Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Shadow Scholar

chronicle.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 115 posts

Re: The Shadow Scholar

#91

Post by Natsu »

jorleif wrote: post #16

I can churn out four or five pages an hour. I'm utterly fascinated, is it really possible to produce that much text on an unknown subject? I write maximum about 1 page of academic text per workday. That is of course real, and contains a significant amount of math, but still producing the amount of material mentioned in the article consistently is very impressive. I wonder if one way to improve writing skills would be…

> I'm utterly fascinated, is it really possible to produce that much text on an unknown subject?

If it's anything like the reports I wrote for my own humanities classes, you can skim a bunch of relevant materials and churn something out in a rather short time. That said, you're much better off if you can wrangle things around to write about something you already know.

I seem to recall that for one class, I managed to get out of some weekly writing assignment by turning it into one huge paper about a topic I had already read about. I then wrote it for about 10 hours straight (naturally, the last 12 hours before the assignment was due...) and had an ~80 page paper freshly printed out and in my hand just in time for class.

My teacher loved it and asked to be able to use it as a class reading assignment in the future. It was a first draft, hastily written brain dump of everything I had ever known about the subject. But there was no need to pad out my writing to fill pages and I think that's why my teacher liked it.

Re: The Shadow Scholar

#92

Post by Natsu »

BoppreH wrote: post #56
light3 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure he probably goes through more material per day than 99.99999% of the population, but whether he remembers or understands is another matter.

And there is also the sad fact that he has to hide all that under heavy layers of academic wording. But even in the worst case scenario, he has some degree of familiarity with almost everything. Except math.

You might not believe me, but I've seen essays in place of equations on math tests before.

I think one was even relevant enough to get partial credit...

Re: The Shadow Scholar

#93

Post by JesseAldridge »

oz wrote: post #31

I, who dropped out of CompSci after my first year, was a small-time shadow scholar. It started innocently enough: I wasn't working, and a friend of a friend who was doing her Master's (in Education, wouldn't you know) needed help typing and formatting a document according to APA Style. I needed the money, so I visited her at the school where she worked. I took the draft she had penned and started reading. I nearly vo…

Before I dropped out of school altogether, I decided I would try devoting as little time to it as possible. I started forcing myself to write essays faster and faster. It got to the point where I would sit down in front of my computer for five to ten minutes and literally write a stream of consciousness vaguely connected to the topic. I could turn it in for a C or a D. We've all heard about the 80/20 rule, but it seems like there's a 60/1 rule too. The hardest part about it was putting my name on such low quality work. But if you just want to optimize returns on your time, it's amazing how little effort is required.

Re: The Shadow Scholar

#94

Post by arethuza »

oz wrote: post #33
grellas wrote: post #30

Has modern education become so jaded that it now plays out as farce, where learning is not the goal but gaming the system is? I vividly remember the slackers of my generation (college/law school in the 1970s). They took the basket-weaving classes on the cynical assumption that it was a short-cut to getting an "easy A." They padded their papers with junk - that is, whenever they couldn't avoid having to do a paper. Th…

"Has modern education become so jaded that it now plays out as farce, where learning is not the goal but gaming the system is?" In a word, yes. You see, education, for most people, is NOT about learning . It's about getting a job . We HN types value learning for its own sake, and would happily curl up with a copy of SICP or TAOCP and feel content. The average person wants the whole thing to be over as quickly and pai…

My wife, who has a grand total of four degrees (two undergrad, two postgrad) as well as a number of difficult to get professional qualifications jokes about it as "collecting the badges" - she is serious about learning but has no illusions about how these things are viewed by others.

Re: The Shadow Scholar

#95

Post by 3dFlatLander »

> Over the years, I've refined ways of stretching papers. I can write a four-word sentence in 40 words. Just give me one phrase of quotable text, and I'll produce two pages of ponderous explanation. I can say in 10 pages what most normal people could say in a paragraph.

I did this a lot while in college--I'm sure many did. The quality of the work was terrible in hindsight, and I did cheat myself out of some good learning opportunities. But, the thing that bothers me to this day is that no teacher ever called me out. My writing tends to be technically correct, which wasn't very common in most of my classes. I think the fluff was acceptable in comparison to sloppy spelling and grammar.

Re: The Shadow Scholar

#96

Post by derefr »

oz wrote: post #33
grellas wrote: post #30

Has modern education become so jaded that it now plays out as farce, where learning is not the goal but gaming the system is? I vividly remember the slackers of my generation (college/law school in the 1970s). They took the basket-weaving classes on the cynical assumption that it was a short-cut to getting an "easy A." They padded their papers with junk - that is, whenever they couldn't avoid having to do a paper. Th…

"Has modern education become so jaded that it now plays out as farce, where learning is not the goal but gaming the system is?" In a word, yes. You see, education, for most people, is NOT about learning . It's about getting a job . We HN types value learning for its own sake, and would happily curl up with a copy of SICP or TAOCP and feel content. The average person wants the whole thing to be over as quickly and pai…

I think everyone values learning for its own sake to some degree; however, they value having a job more. If you were guaranteed a job whether or not you did well in school (not that that's a good idea), I think a lot more people would venture to actually challenge themselves in classes, because it would be a game (i.e. low stakes) rather than a trial.

Re: The Shadow Scholar

#97

Post by derefr »

azanar wrote: post #44
liuhenry wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "You see, education, for most people, is NOT about learning . It's about getting a job. " That is exactly true. But I challenge that "learning for its own sake" is not normal; rather, the educational system is atrocious in its ability to foster "learning" in kids who never experienced truly mastering something in the first place. I daresay that the sense of accomplishment from solving a problem or truly learning so…

I don't think it is reasonable to lay this at the feet of the education system. In fact, it is somewhat difficult to lay this at the feet of any system, to be honest. It is a systemic failure of both the system, and the people who depend upon it to do either what they can't do, or what they wish not to do. As for the system encouraging people to get a job, it is just responding to popular sentiment. The gauge people…

And we, in turn, are a reflection of the meta-system: industrialization. If we didn't punt—if everyone went out and tried to become an entrepreneur, or a classical musician, or a game designer, to their taste, and nobody ever gave up on their dreams, just said "meh" and took a job at McDonald's or slinging Java code or picking up trash—then our society wouldn't run. The industrial society—the society that manages to generate extreme levels of wealth in scarcity—is built on the backs of those who are willing to just stand around and let others get rich at their expense. The "losers," in other words.[1]

[1] http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/10/07/the-gervais-principle-o...

Re: The Shadow Scholar

#98

Post by derefr »

oz wrote: post #40
liuhenry wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "You see, education, for most people, is NOT about learning . It's about getting a job. " That is exactly true. But I challenge that "learning for its own sake" is not normal; rather, the educational system is atrocious in its ability to foster "learning" in kids who never experienced truly mastering something in the first place. I daresay that the sense of accomplishment from solving a problem or truly learning so…

Upvoted. I see your point. Question for you: Is there any way it could be different, given the constraints the education system faces, such as limited time, untalented teachers, and the human need to quantify?

No, but for far more general reasons than you're explicating. Large-scale systems, like education, are borne of incentives, not single decisions here or there. No matter what little initiatives you try to foist upon them, they reach a new dynamic equilibrium that's just as bad in some other way, because they are incentivized to do so in some way.

According to Robin Hanson, the incentives the school system has are to make children more obedient to non-empathetic authority (people who haven't personally proved themselves as being worth following, but rather just hold positions of power), and to teach self-control: http://www.overcomingbias.com/2010/08/functions-of-school.ht...

Both of these functions have been "absorbed" into the education system, not through any explicitly-stated goals, but rather by setting the incentives. Teachers must grade; children must pass. Therefore, children will be compared by their grades, and learn to feel like they can be, on the whole, quantified and valuated—in other words, objectivized.

Re: The Shadow Scholar

#99

Post by derefr »

oz wrote: post #41
azanar wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The world is bullshit. And you certainly did your part in helping the world that direction. You were willing to undersell yourself in allowing people to pass off your work and knowledge and skills as your own, and then you wonder why everyone around you seems to be so amazingly stupid. They're stupid because you provided them absolutely no incentive not to be. You made ignorance cheap, and as a result, it is precisel…

I'm not going to play dumb and act like I didn't realize what I was doing. I did it partly for the money, and partly for the sake of helping someone who would probably not have a chance to improve their life (via education). We remain good friends to this day - she called just before I read your comment. " They're stupid because you provided them absolutely no incentive not to be." There are some people who, irrespec…

> Don't believe for a second that one day, everyone will be smart, uber-rational and we'll all live in some Randian, Galt-led utopia.

Not even with properly-applied eugenics (i.e. widespread pre-fertilization gene therapy)?

Re: The Shadow Scholar

#100

Post by gyardley »

It's a shame the author didn't discuss where he worked, and how this industry is connected to other aspects of for-profit online education.

I 'edited' college admissions essays for a couple of years, back when I was a hungry grad student. The company I worked for, CyberEdit, was acquired by Peterson's, a subsidiary of the Thompson Corporation. When Thompson started divesting its education-based businesses, Peterson's (and CyberEdit) were acquired by Nelnet, which holds and services a large portion of federally subsidized student loans.

CyberEdit helps you get into a school you couldn't otherwise attend and Nelnet helps you pay for a school you couldn't otherwise afford - with all parties financially underwritten by your tax dollars. Great business.

Post reply on HN