You're probably in my generation (the Quiet or Silent Generation) - in my
case, being three years older than the oldest baby-boomer. So you have an
insight to what occurred before the 1960s.
Back in 1962, when the SAT scores peaked - never to return, the median GPA
of a graduating senior in electrical engineering at the University of
Wisconsin (a decent engineering college as Purdue) was around 2.1 or 2.2.
That wasn't because they weren't very bright, but instead they took
difficult courses where the few As and Bs were not awarded based on
attendance, but on merit. Non-engineering courses were similarly graded.
L&S
students' grades were similarly much lower than the present.
In addition, Ds and Fs were freely awarded for substandard work because
there were rigorous standards that have been lacking for some four
decades.
A typical grade then was a C. Cs today are rare. Ask any prof (emeritus,
probably) who taught prior to the 1960s. Also, calculus and geometry
courses
were axiom-based then, but not today.
And yes, evaluations are primarily used for "shopping around" by students
for an easy grade. Imagine a case of a Rip van Winkel prof who somehow
fell
asleep for 40 years and awoke and resumed teaching (and grading) as he did
in the past. He'd probably get death threats, from all quarters...
Gary Schnabl
"Herman Rubin" <hrubin@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:cal0a5$414a@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> It WAS the case in the 60s. The 50s had the best college
> cl***** of all time; the returned veterans had the drive,
> and the colleges did not lower their standards for them
> (they did not have to), but even raised standards. The
> decline in undergraduate students became noticeable in the
> 60s, but this was not a major problem, as there were still
> enough good students to provide good courses.
>
> One of the major factors was the decline in the quality
> of high school courses, and also in such items even in
> elementary school as grammar and good history. The change
> from geography and history to social studies took place
> about this time, and the teaching of languages moved from
> grammar-oriented to the memorization of phrases with no
> use made of structure. This was also the time that the
> full impact of the look-say illiteracy was finally noticed.
>
> It was well recognized in the "old days" that the one real
> mathematics course below the upper division college level
> was the "Euclid" geometry course, teaching axioms, theorems,
> and proofs, NOT memorizing facts and computational methods.
> This got perverted, and the algebra course got lowered, by
> the aim to have everyone take the same programs. Also, the
> previously mentioned changes made memorization, routine, and
> regurgitation the process, and getting grades the only goal
> which anyone could see.
>
> >The primary difference these days is that kids have many times the
> >number of alternatives to doing homework than they did when I was a
> >kid. Many high school kids then had a part time weekend job.
> >Nowadays they have cars to sup****t and work 20 or 30 hours a week, or
> >even full time. Money and being able to get around is more im****tant
> >to most of them than grades. But that was equally true then.
>
> It can be, if the adults instill it. Push understanding and
> learning early, before the educationists knock it out of the
> children. Give those who want to learn and can the chance to
> do it without sitting in class bored. Before WWII, and this
> still had some effect in the 50s, there was a separation at
> the high school level between those going to high school and
> those not, and while those not could take the college preparatory
> cl***** if they were willing and able, there was no bowing to
> the "lowest common denominator", which started in the elementary
> schools in the 30s.
>
> The rot set in, and the colleges fell for it, and made no attempt
> to keep standards up. Thinking is out of fa****on now, and the
> professor who makes them think is not going to be promoted or to
> get raises. Mandatory student evaluation of teachers, taken as
> dogma by administrators, is the rating by those who do not care
> what they learn as long as they get grades, and at a time when
> they have no good idea of how much they have learned.
|
