At PermaU there is quite a bit of pressure in regards to D/F/withdrawal rates. In my department, the DFW rate is about 30% (so 30% of a class gets a D, F, or withdraws by the end of the term). When a class doesn't meet this number, eyebrows are raised. Is the professor too easy? It couldn't possibly be that the class was just better than average, right?
I maintain my standards from semester to semester. I do not believe in curving. The first exam average was an 80% (B-). The latest exam had an average of a 75% (C). These are, in my opinion, fairly high. Despite this, my DFW rate right now is right at 25%. With still another half of the semester to go, this percentage will likely go up. So this semester, I would guess I am on track for a 35-40% DFW rate.
My department maintains that the national DFW rate is between 50 and 60%. I find this insanely high, but it is likely that I am just out of touch. Could it be that the DFW rate really is that high in the sciences? Do you feel pressure to keep a certain average in your classes?
7 comments:
I've heard from other professors that the number giving to them is something to stay close too but not dogma. I'm sure the administration would get suspicious if someone had a 10% or a 75% rate, so you should be fine. One PI I worked with was freaking about about a high DFW rate (read 60%) for intro chem for science majors. The department chair told her not to worry about it but that would be abnormal at the upper level courses as you have already weeded out the slackers and those who can't hack it.
What level courses does this apply to? My DFW rate in my undergraduate courses is probably in the neighborhood of 15%, but these are junior and senior majors, so a DFW rate of 30% would seem high to me for this population. I'm sure the DFW rates in intro Bio/Chem/Physics are much higher, but 60% seems ridiculous to me too.
To complicate things here, our state is apparently contemplating a change where we (a state university) would only get our $ for students who get at least a D in a course (ie we would get NO state money for students who flunked or withdrew). Way to promote standards there, guys!
whyme?, that is a crazy idea by the state and just promotes grade inflation to get the cash. In the case of my PI, it was the chem 111/112 (science mjr) courses. Many of the students dropped because they didn't have the requisite math experience (college pre-cal) to make it through the course.
In reverse order, no I do not feel, nor am I under, any pressure at all to keep a certain average in my classes. Quite the opposite. I am expected to maintain a certain standard, even if it means failing everyone or giving everyone an A. My measure is how well prepared they are for their next class.
BTW, my college looks at the ABC rate rather than the DFW rate, but we can all do the math. ;-) I find it odd that a private college would want a high failure rate, since that can result in lost students and lost $$$$$. We track it as part of our budgeting process.
The DFW rate is definitely that high in introductory physics (with calculus for engineering majors, my class) or chemistry (my colleagues classes) but varies a lot from semester to semester and SIGNIFICANTLY between course 1 and 2. DFW rate in second semester is usually around 10% but ranges from 0% to 20%. Rate in first semester varies from 20% to 50% but has been trending to the high end lately.
Based on the appalling algebra and trig skills I see, I suspect some faculty are giving extra credit to improve the pass rate in algebra above the 50% norm for our CC. I attribute some of this to a "student centered" indoctrination program that our new faculty are exposed to, since one was actually giving extra credit in a majors class like calculus! Needless to say, some of those lambs went to the slaughter when they got to second semester calculus.
I'm kind of surprised that this is an issue the department gets involved in. When I studied (not oh-so-long ago but before a major change in the university system), I'm not even sure if there were formal registrations of who was in which class. If you stopped doing the homework and/or didn't take the exam, well, you didn't pass (almost all classes were pass/fail, we got our grades in the mid-studies and end-of-studies exams).
That said, a lot of people did drop out -- but it was only measured in terms of majors, not individual classes, and I have the impression that some universities were rather proud of their high standards if many dropped out, instead of being concerned.
I've tracked DFW vs. math (entry test, SATs) for general chemistry for years. There seems to be some minimum value of the math score which just about guarantees the student will DFW, but above that level there is not a huge correlation with the grade. If the student takes a college math class their DFW percentage decreases substantially. I have friends at other places that find the same thing
I totally disagree with curves.
Standards should be set, and the instructors job should be to help as many students as possible reach that standard.
It should be possible for everyone to get an A. It should also be possible that everyone might fail.
I do not think it is good to have students competing against one another. If the top 10 % are B standard student, then they should not receive As.
This "curve" thing is one thing about the US grading system that I hate.
When I took first year biochem at my uni in the UK I was in the 5% who passed the midterm (and I did not get a good grade). The exam was investigated and the conclusion was that it was not unusually hard and that we all just sucked. We simply had to work harder to earn a pass. Lowering the standard would only depreciate the value of the degree.
Post a Comment