Are Gen Eds in college useful or just a drag on finishing? (doctor, social science)

[tnff]

Well back to the old style. Wish CD would have a better way to keep quotes together.

Originally Posted by mitsguy2001

No, I do not use fluid mechanics at all. What you describe sounds more like research, not work that's done in the real world. I literally do not use any classes that I took in college.

I'm really fascinated about what a traffic engineer would do. I was assuming something like efficient traffic flow, light timing, etc. It always fascinated me how much traffic resembles a fluid until it undergoes a phase change and freezes.

Originally Posted by mitsguy2001

About summary vs summation?

Not those specific words but about things just as silly. I've seen some very senior managers get completely in a wad over 10 vs ten. Yep, 10 vs ten.

Originally Posted by mitsguy2001

So, I am confused as to why you say that STEM grades are more subjective (and more fair? or just?) than liberal arts grades, but in this response, you acknowledge that STEM classes are especially bad when it comes to grading?

Two separate things. The grading of the work itself is more objective in that the answer is right or wrong; or you applied the correct formula or didn't, etc. How that translates into a letter grade may be completely obscure but as long as it's consistent it's fair. But take for example, "The Road Not Taken." It could be interpreted differently by multiple people. But the exam asks "What is the true meaning ...?" What do you answer? What answer does the professor want?

I can deal with getting an answer wrong if I know what's wrong and learn to fix it next time, even if I don't know what letter grade it might translate into. But that's a completely different beast than having to guess what the professor wants to hear.

Originally Posted by mitsguy2001

Also, what do you think of the other posters in this forum who labeled me as a grade grubber when I posted that I wanted to know that professor's grading policy, but he refused to tell me? I wasn't asking for any special treatment, just an explanation of his policy. Yet other posters labeled me a grade grubber.

I don't want to try to guess why other posters might have said that. That would be inappropriate on a public forum.

What I can do is discuss what I've heard from classmates when they used that term. In their minds they used it in much the same usage as when a team that's already won the game runs up the score. While I don't think the person usually asking had this intent, they interpreted it through their own lens as trying to embarrass them over their scores. Kind of like the kid who has a 100 average asking for extra credit. Like I said, I don't think the kid asking had any kind of intent in mind other than an honest question, but just operated on a different wavelength than the other kids and couldn't understand why they would take it as an affront. And teachers, often being from the latter group often carried the same mindset into their professional world when confronted with really bright students who ask such questions.

[mitsguy2001]

Originally Posted by tnff

Well back to the old style. Wish CD would have a better way to keep quotes together.


I'm really fascinated about what a traffic engineer would do. I was assuming something like efficient traffic flow, light timing, etc. It always fascinated me how much traffic resembles a fluid until it undergoes a phase change and freezes.

Yes, but it doesn't involve fluid mechanics, nor anything that we really learned in college.

Not those specific words but about things just as silly. I've seen some very senior managers get completely in a wad over 10 vs ten. Yep, 10 vs ten.

Yes, I have seen that too. And since different personalities have a different preference, you can't make them all happy, so you sometimes have to choose who to alienate.

Two separate things. The grading of the work itself is more objective in that the answer is right or wrong; or you applied the correct formula or didn't, etc. How that translates into a letter grade may be completely obscure but as long as it's consistent it's fair.

But, from my experience, STEM teachers were not consistent with their grading, and a lot of things, such as whether or not you "showed all your work", whether or not you rounded properly, whether or not your handwriting was neat enough, are more subjective than you think.

But take for example, "The Road Not Taken." It could be interpreted differently by multiple people. But the exam asks "What is the true meaning ...?" What do you answer? What answer does the professor want?

Did the professor share his/her opinion as to the true meaning before the exam?

I can deal with getting an answer wrong if I know what's wrong and learn to fix it next time, even if I don't know what letter grade it might translate into. But that's a completely different beast than having to guess what the professor wants to hear.

I'm guessing that you didn't have a scholarship that required a certain GPA to keep? In my case, I was forced to be concerned with the final grade, in order to keep my scholarship.

I don't want to try to guess why other posters might have said that. That would be inappropriate on a public forum.

What I can do is discuss what I've heard from classmates when they used that term. In their minds they used it in much the same usage as when a team that's already won the game runs up the score. While I don't think the person usually asking had this intent, they interpreted it through their own lens as trying to embarrass them over their scores. Kind of like the kid who has a 100 average asking for extra credit. Like I said, I don't think the kid asking had any kind of intent in mind other than an honest question, but just operated on a different wavelength than the other kids and couldn't understand why they would take it as an affront. And teachers, often being from the latter group often carried the same mindset into their professional world when confronted with really bright students who ask such questions.

But this was not what I was doing in that class. I just wanted to know how he calculated the final average. Was is based on a straight average, in which case, I'd be failing, with an average in the 40s, and needed to drop the course in order to keep my scholarship, and try again the following year. Or, did he curve the grades, in which case I'd have an A or B on account of having the highest and 2nd highest grade on every exam, in which case I could tough it out and stay in the class. He refused to answer. How was that grade grubbing? I was not asking for any special treatment, just a clarification of existing policy.

Arguing for extra credit when you have a 100 average is just silly, since it just goes in the books as an A anyway, so it's just wasted effort. My problem was that teachers would associate extra credit with students who didn't do their work all semester and are going to fail, and want to somehow get a passing grade. I would ask for extra credit when I wanted to recover from one bad day and wanted to pull an 89 up to a 90, but the teachers would act the same as if I was somebody who did no work all semester and was failing. As you know, a pet peeve of mine is how at the very top are determined by the noise, rather than the signal, and I would sometimes have wanted extra credit to smooth out the noise, not to get away with not doing any work. But teachers never understood that.

[tnff]

Originally Posted by mitsguy2001

Yes, but it doesn't involve fluid mechanics, nor anything that we really learned in college.
.

I'd love to understand more of what you do vs what is taught in college. A big part is that while almost nothing I did in my career is taught in college, at various times over the whole of my career, I've used pretty much everything I learned in one way or another. I can see the linkage between the work I'm doing and the courses where I learned the underlying fundamental skill being applied.

Originally Posted by mitsguy2001

But, from my experience, STEM teachers were not consistent with their grading, and a lot of things, such as whether or not you "showed all your work", whether or not you rounded properly, whether or not your handwriting was neat enough, are more subjective than you think.
.

Of those the only area where I saw significant confusion was in sig figs. I'm not sure anyone really understands the rules of sig figs, including the professors teaching them.

Originally Posted by mitsguy2001

Did the professor share his/her opinion as to the true meaning before the exam?
.

This is where I find the subjectivity of liberal arts courses distrustful. In general, the professors who shared their opinion prior to an exam, enjoyed hearing students' opinions that differed from theirs. They liked the dialog. Professors who didn't share their opinion simply expected everyone to have the same, obvious to them, opinion. And if you didn't, then obviously you simply weren't smart enough to be in the class. While I had a lot of professors in my STEM classes who were simply idiots; of all the professors I've had, the ones who were the most smug, stuck up, pompous, were English, Lit, and History professors. If you wanted to write a stereotypical, tweed wearing, pompous, dweeb of a professor, my History101 prof could have come right out of central casting. He didn't feel the need to tell you his opinion because anyone smart enough to be in his class would obviously hold the same opinion and if you didn't then you should be failed out of school anyway. Didn't take long to figure out his opinion was based on communism as the best form of government. So I went and read Marx and tossed in some meaningless quotes out of context since he didn't use the textbook anyway. (He taught history by having us read historical romance fiction.)

Originally Posted by mitsguy2001

I'm guessing that you didn't have a scholarship that required a certain GPA to keep? In my case, I was forced to be concerned with the final grade, in order to keep my scholarship.
.

I did. In fact had to first earn the scholarhip and then keep it. First year was the hardest because of those stupid gen ed requirements and the subjective grading of the gen ed/liberal art teachers (remember the English prof I mentioned who had a thing for gendered pronouns?) Once I got past freshman year it was easier to maintain my grades. The courses may have gotten harder and some of the grading schemes were undecipherable but once I learned to not worry as much about individual grades but the course overall, my GPA went up. Not saying it wasn't stressful because it was. But I could only control my own performance.

Originally Posted by mitsguy2001

But this was not what I was doing in that class. I just wanted to know how he calculated the final average. Was is based on a straight average, in which case, I'd be failing, with an average in the 40s, and needed to drop the course in order to keep my scholarship, and try again the following year. Or, did he curve the grades, in which case I'd have an A or B on account of having the highest and 2nd highest grade on every exam, in which case I could tough it out and stay in the class. He refused to answer. How was that grade grubbing? I was not asking for any special treatment, just a clarification of existing policy.
.

I wouldn't consider that it was grade grubbing. What I was trying to say is I've known a lot of students and teachers who consider any discussion of grades, esp if it includes a discussion of an A or B, to be grade grubbing. Other students, rightly or wrongly, often think it's a case of "he/she is no better than I am." A lot of teachers I've seen over the years also have this feeling toward top students asking about grades. Other teachers and some professors also seem to have an almost religious approach -- "you shouldn't care about the grade" but about the subject belief. If so, then why do they assign grades at all?

Originally Posted by mitsguy2001

Arguing for extra credit when you have a 100 average is just silly, since it just goes in the books as an A anyway, so it's just wasted effort. My problem was that teachers would associate extra credit with students who didn't do their work all semester and are going to fail, and want to somehow get a passing grade. I would ask for extra credit when I wanted to recover from one bad day and wanted to pull an 89 up to a 90, but the teachers would act the same as if I was somebody who did no work all semester and was failing. As you know, a pet peeve of mine is how at the very top are determined by the noise, rather than the signal, and I would sometimes have wanted extra credit to smooth out the noise, not to get away with not doing any work. But teachers never understood that.

Wanting to pull an 89 up to a 90 is where teachers would hear "grade grubbing." Consider that the teachers don't understand the signal vs noise issue, they're never going to understand wanting to pull a B up to an A as anything other than grade grubbing. To them, and most students, a B is already a well above average grade, so their thought is "be grateful you got a B." In their mind, once you are above a C, then anything extra is grade grubbing.

[mitsguy2001]

Originally Posted by tnff

I'd love to understand more of what you do vs what is taught in college. A big part is that while almost nothing I did in my career is taught in college, at various times over the whole of my career, I've used pretty much everything I learned in one way or another. I can see the linkage between the work I'm doing and the courses where I learned the underlying fundamental skill being applied.

It's more that the type of work I do was not taught at all in college. I did take a traffic engineering class in college, but we didn't learn much of anything in it. In fact, even the professor openly admitted to me that he did a poor job of teaching the class.

Of those the only area where I saw significant confusion was in sig figs. I'm not sure anyone really understands the rules of sig figs, including the professors teaching them.

Yes, that was a real problem for me, especially in my AP Chemistry class, where the teacher would refuse to answer questions about his methodology for signficant figures, but any problem that was solved completely correctly but the "wrong" (according to him) number of significant figures would be marked completely wrong, no partial credit. Also had the same problem with him inovling rounding when the next digit is 5, where his rules seemed to change from day to day, and I never seemed to be able to read his mind and answer correctly, and he'd mark it completely wrong, no partial credit. When I tried to ask him to explain his method, he would just tell me to shut up, and that I'm as dumb as a rock, and he'd use words that I can't post here.

This is where I find the subjectivity of liberal arts courses distrustful. In general, the professors who shared their opinion prior to an exam, enjoyed hearing students' opinions that differed from theirs. They liked the dialog. Professors who didn't share their opinion simply expected everyone to have the same, obvious to them, opinion. And if you didn't, then obviously you simply weren't smart enough to be in the class.

That is very true, and a very good point.

While I had a lot of professors in my STEM classes who were simply idiots; of all the professors I've had, the ones who were the most smug, stuck up, pompous, were English, Lit, and History professors. If you wanted to write a stereotypical, tweed wearing, pompous, dweeb of a professor, my History101 prof could have come right out of central casting. He didn't feel the need to tell you his opinion because anyone smart enough to be in his class would obviously hold the same opinion and if you didn't then you should be failed out of school anyway. Didn't take long to figure out his opinion was based on communism as the best form of government. So I went and read Marx and tossed in some meaningless quotes out of context since he didn't use the textbook anyway. (He taught history by having us read historical romance fiction.)

And I'm sure those classes were all full of students who supported everything the professor said.

I did. In fact had to first earn the scholarhip and then keep it. First year was the hardest because of those stupid gen ed requirements and the subjective grading of the gen ed/liberal art teachers (remember the English prof I mentioned who had a thing for gendered pronouns?) Once I got past freshman year it was easier to maintain my grades. The courses may have gotten harder and some of the grading schemes were undecipherable but once I learned to not worry as much about individual grades but the course overall, my GPA went up. Not saying it wasn't stressful because it was. But I could only control my own performance.

In my case, it was more that the later you are in your college career, the more grades you have calculated into your GPA, so the effect of an individual class is less. When you have only one semester of grades, a single unfair grade can really ruin your GPA. But during your 8th and final semester, one grade isn't going to matter so much, since you have 8 semesters worth of grades averaged together. But I think that is another point that liberal arts people don't really understand.

I wouldn't consider that it was grade grubbing. What I was trying to say is I've known a lot of students and teachers who consider any discussion of grades, esp if it includes a discussion of an A or B, to be grade grubbing. Other students, rightly or wrongly, often think it's a case of "he/she is no better than I am." A lot of teachers I've seen over the years also have this feeling toward top students asking about grades. Other teachers and some professors also seem to have an almost religious approach -- "you shouldn't care about the grade" but about the subject belief. If so, then why do they assign grades at all?

I used to really hate that line. First of all, if the grades are supposed to be an assessment of how well you learned the material, then wouldn't focusing on learning also mean focusing on better grades? Or, if they are somehow different, then why give grades? Plus, rightly or wrongly, college admissions and scholarships are based on grades. And, rightly or wrongly, keeping my scholarship was based on grades.

The worst were my parents. They would act like a B+ was a failing grade. But they would also accuse me of focusing on grades and arguing with teachers about grades, rather than focusing on learning. Maybe if they didn't crucify me over a B+ I could have stopped worrying about grades and stopped arguing with teachers over grades.

Wanting to pull an 89 up to a 90 is where teachers would hear "grade grubbing."

Fair enough.

Consider that the teachers don't understand the signal vs noise issue,

What is a better way to describe that concept to liberal arts people?

they're never going to understand wanting to pull a B up to an A as anything other than grade grubbing. To them, and most students, a B is already a well above average grade, so their thought is "be grateful you got a B." In their mind, once you are above a C, then anything extra is grade grubbing.

True.

[ElijahAstin]

Originally Posted by tnff

This is where I find the subjectivity of liberal arts courses distrustful. In general, the professors who shared their opinion prior to an exam, enjoyed hearing students' opinions that differed from theirs. They liked the dialog. Professors who didn't share their opinion simply expected everyone to have the same, obvious to them, opinion. And if you didn't, then obviously you simply weren't smart enough to be in the class. While I had a lot of professors in my STEM classes who were simply idiots; of all the professors I've had, the ones who were the most smug, stuck up, pompous, were English, Lit, and History professors. If you wanted to write a stereotypical, tweed wearing, pompous, dweeb of a professor, my History101 prof could have come right out of central casting. He didn't feel the need to tell you his opinion because anyone smart enough to be in his class would obviously hold the same opinion and if you didn't then you should be failed out of school anyway. Didn't take long to figure out his opinion was based on communism as the best form of government. So I went and read Marx and tossed in some meaningless quotes out of context since he didn't use the textbook anyway. (He taught history by having us read historical romance fiction.)

Originally Posted by mitsguy2001

And I'm sure those classes were all full of students who supported everything the professor said.

Originally Posted by tnff

I did. In fact had to first earn the scholarhip and then keep it. First year was the hardest because of those stupid gen ed requirements and the subjective grading of the gen ed/liberal art teachers (remember the English prof I mentioned who had a thing for gendered pronouns?) Once I got past freshman year it was easier to maintain my grades. The courses may have gotten harder and some of the grading schemes were undecipherable but once I learned to not worry as much about individual grades but the course overall, my GPA went up. Not saying it wasn't stressful because it was. But I could only control my own performance.

I think this is just a matter of humanities courses being better-suited to students with certain interests and skill sets, just as the same is true for STEM courses and any other area of study. I performed extremely well in my creative nonfiction and political science classes and I was never a sycophant to the professor—far from it. I was mindful of my audience and, to the extent that I had the autonomy to frame the scope and focus of my coursework (which is often considerable in writing-intensive liberal arts courses), I made sure to play to my audience.

Originally Posted by tnff

Wanting to pull an 89 up to a 90 is where teachers would hear "grade grubbing." Consider that the teachers don't understand the signal vs noise issue, they're never going to understand wanting to pull a B up to an A as anything other than grade grubbing. To them, and most students, a B is already a well above average grade, so their thought is "be grateful you got a B." In their mind, once you are above a C, then anything extra is grade grubbing.

I never thought to ask a college professor for extra credit for any reason, and I can see them taking issue with a student demanding they take on extra work in order to provide that one student a unique opportunity to improve their grade. But perhaps that’s more commonly accepted in STEM courses. I wouldn’t know.

Originally Posted by mitsguy2001

In my case, it was more that the later you are in your college career, the more grades you have calculated into your GPA, so the effect of an individual class is less. When you have only one semester of grades, a single unfair grade can really ruin your GPA. But during your 8th and final semester, one grade isn't going to matter so much, since you have 8 semesters worth of grades averaged together. But I think that is another point that liberal arts people don't really understand.

This liberal arts person knew that quite well. On the other hand, I got an A+ in business calculus and always excelled in non-visual math (geometry and trig were killers for me in high school, and I was happy to escape those courses with B’s).

I actually helped show a hard sciences-focused pre-med student how to calculate his GPA at the beginning of the spring semester after he was freaking out over what he thought was a sub-3.0 from the prior fall. After seeing that his lowest grade was a B in one hard science course, and I patiently explained that having a sub-3.0 GPA was literally impossible based on his mix of A/B-level grades, I showed him how to create a spreadsheet using weighted averages based on course credits and our university’s GPA scale. He ended up with something like a 3.7, which obviously was a huge relief. And I did this for him even though he was a bit of a tool and was always slightly hostile towards me for no reason. I guess I took pleasure in the fact that I gave the pre-med guy a math lesson.

[mitsguy2001]

Originally Posted by ElijahAstin

I think this is just a matter of humanities courses being better-suited to students with certain interests and skill sets, just as the same is true for STEM courses and any other area of study. I performed extremely well in my creative nonfiction and political science classes and I was never a sycophant to the professor—far from it. I was mindful of my audience and, to the extent that I had the autonomy to frame the scope and focus of my coursework (which is often considerable in writing-intensive liberal arts courses), I made sure to play to my audience.

Play to your audience means write what the professor wants.

I never thought to ask a college professor for extra credit for any reason, and I can see them taking issue with a student demanding they take on extra work in order to provide that one student a unique opportunity to improve their grade. But perhaps that’s more commonly accepted in STEM courses. I wouldn’t know.

I never asked a college professor for extra credit either. I was thinking more of middle school and, to a lesser extent, high school.

This liberal arts person knew that quite well. On the other hand, I got an A+ in business calculus and always excelled in non-visual math (geometry and trig were killers for me in high school, and I was happy to escape those courses with B’s).

I actually helped show a hard sciences-focused pre-med student how to calculate his GPA at the beginning of the spring semester after he was freaking out over what he thought was a sub-3.0 from the prior fall. After seeing that his lowest grade was a B in one hard science course, and I patiently explained that having a sub-3.0 GPA was literally impossible based on his mix of A/B-level grades, I showed him how to create a spreadsheet using weighted averages based on course credits and our university’s GPA scale. He ended up with something like a 3.7, which obviously was a huge relief. And I did this for him even though he was a bit of a tool and was always slightly hostile towards me for no reason. I guess I took pleasure in the fact that I gave the pre-med guy a math lesson.

Not surprised.

[ElijahAstin]

Originally Posted by mitsguy2001

Play to your audience means write what the professor wants.

In a broad sense, yes, but when you’re given any sort of assignment, you have to do what the professor wants in order to get credit. If the professor asks you to write a personal essay about a difficult life event and you turn in a narrative fiction novel, then you deserve the zero you will very likely get.

Originally Posted by mitsguy2001

I never asked a college professor for extra credit either. I was thinking more of middle school and, to a lesser extent, high school.

I honestly don’t remember if I asked for extra credit at all in high school. I certainly agree it’s a far more acceptable practice in the secondary education context. I might have done it once or twice.

Originally Posted by mitsguy2001

Not surprised.

If that’s intended as a compliment, I’ll take it.

[mitsguy2001]

Originally Posted by ElijahAstin

In a broad sense, yes, but when you’re given any sort of assignment, you have to do what the professor wants in order to get credit. If the professor asks you to write a personal essay about a difficult life event and you turn in a narrative fiction novel, then you deserve the zero you will very likely get.

Yes, but you shouldn't lose points because the professor doesn't agree politically, nor for frivolous reasons. That is what the poster we're responding to was saying.

[ElijahAstin]

Originally Posted by mitsguy2001

Yes, but you shouldn't lose points because the professor doesn't agree politically, nor for frivolous reasons. That is what the poster we're responding to was saying.

I understood what you were saying. I’m only saying that you can never write exactly what you might feel like because all assignments, even creative writing ones, come with expectations and parameters. So keeping in mind a professor’s viewpoints on the assigned subject matter (whether or not they consciously ding “dissenters”) is not only appropriate but a great exercise in critical thinking to the extent that you might personally disagree with certain viewpoints. I never slavishly sucked up to a professor’s ideology, but my papers showed that I took it into consideration and was willing to examine things from their point of view (which I very much was).

[riffle]

Attitude makes a difference. I had courses (both in my major and unrelated to it) which I was excited about and invested in. I believe those courses contributed to my personal and professional development. I also had courses (both in my major and unrelated to it) which I was uninterested in and approached strategically as a step towards my degree. I've never thought about any of that subject matter again after graduation. You get out what you put in.

In my opinion, requiring students to select general education classes from certain buckets encourages the latter mindset. I would rather see colleges require x credits outside of the major program - whatever courses the student wants. This would encourage voluntary intellectual exploration rather than compliance.