Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!nic.MR.NET!srcsip!shankar
From: shankar@src.honeywell.COM (Son of Knuth)
Newsgroups: comp.edu
Subject: Re: Studies done with "bright" or "dumb" students
Keywords: expectations
Message-ID: <14119@srcsip.UUCP>
Date: 30 Dec 88 18:52:03 GMT
References: <1276@dsacg3.UUCP>
Reply-To: shankar@haarlem.UUCP (Son of Knuth)
Organization: Honeywell Systems & Research Center, Camden, MN
Lines: 19

In article <1276@dsacg3.UUCP> vfm6066@dsacg3.UUCP (John A. Ebersold) writes:
>A teacher is given a group of students to teach.  The teacher has no prior
>knowledge of the students other than the fact that the teacher has been told
>they are bright, i.e, smart and well motivated or "dull", i.e.,
>dim-witted and sloths.
>
>The teacher then treats the students accordingly.

I couldn't agree more with this philosophy of teaching.
Performance in class is related more to hard work and interest in learning
then to any inherent inclivity to genius.

If they were to get rid of "weed-out" classes, and undergrads would
be treated more like people rather then students every professor is
stuck with one class a quarter/semester, I think that professors will be
in for a suprise.  Getting rid of weed out classes also has the added
benefit of eliminating the meaningless grading criterion that I've
typically seen in these classes (i.e. who can memorize the largest 
number of theorems and regurgitate them fastest).