Student Preparation

Re “Graduating the Unprepared--Our Educational Disaster,” June 21.

The Times has published yet another column by a Cal State Northridge professor blaming high school teachers for failing to prepare students to do college-level work.

About a dozen years ago, the Los Angeles Unified School District set up a program called “articulation,” a series of meetings between senior and junior high (as middle schools were then called) teachers, and between middle school and elementary school teachers to discuss common problems. The inevitable happened. The senior high teachers blamed the junior high teachers for failing to prepare the students for senior high work. In turn, the junior high teachers blamed the elementary teachers for failing to prepare the students for junior high work.

I can assume that if a meeting between elementary and pre-K teachers had been called for then, the pre-K teachers would have gotten the blame. Who would the pre-K teachers have blamed? The parents? Perhaps the CSUN professors who send new teachers out with too little content knowledge and preparation?

No one at the time seemed to notice that “articulation” was based on the assumption that a student would proceed from kindergarten through 12th grade. In actuality (advocates and opponents of bilingual education take note), we get students of all ages and backgrounds coming into the district, often without the skills taught at a grade prior to the new students’ arrival. So articulation was conveniently shelved, as should the absurd statistics presented by Professor [William] Hosek in his diatribe against high school teachers. Mark Twain would have had something to say about studies and expectations that have little to do with reality.

ABRAHAM HOFFMAN, Reseda

*

There is a wide discrepancy between high school proficiency and university readiness. The Entry Level Mathematics and English Placement Test act as placement instruments within the university’s sequence of instruction. They do not, as Hosek states, “show that most freshmen entering the CSU system do not meet high school proficiency levels in reading, writing and mathematics.”

Hosek also dwells on the myth that the Cal States admit only the top third of the high school graduating class. There is no item on the admission’s application that even asks for the students’ class rank so it would be difficult to assess accuracy on this issue. I can, however, speak for North Hollywood High on this point. As the top feeder to CSUN in 1997, about 105 of our graduates were admitted to the university. Of that group, 47 were not in the top third of our graduating class, and a number were even in our lowest 10%. The questions then exist as to why these students were admitted, and why they are receiving state and federal financial assistance to attend a four-year university when they are not yet ready for the experience.

Hosek also speaks about the accountability of teachers, school administrators, and elected school board members, all of whom certainly do bear a great responsibility. I would add to that list the parents and students themselves. All of us must work as a unified force for the improvement of education. Hosek is adamant that the children’s futures are at stake. I suggest that all of our futures are intrinsically interwoven into this process, and Hosek’s posture and finger-pointing are counterproductive. Perhaps he should investigate this issue further and write a follow-up article titled, “Accepting the Unprepared.”

SUSAN BONOFF, College Counselor, North Hollywood High School