovation. I've met many such
>high
>school teachers, but there are also many marginal ones. So long as a
>good
>economy provides good paying jobs to new college graduates, a shortage
>of excellent teachers will ensue. We've got to make do with what we've
>got.
>
>Prof. Eric Kaljumagi
>LAC/Math
>Mt. San Antonio College
>
>------------------------------
>
>End of LRNASST Digest - 23 Mar 2000 to 24 Mar 2000 (#2000-78)
>*************************************************************
>
>
|
|
|
Archives |
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011, Week 3
January 2011, Week 2
January 2011, Week 1
January 2011
December 2010, Week 5
December 2010, Week 4
December 2010, Week 3
December 2010, Week 2
December 2010, Week 1
November 2010, Week 5
November 2010, Week 4
November 2010, Week 3
November 2010, Week 2
November 2010, Week 1
October 2010, Week 5
October 2010, Week 4
October 2010, Week 3
October 2010, Week 2
October 2010, Week 1
September 2010, Week 5
September 2010, Week 4
September 2010, Week 3
September 2010, Week 2
September 2010, Week 1
August 2010, Week 5
August 2010, Week 4
August 2010, Week 3
August 2010, Week 2
August 2010, Week 1
July 2010, Week 5
July 2010, Week 4
July 2010, Week 3
July 2010, Week 2
July 2010, Week 1
June 2010, Week 5
June 2010, Week 4
June 2010, Week 3
June 2010, Week 2
June 2010, Week 1
May 2010, Week 4
May 2010, Week 3
May 2010, Week 2
May 2010, Week 1
April 2010, Week 5
April 2010, Week 4
April 2010, Week 3
April 2010, Week 2
April 2010, Week 1
March 2010, Week 5
March 2010, Week 4
March 2010, Week 3
March 2010, Week 2
March 2010, Week 1
February 2010, Week 4
February 2010, Week 3
February 2010, Week 2
February 2010, Week 1
January 2010, Week 5
January 2010, Week 4
January 2010, Week 3
January 2010, Week 2
January 2010, Week 1
December 2009, Week 5
December 2009, Week 4
December 2009, Week 3
December 2009, Week 2
December 2009, Week 1
November 2009, Week 5
November 2009, Week 4
November 2009, Week 3
November 2009, Week 2
November 2009, Week 1
October 2009, Week 5
October 2009, Week 4
October 2009, Week 3
October 2009, Week 2
October 2009, Week 1
September 2009, Week 5
September 2009, Week 4
September 2009, Week 3
September 2009, Week 2
September 2009, Week 1
August 2009, Week 5
August 2009, Week 4
August 2009, Week 3
August 2009, Week 2
August 2009, Week 1
July 2009, Week 5
July 2009, Week 4
July 2009, Week 3
July 2009, Week 2
July 2009, Week 1
June 2009, Week 5
June 2009, Week 4
June 2009, Week 3
June 2009, Week 2
June 2009, Week 1
May 2009, Week 5
May 2009, Week 4
May 2009, Week 3
May 2009, Week 2
May 2009, Week 1
April 2009, Week 5
April 2009, Week 4
April 2009, Week 3
April 2009, Week 2
April 2009, Week 1
March 2009, Week 5
March 2009, Week 4
March 2009, Week 3
March 2009, Week 2
March 2009, Week 1
February 2009, Week 4
February 2009, Week 3
February 2009, Week 2
February 2009, Week 1
January 2009, Week 5
January 2009, Week 4
January 2009, Week 3
January 2009, Week 2
January 2009, Week 1
December 2008, Week 5
December 2008, Week 4
December 2008, Week 3
December 2008, Week 2
December 2008, Week 1
November 2008, Week 5
November 2008, Week 4
November 2008, Week 3
November 2008, Week 2
November 2008, Week 1
October 2008, Week 5
October 2008, Week 4
October 2008, Week 3
October 2008, Week 2
October 2008, Week 1
September 2008, Week 5
September 2008, Week 4
September 2008, Week 3
September 2008, Week 2
September 2008, Week 1
August 2008, Week 5
August 2008, Week 4
August 2008, Week 3
August 2008, Week 2
August 2008, Week 1
July 2008, Week 5
July 2008, Week 4
July 2008, Week 3
July 2008, Week 2
July 2008, Week 1
June 2008, Week 5
June 2008, Week 4
June 2008, Week 3
June 2008, Week 2
June 2008, Week 1
May 2008, Week 5
May 2008, Week 4
May 2008, Week 3
May 2008, Week 2
May 2008, Week 1
April 2008, Week 5
April 2008, Week 4
April 2008, Week 3
April 2008, Week 2
April 2008, Week 1
March 2008, Week 5
March 2008, Week 4
March 2008, Week 3
March 2008, Week 2
March 2008, Week 1
February 2008, Week 5
February 2008, Week 4
February 2008, Week 3
February 2008, Week 2
February 2008, Week 1
January 2008, Week 5
January 2008, Week 4
January 2008, Week 3
January 2008, Week 2
January 2008, Week 1
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998
April 1998
March 1998
February 1998
January 1998
December 1997
November 1997
October 1997
September 1997
August 1997
July 1997
June 1997
May 1997
April 1997
March 1997
February 1997
January 1997
December 1996
November 1996
October 1996
September 1996
August 1996
July 1996
June 1996
May 1996
April 1996
March 1996
February 1996
January 1996
December 1995
November 1995
October 1995
September 1995
August 1995
July 1995
June 1995
May 1995
April 1995
March 1995
February 1995
January 1995
|
|
