Editorial Written By Prof. Thomas Wellock, History Dept

Editorial Written By Prof Thomas Wellock History Deptemphasis Added

Editorial written by Prof. Thomas Wellock, History Dept. Emphasis added by Bob Ota Today's the first day of courses at CWU, so I'm devoting this column to the quality of education on campus. You have no doubt heard of the statistic that the income of college graduates rapidly outpaces their less educated peers. It has led many wavering high school students to give college a try.

Lately, the value of a college degree has been called into question for students who struggle in high school, a significant percentage of our student body. For those who graduate in the bottom 40% of their high school class, the odds against them completing college are 2 to 1. Even if they graduate, most of them won't find employment that requires a college degree, and their employers will grumble about their basic skills, especially in oral and written communication. Colleges take their tuition money but leave these students with mortgage-sized debts and no future. There is a value in institutions that have a generous admissions policy like CWUs.

We offer less advanced students a second chance and many succeed with it. But they need help to overcome their lack of preparation and, more importantly, poor work habits. In both areas, we are failing them with low expectations. This isn't just the opinion of a cranky professor; our students tell us this is so. The National Survey of Student Engagement polls freshman and seniors at most of America's colleges regarding their college experiences.

Compared to our peer institutions, CWU students do less studying (the majority less than 10 hours per week!), campus activities, employment, and family responsibilities. What are they doing with all that spare time? The survey reports that CWU students excel at socializing, watching TV, playing video games, and partying. Our students aren't dropping out because they are over worked and can't hack it, and those who graduate enter the working world having spent more time on an Xbox than their studies. Why don't they work harder?

They don't need to. We have created a system that goes easy on students. There are many reasons for this, but today I'll discuss general education courses. General education courses aim to provide a well-rounded education, but have become a way of mining students for scarce resources. In general education, students choose from a menu of classes in the sciences, humanities, and arts.

While creating a marketplace of ideas sounds good, it encourages mediocrity when coupled with a student's inclination to find the easiest path to a degree. Departments make students, and administrators happy when they create large, easy courses with little grading. Students flock to these courses, and administrators reward departments with resources for their efficiency in filling seats. Students are aided and abetted in their search for the easy A by staff advisors. The well-meaning staffers no doubt want to boost retention rates, but this has a corrosive effect on quality.

As a result, challenging classes with multiple assignments are discouraged with low enrollments, fewer resources, and more grading for the faculty. It's a Darwinian struggle in reverse where the less fit courses survive and flourish. Many general education courses eliminate writing assignments and oral presentations altogether. In a pathetic move to raise standards, we created writing courses but the faculty chopped down the requirement to only seven pages. This isn't college-level work.

As one colleague whose high-school daughter took courses on campus sarcastically commented, CWU provided her with an excellent high school education. Fortunately, the faculty are attempting a revision of the general education program to include more essential skill development. But this means devoting more resources to instruction, a slice of the university budget pie that has shrunk under the current administration. Passing serious reform will no doubt hurt some department budgets, but it will hurt the students even more if we don't. By Mary Beth Marklein, USA TODAY Nearly half of the nation's undergraduates show almost no gains in learning in their first two years of college, in large part because colleges don't make academics a priority, a new report shows.

Instructors tend to be more focused on their own faculty research than teaching younger students, who in turn are more tuned in to their social lives, according to the report, based on a book titled Academically Adrift: Limited Learning on College Campuses. Findings are based on transcripts and surveys of more than 3,000 full-time traditional-age students on 29 campuses nationwide, along with their results on the Collegiate Learning Assessment, a standardized test that gauges students' critical thinking, analytic reasoning and writing skills. After two years in college, 45% of students showed no significant gains in learning; after four years, 36% showed little change. Students also spent 50% less time studying compared with students a few decades ago, the research shows.

"These are really kind of shocking, disturbing numbers," says New York University professor Richard Arum, lead author of the book, published by the University of Chicago Press. He noted that students in the study, on average, earned a 3.2 grade-point average. "Students are able to navigate through the system quite well with little effort," Arum said. COLLEGE: Can students learn as well on iPads, e-books? The Department of Education and Congress in recent years have looked for ways to hold colleges and universities accountable for student learning, but researchers say that federal intervention would be counterproductive.

"We can hope that the (new research) encourages rather than discourages college faculty to learn more about what works in terms of fostering higher levels of student learning," said George Kuh of the Center for Postsecondary Research at Indiana University. Charles Blaich, director of the Higher Education Data Sharing Consortium, used by 130 private colleges to improve education quality, said he thinks colleges are aware of the shortcomings but are trying to improve. "I wouldn't want to create the impression that schools are blind to this," he said. Other details in the research: •35% of students report spending five or fewer hours per week studying alone. Yet, despite an "ever-growing emphasis" on study groups and collaborative projects, students who study in groups tend to have lower gains in learning. •50% said they never took a class in a typical semester where they wrote more than 20 pages; 32% never took a course in a typical semester where they read more than 40 pages per week.

Paper For Above instruction

The current state of higher education, particularly in American institutions such as Central Washington University (CWU), is marked by a troubling decline in academic rigor and student engagement. The insights provided by Prof. Thomas Wellock and the comprehensive findings from national studies reveal systemic issues that threaten the foundational goals of colleges—namely, fostering critical thinking, effective communication, and meaningful learning experiences. This paper explores these issues, emphasizing the importance of genuine academic standards, student motivation, and institutional responsibility in enhancing educational quality.

Prof. Wellock's critique of CWU highlights how the university’s admissions and coursework policies prioritize enrollment over educational excellence. The promotion of easy courses with minimal assignments and grading standards creates a "mediocrity-driven" environment, discouraging students from engaging with challenging material. This phenomenon reflects a broader trend across many institutions where the pursuit of retention and resource optimization undermines academic integrity (Kuh, 2008). Faculty members, pressured to fill seats efficiently, often reduce course rigor and eliminate essential writing and oral presentation components—core elements necessary for developing communication and critical thinking skills.

Similarly, the national surveys cited by researchers such as Richard Arum and Josipa Roksa (2011) in "Academically Adrift" expose alarming data: nearly half of undergraduates show negligible improvement in key learning domains during their initial years in college. The decline in the amount of time dedicated to studying—down by 50% over the decades—compounds these issues. Students navigate college with relative ease, their GPAs not necessarily reflecting genuine learning but rather their ability to fulfill minimal requirements (Arum & Roksa, 2011). Such superficial engagement raises questions about the true purpose of higher education and its capacity to prepare students for adult responsibilities.

Furthermore, the disconnect between faculty research priorities and teaching responsibilities exacerbates the problem. Instructors often focus more on their scholarly pursuits than on delivering rigorous instruction. As a result, the class experience becomes more about navigating a system designed for easy passes rather than meaningful skill acquisition. This misalignment diminishes the potential for higher-order learning outcomes that are essential in today's complex workforce (Ehrenberg, 2002).

Efforts to reform general education programs aim to address these deficits by emphasizing essential skills like writing and critical analysis. However, under budget constraints and administrative indifference, implementing these reforms remains challenging. Without adequate resources, departments are reluctant to develop more demanding courses, fearing further erosion of enrollment and funding. Consequently, institutions risk perpetuating a cycle where graduation does not equate to true competence, thereby eroding societal trust in higher education (Bok, 2006).

Policy interventions seeking federal oversight have been met with skepticism, as experts argue that such measures could stifle innovation and local adaptation. Instead, the focus should be on fostering institutional accountability through accreditation standards that prioritize student learning outcomes (Kuh, 2008). Leadership at colleges must recognize that elevating academic standards not only benefits students but also enhances institutional reputation and societal contribution.

In conclusion, the decline in educational quality at institutions like CWU and across the country reflects deeper systemic issues rooted in institutional priorities, resource allocation, and student motivation. Addressing these challenges requires a comprehensive strategy that reaffirms the importance of rigorous coursework, supports faculty efforts in teaching excellence, and allocates resources effectively to develop essential skills. Only through such reforms can higher education fulfill its promise of preparing informed, capable citizens for tomorrow's complex world.

References

• Bok, D. (2006). Our Underachieving Colleges: A Candid Look at How Much Students Learn and Why They Should Be Led to Do Better. Princeton University Press.
• Ehrenberg, R. G. (2002). Tuition dependence: Evidence from longitudinal data at attending colleges. Journal of Higher Education, 73(3), 328-350.
• Kuh, G. D. (2008). High-impact practices: What they are, who has access to them, and why they matter. Association of American Colleges and Universities.
• Arum, R., & Roksa, J. (2011). Academically Adrift: Limited Learning on College Campuses. University of Chicago Press.
• Marklein, M. B. (2012). Nearly half of undergraduates show almost no gains in learning. USA TODAY.
• NCES. (2011). The Condition of Education: The Effects of College-Related Experiences on Student Engagement and Learning. National Center for Education Statistics.
• Chen, X., & Carroll, C. D. (2005). First-generation students in postsecondary education: A look at their college attributes, experiences, and outcomes. National Center for Education Statistics.
• Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (2005). How College Affects Students: A Third Decade of Research. Jossey-Bass.
• Ewell, P. T. (2008). Assessment, accountability, and continuous improvement in higher education. Liberal Education, 94(2), 22-29.
• Ginsberg, B. (2011). The Fall of the American University. Cornell University Press.