Anonymous wrote:Purdue and Cornell fall in the 'crush the soul and happiness category' due to coursework, grading and weather.
Anonymous wrote:Purdue and Cornell fall in the 'crush the soul and happiness category' due to coursework, grading and weather.
Anonymous wrote:Hi professor.
I feel bad that you don’t get what this thread is about.
A lot of parents are still teaching their kids what to care about and look out for, what to weigh and balance as they enter adulthood. And I hope most of us recognize that if we offer suggestions to our children they often don’t have the independent knowledge to challenge what we tell them, go “do their own research,” or have some Jedi-esque passion well up in them to direct their lives.
Are you, or we, or society, interested in have our kids gain the skills to make a livelihood within? Are we sending them to compete in their profession as if it were a varsity sport? Are we sending them to a gatekeeping guild to be hazed and judged worthy? Are we sending them to be taught to think in ways that they have not considered before?
I believe it is all of these things, at various levels, and people can disagree about which is a priority.
I would hope not to have my children taught by someone who thinks pedagogy is a primarily about making life difficult for adolescents and seeing how they respond.
Basically, I can understand how a proud professional from a given field would have a hard time separating hazing would-be new entrants in their field from best practices in actual education. But since that’s not the right approach, I’m going to look out for me and mine.
Good luck as an educator and professional in your field.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Hi professor.
I feel bad that you don’t get what this thread is about.
A lot of parents are still teaching their kids what to care about and look out for, what to weigh and balance as they enter adulthood. And I hope most of us recognize that if we offer suggestions to our children they often don’t have the independent knowledge to challenge what we tell them, go “do their own research,” or have some Jedi-esque passion well up in them to direct their lives.
Are you, or we, or society, interested in have our kids gain the skills to make a livelihood within? Are we sending them to compete in their profession as if it were a varsity sport? Are we sending them to a gatekeeping guild to be hazed and judged worthy? Are we sending them to be taught to think in ways that they have not considered before?
I believe it is all of these things, at various levels, and people can disagree about which is a priority.
I would hope not to have my children taught by someone who thinks pedagogy is a primarily about making life difficult for adolescents and seeing how they respond.
Basically, I can understand how a proud professional from a given field would have a hard time separating hazing would-be new entrants in their field from best practices in actual education. But since that’s not the right approach, I’m going to look out for me and mine.
Good luck as an educator and professional in your field.
But any learning involves receiving negative feedback! And being in a peer group that is stronger the oneself doesn’t mean unhealthy competition. I always think being surrounded by driven peers is one of the best things can happen in college! So many American kids these days are so easy to be crushed by any negative feedback and peer pressure.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Several threads discuss engineering schools that are hard to just survive. Some hint that there are alternatives
Could you list these alternatives?
Short background: my HS sophomore has great grades and tests well at a difficult school and has a general interest in engineering. But I don’t want him to drift into a situation where his soul could be crushed without choosing that.
Are there schools we could choose with engineering majors where you just learn how to do it without the excessive pressure and stress?
Crush the soul? Are their souls made with glass? Why do you have to worry? Is it you who is going to school? Or your dear child who can’t be and refused to be challenged?
As a prof, I am so shocked how protective today s parents are.
Anonymous wrote:Hi professor.
I feel bad that you don’t get what this thread is about.
A lot of parents are still teaching their kids what to care about and look out for, what to weigh and balance as they enter adulthood. And I hope most of us recognize that if we offer suggestions to our children they often don’t have the independent knowledge to challenge what we tell them, go “do their own research,” or have some Jedi-esque passion well up in them to direct their lives.
Are you, or we, or society, interested in have our kids gain the skills to make a livelihood within? Are we sending them to compete in their profession as if it were a varsity sport? Are we sending them to a gatekeeping guild to be hazed and judged worthy? Are we sending them to be taught to think in ways that they have not considered before?
I believe it is all of these things, at various levels, and people can disagree about which is a priority.
I would hope not to have my children taught by someone who thinks pedagogy is a primarily about making life difficult for adolescents and seeing how they respond.
Basically, I can understand how a proud professional from a given field would have a hard time separating hazing would-be new entrants in their field from best practices in actual education. But since that’s not the right approach, I’m going to look out for me and mine.
Good luck as an educator and professional in your field.
Anonymous wrote:Several threads discuss engineering schools that are hard to just survive. Some hint that there are alternatives
Could you list these alternatives?
Short background: my HS sophomore has great grades and tests well at a difficult school and has a general interest in engineering. But I don’t want him to drift into a situation where his soul could be crushed without choosing that.
Are there schools we could choose with engineering majors where you just learn how to do it without the excessive pressure and stress?
Anonymous wrote:"crush my child's soul" sounds awfully dramatic... engineering is hard but if your kid is reasonably smart and works hard, nothing will get crushed.
- engineer
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Major tech companies are not just recruiting at top 3 publics. Most big tech companies also are recruiting at these regional public engineering programs like GMU, UMCP, UMBC, UVA, VCU, and VT.
I am sure they also recruit at other publics, but I know it is true for those publics.
Pushing "top ranked" is a DCUM thing across this forum. It is not reality for engineering degrees. ABET sets a high floor and most employers know this. A more supportive engineering program without the weed out classes also meets the standards and is NOT usually lower quality.
+1
Calc 1/2/3/4 and Physics 1/2 all cover the same material. If it's ABET accredited program, you will do well.
In reality, attending a school that is collaborative and whose goal is not to "weed out 40%" is much better IMO. Yes there will always be "weed outs" as the courses are difficult and some kids might realize "heck, engineering is not for me". But there is a difference between 50%+ flunk out and 25% do and also huge difference between the "average on a Chem 101 exam is 65/70 versus 30%".