Re: [ECOLOG-L] now I've seen it all: Decline in education- student's perspective
A good friend of mine, an older gentleman who has worked as president for an environmental NGO in the northeast for years, put it to me in a particularly striking way. He said, and I am paraphrasing, In terms of education, the reality in America is that a lot of people are going to college who shouldn't. When I asked him to expound on his point, he said, Ideally, especially when I was going to university in the 60's, it was viewed as a way of getting an education and expanding your mind and interests. The fact it could lead to meaningful and satisfying work was an afterthought. The point was education. Today, it feels like many students, and others have said this too, are going for certification. Instead of education being the end, it is the means to something else, such as a job position. It isn't like I am saying that people should not try to educate themselves; what I am saying is that the trend towards mass production of education (which very obviously has led to some real shortcomings in quality) has damaged the overall education of many students, and that some people who are students shouldn't be; standards have dropped for entry to many universities, and it shows. After hearing his thoughts, I thought about all the students I had met as a student whom were there because their parents told them to go and gave them the money to do so. Many of them didn't want to be there; they only knew that college was expected of them and they wouldn't resist being pushed into it, considering how many students these days treat college as an extension of high school. I realize that the opinions expressed here seem harsh and the evidence only anecdotal, but these are my personal observations. In the same breath, my former advising professor told me a story of a student years ago who came into his office angry. He asked the student why he was upset and he said he didn't want to be there. My professor pressed him and asked why, and he said it was because his old man was making him go to college. My professor informed him that he was an adult and didn't have to go to college if he didn't want to. The frustrated young man looked at him, nodded, thanked him, said goodbye, and as my former advisor professor testified, he never saw him again. It appears as if at least some people figure out on their own that college isn't for them, hm? - Derek E. Pursell --- On Fri, 1/22/10, Wayne Tyson landr...@cox.net wrote: From: Wayne Tyson landr...@cox.net Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] now I've seen it all: Decline in education- student's perspective To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Date: Friday, January 22, 2010, 9:14 PM Honorable Forum on Ecology and Education: This is one of the best threads I've read on Ecolog. There have been so many good points made from such a varied assemblage of participants that what we have here, is a high potential for actually communicating on a very important subject. Because it is important, comment can be touchy, but the quality of the responses has shown that most everybody has straddled the line between frankness and abusiveness pretty well. I, at least, think I've learned a lot. There are some aspects of this issue that have not been discussed, and I will offer some in the hopes I can learn whether or not there is sympathy, hostility, or neutrality out there. In the USA, we have a strong tradition of the concept of a free education. There is also a strong tradition that comes from pioneering, hard work, and an instinctive contempt for elitism and an embracing of the concept of a classless society. There is also a tradition born out of a strong sense of inferiority in the realm of letters. There can be little question that there is some truth and some exaggeration in all of these factors. It seems that higher education in the USA has developed more strongly and increasingly along the lines of specialization and preparation of marketable skills than a truly liberal education. There is an undercurrent that seems to imply that specialists needn't or shouldn't waste their time on irrelevant matters like literature and arts--humanities and other soft subjects. Increasingly, there seems to be more division than integration, as well as a growing trend, ironically, toward hybrid curricula that attempts a middle ground between hard and soft, resulting in an education that is neither fish nor fowl--but which provides a watered-down dose of science and humanities and degrees that satisfy the need for numerical expansion of universities at the expense of the kind of intensive devotion to intellectual development that, for example, was the strong meat upon which Darwin and other Caesars of the intellect doth fed (Latin and other languages, literature, mathematics, etc.). It involved a tradition, not of grinding though or even running the gauntlet, but one in which the goal was a fully integrated and competent and honest individual. This example
Re: [ECOLOG-L] now I've seen it all: Decline in education- student's perspective
I think that Derek's older gentleman friend may have an idealistic view of why students went to college back in the remote 60's. When I entered college in 1954 (a good one, an Ivy League university) there was a reception for the scholarship students at which I met the Dean of Admissions. He immediately recognised me, to my great surprise. When I expressed shock that he could recognise me from a single photograph in a university with thousands of applicants he laughed and replied that I was especially memorable because of my reply to the question, Why do you wnt to go to Brown University?. My answer, which I thought straightforward but which was apparently unusual, was To get an education. I hardly believe that it became more common ten years later. Bill Silvert Brown '58 - Original Message - From: Derek Pursell dep1...@yahoo.com To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Sent: sábado, 23 de Janeiro de 2010 6:20 Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] now I've seen it all: Decline in education- student's perspective A good friend of mine, an older gentleman who has worked as president for an environmental NGO in the northeast for years, put it to me in a particularly striking way. He said, and I am paraphrasing, In terms of education, the reality in America is that a lot of people are going to college who shouldn't. When I asked him to expound on his point, he said, Ideally, especially when I was going to university in the 60's, it was viewed as a way of getting an education and expanding your mind and interests. The fact it could lead to meaningful and satisfying work was an afterthought. The point was education. Today, it feels like many students, and others have said this too, are going for certification. Instead of education being the end, it is the means to something else, such as a job position. It isn't like I am saying that people should not try to educate themselves; what I am saying is that the trend towards mass production of education (which very obviously has led to some real shortcomings in quality) has damaged the overall education of many students, and that some people who are students shouldn't be; standards have dropped for entry to many universities, and it shows. After hearing his thoughts, I thought about all the students I had met as a student whom were there because their parents told them to go and gave them the money to do so. Many of them didn't want to be there; they only knew that college was expected of them and they wouldn't resist being pushed into it, considering how many students these days treat college as an extension of high school. I realize that the opinions expressed here seem harsh and the evidence only anecdotal, but these are my personal observations. In the same breath, my former advising professor told me a story of a student years ago who came into his office angry. He asked the student why he was upset and he said he didn't want to be there. My professor pressed him and asked why, and he said it was because his old man was making him go to college. My professor informed him that he was an adult and didn't have to go to college if he didn't want to. The frustrated young man looked at him, nodded, thanked him, said goodbye, and as my former advisor professor testified, he never saw him again. It appears as if at least some people figure out on their own that college isn't for them, hm? - Derek E. Pursell
Re: [ECOLOG-L] now I've seen it all: Decline in education- student's perspective
. . . brisk rub, that provides the vital spark! --Alexander Reid Martin - Original Message - From: Frank Marenghi frank_maren...@hotmail.com To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2010 6:27 PM Subject: [ECOLOG-L] now I've seen it all: Decline in education- student's perspective Venerable ECOLOGGERS, I actually once had a teacher tell me that the point of all in-class instruction was that at some point in the future when we entered “the real world” we would of already heard about some of the topics in lecture so that we may look them up. She said that it would be easier for us to learn about topics that we had already heard about than ones that were completely new (that part is probably true). Of course, I’ve forgotten who said that, now. There is also huge difference between classes that are required and electives. I learned more (and may have even gotten better grades, incidentally) in elective classes than required ones. I don't think I was alone in that. I wanted to be in the elective courses and I did not often have an interest in some of the required ones. I hear teachers lamenting about “all students care about are grades,” and “is this going to be on the exam,” and “exams are a barrier, not a challenge.” You know, they’re probably right. Exams are barriers. Degrees (or lack thereof) are barriers, at least they are considered as such by the general public – even by a lot of teachers. We are taught from a young age that the point of school is be done with school. How many commencement speeches have a “now you will be entering the real world” component? Why is being a student not real? School may be an obstacle to fuller, longer-lasting learning because of the systemic problems that have been so eloquently mentioned on this listserv (standardized exams, etc.) - not necessarily holistic or rubric-based approaches, which as a student, felt to be more fair and more rigorous at the same time). Although there is something inherently ironic about complaining about exams and then continuing to give and grade them. I do not mean to sound condescending at all, here. It is just that we will never eliminate the “is this going to be on the test?” question unless we eliminate the requirement of taking (and passing) tests, regardless of how sophisticated they may be. This mostly applies to “traditional age” students, right out of high school. Non-trads are completely different. Again, this is because they want to be there, not because it is part of their chores. I have not been out of school that long (28 y old and just graduated with a Master’s last year after taking some time off after undergrad) and I am confident that I have learned more on my own outside of school than I learned in school (and I learned a lot in school)! And I am talking about things of an academic nature, not to mention social, spiritual, etc. I enjoy learning, like most of the subscribers on this list, however it wasn’t until I was “through with school” that I had the most intellectual freedom. I have also noticed a decline in academic standards but, as with others, this could be because of simple changes in physical location, as I suspect much of it is. Some of my “graduate-level” courses, for example, were not as rigorous as some of my undergrad classes. I also had 4 years of “real-world” and research experience prior to going to grad school and I may have had a different perspective if I had taken them right out of college. I also felt that many of my fellow students probably shouldn’t have been in grad school and wouldn’t have gone years ago, but were nevertheless there because of a combination of “that’s what you’re supposed to do” and perhaps, lower standards for admission. Either way, there is a tremendous amount of variation between and among programs. I value education and like learning. Many of the students in advanced degree programs (including master’s) are there because of this “higher demand for education,” because politicians and administrators want them there, and because students (and their parents) are afraid they won’t be able to compete in the job market without that “piece of paper.” I don't think it is because they (or their parents) value education or love (or even like) learning. I don’t know how many times through school I’ve heard “D stands for Diploma.” Regards, Frank Marenghi Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 10:00:08 -0700 From: bangr...@isu.edu Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] now I've seen it all: Decline in education To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Now, perhaps, we need to consider the student's perspective. Since our culture values quantity over quality, is the student's attitude of just tell me what I need to know really that odd or unreasonable? Given that they are being shoveled massive amounts of information in several courses, not just one course, and need to finish in four years. Following this thread gives the impression
Re: [ECOLOG-L] now I've seen it all: Decline in education
Dave has hit upon a major difference between today's students and those in the past: a strong tendency towards continuous multi-tasking, and failing to focus upon one thing at a time. For the last month or so I have been mentoring an undergraduate at KU who approached me for assistance with his study habits and learning skills, because despite putting in lots of hours of study time, this student still was not getting the grades desired (B's rather than A's). The first question I asked was, is the TV on while you are studying; the answer was yes. The second question was, is your iPhone also turned on, and do you text periodically during studying; the answer was yes. The third question was, is your computer open not only to your classes' PowerPoints, but also Internet Messaging, on which you actively chat while studying; the answer was yes. I suggested discontinuing all three distractions, and to focus instead on the job at hand: learning the material, without interruption. I also asked this student what he/she would think if a surgeon picked up a phone to text someone while performing surgery on a patient; predictably, the student shuddered, and said no. I think he/she got the point. However, I suspect that my youngest daughter (age 18) thinks that I am a Neanderthal when I try to tell her the same basic message (smile). Best wishes, Val Smith On 1/20/2010 10:22 PM, David M. Lawrence wrote: Why would this discussion give the impression that students are taking only one ecology course? To earn a bachelor's degree today, you have to take about 120 semester hours. To hear a bachelor's degree in the Archaean (when I was an undergrad), you had to about 120 semester hours. Textbooks were as large then as they are now (though today's books often have better graphics), and I know that the stuff shoveled per class today (at least in classes that I teach) approximately equals the stuff shoveled per class when I was an undergraduate. There are more distractions available today -- instead of three television channels, there are hundreds. Instead of landline phones, we have smartphones that can play albums and movies. Instead of Dungeons and Dragons, we have a host of electronic games and gaming systems, etc., etc., etc. Still, I should not lower my expectations of how students should perform today based on how poorly they manage their time. I'm sympathetic to students who have to work their way through school -- financial aid, or lack thereof, is a significant problem -- but it seems to me the adjustment should be on their part by taking lighter loads (12 hours per semester instead of 18) rather than me diluting the content and lowering the standards in MY class. Dave On 1/20/2010 12:00 PM, Randy Bangert wrote: Now, perhaps, we need to consider the student's perspective. Since our culture values quantity over quality, is the student's attitude of just tell me what I need to know really that odd or unreasonable? Given that they are being shoveled massive amounts of information in several courses, not just one course, and need to finish in four years. Following this thread gives the impression that students are only taking a single ecology course. randy = RK Bangert = -- Val H. Smith Professor, Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology University of Kansas Lawrence, KS 66045 USA 785-864-4565 FAX: 785-864-5321 e-mail: vsm...@ku.edu
Re: [ECOLOG-L] now I've seen it all: Decline in education
I don't think that students' education level has declined. 20-30 years ago, few high school students went to higher education, but now, having a bachelor degree is almost required for many jobs. In response to the demand for higher education, many universities increased school capacities, instead of limiting students. Consequently, we see more students who are unprepared in the classroom. If you believe in education, (I hope most of you are), then you have to work harder to raise students' level to the standard you believe in, by applying and developing various teaching techniques. I believe that's part of a college professor's job. If a professor just blames students for their unpreparedness and whatever, then I must say that the professor is also just lazy. By the way, I also have seen influx of so called just tell me what I need to know graduate students while I was at the graduate school. When I started about 20 years ago, all my graduate students peers came to the program because they were curious about ecology. Most of us stayed in the school till midnight 2-3 am, arguing about ecological theories in varieties of subjects. They chose research projects that were very difficult, time consuming, and probably far beyond thesis requirement. They worked until they were satisfied of their projects. Consequently, many students spent 7-10 years to finish and get the degree. By the time, I was about to graduate, popularity of ecology/conservation biology increased, and we had influx of students who just want to get a degree as soon as they can, so that they can do whatever with the earned degree. They were very smart, but their attitude was more like just tell me what I need to know to get the degree. They choose research p! rojects th at sure get sufficient results to write a thesis and graduate within 3-5 years, and they took only classes needed for their thesis projects. Needless to say, these new students did not mingle us old-timer graduate students at all. By the way, I saw nothing wrong with this change of attitudes. Toshihide Hamachan Hamazaki, PhD : 濱崎俊秀：浜ちゃん Alaska Department of Fish Game Division of Commercial Fisheries 333 Raspberry Rd. Anchorage, Alaska 99518 Ph: 907-267-2158 Fax: 907-267-2442 Cell: 907-440-9934 E-mail: toshihide.hamaz...@alaska.gov
Re: [ECOLOG-L] now I've seen it all: Decline in education
I apologize for the zinger. I completely understand the rubric used to grade undergrads and appreciate the time and effort that it takes to do so. My point (that I so tackily stated) was that students understand this rubric and that is why they ask just tell me what I need to know. I believe that most students start at this point and then integrate this information into the larger context of the subject matter. Again, I apologize, but can we please be a less harsh with our generalizations about our students. The majority of them are trying to absorb what we are teaching them and not shoveling in, then purging information. -Original Message- From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [mailto:ecolo...@listserv.umd.edu] On Behalf Of Val Smith Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2010 6:14 PM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] now I've seen it all: Decline in education Just for information's sake, more than a decade ago I helped to create the University of Kansas' Center for Teaching Excellence (http://www.cte.ku.edu), and like other teaching faculty at KU, I follow its well-thought-out, professional recommendations with regards to assuring the consistency and fairness of exam grading. The grading of 400 exams containing up to 3-4 short answers and 1-2 essays can take the better part of 12-15 hours or more even when we obtain the assistance of as many as ten highly knowledgeable grading assistants who are already serving as GTAs in the laboratory portion of the course. A grading rubric that defines the best or preferred answers to the questions in any exam is created and provided to all graders (which include the teachers of record): there can after all be only a small subset of completely correct answers to any given question, such as the correct direction of heat energy or material flows in counter-current exchange systems, or the correct direction of water flow in a plant's xylem, or the correct absolute value of Avogadro's number, or the correct equation for exponential population growth, or the correct balanced equation for photosynthesis, or the correct name for the enzyme that catalyzes the breakdown of lactose, or the correct definition for gastrovascular cavity, or the major taxonomic characteristics that are considered to be unique to a specific Order of plants (I'm sure that you surely must see my point here). Typically one or two graders (including both of the faculty members who are the teachers of record) are then assigned a certain question, and exam grading proceeds. If there is any concern about a particular student's answer for any particular question, then the entire group stops and deliberates/discusses whether the particular answer under consideration was either correct (100% credit), partially correct (for partial credit), or incorrect (0% credit). The grading rubric is provided electronically to all students taking the course after the exam, and each student then has further recourse by making a formal appointment with the instructors of record to discuss any and all questions for which they might dispute the grading. Just curious: did you intend for your tone in this message to be as hostile to academia, and as intentionally and deliberately derogatory as I perceived it? If so, very tacky, and one might wonder whether you have ever bothered to read the literature on exam grading and learning assessment methods, or whether you have ever actually taught in the classroom? Please explain clearly to me, and also to the readers of ECOLOG, how the extremely lengthy, objective, completely transparent, and highly deliberative grading process above might constitute professorial laziness. It is unfortunately very easy in an electronic forum such as this to write a three-sentence zinger that is completely without basis or merit. Val H. Smith On 1/19/2010 2:29 PM, Meenan, James wrote: Let me see if I have this clear. You criticize students for asking you to just tell me what I need to know and then you grade their essay questions by using a rubric (tell me what I want to hear) that is interpreted by a GTA. Professorial laziness? -Original Message- From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [mailto:ecolo...@listserv.umd.edu] On Behalf Of Val Smith Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2010 9:28 AM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] now I've seen it all: Decline in education Dave, you are not being unreasonable at all. The responses that you mention stem from intellectual laziness and/or short-term-oriented learning strategies. I, too, have had my students say, just tell me what I need to know, and it is very clear that they indeed wish to shovel in the information, play it back to me on an exam, and then purge it from their memory banks. The ideal of obtaining a broad education is largely irrelevant for a substantial portion of the student population, whose goal is simply to pass
Re: [ECOLOG-L] now I've seen it all: Decline in education
Now, perhaps, we need to consider the student's perspective. Since our culture values quantity over quality, is the student's attitude of just tell me what I need to know really that odd or unreasonable? Given that they are being shoveled massive amounts of information in several courses, not just one course, and need to finish in four years. Following this thread gives the impression that students are only taking a single ecology course. randy = RK Bangert = On Jan 20, 2010, at 5:15 AM, Meenan, James wrote: I apologize for the zinger. I completely understand the rubric used to grade undergrads and appreciate the time and effort that it takes to do so. My point (that I so tackily stated) was that students understand this rubric and that is why they ask just tell me what I need to know. I believe that most students start at this point and then integrate this information into the larger context of the subject matter. Again, I apologize, but can we please be a less harsh with our generalizations about our students. The majority of them are trying to absorb what we are teaching them and not shoveling in, then purging information. -Original Message- From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [mailto:ecolo...@listserv.umd.edu] On Behalf Of Val Smith Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2010 6:14 PM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] now I've seen it all: Decline in education Just for information's sake, more than a decade ago I helped to create the University of Kansas' Center for Teaching Excellence (http://www.cte.ku.edu), and like other teaching faculty at KU, I follow its well-thought-out, professional recommendations with regards to assuring the consistency and fairness of exam grading. The grading of 400 exams containing up to 3-4 short answers and 1-2 essays can take the better part of 12-15 hours or more even when we obtain the assistance of as many as ten highly knowledgeable grading assistants who are already serving as GTAs in the laboratory portion of the course. A grading rubric that defines the best or preferred answers to the questions in any exam is created and provided to all graders (which include the teachers of record): there can after all be only a small subset of completely correct answers to any given question, such as the correct direction of heat energy or material flows in counter-current exchange systems, or the correct direction of water flow in a plant's xylem, or the correct absolute value of Avogadro's number, or the correct equation for exponential population growth, or the correct balanced equation for photosynthesis, or the correct name for the enzyme that catalyzes the breakdown of lactose, or the correct definition for gastrovascular cavity, or the major taxonomic characteristics that are considered to be unique to a specific Order of plants (I'm sure that you surely must see my point here). Typically one or two graders (including both of the faculty members who are the teachers of record) are then assigned a certain question, and exam grading proceeds. If there is any concern about a particular student's answer for any particular question, then the entire group stops and deliberates/discusses whether the particular answer under consideration was either correct (100% credit), partially correct (for partial credit), or incorrect (0% credit). The grading rubric is provided electronically to all students taking the course after the exam, and each student then has further recourse by making a formal appointment with the instructors of record to discuss any and all questions for which they might dispute the grading. Just curious: did you intend for your tone in this message to be as hostile to academia, and as intentionally and deliberately derogatory as I perceived it? If so, very tacky, and one might wonder whether you have ever bothered to read the literature on exam grading and learning assessment methods, or whether you have ever actually taught in the classroom? Please explain clearly to me, and also to the readers of ECOLOG, how the extremely lengthy, objective, completely transparent, and highly deliberative grading process above might constitute professorial laziness. It is unfortunately very easy in an electronic forum such as this to write a three-sentence zinger that is completely without basis or merit. Val H. Smith On 1/19/2010 2:29 PM, Meenan, James wrote: Let me see if I have this clear. You criticize students for asking you to just tell me what I need to know and then you grade their essay questions by using a rubric (tell me what I want to hear) that is interpreted by a GTA. Professorial laziness? -Original Message- From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [mailto:ecolo...@listserv.umd.edu] On Behalf Of Val
Re: [ECOLOG-L] now I've seen it all: Decline in education
No question that the students face a great challenge. Let's hope so, anyway. BTW, finishing in four years doesn't seem to be the norm, what with working outside and other demands. Still remains the ideal I suppose, but not usual, at least in many state universities. David Mc On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 11:00 AM, Randy Bangert wrote: Now, perhaps, we need to consider the student's perspective. Since our culture values quantity over quality, is the student's attitude of just tell me what I need to know really that odd or unreasonable? Given that they are being shoveled massive amounts of information in several courses, not just one course, and need to finish in four years. Following this thread gives the impression that students are only taking a single ecology course. randy = RK Bangert = On Jan 20, 2010, at 5:15 AM, Meenan, James wrote: I apologize for the zinger. I completely understand the rubric used to grade undergrads and appreciate the time and effort that it takes to do so. My point (that I so tackily stated) was that students understand this rubric and that is why they ask just tell me what I need to know. I believe that most students start at this point and then integrate this information into the larger context of the subject matter. Again, I apologize, but can we please be a less harsh with our generalizations about our students. The majority of them are trying to absorb what we are teaching them and not shoveling in, then purging information. -Original Message- From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [mailto:ecolo...@listserv.umd.edu] On Behalf Of Val Smith Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2010 6:14 PM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] now I've seen it all: Decline in education Just for information's sake, more than a decade ago I helped to create the University of Kansas' Center for Teaching Excellence (http://www.cte.ku.edu), and like other teaching faculty at KU, I follow its well-thought-out, professional recommendations with regards to assuring the consistency and fairness of exam grading. The grading of 400 exams containing up to 3-4 short answers and 1-2 essays can take the better part of 12-15 hours or more even when we obtain the assistance of as many as ten highly knowledgeable grading assistants who are already serving as GTAs in the laboratory portion of the course. A grading rubric that defines the best or preferred answers to the questions in any exam is created and provided to all graders (which include the teachers of record): there can after all be only a small subset of completely correct answers to any given question, such as the correct direction of heat energy or material flows in counter-current exchange systems, or the correct direction of water flow in a plant's xylem, or the correct absolute value of Avogadro's number, or the correct equation for exponential population growth, or the correct balanced equation for photosynthesis, or the correct name for the enzyme that catalyzes the breakdown of lactose, or the correct definition for gastrovascular cavity, or the major taxonomic characteristics that are considered to be unique to a specific Order of plants (I'm sure that you surely must see my point here). Typically one or two graders (including both of the faculty members who are the teachers of record) are then assigned a certain question, and exam grading proceeds. If there is any concern about a particular student's answer for any particular question, then the entire group stops and deliberates/discusses whether the particular answer under consideration was either correct (100% credit), partially correct (for partial credit), or incorrect (0% credit). The grading rubric is provided electronically to all students taking the course after the exam, and each student then has further recourse by making a formal appointment with the instructors of record to discuss any and all questions for which they might dispute the grading. Just curious: did you intend for your tone in this message to be as hostile to academia, and as intentionally and deliberately derogatory as I perceived it? If so, very tacky, and one might wonder whether you have ever bothered to read the literature on exam grading and learning assessment methods, or whether you have ever actually taught in the classroom? Please explain clearly to me, and also to the readers of ECOLOG, how the extremely lengthy, objective, completely transparent, and highly deliberative grading process above might constitute professorial laziness. It is unfortunately very easy in an electronic forum such as this to write a three-sentence zinger that is completely without basis or merit. Val H. Smith On 1/19/2010 2:29 PM, Meenan, James wrote: Let me see if I have this clear. You criticize students for asking you to just tell me what I
Re: [ECOLOG-L] now I've seen it all: Decline in education
Why would this discussion give the impression that students are taking only one ecology course? To earn a bachelor's degree today, you have to take about 120 semester hours. To hear a bachelor's degree in the Archaean (when I was an undergrad), you had to about 120 semester hours. Textbooks were as large then as they are now (though today's books often have better graphics), and I know that the stuff shoveled per class today (at least in classes that I teach) approximately equals the stuff shoveled per class when I was an undergraduate. There are more distractions available today -- instead of three television channels, there are hundreds. Instead of landline phones, we have smartphones that can play albums and movies. Instead of Dungeons and Dragons, we have a host of electronic games and gaming systems, etc., etc., etc. Still, I should not lower my expectations of how students should perform today based on how poorly they manage their time. I'm sympathetic to students who have to work their way through school -- financial aid, or lack thereof, is a significant problem -- but it seems to me the adjustment should be on their part by taking lighter loads (12 hours per semester instead of 18) rather than me diluting the content and lowering the standards in MY class. Dave On 1/20/2010 12:00 PM, Randy Bangert wrote: Now, perhaps, we need to consider the student's perspective. Since our culture values quantity over quality, is the student's attitude of just tell me what I need to know really that odd or unreasonable? Given that they are being shoveled massive amounts of information in several courses, not just one course, and need to finish in four years. Following this thread gives the impression that students are only taking a single ecology course. randy = RK Bangert = -- -- David M. Lawrence| Home: (804) 559-9786 7471 Brook Way Court | Fax: (804) 559-9787 Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: d...@fuzzo.com USA | http: http://fuzzo.com -- All drains lead to the ocean. -- Gill, Finding Nemo We have met the enemy and he is us. -- Pogo No trespassing 4/17 of a haiku -- Richard Brautigan
Re: [ECOLOG-L] now I've seen it all: Decline in education
Dave, you are not being unreasonable at all. The responses that you mention stem from intellectual laziness and/or short-term-oriented learning strategies. I, too, have had my students say, just tell me what I need to know, and it is very clear that they indeed wish to shovel in the information, play it back to me on an exam, and then purge it from their memory banks. The ideal of obtaining a broad education is largely irrelevant for a substantial portion of the student population, whose goal is simply to pass their exams and to get acceptable grades /*now*/. They also consistently ask me to prune or restrict the lecture content: if a fact, concept, or idea will not appear on the MCAT, for example, it is deemed irrelevant because it does not help with their short-term goals (these same students forget that my General Biology course is required of all Biological Science majors, and not just pre-Health Science majors). This problem is particularly apparent during the general botany and the general ecology portions of my 400-student General Biology class, but I help them to /*see*/ the relevance of this material by, for example, pointing out that the human gut is functionally an ecosystem whose microflora obeys the known principles of population and community ecology. One could equally well create teaching slides which refer to the literature that links ecological principles to outbreaks of Lyme disease, or other human pathogens. If you /*show*/ them how and why a key concept or fact is relevant, they are less likely to complain about it. I have stopped pandering to this attitude entirely: I have stuck with question-driven, active learning methods, and I simply accept the increased probability that I will likely receive lower evaluation scores. I also make it very clear within the formal wording of my syllabus that mine is a very demanding and highly interactive class, and that all exams will be based upon a mix of multiple choice + short answer + essay questions (even in the 400-student class; we hire GTAs to grade the short answer and essay sections of these exams after providing each of them with a formal grading rubric). If they choose not to enroll, and wish to wait for a semester when my course has a different professor, then that is their own personal choice. My teaching rigor has not stopped students from nominating me for the best teaching awards that KU offers (some of which I have indeed won), confirming that the student population still contains a significant number of students (including pre-Health Science) who really /*do*/ care about learning, and who respect my methods. Thankfully, I have and am completely supported by an Upper Administration at KU that strongly believes in teaching rigor, and thus I do not risk reprisals; I fear that this is not always the case in every U.S. university or college, however. Best wishes, Val Smith University of Kansas On 1/18/2010 2:18 PM, David M. Lawrence wrote: I watched my evaluation scores decline when I switched to active learning. I got tired of lecturing from powerpoints that the students could memorize, regurgitate on tests, and quickly forget. Somehow, it was unreasonable for me to expect the students to show up for the lectures prepared and willing to participate in class discussions. It was even more unreasonable for me to refuse to just tell us what we need to know, when they couldn't answer very simple questions that I'd toss out to stimulate discussion. It was also unreasonable for me to expect them to ask questions relevant to the material we discussed in class. I had students complain they didn't learn anything from me, but it seems to me that if they weren't asking questions -- either in class, on class discussion boards, or via e-mail -- they couldn't have been trying very hard. Maybe I am unreasonable... Dave On 1/18/2010 12:17 PM, James Crants wrote: On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Val Smithvsm...@ku.edu wrote: I lay much of this decline at the feet of their parents, who seem to care progressively less and less about knowledge. I recall a particularly notable incident from over a decade ago, when my youngest daughter's grade school Principal retired. The new Principal unilaterally decided that Science Fair projects for grades 2-6 should become completely voluntary, rather than remaining as a formal requirement that had long been embedded in this school's outstanding science preparation curriculum. On the day of the science project evaluations, I expressed dismay about this undesirable change to another parent, who at that time was almost 20 years my junior. Her response was to shout across the room to her husband, John (not his real name), this guy thinks everybody should have to do a science fair project, and /that this is all about learning science/! and she then turned to me to say, If everyone has to do a project, that lowers the
Re: [ECOLOG-L] now I've seen it all: Decline in education
I've been teaching college biology and ecology for more than 20 yrs, and I'm not convinced that this supposed decline in student preparedness and attitudes is real. I've always had a mix of poorly- prepared, bad attitude students and well-prepared, intellectually adventurous ones. Of course, that's just another piece of anecdotal evidence. Where are the data that show education is really getting worse? Charles Charles W. Welden Departments of Biology and Environmental Studies Southern Oregon University Ashland, OR USA 97520 wel...@sou.edu 541.552.6868 (voice) 541.552.6415 (fax) On Jan 19, 2010, at 6:28 AM, Val Smith wrote: Dave, you are not being unreasonable at all. The responses that you mention stem from intellectual laziness and/or short-term- oriented learning strategies. I, too, have had my students say, just tell me what I need to know, and it is very clear that they indeed wish to shovel in the information, play it back to me on an exam, and then purge it from their memory banks. The ideal of obtaining a broad education is largely irrelevant for a substantial portion of the student population, whose goal is simply to pass their exams and to get acceptable grades /*now*/. They also consistently ask me to prune or restrict the lecture content: if a fact, concept, or idea will not appear on the MCAT, for example, it is deemed irrelevant because it does not help with their short-term goals (these same students forget that my General Biology course is required of all Biological Science majors, and not just pre-Health Science majors). This problem is particularly apparent during the general botany and the general ecology portions of my 400-student General Biology class, but I help them to /*see*/ the relevance of this material by, for example, pointing out that the human gut is functionally an ecosystem whose microflora obeys the known principles of population and community ecology. One could equally well create teaching slides which refer to the literature that links ecological principles to outbreaks of Lyme disease, or other human pathogens. If you /*show*/ them how and why a key concept or fact is relevant, they are less likely to complain about it. I have stopped pandering to this attitude entirely: I have stuck with question-driven, active learning methods, and I simply accept the increased probability that I will likely receive lower evaluation scores. I also make it very clear within the formal wording of my syllabus that mine is a very demanding and highly interactive class, and that all exams will be based upon a mix of multiple choice + short answer + essay questions (even in the 400- student class; we hire GTAs to grade the short answer and essay sections of these exams after providing each of them with a formal grading rubric). If they choose not to enroll, and wish to wait for a semester when my course has a different professor, then that is their own personal choice. My teaching rigor has not stopped students from nominating me for the best teaching awards that KU offers (some of which I have indeed won), confirming that the student population still contains a significant number of students (including pre-Health Science) who really /*do*/ care about learning, and who respect my methods. Thankfully, I have and am completely supported by an Upper Administration at KU that strongly believes in teaching rigor, and thus I do not risk reprisals; I fear that this is not always the case in every U.S. university or college, however. Best wishes, Val Smith University of Kansas On 1/18/2010 2:18 PM, David M. Lawrence wrote: I watched my evaluation scores decline when I switched to active learning. I got tired of lecturing from powerpoints that the students could memorize, regurgitate on tests, and quickly forget. Somehow, it was unreasonable for me to expect the students to show up for the lectures prepared and willing to participate in class discussions. It was even more unreasonable for me to refuse to just tell us what we need to know, when they couldn't answer very simple questions that I'd toss out to stimulate discussion. It was also unreasonable for me to expect them to ask questions relevant to the material we discussed in class. I had students complain they didn't learn anything from me, but it seems to me that if they weren't asking questions -- either in class, on class discussion boards, or via e-mail -- they couldn't have been trying very hard. Maybe I am unreasonable... Dave On 1/18/2010 12:17 PM, James Crants wrote: On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Val Smithvsm...@ku.edu wrote: I lay much of this decline at the feet of their parents, who seem to care progressively less and less about knowledge. I recall a particularly notable incident from over a decade ago, when my youngest daughter's grade school Principal retired. The
Re: [ECOLOG-L] now I've seen it all: Decline in education
Try the Socratic Method sometime. I did, for my entire career of 40 years. But, it was not popular, though I was sometimes (and sometimes definitely not) a popular instructor. The general word was that I refused to answer questions (because I responded with questions intended to elicit better understanding). I did not refuse to answer questions, I chose to lead students to the answer or to the skills needed to find the answer. I had great success with some, but it was like pulling teeth with most, and a good many were too willing to give up. It worked best in a laboratory situation. I had resolved early on that, patterned after a mentor whom I admired greatly, I would use active learning primarily, and I assigned groups to investigate and so on. For sanity and survival I had to revert to more traditional lecture format for a lot of the teaching I did, but I always tried to mix in more active, including Socratic, approaches. Of course, lab is the place where that was easiest to accomplish, but for students trained to follow a cook book, that was sometimes difficult, too. The inevitable question (when extension of content went beyond what students expected) of, Will this be on the test, was also a challenge to my commitment. For the average to moderately good student the bottom line to any course always seemed to be the test, not taken as a challenge, but as a barrier. Oh well. All in all, I enjoyed teaching. It was just frustrating at times. I miss it a lot, btw. David McNeely On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 2:18 PM, David M. Lawrence wrote: I watched my evaluation scores decline when I switched to active learning. I got tired of lecturing from powerpoints that the students could memorize, regurgitate on tests, and quickly forget. Somehow, it was unreasonable for me to expect the students to show up for the lectures prepared and willing to participate in class discussions. It was even more unreasonable for me to refuse to just tell us what we need to know, when they couldn't answer very simple questions that I'd toss out to stimulate discussion. It was also unreasonable for me to expect them to ask questions relevant to the material we discussed in class. I had students complain they didn't learn anything from me, but it seems to me that if they weren't asking questions -- either in class, on class discussion boards, or via e-mail -- they couldn't have been trying very hard. Maybe I am unreasonable... Dave On 1/18/2010 12:17 PM, James Crants wrote: On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Val Smith wrote: I lay much of this decline at the feet of their parents, who seem to care progressively less and less about knowledge. I recall a particularly notable incident from over a decade ago, when my youngest daughter's grade school Principal retired. The new Principal unilaterally decided that Science Fair projects for grades 2-6 should become completely voluntary, rather than remaining as a formal requirement that had long been embedded in this school's outstanding science preparation curriculum. On the day of the science project evaluations, I expressed dismay about this undesirable change to another parent, who at that time was almost 20 years my junior. Her response was to shout across the room to her husband, John (not his real name), this guy thinks everybody should have to do a science fair project, and /that this is all about learning science/! and she then turned to me to say, If everyone has to do a project, that lowers the chance that our child will win the Best Science Project award. That's unfair competition. And she walked away. As I was reading your post, I was hoping you would mention the role of parents in any decline in the quality of the American education. I think it started with the baby boom. After the Depression and World War II, parents wanted the best for their children, but by providing the best materially, many raised children with an inflated sense of entitlement and self-importance. When these children raised my generation, self-esteem was seen as the most important quality you could promote in a developing mind, so many of us grew up feeling even more entitled and important. Also, since self-important people like today's parents don't respect authority figures, parents now tend to side with their children over teachers when there is a student-teacher conflict. Worse, since the entire class is, on average, not as prepared as it should be to learn the material you're trying to teach, disgruntled students can look to low average performance for the whole class to assure themselves that it's your fault if they don't get high marks. With students and parents both blaming you for low grades, and a low class average apparently supporting their arguments, it's easiest to lower your expectations and standards. (And you'll probably get higher teaching evaluation scores if you do.) When you do, you
Re: [ECOLOG-L] now I've seen it all: Decline in education
Just for information's sake, more than a decade ago I helped to create the University of Kansas' Center for Teaching Excellence (http://www.cte.ku.edu), and like other teaching faculty at KU, I follow its well-thought-out, professional recommendations with regards to assuring the consistency and fairness of exam grading. The grading of 400 exams containing up to 3-4 short answers and 1-2 essays can take the better part of 12-15 hours or more even when we obtain the assistance of as many as ten highly knowledgeable grading assistants who are already serving as GTAs in the laboratory portion of the course. A grading rubric that defines the best or preferred answers to the questions in any exam is created and provided to all graders (which include the teachers of record): there can after all be only a small subset of completely correct answers to any given question, such as the correct direction of heat energy or material flows in counter-current exchange systems, or the correct direction of water flow in a plant's xylem, or the correct absolute value of Avogadro's number, or the correct equation for exponential population growth, or the correct balanced equation for photosynthesis, or the correct name for the enzyme that catalyzes the breakdown of lactose, or the correct definition for gastrovascular cavity, or the major taxonomic characteristics that are considered to be unique to a specific Order of plants (I'm sure that you surely must see my point here). Typically one or two graders (including both of the faculty members who are the teachers of record) are then assigned a certain question, and exam grading proceeds. If there is any concern about a particular student's answer for any particular question, then the entire group stops and deliberates/discusses whether the particular answer under consideration was either correct (100% credit), partially correct (for partial credit), or incorrect (0% credit). The grading rubric is provided electronically to all students taking the course after the exam, and each student then has further recourse by making a formal appointment with the instructors of record to discuss any and all questions for which they might dispute the grading. Just curious: did you intend for your tone in this message to be as hostile to academia, and as intentionally and deliberately derogatory as I perceived it? If so, very tacky, and one might wonder whether you have ever bothered to read the literature on exam grading and learning assessment methods, or whether you have ever actually taught in the classroom? Please explain clearly to me, and also to the readers of ECOLOG, how the extremely lengthy, objective, completely transparent, and highly deliberative grading process above might constitute professorial laziness. It is unfortunately very easy in an electronic forum such as this to write a three-sentence zinger that is completely without basis or merit. Val H. Smith On 1/19/2010 2:29 PM, Meenan, James wrote: Let me see if I have this clear. You criticize students for asking you to just tell me what I need to know and then you grade their essay questions by using a rubric (tell me what I want to hear) that is interpreted by a GTA. Professorial laziness? -Original Message- From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [mailto:ecolo...@listserv.umd.edu] On Behalf Of Val Smith Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2010 9:28 AM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] now I've seen it all: Decline in education Dave, you are not being unreasonable at all. The responses that you mention stem from intellectual laziness and/or short-term-oriented learning strategies. I, too, have had my students say, just tell me what I need to know, and it is very clear that they indeed wish to shovel in the information, play it back to me on an exam, and then purge it from their memory banks. The ideal of obtaining a broad education is largely irrelevant for a substantial portion of the student population, whose goal is simply to pass their exams and to get acceptable grades /*now*/. They also consistently ask me to prune or restrict the lecture content: if a fact, concept, or idea will not appear on the MCAT, for example, it is deemed irrelevant because it does not help with their short-term goals (these same students forget that my General Biology course is required of all Biological Science majors, and not just pre-Health Science majors). This problem is particularly apparent during the general botany and the general ecology portions of my 400-student General Biology class, but I help them to /*see*/ the relevance of this material by, for example, pointing out that the human gut is functionally an ecosystem whose microflora obeys the known principles of population and community ecology. One could equally well create teaching slides which refer to the literature that links ecological principles to outbreaks of Lyme
Re: [ECOLOG-L] now I've seen it all: Decline in education
I can't imagine what data could objectively show whether education has gotten worse. Education has changed with changes in both technology and education theory. Even if standardized tests (and the pool of students taking them) had not changed, scores on them probably would, yet those changes in scores might have nothing to do with changes in the quality of education. Rather, the changes could reflect the changing relevance of the skills and knowledge the tests were intended to assess. Snopes.com has an example of a supposed graduation test for eighth graders in Kansas in 1895 that most of us on this list would probably fail. If the exam really served the purpose described, its difficulty mostly reflects the steady shift in the skills and knowledge considered important for an educated person over the past 115 years (e.g., few of us need to know how big an acre or a rod is, and we can look it up if needed). Charles may be right that there is no real decline in student preparedness and attitudes. I taught labs and discussions for just 10 years, and the changes I saw in student attitudes over that time could be due to differences between students in Wisconsin, where I started, and Michigan, where I finished. My perceptions have been reinforced by the anecdotes of professors with much longer teaching careers, but I don't expect to ever see any more persuasive evidence for a decline in standards or attitudes. Maybe it's best to go with the adage that most people rise or sink to meet your expectations, so you should keep your expectations high, in the best interest of your students. Jim Crants On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Charles Welden wel...@sou.edu wrote: I've been teaching college biology and ecology for more than 20 yrs, and I'm not convinced that this supposed decline in student preparedness and attitudes is real. I've always had a mix of poorly-prepared, bad attitude students and well-prepared, intellectually adventurous ones. Of course, that's just another piece of anecdotal evidence. Where are the data that show education is really getting worse? Charles Charles W. Welden Departments of Biology and Environmental Studies Southern Oregon University Ashland, OR USA 97520 wel...@sou.edu 541.552.6868 (voice) 541.552.6415 (fax) On Jan 19, 2010, at 6:28 AM, Val Smith wrote: Dave, you are not being unreasonable at all. The responses that you mention stem from intellectual laziness and/or short-term-oriented learning strategies. I, too, have had my students say, just tell me what I need to know, and it is very clear that they indeed wish to shovel in the information, play it back to me on an exam, and then purge it from their memory banks. The ideal of obtaining a broad education is largely irrelevant for a substantial portion of the student population, whose goal is simply to pass their exams and to get acceptable grades /*now*/. They also consistently ask me to prune or restrict the lecture content: if a fact, concept, or idea will not appear on the MCAT, for example, it is deemed irrelevant because it does not help with their short-term goals (these same students forget that my General Biology course is required of all Biological Science majors, and not just pre-Health Science majors). This problem is particularly apparent during the general botany and the general ecology portions of my 400-student General Biology class, but I help them to /*see*/ the relevance of this material by, for example, pointing out that the human gut is functionally an ecosystem whose microflora obeys the known principles of population and community ecology. One could equally well create teaching slides which refer to the literature that links ecological principles to outbreaks of Lyme disease, or other human pathogens. If you /*show*/ them how and why a key concept or fact is relevant, they are less likely to complain about it. I have stopped pandering to this attitude entirely: I have stuck with question-driven, active learning methods, and I simply accept the increased probability that I will likely receive lower evaluation scores. I also make it very clear within the formal wording of my syllabus that mine is a very demanding and highly interactive class, and that all exams will be based upon a mix of multiple choice + short answer + essay questions (even in the 400-student class; we hire GTAs to grade the short answer and essay sections of these exams after providing each of them with a formal grading rubric). If they choose not to enroll, and wish to wait for a semester when my course has a different professor, then that is their own personal choice. My teaching rigor has not stopped students from nominating me for the best teaching awards that KU offers (some of which I have indeed won), confirming that the student population still contains a significant number of students (including pre-Health Science) who really /*do*/ care about
Re: [ECOLOG-L] now I've seen it all: Decline in education
On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Val Smith vsm...@ku.edu wrote: I lay much of this decline at the feet of their parents, who seem to care progressively less and less about knowledge. I recall a particularly notable incident from over a decade ago, when my youngest daughter's grade school Principal retired. The new Principal unilaterally decided that Science Fair projects for grades 2-6 should become completely voluntary, rather than remaining as a formal requirement that had long been embedded in this school's outstanding science preparation curriculum. On the day of the science project evaluations, I expressed dismay about this undesirable change to another parent, who at that time was almost 20 years my junior. Her response was to shout across the room to her husband, John (not his real name), this guy thinks everybody should have to do a science fair project, and /that this is all about learning science/! and she then turned to me to say, If everyone has to do a project, that lowers the chance that our child will win the Best Science Project award. That's unfair competition. And she walked away. As I was reading your post, I was hoping you would mention the role of parents in any decline in the quality of the American education. I think it started with the baby boom. After the Depression and World War II, parents wanted the best for their children, but by providing the best materially, many raised children with an inflated sense of entitlement and self-importance. When these children raised my generation, self-esteem was seen as the most important quality you could promote in a developing mind, so many of us grew up feeling even more entitled and important. Also, since self-important people like today's parents don't respect authority figures, parents now tend to side with their children over teachers when there is a student-teacher conflict. Worse, since the entire class is, on average, not as prepared as it should be to learn the material you're trying to teach, disgruntled students can look to low average performance for the whole class to assure themselves that it's your fault if they don't get high marks. With students and parents both blaming you for low grades, and a low class average apparently supporting their arguments, it's easiest to lower your expectations and standards. (And you'll probably get higher teaching evaluation scores if you do.) When you do, you end up passing on students who aren't prepared for the next level of education. I understand the importance of questioning authority, and Wendee Holtcamp's example of childbirth in American hospitals attests to that importance (though I believe the doctors rush the delivery because they're trained to believe it's best for the patient, not because they put their spare time ahead of patient care). However, there's an important distinction between questioning authority and assuming authority is wrong. With respect to the original conversation thread, while I certainly agree that it's a problem that people with the appearance of authority are making BS claims on television, I don't think that's the only major threat to scientific authority. Another threat is the widely-held perception that any scientist who thinks they know more than you do about their area of expertise is arrogant (and wrong). Because scientific knowledge is contingent on future results, scientists sometimes find themselves admitting that they were wrong about something. Unlike pundits or politicians, scientists can't blame some other party, and people will hold onto those errors as evidence that we're not as clever as we think we are, so they can ignore us if they don't like our message. Also, some people just don't like smart people much, so mistakes made by smart people are cherished as proof that they aren't so smart after all. Mind you, I have little evidence for most of the generalities I'm making here, but this is just my model of why students seem to be less prepared than they used to and why scientific authority doesn't get the respect I think it should. Jim Crants
Re: [ECOLOG-L] now I've seen it all: Decline in education
I watched my evaluation scores decline when I switched to active learning. I got tired of lecturing from powerpoints that the students could memorize, regurgitate on tests, and quickly forget. Somehow, it was unreasonable for me to expect the students to show up for the lectures prepared and willing to participate in class discussions. It was even more unreasonable for me to refuse to just tell us what we need to know, when they couldn't answer very simple questions that I'd toss out to stimulate discussion. It was also unreasonable for me to expect them to ask questions relevant to the material we discussed in class. I had students complain they didn't learn anything from me, but it seems to me that if they weren't asking questions -- either in class, on class discussion boards, or via e-mail -- they couldn't have been trying very hard. Maybe I am unreasonable... Dave On 1/18/2010 12:17 PM, James Crants wrote: On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Val Smithvsm...@ku.edu wrote: I lay much of this decline at the feet of their parents, who seem to care progressively less and less about knowledge. I recall a particularly notable incident from over a decade ago, when my youngest daughter's grade school Principal retired. The new Principal unilaterally decided that Science Fair projects for grades 2-6 should become completely voluntary, rather than remaining as a formal requirement that had long been embedded in this school's outstanding science preparation curriculum. On the day of the science project evaluations, I expressed dismay about this undesirable change to another parent, who at that time was almost 20 years my junior. Her response was to shout across the room to her husband, John (not his real name), this guy thinks everybody should have to do a science fair project, and /that this is all about learning science/! and she then turned to me to say, If everyone has to do a project, that lowers the chance that our child will win the Best Science Project award. That's unfair competition. And she walked away. As I was reading your post, I was hoping you would mention the role of parents in any decline in the quality of the American education. I think it started with the baby boom. After the Depression and World War II, parents wanted the best for their children, but by providing the best materially, many raised children with an inflated sense of entitlement and self-importance. When these children raised my generation, self-esteem was seen as the most important quality you could promote in a developing mind, so many of us grew up feeling even more entitled and important. Also, since self-important people like today's parents don't respect authority figures, parents now tend to side with their children over teachers when there is a student-teacher conflict. Worse, since the entire class is, on average, not as prepared as it should be to learn the material you're trying to teach, disgruntled students can look to low average performance for the whole class to assure themselves that it's your fault if they don't get high marks. With students and parents both blaming you for low grades, and a low class average apparently supporting their arguments, it's easiest to lower your expectations and standards. (And you'll probably get higher teaching evaluation scores if you do.) When you do, you end up passing on students who aren't prepared for the next level of education. I understand the importance of questioning authority, and Wendee Holtcamp's example of childbirth in American hospitals attests to that importance (though I believe the doctors rush the delivery because they're trained to believe it's best for the patient, not because they put their spare time ahead of patient care). However, there's an important distinction between questioning authority and assuming authority is wrong. With respect to the original conversation thread, while I certainly agree that it's a problem that people with the appearance of authority are making BS claims on television, I don't think that's the only major threat to scientific authority. Another threat is the widely-held perception that any scientist who thinks they know more than you do about their area of expertise is arrogant (and wrong). Because scientific knowledge is contingent on future results, scientists sometimes find themselves admitting that they were wrong about something. Unlike pundits or politicians, scientists can't blame some other party, and people will hold onto those errors as evidence that we're not as clever as we think we are, so they can ignore us if they don't like our message. Also, some people just don't like smart people much, so mistakes made by smart people are cherished as proof that they aren't so smart after all. Mind you, I have little evidence for most of the generalities I'm making here, but this is just my model of why students seem to be less prepared than they used to and why scientific
