Exams

[DrSpike]

As a former academic myself I beg to differ. If that is your experience them I'm sorry for you.

[Ben Kenobi]

If that is your experience them I'm sorry for you.

You go to school with the academia you have and not the ones you wish you had.

I had some great profs, I even got to do some of their classes for them.

And then I had some who were terrible. The mark tended to reflect how they saw me, and was independent of the work that I put into it.

Those C- are all from 2 profs who are well known to be the worst that my school had to offer, but since half our degree has to be history credits I had to take classes with them to complete.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi

I think students ought to be permitted to manage their time outside of class the way they see fit.

It's funny how other employers are allowed to prohibit moonlighting, but we aren't. Being a student is really a job, especially in Canada, where the public picks up a lot of the tab.

If a student wants to slack, he should be allowed to do so and get the marks reflected in his coursework.

Except that universities have rules that you are only allowed to fail a certain percentage of students and only give a certain percentage top marks. I've seen this rule overturned once in my university career, and that was a course I TAed in where for some inexplicable reason all the students did brilliantly on the final exam. The sheer amount of red tape we had to go through was enough to put the lecturer off doing it again.

Students know this, so there is a fair degree of satisficing that goes on. This is particularly evident in humanities and social science courses, where the grading is not done on a point per answer basis.

I've gotten A's and C-'s and now I advise the students I tutor that it isn't about the work. If the prof likes you you will get an A, if they don't it's a C-. I tell them to write their papers to fit what the prof likes and they will do well.

Then you had some appalling teachers. I always enjoy getting papers from people who disagree with me (although I make a point of not telling the students my own views). I can't say that I've ever graded people based on their agreement with my somewhat peculiar beliefs.

Papers should be graded on how well the student has argued, not what the conclusion is.

I feel your pain about history professors though. The only low grade I ever got was from a history professor. I guess it was my own fault for humiliating her week in and week out for her bull**** philosophical beliefs (she was one of those postmodernist *****).

[Ben Kenobi]

It's funny how other employers are allowed to prohibit moonlighting, but we aren't. Being a student is really a job, especially in Canada, where the public picks up a lot of the tab.

Not really. If they were then the employers would be the schools themselves and the students would be working and paid for directly by them.

As it is the model is more like the entertainment industry. The students have a roster of professors, and they get to choose the professors and the courses that they want to take in order to get a degree. They pay the professors to teach them.

If the students were getting paid I can see them being held accountable for their work, but the reality is that the students are the ones writing the cheques for the professors.

I wouldn't mind a model where the students had to help the profs do their research and in turn the profs taught them. I don't know if you could make a profit doing that off the research and the work, but it would make for a very different university.

Except that universities have rules that you are only allowed to fail a certain percentage of students and only give a certain percentage top marks.

I'd support getting rid of this rule. I know how much pain that causes you guys, my mom teaches nursing and I had to help her construct her curve. I don't think the rule is helpful, I think the profs should be allowed to fail however many students they believe are not doing the work. I don't believe it's in the university's best interest or in the interest of society to grade in this way.

Then you had some appalling teachers. I always enjoy getting papers from people who disagree with me (although I make a point of not telling the students my own views). I can't say that I've ever graded people based on their agreement with my somewhat peculiar beliefs.

You are a good professor honestly. We've sparred on lots of stuff, but many other professors see it as a platform for their peculiar views.

Of the two that I was talking about, one of them was teaching Scandinavian history and she liked to skip over the part about Napoleon because war was evil.

I ended up doing my papers for her on an itenerant Lutheran preacher who helped folks emigrate to America, and in my Soviet history course I did it on the Stolypin land reforms. C- on both of them.

I feel your pain about history professors though. The only low grade I ever got was from a history professor. I guess it was my own fault for humiliating her week in and week out for her bull**** philosophical beliefs (she was one of those postmodernist *****).

That was the other one. Her 'lectures' if I could call them that were 20 minutes long once a week. I would leave before the 'discussion session' was over because I had other things to do. She didn't like it and I asked her why a 3 hour class was only 20 minutes of lecturing from her, and of that 20 minutes, none of it was real history. I had 'history of urban spaces' and 'history of canadian education' with her and the C-'s I got were for a paper on the bridge construction of WAC Bennett and the subsequent postwar suburb boom in Vancouver and another on St. Boniface College, which founded all the schools we now know of in the west as part of their Catholic mission.

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by Snotty
I think it would be more motivating for general everyday students if they are funding themselves rather than if the government is funding them. If you have to repay your debt you are less likely to spend that university time slacking off as you are only ripping yourself off.

this is true

in the US the main differences seem between students who have scholarships or work, these treat education more seriously normally.. although if they have to work too many hours they start having a harder time having the hours to study

and the other type of student often has their parents pay everything for them, these types of students are less likely to treat their education seriously and are more likely to be spending their time partying/etc then studying

JM

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi

I've gotten A's and C-'s and now I advise the students I tutor that it isn't about the work. If the prof likes you you will get an A, if they don't it's a C-. I tell them to write their papers to fit what the prof likes and they will do well.

Works like a charm.

This isn't true in physics and mathematics (in my experience)... which is a good thing.

JM

[Traianvs]

Originally posted by Jon Miller


this is true

in the US the main differences seem between students who have scholarships or work, these treat education more seriously normally.. although if they have to work too many hours they start having a harder time having the hours to study

and the other type of student often has their parents pay everything for them, these types of students are less likely to treat their education seriously and are more likely to be spending their time partying/etc then studying

JM

A catch 22 then? -> If they have to work they don't have enough time to study, but if they don't they have too much time on their hands and start partying?

You're right about the last one, but only partly I think? Succeeding your exams is important if you want your parents to keep funding you. Say if you keep failing those exams you will either have to drop out or pay for it yourself, and that's not particularly an improvement I dare say.
In my experience having your parents pay university doesn't show a significant difference. Then again, over here the entrance fee for one regular year costs some €550 for one year, a room in the city plus expenses not included of course. Studying here is probably a bit less of a burden for parents to let the kids go to university as in most other countries. It costs our government a ****load of money to subsidise all that though.

PS: people having a job don't always do a good job because they can't go to classes, can't meet deadlines if they're busy at work etc. Last year for example I was required to write a 35 page paper on some EU-Algerian association agreement with a certain female who worked at some government ministry or somesuch. I ended up writing it all alone in two weeks, while she hadn't even contacted me at all! True to my altruistic nature, I sent here the powerpoint so we did the presentation together :/ Looks like the partydrunks aren't always the ones slacking eh!

[Jon Miller]

In the US everyone (who I knew) who partied hard and didn't get great grades had their parents funding them.

People who payed for themselves (either through work or scholarship) got good grades and worked hard on their class work.

There were some people who had everything payed for them who worked hard, I am not saying that that isn't the case.

In the US paying for college is 25k per year for private or 15k per year for public.

Everyone I knew in college who worked 10-20 hours per week also where among the hardest working on their school work as well.

JM

[-Jrabbit]

My grades went up significantly when I started paying my own way.
OTOH, I'm paying for my daughter's college, and she's doing brilliantly.

[Jon Miller]

It's really quite obvious to me. Why would you work hard and try to succeed if it isn't costing you anything? The people who are having to sacrifice are going to make sure that they succeed due to that sacrifice, because otherwise the sacrifice doesn't make sense.

Most parents do care a bit about their children's thing, but I didn't know many who told their kids that they had to get As or else their schooling wouldn't be payed for. Most just required that their kids weren't kicked out for bad grades.

This might be a different culture thing, but I don't think that many were under heavy pressure from their parents to get great grades.

JM

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by -Jrabbit
My grades went up significantly when I started paying my own way.
OTOH, I'm paying for my daughter's college, and she's doing brilliantly.

Some I think will work hard no matter what. I would put myself in that group.

Question though, do you press your daughter to get good grades? Some do, some don't. I think many in the US don't.

JM

[Traianvs]

Well... what's the point in getting really good grades. If you know what you need to know, then you're fine. Spending all your time in your books doesn't do it all...

When I did archaeology, most of the ppl with very good grades were sort of... nerds who were very boring and childish. Parteh and extracurricular pastimes and interests are quite important too I find. Good grades don't automatically mean that person's better than another. Most of them have simply learnt everything by heart for example. Maybe that's my jealous side speaking here, dunno

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
That's what I did myself.

The grades reflected the teacher's position on the issues.

The teachers who liked me gave me an A, and the ones who didn't gave me C-, I had no grades in between the two.

That's the state of so called academia.

I thought oyu took some physics/math?

JM

[Jon Miller]

You are right, grades don't really matter all that much. But still, you should be advancing more in your field and treating it seriously...

It is a whole bunch of people goofing off which makes some professors/institutions relax requirements which make the workforce as a whole dumber (Because people still goof off).

JM

[Whaleboy]

It's really quite obvious to me. Why would you work hard and try to succeed if it isn't costing you anything? The people who are having to sacrifice are going to make sure that they succeed due to that sacrifice, because otherwise the sacrifice doesn't make sense.

You assume that the main motivator is that of a return on your own financial investment in the courses. Given the amount I've spent I can understand that reasoning but when I was younger (pre-drugs) I worked very hard on my courses because I wanted to succeed. I think it's the attitude of "I want to succeed" that is the main motivator for people.