Dear Faculty,

I would like to share with you issues related to the quality of teaching at the University, and measures being taken to reduce dropout rates.

First, we convey our warm congratulations to Yemima Ben-Menahem, from the Department of Philosophy in the Faculty of Humanities, upon receiving the Israel Prize award in the field of philosophy. Yemima is one of the world's leading researchers in the field of philosophy of science, including interpretation of quantum theory, and in the field of philosophy of history. Receiving the award is a tribute to Yemima's excellent scientific contribution and her outstanding personality.

Teaching matters: The degree of students’ satisfaction with teaching, which was on the rise from 2018 until the first semester of 2021, has remained stable during the last two semesters. Student satisfaction is at a reasonable level—an average score of about 7.95 satisfaction with courses, and about 8.35 satisfaction with instructor—but still not high enough. (Students report their satisfaction on a scale of 1 to 9; the result is adjusted based on the class size, and the scale is thus up to 9.8 in large classes; the response rate to the survey was about 40 to 45 percent). Here is a summary of the data in recent years:

Our students' satisfaction with instruction at the University is generally high, and we can attribute this to the fact that faculty members at the Hebrew University take their teaching very seriously. The main change that has taken place in recent years at the University in the field of teaching is the extensive enhancement of "active learning." This includes a significant increase in the scope of active learning assignments that students complete, usually in groups, during the semester, and a reduction of the weight of the final exam in the final grade. I believe that this is an important move, critical to improving the quality of teaching. All instructors who have not yet done so should seriously consider strengthening the component of active learning in groups in the courses that they teach.

An issue that I find disturbing is courses in which the failure rate is high. Each semester, there are at least 40 courses in which the failure rate is more than 10% (after two exam sittings and weighting of the partial grades). Among these, there are courses in which the failure rate is between 20 and 30 percent. Unfortunately, only part of those involved in these courses recognize that a failure rate of more than 10% in any course at the Hebrew University is unreasonable. The complacency with which some instructors and unit heads accept such results is one of my major failures during my tenure as Rector.

The admission credentials data of students at the Hebrew university is very high, and they increase from year to year. Almost all students invest many hours studying, and certainly in the courses in which failure rates are known to be high. If a high percentage of these students do not pass the exam, this suggests that the instructor did not succeed in teaching the course (or did not succeed in wording the exam properly). None of us is immune to mistakes, and it is certainly possible that due to a non-optimal teaching method in a particular course or the administration of an exam that is at an inappropriate level of difficulty, a glitch occurs, causing the failure rate to be unreasonably high. In such a case, we must take two steps. One, which looks to address the past, is to correct the fault, by artificially raising the scores (applying a ”factor"), so that the failure rate is reasonable, for example, up to 10%. The second step, which looks to the future, is an in-depth investigation into the reasons why this result occurred, and the correction of such incidents in coming years. So, for example, during the classes, and not just at the end of the semester, questions given on the exam in previous years should be discussed in class, to make sure that the level of instruction, and consequently, the students’ level of understanding, is appropriate to what is required for the exam; the scope of the exam should be adjusted to the time allotted to it (it does not make sense for the exam to test the speed with which students are able to answer the questions); the scope and level of material studied should be adjusted to correspond to the average level in the class; the need to add study and practice hours should be examined; additional ways of presenting the material should be explored;  the validity of assumptions regarding students' prior knowledge must be verified; and a series of further steps.

To my mind, the fact that there are courses at the university in which these high failure rates have continued for years, and they are perceived as inevitable, while attributing sole responsibility for the situation to the students, testifies to a flawed academic culture. There is no consolation in the fact that a similar situation exists in other academic institutions in Israel. We must take the lead in this matter, and act in a manner similar to what is customary at the leading institutions in the United States, where, as a rule, this phenomenon does not exist. I’m happy to report that some academic units at the university are acting in this direction.

Regarding a closely connected matter, we are taking extensive steps, led by the Dean of Students (the Equal Opportunities Unit), to reduce, not to eradicate, the extent of students who drop out of their studies at the university. Although the budget that the university receives from the PBC for teaching is calculated according to students who have successfully completed their studies, the reason for our extensive move to reduce dropouts is not financial, but a moral one. It is our duty to grant all students who meet our university’s high admissions standards a fair opportunity to successfully complete their studies here. To this end, we help those students who are experiencing difficulties, including financial assistance (scholarships), academic assistance (individual and group tutoring), and social and psychological assistance. Identifying those students in need of assistance is an important challenge. To this end, the university applies an extensive policy to identify students in danger of dropping out, based on achievements in the first weeks of certain courses, identified as markers. In addition, we gather information regarding students who failed two courses or more during the first semester and offer them an assistance. Moreover, we encourage students who are required to take language courses, in Hebrew and English, to split their first year and extend the period of study, without being charged additional tuition fees for the extended period of study.

The move has begun to bear fruit. In the 2021/2022 academic year, about 30,000 tutoring hours were allotted to about 1,700 students. The assistance is provided free of charge. The tutors are undergraduate students who receive a salary for this work. Overall satisfaction with the tutoring is very high (the average score on the survey is 4.7 out of 5), and the dropout rates among students receiving tutoring are lower than the general average, even though these are students who are prone to dropping out (after having failed two courses during the first semester). The results indicate a trend of improvement, though we still have a way to go.

Table 1 presents the dropout data of first-year students studying towards a bachelor's degree. (only those students who left the University entirely were counted, without taking into account those students who transferred from one department to another within the university. The data also include those who left the university voluntarily. The data does not count students who repeated the first year as having dropped out):

2021	2020	2019	Table 1: Dropout Rate (end of 1st year)
10.1	10.2	11.6	Humanities
5.4	6.8	7.9	Social Sciences
5.6	11.2	12.2	Education
5.2	6.6	5.2	Law
6.3	8.3	6.8	Business Administration
5.6	5.7	0.9	Social Work
7.1	8.2	10.9	Agriculture
0.0	1.8	0.9	Medicine
10.8	3.6	5.6	Dental Medicine
9.3	6.3	8.2	Pharmacy
7.6	7.8	11.1	Nursing
13.9	5.9	18.0	Bio-Medical Sciences
7.2	6.6	9.6	Computer Sciences
16.4	10.8	17.4	Natural Sciences
8.6	7.7	10.0	Overall at the University

The reduction in dropout rates, from about 10% to about 8%, reflects a good improvement. Our target is a dropout rate of up to 6% in all units.

The data indicate a certain gap between the dropout rates among Arab and ultra-Orthodox students and the rest of our students. It seems that most of the increase in dropout rates in 2021 compared with 2020 is due to an increase in dropout rates among these groups (Table 2):

2021	2020	2019	Table 2: Dropout Rate (by sectors)
11.3	8.3	11.9	Arabs (including East Jerusalem)
10.1	6.8	13.7	Arabs from East Jerusalem
14.2	10.1	10.7	Haredi
6.2	7.1	14.7	Ethiopian Descent
7.8	7.5	9.5	All others students
8.6	7.7	10.0	Overall at the University

 

The Dean of Students office staff (led by the Dean of Students), together with the Diversity Unit staff (led by the Vice President for Diversity and Strategy), are working hard to identify the reasons for the reverse in the trend among Arab and ultra-Orthodox students, in order to return to the downward dropout trend. We continued hard work of the academic units, the diversity coordinators in the units and the entire administrative and academic staff in this matter are all essential. This is an opportunity to thank all those engaged in these efforts, including the staff members within the secretariats for teaching matters and our dropout prevention counselors, who are making a unique contribution in this matter. We all have a duty to look around and identify those students in need of our assistance.

Finally, our call for applications for scholars from Ukraine is very successful, with more than 100 applications. We’ve extended offers to about 30 scholars and research students and allocated for the project 1.5 million NIS. We try to extend invitations to additional applicants. The generosity of the faculty members who agreed to host the scholars is highly appreciated.

Sincerely, Barak Medina