5 ms·
I don't like the phrase "dumbing down". Based on the article, they are loosening their admission requirements, and seem to be allocating extra coursework to hel
by ern 15y ago
I don't like the phrase "dumbing down". Based on the article, they are loosening their admission requirements, and seem to be allocating extra coursework to help students catch up.
I think that what matters is if the students manage to acquire the necessary skills after they do the mathematics coursework (which many should have done at school). There are probably a significant number of students who thrive after they catch up - implying that they are "dumb" is quite offensive.
- thebooktocome 15y agoIf the shoe fits... In the US, "extra coursework to help students catch up" typically means these people aren't graduating in four years. (My university just recently released data that the average student was graduating in five to six years). That means more gov't support, more student loans, and yet more time separated from the workforce. However, many incoming freshmen still seem to either 1) not be making an informed decision about whether or not they will succeed in college, or 2) not have enough character to resist the social forces that say they should go to college no matter what and damn the consequences. If that's not dumb, I don't know what is.
- ern 15y agoAs someone pointed out elsewhere in this thread, people choose their A Levels at age 16. I had a vague idea that I wanted to study medicine at age 16. I ended up doing CS. 16 year olds tend to have very fuzzy ideas about what they want to do with their lives. Excluding them from entire fields of study based on poor A Level choices seems a bit harsh to me.