NYU organic chemistry professor terminated for tough grading • Hacker News Board

Re: NYU organic chemistry professor terminated for tough grading

#91

Post by nh23423fefe » Wed, Oct 05, 2022, 2:16 PM UTC

forgetbook wrote: post #86

nh23423fefe wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are confusing the necessary with the sufficient and ignoring that competence is correlated across diverse tasks. So yes, I could hire someone based only on seeing them perform at a high level in an unrelated task.

How do you think I confuse necessary and sufficient?

There are lots of necessary tasks entailed in a job, and I could test someone on one of those tasks (if it were suitable in an interview context). But there are other things I could ask someone and their performance on that task would be sufficient to hire them. The retort that only necessary skills should be interviewed against isn't a great argument.

Re: NYU organic chemistry professor terminated for tough grading

#92

Post by hilbert42 » Wed, Oct 05, 2022, 4:28 PM UTC

forgetbook wrote: post #83

hilbert42 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"...students have no recourse against their colleges, the companies they aspire to move into, or the federal government barring declaration of bankruptcy on their loans." I've quoted all that because each part is relevant. 1. Students had no recouse against the uni or colleges in my time either, it's just the system was fair and worked reasonably well. If the uni or colleges clamped down because you'd screwed up big-…

2 & 3] So, the students now bear the risk/burden of their training costs, where in the past they were heavily subsidized by the University capping costs ($400), the fed paying what remained (made fees free), and in some cases the company taking on an obligation to hire (cadetship). 5] Spot the strawman. How are students entitled when they are the ones paying tuition and shouldering risk of failure, while institutions…

I've really no issue with students, essentially they're the same as they have always been. My criticism is with the era, things have gotten a lot rougher and less certain for students since my time.

The fixes are obvious, but then I'm not in possession of Aladdin's lamp.

Re: NYU organic chemistry professor terminated for tough grading

#93

Post by hilbert42 » Wed, Oct 05, 2022, 4:31 PM UTC

dsq wrote: post #79

hilbert42 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"...students have no recourse against their colleges, the companies they aspire to move into, or the federal government barring declaration of bankruptcy on their loans." I've quoted all that because each part is relevant. 1. Students had no recouse against the uni or colleges in my time either, it's just the system was fair and worked reasonably well. If the uni or colleges clamped down because you'd screwed up big-…

I think the relative reward for completing higher education in any field was greater than today. Being college educated provided such a clear advantage that it was a no brainer to put up with some academic arrogance.

Very true, see my reply to forgetbook.

Re: NYU organic chemistry professor terminated for tough grading

#94

Post by hilbert42 » Wed, Oct 05, 2022, 4:42 PM UTC

cafard wrote: post #80

forgetbook wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is trivially simple for an educator(edit: typo) to write a test that every student fails, curve the grades into a normal distribution, and place blame on students while showing a normal distribution of outcomes to administration. Do you think that practice produces better learning?

Damn near fifty years ago, I had a multivariate calculus teacher who thought it was amusing to provide tests where the curve peaked about 49%. I was lazy and neglectful of doing the homework problems, so I don't blame him for my own performance. But it didn't seem like a good way to run a class. I should say that he did not curve on 50% and grade on 90%: I think that a 50% was probably a B- or a C. But it was a while…

"provide tests where the curve peaked about 49%"

Fucking smart Alec, he'd have deserved it if students had let his tires down.

The only possible saving grace would have been if he'd demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt that multivariate calculus would provide the means to get such precision, ipso facto the class results (complete with workings out). Even then, it's a ratshit idea of the worst order.

Re: NYU organic chemistry professor terminated for tough grading

#95

Post by hilbert42 » Wed, Oct 05, 2022, 4:52 PM UTC

Ekaros wrote: post #74

cannaceo wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I completed medical school back in 2012. Here's the unfortunate rub with this particular class--organic chemistry is a requisite for medical school and probably shouldn't be. The class is mostly pre-med students and very few chemistry majors. It seems that once upon a time some administrators decided that students should complete 2 years of chemistry and organic chemistry happened to be the most common second year co…

Maybe there should be an entire pre-med degree. Or at least half of it, fully focused on the subject. Some other countries just straight up admit to med-school and those who don't pass examinations end up doing things like chemistry, and rightfully treated as such students.

"Maybe there should be an entire pre-med degree."

I think there's something to that (but also it is applicable to some other professions). Trouble is it would change the complete order of things (having a 'higher' high school as a prep or similar). Unfortunately, it'd never happen as too much is already tied up in keeping in place the artificial dividing line that separates high school and higher education (think economics, whingeing employers, etc., etc.).

Re: NYU organic chemistry professor terminated for tough grading

#96

Post by hilbert42 » Wed, Oct 05, 2022, 5:33 PM UTC

Siddarth1977 wrote: post #72

cannaceo wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I appreciate your thoughtful response. Some of the concepts you mentioned, such as Gibbs free energy, are covered in intro physics, intro biology, and biochemistry courses that are also required as a physician. I believe one biochemistry class as an undergrad and one year of biochemistry instruction in the first 2 years of medical school. A simplified organic chemistry course could cover the theory of SN1/SN2 attacks…

My school had weed out classes in my program, but it had nothing to do with graduate admissions or competitive rankings. The point was that it's better to have a student struggle and make adjustments earlier rather than later in their education. Regardless if that adjustment is "spend more time studying" or "change from STEM to something easier", it's better for it to happen in a students first year than fourth year…

"Lots of smart kids who didn't have to work very hard in high school learned early that they were going to have to work harder in college."

Some don't learn early either. I was smart enough to coast along for quite a while doing little and then I suddenly had to apply myself (it was a bit of a shock). I had to relearn how to apply myself and it was harder than I anticipated.

Of course, this never applied to truly brilliant kids (they're the ones I envy). It also doesn't help when one's parents kept pointing to a couple of brothers who lived several blocks away from my home and saying to the effect 'why can't you stop mucking around and just apply yourself like them'. (They were in different classes to me and a year's difference separated them. Trouble was my mother and theirs used to associate with each other (mother's club and all that stuff), so such comparisons were easy.)

It turned out later that it wasn't that they just had normal brains but with lost of application to study—but more. Some years later (perhaps a decade or so) I opened the pages of Scientific American and started reading a fascinating and informative article, it was then that I turned to the author's name only to realize that I knew that 'bastard'. Also a check of the references showed that he had a string of publications about the subject in other advanced publications.

As they say, that's life.

Re: NYU organic chemistry professor terminated for tough grading

#97

Post by forgetbook » Wed, Oct 05, 2022, 5:47 PM UTC

hilbert42 wrote: post #92

forgetbook wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

2 & 3] So, the students now bear the risk/burden of their training costs, where in the past they were heavily subsidized by the University capping costs ($400), the fed paying what remained (made fees free), and in some cases the company taking on an obligation to hire (cadetship). 5] Spot the strawman. How are students entitled when they are the ones paying tuition and shouldering risk of failure, while institutions…

I've really no issue with students, essentially they're the same as they have always been. My criticism is with the era, things have gotten a lot rougher and less certain for students since my time. The fixes are obvious, but then I'm not in possession of Aladdin's lamp.

It did occur to me that my ask is being delivered to someone in no position to say yes. Thank you for helping me organize my thoughts though.

Re: NYU organic chemistry professor terminated for tough grading

#98

Post by hilbert42 » Wed, Oct 05, 2022, 6:07 PM UTC

cannaceo wrote: post #85

Siddarth1977 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My school had weed out classes in my program, but it had nothing to do with graduate admissions or competitive rankings. The point was that it's better to have a student struggle and make adjustments earlier rather than later in their education. Regardless if that adjustment is "spend more time studying" or "change from STEM to something easier", it's better for it to happen in a students first year than fourth year…

My experience in medical school is that your success is based on your ability to memorize large amounts of information that is of low conceptual difficulty in short periods of time. This isn't a trait that is selected for in passing ochem. Furthermore, ochem is the last time in your undergrad or medical school training where you'll be faced with that level of conceptual rigor. You could just as easily ask all the und…

"We all have our biases against the kids who couldn't pass o-chem."

Do you think that really true? I know some people who struggled with it who took it (or had to take it) as a major. Others, found it easy because they were good at remembering many details, yet others loved its systematic order.

I love the subject but the amount of detail drives me batty at times (one only has to thumb through a copy of Merck to be overwhelmed by the number of processes, etc.)—and I don't have a photographic memory.

However, I don't see that as a major issue in the long run, for if one is heavily involved with some of its specialized threads/areas then it all makes sense at that level (well sort of for much—duh, some—of the time).

Unlike physics where the rules seem clearer and more straightforward, the detail in o-chem throws people (especially those who don't have a good memory for detail). From my experience, this can become an acute problem around exam time when other subjects are competing for attention. Some people do much better in that situation than others, it doesn't mean that they're not good students, or haven't tried hard enough—or that they even dislike the subject.

It seems to me it's the nature of the beast that is actually the real culprit. Perhaps that ought to be taken into account when teaching the subject (for instance, we could offset o-chem exams from others by scheduling them to be held at a different time of year).

Just a thought.

Re: NYU organic chemistry professor terminated for tough grading

#99

Post by forgetbook » Wed, Oct 05, 2022, 6:15 PM UTC

fsckboy wrote: post #88

forgetbook wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is trivially simple for an educator(edit: typo) to write a test that every student fails, curve the grades into a normal distribution, and place blame on students while showing a normal distribution of outcomes to administration. Do you think that practice produces better learning?

your comment incorporates so much ... fail > It is trivially simple for an educator to write a test that while it is not trivial to write any test, it is trivial to have the test cover the material that was taught and not the material that wasn't, and that's how tests are written > every student fails, curve the grades into a normal distribution, then the bulk of students didn't fail under the normal meaning of gradi…

I'll imply numbering:

1] Tests are written in many different ways. There is no regulatory body controlling pedagogy across institution at the college level. At best you can assume an invisible hand of the market for hiring graduates influencing student enrollment decisions, and you'll be introducing too many confounding variables to continue a productive discussion of individual tests.

2] I mean the bulk of students fail the test before the curve is applied. If even the highest cohort didn't learn enough material to constitute getting credit, I would hope they are not simply curved into a passing grade relative to each other and passed along. I would hope they are able to retake the course, learn the material, and demonstrate that learning.

3] The blame for poor performance necessitating grading on a curve to avoid bulk-of-class failure being placed on students for failing to learn, rather than an educator failing to teach.

4] Testing is not what produces learning. Testing attempts to measure competence. Receiving feedback from testing enables students to use the measurements in their learning, but the data point 'we all failed' hardly seems useful. // Grading on a curve evaluates student performance relative to each other. Grading without a curve evaluates student performance relative to the test. You can argue either is more fair if you want, but simplifying the task of the professor writing the exam is hopefully not the goal of college education. Hopefully the goal is to train students into highly competent graduates, who can perform across uneven difficulty in different material.

(edit: testing attempts to measure learning -> testing attempts to measure competence)

Re: NYU organic chemistry professor terminated for tough grading

#100

Post by forgetbook » Wed, Oct 05, 2022, 6:24 PM UTC

hilbert42 wrote: post #92

forgetbook wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

2 & 3] So, the students now bear the risk/burden of their training costs, where in the past they were heavily subsidized by the University capping costs ($400), the fed paying what remained (made fees free), and in some cases the company taking on an obligation to hire (cadetship). 5] Spot the strawman. How are students entitled when they are the ones paying tuition and shouldering risk of failure, while institutions…

I've really no issue with students, essentially they're the same as they have always been. My criticism is with the era, things have gotten a lot rougher and less certain for students since my time. The fixes are obvious, but then I'm not in possession of Aladdin's lamp.

I think students (demographically) have changed as well as the conditions they operate in. As you've pointed out, even attending a higher ed is much more common. There are not only more students, but also more students from different backgrounds. Motivationally there is likely similarity to how they have always been, but the challenge of training a student population of increasing size and diversity remains.