The more successful credentialing became as a growth industry, the more it dominated education, from the viewpoints of both teachers and students. Teachers could not help despairingof classes whose memebers seem less interested in learning than in doing the minimum work required to get by and get out. Enthuastic students could not help despairing of institutions that seemed to think of them as raw material to process as efficiently as possible rather than as human beings with burning questions and confusions about the world and doubts about why they were sinking time and money into this prelude to their working lives.Students who are passionate about learning, or could become so, do exist.I believe that (but am not certain) that many larger colleges have become impersonal in comparison to small colleges. This is due to credentialing or professors caring more about their research than their students. The problem is that the research is useless without new minds to continue expanding it into the future.
Faculty memebers who love their subject passionately and are eager to teach what they knowand to plumb its depths further also exist. But institutions devoted to respecting and fulfilling these needs as their first purposes have become rare, under pressure of different necessities...
A vigorous culture capable of making corrective, stabilizing changes depends heavily on its educated people, and especially upon there critical capacities and depth of understanding.
I realize that the financial aid and admissions offices at any college are impersonal and good at losing student scholarship and refund checks. But besides these offices, I can only name two departments from my alma mater that are more interested in credentialing than educating. Professors in my department (CEE) did a fantastic job in putting aside their research to help a student with an assigned problem or setting up review sessions for the FE Exam. Heck, most of the professors and graduating seniors gather for a barbeque (hosted by the department) at one professor's home at the end of every spring semester!
Now I expect much feedback, so comment away! The next chapter in Dark Age Ahead is titled, Science Abandoned.
10 comments:
Let me take a guess at which two departments you thought were more interested in credentialing then educating:
Chemistry and Physics
Those were the two that I felt were more interested in credentialing. Interestingly enough, I really liked both chemistry and physics in high school, but hated both in college. Coincidence? I think not.
Well, it's been a long day so my brain isn't really working well enough to say something intelligent on this post. Kind of on topic though--I get to wear an orange "operator's license" for the indoor forklift at work. That's a credential of one sort, and what it basically says is that "This Guy Has Demonstrated Some Basic Competency With This Dangerous Heavy-lifting Machinery Over The Course of Twenty Minutes One Tuesday Afternoon One Year Ago, So That Means He Can Now Drive It Willy-Nilly All Over The Damn Place Whenever He Feels Like". (stay tuned for my next comment, in which I will say something else really insightful and on-topic)
Well Andy, I wasn't planning on revealing the two departments, but since you did let it be known.
Any SDSMT Chemistry or Physics Department faculty member may post "hate messages " at http://andy-kannenberg.blogspot.com.
Do you have an outraged SDSMT chemistry professor problem? Lock up your cats! (inside joke)
Rollicking! Got them right on the first try!
I don't know about Chemistry, but Physics 211 and 212 are a very bad representation of the Physics department. Yes, it is unfortunate that the Physics class has to be so large, but when there are only three (three!) physics professors (and no instructors, only TAs) then it isn't surprising that there is only one Physics 211 and 212 class offered per semester, especially since there are some students who would like to take upper level physics classes (especially those physics students who would like to get their degree in less than five years). So, to allow the physics students to graduate in a reasonable time, lower level courses have to suffer with only one course offered per semester in a large lecture hall so as to satisfy the need. Large classes tend to result in impersonal education, hence your misrepresentation of the Physics department at SDSM&T.
For comparison, the mathematics department, on the other hand, is much larger than the Physics department (mostly due to the fact that there are over four math classes required of most students). There are 12 professors with a PhD in the Mathematics and Computer Science department consisting of eight doctorates in mathematics, three doctorates in computer science, one doctorate in biochemistry, and one doctorate in law. That works out to, lets see, at least eight professors who are more than capable of teaching many mathematics courses (both upper level and lower level), of course I haven't mentioned the instructors and professors who only have a masters degree. This allows the Mathematics and Computer Science department to offer several concurrent instances of lower level mathematics courses while at the same time offering upper level mathematics courses to those who wish to take them (such as mathematics majors who would wish to graduate in four years).
I would say my Physics 211 course was about as good as my CENG 244 course. I could conclude that the whole CENG department was impersonal and didn't care about education, since that was the impression I got from CENGE 244, but I won't, because I know better than to make rash judgments based off of little experence. My experience, and I'll give it since I have some, is that upper level physics courses are much better than lower level physics courses. I learned more stuff in my Physics 471 course than a lot of other courses a Tech (including some courses that I thought were very good). Dr. Petukhov is a very good professor, you just need to experience him in a more fair environment than the impersonal environment of large lecture courses to come to this realization.
Part of a personal learning experience is the treatment a student recieves when visiting a professor (during office hours). I always felt like the Physics and Chemistry preofessors rush through their explanation, while my CEE professors always were willing to spend additional time expaining concepts/problems. My CEE professors would even answer questions outside of their office hours (if you could track them down). I will admit that the physics department has many more students and fewer professors than the CEE department. Also, I was semi impressed by one physics professor...
Research is very important in the University system, because it encourages the growth of science and technology. However, research doesn't mix very well with undergraduate education. Those professors who are interested in teaching should teach undergrad courses (and possibly some graduate courses), those who are interested in research should teach graduate courses, especially those related to their field of research. Graduate students are typically involved in research, but graduate programs should represent a mentor-tutor model of education (that is, students work closely together with professors in research, and classes are very small: 12 students maximum). Ideally all education would follow a mentor-tutor model (I can't remember where I read this, but the maximum size of a group is somewhere around 12 people; add several more and some of the more reserved members become less active), unfortunately the current economy cannot support such a model (that is, education is too important in our society, but education would cost too much if class ratios had to be kept around 1:12).
"Those professors who are interested in teaching should teach undergrad courses (and possibly some graduate courses), those who are interested in research should teach graduate courses, especially those related to their field of research."
We can agree here. I believe that an optimal class size is somewhere between 20 and 30... I do understand that universities need to have some larger classes due to lack of professors and many students.
But remember Pat, you've had a lot more experience with the CEE department. Plus with only four (I forgot Foygel before, oops!) professors to support all of those students, I'm not surprised you felt rushed. Plus you must remember, your CEE courses are very different. There is no CEE course that has to support as many students as PHYS 211 and 212, simply because so many more students have to take those courses. Not only that, but physics professors are, quite frankly, not very interested in PHYS 211 or 212. Those courses are somewhat akin to the GE course you and Andy had to take, in that they are relatively rudimentary in comparison to upper level courses. From what I hear those courses weren't that great either, and they weren't over 100 students. The professor teaching PHYS 211 (or 212) not only has over 100 students in that course alone, but has students in the upper level Physics courses they are teaching as well. Whenever I went to Dr. Peukhov for help in Quantum, he was very helpful. I never felt rushed out of his office. (Incidentally I don't think he was teaching PHYS 211 or 212 that semester, so he probably had more time to spend on each student).
I would argue that if something is true, than it is not a misrepresentation regardless of the cause. Terrible Physics 211/212 classes aside, every time I went to talk to a Physics professor in their office, I was treated rudely at best.
When I took CENG 244, I felt that the professor did an excellent job of explaining the material, and on several occasions I went to talk to him in his office, and he answered my questions very thoroughly. Ben, you may have had a different experience, but not everyone comes out of 244 with a bad taste in their mouth, while I believe that most students do from Physics 211/212 (just judging by the comments I heard while working as a tutor).
Therefore, I think the statement about the Physics department holds. Based on 211/212 why would anyone be interested in studying more Physics? I found CENG 244 was interesting enough to make me want to continue a CENG degree even when I disliked several of the required EE courses (but not because the professors were bad).
Again, I bring up the point that I thoroughly enjoyed both Physics and Chemistry in high school, but hated them in college. For every other course type that I took, I either liked it the same as in high school or actually liked it better.
Post a Comment