Blame for on-line math tests misplaced

This past Wednesday’s lead editorial rather sharply criticized the way orientation conducted the math placement test during this past summer. The editorial attributes various difficulties surrounding this exam to the Department of Mathematics and then goes on to be critical of the department for what the editorial understands will be steps taken to make improvements in the future. This is really very unfair. Of all departments in the university, mathematics is the one with the heaviest teaching responsibility, in fact, last year they taught more than 30,000 undergraduates. Furthermore, because the department knows how important a prerequisite math is for many major programs, it is profoundly committed to getting students as quickly as possible into the right courses. It is honestly possible to say that math virtually never closes students out, a feat which they have accomplished over the years by using the math placement test to slot students efficiently and accurately into courses matching their preparation levels. So when I, on behalf of the orientation program, asked the department to help us deliver the test in a new way, they felt (and expressed) considerable hesitation, fearing that any change in the test might throw off its ability to use its results accurately. However, a number of us associated with orientation felt that the summer program could be considerably enhanced if students could take the test before they came to campus. This would free-up time to be used for other activities; perhaps more importantly, we could have student scores at the beginning of the two days, enhancing the academic scheduling process. We were encouraged to use this approach because we consulted with colleagues at the University of Minnesota, Michigan State University and Miami University, all of whom have used take-home or web-delivered tests for years, without problems. In fact, for more than 90 percent of the orientation students, the new web-delivered test produced scores that were not in any way problematic. On the other hand, for the students who did achieve placement scores that seemed anomalous when considered along side their other preparation indicators, I sent a letter advising them that they might be better placed in a different course. And then on the first day of class the department provided a short diagnostic test which gave students additional information about how hard they might need to study to do well in the course they were in. All of this seems to me to be the right way for a university to behave when it`s trying to provide better instruction and service to its students. We will continue to make changes in our systems and I imagine we will continue to experience some unexpected outcomes. Through it all, I hope you`ll believe that our motivation is and will continue to be an enhanced educational experience for our students.
Martha M. Garland is the vice provost and dean of undergraduate studies at OSU.