Believing that student success depended on acquiring certain skills and knowledge, I used a combination of standardized tests, institutionally developed instruments, and interview procedures to get a clear picture of whether each student was prepared or underprepared. This was good practice in many ways, but I eventually came to see that I had structured my practice with the tenets of the Deficit Remediation Educational Model, which has been predominant in education for decades and remains the most prevalent approach in use day. This model assumes that the first and most important thing to do is to”fix” the student. Programs and services based on this model are dedicated to helping students achieve by first diagnosing student needs , problems, ignorance, concerns, defects, and deficits. Those who use the Deficit Remediation Educational Model have the challenge of designing classes, workshops, programs, and services to help stundents improve in areas in which they are underprepared. Based on the diagnosis, participation in remedial programs and services is often required. Students are usually prevented from pursuing other areas of study and from pursuing their interests until their “deficits” have been removed and their “problems” have been overcome. Typically, if students are unable to overcome their deficiencies by an established date, they are dismissed or told that they aren’t college material.
What would happen if we turned our traditional retention effort on its head ? If we developed programs that helped students assess their strengths and then apply those strengths to their studies ? Of course, we would still assist students in improving their ability to write well or to master mathematics or to read their political science text more efficiently and critically, but all this would be in the context of helping them identify, further develop, and apply what they can already do well. In my experience, this approach is tremendously motivating, contributes to a sense of agency, and helps young people stay in college.
注意：此部分试题请在答题卡2上作答。
52.What proved that nearly half of the author’s professional career was a mistake ?
A)Few of the participants in his training programs made great achievements.
B)Few of the participants in his training programs graduated from the courses.
C)The author made inaccurate assumptions about how to increase student achievement.
D)The author came to the wrong conclusions about how to increase student achievement.
53.Which of the following was the author’s wrong focus when he attempted to help students achieve ?
A)He tired to make everything take care of itself.来自
B)He tried to recognize those underprepared students.
C)He organized sufficient interactions between students and faculty.
D)He helped the prepared students meet their professors’ faulty expectations.
54.What will be the most likely outcome of the author’s faulty achievement training projects ?
A)Not only their students’ weakness but also their strengths will be identified.
B)Most of the training programs will focus on the strengths of their students.
C)Many students become frustrated and disillusioned as a result of it.
D)More students will stay in college in spite of their lack of ability.
55.Which word or expression is closest in meaning to “deficits” in Para. 3 ?
A)Diagnosis. B)Deficiencies. C)College material. D)Skills and konwledge.
56.How does the author like the approach of assessing students’ strengths and then applying them to their studies ?
A)It will assist students in improving their ability to study some courses.
B)It will tremendously motivate students to manage their weaknesses.
C)It will seriously discourage students of their further study in college.
D)It will positively improve student achievement with encouragement