What's wrong with higher education?
-
Do they[^]? ;-P I had a male mathematic professor who gave girls consistently higher grades because they were girls :rolleyes:
Don't hit a man with glasses. Hit him with a baseball bat. Fold with us! ¤ flickr
K(arl) wrote:
I had a male mathematic professor who gave girls consistently higher grades because they were girls
There must be something about maths professors, because I had one like that too.
Upcoming events: * Glasgow Geek Dinner (5th March) * Glasgow: Tell us what you want to see in 2007 My: Website | Blog | Photos
-
My mates son is getting in trouble because he does not agree with the racial model of the school (which is completely BS)
Brad Australian - Christian Graus on "Best books for VBscript" A big thick one, so you can whack yourself on the head with it.
-
K(arl) wrote:
I had a male mathematic professor who gave girls consistently higher grades because they were girls
There must be something about maths professors, because I had one like that too.
Upcoming events: * Glasgow Geek Dinner (5th March) * Glasgow: Tell us what you want to see in 2007 My: Website | Blog | Photos
-
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:
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.
I hate to say it, but the guy deserved it. Not for disagreeing with the professor - that's a good and honorable thing to do, regardless of the subject. But for being blunt and stupid about it. Two rules:
- Don't make the person assigning you grades feel stupid.
- Don't give the person grading your test an easy way to fail you.
Nothing wrong with debating in class, but always keep in mind that you're there to earn a good grade - learning from it is, at best, a nice bonus. Always show respect to the person teaching, even if she doesn't deserve it. If you can't do that, then drop the class instead of pissing away your time and money. You can always find people to argue with for free...
---- Scripts i’ve known... CPhog 1.8.2 - make CP better. Forum Bookmark 0.2.5 - bookmark forum posts on Pensieve Print forum 0.1.2 - printer-friendly forums Expand all 1.0 - Expand all messages In-place Delete 1.0 - AJAX-style post delete Syntax 0.1 - Syntax highlighting for code blocks in the forums
-
Maybe it is the same one? :-D
Don't hit a man with glasses. Hit him with a baseball bat. Fold with us! ¤ flickr
Did your Maths professor hire a prostitute to act as his date for a christmas party? Then subsequently propose to her... Get married... And have her leave after two weeks?
Upcoming events: * Glasgow Geek Dinner (5th March) * Glasgow: Tell us what you want to see in 2007 My: Website | Blog | Photos
-
Al Beback wrote:
1. Don't care; do nothing. If God hadn't wanted the environment polluted, he wouldn't have created smoke.
Or, more appropriately, don't fanaticise everything and turn it into a "the sky is falling" approach.
Al Beback wrote:
2. Claim that nothing's happening; or at least nothing that hasn't already happened before. Try to use the current weather as proof.
The fact that the climate changes naturally is very well known, so a small warming is very likely to be natural. That angle, however, is ignored because "the sky is falling".
Al Beback wrote:
3. "Hire" several scientists to confuse the issue by disputing the facts or its effects.
All of the "scientists" that have been "hired" to support global warming were hired by those who want it to be true (i.e. governments). If you want to say that any scientist who received research grants from private companies (and who rightly doubt the claims of the global warming crowd) are immediately discredited for that fact, then the same must be said of pro-global warming scientists. Their funding overwhelmingly comes from government and if they don't endorse global warming, they're suddenly unemployed.
Al Beback wrote:
4. Talk about the need to address the issue, and then do nothing about it.
The "issue" has not been verified. There's nothing wrong with researching our atmosphere, but the left wants to act based on fear rather than science. After all, we're suddenly up against an irreversable deadline of 2010. If we don't accept Marxism, we will al die.
Al Beback wrote:
5. Claim that this isn't something we should address until its effects are clearly being felt -- it starts cutting into profit margins. Until then, you should be smart and avoid living in coastal cities.
No, we shouldn't "address" a "problem" that we don't even know exists, especially when "addressing" that problem involves colapsing economies and enslaving free nations by placing them under Marxist rule. As for your sensational flooding of coastal cities claim, that's just another example of leftist fear-mongering that isn't based in fact.
Al Beback wrote:
6. Discard the whole thing as yet another subversive plot from the Left.
Seeing a
If global warming is a plot, what would persuade you otherwise? 1. Perhaps your country's greatest east coast cities and subsequently your nations financial centre being under water as the result of the rise in sea levels. 2. Your country having a catastrophic crop failure that lasts many years.
-
If global warming is a plot, what would persuade you otherwise? 1. Perhaps your country's greatest east coast cities and subsequently your nations financial centre being under water as the result of the rise in sea levels. 2. Your country having a catastrophic crop failure that lasts many years.
Richard A. Abbott wrote:
If global warming is a plot, what would persuade you otherwise?
At this point, a revolution in our understanding of our atmosphere. Our understanding is extremely limited, so anybody who says action is needs on global warming is adopting a "shoot first, ask questions later" approach.
Richard A. Abbott wrote:
1. Perhaps your country's greatest east coast cities and subsequently your nations financial centre being under water as the result of the rise in sea levels.
More fear-mongering that isn't based in fact or reason.
Richard A. Abbott wrote:
2. Your country having a catastrophic crop failure that lasts many years.
More fear-mongering that isn't based in fact or reason. What if our "global warming" is actually holding off an ice age? What if, by stopping it, millions freeze and starve to death?
-
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.
I hate to say it, but the guy deserved it. Not for disagreeing with the professor - that's a good and honorable thing to do, regardless of the subject. But for being blunt and stupid about it. Two rules:
- Don't make the person assigning you grades feel stupid.
- Don't give the person grading your test an easy way to fail you.
Nothing wrong with debating in class, but always keep in mind that you're there to earn a good grade - learning from it is, at best, a nice bonus. Always show respect to the person teaching, even if she doesn't deserve it. If you can't do that, then drop the class instead of pissing away your time and money. You can always find people to argue with for free...
---- Scripts i’ve known... CPhog 1.8.2 - make CP better. Forum Bookmark 0.2.5 - bookmark forum posts on Pensieve Print forum 0.1.2 - printer-friendly forums Expand all 1.0 - Expand all messages In-place Delete 1.0 - AJAX-style post delete Syntax 0.1 - Syntax highlighting for code blocks in the forums
Shog9 wrote:
Don't make the person assigning you grades feel stupid. Don't give the person grading your test an easy way to fail you.
I know exactly what you mean. I question things presented by my professors, but usually not to the point where I end up making a huge debate on the subject. Now my girlfriend kept the argument going for 30 or 40 minutes, and her professor was getting very angry. I don't know if it was because of the debate or if it was because everything the professor said was countered with another fact so that it stayed an indecisive argument.
Zach
-
Shog9 wrote:
Don't make the person assigning you grades feel stupid. Don't give the person grading your test an easy way to fail you.
I know exactly what you mean. I question things presented by my professors, but usually not to the point where I end up making a huge debate on the subject. Now my girlfriend kept the argument going for 30 or 40 minutes, and her professor was getting very angry. I don't know if it was because of the debate or if it was because everything the professor said was countered with another fact so that it stayed an indecisive argument.
Zach
Zach Burnett wrote:
I don't know if it was because of the debate or if it was because everything the professor said was countered with another fact so that it stayed an indecisive argument.
We could be generous and allow that he might also have wanted to cover other material in that session, and was becoming frustrated. Though i doubt it, and if you want that girlfriend to stay non-ex'd, you're probably best doing so as well... :rolleyes:
---- Scripts i’ve known... CPhog 1.8.2 - make CP better. Forum Bookmark 0.2.5 - bookmark forum posts on Pensieve Print forum 0.1.2 - printer-friendly forums Expand all 1.0 - Expand all messages In-place Delete 1.0 - AJAX-style post delete Syntax 0.1 - Syntax highlighting for code blocks in the forums
-
Zach Burnett wrote:
I don't know if it was because of the debate or if it was because everything the professor said was countered with another fact so that it stayed an indecisive argument.
We could be generous and allow that he might also have wanted to cover other material in that session, and was becoming frustrated. Though i doubt it, and if you want that girlfriend to stay non-ex'd, you're probably best doing so as well... :rolleyes:
---- Scripts i’ve known... CPhog 1.8.2 - make CP better. Forum Bookmark 0.2.5 - bookmark forum posts on Pensieve Print forum 0.1.2 - printer-friendly forums Expand all 1.0 - Expand all messages In-place Delete 1.0 - AJAX-style post delete Syntax 0.1 - Syntax highlighting for code blocks in the forums
Actually the professor was getting pissed because she couldn't make any clear points. the debate took up about 40 minutes of them watching the Al Gore movie about global warming :rolleyes::laugh:
Zach
-
Actually the professor was getting pissed because she couldn't make any clear points. the debate took up about 40 minutes of them watching the Al Gore movie about global warming :rolleyes::laugh:
Zach
Zach Burnett wrote:
the debate took up about 40 minutes of them watching the Al Gore movie about global warming
Ah, well, at least it was time well spent then. :)
---- Scripts i’ve known... CPhog 1.8.2 - make CP better. Forum Bookmark 0.2.5 - bookmark forum posts on Pensieve Print forum 0.1.2 - printer-friendly forums Expand all 1.0 - Expand all messages In-place Delete 1.0 - AJAX-style post delete Syntax 0.1 - Syntax highlighting for code blocks in the forums
-
Zach Burnett wrote:
the debate took up about 40 minutes of them watching the Al Gore movie about global warming
Ah, well, at least it was time well spent then. :)
---- Scripts i’ve known... CPhog 1.8.2 - make CP better. Forum Bookmark 0.2.5 - bookmark forum posts on Pensieve Print forum 0.1.2 - printer-friendly forums Expand all 1.0 - Expand all messages In-place Delete 1.0 - AJAX-style post delete Syntax 0.1 - Syntax highlighting for code blocks in the forums
They watch a video from discovery or national geographic every time they have class. the professor said it's "Because I probably torture you enough by being so scatterbrained." She will go off on wild tangents for no apparent reason. Another problem is, is that We have watched pretty much every video she's shown in class at home...with exception to the Al Gore one.
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
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
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.
The assumption is whether or not that matters.
Stan Shannon wrote:
Suggesting that we should be concerned about that is not an assumption, it is a suggestion.
The tone is never that of a "suggestion". It's consistently a fantasy-scenario wherein we all die if we don't transfer vast amounts of power to a centralized state within 3 years.
Stan Shannon wrote:
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.
Nobody disputes the "possibility" of that, but I dispute the "factuality" of that. It's something worth examining, but the science has turned into something resembling a witch trial. There are numerous legitimate scientists that are at odds with the conclusions drawn from the data, but they are actively attacked and their opinions are squashed by the media such that the opinions of the public can be molded out of fear. Global warming is sold to the public via fear-mongering as indisputable "fact" demanding urgent action without any consideration (which always involves excessive taxation and the squeezing of capitalism...primarily in the United States).
Stan Shannon wrote:
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.
Conservatives are taking the right approach...a level headed one. Liberals are demanding urgent, fear-based action that will collapse entire economies and (as you point out) centralize and nationalize basically the entire world. Liberal nations are drawn to global warming because it brings to fruition their deepest political desires. If global warming turns out to be man-made (something we're not near proving) AND those effects are actually negative (at this point, we don't know if global warming would be
Accusing the left of fear mongering on global warming is just as disinginuous as when the left accuses the right of fear mongering on the issue of terrorism. Both issues warrent legitimate concern and are thus both legitimate political topics. Fear mongering is polictics as usual, but that doesn't mean that a prudent person does not have reason for concern. Frankly, I do not need in depth scientific conclusions to convince me that dumping billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere is a very, very bad idea. Evidence does indicate that weather is extremely sensitive to even the most minor pertubations of the chemical signiture of the atmosphere. The very 'natural changes' cited by doubters is ample evidence of that. It simply makes common sense to be concerned about what we are doing to our environment. If we do not have a set of legitimate free market solutions ready to roll out in a few years, all of the solutions are going to be Marxist and there will not be a damned thing you or I can do about it. This issue will be used to thoroughly socialise American society, and it will be successul if all we conservative can do is stand around ranting about the finer points of 'science' when the bulk of the actual scientific consensus is being used to justify our political opponents. The left is going to win on this issue, just as they won on the issue of race, if the right does not take a completely different tact than it has so far done.
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
-
Accusing the left of fear mongering on global warming is just as disinginuous as when the left accuses the right of fear mongering on the issue of terrorism. Both issues warrent legitimate concern and are thus both legitimate political topics. Fear mongering is polictics as usual, but that doesn't mean that a prudent person does not have reason for concern. Frankly, I do not need in depth scientific conclusions to convince me that dumping billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere is a very, very bad idea. Evidence does indicate that weather is extremely sensitive to even the most minor pertubations of the chemical signiture of the atmosphere. The very 'natural changes' cited by doubters is ample evidence of that. It simply makes common sense to be concerned about what we are doing to our environment. If we do not have a set of legitimate free market solutions ready to roll out in a few years, all of the solutions are going to be Marxist and there will not be a damned thing you or I can do about it. This issue will be used to thoroughly socialise American society, and it will be successul if all we conservative can do is stand around ranting about the finer points of 'science' when the bulk of the actual scientific consensus is being used to justify our political opponents. The left is going to win on this issue, just as they won on the issue of race, if the right does not take a completely different tact than it has so far done.
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
Stan Shannon wrote:
Accusing the left of fear mongering on global warming is just as disinginuous as when the left accuses the right of fear mongering on the issue of terrorism. Both issues warrent legitimate concern and are thus both legitimate political topics. Fear mongering is polictics as usual, but that doesn't mean that a prudent person does not have reason for concern.
I accuse them of fear-mongering because the global warming's scientific basis is shakey, but sold as fact. The potential scenarios derived from that shakey foundation are designed to instill fear and a sense of urgency and are based on complete fantasy. Terrorism is and always has been a genuine threat and 9/11 (along with numerous attacks before and since) is evidence of that. The difference between a now subsiding terrorist threat and global warming is that the former has real, tangible and measurable effects whereas the latter is sheer fantasy.
Stan Shannon wrote:
Frankly, I do not need in depth scientific conclusions to convince me that dumping billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere is a very, very bad idea. Evidence does indicate that weather is extremely sensitive to even the most minor pertubations of the chemical signiture of the atmosphere. The very 'natural changes' cited by doubters is ample evidence of that. It simply makes common sense to be concerned about what we are doing to our environment.
Concern is one thing, but irrational reaction (the left's response) is quite another. Our atmosphere is certainly a self-stabilizing, negative-feedback system such that perturbations (and there have been undoubtedly thousands in its history) ultimately result in a restabilization of the atmosphere. I advocate moving away from antiquated combustion engines as the primary source of energy conversion. However, I don't advocate responding irrationally to a poorly understood and extremly complex system with completely arbitrary scenarios. The propaganda machine is working in overdrive to disseminate misinformation about our understanding of the atmosphere so that governments can employ taxes to effectively nationalize industry.
Stan Shannon wrote:
If we do not have a set of legitimate free market solutions ready to roll out in a few years, all of the solutions are going to be Marxist and there will not be a damned thing you or I can do about it. This issue will be used to t
-
My mates son is getting in trouble because he does not agree with the racial model of the school (which is completely BS)
Brad Australian - Christian Graus on "Best books for VBscript" A big thick one, so you can whack yourself on the head with it.
Bradml wrote:
My mates son is getting in trouble because he does not agree with the racial model of the school
Where is the school and what is a racial model? I went to Balmain high and we had a racial model, skips and wogs. Worked quite well :)
System.IO.Path.IsPathRooted() does not behave as I would expect
-
John Carson wrote:
Discussing the ignorant views of students may be a useful strategy on occasion, but it would be a disaster if carried to excess.
The goal is not to discuss but to involve the student, to make him participate and discover by himself. IMHO a good teacher doesn't enumerate knowlesge but give the means to learn. Enabling the student to make a study and then discuss it can be a good start to introduce what a scientific approach is, especially if is flawed. That seems more important to me in a science class than learning only about facts.
John Carson wrote:
There is a vast body of well-established knowledge to be assimilated, and students need to be involved in this process by having them conduct experiments, make calculations, solve problems and so on
Absolutely: students have to experiment and discover by themselves.
John Carson wrote:
ignorance-fuelled controversy
Ignorance? AFAIK, the correlation between human activities and global warming is not a demonstrated fact yet.
It is easier to make war than to make peace. Fold with us! ¤ flickr
K(arl) wrote:
IMHO a good teacher doesn't enumerate knowlesge but give the means to learn.
A good teacher does both. Books present knowledge. Are they a bad thing? The "means to learn" is often just access to sources that present knowledge. Why shouldn't the teacher be one of them?
K(arl) wrote:
Enabling the student to make a study and then discuss it can be a good start to introduce what a scientific approach is, especially if is flawed.
Second guessing the teacher on the most appropriate pedagogy from this distance seems like a bad idea to me. For example, neither of us knows at what point in the course/degree this controversy took place. Perhaps the student already had ample opportunity to learn some stuff and had just not done so.
K(arl) wrote:
Ignorance? AFAIK, the correlation between human activities and global warming is not a demonstrated fact yet.
A claim which is not inconsistent with the fact that most controversy on the subject is fuelled by ignorance.
John Carson
-
Bradml wrote:
racial model of the school (which is completely BS)
Which one is BS? The racial model of the school or him not agreeing with it?
█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██
The model was pretty much you cannot show any distaste towards someone of another culture, not even if they do something to you.
Brad Australian - Christian Graus on "Best books for VBscript" A big thick one, so you can whack yourself on the head with it.
-
Did your Maths professor hire a prostitute to act as his date for a christmas party? Then subsequently propose to her... Get married... And have her leave after two weeks?
Upcoming events: * Glasgow Geek Dinner (5th March) * Glasgow: Tell us what you want to see in 2007 My: Website | Blog | Photos
:laugh::laugh: Hum, no, he's not the same than mine. Mine was less spectacular... he just wanted to demonstrate travel outside the body was real and created a theory based on space and time shift.
Last modified: after originally posted -- typo correction
Where do you expect us to go when the bombs fall?
-
K(arl) wrote:
IMHO a good teacher doesn't enumerate knowlesge but give the means to learn.
A good teacher does both. Books present knowledge. Are they a bad thing? The "means to learn" is often just access to sources that present knowledge. Why shouldn't the teacher be one of them?
K(arl) wrote:
Enabling the student to make a study and then discuss it can be a good start to introduce what a scientific approach is, especially if is flawed.
Second guessing the teacher on the most appropriate pedagogy from this distance seems like a bad idea to me. For example, neither of us knows at what point in the course/degree this controversy took place. Perhaps the student already had ample opportunity to learn some stuff and had just not done so.
K(arl) wrote:
Ignorance? AFAIK, the correlation between human activities and global warming is not a demonstrated fact yet.
A claim which is not inconsistent with the fact that most controversy on the subject is fuelled by ignorance.
John Carson
M
John Carson wrote:
Why shouldn't the teacher be one of them?
Because 'feeding from the top"' doesn't work with the majority of students. Just a fraction of them are able to learn that way, most don't. If a teacher just displays data, like reading a book to the students, I bet most of them won't learn anything. The teacher will get much more better results if (s)he can push his/her students to be proactive. Of course, the teacher would need to do much more preparation work, at least to adapt his/her teaching to his/her public. Teachers should be also psychologists.
John Carson wrote:
A claim which is not inconsistent with the fact that most controversy on the subject is fuelled by ignorance.
After all, 'All I know is I know nothing' :)
