Print

Print


I wonder if I can piggyback on this discussion with a different issue:  At
our school, Seattle Central Community College, we have a 2.5 grade
requirement (the lowest B-) established to move from our Developmental
English level to English 101 (college transfer).  But, for various
political, ideological and spheres of influence reasons, we do not enforce
the requirement; in fact, we really don't know how many students do or don't
move appropriately.  Some of us are now looking to perhaps either enforce
the standard or to drop it completely, so we are wondering what the rest of
the developmental world does when it comes to movement from developmental to
transfer.  What do you require and how do you monitor a student's English
passage?  When does a standard become a barrier to student progress in an
institution?  Thanks.
Larry Silverman
English Department
Seattle Central Community College
[log in to unmask]

> ----------
> From:         Mon Nasser[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Reply To:     Open Forum for Learning Assistance Professionals
> Sent:         Tuesday, December 05, 2000 11:31 AM
> To:   [log in to unmask]
> Subject:      Re: accutrack et al.
>
> I remember you Ruth.  You contacted us about a year and a half ago, and
> after spending some time trying to understand your needs, including
> looking
> at a the DOS program you wanted to replace, we sent you a customization
> quote.  Our software was not compatible with your needs at that time since
> all your tutoring was done *outside* the lab.  We offered to do some heavy
> customization to meet these needs, and as usual, the quote came with no
> obligation and at no charge.  I understand if you did not have the budget
> to
> order programming work, but I'm not sure how that makes us "greedy" and
> not
> "willing to work with educational institutions."
>
> Since each center has their own unique ways of doing things, it is
> impossible to create a silver bullet software that meets *everyone's*
> needs.
> Our goal is to offer software that meets the needs of *most* potential
> users, and we offer the rest the opportunity to customize it if needed.
> As
> I mentioned, we offer a free 30-day evaluation version of the software so
> that potential users can test it *before* they order.  Even after the
> order,
> customers have *30 days* from software receipt to return it and not pay a
> penny.  This is ample opportunity for someone to determine whether the
> software meets their needs before committing to the purchase.
>
> What surprises me here is that supposedly there are people out there who
> ordered the software and for some reasons encountered difficulties with
> it,
> but they did not return it or seek support from the developer.  Instead,
> they seem to be emailing Ruth and Jan, who are neither software developers
> nor even users of our software, to tell them about the difficulties.  If
> these people are on this list, I urge you to contact our support staff now
> so we can help you.
>
> If you are interested in this software I can provide you with contact info
> of many customers who have been using it for years and are very happy with
> it.  However, I hope you will take the time to test it and judge how it
> meets *your* requirements instead of relaying on the opinions of other
> people whether bashing or complementing it.
>
> Since some list members expressed strong objections to hearing from "a
> commercial vendor" on this list, this will be my last post on this subject
> so please *do not* flame me for it.  It takes one mouse click to delete a
> message you don't like, and many key strokes to write the sender
> complaining
> about it.
>
> If you have any questions or comments about the software and you would
> like
> to discuss them with me, please email me *off the list*.
>
> Cheers.
>
> Mon
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Thank you Jan!  I also responded to a few people off the list as I am not
> impre
> ssed with Accutrac and their price tags.  I have found some other
> companies
> tha
> t are not nearly as greedy and are more willing to work with educational
> instit
> utions.  I found one such individual at the most recent CRLA conference.
> I also know of some other institutions who have not been happy with their
> product or service.  But knowing that Mon was lurking out there on the
> list
> ser
> ve, made me think twice about what and how to say things, so I responded
> off
> the list.  Thank you again for your honest critique.
>
>
>
> Ruth A. Doucette
> Tutor Coordinator
> The Tutor Program
> University of Maine
> Orono, Maine 04473-5724
>