16 ms·

I don't think the line of thinking is directly "lets make this painful on purpose" but there is a sense of - everyone has to go through the same gauntlet and so

I don't think the line of thinking is directly "lets make this painful on purpose" but there is a sense of - everyone has to go through the same gauntlet and some people are just not cut out of math/physics/etc. It's just the way of the world. There is not direct desire to make the experience better/smoother/easier than it was your generation. I don't know how it is in the Math department, but in Physics there is almost a sort of hazing that goes on, where some subjects are just known for how grueling they are and how you just have to go through it "To the contrary, we are delighted when someone shows even a spark of interest or aptitude" Not to read too much into it, but this kinda hints at the problem. You're delighted at the students that have passed your IQ test. There is generally very little care given to the 70%+ of students that aren't making the cut. The true horror is how many students are in the class and not getting it. And the teachers are not freaking out From my university experience (which was a while ago) it was abundantly clear that most students hate their math/physics classes, were bored out of their skulls and the teachers are only interested in the engaged students that are getting it. What you should be "delighted" by is when you find a new way to explain something that resonates with most of the class

zozbot234 3y ago
> You're delighted at the students that have passed your IQ test. There is generally very little care given to the 70%+ of students that aren't making the cut. That's because happy students are all alike, but every unhappy student is unhappy in their own way. It's just not feasible to care in depth about why any one of the 70%+ is not learning effectively. They're probably missing some prior topic that's effectively a prereq for the class, but that's something that should be addressed by the student themselves.
JadeNB 3y ago
> What you should be "delighted" by is when you find a new way to explain something that resonates with most of the class You are right, and I am! I don't think that's incompatible with also being delighted when someone shows interest or aptitude. In fact, the synergy is the best part, when someone shows interest or aptitude because they are willing to put in the work to follow the pathway that I have tried to open up for them.
quacked 3y ago
I don't know why you're catching downvotes, I think you're completely right. In my engineering curriculum in some cases the teachers were openly hostile to students that had a hard time understanding the material. Professors of undergraduates don't seem to think from the undergraduate perspective. Most undergrads have only ever known school, and are just following directions while fumbling their way to their first interview. From that perspective it doesn't make any sense why some classes have to be immensely difficult and high-stakes, and others can be a little easier. From the graduated perspective, you can see "the big well-intentioned lie"--in truth, no field can be condensed into 16 weeks, even if you're studying it and nothing else 14 hours per day. The more difficult a class is, the closer it is to the truth that the class itself is a carefully structured playground, and the real field is more dizzyingly wide and complex than any student can imagine. However, I don't see why this lesson has to be so painful to students.
- JadeNB 3y ago
  > In my engineering curriculum in some cases the teachers were openly hostile to students that had a hard time understanding the material. While there's no excuse for it, I think faculty see so much apathy on such a regular basis that sometimes it's easy to mistake sincere struggle for a lack of desire to engage. For precisely that reason, I try very hard to recognize and reward my students who are willing to take the time to work with me, whatever their existing comfort or proficiency level with the subject is, but I know that there are times (probably many more than I'd like to imagine) when I don't rise to that ideal. > Professors of undergraduates don't seem to think from the undergraduate perspective. … However, I don't see why this … has to be so painful to students. I think you might underestimate how painful it is to faculty, too! Most of us are in this for the love of our subject, and many are even in it for the love of teaching, and it's painful to have something that's so beautiful and beloved for us be the cause of suffering in others. Anyway—while I completely agree that it would be better if the learning experience could be the joy it should be, and free of the pain that it often carries, I do wonder if some of this might be intrinsic. There are certain topics that are just difficult, and on their first encounter with which most learners will find themselves lost and confused. But those topics have to be, or are believed to have to be, understood to be successful in the field, so that loss and confusion will have to be felt some time. Isn't it better if that's in the classroom rather than on the job? > The more difficult a class is, the closer it is to the truth that the class itself is a carefully structured playground, and the real field is more dizzyingly wide and complex than any student can imagine. This is a beautiful description. I know as a teacher that I try to communicate this to my students, but also that I surely fail much more often than I succeed.

zozbot234 3y ago

> You're delighted at the students that have passed your IQ test. There is generally very little care given to the 70%+ of students that aren't making the cut. That's because happy students are all alike, but every unhappy student is unhappy in their own way. It's just not feasible to care in depth about why any one of the 70%+ is not learning effectively. They're probably missing some prior topic that's effectively a prereq for the class, but that's something that should be addressed by the student themselves.

JadeNB 3y ago

> What you should be "delighted" by is when you find a new way to explain something that resonates with most of the class You are right, and I am! I don't think that's incompatible with also being delighted when someone shows interest or aptitude. In fact, the synergy is the best part, when someone shows interest or aptitude because they are willing to put in the work to follow the pathway that I have tried to open up for them.

quacked 3y ago

I don't know why you're catching downvotes, I think you're completely right. In my engineering curriculum in some cases the teachers were openly hostile to students that had a hard time understanding the material. Professors of undergraduates don't seem to think from the undergraduate perspective. Most undergrads have only ever known school, and are just following directions while fumbling their way to their first interview. From that perspective it doesn't make any sense why some classes have to be immensely difficult and high-stakes, and others can be a little easier. From the graduated perspective, you can see "the big well-intentioned lie"--in truth, no field can be condensed into 16 weeks, even if you're studying it and nothing else 14 hours per day. The more difficult a class is, the closer it is to the truth that the class itself is a carefully structured playground, and the real field is more dizzyingly wide and complex than any student can imagine. However, I don't see why this lesson has to be so painful to students.

JadeNB 3y ago
> In my engineering curriculum in some cases the teachers were openly hostile to students that had a hard time understanding the material. While there's no excuse for it, I think faculty see so much apathy on such a regular basis that sometimes it's easy to mistake sincere struggle for a lack of desire to engage. For precisely that reason, I try very hard to recognize and reward my students who are willing to take the time to work with me, whatever their existing comfort or proficiency level with the subject is, but I know that there are times (probably many more than I'd like to imagine) when I don't rise to that ideal. > Professors of undergraduates don't seem to think from the undergraduate perspective. … However, I don't see why this … has to be so painful to students. I think you might underestimate how painful it is to faculty, too! Most of us are in this for the love of our subject, and many are even in it for the love of teaching, and it's painful to have something that's so beautiful and beloved for us be the cause of suffering in others. Anyway—while I completely agree that it would be better if the learning experience could be the joy it should be, and free of the pain that it often carries, I do wonder if some of this might be intrinsic. There are certain topics that are just difficult, and on their first encounter with which most learners will find themselves lost and confused. But those topics have to be, or are believed to have to be, understood to be successful in the field, so that loss and confusion will have to be felt some time. Isn't it better if that's in the classroom rather than on the job? > The more difficult a class is, the closer it is to the truth that the class itself is a carefully structured playground, and the real field is more dizzyingly wide and complex than any student can imagine. This is a beautiful description. I know as a teacher that I try to communicate this to my students, but also that I surely fail much more often than I succeed.