NYU Prof fired because his class was too hard

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:His nasty tone notwithstanding, I can't say I disagree with the substance of his farewell letter to students.

"I learned last week that I have been fired from my position in the chemistry department at NYU. I was not given a reason, but I assume that it involves the “petition” of last spring (which I have never been allowed to see or comment on).
I send you this information because I will no longer be able to make any changes to the current data for chemistry 225 (2021) and 226 (2022). ALL – repeat ALL - future administrative matters including, but not limited to, grade changes, regrades, resolution of INC grades, and letters of recommendation must be dealt with by the deans and/or the departmental leadership, Professors Tuckerman and Walters.
I send congratulations to those of you who did well, and an apology to those of you who cruised through this course with a relentless stream of 100’s. The apology comes because I didn’t stretch you, and thus deprived you of the chance to improve beyond an already formidable baseline. Keep it up!
This incident is far more important than it looks. Consider the effect on an untenured or clinical professor. If his or her career is at the mercy of disgruntled students and accommodating deans, how are they to teach real material and give real grades? Much the same can be said for departmental administrators who meet with students daily. Can they afford to be tough when necessary?
The chemistry department’s ability to meet its teaching responsibilities has been diminished. Indeed, the university’s reputation has already suffered.
Now a piece of unsolicited advice: It is very difficult to be self critical. It is hard to accept personal responsibility when we meet failure, as each of us will at some point, but it is an essential life skill you would be wise to develop.
Good luck to all of you.
mj"

Is this for real? Where did you get this letter?

Yes, it's real. A colleague passed it along.

This is pretty much why my father retired 15 years earlier than I thought he would. He loved teaching and I thought he might never retire. But over the decades of his career, students became consumers who thought they bought the right to succeed when they paid their tuition. Respect for expertise and knowledge has diminished and now there’s a frequent “you work for me” attitude instead.

I'm a regular person so I have to keep developing, growing, showing value to the people who pay me money to work or I will be canned. The concept of tenure seems utterly outdated and I have yet to hear of anything persuasive in favor of it. Sounds like a contributor to ossification.

Students today pay far more for college than you or your father did. Therefore, the standards and expectations are going to increase. Sounds like your father did not understand that.

You are part of the problem. You think your kid is a consumer. “I pay a lot.” Yes, you do - for fancy dorms, a hundred different food options, the Starbucks food truck, enormous first class fitness centers, and sports. THAT’S why you pay more. Enjoy it. You also pay for the opportunity to learn from masters of their fields. You are not buying a promise of success.

Professors are tenured because education requires free thought and free speech. Professors have to have the freedom to choose their texts, their lessons, and prompt conversations that encourage thinking outside a student’s current perspective - sometimes that’s a controversial subject. Professors need to publish and do research. They need to do all of these things with intellectual pursuit free of any fear of control or punishment from their employer.

Your post is a fine example of the ignorance and entitlement that dumbs down our country.

Lol “masters in the field”, what a load of crap.

Professors are there for research, teaching is an annoyance. Few are there yo teach and even fewer are good at it.

Tenure is to protect research because they are deep teachers. Not just this one, they are at every university. We are not here to fund your research.

Your post shows you have no clue about the system put in place to protect average white makes.

You’re super proud of your ignorance.

Sorry grandma the world has passed you by. I’m sure the “masters” are teaching.

Ah. And now I see you’re not a parent. You’re a kid. College is not for everyone and that’s ok.

Clearly it was not for you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:His nasty tone notwithstanding, I can't say I disagree with the substance of his farewell letter to students.

"I learned last week that I have been fired from my position in the chemistry department at NYU. I was not given a reason, but I assume that it involves the “petition” of last spring (which I have never been allowed to see or comment on).
I send you this information because I will no longer be able to make any changes to the current data for chemistry 225 (2021) and 226 (2022). ALL – repeat ALL - future administrative matters including, but not limited to, grade changes, regrades, resolution of INC grades, and letters of recommendation must be dealt with by the deans and/or the departmental leadership, Professors Tuckerman and Walters.
I send congratulations to those of you who did well, and an apology to those of you who cruised through this course with a relentless stream of 100’s. The apology comes because I didn’t stretch you, and thus deprived you of the chance to improve beyond an already formidable baseline. Keep it up!
This incident is far more important than it looks. Consider the effect on an untenured or clinical professor. If his or her career is at the mercy of disgruntled students and accommodating deans, how are they to teach real material and give real grades? Much the same can be said for departmental administrators who meet with students daily. Can they afford to be tough when necessary?
The chemistry department’s ability to meet its teaching responsibilities has been diminished. Indeed, the university’s reputation has already suffered.
Now a piece of unsolicited advice: It is very difficult to be self critical. It is hard to accept personal responsibility when we meet failure, as each of us will at some point, but it is an essential life skill you would be wise to develop.
Good luck to all of you.
mj"

Is this for real? Where did you get this letter?

Yes, it's real. A colleague passed it along.

This is pretty much why my father retired 15 years earlier than I thought he would. He loved teaching and I thought he might never retire. But over the decades of his career, students became consumers who thought they bought the right to succeed when they paid their tuition. Respect for expertise and knowledge has diminished and now there’s a frequent “you work for me” attitude instead.

I'm a regular person so I have to keep developing, growing, showing value to the people who pay me money to work or I will be canned. The concept of tenure seems utterly outdated and I have yet to hear of anything persuasive in favor of it. Sounds like a contributor to ossification.

Students today pay far more for college than you or your father did. Therefore, the standards and expectations are going to increase. Sounds like your father did not understand that.

Whose standards, though? What you're saying is that tuition is a way of buying a grade. Some of us think it's how you pay someone to teach students.

This guy sounds like a major dick, but when college students are asking for "extra credit," it's pretty clear where the weakest link is.

“Standards” means teachers should be able to communicate information effectively to the median in this class. I think that’s pretty obvious actually and telling that so many of you consider this buying a grade or some such nonesense. This professor had terrible reviews for years and floated on his reputation as a researcher. That sh** shouldn’t fly anymore.

Actually, this teacher had an equal number of excellent reviews. The students with the excellent reviews state that the whiners didn’t want to do the work.

Kids are snowflakes these days, full stop.

Average White makes have been skating for centuries time to actually do your job to make your salary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:His nasty tone notwithstanding, I can't say I disagree with the substance of his farewell letter to students.

"I learned last week that I have been fired from my position in the chemistry department at NYU. I was not given a reason, but I assume that it involves the “petition” of last spring (which I have never been allowed to see or comment on).
I send you this information because I will no longer be able to make any changes to the current data for chemistry 225 (2021) and 226 (2022). ALL – repeat ALL - future administrative matters including, but not limited to, grade changes, regrades, resolution of INC grades, and letters of recommendation must be dealt with by the deans and/or the departmental leadership, Professors Tuckerman and Walters.
I send congratulations to those of you who did well, and an apology to those of you who cruised through this course with a relentless stream of 100’s. The apology comes because I didn’t stretch you, and thus deprived you of the chance to improve beyond an already formidable baseline. Keep it up!
This incident is far more important than it looks. Consider the effect on an untenured or clinical professor. If his or her career is at the mercy of disgruntled students and accommodating deans, how are they to teach real material and give real grades? Much the same can be said for departmental administrators who meet with students daily. Can they afford to be tough when necessary?
The chemistry department’s ability to meet its teaching responsibilities has been diminished. Indeed, the university’s reputation has already suffered.
Now a piece of unsolicited advice: It is very difficult to be self critical. It is hard to accept personal responsibility when we meet failure, as each of us will at some point, but it is an essential life skill you would be wise to develop.
Good luck to all of you.
mj"

Is this for real? Where did you get this letter?

Yes, it's real. A colleague passed it along.

This is pretty much why my father retired 15 years earlier than I thought he would. He loved teaching and I thought he might never retire. But over the decades of his career, students became consumers who thought they bought the right to succeed when they paid their tuition. Respect for expertise and knowledge has diminished and now there’s a frequent “you work for me” attitude instead.

I'm a regular person so I have to keep developing, growing, showing value to the people who pay me money to work or I will be canned. The concept of tenure seems utterly outdated and I have yet to hear of anything persuasive in favor of it. Sounds like a contributor to ossification.

Students today pay far more for college than you or your father did. Therefore, the standards and expectations are going to increase. Sounds like your father did not understand that.

Whose standards, though? What you're saying is that tuition is a way of buying a grade. Some of us think it's how you pay someone to teach students.

This guy sounds like a major dick, but when college students are asking for "extra credit," it's pretty clear where the weakest link is.

“Standards” means teachers should be able to communicate information effectively to the median in this class. I think that’s pretty obvious actually and telling that so many of you consider this buying a grade or some such nonesense. This professor had terrible reviews for years and floated on his reputation as a researcher. That sh** shouldn’t fly anymore.

Actually, this teacher had an equal number of excellent reviews. The students with the excellent reviews state that the whiners didn’t want to do the work.

They also (the positive reviews) say he doesn’t teach, you have to learn from the book and that he is rude,

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:His nasty tone notwithstanding, I can't say I disagree with the substance of his farewell letter to students.

"I learned last week that I have been fired from my position in the chemistry department at NYU. I was not given a reason, but I assume that it involves the “petition” of last spring (which I have never been allowed to see or comment on).
I send you this information because I will no longer be able to make any changes to the current data for chemistry 225 (2021) and 226 (2022). ALL – repeat ALL - future administrative matters including, but not limited to, grade changes, regrades, resolution of INC grades, and letters of recommendation must be dealt with by the deans and/or the departmental leadership, Professors Tuckerman and Walters.
I send congratulations to those of you who did well, and an apology to those of you who cruised through this course with a relentless stream of 100’s. The apology comes because I didn’t stretch you, and thus deprived you of the chance to improve beyond an already formidable baseline. Keep it up!
This incident is far more important than it looks. Consider the effect on an untenured or clinical professor. If his or her career is at the mercy of disgruntled students and accommodating deans, how are they to teach real material and give real grades? Much the same can be said for departmental administrators who meet with students daily. Can they afford to be tough when necessary?
The chemistry department’s ability to meet its teaching responsibilities has been diminished. Indeed, the university’s reputation has already suffered.
Now a piece of unsolicited advice: It is very difficult to be self critical. It is hard to accept personal responsibility when we meet failure, as each of us will at some point, but it is an essential life skill you would be wise to develop.
Good luck to all of you.
mj"

Is this for real? Where did you get this letter?

Yes, it's real. A colleague passed it along.

This is pretty much why my father retired 15 years earlier than I thought he would. He loved teaching and I thought he might never retire. But over the decades of his career, students became consumers who thought they bought the right to succeed when they paid their tuition. Respect for expertise and knowledge has diminished and now there’s a frequent “you work for me” attitude instead.

I'm a regular person so I have to keep developing, growing, showing value to the people who pay me money to work or I will be canned. The concept of tenure seems utterly outdated and I have yet to hear of anything persuasive in favor of it. Sounds like a contributor to ossification.

Students today pay far more for college than you or your father did. Therefore, the standards and expectations are going to increase. Sounds like your father did not understand that.

The problem with increasing tuition, in large part, is that it makes students entitled consumers (note the nyu dean admitted to appeasing the tuition payers!!). But becoming educated requires significant exertion. The most engaging organic chemistry professor in the world will still need her students to work hard and study hard. Usually, there will be a natural curve. Instead, top universities (my DH teaches at one) require professors to give good grades… even when students haven’t mastered the material! It means that truly prepared students no longer stand out. It means mediocre and poor students pass. There will be consequences for the sham that higher education is becoming.

Except there are other teachers teaching the exact same material to the same cohort of students and they don’t have a problem.

“Exact same material” & the students are actually learning it? You know this how? Or is it that the other profs have dumbed down the material and the exams?

People have been saying orgo is standardized. Now it is not? How many of his students go on to be successful chemistry majors, pass MCAT, become TA/RAs? So many ways to figure out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The inmates are running the asylum.

or he was simply bad at teaching

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lol “masters in the field”, what a load of crap.

Professors are there for research, teaching is an annoyance. Few are there yo teach and even fewer are good at it.

Tenure is to protect research because they are deep teachers. Not just this one, they are at every university. We are not here to fund your research.

Your post shows you have no clue about the system put in place to protect average white makes.

Now this is a special kind of dumb right here.

[Anonymous]

Have we talked about how the professor is 84? Isn’t it possible, even likely, that he is having some memory or processing issues that could have affected his teaching skill?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Have we talked about how the professor is 84? Isn’t it possible, even likely, that he is having some memory or processing issues that could have affected his teaching skill?

There were reviews from students who did well in his class that said he was a good teacher.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Have we talked about how the professor is 84? Isn’t it possible, even likely, that he is having some memory or processing issues that could have affected his teaching skill?

Yes, that has been discussed repeatedly.

[Anonymous]

My dad is 80 and is still teaching. He has no memory or processing issues. He does teach in this old style though, where test problems are not exactly what was covered in class. The expectation is that you learn the basic rules in class, and that you use your knowledge to wrestle with something new in the test. Most students aren’t used to that kind of testing and freak out. However, he makes all his lectures, notes, and past exams available, so if you bothered to look, you’d be prepared.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He was used to Princeton students and failed to adjust down for a lower-achieving cohort. Pretty straightforward.

Profs are ordered to fail read “weed out” a certain amount of students because the universities don’t want to spend big money adding capacity to highly expensive STEM depts. They want to force XX% of each freshmen class to high margin soft departments. It’s a big racket and has literally nothing to do with the students being equipped to handle medical school.

Actually, I never found this to be true. The students just usually aren't up to the material and these are classes they need to get through for STEM, which is by nature, hard.

This professor didn't understand he was going to be tecahing in a much easier environment in retirement and was not familiar with being left go, in order to appease the tuition payers. The younger, non retired faculty know they better score well on the student surveys or they are out.

When I pay high tuition for my kids, I would want them to be challenged by difficult problems that will push them, advance their analytical ability and expand their perspective. I want these professors to test their students’ limits and push their boundary. If these professors don’t do this and just try to make it easy for students, why would I send them to top school? They might as well learn it from YouTube lectures (which is quite good for just learning materials). I suggest these NYU students to take khan academy organic chemistry instead

You’re fine with your kids being challenged until they earn a C or below. Then you would lose your shit.

+100. The parents are the ones calling the Dean, and then the Dean pressures the prof to make everything easier. Most STEM profs I know say this same thing.

Tuition is so high now that the expectation is, if you pay it, you get the grades necessary for med school, etc. To pay that much and then be weeded out is unacceptable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He was used to Princeton students and failed to adjust down for a lower-achieving cohort. Pretty straightforward.

Profs are ordered to fail read “weed out” a certain amount of students because the universities don’t want to spend big money adding capacity to highly expensive STEM depts. They want to force XX% of each freshmen class to high margin soft departments. It’s a big racket and has literally nothing to do with the students being equipped to handle medical school.

Actually, I never found this to be true. The students just usually aren't up to the material and these are classes they need to get through for STEM, which is by nature, hard.

This professor didn't understand he was going to be tecahing in a much easier environment in retirement and was not familiar with being left go, in order to appease the tuition payers. The younger, non retired faculty know they better score well on the student surveys or they are out.

When I pay high tuition for my kids, I would want them to be challenged by difficult problems that will push them, advance their analytical ability and expand their perspective. I want these professors to test their students’ limits and push their boundary. If these professors don’t do this and just try to make it easy for students, why would I send them to top school? They might as well learn it from YouTube lectures (which is quite good for just learning materials). I suggest these NYU students to take khan academy organic chemistry instead

You’re fine with your kids being challenged until they earn a C or below. Then you would lose your shit.

+100. The parents are the ones calling the Dean, and then the Dean pressures the prof to make everything easier. Most STEM profs I know say this same thing.

Tuition is so high now that the expectation is, if you pay it, you get the grades necessary for med school, etc. To pay that much and then be weeded out is unacceptable.

+1. I hate this trend, but it’s not *crazy* to expect good customer service from an institution that is charging you 60k per year or whatever it is now. For that kind of money, people are going to expect results. They aren’t entirely wrong to do so IMO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Have we talked about how the professor is 84? Isn’t it possible, even likely, that he is having some memory or processing issues that could have affected his teaching skill?

sounds like Biden

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lol “masters in the field”, what a load of crap.

Professors are there for research, teaching is an annoyance. Few are there yo teach and even fewer are good at it.

Tenure is to protect research because they are deep teachers. Not just this one, they are at every university. We are not here to fund your research.

Your post shows you have no clue about the system put in place to protect average white makes.

Now this is a special kind of dumb right here.

Truth hurts

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He was used to Princeton students and failed to adjust down for a lower-achieving cohort. Pretty straightforward.

Profs are ordered to fail read “weed out” a certain amount of students because the universities don’t want to spend big money adding capacity to highly expensive STEM depts. They want to force XX% of each freshmen class to high margin soft departments. It’s a big racket and has literally nothing to do with the students being equipped to handle medical school.

Actually, I never found this to be true. The students just usually aren't up to the material and these are classes they need to get through for STEM, which is by nature, hard.

This professor didn't understand he was going to be tecahing in a much easier environment in retirement and was not familiar with being left go, in order to appease the tuition payers. The younger, non retired faculty know they better score well on the student surveys or they are out.

When I pay high tuition for my kids, I would want them to be challenged by difficult problems that will push them, advance their analytical ability and expand their perspective. I want these professors to test their students’ limits and push their boundary. If these professors don’t do this and just try to make it easy for students, why would I send them to top school? They might as well learn it from YouTube lectures (which is quite good for just learning materials). I suggest these NYU students to take khan academy organic chemistry instead

You’re fine with your kids being challenged until they earn a C or below. Then you would lose your shit.

+100. The parents are the ones calling the Dean, and then the Dean pressures the prof to make everything easier. Most STEM profs I know say this same thing.

Tuition is so high now that the expectation is, if you pay it, you get the grades necessary for med school, etc. To pay that much and then be weeded out is unacceptable.

+1. I hate this trend, but it’s not *crazy* to expect good customer service from an institution that is charging you 60k per year or whatever it is now. For that kind of money, people are going to expect results. They aren’t entirely wrong to do so IMO.

What if the truth is some kids just can’t handle difficult subjects like organic chemistry or engineering, and careers in medicine and engineering are not good fit for them? Many parents believe that their kids have special talents or are genius, but the reality is most kids are not.