I fucking hate uni

[Broletariat]

This is seriously like, the worst educational experience ever, in high school I used to feel like I was actually learning stuff (in my math and sciences class), and where I wasn't learning, I was educating others in discussions and etc.

At uni, my current math teacher sucks so that should get better, but dear god the liberalism. One of my papers had sick points deducted for simply criticising the author of the book the paper was on. We were supposed to explore ideas, I chose to explore the idea that the author was wrong, but there's no criticism of the framework apparently or something.

The author has a Ph. D in political philosophy and he had his criticism of Marxism mad wrong and I chose to correct that, at which point I learned someone with a Ph. D in political philosophy must always be right on matters of political philosophy.

Uni is turning me into a cynical bastard.

[xub3rn00dlex]

Sorry to hear this but uhh... join the club. :crying:

[A Revolutionary Tool]

That's why I get my education from the streets :cool:

[Magón]

It can only get better, believe me, you haven't seen shit from that one experience.

[RHIZOMES]

Stay away from Politics departments, they're usually one of the least political departments at most humanities faculties.

I'm at my third year of my debt-funded uni education and it's been the most rewarding experience of my life. Stick to it, try to find courses with radical lecturers.

[Tablo]

I've had mostly good experiences with history professors. Normally I get respect for questioning them or disagreeing.

From what I've gathered, people with degrees in political science don't know shit about anything.

[Rusty Shackleford]

at my college, one of the polisci professors has hosted PSL talks twice. Like literally. Our position of Libya was one of the more attended ones.


as for the liberalism on campuses though. oh god is it painful.

[black magick hustla]

college is only cool because there are 40k horny 20somethings and a noticeable minority that likes to read books. the aspect of uni that i got more out of was not lectures but discussing and theorizing and dreaming with people about my age

[black magick hustla]

polisci as a field is a joke anyhow. i dont think anyone takes political science seriously as a field except political scientists. its a diluted mix of more legitimate fields like economics, sociology, and philosophy

[RHIZOMES]

college is only cool because there are 40k horny 20somethings and a noticeable minority that likes to read books. the aspect of uni that i got more out of was not lectures but discussing and theorizing and dreaming with people about my age

I agree.

Also just enrolling in courses as an excuse to write about shit you're interested in and get graded on it - fuck yeeeaaahhh.

[Nox]

The author has a Ph. D in political philosophy and he had his criticism of Marxism mad wrong and I chose to correct that, at which point I learned someone with a Ph. D in political philosophy must always be right on matters of political philosophy.

.

What did he say?

What did you say?

How did he react?

[Broletariat]

as for the liberalism on campuses though. oh god is it painful.

I gathered that from the PSL stuff.

[Broletariat]

What did he say?

What did you say?

How did he react?

Well like most people, the author completely failed to understand why Marx said alienation is hateful to a worker. This dude just thought it meant that simply because the item was taken away from a worker that it was hateful. He drew the extreme contrast between, okay maybe its true for a chinese sweatshop worker, but for a local carpenter who gets to see his work displayed? He can take pride in that work.

The real reason why alienated labour is hateful to a proletarian worker, is because as you work, it is used to profit those employing you. You are enslaving yourself by working. You give your boss the profit necessary to continue the operation.

The reaction was exactly as I described. I don't have a Ph. D in polisci or whatever but the author does so why the hell should they believe me right?

[manic expression]

I've always said that college is a combination between the worst parts of high school and summer camp. The almost-incessant anti-leftist bent of academia is just the tip of the iceberg.


I gathered that from the PSL stuff.
Funny, I gathered that from your OP. ;)

[Broletariat]

Funny, I gathered that from your OP. ;)


Okay left of Capital scum ;)

[Invader Zim]

Well like most people, the author completely failed to understand why Marx said alienation is hateful to a worker. This dude just thought it meant that simply because the item was taken away from a worker that it was hateful. He drew the extreme contrast between, okay maybe its true for a chinese sweatshop worker, but for a local carpenter who gets to see his work displayed? He can take pride in that work.

The real reason why alienated labour is hateful to a proletarian worker, is because as you work, it is used to profit those employing you. You are enslaving yourself by working. You give your boss the profit necessary to continue the operation.

The reaction was exactly as I described. I don't have a Ph. D in polisci or whatever but the author does so why the hell should they believe me right?

I'm willing to bet that the reason you got a shit mark is not because the marker was penalising you for arguing a point of view their disagree with, but because you argued it ineptly, failed to justify it with significant secondary literature, you probably don't understand the subject matter half as well as you believe you do and you certainly underestimate how much your lecturer grasps.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/evolved-primate/201006/when-ignorance-begets-confidence-the-classic-dunning-kruger-effect


I chose to explore the idea that the author was wrong, but there's no criticism of the framework apparently or something.
See, this is a clue.

See, there is an easy way to get better marks - less whining on here and more research in the library.

[Broletariat]

I'm willing to bet that the reason you got a shit mark is not because the marker was penalising you for arguing a point of view their disagree with, but because you argued it ineptly, failed to justify it with significant secondary literature, you probably don't understand the subject matter half as well as you believe you do and you certainly underestimate how much your lecturer grasps.
QED.
See, there is an easy way to get better marks - less whining on here and more research in the library.


On the contrary on every paper I've had, this one included, they explicitly mentioned that I argued my points flawlessly. They explicitly request you do NOT go to outside information as well.

Unless you're telling me I've got Marx's concept of alienation wrong which I will tell you I do not.

[Invader Zim]

On the contrary on every paper I've had, this one included, they explicitly mentioned that I argued my points flawlessly. They explicitly request you do NOT go to outside information as well.

Unless you're telling me I've got Marx's concept of alienation wrong which I will tell you I do not.

I would have to see the paper you submitted, the course outline, your feedback and marking scheme.

And if you argued it flawlessly then you would have got a good mark. Presumably what you argued, however flawless, was irrelevent or unsustained by reading, contextualisation and contextualisation within a relevent theoretical framework.

[Broletariat]

I would have to see the paper you submitted, the course outline, your feedback and marking scheme.

And if you argued it flawlessly then you would have got a good mark. Presumably what you argued, however flawless, was irrelevent or unsustained by reading, contextualisation and contextualisation within a relevent theoretical framework.

I really don't think you get it and simply distrust me for some reason. I wrote in my opening paragraph that part of the point of the paper would be to criticise the author of the book, they took points off at that point because we're not supposed to criticise him, simply "explore ideas."

[Invader Zim]

I really don't think you get it

Not only have I been in your position as a student but I have spent the last three years earning my rent marking undergraduate papers, so I'm pretty sure I 'get it' better than you suppose.


and simply distrust me for some reason.

Indeed I do, and that reason is experience. Firstly because I am aware of and understand the safeguards that are typically in place to prevent negligent marking. Secondly, as noted above, I was a whiny student who thought I had been wrongly penalised myself once. Thirdly, I regularly see kids who submit crap work and complain that they get bad marks that they haven't warrented.


I wrote in my opening paragraph that part of the point of the paper would be to criticise the author of the book

And was that the assignment? According to your next statement, clearly not:

"they took points off at that point because we're not supposed to criticise him, simply "explore ideas."

As for your criticisms of the author, again:

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/evolved-primate/201006/when-ignorance-begets-confidence-the-classic-dunning-kruger-effect

[Broletariat]

And was that the assignment? According to your next statement, clearly not:

"they took points off at that point because we're not supposed to criticise him, simply "explore ideas."

The actual assignment is merely a "reflection paper" and by title alone we are supposed to write the paper, it was only post mortum that I found out we were not allowed to criticise the author.

Which is entirely my fucking point, the framework FORBIDS us from criticising the author. Do you not see the problem with that?

[black magick hustla]

I'm willing to bet that the reason you got a shit mark is not because the marker was penalising you for arguing a point of view their disagree with, but because you argued it ineptly, failed to justify it with significant secondary literature, you probably don't understand the subject matter half as well as you believe you do and you certainly underestimate how much your lecturer grasps.
.

dude i am also a a "TA" stop defending so much academia, its embarrassing. a lot of TAs are dumb as fucking rocks, some of them are my friends. i used to think that some students whined about biased instructors because they were dumb, and honestly this is sometimes the case, but even as an undergrad i experienced one TA that was basically shitting on my papers because he was unable to understand arguments that were more complex than a 8th grade level essay. and the experience was in my side, because i generally pulled 4.0s in most of my essays, because i am a good essay writer in general. academia is a shithole, as any other bourgeois institution.

[ZeroNowhere]

We were supposed to explore ideas, I chose to explore the idea that the author was wrong
That doesn't sound promising.

[RHIZOMES]

I've always said that college is a combination between the worst parts of high school and summer camp. The almost-incessant anti-leftist bent of academia is just the tip of the iceberg.

That must really be an American thing. Every lecturer I've had that wasn't in the politics or english departments has been a total pinko.

[Princess Luna]

According to my government professer

politicians are some of the smartest people in America, nobody can reach that level of government and not know what their doing
I think I am going to change my major from Political Science to Mass Communications.

[Rusty Shackleford]

I gathered that from the PSL stuff.
http://memedepot.com/uploads/2000/2155_troll_pc_face.jpg

[Broletariat]

That must really be an American thing. Every lecturer I've had that wasn't in the politics or english departments has been a total pinko.

Pinkos are the worst. I much prefer someone who hates politics in general.

[manic expression]

That must really be an American thing. Every lecturer I've had that wasn't in the politics or english departments has been a total pinko.
Yeah, I think so. Just about anyone close to the left got purged in the late 40's and early 50's (even people who worked in completely apolitical fields like math got blackballed). American academia never really recovered from that, I think.

[Il Medico]

Relevant:
ccNIpaUk9nA

[RHIZOMES]

Pinkos are the worst. I much prefer someone who hates politics in general.

Why? Pinko academics are a lot more sympathetic to Marxist essays than apolitical and reactionary academics. Unless we have a different understanding of what 'pinko' means.


Yeah, I think so. Just about anyone close to the left got purged in the late 40's and early 50's (even people who worked in completely apolitical fields like math got blackballed). American academia never really recovered from that, I think.

Yeah. When the most radical academics you have in a nation's universities are postmodern idealists, you know have a problem.


Relevant:
ccNIpaUk9nA

Disturbingly so.

[Broletariat]

Why? Pinko academics are a lot more sympathetic to Marxist essays than apolitical and reactionary academics. Unless we have a different understanding of what 'pinko' means.

I tend to think of pinko as a light shade of red.

They tend to be more sympathetic in an obnoxious patronising way.

[Invader Zim]

dude i am also a a "TA" stop defending so much academia, its embarrassing. a lot of TAs are dumb as fucking rocks, some of them are my friends. i used to think that some students whined about biased instructors because they were dumb, and honestly this is sometimes the case, but even as an undergrad i experienced one TA that was basically shitting on my papers because he was unable to understand arguments that were more complex than a 8th grade level essay. and the experience was in my side, because i generally pulled 4.0s in most of my essays, because i am a good essay writer in general. academia is a shithole, as any other bourgeois institution.

I related reality as I have experienced it. That isn't a defence of academia, but calling it how I have seen it. Now, let me tell you a true story about a guy I know:

There was this kid who submitted a piece of work. That work was anonymised and sent to a first-time post-grad tutor to mark along with a batch of others. That PGT read the work, found it lacking in a whole host of areas and gave the essay a poor mark. The kid collected the essay, saw the mark and consulted the feedback. The kid was not happy that the mark and feedback were less than stellar, so the kid complained to the department. The department then gave the PGT a lot of agro and the essays was sent for remarking, and furthermore all of the other essays the PGT had marked were sent for re-marking, and the PGT got worried. Perhaps they had miss-marked the essay? There were a lot of them, about 70, and maybe a mistake had been made. Perhaps judgement had been clouded? The PTA thought that they may lose their job and was very stressed about how they would be able to eat for a while. But when the marks came back it turned out that they were all acceptable, and that the kid who complained was full of shit.

I've heard and seen this story, or ones with a similiar theme, many times. 90% of the time it ends with "and the kid was full of shit all along". Occassionally marks do get changed, but I've never even heard of a case where an essay marker has been found to have deliberately mismarked an essay or been too stupid to grasp the highly nuanced argument being made by some wonder student. Firstly, students aren't that smart, lecturers aren't that thick, and the risk of negligent marking is far too high.


i generally pulled 4.0s in most of my essaysI'm not entirely sure why you pointed this out or why I'm supposed to care... But whatever, if you really need validation, well done! Go you.



Which is entirely my fucking point, the framework FORBIDS us from criticising the author. Do you not see the problem with that?

Well that entirely depends on the aim of the assignment. And to be honest, I fail to see the academic merit in any assignment which called on you to make value judgements on an author as opposed to a thesis.

[Pirate Utopian]

Have a toga party and get put on double secret probation.

[La Comédie Noire]

Could we see the essay??

[manic expression]

The department then gave the PGT a lot of agro and the essays was sent for remarking, and furthermore all of the other essays the PGT had marked were sent for re-marking, and the PGT got worried. Perhaps they had miss-marked the essay? There were a lot of them, about 70, and maybe a mistake had been made. Perhaps judgement had been clouded? The PTA thought that they may lose their job and was very stressed about how they would be able to eat for a while.
So tell me, how does this apply to professors with tenure? Are they worried about how they'll be able to eat for awhile after a student complains? That'd be the day! :laugh:

I remember taking two courses over two semesters: same reading load, same assignments, same regional scope, same professor...two different periods. The first went to the mid-19th Century and the second went from the mid-19th Century to the present. Throughout those two semesters, I could actually chart a sharp decrease in grades as soon we got into issues of revolutionary ideologies. I never sent the assignments to review and I never went to anyone aside from the course's professor because in all honesty it was what it was and I just wanted to pass the stupid course. I'm sure you'll have some excuse and tell us that academia's shit don't stink...but if you actually believe there isn't any occasional political bias in certain professors, then your faith is admirable.

[RHIZOMES]

Could we see the essay??

Yeah I would like to as well. As much as I dislike with IZ's harsh tone since I see quite a bit of my younger self in Broletariat's attitudes, I'm a bit unsure as to whether it was the fault of the teachers or the student for this bad mark.

When I was a less experienced first-year student, I also assumed that the reason my ultra-hardcore revolutionary marxist essays weren't getting higher grades was because of the inherent bias in bourgeois academia and other such buzzwords. Then as both my writing and my critical thinking developed, I realised in retrospect that it was because what I wrote in first-year was overly didactic, dogmatic crap that read more like a polemical party pamphlet then it did serious academic writing.

Now I write stuff that has radical content and actually gets good grades.

[Invader Zim]

So tell me, how does this apply to professors with tenure?

Firstly, there are no tenured professors in the UK. It doesn't work that way. Secondly, kids complain about staff marks all the time, that is why the system exists to specifically allow complaints. The difference is that they know full well, unlike PGTs who aren't that experienced, that they are probably right and the kid is nearly always wrong, and if they aren't then the mark gets changed and everybody is happy. There is even a second marking system in place so that essays get marked, then they go to a second marker to be re-examined, as standard, and then the two markers have to agree a mark. So the political bias would have to effect a random second member of staff. At that point a random sample of essays go to external marking, and if the external examinor finds that a large sample of essays by one marker are off, then they all get seen and remarked.

The fact is political diatribes in essays - and this goes both ways but rightwing rants are actually more common in my experience - are typically not relevent (or their relevence isn't suitably explained), intellectually vacuous, based on negligable familiarity with the relevent literature, sweeping in their generalisations and opposing literature is provided only perfunctory examination. Decent essays are, while not ever objective, at least fair minded and show reasoned analysis in the process of weighing up both sides of a debate. To quote a standard marking scheme, for a mediocre grade:

"Work which is satisfactory for the MSc degree, showing some accurate knowledge of topic, and understanding, interpretation and use of sources and evidence. There may be gaps in knowledge, or limited use of evidence, or over-reliance on a restricted range of sources. Content may be mainly descriptive. The argument may be confused or unclear in parts, possibly with a few factual errors or misunderstandings of concepts. Writing, referencing and presentation satisfactory."

http://www.sps.ed.ac.uk/gradschool/research_training_courses/introduction/marking_scheme

In my experience this pretty much sums up most one sided political essays. The problem isn't that the marker is bias, its just that nine times out of ten the kid isn't half as smart as they believe they are.

[RHIZOMES]

Firstly, there are no tenured professors in the UK. It doesn't work that way. Secondly, kids complain about staff marks all the time, that is why the system exists to specifically allow complaints. The difference is that they know full well, unlike PGTs who aren't that experienced, that they are probably right and the kid is nearly always wrong, and if they aren't then the mark gets changed and everybody is happy. There is even a second marking system in place so that essays get marked, then they go to a second marker to be re-examined, as standard, and then the two markers have to agree a mark. So the political bias would have to effect a random second member of staff. At that point a random sample of essays go to external marking, and if the external examinor finds that a large sample of essays by one marker are off, then they all get seen and remarked.

The fact is political diatribes in essays - and this goes both ways but rightwing rants are actually more common in my experience - are typically not relevent (or their relevence isn't suitably explained), intellectually vacuous, based on negligable familiarity with the relevent literature, sweeping in their generalisations and opposing literature is provided only perfunctory examination. Decent essays are, while not ever objective, at least fair minded and show reasoned analysis in the process of weighing up both sides of a debate. To quote a standard marking scheme, for a mediocre grade:

"Work which is satisfactory for the MSc degree, showing some accurate knowledge of topic, and understanding, interpretation and use of sources and evidence. There may be gaps in knowledge, or limited use of evidence, or over-reliance on a restricted range of sources. Content may be mainly descriptive. The argument may be confused or unclear in parts, possibly with a few factual errors or misunderstandings of concepts. Writing, referencing and presentation satisfactory."

http://www.sps.ed.ac.uk/gradschool/research_training_courses/introduction/marking_scheme

In my experience this pretty much sums up most one sided political essays. The problem isn't that the marker is bias, its just that nine times out of ten the kid isn't half as smart as they believe they are.

Adding to what you said, writing an essay from a Marxist POV can be made far less 'one-sided' if one simply writes the essay bearing in mind that Marxism is simply a particular theoretical perspective and not the holy writ.

[Misanthrope]

Why I'm not studying politics or history in college.

[Invader Zim]

Why I'm not studying politics or history in college.


Well, the complaints here shouldn't put you off. The fact is history and politics are no better or worse than any other subject, in regards to this, than any other, provided you appriciate what it is you are supposed to be writing. And that is an essay which draws balanced conclusions based on an extensive, thorough and fair minded analysis of the existing literature. The fact is that undergraduate students are not equipped with the experience, expertese or research background to make a serious challenge to the literature of any specific topic. All you can do is make a balanced judgement based on a surevey of the existing secondary literature. Yoiu haven't done any real primary research so your views are effectively conclusions based on received wisdom.

Until you have examined a topic, drawn up research questions and case studies related to that topic, and heavily interegated relevent primary source material, to test various conclusions you disagree with against first hand, your opinion ios effectively worthless because you just aren't in a position to make a judgement. That is why a typical PhD course, which involves you actively doing that, takes longer than most undergraduate degrees. It takes a long time and a hell of a lot of primary research to be able to say, with any authority, that another person who has also done serious primary research is wrong. And undergraduates who have spent a couple of weeks in the library, and try it, look arrogant, inexperienced and underread... because they are.

And this is the same with any degree you study.

[Misanthrope]

Thanks for the insight :)

[manic expression]

Firstly, there are no tenured professors in the UK. It doesn't work that way. Secondly, kids complain about staff marks all the time, that is why the system exists to specifically allow complaints. The difference is that they know full well, unlike PGTs who aren't that experienced, that they are probably right and the kid is nearly always wrong, and if they aren't then the mark gets changed and everybody is happy. There is even a second marking system in place so that essays get marked, then they go to a second marker to be re-examined, as standard, and then the two markers have to agree a mark. So the political bias would have to effect a random second member of staff. At that point a random sample of essays go to external marking, and if the external examinor finds that a large sample of essays by one marker are off, then they all get seen and remarked.
Alright, well this is how it works in the US: professors grade your work and then it's handed back to you. I don't know how the review process works because I never went there. In the end, though, tenured professors have no reason to worry about the occasional student complaint.


In my experience this pretty much sums up most one sided political essays. The problem isn't that the marker is bias, its just that nine times out of ten the kid isn't half as smart as they believe they are.I don't at all claim to be a great student...but what I'm saying is that certain professors do sometimes grade you more harshly when they disagree with you. I think most professors I've come across are fair when it comes to grades, but that's not always the case and it's just how it goes.

[GPDP]

Am I the only one that had a satisfying academic (i.e. not counting parties and campus activities) experience in college, with political science professors that actually gave a damn?

I honestly feel that way. Save for a few classes, I had a fucking blast in college. I didn't experience condescension by ivory-tower liberal professors or any of that crap. And I was a Political Science major!

I must've gotten lucky despite my uni being third-rate.

[RHIZOMES]

Am I the only one that had a satisfying academic (i.e. not counting parties and campus activities) experience in college, with political science professors that actually gave a damn?

I honestly feel that way. Save for a few classes, I had a fucking blast in college. I didn't experience condescension by ivory-tower liberal professors or any of that crap. And I was a Political Science major!

I must've gotten lucky despite my uni being third-rate.

I'm having a blast with my college experience, although the Auckland Uni Politics department is 100% reactionary.

[La Comédie Noire]

I've never had a teacher grade me harshly because of my politics, I've gotten As from reactionary as fuck professors because I had a well reasoned and supported argument backed by a well rounded bibliography. One teacher even went so far as to write he appreciated I used Richard Pipes as a source even though his work wasn't in the spirit of my essay.

When I first entered college I was dismayed that I kept getting Cs, but it was because High school gives inflated grades to students who show even a smidgen of talent. I mean it's a miracle to find a student with a pulse, let alone one who shows an interest and a knack in reading and writing. However, instead of disciplining this raw talent most teachers opt to encourage the student by giving them good grades.

When I went to college I had to learn how to do research and editing all over again because I had never been sufficiently criticized, therefore I never improved. I was mad at first, but then i got over it and realized I had to earn an A, instead of just expecting a teacher to give me one because I was smart.

Trust me, I promise once you get over the shock of a mediocre grade, buckle down, and do some serious essay writing you'll be better for it and those easy As you used to be so proud of will become a source of embarrassment and shame.