Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (Feb. 11, 1982)
emerald platform Tests need revising Colleges and universities need to revise their testing procedures for the benefit of minority students, a Ford Foundation commission announced in January. The com mission's findings, reported in The Chronicle of Higher Education (Feburary 3). are more than a little applicable at the University. The Commission on the Higher Education of Minorities called for institutions to adopt a "value added" system, in which students would be admitted and evaluated “on the basis of their potential for learning and growth rather than their relative standing on tests and grades " The three year study found testing and grading methods in higher education not only fail to contribute to the learning process, but also pose special obstacles to the development of minority students ” More just presenting special obstacles to minority students' educational development, some forms of testing at the University contain elements that are discriminatory These tests, and specifically a test called The Cooperative English Test, are incomprehensible to many minority students The Cooperative English Test was selected by the University’s School of Journalism in 1977 as a screening devise for prospective journalism students. Passing this test, and a tortuous typing test on ancient manual typewriters, allows us journalism students to waive Journalism 250 The most compelling reason behind use of the test was its emphasis on the basic aspects of English The test stresses grammar, punctuation, capitalization, vocabulary, and spelling. This, in the minds of the journalism school, outweighed the fact The Cooperative English Test was first published in 1951 It has not been extensively revised since. Not just a few of the words in the vocabulary section weren't common com even then. Examples of the questions become comical, and not even near the language indigenous to minority students A group of three sentences requiring correct punctuation read: ‘‘Boys who are blessed with good looks and pleasant manners often manage to get their own way” (sic), “Peter had no small success in wheedling his elders" (sic) and "I hope that I shant be battered and jarred to bits" (sic). The first sentence is amusingly sexist, while the last two are strangely phrased with the words "wheedling” and ‘ shant be battered ’ ’ Some of the words that require correct spelling are mystifying: ‘ adjasent (sic), vaudeville, kimono. Chautauqua, millinery ” The terms needing proper definition are certainly un fathomable: “Jollification, gloaming, chorister, laundau gallivant, shoat. euchre, cassava, and ormolu " It’s doubtful a fair number of minority students with an urban public school education could define more than two of those words A shoat. we learn after having ransacked the Oxford English Dictionary, is a young pig These words, cunos even in 1951. are arcane thirty-one years later The Cooperative English Test should be a source of embarrassment to the journalism school It fails as a test of a student's knowledge, but succeeds as a piece of antiquity Why is this test in use? That it asks questions on capitalization and simple grammar isn’t reason enough to continue use in its present, copyright 1951. form.' The Cooperative English Test is a blatant example of the type of test that discriminates against minority students This test points out the constant need at the University to examine the effectiveness of all forms of testing and grading The University’s CLEP program updates its tests every two years This revision procedure is commendable if the test questions are examined for their potential to be understood and responded to by all students — minority and non-minority The Ford Commission findings indicate that testing and grading must be frequently revised to become more respon sive to the particular requirements of minority students While true of minority students it is also true of non-minority students screened with archaic tests such as the journalism school’s Cooperative English Test "^UND w/# W^£™', jK&£*g*«e* j^asssr ^aWs SUWATftjfcy UVtABif av' 1992 - Wi^mc W T5€ SEAMAN 1WC letters Hard to believe In response to David Thomas letter (Feb 5), I say tough shit I find it hard to believe that after four years here at the University, you've singled out the University post office and gays as being continued plagues" to us all Surely you can come up with more important issues on which to exercise your acute literary talent First, concerning your beef with the post office Where do you think people should take their packages to mail them so as to stay out of your way. the fishbowl7 If you re tired of seeing a line every stinking time" you go to the post office to buy a stamp, go somewhere else or better yet. buy youcself a book of stamps and save us all some trouble Also, what kind of strictly personal business do you think occurs af the post office that's any different than your own7 Second, in regards to your getting sick" when you open up the Emerald and see some thing about gay pride " I feel you have an overactive gall bladder all punning aside You suggest that groups like these are a cause of increased fees How naive. David I think if you were to look into the matter you would find that a greater percentage of your dollars went to sub sidizing athletics, another self-chosen minority group here on campus Perhaps you believe they are more deserving of your money because they represent a less unrighteous cause I believe neither C'mon David, if you don't have anything more important to bitch about, let someone who does fill this space don’t waste our time Moreover if you think OSU has a better handle on these "problems by having a separate stamp only line at their post office, and a no funding policy for the gay (yech) groups then perhaps that's precisely where you should be You won t be missed here Mark Yarish architecture More common focus The University Assembly voted last week to refuse to consider a motion of no confidence in the State Board of Higher Education and the outgoing Chancellor Lieuallen A great statement both for free and open debate — and for a willingness to address seriously the problems which confront this University I am appalled Since coming to this University a decade ago, I believe there has been no more common focus of faculty complaint than the chancellor s office But one was always told that there was no point in complaining publicly: the chancellor had been here a long time and still had many years to go Now he ts retiring A search is underway for a successor There is an opportunity at hand to state that we are sick and tired of a chancellor with no understanding of the functions and needs of universities, and wish instead one who can serve as an effective advocate of higher educa tion in the state of Oregon Yet the assembly chose silence — the same silence it has chosen during a decade of eroding support for Higher Education in Oregon Instead we have a Board which sees its function as voting on the means to affect cuts ordered by budget notes of the legislature and proposed by the chancellor s office And what is the result of this state of affairs7 Simple: public and legislative support for higher education evaporates A decade ago higher education represented about one-quarter of the state budget The figure now is closer to 12 percent — a 50 percent decline Oregon is a poor state, some will say — but does it even contribute as much of its income as others do7 In state appropriations to higher education per $1000 of personal income, Oregon ranked seventeenth in the nation in 1974-75 In 1981-82 we ranked 31st — and the decline continues as more cuts are on the way Our library drops from a high of 37th to 84th in the rankings of the Association of Re search Libraries Our students' tuition rises to top among public institutions in the Pac-10 But dare we speak an ill word of the chancellor and State Board entrusted witht he duty of providing quality education for the citizens of Oregon7 No We chose silence — a parliamentary device of a non-debatable motion Even a poor dumb puppy will at least whimper as it rolls on its back before some insurmountable aggressor But not the faculty and students of this university assembly — there the vote is to accept the demise of a once rather respectable university without even a whimper Sad Sad Joseph W. Esherick history staff rm Ormgor Dm*y Emtrmid is pu6M*h*d wy' '«*/ rrwjwf fzcvpt m/rnyg 6nalt ■'»»«• and racatfoo* toy tfw Orayon My Emmrmtd PubttoMng Co 60-5511 /BwsMm* 6*6-3712 6*6-4343 1 D 0 Editor Salty HoOgsinson Managing EdMor Gatxmt Boehmar Matat Editor Harry Ester* Assistant Maws EdMor John Healy Bot Baker GraptPcs EOttor WiiCePurgt EOitons/ Page Ettrtor Con FarnaU Sports EOMor Slere Spat? AkocM* Sport* EOttor Jatf DiC*&ru>r ErmrUMnmant Editor Matt Mayor Might Editor Ann Portal Atao.ieSa Editors ASUO Dane Ciaussen Community Marian Green Deportments end Schools Debt's Hewlett Features Caroline Pet rich Higher Education Ann Portal Potties / Environment Ron Hunt Oaneral St* ft Advertising Dtrectt. Darlene Gore Production Manager Ann Paterson Classifier) Advertising C ootr otter SaUy Ottar jean Ownbey
