Demanding and Enforcing High Expectations in Freshman Courses

Journal of Geoscience Education, Sep 2004 by Basu, Abhijit, Middendorf, Joan

ABSTRACT

A teaching experiment, setting extremely high goals, was conducted in two courses enrolling only high school graduates in the summer before they entered college, ne was a six-week Introduction to Geology in the field (Indiana University Judson Mead Field Station, Montana) and the other was a three-week seminar on Life in Mars in a computer cluster on campus. Students in the field course had averaged above 1350 in SAT (1991-1996), worked some 14 hours everyday, and mapped (a) an S-fold with an unconformity as its bone, and (b) an overturned anticline with splaying thrusts on its normal limb. Although no student intended to major in geology, several did, went through graduate school and have become successful faculty and practicing geologists. Students in the Mars course had averaged 1100 in SAT (2000), worked some 8-10 hours per day, and combined their term papers into a single class-manuscript for JGE, which received mixed reviews. These tangible outcomes are commensurate with very high student satisfaction. The experiments showed that getting students engaged in physical sciences is possible but at a high cost.

INTRODUCTION AND RATIONALE

In a series of editorials and articles Shea (1995; 1998a, b; 2000a, b) describes a noticeable decline in student-interest in physical sciences especially if quantitative skills are required. Enrollment pressure from administrators and an overall social trend away from Jeffersonian rationality are part of the reason (Shea, 2000c). The reasons for student attrition in physical sciences are complex and have been investigated through surveys. The three main reasons for leaving physical sciences are: (1) loss of interest in the subject (not immediately relevant to life), (2) attractive career choices in the biological and social sciences, business, or humanities, and (3) poor teaching. Students who switch out of being science majors report these concerns, as do students who remain science majors (Seymour, 1995). Interest in physical sciences continues to decline (Drummond, 2002). Regardless, it is necessary to foster some understanding of the physical sciences in an informed citizenry, most conveniently through courses for non-science majors. We believe addressing item three may diminish the effects of items one and two.

An oft repeated conclusion in the literature in education theory is: setting high expectations results in better outcomes (e.g., in Sorcinelli, 1991). When teachers set high but attainable goals for student learning, academic achievements tend to increase. In addition, research on setting high expectations shows that students give higher ratings to difficult courses they work hard in. Setting high but reachable goals for student performance increases student achievement, whether the students are poorly- or well-prepared and motivated or not (Sorcinelli, 1991). How does one set high expectations? Scott and Tobe (1995) describe the steps that can be taken to set expectations. These include creating a supportive climate, providing prompt feedback on student work, and the most difficult one: clear expectations of performance. The removal of perceived competition contributes to a supportive climate. When students have to compete with one another rather than cooperate, motivation can suffer (Boylan, 1999). Another factor that contributes to a supportive atmosphere is when multiple attempts for success are allowed, so students will keep trying, even when they make mistakes (Scott and Tobe, 1995). Prompt, corrective, and supportive feedback increases student achievement and contributes to a supportive learning climate. Setting high expectations in an explicitly supportive environment is not, or is at least less, threatening and easier to implement.

A consideration for setting high expectations is to structure out-of-class assignments so students are motivated to expend large amounts of time and energy on them. The educational construct known as "time on task," holds that increased time spent on course assignments increases student learning. Astin (1993) tracked the record of many thousand students (1985 SAT/ACT through 1989/90 GRE, MCAT, LSAT, NTE and retention in college) across the nation to identify this as one of three factors that increases student learning. One way to set high expectations is to demand serious effort on out-of-class assignments. For high expectations not to be overwhelming, students need clear expectations of the performance expected of them.

Expectations stated in such terms as "critical thinking is necessary" are vague, however. Especially for students of lesser ability, tasks that require thinking critically should be spelled out including standards for evaluation (Chaffee, 1992). Critical thinking skills, though rarely specified, can enhance student ability to research class assignments, to read, write, and communicate, and to improve student attitudes towards learning (Boylan, 1999).

Two low-enrollment (faculty: student ratio > 1:7) residential summer courses for entering freshmen described below have demanded higher order thinking and complicated problem solving. Course I was taught for six consecutive years (1992-1997) at the Judson Mead Field Station in Montana for nearly six weeks as a six credit course; Course II (Mars) was taught once (2001) for three weeks (3 credits) in a computer-cluster classroom in Bloomington, Indiana. Average SAT (verbal plus mathematics) in the field course was well above 1350 and in the Mars course was about 1100. Some of the students from Course I became geology-majors. We have tracked these geology majors and obtain a success story.