Readiness Level of Engineering Freshman Students in College Physics


Research Paper (postgraduate), 2015
45 Pages

Excerpt

Table of Contents

Chapter 1: THE PROJECT AND ITS BACKGROUND
Introduction
Background of the Study
Theoretical Framework
Statement of the Problem
Hypothesis
Significance of the Study
Scope and Delimitation of the Study
Definition of Terms

Chapter 2: REVIEW OF RELATED STUDIES AND LITERATURE
Local and Foreign Studies
Local and Foreign Literature

Chapter 3: MATERIALS AND METHODS
Research Method
Population Frame and Sampling Scheme
Description of the Respondents
Instruments Used
Data Gathering Procedures
Statistical Treatment of Data

Chapter 4: PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRATATION OF DATA
1. Profile of the Respondents
2. Respondents’ Levels of Proficiency
2.1 High School Physics
2.2 College Algebra
2.3 Plane and Spherical Trigonometry
2.4 Hewitt’s Basic Content Physics Test
3. Variation in Hewitt’s Basic Content Physics Test Performance According to Profile Variables
4. Correlations of Performances in Hewitt’s Basic Content Physics Test to High School Physics, College Algebra and Plane and Spherical Trigonometry

Chapter 5: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary
Summary of Findings
1. Profile of the Respondents
2. Level of Proficiency
3. Variations in Hewitt’s Basic Content Physics Test when Grouped According to Age, Gender and Year Level
4. Correlations of Readiness Level in Hewitt’s Basic Content Physics Test to High School Physics, College Algebra and Plane and Spherical Trigonometry
Conclusions
Recommendations

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Figures and Tables

Figure 1. Framework of the Study

Table 1. Readiness Level

Table 2. Frequency Distribution of Respondents by Age

Table 3. Frequency Distribution of Respondents by Gender

Table 4. Frequency Distribution of Respondents by Type of High School Graduated From

Table 5. Frequency Distribution of Respondents’ Level of Proficiency In High School Physics

Table 6. Frequency Distribution of Respondents’ Level of Proficiency In College Algebra

Table 7. Frequency Distribution of Respondents’ Level of Proficiency in Plane and Spherical Trigonometry

Table 8. Frequency Distribution of Respondents’ Level of Proficiency in Hewitt’s Basic Content Physics Test

Table 9. ANOVA Table for the Variations in the Performance Level when Grouped According to Age, Gender and Type of High School Graduated From

Table 10. Correlations of Performances in Hewitt’s Basic Content Physics Test to High School Physics, College Algebra and Plane and Spherical Trigonometry

ABSTRACT

This study aims to find out the readiness level of engineering freshman students in college physics at Rizal Technological University of the academic year 2013-2014.

The descriptive method through correlational survey technique was used in the study. Percentage, analysis of variance and spearman rank correlation coefficient was used to analyze the data and the readiness level of the respondents was categorized based on DepEd Order No. 73, 2012.

Results of the study showed the level of proficiency of the respondents in high school physics is proficient, developing in college algebra, plane and spherical trigonometry and in Hewitt’s basic content in physics. No significant variations in the college physics performance of respondents when grouped according to profile variables. A negative correlation between the respondents’ performances in Hewitt’s Basic Content Physics Test and a positive correlation in college algebra. The positive correlation between the respondents’ performances in Hewitt’s Basic Content Physics Test and in plane and spherical trigonometry with a computed -value of 0.12 is found to be significant at 0.05 level.

Based on the findings, researchers recommended to identify other factors that might affect students’ readiness in college physics aside from the variables used in the study.

Chapter 1: THE PROJECT AND ITS BACKGROUND

Introduction

Physics is everywhere. It is known as the fundamental science and creates a foundation for engineering courses. But physics also considered as the most problematic area within the realm of science. Physics is perceived as a difficult course for students from secondary school to university and also in graduate education (Erdimir, 2009).

Any technology involving electricity, magnetism, force, pressure, heat, light, energy, sound, optics, etc. comes from physics. Physics has been called the most basic science and in many cases is required in order to understand concepts in other sciences. Its classes provide practice in both algebra and geometry. However, physics is not just a math class. To work physics problems, students must be able to read and comprehend short paragraphs then develop problem solving strategies from them. So, Physics helps develop both math and verbal skills. It is a whole brain subject requiring students to use both right and left brain regions for translating complex verbal information into pictures and finally into mathematical models in order to solve problems. In addition to the subject's content knowledge, physics requires students to develop higher level thinking--a useful skill in any endeavor.

It is unfortunate that many teachers in the secondary levels fail to recognize the skills, knowledge, attitudes and techniques necessary in understanding and applying physics in different situations. If the student’ difficulties could be discovered the first time they appear, remedial measures could be applied earlier, thus there will be less wastage of time and effort in later years of schooling. The students’ skills, habits, attitudes, interests, knowledge and ideas as a consequences of many factors. Factors which causes difficulty or disability in college physics. Despite of this, it is essential to link what students are doing in the present with their future plans and aspirations so they can understand the importance of their high school academic achievement (Roderick, 2006).

College recruiters tend to be favorably impressed by transcripts containing challenging classes like physics. As studies indicate that a high quality high school physics course helps significantly reduce the failure rate in college-level physics. Students themselves typically indicate that high school physics is a significant factor in their ability to handle college-level physics material. Knowledge of physics is a prerequisite for many forms of employment as in engineering which largely used applied physics in its different fields. Therefore, the key to success in learning and understanding physics is being able to build on a solid foundation of basic skills.

The likelihood that students will make a successful transition to the college environment is often a function of their readiness-the degree to which previous educational and personal experiences have equipped them for the expectations and demands they will encounter in college. A key problem is that the current measures of college preparation are limited in their ability to communicate to students and educators the true range of what students must do to fully ready to succeed in college (Conley, 2004).

From a wide range of education advocacy groups, associations, curriculum developers and policy makers, one now hears a remarkably consistent message: The most critical mission for K-12 education is to prepare students for higher education.

In the desire to understand the causes of difficulties or lack of ability in college physics, the researchers would like to determine the readiness level of engineering freshman students in the forces of physics.

Background of the Study

Physics is a science that deals with the facts about matter and motion and includes the subjects of mechanics, heat, light, electricity, sound, and the atomic nucleus (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/physics). It is an exciting intellectual adventures that inspires young people and expands the frontiers of our knowledge about nature. Many of the tools on which the advances of science and technology depend are direct product of physics. The interests and concerns of physicists have always formed the basis of future technology.

Engineering is also a form of applied science with Physics as an important part (Moron, 2011). Initially, Engineering started with Mechanical and Civil engineering as the main branches. Both the streams are derivatives of Mechanics which in turn is a form of Physics. Hence, the two branches do not have any meaning without Physics. Civil engineering involves a major part of geology, which is also a derivative of Physics.

Another major part of engineering is Electrical engineering. This is a derivative of Electrical Physics. Since Electrical engineering leads to Electronics engineering and finally to Computer engineering and Information Technology, it can be concluded that the mother of all engineering branches is Physics. Recently, some other branches like Biomedical engineering and Bio-Technology have also been derived. These two streams are derivatives of Biology. Biology also has got thick links with principles Physics. Both these branches are a blend of applied biology with principles of molecular physics. Thus, it is true that Physics has a significant role in Engineering.

Mathematics is a critical part of much scientific research and it is commonly referred to as “the language of science” and we typically require our physics students to take mathematics as prerequisites to their study of physics (Redish, 2005). Physics in particular weaves math extensively into its instruction beginning in high school. Despite much research on the learning of both physics and math, the problem of how to effectively include math in physics in a way that reaches most students remains unsolved. (Redish & Kuo, 2014).

Readiness according to Boethel (2004) has been variously theorized as a particular chronological age, as a stage or level of development in children, as a set of skills and competencies, as a process, and as a set of relationships. But for this, study, researchers would like to determine the readiness level of engineering freshman students in college physics correlating their performances in high-school physics, college algebra and plane and spherical trigonometry.

Results of the study would help teachers in the preparation of their lessons and improving methods and strategies in teaching the subject. This will give an initial assessment to a student whether he lacks the expected competencies as they will continue to take-up higher level of Physics in college as well. Evaluating their pre-conceptions about this subject will establish a point of reference and serve as a basis on how to discuss Physics in college level.

Theoretical Framework

This study is anchored on the idea of constructivism learning theory. The constructivism learning theory argues that people produce knowledge and form meaning based upon their experiences. The underlying concept within the constructivism learning theory is the role which experiences-or connections with the adjoining atmosphere-play in student education.

Jerome Bruner's theory on constructivism encompasses the idea of learning as an active process wherein those learning are able to form new ideas based on what their current knowledge is as well as their past knowledge (i.e high school physics performance to college physics). A cognitive structure is defined as the mental processes which offer the learner the ability to organize experiences and derive meaning from them. These cognitive structures allow the learner to push past the given information in constructing their new concepts. The learner, often a child, will take pieces of their past knowledge and experiences and organize them to make sense of what they know, then base further concepts and solve additional problems based upon a combination of what they already processed and what they think should be processed next.

Jean Piaget's theory of constructivism argues that people produce knowledge and form meaning based upon their experiences. Piaget's theory covered learning theories, teaching methods, and education reform. Two of the key components which create the construction of an individual's new knowledge are accommodation and assimilation. Assimilating causes an individual to incorporate new experiences into the old experiences. This causes the individual to develop new outlooks, rethink what were once misunderstandings, and evaluate what is important, ultimately altering their perceptions. Accommodation, on the other hand, is reframing the world and new experiences into the mental capacity already present. Individuals conceive a particular fashion in which the world operates. When things do not operate within that context, they must accommodate and reframing the expectations with the outcomes (i.e relation of mathematics performance to physics).

Lev S. Vygotsky believed that culture is the principal determinant of cognitive progress. In Vgostsky's theory on constructivism, knowledge leads to further cognitive development. The societal configuration of intelligence states that the individual growth could not be comprehended without indication to the societal and cultural context where the aforementioned evolution is entrenched mind development is continuous (i.e interaction among students with different ages, sex and type high school graduated from).

Paul G. Hewitt, a well-known physicists and author of conceptual physics books formulated a sixty (60) item test questions on basic physics. It covers topics about mechanics, heat, electricity and magnetism, waves and optics, nuclear physics and atomic structure of matter in a conceptual manner. His colleagues working on Physics Education Research, PER have made strides in validating the use of multiple-choice questions to test for conceptual understanding. Questions are straightforward, without tricks or subtleties, treating only essential content, which every student should be able to answer after completing an introductory physics course-particularly for engineers and scientists.

Figure 1 presents the framework of the study. It shows how student’s proficiency level in high school physics and the two pre-requisite mathematics, college algebra and plane and spherical trigonometry correlates to their proficiency level in Hewitt’s Basic Concept Test in Physics to determine the readiness level in college physics of engineering freshman students.

illustration not visible in this excerpt

Figure 1. Framework of the Study

Statement of the Problem

This study aims to find out the readiness level of engineering freshman students in college physics at Rizal Technological University of the academic year 2013-2014.

Specifically, this study aims to answer the following questions.

1. What is the profile of respondents in terms of:

1.1 Age
1.2 Gender
1.3 Type of High School Graduated From

2. What is the respondents’ readiness level in:

2.1 High School Physics
2.2 College Algebra
2.3 Plane and Spherical Trigonometry
2.4 Hewitt’s Basic Content Physics Test

3. Is there a significant variation in the respondents’ readiness level in Hewitt’s Basic Content Physics Test when grouped according to their profile variables?

4. Is there a significant relation between respondents’ readiness level in Hewitt’s Basic Content Physics Test and in

4.1 High School Physics?
4.2 College Algebra?
4.3 Plane and Spherical Trigonometry ?

Hypothesis

The following null hypotheses were tested in this study:

1. There is no significant variation in the respondents’ proficiency level in Hewitt’s Basic Content Physics Test when grouped according to profile variables.
2. There is no significant relation between respondents’ proficiency levels Hewitt’s Basic Content Physics Test and High School Physics, College Algebra and Plane and Spherical Trigonometry.

Significance of the Study

In line with the concern for improving the Science education in the Philippines, the researcher believes that the findings of the study will provide for improvement of education.

The results therefore will be significant to the following:

Students. This will give them an idea on how their earlier performance in their high-school physics and pre-requisite in mathematics such as college algebra and plane and spherical trigonometry affect their performance in college physics. . Results will help the students become aware of the factors that affect their performance in mathematics. Knowing such factors can help them identify their strengths and weaknesses that constantly interfere their performance in college physics. This will, in turn inspire the students to overcome their weaknesses and hence, results to a good performance of toward College Physics.

Teachers. This will help them understand their students better and prepare any remediation when necessary to ensure students’ increase in passing rate. They can also predict their students’ performance in college physics through their earlier performance in high school physics and pre-requisite mathematics. Results will provide teachers teaching college physics with a better understanding of, and a deeper insight into the needs and problems of their students.

Department Heads. This will help them review their screening process in accepting freshman students in their departments. They might consider other factors such as the result of their entrance exams in science and mathematics aside from their GPA’s or suggests programs that will help their students from failing. Results will serve as springboard for administrators to revise the mathematics curriculum that may improve mathematics instruction.

Deans. This will help them to encourage their faculty members to work hand-in-hand in helping their students be prepared in college studies.

Parents. They will become aware of the performance of their children and in think of ways on how they can support them especially when they are pursuing a hard course such as engineering. Results will provide more accurate assessment of their children’s ability, and information they need in order to properly address their children’s academic problems.

Scope and Delimitation of the Study

The readiness level of engineering freshman students in college physics at Rizal Technological University for Academic Year 2014-2015 were brought into focus in this study.

Respondents of the study were engineering freshman students under the College of Engineering and Industrial Technology at Rizal Technological University during the summer of the academic year 2013-2014. The highest physics they obtained is the high school physics and they already passed the college algebra and plane and spherical trigonometry during the first or second semester in RTU. These type of students are the ones usually struggles in their college mathematics subjects.

Levels of Proficiency of respondents based on their performances in high school physics, college algebra and plane and spherical trigonometry where identified and correlates to their level of proficiency on Hewitt’s basic concept test on physics. Variation in their performance on Hewitt’s Basic Content Physics Test when grouped according to profile variables such as age, sex and type of school graduated from is also studied.

The study limits on identifying the strength and weaknesses of the students in different topics on physics since the test used is adapted and no table of specifications was available. Also, significant difference in the readiness level of respondents when grouped according to their courses is not a part of the study.

Definition of Terms

The following terms were defined operationally to better understand this research:

Advanced Level. The student at this level exceeds the core requirements in terms of knowledge, skills and understandings and can transfer them automatically and flexibly through authentic performance tasks

Age. The length of time that a person has lived or a thing has existed.

Approaching Proficiency Level. The student at this level has developed the fundamental knowledge and skills and core understandings and , with little guidance from the teacher and/or wit some assistance from peers, can transfer these understandings through authentic performance tasks

Beginner Level. The student at this level struggles with his/her understanding prerequisite and fundamental knowledge and/or skills have not been acquired or developed adequately to aid understanding.

College Algebra. A study of mathematical symbols and the rules for manipulating these symbols regularly offered during first semester for freshman engineering students and a pre-requisite for college physics

College Physics. A physics for college students in which competencies were based on CHED’ course specifications

Developing Level. The student at this level possesses the minimum knowledge and skills and core understandings but needs help through the performance of authentic tasks

Engineering. The application of mathematics, empirical evidence and scientific, economic, social, and practical knowledge in order to invent, innovate, design, build, maintain, research, and improve structures, machines, tools, systems, components, materials, and processes.

Freshman. A student in the first year of the course at a university, college

Gender. The classification of people as male or female

High School Physics. A Physics for high school students in which competencies were based on DepEd’s curriculum

Physics. A branch of science concerned with the nature and properties of matter and energy. The subject matter of physics, distinguished from that of chemistry and biology, includes mechanics, heat, light and other radiation, sound, electricity, magnetism, and the structure of atoms.

Plane and Spherical Trigonometry. A branch of mathematics that studies relationships involving lengths and angles of triangles. A pre-requisite for college physics that is regularly offered during first semester for freshman engineering students.

Private School. A school supported by a private organization or private individuals rather than by the government.

Proficient Level. The student at this level has developed the fundamental knowledge and skills and core understandings and can transfer them independently through authentic performance tasks

Public School. A school supported by public funds

Readiness Level. Also known as proficiency level is a level of development at which an individual (of any age) is ready to undertake the learning of specific materials such as college physics

Readiness. This refers to the ability of a student to pass a course without remediation.

Student. A person formally engaged in learning, especially one enrolled in a school or college

Chapter 2: REVIEW OF RELATED STUDIES AND LITERATURE

Local and Foreign Studies

Readiness defined by Schunk (2008) as “what children are capable of doing or learning at various points in development” while La Paro and Pianta (2000) identified an operational definition of readiness that includes child’s academic skills, abilities and behaviors. As long as school accountability is based primarily upon the performance of children on skill based assessments, student school readiness will continue to be an important issue.

Many researchers have studied the possible relationship between school entry age and academic success. Voyles (2011) study indicated that student age had a statistically significant impact on academic achievement for students in mathematics assessment but not in reading assessment. A research study by Stipek and Byler (2001) concluded that older children in school classrooms performed better academically than their younger peers. In this study, mature students are defined as those students whose age was greater than 21 years on their first day at the university. Students who were 21 years of age and younger were classified as ‘young’ students. Mature students are thought to lack basic skills required for effective study or to be impaired by age-related intellectual deficits. Mature students tend to be admitted into their programmes with distinctly lower educational attainment than the young students (Newman-Ford, Lloyd & Thomas, 2009). Learning preferences were found to be independent of both the age and gender of students (Mlambo, 2011).

Gender can also be considered as a possible factor in overall school success. In an Australian study conducted with a sample of over 880 prep (equivalent to first grade) students, In the study of Boardman (2006) cited by Voyles (2011) found that student gender was a factor in overall academic success, particularly in the area of reading. Oshima and Domaleski (2006) studied gender in relation to academic success in the reading and math domains. They found gender to be significant for predicting success in reading but not in mathematics in elementary and middle school. Voyles (2011) study indicated that student gender did not impact achievement scores on either the mathematics or reading portion of the assessment.

Gender differences in course grades in favor of males emerge only in college, and the evidence for that is not consistent. Research has shown that men perform better than women in certain settings while women outperform men in other settings (Haist, Wilson, Elam, Blue, & Fosson, 2000). From elementary school through high school, males have been found to have higher scores on physics sections of achievement tests (e.g. NAEP 2005). Research of Felder et al.( 1995) suggests that male students outperform females in science courses, particularly in physics and engineering courses. There is substantial research indicating that males outperform females in introductory level physics courses required for physics and engineering majors (Tai and Sadler 2001) mainly because women are significantly under-represented in physics (McCullough, 2002 ; Ivie, R and Stowe, K, 2000).

The research examining science Grade Point Average (GPA) in college is inconsistent, with some research suggesting that female undergraduate students perform as well as males in science courses (Glynn et al. 2007). DeBacker and Nelson (2000) said that it is unclear why females are able to attain similar grades as males in the classroom from elementary through high school, but not on science achievement tests administered during these years. It is also unclear why females receive lower grades than males in college-level science classrooms. It has been suggested that females receive higher grades in class because they are more concerned with pleasing the teacher.In elementary and middle school, males receive lower grades than females in all subjects, including science (Posnick-Goodwin 2005). In high school (Willingham and Johnson 1997), males and females receive similar grades in their science courses, including physics courses. Based on an analysis of close to two million graduating students, Woodfield and Earl-Novell (2006) found that female students outperformed male students and attributed this partly to female students being more conscientious and thus less likely to miss lectures.

According to Sharma (2011), students were equally likely to attend college whether they had graduated from a public or private school. Braun, et. al (2006) argued that statistically, public schools has an advantage in math and parity between the sectors in reading over private schools. Private schools’ teaching techniques need not always be complementary to students’ ability to learn, so that better students select into private education: when high ability students are well served by government schools, private schools may cater to worse students (Bertola & Checchi , 2013). MacLeod and Urquiola (2009) have shown that if schools select students, and talent is revealed by entrance exams, then students admitted to selective institutions have lower incentives to accumulate skills. This may provide an alternative explanation for worse performance of students admitted in selective private colleges at least in developing countries like India (Rubinstein and Sekhri 2008), or in situations like that of Chile where, after introduction of vouchers in 1981, up to 55% of students were attending a private institution, without any effect on average competencies (Contreras, Sepulveda and Busto 2010).

McEwan (2000) argues that with a few exceptions, there is generally insufficient evidence to reach strong conclusions with regards to the comparisons between private and public schools. Vandenberghe & Robin’s (2004) cross-country analysis of the 2000 PISA survey finds that private education is associated with higher competencies in some countries, but with lower competencies in others. Wenglinsky, H . (2007). A hot topic in education right now is the debate of public versus private schools. Recent studies suggest there is no difference between the two in the American curriculum. With public schools having all their failures so highly publicized one can easily assume that students who attend private schools are likely receiving a better education, however this is not the case. A study released in 2007 by the Center on Education Policy (CEP) found that students of both public urban high schools and private high schools perform on average similarly.

The average private school mean mathematics score was higher than the average public school mean mathematics score (NAEP, 2006). Dronkers & Robert (2003) stated that the tendency for stronger informal relations between school boards and teacher in private schools partly explain the better performance of the pupils. The private school facilities including computer rooms, laboratories are considered to be better than that of the public schools and the lessons taught in private school tends to be more advance than that of the public schools (Geminiano , 2012). Frenette & Chan (2015) study showed that private high school students score significantly higher than public high school students on reading, mathematics, and science assessments at age 15, and have higher levels of educational attainment by age 23. Unless wealth and talent are negatively correlated, the larger educational investments or better peer quality that complement richer students’ talent still imply that they should do better than government school students (De Fraja 2002).

Analysis and evaluation are skills closely associated to problem-solving skills, so a mathematical approach in teaching physics could be beneficial to male students in getting better grades in physics. For female students, activities that require them to maximize their evaluation will be helpful in their physics performance. These results are in agreement with the findings of Rodrigues and Oliveira (2008) when they pointed out that “critical thinking level is a predictor of the pupils’ performance in physics”. This finding is not surprising since Physics is considered as a higher order thinking or HOT subject, hence, the importance of fostering such skills in the physics classroom.

Results of the study of Mangaoang-Boado (2013) implied that students’ performance in Physics will be higher if they perform better in English and Mathematics; if they show positive attitude towards Physics; and if they possess good study habits. Among the factors, GPA in Math had the best influence to academic performance in Physics. The result of this study was the same with the study of Yumul (2001). According to his study, the best predictor of board performance in Engineering is GPA in Mathematics. Inference can be made with the result of this study and with the study of Yumul. Both studies revealed the importance of Mathematics. Note that Mathematics is a means to calculate Physics problems and Mathematics also is the major tool in Engineering subjects.

Alimen (2009) revealed that attitude and performance in Physics among engineering students had declined in the period of five years. With the Filipino sample in the study of Ben (2010) , school type (government/private, independence in the actual physics classroom climate, investigation in the preferred physics classroom climate, and motivation to learn physics through learning environment stimulation and science-learning value were found to affect students' attitudes.

Halloun & Hestenes (1985) results show that a student’s initial knowledge has a large effect on his performance in physics, but conventional instruction produces comparatively small improvements in his basic knowledge. Meltzer (2002) results of investigation is into some of the factors, including mathematical skill that might be associated with variations in students’ ability to achieve conceptual learning gains in a physics course that employs interactive-engagement methods. It was found that students’ normalized learning gains are not significantly correlated with their pretest scores on a physics concept test. In contrast, in three of the four sample populations studied it was found that there is a significant correlation between normalized learning gain and students’ pre-instruction mathematics skill. Physics achievement according to Wollman & Lawrenz (1984) appears to depend on mathematics ability only to the extent that students possess the ability to utilize mathematics knowledge for solving physics problems. Identification of the specific aspects of this ability as well as the specific deficiencies leading to dropout should be the object of future research. In the mathematics test, it noted, Filipino students did best in Data Representation, Analysis and Probability, and poorest in Algebra (Crisostomo, 2000). For the present, interviews might be more revealing than group testing methods. If students had a better grasp of algebra and trigonometry and could reason better in the abstract theory would do better in the study of physics according to Hudson (1982).

Local and Foreign Literature

Students become “ready” to enroll in college as soon as they acquire a diploma from an accredited high school, or earn a General Educational Development, or GED, high school equivalency credential. But the numbers tracking how students fare in college suggest that mere credentials are not necessarily enough to prove they are prepared. High schools are preparing students to enter college, but not to succeed in college (Conley, 2008).

High schools are designed to get their students to graduate, and for some, to get them accepted into college. However, this does not necessarily enable students to succeed in college. Balfanz (2009) predicts that the majority of today’s college bound students are likely to struggle when they get to campus. The evidence of his study suggests that “somewhere between a third and a half of high school graduates leave high school prepared with a reasonable chance to succeed in college,” he concludes.

College entrance tests have typically been aimed at students whose families expect they will complete a bachelor’s degree. Youth who score well on college placement-level assessments, however, are not always those who consider themselves “college material. As Roderick (2008) said that if high school diplomas and other comparable credentials do not guarantee the ability to succeed in college, it might be better to define readiness as the ability to do college-level work. College-level assessments according to Dounay (2006) can also serve as an indicator of whether students are on track for entry-level college courses while there’s still time in high school to hone knowledge and skills. Their strong performance can serve as an incentive to reconsider their post-high school plans.

In most high schools, determining the knowledge and skills students need to succeed in college is largely left to individual teachers who rely on their instincts. Today’s high school graduates must possess the skills and knowledge to adapt rapidly to the ever-changing landscape of a knowledge-based economy (Baker, 2005). Even when an individual teacher does a good job figuring this out, rarely does a four-year high school instructional program provide an intellectually coherent experience – both in terms of skills and content – that ensures a majority of its students will be prepared for college.

Although the skill set of today’s graduates has changed, today’s high schools still look much as they did at the beginning of the 20th century when students were being prepared to work in an industrial economy. It is essential to link what students are doing in the present with their future plans and aspirations so they can understand the importance of their high school academic achievement (Roderick, 2006). Simultaneously, governmental and public expectations have raised to ensure that all students have access to rigorous and demanding educations. Thus, in the 21st century, college preparation is a necessity for all high school students to be prepared for life in today’s “Knowledge Economy.”

[...]

Excerpt out of 45 pages

Details

Title
Readiness Level of Engineering Freshman Students in College Physics
College
Rizal Technological University
Authors
Year
2015
Pages
45
Catalog Number
V338514
ISBN (eBook)
9783668283541
ISBN (Book)
9783668283558
File size
676 KB
Language
English
Tags
college physics, engineering freshman, readiness level, engineering
Quote paper
Liberty Gay Manalo (Author)Aida B. Baniqued (Author)Cesar A. Dulog (Author), 2015, Readiness Level of Engineering Freshman Students in College Physics, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/338514

Comments

  • No comments yet.
Read the ebook
Title: Readiness Level of Engineering Freshman Students in College Physics


Upload papers

Your term paper / thesis:

- Publication as eBook and book
- High royalties for the sales
- Completely free - with ISBN
- It only takes five minutes
- Every paper finds readers

Publish now - it's free