Posted on 12/19/2019 9:38:53 AM PST by C19fan
The authors of a new study suggest that science and technology professors should “equalize average grades across classes” in order to draw more women into those fields of study.
Inside Higher Ed reports that the researchers, examining administrative and course data from the University of Kentucky’s archives from 2012, found that students both spent more time on STEM courses every week—about an hour—and that they also got lower grades in STEM classes than in others.
(Excerpt) Read more at thecollegefix.com ...
And as a woman, I despise being treated like I’m only getting by because of affirmative action. I had the highest test scores in most of my math and science classes, even in college. And I earned those grades, d@mn it!!!!
Affirmative action is insulting. The only anatomy that matters in STEM fields is the brain.
STEM used to be a good major but with all the H1B's flooding into the US it is not a good long term career choice anymore. Also many STEM jobs can be outsourced to workers in foreign countries directly.
These days I would stick with something "hands on" - like hvac or nursing.
The authors of a new study do not comprehend the base axiom of STEM: objective reality exists.
I have a BS EET, not a EE. I had to take a college based physics course(no calculous). The course was taught by a Russian immigrant that thought everybody he was teaching were potential Einsteins. This guy was so far above everybody's head that 2/3 of the class dropped out after the first test. I hung around and ended getting an A. If I remember correctly, I didn't score higher than about 60% on any of the tests.
LOL...when my (future) wife was working on a BS (and later PhD) in chemistry in the early 1970’s, about half the chemistry majors were female. I don’t recall them having problems with “non-dumbed down” classes and coursework.
2 minute video explains why this could lead to a tragedy!
https://www.brighteon.com/dashboard/videos/5632c03b-dea3-4079-9723-75d57b38a7ac
Of course, dumbing down the curriculum always solves the problem.
How about drawing more smart people into the field — both men and women?
Bookmark
I have a BS degree so it’s kind of STEM-ish, I suppose. I worked HARD for those grades and did not expect to be graded on a curve just because I’m female. What a slap in the face — to think I can’t do math because I’m a girl. One of the things I always liked about math is — no gray areas. It’s either right or wrong. Doesn’t have anything to do with my feelings.
After a very short stent teaching in high school, I discovered that the girls do very well with engineering and math. Boys are too entangled with computer gaming to compete.
My physics professor was a 26 year old with his PhD from Rice University and was just the opposite. On the first day of class he asked how many of us were going to to become research physicists. Seeing no hands he said great and proceeded to teach physics for engineers. He got in trouble for not “weeding” enough of us out.
I believe these programs are pushed because it is becoming clear the STEM fields will be the “good” jobs of the future; it is about wealth redistribution, nothing less.
Since the STEM push failed (the targeted groups - women and certain preferred ethnic minorities weren’t interested enough), I’ve seen an “A” added for “arts” - and I assume this was done so STEM money could be diverted to fake students in easy fields with no wrong answers.
The problems with STEM recruiting are the same which led to affirmative action in other areas for the same demographics (females and certain preferred ethnic minorities): They simply didn’t want to endure the training/schooling, then the work which tends to be much more difficult than the areas many were choosing (schoolteachers and such). If STEM fields would offer easier schooling, shorter work days for only 180 days per year, and tenure that guaranteed employment for life after a few years of service, I’m quite sure the targeted groups would sign up.
I don’t think it really weeded out a bunch of folks. They dropped the course after the first test so it didn’t hurt GPA. I am guessing they hoped for a new professor the next time around.
As one who has seen how pathetically far college standards have fallen—in large part to make sure that “everyone” can go to college and stay in college—I am not surprised by this little tidbit in the story behind the story (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2019/12/18/study-suggests-professors-should-standardize-their-grading-curves-boost-womens?utm_source=Inside+Higher+Ed&utm_campaign=9f02957c72-DNU_2019_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_1fcbc04421-9f02957c72-198611657&mc_cid=9f02957c72&mc_eid=144e12a9df)
Students on average spend an hour more a week studying for a STEM class compared to a non-STEM class. They also refer to that as 40% more time. Suggesting that the average college student spends a whopping hour and a half a week studying for a non-STEM course and two and a half hours a week studying for a STEM course.
Is it any wonder that what we knew as an introductory algebra class, taken in junior high or at latest as a freshman in high school, is now known as “college algebra”?
And of course as more students are drawn into STEM courses that are mandated to sustain higher grades given, the content and standards of those classes will necessarily be dropped lower. Then still more marginal students will take them and they will be dropped lower still.
Expect more bridges and buildings to fail by, what, 2030?
It has killed higher ed as an institution, which is now full of minority and other kids who are being taught at the 7th grade level while they are under the delusion that they are doing college level work.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.