Xref: utzoo comp.edu:1578 sci.math:5137 sci.physics:5178 Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!ncar!boulder!sunybcs!bingvaxu!leah!itsgw!imagine!rpics!mccombt From: mccombt@rpics (Todd McComb) Newsgroups: comp.edu,sci.math,sci.physics Subject: Re: Student and Course Integrity Summary: don't slow down faster students Keywords: pace, office hours Message-ID: <2082@imagine.PAWL.RPI.EDU> Date: 13 Dec 88 21:50:14 GMT References: <4550@homxc.UUCP> <4847@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> Sender: news@imagine.PAWL.RPI.EDU Reply-To: mccombt@turing.cs.rpi.edu (Todd McComb) Organization: Rensselaer Mathematics Dept., Troy NY Lines: 85 In article <4847@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> Daniel Yaron Kimberg writes: >In article <4550@homxc.UUCP> B.TONGUE writes: >> It's always >>amazed me that students can muddle through classes, attend office >>hours *ONCE* and expect to absorb a semester's worth of material. >>But that's another issue entirely; let me now address the >>non-possibility of office hour attendence at all. Why is that so surprising? Perhaps it should be amazing that people who are struggling with the material do not seek help with it, but it hardly amazes me that some people are capable of following material directly from lecture. >Why is 36 hours a week plus time spent doing homework not enough to learn a >semester's worth of math? I've never taken a course where I thought the time >allotted wasn't plenty, given that sufficient time was spent on assignments. >Of course, some professors try to cover too much of a broad topic, but that's >a different problem. The only reason I've ever been to a professor's office >hours has been for something administrative like working out a paper topic - >not for additional instruction. I agree. The only reason I ever went to a professor's office was just to talk to them about some extension of the course material, or maybe their research work or something of the like. In fact, I would say that the only complaints I have had about the time allocated for a course was that many courses were given too _much_ time based on the material they got covered. When instructors go too slowly, it bothers me. >>Professors are obligated to have office hours, students >>should be obligated to use them. If a student cannot understand the material, I think it would be in their best interest to attend office hours. Other than that, it's their life. >I disagree with this completely. I think office hours are useful for students >who are having difficulty with course material or for students who want to >discuss some point with the professor, or work out a paper topic, or things >like that. But I don't see any good reason why a student who is doing well >in a course, who is having no trouble picking up the material, and who has no >other real reason to see the professor, should be obligated to go waste >someone's time. As far as I'm concerned, office hours exist because situations >come up during the course of a semester when some students need to see the >professor, not because individual conferences are invariably a necessary part >of the curriculum. I agree. Most introductory level courses (most anything taught at an undergraduate level) work well in classroom settings. There just isn't a need for individual instruction for the majority of students. Alright. Now, what do I think should be done to combat the falling quality in universities today? Well, I am not completely sure. However, the thing that grated on me the most in my undergraduate days was when the professor would teach for the lowest common denominator. That was done all through elementary and high schools, and I naively believed I would escape that in college. So, I am basically saying that many students who are capable of excelling are at least partially held back in order to keep the other students from falling too far behind. I hate that as a philosophy, but I am not sure of an ideal solution. In a bad mood, I just think "forget the people who don't understand, let's move on--it's dragging already." But, that doesn't last; since, after all, no two people learn at exactly the same pace. I think much of this problem was caused when college became almost mandatory. Suddenly, people who wouldn't have previously gone to college were there, and expected to be there. Of course much of _that_ problem was caused when the nation's high schools decided to no longer teach anything, but I won't start flaming about that. Anyway, there needs to be a way to let students who are able to progress more quickly do that easily. As it stands, that is more difficult (though not impossible) and there is no real incentive to do anything but sit back, relax, and rack up the easy A's. --Todd -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- The way I feel is the way I am. Todd McComb mccombt@cs.rpi.edu -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-