What Should I Do If My Professors Don’t Teach?

[berkeman]

Average scores for test in such courses were around mid 40s to 50s. However, due to the scoring system of the college, most people passes.

Was the distribution of scores Gaussian? In a couple of my undergraduate physics classes with lots of students (required frosh-sophomore physics classes for physics and engineering students with several hundred students per class), the average score on midterms and finals was around 50%-60%, the distribution of scores were very Gaussian, with a number of the best students scoring in the 90% to high 90% range. The instructors were excellent and very accessible, with several TAs per class who were also very accessible. And in one of those classes, the instructor even issued a handout at the start of the class of the most likely 200 questions that could show up on exams.

The tests and questions were hard, but the instruction was great. The scores followed a Gaussian distribution, and the passing grade was whatever the standard was for the University. It was a bit like it is in college sports -- the students/athletes with the best natural abilities who were willing to work the hardest did the best. As long as I can see that Gaussian distribution of test scores and can interview the best students to see how they felt about the instructor, I feel okay with how the instruction is going. If the distribution is skewed one way or the other, that seems like a red flag for grade inflation or extremely clueless instruction, IMO.

 

[Charles Link]

I've seen a lot of people comment things like, "You need to grow up and put in the work," "Teachers can't do the learning for you," "Utilize your school's resources," and so on. I want to clarify that I completely understand. My goal for this thread is not to look for sympathy, or to have a bunch of pitchforks pointed at my lecturers. I'm just trying to figure out exactly where to start learning for myself!

To elaborate, back when I was in community college (where professors typically hold your hand and classes were much less rigorous), my professors would begin a topic by discussing the theory, then they'd do lots of different examples to show you what it all means mathematically. Because of this, I'd come home knowing what the hell I was supposed to study. Even if I didn't quite get it in class, I'd have enough resources to further study the material on my own. Now, however, I go to the lecture where my professor is discussing the subject like a poor quality science documentary, barely does one example occasionally, and then I come home to do homework without even knowing where to begin learning the actual material.

The problems given in my assignments require a very good understanding of the subject. Not a single problem allows you to just plug in numbers into an equation (and that's a good thing), yet the teacher barely even goes over the basics in class. As a result, even after reading the textbook, I can't even begin to understand the material enough to think outside the box like the assignments require me to. I'd say that it's because I'm just dumb, but, as I've said, nearly everyone in the class is also lost.

I suppose I should just start making use of on-campus tutoring, but these lectures were expensive. I'm hoping that maybe I'm just being overly demanding, and that things will improve as the semester progresses. Otherwise I'm not sure exactly what I paid for...

You might have gotten some bad luck with the lectures you paid for, and perhaps didn't get anywhere near your money's worth. Depending upon the institution, in some cases, someone who isn't qualified for the teaching position may try to occupy that spot anyway, if the pay is good. $\\$ Perhaps that is one of the benefits/advantages for students who do some of their learning on Physics Forums. The fact that it is all volunteer keeps it purely academic, where the emphasis can be very much on education , rather than being affected by all kinds of monetary considerations.

 

[berkeman]

To elaborate, back when I was in community college (where professors typically hold your hand and classes were much less rigorous), my professors would begin a topic by discussing the theory, then they'd do lots of different examples to show you what it all means mathematically. Because of this, I'd come home knowing what the hell I was supposed to study. Even if I didn't quite get it in class, I'd have enough resources to further study the material on my own. Now, however, I go to the lecture where my professor is discussing the subject like a poor quality science documentary, barely does one example occasionally, and then I come home to do homework without even knowing where to begin learning the actual material.

The problems given in my assignments require a very good understanding of the subject. Not a single problem allows you to just plug in numbers into an equation (and that's a good thing), yet the teacher barely even goes over the basics in class. As a result, even after reading the textbook, I can't even begin to understand the material enough to think outside the box like the assignments require me to. I'd say that it's because I'm just dumb, but, as I've said, nearly everyone in the class is also lost.

It does sound like you are intelligent and sincere in your wanting to do well overall in your university work, which is good. And it does sound like the instructor is waxing off-topic in class, when he should be focusing in a bit more. He may be experiencing the onset of dementia or having other medical issues, and that should be reported to your academic advisor if you think that may be the problem.

But in the mean time, I would recommend attending every one of his office hour sessions, and attending any TA office hour sessions that may be available. Bring concrete problems that you have worked on, show your work, and ask if you have done them correctly. If you want to poke at the tiger a bit, bring a problem from a related text that you have the solution for, and show the instructor or TA the problem worked half-way through, and ask what you should do next. They should be able to give you the next step, and if they don't, that would be something else for you to bring up with your academic advisor, IMO...

 

[Drakkith]

I don't think the term "teaching" implies any of that though.

I agree. That's my point.

Perhaps that is one of the benefits/advantages for students who do some of their learning on Physics Forums. The fact that it is all volunteer keeps it purely academic, where the emphasis can be very much on education , rather than being affected by all kinds of monetary considerations.

Not to mention the benefit of one-on-one interaction instead of one-on-one-hundred.

 

[HAYAO]

Was the distribution of scores Gaussian? In a couple of my undergraduate physics classes with lots of students (required frosh-sophomore physics classes for physics and engineering students with several hundred students per class), the average score on midterms and finals was around 50%-60%, the distribution of scores were very Gaussian, with a number of the best students scoring in the 90% to high 90% range. The instructors were excellent and very accessible, with several TAs per class who were also very accessible. And in one of those classes, the instructor even issued a handout at the start of the class of the most likely 200 questions that could show up on exams.

The tests and questions were hard, but the instruction was great. The scores followed a Gaussian distribution, and the passing grade was whatever the standard was for the University. It was a bit like it is in college sports -- the students/athletes with the best natural abilities who were willing to work the hardest did the best. As long as I can see that Gaussian distribution of test scores and can interview the best students to see how they felt about the instructor, I feel okay with how the instruction is going. If the distribution is skewed one way or the other, that seems like a red flag for grade inflation or extremely clueless instruction, IMO.

I was not always provided with distribution so I am not sure. But many of the professors explain that it is always not precisely Gaussian. Along with my personal investigation of the distribution of the scores, it looks something like this: A nice Gaussian distribution around the average score with around 30-40% FWHM, but we always have one student ALWAYS getting 90s (the genius), with another one or two students getting 70s to 80s (smart and enthusiastic guys). Then we have another very small Gaussian distribution around 5-10 (probably those who just don't want to study). Finally, one or two 0s (those two did not come to the test),

 

[berkeman]

I was not always provided with distribution so I am not sure. But many of the professors explain that it is always not precisely Gaussian. Along with my personal investigation of the distribution of the scores, it looks something like this: A nice Gaussian distribution around the average score with around 30-40% FWHM, but we always have one student ALWAYS getting 90s (the genius), with another one or two students getting 70s to 80s (smart and enthusiastic guys). Then we have another very small Gaussian distribution around 5-10 (probably those who just don't want to study). Finally, one or two 0s (those two did not come to the test),

What was the sample size? (class size)

In one of the classes I referred to, the class size was about 250, and the instructor always posted the score distribution (and within 1 day -- he worked his TAs pretty hard), to his credit.

it was always Gaussian, so probably 10 students in the 90% plus range (top two students 96-97%), lots in the 70-90% range and so on. Average/Peak of the distribution was around 50-55%.

 

[HAYAO]

What was the sample size? (class size)

In one of the classes I referred to, the class size was about 250, and the instructor always posted the score distribution (and within 1 day -- he worked his TAs pretty hard), to his credit.

it was always Gaussian, so probably 10 students in the 90% plus range (top two students 96-97%), lots in the 70-90% range and so on. Average/Peak of the distribution was around 50-55%.

Depends on the class. Mandatory classes will have around 80-90 students. Non-mandatory classes will have around 60-70.

 

[HRubss]

I’m taking physics II and discrete math this semester. As the title suggests, my professors are awful. Their RateMyProfessor scores are both in the low 2 range. Of course, every person in both lecture halls is freaking out right now because the subjects are difficult and both professors love giving tests, yet can’t seem to avoid rambling about unrelated stuff in class.

Long story short: I’m probably not going to be able to rely on the professors to teach me this semester. I’m really, really hoping that I can get all A’s this year. What do you guys recommend I do?
I should note that I’m also working this semester (15-20 hours/week).

I’ve had success in reading the textbook before hand and then watching online lectures from MIT OCW or professors off of Youtube if something seems to dense for me to understand. It won’t be easy since it’ll be completely based off of how much work you put in yourself. If you still don’t understand a CERTAIN topic, ask your professor as a last resort if he’s really that bad. You’ll have to dedicate more time in studying outside of school since your professor won’t be much help but hey, you’ll learn to become independent!

 

[bhobba]

What precisely are you paying for then? How frustrating!

Well it depends on the professor ie if they hold good tutorials to make up for it.

All my professors were good - some merely good while others excellent. I was fortunate.

But it has to be said you learn a lot more doing tutorials than from the actual professor lecturing. Every professor I had had at least a one hour tutorial session they attended. Attendance was not compulsory, but I strongly advise any student to attend them. You learn much more from the tutorial than the lectures - the content of which is mostly in the textbook or easily locateable. But doing the problems - that's the real key to learning. The first thing I did in any subject was get the exam papers for the last 10 years then made absolutely sure I could do every single question in my sleep. If you can't take it up with the professor, as well as the set exercises in your tutorials.

If your school does not have a tutorial system, then as much as I am not a fan of student activism, in this case I would be speaking to upper level administration - all courses should have tutorials - that's where the real learning takes place.

See the movie - Real Genius - there is a hilarious scene where the professor has simply left a tape playing with the content of the lecture and no students in the class - they simply left their tape recorders. Funny but with a serious message. Forget lectures - have them videotaped and anyone can view them. Then replace the lectures with tutorials - that's where you really learn.

Personally at the lectures I simply wrote and wrote what the lecturer said - I didn't care if it made sense or not - I just wrote. I then rewrote them in a much more coherent form - twice. I figured out my own proofs for the supplied ones - often they were far shorter and more elegant. That way you really understand it and can test your understanding in the tutorials and past papers.

Thanks
Bill

 

[strangerep]

I've seen a lot of people comment things like, "You need to grow up and put in the work," "Teachers can't do the learning for you," "Utilize your school's resources," and so on. I want to clarify that I completely understand. My goal for this thread is not to look for sympathy, or to have a bunch of pitchforks pointed at my lecturers. I'm just trying to figure out exactly where to start learning for myself!

Yeah, I can sympathize (even if some others here can't).

I too was thrown in the deep end during my 1st year at university, never having been educated on how to self-study (because I flew through high school with no effort). Back then, there was no Internet from which to seek help. Nevertheless, many years later, I found myself able to self-study advanced quantum mechanics and introductory quantum field theory from just textbooks and occasional help from kind people on the Internet. There is a technique... see below.

To elaborate, back when I was in community college (where professors typically hold your hand and classes were much less rigorous), my professors would begin a topic by discussing the theory, then they'd do lots of different examples to show you what it all means mathematically. Because of this, I'd come home knowing what the hell I was supposed to study. Even if I didn't quite get it in class, I'd have enough resources to further study the material on my own. Now, however, I go to the lecture where my professor is discussing the subject like a poor quality science documentary, barely does one example occasionally, and then I come home to do homework without even knowing where to begin learning the actual material.

OK, are you at least able to match up the lecture material with a chapter or section of the textbook(s) that have been recommended for the course? If so, then here is a technique for self-learning from a textbook which I know works:

1) Read a chapter carefully, making pencil notes in the margin whenever you don't quite understand something. Don't try and understand every detailed step initially -- just make a note wherever something isn't clear.

2) Go through the chapter again, this time making a serious effort to understand every fine detail perfectly. Don't move on until each detail is sorted out. (Sometimes, you'll be able to understand simply because you now have the benefit of an overview of the chapter.) If you're still stuck on any point, ask here on PF, or ask a tutor, or whatever. The crucial thing is to reach the end of the chapter having understood everything therein perfectly.

3) Then do ALL the exercises that are prescribed for that chapter. If you've truly understood the material in the chapter you'll at least be able to make a start on each exercise, even if you can't solve them all completely. If you get stuck on an exercise, ask for help in the PF homework section (but remember that you must demonstrate there that you've made a serious effort to get started).

4) Oh, and get past exam papers if available. Try to relate questions therein with exercises in your textbooks, and eventually try to do the past exam questions fully.

HTH.

 

[MathematicalPhysicist]

Are college kids suckers who should just buy the textbooks and self learn?

Yes.

 

[Drakkith]

Are college kids suckers who should just buy the textbooks and self learn?

Yes.

Hmmm. That doesn't appear to have been successful with me and my Linear Algebra class.

 

[MathematicalPhysicist]

Hmmm. That doesn't appear to have been successful with me and my Linear Algebra class.

I learned by myself Linear Algebra from Lipschutz's textbook.

The lecturers can't really teach, this is why students pay extra cash for private tutoring.

 

[Dr. Courtney]

Students need to know that about half of the professors they will have will be below average teachers.

Given this, students need to figure out how to learn in courses with below average teachers.

There are a lot more resources easily available in 2018 than in past decades.

Most colleges and universities with which I am familiar have multiple tutoring centers, ample office hours, and other in-person resources in addition to all the resources in the internet.

At the Air Force Academy, I directed the learning center with faculty in each STEM discipline available with open office hours from 6-10 each night, and all the STEM departments had faculty available until 5 PM. We kept careful records of student attendance. Lots of struggling students didn't regularly go see either departmental faculty before 5 or come see us from 6-10. But lots and lots complained that their professors didn't teach.

Most of the time it is a matter of a mismatch between the student's preparation and the level of the class presentation or the student's learning style and the teacher's teaching style. The student needs to realize what is happening here and bridge the gap. At the Air Force Academy, most STEM classes had pre-class assignments often including a reading assignment and working a homework problem or two. Students who came to class without having made a good honest attempt at those would miss a lot of the class presentation.

Likewise, when I taught Physics at other institutions, my presentation in class was at a level that assumed students had done the assigned reading from the book and made an honest attempt at the assigned homework problems in the chapter so far. There is simply not enough time to present every topic in class from first principles without assuming prerequisite background or completing the assigned readings and homework. I viewed class time more as refining and building rather than starting with a blank slate. There was also never enough time in class to pitch material for students of each learning style. I did keep more office hours than most colleagues and run numerous informal recitations where I could better tailor presentations to the needs of students who made the effort to get more individual attention.

 

[MathematicalPhysicist]

Students need to know that about half of the professors they will have will be below average teachers.

Given this, students need to figure out how to learn in courses with below average teachers.

There are a lot more resources easily available in 2018 than in past decades.

Most colleges and universities with which I am familiar have multiple tutoring centers, ample office hours, and other in-person resources in addition to all the resources in the internet.

At the Air Force Academy, I directed the learning center with faculty in each STEM discipline available with open office hours from 6-10 each night, and all the STEM departments had faculty available until 5 PM. We kept careful records of student attendance. Lots of struggling students didn't regularly go see either departmental faculty before 5 or come see us from 6-10. But lots and lots complained that their professors didn't teach.

Most of the time it is a matter of a mismatch between the student's preparation and the level of the class presentation or the student's learning style and the teacher's teaching style. The student needs to realize what is happening here and bridge the gap. At the Air Force Academy, most STEM classes had pre-class assignments often including a reading assignment and working a homework problem or two. Students who came to class without having made a good honest attempt at those would miss a lot of the class presentation.

Likewise, when I taught Physics at other institutions, my presentation in class was at a level that assumed students had done the assigned reading from the book and made an honest attempt at the assigned homework problems in the chapter so far. There is simply not enough time to present every topic in class from first principles without assuming prerequisite background or completing the assigned readings and homework. I viewed class time more as refining and building rather than starting with a blank slate. There was also never enough time in class to pitch material for students of each learning style. I did keep more office hours than most colleagues and run numerous informal recitations where I could better tailor presentations to the needs of students who made the effort to get more individual attention.

More than about half, I would say it's above 70% of professors.

But it's really subjective.

 

[Dr. Courtney]

More than about half, I would say it's above 70% of professors.

But it's really subjective.

Think about it, you would have to have an extremely skewed distribution for 70% (of anything) to be below the average.

It is (almost) a tautology to say that about half (of anything) are below average - the mean is usually within a few percent of the median.

 

[MathematicalPhysicist]

Think about it, you would have to have an extremely skewed distribution for 70% (of anything) to be below the average.

It is (almost) a tautology to say that about half (of anything) are below average - the mean is usually within a few percent of the median.

This is a subjective question.

I for one took several courses both in UG and G from more than 10 professors, less than 5 I remember were really good teachers; the rest are either awful or mediocre.

 

[bhobba]

Hmmm. That doesn't appear to have been successful with me and my Linear Algebra class.

Tutorials where you directly interact with the professor are of great value - they get to know you and you them.

That greatly enhances the education experience. Because, from such tutorials I was known as a good thinking student, as well as the questions I asked in class that I know exasperated the lectures - I knew you would ask that, just knew it - see me after class. They waived prerequisites in subjects and various other things. It was part of what I felt was a terrific experience. But its up to you - it will not be hand fed to you.

Thanks
Bill

 

[symbolipoint]

Maybe university students especially in the sciences and engineering need to be given an orientation about what is all that will be in their college and university education. The courses have an outline, or a syllabus. The courses also have expected and assigned textbooks. The PROFESSOR is an expert in his field; but not necessarily an official teacher. He is a guide for the course. Students are the personnel who must do the learning and the studying to support that learning. Some professors may teach well and some may teach poorly; but they are only guides or momentary advisors and experts in their field which is their purpose.

Many of us did not know how to think that way while we were earning a degree. Some professors taught well and some did not; so we complained about, but nothing really changed. Maybe we worked harder and maybe we worked smarter when we had a course taught by one of these badly-teaching professors; or maybe we did not adapt well to him/her. Students should refer more to both their syllabus and their textbook, and do whatever is assigned for homework exercises regardless of teaching skill of professor.

 

[gleem]

When people ask for advice about some distressing situations important information is presented from a very personal point of view often over stating, leaving out or incompletely presenting important information leaving a lot open to interpretation by those whose advice is being sought. So poor teaching or rambling can be difficult for me to appreciate. Perhaps I would not agree with your assessment. So I will not address this issue.

You say the profs like tests so this should give you ample opportunity to tease out what the professors think is important and study accordingly. The onus is first and foremost on the student to make sufficient effort to study the material and to determine those ideas that are and are not fully understood or confusing and seek a remedy by asking the profs for clarifications or seeking other assistance.

Good professors make it easy and enjoyable to learn. But since we will not always blessed with such professors we will sooner or later be rerquired to learn without their assistance. You must accept learning by yourself now or later but if you are to succeed in your field (assumed to be physics) you must be able to learn by yourself.

 

[The Bill]

Think about it, you would have to have an extremely skewed distribution for 70% (of anything) to be below the average.

It is (almost) a tautology to say that about half (of anything) are below average - the mean is usually within a few percent of the median.

The original quote said "below average teachers," not "below average professors." This leads to a natural choice of the population of teachers being averaged as all people whose profession is to teach. This means that professors, most of who didn't receive years of instruction on how to teach, are being compared against primary and secondary school teachers who did receive that sort of instruction.

Thus, one would have to have an extremely skewed distribution of professors in a sample for close to 50% of them to be above average teachers, if I am understanding the original statement in this thread correctly.

 

[symbolipoint]

The original quote said "below average teachers," not "below average professors." This leads to a natural choice of the population of teachers being averaged as all people whose profession is to teach. This means that professors, most of who didn't receive years of instruction on how to teach, are being compared against primary and secondary school teachers who did receive that sort of instruction.

Thus, one would have to have an extremely skewed distribution of professors in a sample for close to 50% of them to be above average teachers, if I am understanding the original statement in this thread correctly.

Interesting discussion is your post.

If part of a professor's job or work is to teach and the setting is a group of students in a well defined space in which the professor tells and shows things to these students as part of them being enrolled in this class, then one of the responsibilities of this professor IS TO KNOW HOW TO TEACH this course to this class of students.

 

[Drakkith]

The original quote said "below average teachers," not "below average professors."

I'm confident that those two mean the same thing in this thread.

This means that professors, most of who didn't receive years of instruction on how to teach, are being compared against primary and secondary school teachers who did receive that sort of instruction.

Since this thread is about college, it doesn't generally include comparisons to primary and secondary school teachers in the discussion.

 

[symbolipoint]

The original quote said "below average teachers," not "below average professors." This leads to a natural choice of the population of teachers being averaged as all people whose profession is to teach. This means that professors, most of who didn't receive years of instruction on how to teach, are being compared against primary and secondary school teachers who did receive that sort of instruction.

Thus, one would have to have an extremely skewed distribution of professors in a sample for close to 50% of them to be above average teachers, if I am understanding the original statement in this thread correctly.

More thoughts on that:

Two ways of leading a class of a professor, depending on the level and purpose of the class.

Example: Physics 1 - Mechanics for the S.T.E.M. major students -
Professor is teacher and TEACHES this class. He goes by a syllabus and uses a good textbook, lectures, explains, sometimes demonstrates; and reviews examples of problems to be solved, taking the class through the solution process for most or all of those he presents. He is focused and teaches in order to meet clear objectives according to the course outline and the syllabus. He assigns and either he or an aid check the students submitted homework.

Example: some graduate level maybe Advanced Optics, for most likely, Physics graduate students -
Professor gives lecture discussions about a variety of modern contemporary work being done at a few different institutions and gives one or two academic lecture presentations on one of the topics from time to time; professor assigns some textbook and periodical article reading, and some questions for students to do as homework; there may or may not be a lab section for this course. This professor is sharing some professional expertise, but is basically LEADING according to professional kowledge. Maybe he checks the students written work, or maybe not. The students probably earn either A or B, and this group of students have none among them who will deserve less than B.

The kinds of teaching in the two examples I described are different. The first example shows situation which the students will benefit from the more thorough teaching. Students still need to learn to operate independently; otherwise they will never reach the kind of level and sense of the students in the second example.

 

[HAYAO]

I don't mind paying extra for the professors if they prepare their material well for the class and really do the effort in trying to make others understand. I'll pay as much as they need for that. If the professors need to take some teaching courses to improve but needs money for that, I'll cover for that. I just don't want these people to waste students' time listening to something that objectively does not help them. It's horrendous when the average score of the test is like 40 - 50s. Then it's better paying nothing and studying on their own than paying and getting nothing and then studying on their own.

The reality is, these students (have to) pay (partially) for these professors and they pretty much have no choice. Then professors will have to do a good job in teaching. Professors are obliged to teach well, much more than students obliged to learn well.

 

[symbolipoint]

Your very last sentence is no good.

...
Then professors will have to do a good job in teaching. Professors are obliged to teach well, much more than students obliged to learn well.

The student still has the obligations to STUDY AND LEARN. Professor might be a good, and in-between, or a bad teacher; but he is the expert in his field leading as group of students and is responsible for overseeing their lecture time and assess their learning. Some courses need traditional teaching be done; while other courses need presentations on a topic from a subject matter expert in his field.

 

[HAYAO]

The student still has the obligations to STUDY AND LEARN.

Did I say otherwise?

 

[symbolipoint]

Did I say otherwise?

My disagreement was that every professor must fill the obligation to be a good teacher. Also the obligation of teaching (by professor) is equal to the obligation of the student to study; neither is greater or lesser than the other.

 

[HAYAO]

My disagreement was that every professor must fill the obligation to be a good teacher. Also the obligation of teaching (by professor) is equal to the obligation of the student to study; neither is greater or lesser than the other.

I very respectfully do not agree with this.

Every professor MUST fill the obligation to be a good teacher. If not, then they should not be paid to teach. They should just do research.

Also, obligation of teaching is NOT equal to the obligation of the student to study. Professors are professionals. If they are being paid to teach, then they are also professional in teaching. On the other hand, students are not paid to study and learn. Students are not professional learners. They are just learners who pays to get taught. That still does not mean students are not obliged to learn of course, they need to satisfy some criteria so that they can graduate (to get an adequate level worthy of bachelors) and trying to study and learn is definitely part of it. Student who does not do the effort to study will only fail and leave. However, professor who does not teach well will not "fail" nor be forced to "leave". That is exactly why professors have more strict obligations.

 

[mathwonk]

I suggest that a student benefits not from blaming his professor for teaching inadequately, but from learning how to learn from him. All teachers teach in some way.
When I was a high school student my math teacher knew us all intimately and planned her classes individually for each of the 10 or 15 of us based on our background and ability. Each student actually had a different assignment with different levels of difficulty. In my opinion now, that was way too much help, and may even have weakened us as learners.

In college my honors calculus professor just waltzed in and lectured at a high level to all 135 of us, with no regard to who knew what, and then walked out, leaving us to assimilate what had occurred. In high school, with all the hand holding, I won the state math trophy for my school every year, and scored so high on standardized tests that I received a merit scholarship worth 120% of tuition at Harvard, equivalent to maybe $50,000 a year now.

But at Harvard, I flunked out within 2 years. The problem was lack of awareness of the new level of expectations, and lack of any comparable study skills. As a successful top tier high school student, I thought I was smarter than everyone else, needed no help, and did not even need to attend class nor read all assigned materials. So in college I ignored all offers of tutorials, and declined even to accept help from classmates, no matter how bright they obviously were.

I did not realize that in college I was in a setting where I was only about average in ability, and way below average in background, having been trained in a poor, low expectation, school system in a southern state whose educational levels were maybe bottom 10% for the US. So even the state champ in math in my state was probably below average for all hs students in New York say. Indeed when we trained for the state math competition we were told to ignore problems from the overly difficult “Regents exam” which I learned later was required for graduation in NY. Some of my classmates in college had prepared at schools like Bronx high school of science, Exeter, and Andover. My high school didn’t even offer calculus. My high school teacher was the spouse of a college engineering prof, my college prof was an internationally famous researcher. I did not realize that the version of the subject he was lecturing to us exceeded in quality what could be found in most books, he was literally dictating to us a course that could have been published as a top level book, he just didn’t bother to do so. It was up to us to absorb it. Only at Christmas when I compared notes with a friend who attended Georgia Tech, did I realize my class was miles above what most people were being taught.

So unfortunately when we transfer from one school to another we bring our expectations and assumptions with us. But we need to adjust them. In a challenging college, it is essential to compare notes with classmates, discuss work with others, listen to the insights of friends, and go to tutorials, office hours, and help sessions, even if we have never needed help before. We need to get over the idea that only weak students go to tutorial; the demands have gone up, and the student is expected to do far more.

If you have transferred from community college to university, your professors are not necessarily less capable, but they are expecting more of you. The result, if you adapt, will be to lift you to a level you would not otherwise have achieved. After a year off working in a Boeing factory and in construction, I went back, put my head down, and eventually became a successful mathematician, my chosen career. You can too. (But getting all A’s is a quite different goal from actually mastering your subject.) Good luck. If this speaks to you, "verbum sapienti." If not, please forgive me, I did my best to help. At least I speak as someone who has been in both situations, earlier as a student complaining about my awful profs, and much later as a successful professional. The difference was largely in my approach.