12The Tar Heel Thursday, June 5, 1986
in, MMMMMMMwMMMMMMMiMiiMMMMiMM HMHlWTTwlF
A ffe w ; bad apples
, One-fourth of all freshmen enrolled in the
UNC system took a remedial English or math
course last fall to make up courses they did not
take, or complete successfully in high school.
In the last 20 years, the number of students
who scored low on the SAT test 300 or less
on either the verbal or math has risen 600
percent, to more than 3,000 students, while
enrollment increased by only 48 percent during
that period, according to the Statistical Abstract
of Higher Education in North Carolina.
While it is great that more students in the
state are able to go to college than ever before,
it is unfortunate that so many of them seem
so ill prepared to college-level work. While a
majority of the the low-scoring freshmen were
admitted to one of the states five predominately
black institutions, all the schools in the system
are accepting some students whose SAT scores
may indicate they are unprepared for college.
SAT scores only measure ones aptitude to
do college work and they are not the most
accurate representation how one will do in
college. Factors such as high school class rank
and past acheivement are better representations.
SAT tests are definitely biased against
minorities and those in the lower economic
brackets, but 300 out of a possible 800 points
on each portion, in a test that gives you 200
points for writing your name, is too low. Those
alarming figures suggest that there should be
a cut-off point, below which students can not
be accepted.
Twenty years ago, there was no freshmen with
these kind of scores at any of the state's
campuses. Today, no school can make that
claim; even UNC had 26 of them this year.
As system President CD. Spangler so aptly
put it, "Those students who have those (low SAT
scores) don't indicate that they cannot benefit
from exposure (To college)," contending that
the prodominant criteria is class rank and that
SAT scores may be deceptive.
SAT scores should not be the sole basis of
one's admission to college, unless they are at
either extreme of the scoring range, but it should
be questioned whether a college prospect who
may take the test over and over again, yet not
manage to score higher then 300 on a portion,
will be able to meet the mental challenges of
a college curriculum.
If a student cannot successfully complete a
high school class in math or writing, can they
expected to do college level work? Yet, all 16
universities in the system offer some type of
remedial courses for those that fared badly in
their high school courses, and they reward
college credit for these courses. -
UNC requires students scoring less than 400
on the verbal portion of the SAT to take a
remedial catch up course called English W,
which also counts torward graduation, but by
all accounts, it, too, is a high school course.
Athletes are not filling up these courses either,
although they certainly account for part of their
makeup. At NCSU, only 26 scholarship athletes
were enrolled in the remedial classes in 1985
out of a total of 96 students enrolled in the
courses.
UNC-Charlotte offers a course that counts
torwards graduation called "English as a Foreign
Language" for those who are not prepared for
freshmen English courses. What have these
people been reading and writing? One has to
believe that, unless something is very wrong,
these people did have the opportunity to read
and write in high school. If they were able to
capitalize on these oppurtunities and did not,
it may be assumed that either their high school
was crediting them for remedial training for
elementary school work or the students did not
feel that these skills would be of much use to
them.
It seems odd that a student who cannot read
or do high school math at a level high enough
to register any aptitude to do college work would
want to go to college. Are they expecting to
be re-taught what they failed in high school?
It is possible that some of these students are
not seeking academic challenges, but merely
seeking safe haven in an educational system
similar to the one that let them float through
four years of high school without ever having
to do any work at all.
There are many places to put the blame for
the lower test scores and the need for remedial
training. The public schools do not require
students to write enough, because teachers are
not able to correct 120 essays more than a very
few times a year, if ever. Parents who are not
able or interested in seeing that their children
learn to read and write competently, whether
or not they are taught these things in school.
Students themselves have to shoulder some of
the blame for not reading outside the classroom
or persuing any kind of mental challenge beyond
solving the puzzle on "Wheel of Fortune."
Spangler's hope that the recent rise in quality
students will continue is at least a glimmer of
light at the end . of the tunnel, but to count on
its continuance without providing some type of
feedback to the high schools is probably a little
too optimistic. "Well see in improvement in four
years," is an accurate appraisal of the situation
now that attention has been focused on the
problem nationally. But a lot has to be done
at every level, and it will be well worth it. $3
million in federal, state and private money is
diverted from other programs every year to pay
for remedial courses. This money may be far
more useful used in teaching college work than
it is in re-educating the uneducated.
There are solutions, one being for the system
to work closely with state high schools and help
them identify what is missing in their college
preperatory programs. This would be a more
positive step than waiting endlessly for educa
tional reforms to improve the quality of students
applying to these colleges. A more radical step
would be to lo wet the amount of students who
are accepted, ensuring that only those that were
truly ready would be accepted. Another step may
be to designate one college in the system as a
one- or two-year junior college, which would
prepare the most marginal students for college.
It would increase the chances of those who really
wanted to attend college to do so successfully,
while at the same time ensuring that those
starting, with an academic disadvantage stem
ming from racial or economic status, as well
as those who come from schools ill-equipped
to prepare anyone from college.
The easiest step would be to assess the number
of low-scorers and those needing remedial
assistance as freshmen who actually graduate.
It would call attention to the fallacy of admitting
students who are unprepared for the academic
challenges of college and hopefully lead to
meaningful changes.
lf alar Mnl
Jo Fleischer, Jill Gerber
Co-editors
Jamie Cobb photography editor
Linda Causey news editor
Philip Gitelman sports editor
Scott Greig city editor
Staff
Robert Carver, Cathy Cowan, Jean Dobbs, Nancy Harrington,
Beverly Imes, Eddy Landreth, Bill Logan, Matt Long, Shirley Nesbitt,
Jonathan Parker, Randall Patterson, Julia Ritchey, Michelle
Tenhengel, Chris Shearer, Toni Shipman, Alexis White and Julia
White.
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Ml Logan WFOIl:
aiMo rau,iiiMii2aMMii'
To the editor:
Bill "Right (wing) Stuff Logan
is wrong, dead wrong about South
Africa. Besides the falsehoods and
misinformation that he parades as
"research," he insinuates that
Americans are forever stigmitized
due to our forefathers' wrongs.
According to Logan, we should all
give up trying to stop injustices in
today's world and shut up and hang
our heads in shame. Perhaps he is
trying to rationalize his inaction.
.Thank goodness there are people
who know more about the prob
lems in South Africa than hedoes,
and who will not let up their efforts
to help correct them. But let me
calm down and provide the facts
that his column (May 22, 1986) was
lacking.
Logan writes that, in an address
to the North Carolina Central
University, Bishop Desmond Tutu
admitted that demonstrations on
American university campuses had
little or no concrete effect in South
Africa. But according to the
Raleigh News and Observer (May
11, 1986), in that speech, "Tutu
hailed U.S. students for pressuring
university administrators to divest
holdings in the companies that
oppress South African blacks. (He)
repeated his plea for punitive
economic sanctions against South
Africa."
Logan also claims that, "Given
the small relative magnitude of
U.S. investments in the South
African economy, the American
presence or absence can have little
effect, good or bad." That is
FALSE. In "South Africa: Foreign
Investment and Apartheid" by
Lawrence Litvak, Robert
DeGrasse and Kathleen McTigue,
it is stated that U.S. bank?provide
one-third of all loans to South
Africa (where one-third is equal to
over $2 billion). Also, "After
Britain, America is the largest
foreign investor in South Africa."
According to "Foreign Investment
in South Africa and Namibia" by
Anne Newman and Cathy Bowers,
by the end of 1983, American
owned companies controlled
nearly one-half of South Africa's
pertoleum industry p 70 percent of
its computer industry and about
one-third of South Africa's auto
mobile industry. Thus, U.S. invest
ments are not only very large, but
they are also concentrated in those
industries most crucial to the South
African government.
As to his claim that apartheid
will end only after South African
leaders recongnize its wrongness, I
point out a similar case. Slavery
in the United States was ended only
after its supporters were defeated
in a war, and thus were literally
forced to yield. And yet Logan
writes, "No one is going to be able
to force that decision (to end
apartheid) . . . because it entails a
recognition of their (South African
leaders') faulty human nature and
deep consideration. This cannot
even be expediated by pressure
from the outside, it has to come
from within."
The next time Bill Logan wants
to do "research," I suggest that he
get out of his chair and to go to
the library. He is more likely to
find correct information there than
off the top of his uninformed head.
There is no excuse for such abom
inable journalism.
Helen Moore
junior
physics