In the past, I've had students call my problem sets “emotionally trying” • Hacker News Board

Re: In the past, I've had students call my problem sets “emotionally trying”

#221

Post by Mezzie » Wed, Jan 18, 2023, 2:45 PM UTC

jrm4 wrote: post #81

xyzzyz wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But there are smart people who get all this stuff "easily" (previous practice, exposure). Or, simply by virtue of being more intelligent. Life is not fair, and some people do have it easier than others, without having to pay for it with extra study time. If you are pursuing a research career, and you observe other students putting similar amounts of effort, but obtaining much better results, understanding things mo…

Genuine question. Does this kind of "weeding out" actually have any value in the real world, or is it just gatekeeping slash carnival-prizes?

One advantage is making sure that those on the quicker end of the bell curve don't have their time wasted. Not just in classes, but later on with their colleagues: If you know everybody can make the same jumps you can, then you can explain your thought processes without having to jump back and remind people of things. In addition, this helps everybody see each other as colleagues and peers rather than creating a weird situation where some people who are nominally on the same level end up being teachers or tutors rather than peers. It also helps create and set norms around what information people should know or be able to find as opposed to 'John can't search a database' or 'Cindy shows up without knowing first order logic and derails our presentation asking about it every slide'.

Not providing some kind of weeding out/gatekeeping is a great way to disincentivize the talented because then they spend their careers as teachers or hand-holders instead of what they actually want to do + they end up frustrated having to slow down.

Re: In the past, I've had students call my problem sets “emotionally trying”

#222

Post by Mezzie » Wed, Jan 18, 2023, 2:51 PM UTC

opportune wrote: post #128

deskamess wrote: post #42

Pretty much most senior level/grad algorithm classes are like this. They introduce a framework for solution and then give you about 2-3 example lecture problems that they walk you through. 2-3 weeks after being introduced to 5/6 frameworks its Exam day. You are given unique word problems that, in the eyes of someone experienced like a prof or PhD student, is trivial. But you are struggling with 1 week of homework exp…

I did well in Algorithms courses (I took 4-5 and TA’d the intro class). I also studied math on top of CS. Imo a lot of the problem that CS students face in algorithms is due to not having a mathematical background. Even though you are introduced to concepts like invariants, induction, and propositional logic in a discrete math class, IMO it takes more exposure and practice to get to the point where these concepts get…

I have no formal math background but I did take some propositional logic classes and more than a decade later they remain by far the most useful courses I ever took. I'm really surprised that they're not standard/easily skippable in CS curricula.

Re: In the past, I've had students call my problem sets “emotionally trying”

#223

Post by horns4lyfe » Wed, Jan 18, 2023, 2:56 PM UTC

simiones wrote: post #164

krageon wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every child knows what things they like and are good at. It might not map exactly to a career path but it's not like career skills live in some sort of magical vacuum that you can never see until you try them.

How many children are aware that they would enjoy actuarial finance? How many are aware that they would be good at arguing patent law?

Do they enjoy math? Are they good at persuading others to side with them in arguments? Those aren’t non-transferable skills.

Re: In the past, I've had students call my problem sets “emotionally trying”

#224

Post by Savely » Wed, Jan 18, 2023, 2:58 PM UTC

gadders wrote: post #217

loudmax wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed, but part of the teachers' job is to impart that curiosity and interest onto their students. That is hard to do, and only the very best teachers actually manage to do this.

Yeah, maybe when your younger than 16 or 18. If you're at Uni you're an adult and it's on you to study.

If so, why have teachers at all? Give those freshmen adults a syllabus in the beginning of the semester and conduct exams at the end. ”Those who are smart and motivated will get it, and heck with the rest.”

Re: In the past, I've had students call my problem sets “emotionally trying”

#225

Post by gadders » Wed, Jan 18, 2023, 3:08 PM UTC

Savely wrote: post #224

gadders wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, maybe when your younger than 16 or 18. If you're at Uni you're an adult and it's on you to study.

If so, why have teachers at all? Give those freshmen adults a syllabus in the beginning of the semester and conduct exams at the end. ”Those who are smart and motivated will get it, and heck with the rest.”

They still have a role in explaining the material and answering questions, but it's not their job to motivate students to study their subject.

Re: In the past, I've had students call my problem sets “emotionally trying”

#226

Post by reidjs » Wed, Jan 18, 2023, 3:08 PM UTC

The sad thing is, I would have totally love to have studied computer science in school, but the classes were too damn hard.

Re: In the past, I've had students call my problem sets “emotionally trying”

#227

Post by karmelapple » Wed, Jan 18, 2023, 3:12 PM UTC

martopix wrote: post #208

njbooher wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plenty of new faculty are more interested in research than teaching too.

The system is unfortunately unfair to everyone, in the sense that it's an unfair expectation for people to love and be good simultaneously at teaching and research. I met many people that want to do research (because of passion or because that's what gets you a career) and are bothered by teaching; I've also met people, including myself, who prefer teaching to research, and it's unfair that neither of these groups ca…

Talking with my partner just now, it seems like some universities in the USA practice this now. Some colleges at Iowa State University seem to have professors that have very low research expectations, and they typically teach the 100 and 200-level classes. Those teachers seemed to have packed lecture halls, since those profs truly care about teaching and don’t have the stress of constantly producing papers from a large lab.

Re: In the past, I've had students call my problem sets “emotionally trying”

#228

Post by simiones » Wed, Jan 18, 2023, 3:27 PM UTC

horns4lyfe wrote: post #223

simiones wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many children are aware that they would enjoy actuarial finance? How many are aware that they would be good at arguing patent law?

Do they enjoy math? Are they good at persuading others to side with them in arguments? Those aren’t non-transferable skills.

So if they enjoy math, they are as likely to enjoy actuarial finance as they are to like research into category theory or machine learning? If they are good at persuading others to side with them in arguments, they are as likely to enjoy patent law, criminal law, marketing, or politics?

There are some common skills, but all of these professions are extraordinarily different and require completely different aspects of those skills, and entirely different additional skills.

Re: In the past, I've had students call my problem sets “emotionally trying”

#229

Post by njbooher » Wed, Jan 18, 2023, 3:35 PM UTC

karmelapple wrote: post #227

martopix wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The system is unfortunately unfair to everyone, in the sense that it's an unfair expectation for people to love and be good simultaneously at teaching and research. I met many people that want to do research (because of passion or because that's what gets you a career) and are bothered by teaching; I've also met people, including myself, who prefer teaching to research, and it's unfair that neither of these groups ca…

Talking with my partner just now, it seems like some universities in the USA practice this now. Some colleges at Iowa State University seem to have professors that have very low research expectations, and they typically teach the 100 and 200-level classes. Those teachers seemed to have packed lecture halls, since those profs truly care about teaching and don’t have the stress of constantly producing papers from a lar…

Those are term faculty. They typically aren't paid well.

Re: In the past, I've had students call my problem sets “emotionally trying”

#230

Post by WastingMyTime89 » Wed, Jan 18, 2023, 3:51 PM UTC

crote wrote: post #175

defrost wrote: post #15

That takes me back to third year applied mathematics in the 1980s. Small class, seriously smart hard working ederly professor notorious for setting conjectures from whatever areas of interest he currently had as exam questions. Failure was not even trying to answer, grading was scaled on how many you had a shot at and what kind of dent you made on them in the hour. Fun times.

That sounds like an absolute nightmare, to be honest. What does "trying to answer" even mean? I generally try to think about a problem before actually, you know, writing stuff down. I can obviously think a lot faster than I can write, so writing down potential approaches when I can't quite see a way to advance from them - or for which I already know that they are wrong - is not really viable. The only way I can see t…

Well, trying to answer means trying to answer: highlight an approach, try to make a dent, show work even if it doesn't lead you to the final result.

> I generally try to think about a problem before actually, you know, writing stuff down. I can obviously think a lot faster than I can write, so writing down potential approaches when I can't quite see a way to advance from them - or for which I already know that they are wrong - is not really viable.

You are thinking about too simple of a problem.

Any moderatly complex problem won't fit in your head. The traditional approach is to find a path towards what you want to prove, highlight the main lemma and start working on them in order if you can but working backward is fine if you find that easier.

> Giving exam questions for where there isn't a reasonably reachable answer derivable from the taught material is quite cruel.

Life isn't fed to you piece by piece nor is it easy. Advanced questions are hard. That's the point.