FACULTY DEVELOPMENT: THE JERSEY CITY CASE

At least four forces work against effective basic skills training at the college level, even when courses in basic skills are offered. First, many faculty members and administrators judge such courses to be inappropriate in a college or university, or at best peripheral. Second, because the courses are deemed "subcollegiate," they usually carry no academic credit. In effect, students are penalized for their past failures. Third, faculty (and sometimes the administration) do not understand the educational needs of disadvantaged people in the larger community, especially their need for basic skills training as a preliminary for regular college work. Fourth, faculty members who do recognize the need for basic skills courses are seldom trained to teach them, and in any case are inclined to resist getting involved in such "lesser" activities. Senior faculty (usually tenured) tend to relegate the job to junior faculty (usually untenured) or to special basic skills faculty.

One result of these attitudes and practices is that even after students "complete" basic skills training many are unable to perform well in regular courses. Help with basic skills at the point of entry is not enough; they need reinforcement on a continuing basis, but it is seldom available as an integrated, on-going part of their studies. Having been isolated in entry-level basic skills courses on the periphery of the institution, they have difficulty relating the learning of basic skills to the content of core courses. Unable to perform well, they give up and drop out.

In the view of many institutional leaders, including the president of Jersey City State College, the solution to this problem is to modify the regular curriculum so that training in basic skills is woven into core courses. To do that, substantial work with existing faculty is essential