What I might call an ideal University
November 8th, 2007
I heard a rumour today that the main reason the University of Toronto converted their full-year introduction to psychology course to a half-year course was that students were doing too well in the second year psychology courses. That’s right. They were simply too well-prepared, thus why not take the (apparently well-performing) foundational course and condense it so that people do worse.
Now, I don’t really know if it’s true. But I know it’s not impossible. After all that’s what bell-curving tests is all about isn’t it? — about maintaining that bell-curve distribution.
And the friend who was telling me this today said, “I mean I know they need to do this kinda thing because you want your mark for UofT to mean something”…and I know what he meant…but I got to thinking…
What if all the foundational courses were brilliant? What if all the intelligent people who were accepted into the University of Toronto were presented with what they needed to achieve at the greatest potential possible? Then maybe sure, everyone who went here would get good marks, but that would just mean that everyone went to a school that was so dedicated to the development of knowledge and education that everyone performed outstandingly.
Instead of what high marks from this kind of place mean now, which is something like: you’ve done well despite our attempts to hold you back; you are one of the elite few on the top end of the bell curve. Well done.
Entry Filed under: University (Studies and Classes), Psychology
3 Comments Add your own
1. Ali | November 9th, 2007 at 5:04 pm
I second this. It also makes me think of the difference between the “hard” and “easy” majors at UF (and i assume, many other schools). The “hard” majors being engineering, hard sciences, etc. where it’s amazing to get an A in a class and the tests are designed so that you get a low percentage (but are then curved so that some get A’s) and the “easy” majors; mostly liberal arts (”soft” sciences) where it is “easy” to get an A (as in, many people get As) but your grade is based generally on whether you learned the material or not and usually a part of it is subjective- whether the prof felt you really understood what was going on. Just by the distinction of hard and easy, we can see which are more respected, but they are really very different ways of looking at the world and in my experience different ways of thinking and learning, and shouldn’t be given the distinction of better/worse/harder/easier, but just different. Ranking is so pervasive, we can’t simply be satisfied with different.
2. Nick | December 10th, 2007 at 5:10 pm
I think this garden has been fallow these past few months. Where are the daisies, have they been eaten by grazing herds of exam papers that trample everything and everyone in their path?
3. padraigin | January 9th, 2008 at 5:04 pm
Hehehehe Nick! You are lovely. Yes I think they were. Exams and papers, and snowflakes and somehow the daisies just weren’t sprouting :P.
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed