CSU Admissions: Softer Isn’t Better : Trustees retreat on remedial education policy

In an unfortunate retreat on remedial education, California State University trustees now say they will wait until 2007 to fully implement stricter standards and thus reduce the large numbers of academically unqualified students in the 22-campus system.

One negative effect of the decision will be to ease pressure on elementary and secondary schools to set more ambitious academic goals in preparing students for college. More important, it will hamper Cal State’s ability to carry out its primary mission: preparing students for the strongly competitive national and global marketplace.

STAGGERING TOTAL: In the early 1960s, the California Master Plan for Higher Education envisioned CSU as the state’s mid-tier college system, sandwiched between the more prestigious University of California system and the community colleges. Under the plan, high school seniors who graduated in the top 12.5% of their class were automatically eligible to attend UC, the top 33% qualified for CSU and the rest could choose community college.

For a while that formula worked well. But as elementary and secondary schools began to falter under financial and other burdens, educational standards deteriorated and more and more students lacked the skills required for college-level work. Nearly two-thirds of CSU freshmen need remedial help.

Reacting to those sobering numbers, Cal State officials moved in the right direction last July by introducing a plan to phase out remedial education on their campuses by 2001 and deny admission to students who lacked college-level English and math skills. That sensible decision would have given K-12 school officials time to improve standards. Unprepared students would have had alternatives that included adult education courses, summer school and community college.

Now, under the new scaled-down, more gradual proposal contained in a report by a board of trustees subcommittee, Cal State would develop clearer performance standards and improve methods of evaluating student skills by 2001. By 2007, officials hope, only 10% of entering freshmen will require supplemental academic help.

MINORITY CONCERNS: In disclosing the proposal, CSU clearly is trying to calm concerns that many students, especially minority members, would be hurt if standards changed too quickly. The report also emphasizes the need for cooperation among Cal State, the community colleges and the K-12 system. That is laudable, but by setting such a distant date for tougher standards, Cal State officials are doing higher education a disservice.

California’s system of colleges and universities has built a reputation for commitment to academic excellence. Officials aren’t doing anyone--least of all the students--any favors by making this decision on admissions. By failing to address the problem of remedial education now, CSU is merely postponing the inevitable should the public schools not come through.