What's wrong with higher education?
-
Chris Austin wrote:
Don't be an idiot. The saying is "Those who can do, those who can't teach" He is agreeing that the instructor is a dolt.
:mad: HE DIDN'T SAY THAT. HE PUT ... IN PLACE OF TEACH.
█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██
Wow ... infer what you like
My Blog A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects. - -Lazarus Long
-
How on earth do you differ with a maths teacher ? Mine told us about Buddhism, but he didn't test us on it...
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog
Study Probability or Random Number Theory? :rolleyes:
Anna :rose: Linting the day away :cool: Anna's Place | Tears and Laughter "If mushy peas are the food of the devil, the stotty cake is the frisbee of God"
-
I noticed the same type of thing happening when I was in high school. Although I don't know of any teachers failing students because of there opinions you could definitely get in trouble for having a differing opinion than the teacher's. I was a very stubborn student especially with my math teachers. I would not comply with nonsense. I made it very clear what I thought, but not so much that I would get suspended, but there was a couple times I got suspended for not complying with orders.
█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██
Captain See Sharp wrote:
there was a couple times I got suspended for not complying with orders.
So you were the same kind of disruptive ass in HS that you are here. Glad to see you're consistent. I guess that explains a big part of your ignorance. You were running your mouth instead of listening as usual.
The evolution of the human genome is too important to be left to chance idiots like CSS.
-
I just picked up my girlfriend from her geography class and she informed me that her professor last semester just failed a guy on a test for arguing that he believes that global warming is a natural occurrence. The part that gets me is that he was failed because of her personal belief, not whether he argued his point in geography. She argued about how she shouldn't have failed him on that which set off a 40 minute debate on global warming. She would spout off the CO2 levels, which was countered. The professor argued North Atlantic Current, which set off an ice age debate. yes the climate is changing, but that is natural and has occurred for millions of years. I just find it amazing that the professor is so willing to fail a person for putting up a view that is not her own, even if he has supported his claims with science facts also. I know the climate change is a touchy subject, even here, but it just seems unscientific to not allow differing opinions in a science class.
Zach
Would you pass someone who said "my personal belief is this pencil falls to the ground because it is madly in love with the earth"? Geography is science (even though some scientists will tell you otherwise). In science, personal belief is a utility but not a proof. If the person was failed for not adequately (scientifically) defending her point, that was the right thing to do. If the person was failed for not convincing the professor with a adequate defense, that's tough luck, try again. A bit weak on the professors side, but that's how science works. (And life. If you can't convince your boss of your business plan, your project gets cancelled as well.) If the professor fails you just because s/he doesn't want to hear, bummer. Still, don't argue excessively about grades. Final verdict: None with the given information.
Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers, Velopers, Develprs, Developers!
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
Linkify!|Fold With Us! -
Those than can, do. Those that cant......
System.IO.Path.IsPathRooted() does not behave as I would expect
-
I just picked up my girlfriend from her geography class and she informed me that her professor last semester just failed a guy on a test for arguing that he believes that global warming is a natural occurrence. The part that gets me is that he was failed because of her personal belief, not whether he argued his point in geography. She argued about how she shouldn't have failed him on that which set off a 40 minute debate on global warming. She would spout off the CO2 levels, which was countered. The professor argued North Atlantic Current, which set off an ice age debate. yes the climate is changing, but that is natural and has occurred for millions of years. I just find it amazing that the professor is so willing to fail a person for putting up a view that is not her own, even if he has supported his claims with science facts also. I know the climate change is a touchy subject, even here, but it just seems unscientific to not allow differing opinions in a science class.
Zach
Firstly, you do, in fact, have to be pretty fucking stupid to believe that dumping billions of tons of a known green house gas into the atmosphere can be done with absolutely no concern what so ever on the possible impact it might have on the chemical signature of the atmosphere and upon the weather directly dependent upon that atmosphere. Or, for that matter, to say that merely because weather patterns are known to change naturally, that they are somehow magically impervious to similar changes as a conseguence of non-natural, man made, changes. Secondly, college professors are, or at least should be, somewhat like a judge in a court room. A judge is empowered to define what the law means, and a professor is empowered to define what an education means. Either one can make descretionary decisions based upon any number of considerations directly or indirectly related to the issue at hand.
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
-
Chris Austin wrote:
Don't be an idiot. The saying is "Those who can do, those who can't teach" He is agreeing that the instructor is a dolt.
:mad: HE DIDN'T SAY THAT. HE PUT ... IN PLACE OF TEACH.
█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██
Are you unfamiliar with the concept of an ellipsis? Consisting of three dots, it signals that something has been omitted. Go to MS Word, choose "Insert Symbol", select "Special Characters" and you will see Ellipsis in the list. Definition of ellipsis: http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_1861607972/ellipsis.html[^] <edit> Admittedly, Josh used more than 3 dots, but the intent was pretty clear. </edit> -- modified at 5:21 Wednesday 7th February, 2007
John Carson
-
I noticed the same type of thing happening when I was in high school. Although I don't know of any teachers failing students because of there opinions you could definitely get in trouble for having a differing opinion than the teacher's. I was a very stubborn student especially with my math teachers. I would not comply with nonsense. I made it very clear what I thought, but not so much that I would get suspended, but there was a couple times I got suspended for not complying with orders.
█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██
-
Zach Burnett wrote:
I know the climate change is a touchy subject, even here, but it just seems unscientific to not allow differing opinions in a science class.
In science, unlike perhaps in poetry criticism, there are right answers and wrong answers. Science advances by consigning failed arguments to the dustbin. It also seems unscientific to accept the unverified complaints of a person who failed. Maybe the problem wasn't the conclusions reached. Perhaps the argument was complete crap, showing a basic lack of understanding of the relevant science. In my observation, standards in higher education have slipped to the point where you have to be pretty hopeless to fail anything. To elevate the complaints of one disgruntled student into a complaint about the state of higher education is ludicrous.
John Carson
John Carson wrote:
In science, unlike perhaps in poetry criticism, there are right answers and wrong answers.
Erm, I have to disagree. There are right and wrong answers in poetry criticism too.
-
Zach Burnett wrote:
she informed me that her professor last semester just failed a guy on a test for arguing that he believes that global warming is a natural occurrence.
The professor announced this in class? Some other student told her this in class? If it's a story from some other student through the rumor mill, I'm not sure how much credence I'd place in it.
The evolution of the human genome is too important to be left to chance idiots like CSS.
The professor told everyone in class. The same test is coming up, and she "didn't want people putting that global warming was natural."
Zach
-
I just picked up my girlfriend from her geography class and she informed me that her professor last semester just failed a guy on a test for arguing that he believes that global warming is a natural occurrence. The part that gets me is that he was failed because of her personal belief, not whether he argued his point in geography. She argued about how she shouldn't have failed him on that which set off a 40 minute debate on global warming. She would spout off the CO2 levels, which was countered. The professor argued North Atlantic Current, which set off an ice age debate. yes the climate is changing, but that is natural and has occurred for millions of years. I just find it amazing that the professor is so willing to fail a person for putting up a view that is not her own, even if he has supported his claims with science facts also. I know the climate change is a touchy subject, even here, but it just seems unscientific to not allow differing opinions in a science class.
Zach
Zach Burnett wrote:
What's wrong with higher education?
It's not education anymore. It's liberal brainwashing camp. Attacks against anybody who opposes leftist ideology in acadamia is nothing new. The left wants to maintain a monopoly on higher education and therefore reactionary to dissent. If you haven't noticed, there's an active campaign to discredit any scientist that even suggests that the doom and gloom global warming scenarios endorsed by (and benefitting) left-wing governments across the world is even slightly exagerrated. Recent stories attack oil companies for funding research which discredits global warming (nevermind the fact that left-wing governements, which stand to benefit far more from taxation, fund all the pro-global warming research...but that's OK). It's not limited to global warming either. Just look at the MIT professor who was denied tenure because he refuses to conduct research on embryonic stem cells.
-
Firstly, you do, in fact, have to be pretty fucking stupid to believe that dumping billions of tons of a known green house gas into the atmosphere can be done with absolutely no concern what so ever on the possible impact it might have on the chemical signature of the atmosphere and upon the weather directly dependent upon that atmosphere. Or, for that matter, to say that merely because weather patterns are known to change naturally, that they are somehow magically impervious to similar changes as a conseguence of non-natural, man made, changes. Secondly, college professors are, or at least should be, somewhat like a judge in a court room. A judge is empowered to define what the law means, and a professor is empowered to define what an education means. Either one can make descretionary decisions based upon any number of considerations directly or indirectly related to the issue at hand.
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
Stan Shannon wrote:
Firstly, you do, in fact, have to be pretty f****ing stupid to believe that dumping billions of tons of a known green house gas into the atmosphere can be done with absolutely no concern what so ever on the possible impact it might have on the chemical signature of the atmosphere and upon the weather directly dependent upon that atmosphere. Or, for that matter, to say that merely because weather patterns are known to change naturally, that they are somehow magically impervious to similar changes as a conseguence of non-natural, man made, changes.
That's an assumption of atronomical proportions...and the global warming debate is fueled by assumption. The "evidence" supporting man-influenced global warming is circumstantial at best and the consequences are simply pure fantasy designed to scare the public into submission.
-
I just picked up my girlfriend from her geography class and she informed me that her professor last semester just failed a guy on a test for arguing that he believes that global warming is a natural occurrence. The part that gets me is that he was failed because of her personal belief, not whether he argued his point in geography. She argued about how she shouldn't have failed him on that which set off a 40 minute debate on global warming. She would spout off the CO2 levels, which was countered. The professor argued North Atlantic Current, which set off an ice age debate. yes the climate is changing, but that is natural and has occurred for millions of years. I just find it amazing that the professor is so willing to fail a person for putting up a view that is not her own, even if he has supported his claims with science facts also. I know the climate change is a touchy subject, even here, but it just seems unscientific to not allow differing opinions in a science class.
Zach
First, the professor's seems to be a bad one. Education is not pushing knowledge through the throat of students. “Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn" said Benjamin Franklin. The teacher should have told to the guy to make some work about his hypothesis, present it to the other students, and let discuss! Next, if she tells that climate change is for sure caused by human activities, she's wrong and propagate inaccurate facts.
Zach Burnett wrote:
yes the climate is changing, but that is natural and has occurred for millions of years.
For now, climate specialists tell that the probability you are right is lower than 5%.
It is easier to make war than to make peace. Fold with us! ¤ flickr
-
Anyone with a degree would have had his/her fair share of biased and stupid professors :sigh:
Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
Currently working on C++/CLI in Action for Manning Publications. (*Sample chapter available online*) -
Stan Shannon wrote:
Firstly, you do, in fact, have to be pretty f****ing stupid to believe that dumping billions of tons of a known green house gas into the atmosphere can be done with absolutely no concern what so ever on the possible impact it might have on the chemical signature of the atmosphere and upon the weather directly dependent upon that atmosphere. Or, for that matter, to say that merely because weather patterns are known to change naturally, that they are somehow magically impervious to similar changes as a conseguence of non-natural, man made, changes.
That's an assumption of atronomical proportions...and the global warming debate is fueled by assumption. The "evidence" supporting man-influenced global warming is circumstantial at best and the consequences are simply pure fantasy designed to scare the public into submission.
I didn't make any assumptiongs. We are dumping billions of tons of a known green house gas into the atmosphere. That is an easily ascertainable, scientifically measureable fact. Suggesting that we should be concerned about that is not an assumption, it is a suggestion. And pointing out that natural changes in weather patterns in no way excludes the possibility of changes in weather patterns due to man-made changes is also not an assumption. Conservatives badly need to stop dismissing the importance of this issue - and because the left wants to use it to further implement their Marxist agenda is all the more reason to take it seriously. Even the slightest changes in weather will justify draconian leftist "solutions". Conservatives need to take the science seriously and offer our own set of alternative solutions to it.
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
-
I just picked up my girlfriend from her geography class and she informed me that her professor last semester just failed a guy on a test for arguing that he believes that global warming is a natural occurrence. The part that gets me is that he was failed because of her personal belief, not whether he argued his point in geography. She argued about how she shouldn't have failed him on that which set off a 40 minute debate on global warming. She would spout off the CO2 levels, which was countered. The professor argued North Atlantic Current, which set off an ice age debate. yes the climate is changing, but that is natural and has occurred for millions of years. I just find it amazing that the professor is so willing to fail a person for putting up a view that is not her own, even if he has supported his claims with science facts also. I know the climate change is a touchy subject, even here, but it just seems unscientific to not allow differing opinions in a science class.
Zach
We had an engineering professor that was caught giving girls consistently lower grades because he believed girls don't belong in engineering.
_________________________________________________________________ Hey! I don't parallel park big brown Econoline vans on the left side of the road!
-
We had an engineering professor that was caught giving girls consistently lower grades because he believed girls don't belong in engineering.
_________________________________________________________________ Hey! I don't parallel park big brown Econoline vans on the left side of the road!
-
I just picked up my girlfriend from her geography class and she informed me that her professor last semester just failed a guy on a test for arguing that he believes that global warming is a natural occurrence. The part that gets me is that he was failed because of her personal belief, not whether he argued his point in geography. She argued about how she shouldn't have failed him on that which set off a 40 minute debate on global warming. She would spout off the CO2 levels, which was countered. The professor argued North Atlantic Current, which set off an ice age debate. yes the climate is changing, but that is natural and has occurred for millions of years. I just find it amazing that the professor is so willing to fail a person for putting up a view that is not her own, even if he has supported his claims with science facts also. I know the climate change is a touchy subject, even here, but it just seems unscientific to not allow differing opinions in a science class.
Zach
-
-
Sure - the issue is that most people have heard the saying, and you haven't. I don't see why it's a big deal, it's not like this means you've failed at life. But, his meaning was clear to most people here.
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog