Zooze the Horse roams around the pasture near Lamar State College. Zooze thinks about problems in academia. Zhe wants proffies to submit posts (blog posts, not fence posts).
I wish I didn't lie quite so much to students about their chances of doing well. I always find myself fudging things early in the semester to keep them long enough to actually FIND OUT if they're worth anything in my class. But I absolutely lie sometimes and I wish I could be more like proffies of my youth who actually said, "Mr. Sunshine, there are a lot of majors. And you will one day find one that suits you. But I must say, Philosophy is not one of them." I thank that kind man in his sandals and headband every few years.
As Lemuel Gulliver observed, something the Houyhnhnms had particular difficulty understanding and found particularly disturbing was the very idea of "saying the thing that was not." But then of course, Houyhnhnms don't eat turkey.
I have an exercise in my general-ed, intro-astronomy class for non-majors about how parents lie to children. It goes like this:
Disturbingly often, parents and teachers lie, if they don’t know the correct answer when a child asks why the sky is blue. Don’t do this. If a child asks you something and you don’t know the answer, be honest, and admit that you don’t know. They will respect you more, in the long run.
Read (the textbook I wrote), especially the section on “Star formation” in Chapter 26, and explain, in 1-3 sentences that a 9-year-old could understand:
(1) Why Earth’s daytime sky is blue.
(2) Why sunsets on Earth are red.
Hints:
● Explanation (1) is also why oceans and glaciers are blue, and it isn’t because of reflection.
● Saying only “Rayleigh scattering,” even though it’s true, isn’t a good answer. A 9-year-old won’t know what Rayleigh scattering is, other than two big words. What do the big words mean?
● Don’t oversimplify. Don’t call molecules and dust grains just “little particles”: call them molecules and dust grains. A 9-year-old can understand what molecules and dust grains are, if you explain carefully.
● Try to explain both without mentioning wavelengths or waves. You can, in ways that work.
● As an incentive to learn the explanations, both questions will be on the Final Exam.
---
When I was a kid, back during the days of Project Apollo, my Mom had a highly effective way to get me to lay off asking embarrassing questions, which didn't involve lying. She'd give me a good, swift, solid smack in the head. It didn't do me any long-term damage. (TWITCH! TWITCH!!)
@Frod & Zooze: You struck a nerve with me on this one. What, indeed, is the point of college if the key actors are sabotaging the pursuit of truth? Frod's admonition to tell the truth or say "I don't know" is spot on, but there also are lots of other options (e.g., remaining silent or engaging in a very creative response that doesn't involve lying).
The answer, of course, is because they think it will enable them to make money. This is a short-term proposition, at best: every time a certain orange person tells tech people he wants more innovation for the economy, I laugh.
At my joint, it's more likely to be the admin lying rather than the proffies (certainly in my own department).
In addition to the DERP that OPH has previously described, we consider it to be in the program's interest as well as the students' to informally let them know if there appears to be a mismatch between the requirements & their current situation.
We rarely need to convene the DERP due to this.
Pretty sure that certain admin say whatever they think will make students happy.
I wish I didn't lie quite so much to students about their chances of doing well. I always find myself fudging things early in the semester to keep them long enough to actually FIND OUT if they're worth anything in my class. But I absolutely lie sometimes and I wish I could be more like proffies of my youth who actually said, "Mr. Sunshine, there are a lot of majors. And you will one day find one that suits you. But I must say, Philosophy is not one of them." I thank that kind man in his sandals and headband every few years.
ReplyDeleteAs Lemuel Gulliver observed, something the Houyhnhnms had particular difficulty understanding and found particularly disturbing was the very idea of "saying the thing that was not." But then of course, Houyhnhnms don't eat turkey.
ReplyDeleteI have an exercise in my general-ed, intro-astronomy class for non-majors about how parents lie to children. It goes like this:
Disturbingly often, parents and teachers lie, if they don’t know the correct answer when a child asks why the sky is blue. Don’t do this. If a child asks you something and you don’t know the answer, be honest, and admit that you don’t know. They will respect you more, in the long run.
Read (the textbook I wrote), especially the section on “Star formation” in Chapter 26, and explain, in 1-3 sentences that a 9-year-old could understand:
(1) Why Earth’s daytime sky is blue.
(2) Why sunsets on Earth are red.
Hints:
● Explanation (1) is also why oceans and glaciers are blue, and it isn’t because of reflection.
● Saying only “Rayleigh scattering,” even though it’s true, isn’t a good answer. A 9-year-old won’t know what Rayleigh scattering is, other than two big words. What do the big words mean?
● Don’t oversimplify. Don’t call molecules and dust grains just “little particles”: call them molecules and dust grains. A 9-year-old can understand what molecules and dust grains are, if you explain carefully.
● Try to explain both without mentioning wavelengths or waves. You can, in ways that work.
● As an incentive to learn the explanations, both questions will be on the Final Exam.
---
When I was a kid, back during the days of Project Apollo, my Mom had a highly effective way to get me to lay off asking embarrassing questions, which didn't involve lying. She'd give me a good, swift, solid smack in the head. It didn't do me any long-term damage. (TWITCH! TWITCH!!)
@Frod & Zooze: You struck a nerve with me on this one. What, indeed, is the point of college if the key actors are sabotaging the pursuit of truth? Frod's admonition to tell the truth or say "I don't know" is spot on, but there also are lots of other options (e.g., remaining silent or engaging in a very creative response that doesn't involve lying).
DeleteThe answer, of course, is because they think it will enable them to make money. This is a short-term proposition, at best: every time a certain orange person tells tech people he wants more innovation for the economy, I laugh.
DeleteAt my joint, it's more likely to be the admin lying rather than the proffies (certainly in my own department).
ReplyDeleteIn addition to the DERP that OPH has previously described, we consider it to be in the program's interest as well as the students' to informally let them know if there appears to be a mismatch between the requirements & their current situation.
We rarely need to convene the DERP due to this.
Pretty sure that certain admin say whatever they think will make students happy.