You can LIE to a professor and still retain your personal dignity. We're not talking about living your life by this lie we're saying that for one 10-week course you can trick someone into believing you're on their side long enough to get what you need and move on.
If something is worth it you can get up on your soap box and argue it, but if a person is irrational it's typically better to indulge their fantasy. It's a college professor, not an actual authority. Like I said, it's only for a quarter/semester anyway.
If you find yourself running into a LOT of these people in your life then something is horribly wrong with your career/education path.
You can LIE to a professor and still retain your personal dignity. We're not talking about living your life by this lie we're saying that for one 10-week course you can trick someone into believing you're on their side long enough to get what you need and move on.
Keep telling yourself that.
We're just talking about a 10-week course. We're just talking about four years of college. We're just talking about for a couple years until I get that promotion. And so on, and so on.
If you don't learn to stand up for what you believe in, even when it doesn't seem to matter, by college then you likely never will. Ideally they'd hand out spines in grade school...apparently they don't though.
Coming from a democrat that works in an office full of republicans, it's just usually not worth arguing. Not everything needs to be an argument, and I'm not at work to discuss politics. I'm there to work.
In a poli sci class I'd expect there to be an atmosphere more accepting to debate, but something that it seems a lot of people in D&D need to learn this: just because somebody disagrees with you and you know it doesn't necessarily make it the appropriate time to debate with them.
If writing what I'm assuming was a subjective paper in a political science class isn't a time to "argue" (by argue, of course, I mean present an opinion you know the grader may not agree with), then I don't know what is. Especially if we're talking about a paper, and not calling him out in public.
Just thought I'd reiterate that this bit is in response to this, which mcdermott left out for me.
It's no different that doing the same if you worked in a government office, and your boss was a conservative.
I know that there are some times when it's important to stand up for what you believe in. A college classroom where the only consequence of doing so is holding up the class, lowering your grade, and making the professor think less of you is, in my opinion, not one of those times.
Try to convince people that you stand a chance of changing their mind on the issue. It's obvious that the prof had no interest in changing his view and he made that obvious (or so it seems).
Honestly, what's the point of trying to debate with somebody whose reaction is analagous to "La la la la! I can't hear you! AND you get a C!"
jclast on
0
Options
Hi I'm Vee!Formerly VH; She/Her; Is an E X P E R I E N C ERegistered Userregular
Why? It sounds like your issue is with those very consequences, not with the act itself. This is a pretty specific case where there ARE no serious consequences to agreeing with the professor, beyond continuing to inflate his already-swollen ego. And in this case, disagreeing with him won't change anything except your grade.
Except that by encouragnig people to do this as students, it increases the chances they will continue to do this out in the "real world." People who learn to be sellouts in school all too often stay sellouts when they get somewhere that it matters.
I think that's kind of a stretch, but okay.
Note: I understand that there are some professors with whom you can debate. Some are cool with people holding dissenting opinions (I had one of those last quarter as well). I'm not talking about those guys, I'm talking about the ones who are clearly set in their beliefs and don't feel like defending them against us durn youngsters.
My first instinct? Shoot the fuckers. My second instinct? Write what the fuck you believe in, let them grade you down, then take the time to see if taking it to the department will do any good. If not, so long as we aren't talking about ending up with a D, who gives a fuck? Seriously, you don't need straight A's to make it in life...a B- or two isn't going to have you in a gutter begging for food.
No, but more A's is better, and frankly I don't see any tangible harm to me, specifically, arising from sucking up to a teacher.
Yeah, but you could be graduating Summa Cum Laude. But I guess since grades aren't as important to you, then they must not be as important to everybody else. Also, you can't get into the International Economics program at UCLA with less than a 3.0, so I guess I should just forget about that.
If one or two B-'s are enough to drop you below a 3.0, then you were probably doing a lot more wrong than pissing off Professor McConservative once in a while. And again, did your friend try and take it up the chain to see if he could get the papers regraded? Many schools do allow this.
I'm not really sure what he's done about it, I haven't seen him yet this semester. And sure, maybe someone was doing other things wrong, but what does that have to do with this? Why not take the opportunity to increase your gradepoint? Seriously, why would you throw away that opportunity? If it were to make the difference between getting into the major you want or having to settle for something else, why wouldn't you just suck it up and suck up to the teacher?
I'm not sure why there's such an arbitrarily great amount of value attached to "showing some spine" either.
Because living is about more than grades and money?
Sure, but having high grades and more money gives you more options to pursue possibilities. If I find my true calling in nuclear physics, I'm sure as hell not going to be able to pursue it with shitty grades.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go to my next class so I can suck up to my professor. Would you guys hold my spine for me? Thanks.
I've been there, and this is the best advice I can give you: be attentive in class, take notes, regurgitate said notes on the exams and papers, walk out with your sheepskin, and then do whatever the hell you want. College turned me into a cynical S.O.B. It's not about learning things, it's about convincing a group of human beings that you think the same way that they do long enough for them to hand you a scribbly piece of paper and a ridiculous outfit. Any knowledge you might glean in the intervening period of time is merely a bonus.
Your prof wants you to write a paper on the evils of abortion? Write a damn paper on the evils of abortion. Who knows? You might even learn something about your enemies along the way. It's not hyporcracy, it's doing a damn job. It's performing an assignment. It's composing an analysis of a given topic from a given viewpoint. Don't invest yourself in the paper, don't let it change your philosophy one iota, don't brown nose or pretend you're going along with anything, just churn it out and be done with it. Only in the most extreme, repugnant circumstances should you do otherwise; like someone else said in here, pick your battles. And really, if your professor is asking you do do something that extreme or repugnant, you should probably be complaining to the department head or the dean instead.
You aren't going to change your professor's outlook, no matter how eloquent or tenacious you are. At the end of the day (in my mind, anyway), it's more fun to beat the prof at his own game than giving him the pleasure of antagonizing you every single period, to the point where you despise his class and possibly even your own major.
As for grades not meaning anything, a lot of us have to deal with GPA restrictions in financial aid. No, a D wouldn't have put me out in the gutter, but it would have probably made it harder to keep my scholarship that semester. Really, I don't want to jeopardize my whole college career for some fuck clump who has antiquated notions about gay rights or the economic stability of Japan.
Your grades don't mean dick. Yeah really. C? Yup you get your degree. Unless you're shooting for education higher than what degree you're going for, nobody really cares.
That having been said, some people go to classes to learn things (rather than just suck schlong for an A), and some people get a lot more out of a class when some debate and discourse is going on.
I took my C happily in a class with a Feminazi prof who wanted me to write papers about how sexist and evil black right activists were(are). You know what? I said fuck that and wrote real papers, and had good peace of mind about it.
I'm graduating Magna Cum Laude with this attitude, so it's not like it'll kill your grades to stick up for yourself.
Show some spine.
See, this shit is why the Grand Canyon has a "made by god" sign on it. An unwillingness to engage with ideas, mistaking empathy or role-play for actual position, an unwillingness to subject your own viewpoint to criticism, the lack of an open mind.
You're right, some people do go to college to learn. And some people also realise that learning means youy have to put aside your "I'm always right" mantle, even if that may be temporarilly distateful.
If you can't learn to stand up to authority figures that are wrong guess what? Grades are you're last concern. Your primary concern should be that you're developing an attitude that will doom you to medorcrity for the rest of your bloody life.
One of my film professors said it best when he told me "The system is designed to make you fail. Make the best of what's offered then go at it on your own"
No, but more A's is better, and frankly I don't see any tangible harm to me, specifically, arising from sucking up to a teacher.
I put a very real value on my dignity. I think sucking up to a teacher compromises that. It's cool if you don't (the latter, obviously you do the former). I just disagree.
See, this shit is why the Grand Canyon has a "made by god" sign on it. An unwillingness to engage with ideas, mistaking empathy or role-play for actual position, an unwillingness to subject your own viewpoint to criticism, the lack of an open mind.
Um...no. It's people like the professor in question, not the student that contradicts him, that are the reason the Grand Canyon is officially made by God. It's the stifling of dissent that causes it, not the encouragement of it.
Your grades don't mean dick. Yeah really. C? Yup you get your degree. Unless you're shooting for education higher than what degree you're going for, nobody really cares.
That having been said, some people go to classes to learn things (rather than just suck schlong for an A), and some people get a lot more out of a class when some debate and discourse is going on.
I took my C happily in a class with a Feminazi prof who wanted me to write papers about how sexist and evil black right activists were(are). You know what? I said fuck that and wrote real papers, and had good peace of mind about it.
I'm graduating Magna Cum Laude with this attitude, so it's not like it'll kill your grades to stick up for yourself.
Show some spine.
See, this shit is why the Grand Canyon has a "made by god" sign on it. An unwillingness to engage with ideas, mistaking empathy or role-play for actual position, an unwillingness to subject your own viewpoint to criticism, the lack of an open mind.
You're right, some people do go to college to learn. And some people also realise that learning means youy have to put aside your "I'm always right" mantle, even if that may be temporarilly distateful.
I'm sorry that you're confused.
I don't walk into a room thinking "I'm right and I'm going to show everyone what's what." I walk into the room open to the ideas presented to me. If I get confused, or if something doesn't seem right to me, I research it.
If, after doing all that, I still think the professor is wrong or has a flawed opinion, I ask them about it. It's up to them to get argumentative (which rarely if ever happens. You want a happy professor? Show them an interested student who obviously went out and researched a topic to ask them questions).
But no, I don't write papers aping what I believe professor's ideas are.
If that's putting God signs up all over the country, well long live the Lord.
If you can't learn to stand up to authority figures that are wrong guess what? grades are you're last concern. You're primary concern should be that you're developing an attitude that will doom you to medorcrity for the rest of your bloody life.
One of my film professors said it best when he told me "The system is designed to make you fail. Make the best of what's offered then go at it on your own"
I don't see people in this thread who can't stand up to authority figures. I see people who are pursuing their self interest by not standing up to them. Which is fine.
I debate my ass off in class. I love to do it. I have actually written a paper once that plays both sides of the field in terms of political viewpoints. The point of the paper was to illustrate how easy it was to point out the negative of any opponent. I ripped up one side of "Liberal Tree-Hugging Socialists" and and down the other side of "Bible-Thumping Reactionaries". My teacher fucking LOVED it. She said it really gives you an utter disdain for anyone who shouts their political viewpoint at any chance they get.
Does it pay to go at your professor because you disagree? No. In my experience, 90% of professors appreciate and respect divergent viewpoints. Maybe if you're having trouble it's because you aren't respecting theirs.
If a student is disrupting class consistently and hijacking discussions then this student shows that they are self-righteous assholes. It's the sort of thing you judge on a case-by-case basis but most of the time if a student is receiving a lower grade it isn't due to their opinions but their method of expressing them.
I don't know what everyone else's personal experiences are and I'm sure your schools and mine differed greatly but picking your battles is NOT a sign of weakness. Show some restraint, you may even learn something from the experience.
If you can't learn to stand up to authority figures that are wrong guess what? Grades are you're last concern. Your primary concern should be that you're developing an attitude that will doom you to medorcrity for the rest of your bloody life.
One of my film professors said it best when he told me "The system is designed to make you fail. Make the best of what's offered then go at it on your own"
You raise a good point, but it's not expressly related to the discussion at hand. A conservative that doesn't want to argue about politics isn't wrong so much as he is uncommon as the leader of a course on political science.
There's something to be said for respecting other people opinions and beliefs even when they disagree with your own.
If the professor wants to run his course as such that the way it works is he talks, you listen, and you regurgitate his thoughts on the exam that's his prerogative. And what have you learned? To avoid taking courses from him in the future.
Just because you disagree doesn't magically make one of you right and the other wrong.
If you can't learn to stand up to authority figures that are wrong guess what? Grades are you're last concern. Your primary concern should be that you're developing an attitude that will doom you to medorcrity for the rest of your bloody life.
One of my film professors said it best when he told me "The system is designed to make you fail. Make the best of what's offered then go at it on your own"
You raise a good point, but it's not expressly related to the discussion at hand. A conservative that doesn't want to argue about politics isn't wrong so much as he is uncommon as the leader of a course on political science.
There's something to be said for respecting other people opinions and beliefs even when they disagree with your own.
If the professor wants to run his course as such that the way it works is he talks, you listen, and you regurgitate his thoughts on the exam that's his prerogative. And what have you learned? To avoid taking courses from him in the future.
Just because you disagree doesn't magically make one of you right and the other wrong.
I should amend that to "authority figures you think are wrong" I suppose.
Your grades don't mean dick. Yeah really. C? Yup you get your degree. Unless you're shooting for education higher than what degree you're going for, nobody really cares.
That having been said, some people go to classes to learn things (rather than just suck schlong for an A), and some people get a lot more out of a class when some debate and discourse is going on.
I took my C happily in a class with a Feminazi prof who wanted me to write papers about how sexist and evil black right activists were(are). You know what? I said fuck that and wrote real papers, and had good peace of mind about it.
I'm graduating Magna Cum Laude with this attitude, so it's not like it'll kill your grades to stick up for yourself.
Show some spine.
See, this shit is why the Grand Canyon has a "made by god" sign on it. An unwillingness to engage with ideas, mistaking empathy or role-play for actual position, an unwillingness to subject your own viewpoint to criticism, the lack of an open mind.
You're right, some people do go to college to learn. And some people also realise that learning means youy have to put aside your "I'm always right" mantle, even if that may be temporarilly distateful.
I'm sorry that you're confused.
I don't walk into a room thinking "I'm right and I'm going to show everyone what's what." I walk into the room open to the ideas presented to me. If I get confused, or if something doesn't seem right to me, I research it.
If, after doing all that, I still think the professor is wrong or has a flawed opinion, I ask them about it. It's up to them to get argumentative (which rarely if ever happens. You want a happy professor? Show them an interested student who obviously went out and researched a topic to ask them questions).
But no, I don't write papers aping what I believe professor's ideas are.
If that's putting God signs up all over the country, well long live the Lord.
Okay this I can feel good about reading. Thank you.
If you can't learn to stand up to authority figures that are wrong guess what? grades are you're last concern. You're primary concern should be that you're developing an attitude that will doom you to medorcrity for the rest of your bloody life.
One of my film professors said it best when he told me "The system is designed to make you fail. Make the best of what's offered then go at it on your own"
I don't see people in this thread who can't stand up to authority figures. I see people who are pursuing their self interest by not standing up to them. Which is fine.
Still a shitty way to approach life I believe. It's the academic way of making yourself nothing more than a yes man.
If you can't learn to stand up to authority figures that are wrong guess what? grades are you're last concern. You're primary concern should be that you're developing an attitude that will doom you to medorcrity for the rest of your bloody life.
One of my film professors said it best when he told me "The system is designed to make you fail. Make the best of what's offered then go at it on your own"
I don't see people in this thread who can't stand up to authority figures. I see people who are pursuing their self interest by not standing up to them. Which is fine.
Still a shitty way to approach life I believe. It's the academic way of making yourself nothing more than a yes man.
You know what sir, you are absolutely right. Can I get your coat?
If you can't learn to stand up to authority figures that are wrong guess what? grades are you're last concern. You're primary concern should be that you're developing an attitude that will doom you to medorcrity for the rest of your bloody life.
One of my film professors said it best when he told me "The system is designed to make you fail. Make the best of what's offered then go at it on your own"
I don't see people in this thread who can't stand up to authority figures. I see people who are pursuing their self interest by not standing up to them. Which is fine.
Still a shitty way to approach life I believe. It's the academic way of making yourself nothing more than a yes man.
I don't see it as different than doing a job in the way your boss wants it done.
The best thing to do is try to remain neutral. Don't be a pompous jerk and blather on and on about your political views if it doesn't really effect your learning or grade. Like I had a crazy teacher who believed there was internment camps being built in our city, even though there is obviously no such thing going on.
You raise a good point, but it's not expressly related to the discussion at hand. A conservative that doesn't want to argue about politics isn't wrong so much as he is uncommon as the leader of a course on political science.
There's something to be said for respecting other people opinions and beliefs even when they disagree with your own.
If the professor wants to run his course as such that the way it works is he talks, you listen, and you regurgitate his thoughts on the exam that's his prerogative. And what have you learned? To avoid taking courses from him in the future.
Just because you disagree doesn't magically make one of you right and the other wrong.
See, when an exam/paper is subjective, and the professor asks for what I think rather than what he thinks, then I'm going to write that. If he grades me down, I'll complain to the department/college. Possibly see about getting it regraded.
And, the cool part is that if enough people do this the administration might start to take note of it and have a little talk with him. They may not be able to fire him, but they can certainly put pressure on him in other ways.
But if instead students just line up to academically suck his cock, I can guarantee nothing will ever change until the day he dies.
I don't see it as different than doing a job in the way your boss wants it done.
While they are in a position of authority, they are not (in theory) your boss. You are paying the university for an education, in effect paying their salary as well. This doesn't make you their boss, either...but it means that despite that position of authority they've been put in they also owe you a service.
If you can't learn to stand up to authority figures that are wrong guess what? grades are you're last concern. You're primary concern should be that you're developing an attitude that will doom you to medorcrity for the rest of your bloody life.
One of my film professors said it best when he told me "The system is designed to make you fail. Make the best of what's offered then go at it on your own"
I don't see people in this thread who can't stand up to authority figures. I see people who are pursuing their self interest by not standing up to them. Which is fine.
Still a shitty way to approach life I believe. It's the academic way of making yourself nothing more than a yes man.
If nobody suffered those that they believe to be fools then we'd never get anything done. We'd all be constantly locked in debate trying to convince one another to come over to our side of the issue.
Sometimes it's not my goal to make everybody agree with me. Sometimes I just want to coast through a class, learn the material, and get the grade I deserve for learning it. If I take the opposing viewpoint in doing that, who the hell cares? My beliefs are intact. I'm more informed than I was at the beginning of the course.
Part of college is learning how to deal with people. Part of knowing how to deal with people is learning when and when not to drop everything and argue with them.
When the professor is considering nuking China, I'll stand up and disagree.
When he's just trying to teach a class uninterrupted, I'll sit down and take notes.
You raise a good point, but it's not expressly related to the discussion at hand. A conservative that doesn't want to argue about politics isn't wrong so much as he is uncommon as the leader of a course on political science.
There's something to be said for respecting other people opinions and beliefs even when they disagree with your own.
If the professor wants to run his course as such that the way it works is he talks, you listen, and you regurgitate his thoughts on the exam that's his prerogative. And what have you learned? To avoid taking courses from him in the future.
Just because you disagree doesn't magically make one of you right and the other wrong.
See, when an exam/paper is subjective, and the professor asks for what I think rather than what he thinks, then I'm going to write that. If he grades me down, I'll complain to the department/college. Possibly see about getting it regraded.
And, the cool part is that if enough people do this the administration might start to take note of it and have a little talk with him. They may not be able to fire him, but they can certainly put pressure on him in other ways.
But if instead students just line up to academically suck his cock, I can guarantee nothing will ever change until the day he dies.
Well yes, if the professor explicitly asks you for your thoughts then you'd be a liar if you, well, lied.
Part of college is learning how to deal with people. Part of knowing how to deal with people is learning when and when not to drop everything and argue with them.
When the professor is considering nuking China, I'll stand up and disagree.
When he's just trying to teach a class uninterrupted, I'll sit down and take notes.
As an aside, I'm specifically talking about writing papers and written-form exams...not interrupting class to argue for argument's sake.
If you can't learn to stand up to authority figures that are wrong guess what? grades are you're last concern. You're primary concern should be that you're developing an attitude that will doom you to medorcrity for the rest of your bloody life.
One of my film professors said it best when he told me "The system is designed to make you fail. Make the best of what's offered then go at it on your own"
I don't see people in this thread who can't stand up to authority figures. I see people who are pursuing their self interest by not standing up to them. Which is fine.
Still a shitty way to approach life I believe. It's the academic way of making yourself nothing more than a yes man.
You know what sir, you are absolutely right. Can I get your coat?
Scenario 1: Professor says something student disagrees with. Student gets uppitty, calls him out on it, feels better, and goes home a smug asshole. Professor's mind is not changed. He gives the student a bad mark, and then procedes to write a paper about how he's right.
Scenario 2: Professor says something a student disagrees with. Student puts aside his own ego to engage with the professor. He applies what the professor has taught him to his own worldview, and sees if he can take anything away from it. In order to better understand the professor's position, he explores the arguments for/against it in assignment form. Student gets a good mark, keeps his moral integrity, and perhaps walks away a little bit wiser. Maybe even becomes a professor himself, and teaches his own worldview.
In an academic environment, of all places, one should be able to engage with any idea without being afraid that they'll get intelectual cooties from it.
Opening your mouth is not the same as opening your mind. Be sure that you take care of the second before you do the first.
That said, if the professor is inflexible, then there's no use bashing your head against the wall. I ended up failing a religion class my freshman year because of a disagreement in the philosophy of what the class should be teaching. He asked questions like "Who was Confucius' favorite disciple?" I had no clue and told him that I thought the question was dumb (in office hours). I then refused to study the minutiae he demanded, and instead aced my essays and bombed the multiple choice tests (though I handed an extra essay each class to demonstrate my knowledge to him). It was the only failing grade I ever received.
It wasn't worth it, in the end. It cost me money I couldn't afford, and for what? Some stupid sense of pride?
Though he was fired at the end of the year. That made me feel better.
You raise a good point, but it's not expressly related to the discussion at hand. A conservative that doesn't want to argue about politics isn't wrong so much as he is uncommon as the leader of a course on political science.
There's something to be said for respecting other people opinions and beliefs even when they disagree with your own.
If the professor wants to run his course as such that the way it works is he talks, you listen, and you regurgitate his thoughts on the exam that's his prerogative. And what have you learned? To avoid taking courses from him in the future.
Just because you disagree doesn't magically make one of you right and the other wrong.
See, when an exam/paper is subjective, and the professor asks for what I think rather than what he thinks, then I'm going to write that. If he grades me down, I'll complain to the department/college. Possibly see about getting it regraded.
And, the cool part is that if enough people do this the administration might start to take note of it and have a little talk with him. They may not be able to fire him, but they can certainly put pressure on him in other ways.
But if instead students just line up to academically suck his cock, I can guarantee nothing will ever change until the day he dies.
The OP only says that he wrote a couple papers as though he were a conservative. I agree with you that if the exam asks what you think then you should be writing what you think, but if he just says "write me 10 pages about the Middle East" and you interpret that as "write me 10 pages about your opinion of the Middle East" then that's nobody's fault but your own.
Hell, fill the paper with properly cited facts. Then everybody wins. You've learned, he's read (or more likely skimmed) a well-researched paper, and you've earned a good grade.
Prof.: "Your daddy pays a lot of money for you to be able to listen to what an accomplished academic has to say. You don't have to agree, you can even respectfully voice disagreement, but let's all try to get on to doing what we're here to do, ok?"
Student: "Me vs. the world!! Me vs. the world!! You nazi fascists, I'll won't let you get away with it!!"
I'd get pretty pissed of if one of my prof's said that. I worked my ass off to earn scholarships and money to pay to take his class. If a learned academic can't defend his point of view, I'm being defrauded.
The OP only says that he wrote a couple papers as though he were a conservative. I agree with you that if the exam asks what you think then you should be writing what you think, but if he just says "write me 10 pages about the Middle East" and you interpret that as "write me 10 pages about your opinion of the Middle East" then that's nobody's fault but your own.
Hell, fill the paper with properly cited facts. Then everybody wins. You've learned, he's read (or more likely skimmed) a well-researched paper, and you've earned a good grade.
See, in the few subjective and semi-subjective classes I've taken papers/written exams didn't generally just ask for a bunch of cold facts...the student was expected to inject some of their own thoughts into it (and back them up, of course). Maybe in other classes you're just expected to regurgitate facts in written form. But if thought/interpretation is expected, it's going to be mine and not what I think he wants to hear.
Prof.: "Your daddy pays a lot of money for you to be able to listen to what an accomplished academic has to say. You don't have to agree, you can even respectfully voice disagreement, but let's all try to get on to doing what we're here to do, ok?"
Student: "Me vs. the world!! Me vs. the world!! You nazi fascists, I'll won't let you get away with it!!"
Are any of us actually advocating interrupting the professor at every turn to argue with anything he says and bring the class to a screeching halt? Show of hands?
I'd get pretty pissed of if one of my prof's said that. I worked my ass off to earn scholarships and money to pay to take his class. If a learned academic can't defend his point of view, I'm being defrauded.
Then it should mean even more. Even if you're getting your money's worth out of the argument, the other students probably aren't. They're there to learn what the professor has to teach regardless of whether they agree with his opinion on the matter.
If you want to debate him, take it to office hours. I don't pay tuition to listen to other students argue with the teacher.
The OP only says that he wrote a couple papers as though he were a conservative. I agree with you that if the exam asks what you think then you should be writing what you think, but if he just says "write me 10 pages about the Middle East" and you interpret that as "write me 10 pages about your opinion of the Middle East" then that's nobody's fault but your own.
Hell, fill the paper with properly cited facts. Then everybody wins. You've learned, he's read (or more likely skimmed) a well-researched paper, and you've earned a good grade.
See, in the few subjective and semi-subjective classes I've taken papers/written exams didn't generally just ask for a bunch of cold facts...the student was expected to inject some of their own thoughts into it (and back them up, of course). Maybe in other classes you're just expected to regurgitate facts in written form. But if thought/interpretation is expected, it's going to be mine and not what I think he wants to hear.
The last papers I wrote were for a computer science degree. Those are made of facts, research, and practical test results.
I genuinely thought we were talking about arguing during class or writing papers contrary to the professor's view when it wasn't necessary.
If he asks for my opinion, then I'll give it to him. If he then marks me down for it, I'll talk to him after class. If that fails, I'll go to the head of the department.
Is that honestly what was happening here though? The prof asked for a paper about X and made it seem like he wanted the students' thoughts on it? If that's the case then he's an idiot for marking people down for giving him what he asked for.
I've always been thier to learn about reality, not some prof's demonstratable inaccurate view of reality. The bottum line is I'm there to gain skills and knowlage that can be applied outside academia, otherwise the whole endevor is pointless.
You seem to be there to get a piece of paper. that's ok too, I guess, but it is not what I want from educators.
In my experience, very few professors actually want to know what you think about something. They want to know that you've been paying attention, and can recall what they've said. Your results may vary, I'm sure.
I'd get pretty pissed of if one of my prof's said that. I worked my ass off to earn scholarships and money to pay to take his class. If a learned academic can't defend his point of view, I'm being defrauded.
Then it should mean even more. Even if you're getting your money's worth out of the argument, the other students probably aren't. They're there to learn what the professor has to teach regardless of whether they agree with his opinion on the matter.
If you want to debate him, take it to office hours. I don't pay tuition to listen to other students argue with the teacher.
I agree with you to an extent on this one. Again, my main problem is with the idea of having to write papers from positions I disagree with as though they were my own simply to get a better grade. Lecture is another story...it's called lecture for a reason. Listening passively and not interrupting just seems less offensive to me than actively selling my soul for a grade.
I've always been thier to learn about reality, not some prof's demonstratable inaccurate view of reality. The bottum line is I'm there to gain skills and knowlage that can be applied outside academia, otherwise the whole endevor is pointless.
You seem to be there to get a piece of paper. that's ok too, I guess, but it is not what I want from educators.
I think that, for the most part, we're in agreement here. I want to learn things to apply to reality. I just don't want to argue with a man that will 1.) never change his view and 2.) lower my grade for having a differing opinion.
I'm also not a big fan of wasting class (multi-student) time with things that are better handled during office hours (one-on-one time), but I think I was the only one that thought the arguing was taking place during lecture.
Also, learning to wade through the bullshit given and pull out the facts and other useful bits is a wonderfully handy skill that listening to people with differing opinions can net you. It's hard to leave college without having picked it up.
One of the things that some people forget when arguing professors is that the professor probably knows more than you do. If only because they have a "Dr." in front of their name and have been studying the topic for an extended period of time.
The last papers I wrote were for a computer science degree. Those are made of facts, research, and practical test results.
I genuinely thought we were talking about arguing during class or writing papers contrary to the professor's view when it wasn't necessary.
If he asks for my opinion, then I'll give it to him. If he then marks me down for it, I'll talk to him after class. If that fails, I'll go to the head of the department.
Is that honestly what was happening here though? The prof asked for a paper about X and made it seem like he wanted the students' thoughts on it? If that's the case then he's an idiot for marking people down for giving him what he asked for.
In the OP we were talking about political science (as opposed to, say, computer science), and I got the impression we weren't talking about technical papers full of nothing but hard facts...especially since visiblehowl talked about writing papers as though he was a conservative, or some such.
Again, I'm in EE so we don't do a lot of subjective shit either. All my "subjective" experience just came from my core/diversity classes, most of which were admittedly 100- and 200-level courses.
And yeah, we were to some extent talking about argument during class...which I agree in a vast majority of lectures is inappropriate (especially unprompted and excessive argument). If a class is a smaller, more discourse-oriented affair (of which I was in a couple, and many lectures also had a separate portion for this) then it's a bit more appropriate...but if you hit the point where you're obviously just wasting everybody's time I agree that even then it might be best to let it go.
One of the things that some people forget when arguing professors is that the professor probably knows more than you do. If only because they have a "Dr." in front of their name and have been studying the topic for an extended period of time.
Of course, in fields like political science often there are lots of people with "Dr." in front of their name who hold dissenting opinions, some of which might even agree with yours. I'm pretty sure this is a little different than math or chemistry.
dispite how I act here, I'm not a douchebag in class. I'm not that guy. But let's say a prof is doing a forumla on a whiteboard, and he obviously fucks something up.
You wouldn't comment?
or he is giving you notes in a poly sci class, and fucks up a location or system of govenment in how power point presnentation.
You'd sit silent?
I'm not saying that i'd argue some sort of value judgement or other subjective item, but objective errors? Yeah, I'll bring it up. Because I don't know if he just fucked up or actually is wrong in his understanding. If he disgrees with the text, well, I sure as fuck want to know which will be on a test, and why I'm hearing two diffrent things.
to a point, I'd argue or sit on my hand. There is some judgement involved, and asuming that the prof (or even worse a TA) is correct is pretty damn silly in some cases.
One of the things that some people forget when arguing professors is that the professor probably knows more than you do. If only because they have a "Dr." in front of their name and have been studying the topic for an extended period of time.
a lot of people forget that they are still people, and are still failble. A lot of people don't consider what they are hearing and just write down whatever they are told.
The last papers I wrote were for a computer science degree. Those are made of facts, research, and practical test results.
I genuinely thought we were talking about arguing during class or writing papers contrary to the professor's view when it wasn't necessary.
If he asks for my opinion, then I'll give it to him. If he then marks me down for it, I'll talk to him after class. If that fails, I'll go to the head of the department.
Is that honestly what was happening here though? The prof asked for a paper about X and made it seem like he wanted the students' thoughts on it? If that's the case then he's an idiot for marking people down for giving him what he asked for.
In the OP we were talking about political science (as opposed to, say, computer science), and I got the impression we weren't talking about technical papers full of nothing but hard facts...especially since visiblehowl talked about writing papers as though he was a conservative, or some such.
Again, I'm in EE so we don't do a lot of subjective shit either. All my "subjective" experience just came from my core/diversity classes, most of which were admittedly 100- and 200-level courses.
And yeah, we were to some extent talking about argument during class...which I agree in a vast majority of lectures is inappropriate (especially unprompted and excessive argument). If a class is a smaller, more discourse-oriented affair (of which I was in a couple, and many lectures also had a separate portion for this) then it's a bit more appropriate...but if you hit the point where you're obviously just wasting everybody's time I agree that even then it might be best to let it go.
I wasn't trying to show that I didn't know we were talking about poli sci. I was trying to show that I have very little experience writing papers that aren't based on facts.
dispite how I act here, I'm not a douchebag in class. I'm not that guy. But let's say a prof is doing a forumla on a whiteboard, and he obviously fucks something up.
You wouldn't comment?
or he is giving you notes in a poly sci class, and fucks up a location or system of govenment in how power point presnentation.
You'd sit silent?
I'm not saying that i'd argue some sort of value judgement or other subjective item, but objective errors? Yeah, I'll bring it up. Because I don't know if he just fucked up or actually is wrong in his understanding. If he disgrees with the text, well, I sure as fuck want to know which will be on a test, and why I'm hearing two diffrent things.
to a point, I'd argue or sit on my hand. There is some judgement involved, and asuming that the prof (or even worse a TA) is correct is pretty damn silly in some cases.
One of the things that some people forget when arguing professors is that the professor probably knows more than you do. If only because they have a "Dr." in front of their name and have been studying the topic for an extended period of time.
a lot of people forget that they are still people, and are still failble. A lot of people don't consider what they are hearing and just write down whatever they are told.
Disputing facts is different from disputing opinions. The last thing any decent student should want is for the professor to accidentally disseminate false information.
Posts
You can LIE to a professor and still retain your personal dignity. We're not talking about living your life by this lie we're saying that for one 10-week course you can trick someone into believing you're on their side long enough to get what you need and move on.
If something is worth it you can get up on your soap box and argue it, but if a person is irrational it's typically better to indulge their fantasy. It's a college professor, not an actual authority. Like I said, it's only for a quarter/semester anyway.
If you find yourself running into a LOT of these people in your life then something is horribly wrong with your career/education path.
Keep telling yourself that.
We're just talking about a 10-week course. We're just talking about four years of college. We're just talking about for a couple years until I get that promotion. And so on, and so on.
If you don't learn to stand up for what you believe in, even when it doesn't seem to matter, by college then you likely never will. Ideally they'd hand out spines in grade school...apparently they don't though.
Just thought I'd reiterate that this bit is in response to this, which mcdermott left out for me.
I know that there are some times when it's important to stand up for what you believe in. A college classroom where the only consequence of doing so is holding up the class, lowering your grade, and making the professor think less of you is, in my opinion, not one of those times.
Try to convince people that you stand a chance of changing their mind on the issue. It's obvious that the prof had no interest in changing his view and he made that obvious (or so it seems).
Honestly, what's the point of trying to debate with somebody whose reaction is analagous to "La la la la! I can't hear you! AND you get a C!"
I think that's kind of a stretch, but okay.
No, but more A's is better, and frankly I don't see any tangible harm to me, specifically, arising from sucking up to a teacher.
I'm not really sure what he's done about it, I haven't seen him yet this semester. And sure, maybe someone was doing other things wrong, but what does that have to do with this? Why not take the opportunity to increase your gradepoint? Seriously, why would you throw away that opportunity? If it were to make the difference between getting into the major you want or having to settle for something else, why wouldn't you just suck it up and suck up to the teacher?
Sure, but having high grades and more money gives you more options to pursue possibilities. If I find my true calling in nuclear physics, I'm sure as hell not going to be able to pursue it with shitty grades.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go to my next class so I can suck up to my professor. Would you guys hold my spine for me? Thanks.
Your prof wants you to write a paper on the evils of abortion? Write a damn paper on the evils of abortion. Who knows? You might even learn something about your enemies along the way. It's not hyporcracy, it's doing a damn job. It's performing an assignment. It's composing an analysis of a given topic from a given viewpoint. Don't invest yourself in the paper, don't let it change your philosophy one iota, don't brown nose or pretend you're going along with anything, just churn it out and be done with it. Only in the most extreme, repugnant circumstances should you do otherwise; like someone else said in here, pick your battles. And really, if your professor is asking you do do something that extreme or repugnant, you should probably be complaining to the department head or the dean instead.
You aren't going to change your professor's outlook, no matter how eloquent or tenacious you are. At the end of the day (in my mind, anyway), it's more fun to beat the prof at his own game than giving him the pleasure of antagonizing you every single period, to the point where you despise his class and possibly even your own major.
As for grades not meaning anything, a lot of us have to deal with GPA restrictions in financial aid. No, a D wouldn't have put me out in the gutter, but it would have probably made it harder to keep my scholarship that semester. Really, I don't want to jeopardize my whole college career for some fuck clump who has antiquated notions about gay rights or the economic stability of Japan.
See, this shit is why the Grand Canyon has a "made by god" sign on it. An unwillingness to engage with ideas, mistaking empathy or role-play for actual position, an unwillingness to subject your own viewpoint to criticism, the lack of an open mind.
You're right, some people do go to college to learn. And some people also realise that learning means youy have to put aside your "I'm always right" mantle, even if that may be temporarilly distateful.
This is not ideal for college. I am working on my ability to suffer in silence.
One of my film professors said it best when he told me "The system is designed to make you fail. Make the best of what's offered then go at it on your own"
I put a very real value on my dignity. I think sucking up to a teacher compromises that. It's cool if you don't (the latter, obviously you do the former). I just disagree.
Um...no. It's people like the professor in question, not the student that contradicts him, that are the reason the Grand Canyon is officially made by God. It's the stifling of dissent that causes it, not the encouragement of it.
I'm sorry that you're confused.
I don't walk into a room thinking "I'm right and I'm going to show everyone what's what." I walk into the room open to the ideas presented to me. If I get confused, or if something doesn't seem right to me, I research it.
If, after doing all that, I still think the professor is wrong or has a flawed opinion, I ask them about it. It's up to them to get argumentative (which rarely if ever happens. You want a happy professor? Show them an interested student who obviously went out and researched a topic to ask them questions).
But no, I don't write papers aping what I believe professor's ideas are.
If that's putting God signs up all over the country, well long live the Lord.
I don't see people in this thread who can't stand up to authority figures. I see people who are pursuing their self interest by not standing up to them. Which is fine.
Does it pay to go at your professor because you disagree? No. In my experience, 90% of professors appreciate and respect divergent viewpoints. Maybe if you're having trouble it's because you aren't respecting theirs.
If a student is disrupting class consistently and hijacking discussions then this student shows that they are self-righteous assholes. It's the sort of thing you judge on a case-by-case basis but most of the time if a student is receiving a lower grade it isn't due to their opinions but their method of expressing them.
I don't know what everyone else's personal experiences are and I'm sure your schools and mine differed greatly but picking your battles is NOT a sign of weakness. Show some restraint, you may even learn something from the experience.
You raise a good point, but it's not expressly related to the discussion at hand. A conservative that doesn't want to argue about politics isn't wrong so much as he is uncommon as the leader of a course on political science.
There's something to be said for respecting other people opinions and beliefs even when they disagree with your own.
If the professor wants to run his course as such that the way it works is he talks, you listen, and you regurgitate his thoughts on the exam that's his prerogative. And what have you learned? To avoid taking courses from him in the future.
Just because you disagree doesn't magically make one of you right and the other wrong.
I should amend that to "authority figures you think are wrong" I suppose.
Still a shitty way to approach life I believe. It's the academic way of making yourself nothing more than a yes man.
I don't see it as different than doing a job in the way your boss wants it done.
See, when an exam/paper is subjective, and the professor asks for what I think rather than what he thinks, then I'm going to write that. If he grades me down, I'll complain to the department/college. Possibly see about getting it regraded.
And, the cool part is that if enough people do this the administration might start to take note of it and have a little talk with him. They may not be able to fire him, but they can certainly put pressure on him in other ways.
But if instead students just line up to academically suck his cock, I can guarantee nothing will ever change until the day he dies.
While they are in a position of authority, they are not (in theory) your boss. You are paying the university for an education, in effect paying their salary as well. This doesn't make you their boss, either...but it means that despite that position of authority they've been put in they also owe you a service.
Maybe I'm just an idealist.
If nobody suffered those that they believe to be fools then we'd never get anything done. We'd all be constantly locked in debate trying to convince one another to come over to our side of the issue.
Sometimes it's not my goal to make everybody agree with me. Sometimes I just want to coast through a class, learn the material, and get the grade I deserve for learning it. If I take the opposing viewpoint in doing that, who the hell cares? My beliefs are intact. I'm more informed than I was at the beginning of the course.
Part of college is learning how to deal with people. Part of knowing how to deal with people is learning when and when not to drop everything and argue with them.
When the professor is considering nuking China, I'll stand up and disagree.
When he's just trying to teach a class uninterrupted, I'll sit down and take notes.
Well yes, if the professor explicitly asks you for your thoughts then you'd be a liar if you, well, lied.
As an aside, I'm specifically talking about writing papers and written-form exams...not interrupting class to argue for argument's sake.
Scenario 1: Professor says something student disagrees with. Student gets uppitty, calls him out on it, feels better, and goes home a smug asshole. Professor's mind is not changed. He gives the student a bad mark, and then procedes to write a paper about how he's right.
Scenario 2: Professor says something a student disagrees with. Student puts aside his own ego to engage with the professor. He applies what the professor has taught him to his own worldview, and sees if he can take anything away from it. In order to better understand the professor's position, he explores the arguments for/against it in assignment form. Student gets a good mark, keeps his moral integrity, and perhaps walks away a little bit wiser. Maybe even becomes a professor himself, and teaches his own worldview.
In an academic environment, of all places, one should be able to engage with any idea without being afraid that they'll get intelectual cooties from it.
That said, if the professor is inflexible, then there's no use bashing your head against the wall. I ended up failing a religion class my freshman year because of a disagreement in the philosophy of what the class should be teaching. He asked questions like "Who was Confucius' favorite disciple?" I had no clue and told him that I thought the question was dumb (in office hours). I then refused to study the minutiae he demanded, and instead aced my essays and bombed the multiple choice tests (though I handed an extra essay each class to demonstrate my knowledge to him). It was the only failing grade I ever received.
It wasn't worth it, in the end. It cost me money I couldn't afford, and for what? Some stupid sense of pride?
Though he was fired at the end of the year. That made me feel better.
The OP only says that he wrote a couple papers as though he were a conservative. I agree with you that if the exam asks what you think then you should be writing what you think, but if he just says "write me 10 pages about the Middle East" and you interpret that as "write me 10 pages about your opinion of the Middle East" then that's nobody's fault but your own.
Hell, fill the paper with properly cited facts. Then everybody wins. You've learned, he's read (or more likely skimmed) a well-researched paper, and you've earned a good grade.
Student: "Me vs. the world!! Me vs. the world!! You nazi fascists, I'll won't let you get away with it!!"
I'd get pretty pissed of if one of my prof's said that. I worked my ass off to earn scholarships and money to pay to take his class. If a learned academic can't defend his point of view, I'm being defrauded.
See, in the few subjective and semi-subjective classes I've taken papers/written exams didn't generally just ask for a bunch of cold facts...the student was expected to inject some of their own thoughts into it (and back them up, of course). Maybe in other classes you're just expected to regurgitate facts in written form. But if thought/interpretation is expected, it's going to be mine and not what I think he wants to hear.
Are any of us actually advocating interrupting the professor at every turn to argue with anything he says and bring the class to a screeching halt? Show of hands?
Then it should mean even more. Even if you're getting your money's worth out of the argument, the other students probably aren't. They're there to learn what the professor has to teach regardless of whether they agree with his opinion on the matter.
If you want to debate him, take it to office hours. I don't pay tuition to listen to other students argue with the teacher.
The last papers I wrote were for a computer science degree. Those are made of facts, research, and practical test results.
I genuinely thought we were talking about arguing during class or writing papers contrary to the professor's view when it wasn't necessary.
If he asks for my opinion, then I'll give it to him. If he then marks me down for it, I'll talk to him after class. If that fails, I'll go to the head of the department.
Is that honestly what was happening here though? The prof asked for a paper about X and made it seem like he wanted the students' thoughts on it? If that's the case then he's an idiot for marking people down for giving him what he asked for.
You seem to be there to get a piece of paper. that's ok too, I guess, but it is not what I want from educators.
I agree with you to an extent on this one. Again, my main problem is with the idea of having to write papers from positions I disagree with as though they were my own simply to get a better grade. Lecture is another story...it's called lecture for a reason. Listening passively and not interrupting just seems less offensive to me than actively selling my soul for a grade.
I think that, for the most part, we're in agreement here. I want to learn things to apply to reality. I just don't want to argue with a man that will 1.) never change his view and 2.) lower my grade for having a differing opinion.
I'm also not a big fan of wasting class (multi-student) time with things that are better handled during office hours (one-on-one time), but I think I was the only one that thought the arguing was taking place during lecture.
Also, learning to wade through the bullshit given and pull out the facts and other useful bits is a wonderfully handy skill that listening to people with differing opinions can net you. It's hard to leave college without having picked it up.
In the OP we were talking about political science (as opposed to, say, computer science), and I got the impression we weren't talking about technical papers full of nothing but hard facts...especially since visiblehowl talked about writing papers as though he was a conservative, or some such.
Again, I'm in EE so we don't do a lot of subjective shit either. All my "subjective" experience just came from my core/diversity classes, most of which were admittedly 100- and 200-level courses.
And yeah, we were to some extent talking about argument during class...which I agree in a vast majority of lectures is inappropriate (especially unprompted and excessive argument). If a class is a smaller, more discourse-oriented affair (of which I was in a couple, and many lectures also had a separate portion for this) then it's a bit more appropriate...but if you hit the point where you're obviously just wasting everybody's time I agree that even then it might be best to let it go.
Of course, in fields like political science often there are lots of people with "Dr." in front of their name who hold dissenting opinions, some of which might even agree with yours. I'm pretty sure this is a little different than math or chemistry.
You wouldn't comment?
or he is giving you notes in a poly sci class, and fucks up a location or system of govenment in how power point presnentation.
You'd sit silent?
I'm not saying that i'd argue some sort of value judgement or other subjective item, but objective errors? Yeah, I'll bring it up. Because I don't know if he just fucked up or actually is wrong in his understanding. If he disgrees with the text, well, I sure as fuck want to know which will be on a test, and why I'm hearing two diffrent things.
to a point, I'd argue or sit on my hand. There is some judgement involved, and asuming that the prof (or even worse a TA) is correct is pretty damn silly in some cases.
a lot of people forget that they are still people, and are still failble. A lot of people don't consider what they are hearing and just write down whatever they are told.
I wasn't trying to show that I didn't know we were talking about poli sci. I was trying to show that I have very little experience writing papers that aren't based on facts.
Disputing facts is different from disputing opinions. The last thing any decent student should want is for the professor to accidentally disseminate false information.