Today's Education

[Coyote]

As some here know, my Significant Other, Lilith (a sometime poster on the board) is a professor of history at a regional liberal arts college. Recently, the class of kids that are considered to be "the best and the brighterst ever" (based on SAT scores and similar tests) has arrived for their freshman year at the college.

Lilith just this week finished grading mid-terms from these kids. Essays, 'Blue Books', writing journals, etc... and she is left with one overwhelming, near-uniform impression of these 'best and brightest'.

They are nice kids, generally well-behaved and tolerant, and have absolutely zero ability for critical thought processes. They take in vast sums of knowledge and regurgitate it almost exactly. There is no analysis, no interpretation, and no attempt to put an opinion, a point of view, or reach a conclusion.

Their grades are universally mediocre. B through C range. Nothing outstanding, nothing abyssmal. All their essays are essentially the same thing, just repeating what was 'recorded' in class or readings. It seems like an entire generation of faceless, gray blobs of mediocrity have bubbled up through the ranks.

Depressing as I think that is, is it so bad? A lack of excellence counterbalanced by a lack of failure? What awaits these kids in the future, especially the job market?

[Ace Pace]

Bureaucracy, thats what ahead of them, happy boring lives.

And its not limited to America, I've noticed here, more and more students just taking in every word of a course and spewing it out in multi-page tests without actully understanding anything or applying it beyond the course.

[RedImperator]

That's a major problem I've been finding with my students. They've been trained to memorize and regurgitate facts without any kind of critical thinking or analysis. It's to the point that they become confused and hostile when you attempt to engage them in anything more--first, they think it's a trick, and second, they don't like it when you tell them the way they know how to get good grades won't work for you.

These kids, by the way, would not be considered "the best and brightest", even though some of them are obviously bright and deserve a hell of a lot better than the education they've gotten.

[Ace Pace]

The problem is that students are also being taught that opinions are importent and you shouldn't be afraid to say them, which makes them even more hostile when anyone tells them "You're wrong."

[Metatwaddle]

Well, as a freshman at a liberal arts college I think I'm one of these "best and brightest." I hope to think I'm different from these kids who can't think critically, but I don't know. Maybe I am that bad. Maybe I'm just another sample of mediocrity, my only differences being that my study habits are awful - and that my good SAT scores and bad GPA probably raised some eyebrows on admissions committees.

It wouldn't surprise me, though, if she was right and this was a global phenomenon. Most of my classmates seem very preoccupied with "keeping up with the reading," and I get the feeling that all through their lives, teachers have been concerned with "covering the material" to such an extent that actually thinking about said material has become a secondary concern.

Maybe she should be tougher on the grades to get their attention? Maybe she should start giving regurgitation a 'D' grade instead of a 'C+' or whatever. I'm sure she knows better than me.

[RedImperator]

The problem is that students are also being taught that opinions are importent and you shouldn't be afraid to say them, which makes them even more hostile when anyone tells them "You're wrong."

That's not really the issue. Most students I've seen are used to there being one right answer to any question the teacher asks--the first couple times I asked them for their opinion on something, I had to repeatedly reassure them that any answer was acceptable as long as they had a good reason for it. The hostility in telling them "You're wrong" comes from embarassing them, especially if you do it in front of their classmates.

[18-Till-I-Die]

That's a major problem I've been finding with my students. They've been trained to memorize and regurgitate facts without any kind of critical thinking or analysis. It's to the point that they become confused and hostile when you attempt to engage them in anything more--first, they think it's a trick, and second, they don't like it when you tell them the way they know how to get good grades won't work for you.

Thats rather interesting actually, what do you mean they think its a 'trick'? Like they dont understand it? That frankly sounds almost scary, sounds...like robotic or something...

Though i could easily be misinterpeting what you mean, if so my bad.

[Darth Yoshi]

I'm assuming a trick as in "Any answer works? That can't be right! She's trying to get me to say something wrong, I know it."

As much as I like to think I'm intelligent, since I'm in the same age bracket as these students I'm probably not much better outside math or science.

[RedImperator]

That's a major problem I've been finding with my students. They've been trained to memorize and regurgitate facts without any kind of critical thinking or analysis. It's to the point that they become confused and hostile when you attempt to engage them in anything more--first, they think it's a trick, and second, they don't like it when you tell them the way they know how to get good grades won't work for you.

Thats rather interesting actually, what do you mean they think its a 'trick'? Like they dont understand it? That frankly sounds almost scary, sounds...like robotic or something...

Though i could easily be misinterpeting what you mean, if so my bad.

They think I'm playing a trick on them. You have to understand, I'm teaching tenth and eleventh graders who've spent their entire school careers doing dittoes, defining vocabulary words, and reading the textbook in order to answer the questions at the end of the chapter. They know how to do those things, and they know if they do them they'll get a good grade. When I stand up in front of the room and say, "I want an answer from you that's not in the book," I've changed the rules on them. If I don't explain how the new game is played, they assume I'm still looking for the One Right Answer, but now they have to read my mind instead of the book, and they get hostile.

[18-Till-I-Die]

Ok i see. Yes i noticed that too when i was in school, in the halcyon days of my youth. These kids that i ended up with were supposed to be the 'best and the brightest' but i always thought that wasnt exactly true. They didnt 'know' anything, they had memorized things told to them and could repeat it, but there was no thought behind it. They had learned nothing, retained nothing, i mean. But they were supposed to be the smart kids, i heard one teacher call one them a 'genius' once.

Of course i had incredibly bad teachers, this was a private, religious school and i figure most of the teachers were uncredited, i think thats the word. So my experience might not be typical.

[Ace Pace]

Ok i see. Yes i noticed that too when i was in school, in the halcyon days of my youth. These kids that i ended up with were supposed to be the 'best and the brightest' but i always thought that wasnt exactly true. They didnt 'know' anything, they had memorized things told to them and could repeat it, but there was no thought behind it. They had learned nothing, retained nothing, i mean. But they were supposed to be the smart kids, i heard one teacher call one them a 'genius' once.

Of course i had incredibly bad teachers, this was a private, religious school and i figure most of the teachers were uncredited, i think thats the word. So my experience might not be typical.

Bolding Mine.

I think thats the issue, if they atleast retained their knowledge then it would be worth something, but memorising, spewing then forgetting it all in preparation for the next test is the problem, you find it less in the sciences since they are all based on prior work but how would you do that in other subjects?

[Surlethe]

I think thats the issue, if they atleast retained their knowledge then it would be worth something, but memorising, spewing then forgetting it all in preparation for the next test is the problem, you find it less in the sciences since they are all based on prior work but how would you do that in other subjects?

Even retention will do very little good if the student is unable to think critically. Think of each piece of information as a puzzle piece; even if you take them out of the box, the pieces still do you no good if you can't put them together and see the entire picture.

[Ace Pace]

I think thats the issue, if they atleast retained their knowledge then it would be worth something, but memorising, spewing then forgetting it all in preparation for the next test is the problem, you find it less in the sciences since they are all based on prior work but how would you do that in other subjects?

Even retention will do very little good if the student is unable to think critically. Think of each piece of information as a puzzle piece; even if you take them out of the box, the pieces still do you no good if you can't put them together and see the entire picture.

Obviously but its better then nothing, and the current situation is nothing.

The overall trend is more and more memorisation for tests(regardless of their name), but here is something we're lacking, what happens post education? Are there any studies on sucess rate of students nowdays in aquiring and holding a job compared to before?

[Darth Wong]

The problem is lazy teachers. Teaching of critical thinking skills requires considerable effort and individualized teacher-student interaction. Rote memorization, on the other hand, is easy to teach. You simply give students the material and then give them a test to see if they memorized it.

[Surlethe]

Obviously but its better then nothing, and the current situation is nothing.

The overall trend is more and more memorisation for tests(regardless of their name), but here is something we're lacking, what happens post education? Are there any studies on sucess rate of students nowdays in aquiring and holding a job compared to before?

If the bulk majority of students are in the memorization, don't think critically category, then employers will have very little choice but to hire them, because there won't be enough critical thinkers to go around; I'm sure people more versed in economics will correct me if I'm wrong, but the demand curve for labor is rather inelastic, which means as the supply of qualified workers decreases, the wage will rise; some businesses will be unable to afford to hire those qualified workers, so they will have no choice but to hire from the mass of blank-eyed uncritical slobs.

[Surlethe]

The problem is lazy teachers. Teaching of critical thinking skills requires considerable effort and individualized teacher-student interaction. Rote memorization, on the other hand, is easy to teach. You simply give students the material and then give them a test to see if they memorized it.

Doesn't some blame also lie with lazy students? Even if a teacher is willing to teach critical thinking skills, if the student doesn't want to learn those skills, then the knowledge will not be imparted. Overly defensive parents enhance the problem; the threat of a lawsuit against the school system is not something to be taken lightly.

[Einhander Sn0m4n]

The problem is lazy teachers. Teaching of critical thinking skills requires considerable effort and individualized teacher-student interaction. Rote memorization, on the other hand, is easy to teach. You simply give students the material and then give them a test to see if they memorized it.

And this is due to the entrenched teachers' unions. The teachers want the Quick and Easy path; we all know that leads to the Dark Side.

[RedImperator]

The problem is lazy teachers. Teaching of critical thinking skills requires considerable effort and individualized teacher-student interaction. Rote memorization, on the other hand, is easy to teach. You simply give students the material and then give them a test to see if they memorized it.

And this is due to the entrenched teachers' unions. The teachers want the Quick and Easy path; we all know that leads to the Dark Side.

Oh, bullshit. As if the unions went away tomorrow, we'd have a sudden renaissance in teaching.

I'll tell you what. You go to an urban elementary or middle school and you try to deal with 30-40 students of widely varying ability level, learning style, and development, including kids with serious cognative or emotional disabilities (to the point that some first grade teachers are afraid of some of their students), with the state pressuring the district, which in turn pressures you, to get the childrens' test scores up! up! up! no matter what it takes, and see what kind of individual constructivist learning you can accomplish. Or, come to an urban high school, where the worst miscreants have dropped out, gone to jail, or died, but the remaining students have been trained for the last ten years in rote memorization techniques, and you'll still have students with wildly varying skills and styles, including some who have been socially promoted, and you still have the district breathing down your neck over test scores. Do this all with students raised in an environment where one or both parents are absent, violence is endemic, drug dealing is the only well-paying job available, and absolutely nobody from the outside gives a shit if your students live or die.

Not to mention, rote learning has been the design of high school cirricula for the past 100 years. How are you going to accuse the older generation of laziness when rote learning is what they were trained to do, and at least it produces results they know how to measure? How do you accuse the younger generation of it when that's all the kids know how or want to do, its all your experienced colleagues believe works, and it's what your administration is pressuring you to do? There was never some magical golden age of teaching where learning was anything but rote; we just notice it doesn't work today because it's unsuited for an information age economy, whereas it works quite well when you're training the next generation of blue-collars for the assembly lines.

But of course, it all those damn lazy teachers' fault. It's not the disintegration of the family structure, it's not growing intellectual laziness and anti-intellectualism throughout the culture, it's not the replacement of reading and unstructured play with television and video games, it's not an outdated pedagogy, it's not the cult of standardized testing, it's not misspent or nonexistant resources, it's not politicians or administrators or parents or the students themselves. Just those damn teachers.

[Einhander Sn0m4n]

Wau, Red. You just totally pwned me there. Convinced and Conceded. Thank you.

[Boyish-Tigerlilly]

Are we talking about critical thinking in a math/science curriculum, or just social sciences and liberal arts courses? I know the OP said the professor was a Liberal Arts college professor, but I just have a hard time visualizing what the problem is. I know that, in my sciences, the stuff is basically just rote memorization, and people can't even do that half the time. I don't know how they would do critical thinking.

Could you please give a short example of what you mean? In my English and History, we did have research papers and projects and such where we had to form theses, but I don't know if that qualifies. In class, all we really do is scribble down notes from the professor or quote or text-bibles. There really isn't much thought, but I don't know what would be. Maybe I just cannot tell the difference, and perhaps we are doing what you say.

I know some of my professors discourage "out of the box" thinking. All they want to do are so mutliple-choice tests and the like. Interpretive answers are wrong, he said once--he didn't want subjective answers on an objective exame.

[Boyish-Tigerlilly]

Edit: In my texts, there really isn't much controversial that one could make an opinion about or interpret. It's all just stuff objective explanations and facts to regurgitate, as you say.

[Surlethe]

Are we talking about critical thinking in a math/science curriculum, or just social sciences and liberal arts courses?

The ability to think critically is a cross-curricular skill.

I know the OP said the professor was a Liberal Arts college professor, but I just have a hard time visualizing what the problem is. I know that, in my sciences, the stuff is basically just rote memorization, and people can't even do that half the time. I don't know how they would do critical thinking.

Science and mathematics absolutely require critical thinking; memorization and projectile regurgitation do not lead to an understanding of the topic. To understand science and mathematics, one must first be able to draw associations between seemingly dissimilar units of information, find patterns therebetween, distill the patterns into a recognizable form, and finally to form a judgment about the proposition in question. The ability to evaluate facts and judge the truth or falsehood of a proposition is the essence of critical thinking.

[Arrow]

As some here know, my Significant Other, Lilith (a sometime poster on the board) is a professor of history at a regional liberal arts college. Recently, the class of kids that are considered to be "the best and the brighterst ever" (based on SAT scores and similar tests) has arrived for their freshman year at the college.

Lilith just this week finished grading mid-terms from these kids. Essays, 'Blue Books', writing journals, etc... and she is left with one overwhelming, near-uniform impression of these 'best and brightest'.

They are nice kids, generally well-behaved and tolerant, and have absolutely zero ability for critical thought processes. They take in vast sums of knowledge and regurgitate it almost exactly. There is no analysis, no interpretation, and no attempt to put an opinion, a point of view, or reach a conclusion.

Their grades are universally mediocre. B through C range. Nothing outstanding, nothing abyssmal. All their essays are essentially the same thing, just repeating what was 'recorded' in class or readings. It seems like an entire generation of faceless, gray blobs of mediocrity have bubbled up through the ranks.

Depressing as I think that is, is it so bad? A lack of excellence counterbalanced by a lack of failure? What awaits these kids in the future, especially the job market?

I noticed something very similar when I was in college. My college wasn't easy to get into (wasn't the hardest, either, but you needed SAT scores on the high side an a 3.5 unweighted GPA from High School or CC). It was extremely obvious in my software classes. The first class is always Computer Science I, which goes over the basic theory of programming, followed by CS II, where you have to start coding and learning a language. The CS I class had ~40 people, almost all of which made it through. CS II started wtih 35+ students - it finished with 8. The problem: lack of thinking and analysis skills. These people could tell you what a constructor is, what a method is, what the main function does. But they couldn't write one bit of code. The simplest programs, such as a Tower of Hanoi program, was beyond them. They wanted the professor (who left the college and is now one of my coworkers - small county) to write the programs for them! And they leech off of the few us that could figure things out.

As to what happened to those that failed. Some just dropped out. A few went to biology or math (as if that was any easier...). Most switch to philosophy and journalism majors.

And there you have it folks, most journalist can't think! (j/k).

The ones that couldn't analyize took the easy way out, without though for the future. And most of them are now working as bank tellers, salesman and other jobs that require only memorization and little else.

[Arrow]

Ghetto edit: And they make crappy tellers and salesmen, at that!

[Zero]

I've noticed this in my own school. Actually knowing information isn't as important on most tests, essays, or busyworks as regurgitating information. Actually, trying to understand information is often seen by the typical student as a waste of time. If they can get an A by using some pointless formulaic approach, then that's what they're going to do.

I, on the other hand, prefer to actually learn information, and often times, I find the vast amounts of pointless busywork more annoying then anything, so I skip them. This is how I can actually get a C or D in a class in which I score above 100% on the final (beat the curve).

Actually learning and understanding information is seen as a waste of time by us kids, I guess. School is a means to getting to college, which is a means to getting a well-paying job. None of it's about learning.