twofish-quant said:
You are trying to train physicists.
How does training physicists differ from training hockey players, though? They are both trained with the aim of excelling at the highest level, and both require not just throwing the hardest thing you can at them, but a well thought out approach.
twofish-quant said:
Grades are only a motivation method. Part of the reason that this worked at my undergraduate school was that pretty much everyone in the class was smart and motivated, so in the end pretty much everyone was able to pass the class with a decent grade. The reason that the tests were killer was to get really smart people to work at their limits. In high school, if you were a super-duper genius, and you made 100% on all the tests, that was it...
I agree with a lot of what you said here, but grades are not only a motivation method, unfortunately. They matter, they matter to employers and to grad schools. And even if they were just a motivation method, getting low grades due to the test being just ridiculously hard is more of demotivation than a motivation. Well, I guess it depends on the kind of person you are, as well, since failure spurs some to try even harder and others to sink into depression. But you're trying to educate as many people as you can, and you can always motivate the motivated with other means and get the same results, whereas if you screw up the latter category of students, there's no way you can get that back.
But I do agree with pushing people to their limits, and you make a great point. Is the philosophy you're trying to convey here a household idea in most of US universities or was it just that way with MIT? Because I have to say it differs a lot from what I experienced back home and in Belgium. I was only on an exchange for six months in Belgium, but I can safely say that at least in Law it was the same as back home. No one ever expected you to know more than what was covered in lectures and books you were supposed to read, and talking to people doing medicine and social studies (I didn't know or talked to many people who studies sciences, unfortunately, but second-hand info tells me it still wasn't the way you describe) it was the same there, as well. If you had a question that wasn't covered somewhere, people would be really upset, as it would be something quite unusual. This doesn't mean there weren't any really hard questions, just that they pertained to topics we discussed at least.
I'm not saying what we did was the proper way, because I also realize there are vast differences between approaching Arts and Science studies, I'm just trying to portray the landscape of how it was/is where I studied and how I'm used to it being. I'm doing Physics now so maybe I will encounter some of what you said and if I think about it, our first Linear Algebra homework was in that vein, and later the professor even expressly mentioned that he wants to challenge us so that we really have to think about the stuff rather than just go through the motions.
twofish-quant said:
However at my school, the super-duper genius would get 40% on the test, with some incentive to see if they could get 45%. The analogy with the UFC fighter is a good one. We know that you can stick in the ring for 5 seconds. Let's see if you can get in and fight for 6 seconds. OK, we see that you can fight for 6 seconds, let's see if you can fight for 15.
I think the problem with this approach is that at university you can't afford to test people for such a long time to see if they can last longer. By the time you're done doing that years pass, not only a semester, which the course was supposed to be taken in. And you also need to discern between great, good, average and sub-par fighters. If someone lasts for 6 seconds, others for 5 and then some only 4, then that is just too small of a difference to really make that distinction and the error in that assessment is just to great for you to be able to take the result seriously.
twofish-quant said:
Sure but in the end, it didn't matter because grades were sort of bogus anyway.
If the grades are bogus, then there is of course no problem with such an approach, and really is just a (good) way to test people's limits.