scientifically rigorous reasoning drawn on empirical research
It’s a psychology class. This doesn’t need to be stated.
Comment on Transcribed text of Samantha Fulnecky's assignment, paper, and professor's comments
lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 9 hours agoI’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?
TonyTonyChopper@mander.xyz 3 hours ago
lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 2 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?
jacksilver@lemmy.world 4 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 2 hours ago
Dogmatic, ideological junk isn’t philosophical. It is opinion & reaction.
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 2 hours ago
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.