One thing you don't seem to be grasping (and neither did I as an undergrad) is that a lot of real work is busywork. If you can't be bothered to do the mundane, day-to-day details of your work, then the professor has the option of reflecting that in your grade. This tells potential future employers/grad schools that you are not on par with those who scored higher than you. Life lesson #325: the hard worker can get ahead of the guy who thinks he's so smart that he doesn't have to try. You are in school to learn, to be sure. But your GPA is there as a beacon to those who have to differentiate between you and your classmates.
The thing is, it's not as simple as you make it out to be.
But your professor only has the opportunity to indicate one time your adequacy. He has selected his grading scheme accordingly. Since it sounds like you're a freshman and, therefore, probably taking gen chem, if you only get a BS degree in chemistry or biology, you won't need to do much critical thinking. You'll be doing lots of busywork. This is the target audience for these classes, whether you are getting a degree in chemistry or biology or something else. I'm a chemical engineer who went through the exact same thing seven years ago. My suggestion is to buck up and get used to it.
And if I gave you an A based on your performance in the class, I would be promoting laziness. I doubt that's a quality many companies are looking for, especially in lab techs, which is what you'll likely be in about four years if my above guesses are anywhere close to on the mark.
Wrong. As a fourth year grad student, I am painfully aware that the moments of genius are few and far between. The gaps between them are bridged by drudgery and hard work. Unless you're Heisenberg (whose PhD dissertation was 4-5 pages originally), you're going to be doing a LOT of busywork to get it done. Even Heisenberg was sent back to the labs to make his thesis longer, even though his original work was Nobel Prize-worthy.
I'm an engineer, not a doctor. I dropped the MD portion of the PhD/MD because I learned that just about all of med school is memorization, which I deplore. However, MD's ('real doctors'
) spend the years after med school learning critical thinking as an application of their years of memorization. That's the entire point of residency.
Originally posted by: CycloWizard
But your professor only has the opportunity to indicate one time your adequacy. He has selected his grading scheme accordingly. Since it sounds like you're a freshman and, therefore, probably taking gen chem, if you only get a BS degree in chemistry or biology, you won't need to do much critical thinking. You'll be doing lots of busywork. This is the target audience for these classes, whether you are getting a degree in chemistry or biology or something else. I'm a chemical engineer who went through the exact same thing seven years ago. My suggestion is to buck up and get used to it.
And if I gave you an A based on your performance in the class, I would be promoting laziness. I doubt that's a quality many companies are looking for, especially in lab techs, which is what you'll likely be in about four years if my above guesses are anywhere close to on the mark.
Wrong. As a fourth year grad student, I am painfully aware that the moments of genius are few and far between. The gaps between them are bridged by drudgery and hard work. Unless you're Heisenberg (whose PhD dissertation was 4-5 pages originally), you're going to be doing a LOT of busywork to get it done. Even Heisenberg was sent back to the labs to make his thesis longer, even though his original work was Nobel Prize-worthy.
I'm an engineer, not a doctor. I dropped the MD portion of the PhD/MD because I learned that just about all of med school is memorization, which I deplore. However, MD's ('real doctors'
I suggest you calm down and take a step back from your immediate circumstances (i.e. being pissed at the world because you screwed up and got a C - boo hoo). I'm in my eighth year of college and you're probably in your first. Perspective is a great teacher, so maybe you could try to learn something from mine since you lack your own.
Wrong again, at least for chemistry and biology majors. Less than 40% go on to attain higher degrees. Making $40-50k after four years is a lot better than they'd be doing with a high school diploma. It sounds like you plan on grad school and assume that others are also planning on grad school, but that is the minority.
Wrong again. Most of science is repetition, which is the job of the lab tech. You perform several analyses over and over again. If you're lucky, you might get a job where you develop these analyses, but that is marginally better, at best. I've done both of these, and it was more brainless than my previous jobs as a construction worker, janitor, and vacuum cleaner salesman. In fact, being a salesman was sometimes more intellectually stimulating and certainly more financially rewarding than my current career path, but it also sucks your life (and soul) away.
Then you've been insanely 'lucky' to this point or your school is unusual. I've had many professors more than you and all but one required homework that was a significant portion of my grade. The one who didn't required that we do it and turn it in to pass the course (600 level transport phenomena - you couldn't quite copy the answer out of the back of the book).
What school do you go to? I want to know to be sure that I don't accidentally hire anyone from there, as they won't have retained anything.
See, the problem is that you did NOT spend those 18 hours studying. If you had, you would have done better on the exams. The real problem here is that you failed to demonstrate proficiency on the exams, else you would have achieved a B even without doing the homework. Hence my calling you a whiner.
Ah, and when all else fails, resort to ad hominems. Let me know when you grow up a little bit so we can continue the discussion. Until then, continue calling everyone who disagrees with you 'arrogant' so we can appreciate the irony.
Ah, but I only used it as a response to your ad hominems.Originally posted by: CycloWizard
Ah, and when all else fails, resort to ad hominems. Let me know when you grow up a little bit so we can continue the discussion. Until then, continue calling everyone who disagrees with you 'arrogant' so we can appreciate the irony.
Facebook
Twitter