I mean it is Oklahoma, we couldn’t possibly expect more of them… :/
Comment on Transcribed text of Samantha Fulnecky's assignment, paper, and professor's comments
jacksilver@lemmy.world 23 hours ago
I’m really impressed by the grader’s response. They didn’t just fail her for not doing the assignment, but broke down why and how her rhetoric is flawed. The fact the school couldn’t stand behind this clear and concise feedback just means that Oklahoma doesn’t really care about the quality of the work done at their school.
Asafum@lemmy.world 23 hours ago
samus12345@sh.itjust.works 23 hours ago
Oklahoma, the state Missouri thanks god for.
lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 11 hours ago
I’m really impressed by the grader’s response.
Are you impressed they mentioned a number of reasons not in the assignment criteria or that the assignment is a called a reaction paper? I was skeptical about the student’s grievance until the assignment statement caught my attention.
The criteria for a reaction could have mentioned scientifically rigorous reasoning drawn on empirical research as the professor stated in their response. Instead, they were astonishingly lax: a clear reaction of some required length demonstrating they had read & thought about the article. Was the professor’s expectation stated elsewhere, perhaps in the syllabus?
jacksilver@lemmy.world 5 hours ago
They called out multiple reasons why their response didn’t rise to the standards of an empirical analysis. Making up your own philosophical reasoning (that isn’t even consistent within the paper submitted) for a sociological analysis means that the paper contributed nothing to the topic at hand.
For a college level course, you shouldn’t need to explicitly state that a mythos can’t be used as empirical evidence.
lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 4 hours ago
philosophical reasoning
Dogmatic, ideological junk isn’t philosophical. It is opinion & reaction.
means that the paper contributed nothing to the topic at hand
empirical evidence
Again, where does the assignment say to do that?
As written, it merely demands a clear “reaction” showing they read the linked article & thought about it. Where’s the scientific rigor in that?
If the professor had wanted scientific rigor, then it wouldn’t have been hard to plainly write that like a grownass professional would be expected to do. It seems you’re faulting students for following soft instructions exactly as written.
CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 3 hours ago
it merely demands a clear “reaction” showing they read the linked article & thought about it.
The student’s essay does neither of these things. The essay shows the student read the title of the article, not the article itself. I realize those as are the type of reactions we’re used to seeing on Lemmy, but a reaction showing they read the article would mention points directly from the article instead of just the general theme of “Trans people existing”.
Regurgitating dogmatic talking points does not demonstrate that the student “thought about it”. It reads like the student read the title, maybe the first couple of lines, then shut off their brain and said “trans bad because others tell me trans bad”.
Again, I realize it’s very common to see replies from people that did not read a or think about an article so this seems normal, but a collage level course is going to have higher standards than social media.
TonyTonyChopper@mander.xyz 5 hours ago
scientifically rigorous reasoning drawn on empirical research
It’s a psychology class. This doesn’t need to be stated.
lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 3 hours ago
Asking (in unusual, soft language) for a thoughtful “reaction” isn’t unexpected for a science class?
Why shouldn’t an assignment that already departs from common expectations for a science class need it stated which expectations still apply?
fizzle@quokk.au 19 hours ago
Their written response is great but I would’ve flagged this with my boss.
jacksilver@lemmy.world 19 hours ago
That’s definitely fair criticism, but its sad that bringing in their boss should be necessary in a situation like this.
FilthyHands@sh.itjust.works 22 hours ago
🌎👨🚀🔫👨🚀
merc@sh.itjust.works 17 hours ago
In what sense did she not do the assignment? Which aspects of the grading rubric do you think she failed at? Her rhetoric may be flawed, but that wasn’t part of the assignment. You could argue that flawed rhetoric is bad writing, but that’s only 5 points of the assignment out of a total of 25.
a_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.world 16 hours ago
Well, the TA does a pretty good job explaning where it is lacking in a professional manner.
merc@sh.itjust.works 12 hours ago
Well, the TA does a pretty good job explaning where it is lacking.
Again though: Which aspects of the grading rubric do you think she failed at? The TA talks about things that aren’t on the grading rubric, or if they are they fall under “bad writing” which is only worth 5 points.
a_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.world 2 hours ago
The rubric gives only a small amount of context. Do you think it should explicitly say “contains college-quality writing?”
I usually put that crap in the syllabus.
9bananas@feddit.org 6 hours ago
you are confusing the assignment and the grading.
they are two separate things.
the assignment was:
- A discussion of why you feel the topic is important and worthy of study (or not)
- An application of the study or results to your own experiences
the submission failed on both these points, and thus it is automatically disqualified, no grading is even applied.
there was no discussion in the submission.
“discussion” in an academic context is a technical term that means “examining a topic based on evidence from some point of view”. you may have encountered something similar in school as a pro/contra essay. in academia this gets expanded on by requiring evidence in the form of citations in order to support one’s positions and conclusions (or lack thereof).
since the student did not provide sources, this point of the assignment is not fulfilled.
the same goes for the second point, for the same reasons: insufficient evidence was provided.
the teachers explain this in their response.
since neither part of the assignment is fulfilled no grading is applied: it’s an automatic failure.
this is also explained in the response.
you may want to carefully read the responses again, and keep in mind that all of this is happening in an academic context. providing evidence is expected by default.
“i believe”, “i feel”, 'the bible says", etc., are NOT evidence in a scientific context…
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 23 hours ago
We’ve been turning public schools into diploma mills for a while now. This is just another step towards the Liberty University-ification of the national academic system.