Sadly, school is seen as a means to an ends. You want that paper at the end w/ a good gpa. Learning doesn’t factor into it, you’ll learn what you need to when you need it. As such many have learned how to play the professor and do the least possiable to get the best grade.
This is also the justification used for cheating, which seems rampid.
Also the professors themselves play a big part of it. Most will assume themselves openminded, but IMHO very few really are. THe ones are truly are will draw out opposing opinions and explore them w/ the class. This process encourages other students to express viewpoints which may be contrary to the professors. THis is one of the best professors I can remember, who was/is a flameing lib.
OTOH, when you get a professor who just gives lipservice to being openminded - or he may actually think he is being openminded, it’s like beating your head against a wall, and the prof. has the last word anyway. It is hard debate and win in a classroom setting since you can’t back up anything, and it ends up being a he said she said type of thing, which the professor usually wins by default. THis is better to gear your assignments to a point you wish to make, where you can reference points.
I will dispute this. It’s not always a question of what evidence you have available, it’s how you use the evidence you have. I’ve made good, successful arguments out of the textbook and notes. As long as you can make a reasoned argument, most profs will buy it.
I heartily second this. Frankly, it’s like pulling teeth to get students to express an opinion about anything. I’m sure as hell not going to be picky about what that opinion is, as long as they can provide the evidence to support it.
I’m quite young for a college instructor (29), but I’m convinced that there has been a generational shift in college students’ attitudes since I was an undergrad. I argued the hell out of my professors, just for the sake of arguing, and so did many of my classmates. It never even occurred to me that I might be marked down for this (and I wouldn’t have cared if I were). Many of the current crop of students seem to be so risk-averse and conflict-averse that they won’t voice opinions that anyone might disagree with. If one student does venture an opinion, it’s almost impossible to get any of his classmates to volunteer a counterargument. Ditto for reaction papers about assigned readings – only rarely do students show themselves willing to criticize the author’s ideas or unstated assumptions, even if they’ve been specifically invited to do so.
When I started graduate school, I only had a so-so job, and was relying a large part on my graduate career to be a stepping stone to the future. So I had a lot more deference towards my professors, and was more likely to just do what they said and not argue. I noticed, however, that students who had no job at all (and thus were very reliant on the professor’s good graces for grants, etc.) were absolutely fawning and slave-like in their treatment of the professors.
However, in my second semester of grad school, I got a true professional job, which meant the next time I went to class I made more than the professor did (the professor’s salaries were posted in the campus library). And I noticed then that not only did my attitude change towards the professors, treating them more as a semi-equal, but their attitudes changed towards me as well. Suddenly, they were acting like I was on a similar level to them, while I still saw them ordering other graduate students around like a drill sergeant. There was even some resentment shown towards me by the other graduate students, but since I didn’t have to work with them on anything, I really didn’t care.
To be fair to that professor, you got really lucky. That is a major theme of “Pride and Predjudice” and is a perfectly appropriate, if somewhat obvious, essay topic.
(Damn you, I was always pathetically awful at faking my way through an essay)
Indeed. The problem has gotten so severe that many students don’t want to sit in judgment, or in correction, or in debate with anyone else, no matter what.
A colleague handed me one of Michael Kelly’s articles on this; it’s worth reading. Heck, maybe I’ll pass it out in class one of these days:
Many students still think that no opinion could possibly be wrong and that all opinions, no matter how stupid, misguided or ignorant–are pretty much on equal footing.
If students have gotten very scared of expressing an opinion, perhaps this is a data point in favor of the bias argument. Perhaps years of continual bias has had a chilling effect on free expression on campus.
I mostly had lecturers who loved a good, involved debate, so long as you supported your arguments, at Uni. However, I did also experience receiving a significantly lower grade than usual for one assignment in one class, compared to the rest of my grades in that class, because I chose to present on something controversial. I damn well did it anyway, but it was still off-putting. I was told pretty clearly that my subject matter was unacceptable to the lecturer from a personal point of view. If I were someone less, um, pigheaded, I’d have changed it to something he wanted to hear. I can understand how the perception that a lecturer will penalize you/has the power to do so could limit people’s desire to speak out in classes.
It is indeed possible that one presentation out of all my coursework was 40% less competent than anything else I was graded on that semester, but given the hostility I received, I’m hard put to believe it.
I was always impressed by people who argued with the prof, I never had the balls to do such a thing.
Why? I dunno, I just never felt I could. On the occasions that someone did voice an opinion that I really hated I usually got shot down, because I wasn’t much of a debater and didn’t have much self-esteem.
For example, my high school Social Studies teacher made it clear he was 100% pro-life - abortion under no circumstances. Now I wonder what he was doing bringing that particular viewpoint into the classroom. I did argue with him, but he just scolded me and refused to listen.
Nowadays, of course, I still don’t like to argue but certainly would debate if I had a good enough reason to. Just don’t see the point of unneccesary arguments. If you do argue, though, more power to you!
Because the last time I tried, I got charming little turds sprinkled through my paper like:
“This sort of approach …[which requires hypotheses to be falsifiable]… is hegmonic discourse”
and
“Science is often regarded as just another religion”
and
" Computer based modelling and observation are a “crock” "
You can see why I would be less than willing to state my own opinion in a social science class ever again :rolleyes:.
On the other hand, all of my hard science classes have contained rather lively debate, often departing into some quite philosophical issues, without ever descending into postmodernist bullshit.