Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Mathieu Raymond wrote:

McGill had a long policy statement that we had to click that any and all matters discussed in our emails was property of the university and not to be considered private under any circumstances. Every syllabus we got handed at the beginning of every class reminded us of that.

exactly...

anyone still writing "private personal" info in ANYTHING they put through the University computer/intranet/ect ect system, has signed a similar waiver at some point,

so no, its not their private data anymore, they signed off on that,

and yes, it will still more then likely be redacted when the info is pulled,

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
"College professors do nothing to make sure you learn the material and do nothing to make sure what you remember is 'correct'. "

Ha, No. Every proffessor I have had you can go up to, talk, and make sure you know it.

Your experience is not the world's, you know that, right?

I've been through college, grad school and post-grad education, and I've seen the good and the bad. Some professors were absolutely wonderful, but there were also a many of them who were far less interested in teaching. Being good at a subject does not automatically make you a good teacher.

And I think the dramatics are not terribly helpful. You rant and rave about how people hate colleges when that is not what they are saying. I like colleges, but I like them when they are run well and have the ideals of education at heart. A good portion of them do not, period. Blindly defending them, and then getting offended when people push to correct them, is misguidedly naive at best.

Im not blindly defending them, I know some are crap. but many are good. And you know yor experiances are not the worlds either? I personally think dakka has a hard on for hating schools.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Im not blindly defending them, I know some are crap. but many are good. And you know yor experiances are not the worlds either? I personally think dakka has a hard on for hating schools.

Yes you are. You are jumping on anyone who even mentions colleges in anything other than glowing praise.

And as for my experience. It's not just my experience, let's just point out a few sources:

College athletics, particularly in the larger schools. Not only is it gross misuse of funds that could be going to education, but the entire machine of college athletics allows athletes to get degrees with minimal to no strong schoolwork, and even provides cover in the event of poor grades.

Smaller colleges, particularly the national chain 'degree farms', providing untrained an ineffective staff, and returning out poor-quality education with no applicable value.

Poorer and poorer hiring standards for professors and instructors. Specifically hiring professors for SME traits, which while useful, does not translate into effective or coherent teaching.

I agree, Athletics are a problem (They get to retake tests here, by policy)
And what national chain of degree farms? I am at a small college and they have AMAZING staff. Some are piss poor, like my Social research teacher, But I also have Doctors, Textbook writers and my German teacher spent time and lived in germany. Too me Hatred of colleges and schools (The amount fo times I have see "Those that do" line is infuriating) and especially teacher(Dakka loves to hate teachers) is extreme n this site.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
I agree, Athletics are a problem (They get to retake tests here, by policy)
And what national chain of degree farms? I am at a small college and they have AMAZING staff. Some are piss poor, like my Social research teacher, But I also have Doctors, Textbook writers and my German teacher spent time and lived in germany. Too me Hatred of colleges and schools (The amount fo times I have see "Those that do" line is infuriating) and especially teacher(Dakka loves to hate teachers) is extreme n this site.

Again, my experiences somewhat mirror yours. I went to a small college for undergraduate work, and it was very good.

But then I went to a larger school for graduate school, and it was the exact opposite. All but one of the instructors were godawful.

The point of this is that I think you might be seeing people wanting to reform the bad colleges as 'hate', and I think you are taking it too far. To go with something mentioned in this thread before: tenure. If it is used properly, tenure is a very good thing. However, it is being misused, poorly applied or something used as a means to keep bad professors in good positions. In any job, any job, you never get to a level of immunity from firing or competition outside of owning the company itself (in very simple terms, here). Tenure is this bizarre release from competition, and it becomes the goal rather than 'give students the best possible education I can.' Instead, it is 'do good enough to get tenure.'

In my opinion, this is a terrible use of it, because it does not put more pressure on educators as it encourages ADEQUACY over EXCELLENCE. If you wanna give tenure, fine, but give it to someone who is pushing limits and setting the highest level of examples, and, more to the point, keeps it up even with tenure. Do not institutionalize it and make it something that happens over time 'just because'. I greatly respect college teachers, but they should be held to the same standards of other educators, and if their performance is not excellent, the guy whose performance is excellent should reap the rewards.

Well, you're wrong about the "larger schools" being the ones you should have a problem with in regards to allocation of funds. At those larger schools, you should love the football and men's basketball programs because chances are they're sustaining all the other sports that no on cares about, especially the women's sports. That machine you seem to disdain so much also provides a ton of benefit to the university at large.

Besides, at those "larger schools" the athletes are there for the same reason as the chem major: to prepare themselves for their future job.

So please, get off your high horse about big time college athletics.

 curran12 wrote:
Snip

I see what you are saying here. But I often do on Dakka see a hatred of teachers, like the "Those that Do, Do. those that dont Teach" too often on this site.
And Cincydooley, Im issue isnt the money spent on games(Often it is donations over here) It is the crap they get away with. To give one example. A paper was do, We all turned it in. But an athlete was not there for the game, so he could turn it in net week. Later I heard him say "I was up all last night writing that" Meaning he got extra time on his paper NONE of use got. Or the ability to change test dates, the pressure from schools to pass athletes,

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 curran12 wrote:
Snip

I see what you are saying here. But I often do on Dakka see a hatred of teachers, like the "Those that Do, Do. those that dont Teach" too often on this site.
And Cincydooley, Im issue isnt the money spent on games(Often it is donations over here) It is the crap they get away with. To give one example. A paper was do, We all turned it in. But an athlete was not there for the game, so he could turn it in net week. Later I heard him say "I was up all last night writing that" Meaning he got extra time on his paper NONE of use got. Or the ability to change test dates, the pressure from schools to pass athletes,

Actually, I am more disappointed in how they churn through young athletes bodies, injure them, put them and unnecessary risk and then reap the reward and dispose of the athlete the second they are no longer able to play. I also have some issues with how athletes cannot work or support themselves but yet can't earn money.

I have seen lots of proposals like 'guaranteed educations' for injured athletes or 'stipends' to allow athletes to at least have a personal income which is then regulated and equal across the college athletic worlds. There is an air of slavery around college athletics.

Sadly, they overuse athletes who then lose their scholarships and are instantly dumped if they get hurt, and many programs have coaches who make decisions at the expense of athletes. Too many people are making too much money off these students for them to not at minimum get a guaranteed education, even if it means the college helps them through and doesn't flunk them out the first chance they get. In the grand scheme, it is a drop in the bucket cost-wise to get those athletes a 4-year education and actually make an effort to get them through the snake since you are basically destroying their bodies for profit.

 Seaward wrote:
Puuuuuuuublic reeeeeeeeeecords.



I don't know what you want everyone to say about this, Kan. Seems like a pretty pointless slapfight.

The term is, i believe, "abusive sollicitor". The Law itself is not intented to be used as a punishment, it's supposed to determine if there is a punishment needed. If it is possible to wield otherwise legal proceedings as a punishment, then there should be limitations in place. Up here in civilized land, a request can be denied, and the sollicitor of the request banned from making any other request in a court of law on his own, if you can convince a judge that that person is using the otherwise legal proceedings as a retaliation technique.

nkelsch wrote:
Most colleges require zero education degree to teach.

Most college professors would gain zero profit from losing time on education degrees. Especially right now, given how redacted - DON'T bypass the swear filter. --Janthkin educational models are.

 Kovnik Obama wrote:
The term is, i believe, "abusive sollicitor". The Law itself is not intented to be used as a punishment, it's supposed to determine if there is a punishment needed. If it is possible to wield otherwise legal proceedings as a punishment, then there should be limitations in place. Up here in civilized land, a request can be denied, and the sollicitor of the request banned from making any other request in a court of law on his own, if you can convince a judge that that person is using the otherwise legal proceedings as a retaliation technique.

Yeah. Thing is, public records are...well, public records. You can pull them without needing to provide a reason. There aren't conditionals in place, that I know of.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Im not blindly defending them, I know some are crap. but many are good. And you know yor experiances are not the worlds either? I personally think dakka has a hard on for hating schools.

So, on the one hand you're arguing that your experiences mean that people shouldn't generalize about the educational system; and on the other hand, you're using a couple of posters to generalize about the tens of thousands of Dakka users who AREN'T in this thread?

Public record laws have exceptions to allow for the protection of confidential (or secret) information. So, not only should any student-specific information be protected in this case, but there may also be some attorney-client information that is protected here.* But everything that doesn't fall under some recognized exception to public records laws is, and should be, fair game.

*IME, the law professors most closely involved with poverty clinics and the like were also acting as "lawyer" for those people who used the clinic, while law students did most of the work. So, there may be attorney-client privilege involved (communications from clients to/from the attorney regarding some matter on which the attorney is offering legal advice) and also attorney work-product (communications between the attorney and someone acting on his behalf to further the representation of a client.)

I have thought it a little odd in the past that I'm fully qualified to teach at a law school, but not a high school government class. One of life's quirks.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 curran12 wrote:
Snip

I see what you are saying here. But I often do on Dakka see a hatred of teachers, like the "Those that Do, Do. those that dont Teach" too often on this site.
And Cincydooley, Im issue isnt the money spent on games(Often it is donations over here) It is the crap they get away with. To give one example. A paper was do, We all turned it in. But an athlete was not there for the game, so he could turn it in net week. Later I heard him say "I was up all last night writing that" Meaning he got extra time on his paper NONE of use got. Or the ability to change test dates, the pressure from schools to pass athletes,

Dude, seriously, enough with the hysterics. Dakka doesn't hate teachers. Dakka doesn't hate colleges. Certain people on Dakka believe that the higher education industry as a whole could use some serious reform. Higher education costs have skyrocketed in the USA faster than healthcare costs. Why is that? Do you think we're really churning out better college graduates this year than we were 5, 10 or 20 years ago? Why should it cost 20-60 thousand dollars a year to go to school for anywhere from 3-5 hours a day, 4 days a week?

Colleges have perpetuated the myth that in order to be successful, you MUST have a college education, and Americans have bought into it. Most people coming out of college end up in occupations that require a degree, but they end up doing work that doesn't utilize their degree. Why should you go to school for 4 years only to end up in a cubicle making 50,000 a year and saddled with 50-100 thousand in debt? Surely, not everyone should need a 4 year degree in order be successful?

Tenure has it's benefits. Primarily it protects professors who may hold unpopular views or conduct unpopular research from facing repercussions. However, the system is often abused by the academics and there is no recourse. A professor holding down a teaching position who refuses to teach should be fired. Professors should be evaluated and if they suck, they should be fired - no matter how great their ground breaking paper 20 years ago on the three-toed Central American Sloth.

Colleges and Universities provide a necessary and productive service to our society. However, many universities churn out under-educated, under-skilled, and over-privileged students who have no idea what they are doing. They should be reformed. Many people here on Dakka are not happy with the American healthcare system. That doesn't mean they hate healthcare. For someone who aspires to be a professor, I hope you can see the difference.

Not everyone needs a degree to be successful, they can go to a trade school for year or so, or go right our of college(A Friend Of mine did that, became a service technician and made good bucks)
But not veryone wants to be a plumber, a welder or stuff like that. Some may want to work in a cubicle, and they want people they know who know how to do certain things and handle loads of work
And I have a question. Tenure, How are you sure it is being abused hard? I would say those who truly abuse are far and in between, and we remember them because they stick?

Sgt_Scruffy wrote:
Colleges have perpetuated the myth that in order to be successful, you MUST have a college education, and Americans have bought into it.

Please explain how Colleges managed to fool the entire job market into believing in their necessity?

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Not everyone needs a degree to be successful, they can go to a trade school for year or so, or go right our of college(A Friend Of mine did that, became a service technician and made good bucks)
But not veryone wants to be a plumber, a welder or stuff like that. Some may want to work in a cubicle, and they want people they know who know how to do certain things and handle loads of work
And I have a question. Tenure, How are you sure it is being abused hard? I would say those who truly abuse are far and in between, and we remember them because they stick?

I suppose I'm not sure, as in, I haven't found any studies suggesting X% of tenured college professors are abusing their tenure. I'm sure it's a popular subject to bring up before the review board as you fight for grant money. I would point to all the stories of professors doing and saying outrageous things while keeping their jobs, but that would be stereotyping. Suffice to say that I don't believe jobs, especially jobs that are vital to the future of the country like teachers, professors, etc should be made so safe that people become "un-fireable." Competition breeds innovation and with a guaranteed job, I believe innovation drops off and stagnation sets in.

I did a quick google search, and this seems like a pretty good article on why tenure should go. From a professor no less.

http://blogs.hbr.org/2013/03/its-time-for-tenure-to-lose-te/


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kovnik Obama wrote:

Sgt_Scruffy wrote:
Colleges have perpetuated the myth that in order to be successful, you MUST have a college education, and Americans have bought into it.

Please explain how Colleges managed to fool the entire job market into believing in their necessity?

They didn't start it sure, but they haven't disabused anyone of the notion which is why I used the word perpetuated. Do you believe that the vast majority of good, middle-class jobs in the West should require a 4-year college degree or better?

Sgt_Scruffy wrote:
Do you believe that the vast majority of good, middle-class jobs in the West should require a 4-year college degree or better?

There are different academic models to represent the american middle class. Usually, they divide the middle class into Higher, college-educated (15%) and Lower (30%), whereas education isn't specified. So the claim that the vast majority of good, middle-class jobs in the West (in the States at least) should require a 4-year college degree is already doubtful.

On the other hand, if College education is taken seriously by hiring professionnals, perhaps it's because higher education often correlates with expertise, which is a valuable good for any industry. In cases where Colleges produces more candidates then there is demand, as it is nowadays most often the case, college-educated candidates will trickle down into other domains that may not normally require any expertise. But because the ability to developp expertise is itself useful, or often considered to be useful, your going to select the more educated fellows.

Can this dynamic create problems for those that didn't graduate College? Of course. Which is why College needs to be as accessible as possible.

nkelsch wrote:
I have seen professors who say "Women can't do math, if you are a female, you will earn no higher than a C in my class."

That's hilarious. My wife has a math degree. Heck, when we were at Cal, 52% of the math majors were women, and Cal had one of the most competitive and prestigious math departments in the world. (Evans Hall is not too far from the Nobel Prize Winners parking lot for a reason.)

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

nkelsch wrote:
I have seen professors who say "Women can't do math, if you are a female, you will earn no higher than a C in my class."

That's hilarious. My wife has a math degree. Heck, when we were at Cal, 52% of the math majors were women, and Cal had one of the most competitive and prestigious math departments in the world. (Evans Hall is not too far from the Nobel Prize Winners parking lot for a reason.)

I've had a particular logic teacher tell us, on the first day of class, that atheists could never have a coherent world-view.

Another told us that Indians (from India) simply didn't have the mind for analytical philosophy. (there's a good argument to say that western and eastern philosophy are different beasts, but to say that asians can't understand western philosophy?)

Are there terrible teachers in Colleges throughout the world? Definitly. Should tenure be abandonned as a system? Perhaps. But I think you should also take in account that it is currently the one tiny hope of job security Academia provides, and that the lower echelons endure decades at piss poor salaries and conditions, with tenure dangled as an excuse.

Sgt_Scruffy wrote:


Dude, seriously, enough with the hysterics. Dakka doesn't hate teachers. Dakka doesn't hate colleges. Certain people on Dakka believe that the higher education industry as a whole could use some serious reform. Higher education costs have skyrocketed in the USA faster than healthcare costs. Why is that? Do you think we're really churning out better college graduates this year than we were 5, 10 or 20 years ago? Why should it cost 20-60 thousand dollars a year to go to school for anywhere from 3-5 hours a day, 4 days a week?

Why should it and why does it are two entirely different questions.

But if you want tuition costs to lower, all that needs to happen is for the fed to stop guaranteeing student loans and make them bankrupt-able just like any other loan. Student lending is more irresponsible than any lending that occurred during the housing bubble, and almost entirely because there's no reason for lenders to be picky about how they lend to, since it's all guaranteed.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

And Cincydooley, Im issue isnt the money spent on games(Often it is donations over here) It is the crap they get away with. To give one example. A paper was do, We all turned it in. But an athlete was not there for the game, so he could turn it in net week. Later I heard him say "I was up all last night writing that" Meaning he got extra time on his paper NONE of use got. Or the ability to change test dates, the pressure from schools to pass athletes,

And?

You're upset because it isn't fair, I guess? Well I hate to say it, but that's life. Forget the fact that while in season, college athletes are basically working exhausting full time jobs. Forget the fact that college athletes are worth far more to a university than any "normal" undergrad. Life just isn't fair most of the time. The sooner you learn to not worry about other people and their per coerced advantages and focus on yourself, the better off you'll be.

I love the "Life Aint Fair" line. I know it isnt fair. But the fact that those students get an extenstion, but schools are supposed to treat all students equally, and when pointed out the dont(Like in a recent research we did where there was major instituitional racism, but people shrugged and said, So what?) BTW, at my school I doupt water polo brings in the big bucks. And What about me? I have a job outside of school that is nearly full time? Should I get time on papers?

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
I love the "Life Aint Fair" line. I know it isnt fair. But the fact that those students get an extenstion, but schools are supposed to treat all students equally, and when pointed out the dont(Like in a recent research we did where there was major instituitional racism, but people shrugged and said, So what?) BTW, at my school I doupt water polo brings in the big bucks. And What about me? I have a job outside of school that is nearly full time? Should I get time on papers?

Who says they're supposed to be treated equally?

Even if water polo doesn't bring in "the big bucks," chances are those 25 spectators paying to watch the match are paying more to watch that than to watch "normal student" do anything.

And being away on a due date for a match/game is a legitimate excuse to turn in a paper later. I'd be willing to bet if you had a legitimate reason why you needed an extension your professors would grant it. I know mine did.

Like my dad dying on the same day? Nope, Turn it in or your fail.
Also, What is wrong with treating students fairly? They are all paying the same amount to be there, you treat them like customers, all the same.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Like my dad dying on the same day? Nope, Turn it in or your fail.

So he died on the day it was due? Did his death affect your ability to get the work done prior to said death? I mean, presumably you should have had it done already, yes?

Besides, part of being a responsible adult is being able to work within time restraints. If I know I'm going to be taking some vacation days foe work, I get anything that's due during my vacation done BEFORE HAND.

I mean, I'm sorry, but all it sounds like is a bunch of "it's not fair" whining.

My point is that they're under no obligation to treat all students "fairly" when it comes to turning in assignments.

No it was done, but I had to go see him(Dead dad), I calle up the teacher to see if I could turn it in office hours next day or email. HE said I had to come to class, wait till the end when he collected it or it would go down a letter grade. So I missed saying goodbye to my dad.
Here is what I hate about the "Life aint fair line" Why should we not try to make life fair? Why should my co-worker get to leave early to go hang with friends, while im stuck cleaning his half finished job? Why should the athlete get more time then other students? Unless he has a cripple disability that slows down his ability to write he shouldnt. Hell he is going through school on a scholarship, he is getting a free ride, and more time?

Yep. And do you know why? Because gak in the real world is rarely fair.

You should have turned the paper in early.

Five me an answer about why we should not TRY to make the world better?
And why the feth should I turn it in early? When my dad died, but the athlete gets an extra week(Oh I get it, I was supposed to know my dad was going to die that day huh?)

Topic - stay on it.

I think the general idea behind public record laws are terrific. Sometimes sunlight really is the best disinfectant, and ultimately these people are working on the taxpayers nickel, using taxpayer equipment and systems. I really, really wanted to be able to agree with Kanluwen on this thread because it's totally obvious that this is just intended to harass the guy but in my opinion the motivations behind the requester are not salient to the situation that these are public records. In fact, this is why I am so in favor of having policemen (patrolmen) wear body cameras all the time while on the job and having the feeds be public. They have no expectation of privacy when in public, and it protects but the people and them from false accusations. We discussed this in a previous thread, as I recall.

I will always be in favor of more transparency, not less.

OT digression redacted. I meant it, people. --Janthkin

Edited as its not pertinent to the topic.