Comments on: Flatline http://www.quickanded.com/2009/01/flatline.html The Quick and the Ed is an education blog published by Education Sector, an independent think tank in Washington D.C. The Quick and the Ed offers in-depth analysis on the latest in education policy and research. Sun, 21 Mar 2010 21:14:13 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.1 hourly 1 By: Anonymous http://www.quickanded.com/2009/01/flatline.html/comment-page-1#comment-402 Anonymous Sun, 01 Feb 2009 04:06:00 +0000 http://www.quickanded.com/wordpress/?p=1420#comment-402 Is the one year retention data showing all students who continue on to a second year, or only those who continue on at the same institution? I.e. - if a student transfers between years 1 and 2, is he counted as being retained? As a general rule the first year institution doesn't distinguish between the two, and I can't find info on what definition ACT is using. If it's counting transfer students as drop outs, the numbers are misleadingly low.. Is the one year retention data showing all students who continue on to a second year, or only those who continue on at the same institution? I.e. – if a student transfers between years 1 and 2, is he counted as being retained? As a general rule the first year institution doesn’t distinguish between the two, and I can’t find info on what definition ACT is using. If it’s counting transfer students as drop outs, the numbers are misleadingly low..

]]> By: Chad Aldeman http://www.quickanded.com/2009/01/flatline.html/comment-page-1#comment-388 Chad Aldeman Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:30:00 +0000 http://www.quickanded.com/wordpress/?p=1420#comment-388 To me it means we've focused too much emphasis on one part of the college equation (access) while leaving the other part (completions) alone. For an individual college or university, it means they let in a whole lot more students (and graduate more too), but also leave an ever larger percentage of the population with "some college, no degree." <br/><br/>And, almost surely, these stagnating rates are the cause of our overall college graduate problem, the reason why we no longer rank #1 in the world in producing college graduates. To me it means we’ve focused too much emphasis on one part of the college equation (access) while leaving the other part (completions) alone. For an individual college or university, it means they let in a whole lot more students (and graduate more too), but also leave an ever larger percentage of the population with “some college, no degree.”

And, almost surely, these stagnating rates are the cause of our overall college graduate problem, the reason why we no longer rank #1 in the world in producing college graduates.

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.quickanded.com/2009/01/flatline.html/comment-page-1#comment-387 Anonymous Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:22:00 +0000 http://www.quickanded.com/wordpress/?p=1420#comment-387 Not sure I agree with John on the NCLB stuff, but I think raises an interesting point. If enrollment is up 20% and all rates are stable that seems pretty good. Certainly not great, but I wouldn't say its bad.<br/><br/>Chad, comments? Not sure I agree with John on the NCLB stuff, but I think raises an interesting point. If enrollment is up 20% and all rates are stable that seems pretty good. Certainly not great, but I wouldn’t say its bad.

Chad, comments?

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.quickanded.com/2009/01/flatline.html/comment-page-1#comment-385 Anonymous Sat, 24 Jan 2009 14:59:00 +0000 http://www.quickanded.com/wordpress/?p=1420#comment-385 I've been away from higher ed for three decades, so I can't comment on the substance of your post. But for the record, your logic is backwards.<br/><br/>Stable retention rates, when enrollment has increased 20% is a victory. That would be especially true if suburban schools are failing as badly as some claim.<br/><br/>Suburban schools are another subject about which I know little. But fair is fair.<br/><br/>And speaking of fair, after billions spent on NCLB, we should be seeing kids with higher skills entering high schools, community colleges, and universities. Shouldn't we have an honest discussion about that?<br/><br/>And included in the definition of honest discussion, shouldn't we all acknowledge the limitations of our perspectives and both sides of the evidence? <br/><br/>john thompson I’ve been away from higher ed for three decades, so I can’t comment on the substance of your post. But for the record, your logic is backwards.

Stable retention rates, when enrollment has increased 20% is a victory. That would be especially true if suburban schools are failing as badly as some claim.

Suburban schools are another subject about which I know little. But fair is fair.

And speaking of fair, after billions spent on NCLB, we should be seeing kids with higher skills entering high schools, community colleges, and universities. Shouldn’t we have an honest discussion about that?

And included in the definition of honest discussion, shouldn’t we all acknowledge the limitations of our perspectives and both sides of the evidence?

john thompson

]]>