"Oh. Well, it must be easy for you to concentrate because you're old.
Me:
I'm not even twice his age, I'm not old enough to be his mother. But I guess being out of my 20's makes me "old."
Of course the old part wasn't even the most offensive thing he said - I personally took offense at the idea that it was easy for me. I'd like to see him study for a quiz while being constantly interrupted with "Mom, can you tie my shoe?" "Mom, Daniel is squirting the cat with the water gun?" "Mom, do you think it's okay to wear tights with a run in them to dance class? Oh, and can you buy me more tights tomorrow?"
Easier for me because I'm old....
Silly young whippersnapper.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
No offense, but... I think anyone using the word whippersnapper in a sentence must be pretty old. Posts: 1014 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's just his way of dealing with his underperformance. He's just trying to rationalize his low score by trying to convince himself that his performance on this quiz is in no way related to the amount of effort he exerts in preparing for it and that it really depends on elements that he does not have control over. It's an excuse to be lazy.
Posts: 1256 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I had a similar discussion with my nephew a while back. He was bragging on how smart he was and what a terrific student he is. Which is true... he's headed to law school and graduated with honors. But he's also rather insufferable. So after a few minutes of his boasting, I'd had enough. I told him it was all well and good that he was doing so well in school, but until he kept a 4.0 in a microbiology curriculum (he didn't even have to take Organic Chemistry... how hard could it be?!?) while working full time and supporting 6 children on his own, he had nothing on me and he needed to shut his yap.
His mother (my *older* sister) cheered me on. And he did keep it to himself after that.
Posts: 2069 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
The only problem with what you said maui babe (and believe me, you do have my total respect for your accomplishments) is that comparing curricula really gets my ire up.
My husband is fond of teasing me for making an A in a communications or literature course while bragging about how until I can do differential equations with him I haven't really done anything impressive.
Meanwhile, he can't write an email without asking for my help in proofing it.
Actually, I will admit that teasing aside, my husband did tell me once that he was very proud of me for making all A's in a semester and that there is no way he could have made A's in the same classes.
But I do think there are challenges facing parents in college that people without kids don't grok.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
At the same time, I think it takes some time in the real world to really value learning. The non-20-somethings in my classes were always the ones with the best grades. I know that they don't get better grades because it's easier for them; they get better grades because they're hungry to learn, not just trying to pass through and graduate so they can get a job.
With the exception of one woman who was in my German class. Her kids were all grown, and her husband was a professor. This allowed her one free class a semester, so she took classes for fun. As a newlywed working part time and going to school full time, I had no sympathy when she would look down her nose at the rest of us for not studying as hard as she did for every quiz. I mean, come on.
Posts: 1903 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I know, I know. When I was in school, I had a "scientist's disdain" for most of the "squishy" fields. For example, when I was going through my divorce I resisted seeing a counselor at first because I considered all the Psych profs I'd had to be pretty flaky. After a time though, I was able to find a good psychologist who really knew his stuff and was able to help me in ways I never imagined.
So now that I'm older (I was "only" 38 when I graduated), I appreciate the work that goes into other fields a bit better. But when there's a young upstart that needs taking down, I use whatever weapons I have at my disposal.
Posts: 2069 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
And I don't blame you a bit, he needed taking down.
And let's be honest: most science and math types do have a disdain for us liberal arts majors and in a way it's even a bit justified. I mean, math and science overwhelm and terrify me, and while my husband and other mathematical types I know don't like lit classes, they don't seem to be as afraid of them as we are of calculus.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I guess I don't have respect for the grades people earn in humanities classes, because I'm a physics major, and struggle mightily with those classes to get B's... and do zero work outside of class except the bare minimum for my humanities classes, and get A's, even in upper level classes.
quote:Originally posted by Brinestone: At the same time, I think it takes some time in the real world to really value learning. The non-20-somethings in my classes were always the ones with the best grades. I know that they don't get better grades because it's easier for them; they get better grades because they're hungry to learn, not just trying to pass through and graduate so they can get a job.
And because they're most likely paying for it themselves. And they've probably also seen how difficult it is to make it without an education, so they're even more motivated.
My frustration was more with the 18 and 19 year olds whose parents were footing the bill, who whined incessantly that the classes were too hard, too early, too boring etc. They'd skip to go get breakfast as often as not, and then complain when they bombed a test. Fortunately, most of those kids dropped out fairly early. So there were scads of them in my 100 level classes, but none in the 400 level classes 3 years later.
Posts: 2069 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
That happened to me recently at work. I went on date and the day after it, at work, one of my colleagues asked me about it. I said I'd had a good time. He said "So are the wedding bells ringing?"
He was being mostly facetious, but nonetheless I just deflected the question. He kept bringing it up, and finally I put my hand down on the lunch table quite firmly and said "Jesus Christ, Rick, ask me again when I'm 30!" One of my other colleagues replied: "You mean when you're old, right?" By this time the whole table was laughing. I mean, I wasn't actually mad, though I tend to be fairly private about my dating habits. I was just trying to convey that marriage simply isn't on my personal radar, and five years (and some change) out seems like as good a time as any to reevaluate whether it ought to be on said radar. (Added: And I thought the exchange was really funny as well. I like my colleagues. )
What's interesting is that my colleagues (who are almost entirely over 30; some are in their 40s and 50s) interpreted it to mean that I think 30+ is "old," which was neither my intent or my belief.
(It's also interesting that I chose to invoke Jesus. I think I got it from my father, who used to curse "Jesus bloody wept" and "Christ al-bloody-mighty.")
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
You know, when I was trying to get school as fast as possible, I considered the humanities classes something of an impediment... just one more hoop to jump through to get where I wanted to be. But I did enjoy them tremendously, especially literature and history. I did take them all early on in my college years though, and the last two years I only had the science classes required for my degree.
I regret that now. I wish I'd had the time to take more of those types of classes, not least because I feel very intimidated here on this forum when the literary types get going.
As far as grading goes, I preferred the science classes, because there was an objective answer. If you knew it, you were all right, if not you were screwed, but once you knew it, you knew that you knew it. With humanities, it's so much more subjective, that I never knew when I'd studied enough. There was always one more twist, one more perspective to look at. I definitely preferred the more objective grading.
Posts: 2069 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:And because they're most likely paying for it themselves. And they've probably also seen how difficult it is to make it without an education, so they're even more motivated.
I paid much of my way through college, and Jon Boy paid his whole way through. I know there are students who don't, but not all students who are paid for are slackers, and not all who pay their own way aren't.
quote:My frustration was more with the 18 and 19 year olds whose parents were footing the bill, who whined incessantly that the classes were too hard, too early, too boring etc. They'd skip to go get breakfast as often as not, and then complain when they bombed a test. Fortunately, most of those kids dropped out fairly early. So there were scads of them in my 100 level classes, but none in the 400 level classes 3 years later.
Honestly, at BYU I only knew a few of these. There were some who insisted that everything was too hard, but there were many more who just worked hard and got the work done. Then again, that may be because BYU is pretty hard to get into, so it doesn't attract the drop-out-prone students as much.
Posts: 1903 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
One of my community college instructors who had the credentials and connections (daughter of a dean) to teach at any major university told me she chose to teach at community college instead and fully expected to retire as a community college instructor. The reason?
The students in community college had many more adult learners and non-traditional students who were willing to work hard and learn something compared to the typical college freshman she would have if she taught public speaking and English 101 at a university. She also preferred to focus on teaching, not research.
Of course, there are plenty of young people even those whose college is paid for that work hard, but I think that on average, the non-traditional students and adults returning to college probably do wind up being more dedicated students and the instructors and professors notice that.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I talked to an elementary school friend today. He spent 3 years in seminary to be a priest but then chose the secular path. He is a religion teacher, married, with the first baby on its way. He's 26.
As we were talking he commented how happy he is about finally starting a family while many of his friends are only into their carriers.
Anyway, the part that had me stop was when he said he regretted he couldn't have started the family earlier on; he knows he wouldn't have been ready, but still thinks at his age it would be great if his children were already a few years old. *blinks*
Posts: 5700 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm actually glad I started my family early, because now, I see that I'll probably be through undergrad and possibly even graduate school before I'm 40, and my youngest kids will be off to college before I'm 50.
I'll still be young enough to focus on a career and my marriage, and enjoy my adult kids and one day, I hope, enjoy grandchildren, while I'm healthy and active.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I go to a school where about a third (or maybe a fourth) of the students are "mature" and I've actually found very little difference in how they approach their studies in comparison with the "traditional" students. Some take it seriously, others spend hours complaining when we have a quiz.
But I'd expect to be slapped if I said, "it's easy because you're old."
Posts: 367 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
At my college, you had to write a thesis your senior year in your applicable major. I was an English major. This meant you got to analyze literature. And I mean analyze. With what we'd been taught, we could write pages and pages on a single line of poetry if we were so inclined. Even today, whenever I find myself appreciating a good story, I think about what makes it a good story as well.
Now, once I was a junior and senior, I also took some psych and social work courses. I loved it, they were fun, and entirely different from my own major. In one course, another one of the students said that English majors theses were easy. This pissed me off (the guy was an arrogant..um..jerk anyway) because they aren't easy. Not if you want to do well. They're different, yes, very different from what a psych major's thesis would be (they had to do entire experiments and write it all up, etc), but not easy.
I told him, "You can say that when you can write 20 meaningful pages about a single line of poetry."
posted
mack, when at orientation for the arts & humanities majors our advisor was telling us what science courses to take and she said "Now, most people will laugh and say these are science classes for dummies. I must tell you that they are not - they are science classes for arts and humanities majors. And if any science or math major gives you a hard time, tell them to come over here and take a poetry writing class and we'll see how sharp they really are." Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've noticed similar things at my school. I was talking to one of my neighbors and when he found out I was a history major he said, "uh, so that's why you have a good GPA." Kinda bugged me a bit.
Posts: 367 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
I'm such a business nerd, though. I haven't gotten any snide comments from science majors...and when I was a music industry student, the program I was in had one of the lower acceptance rates in the school.
Now I take classes like, "Operations Management" and actually enjoy them...while my friends are all like, "Wow, that must be SO awful."
But! I'm the youngest person in my philosophy class. I'm quite intimidated, really. Like, one of my classmates is a doctor who looks to be in his forties. Philosophy is scary.
posted
I did that, actually. I took a third-year creative writing (poetry, fiction, and drama) class for english and journalism majors (also lots of rhetoric and political writing majors). I got an A, while the english majors were complaining about how hard the professor graded them. There was some great material written in that class, though. I kept some of it. (Added: I also took second and third-year philosophy courses. A's in those as well, while in my engineering courses I was struggling to get B's.)
I think it says a lot more about where my real talents lie than about whether english is "easier" than engineering. I certainly have no interest in writing 20 meaningful pages about a single line of poetry, and I don't imagine you have any interest in spending a week on steam balances like I just did. Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm a political science major at Purdue. Currently I'm taking 19 credit hours, I spend at most 10 hours doing out of class work each week. I have a 4.0 that I have every confidence of keeping this semester. On the other hand, most of my friends are engineering majors. They're taking 15 credit hours and the amount of time they spend on homework everyday tops what I do in a typical week.
So do I think that compared to Engineering the Liberal Arts majors are a piece of cake? Of course. However, if I were a student at a university with a really strong liberal arts program and a weak engineering one, well, things would be different. Posts: 4655 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:I guess I don't have respect for the grades people earn in humanities classes, because I'm a physics major, and struggle mightily with those classes to get B's... and do zero work outside of class except the bare minimum for my humanities classes, and get A's, even in upper level classes.
That's my reasoning as well. Not that I don't think it takes a certain disposition and skill level to excel in the humanities, it's just that it always seemed easier to me than my engineering classes.
Of course, I have a friend in med school who aced a physics class full of math and engineering majors and she swears that most of her classmates shouldn't be allowed to design sandcastles.
Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
Of course, I have a friend in med school who aced a physics class full of math and engineering majors and she swears that most of her classmates shouldn't be allowed to design sandcastles. [/QB]
Most of my engineering friends say that about the majority of engineering majors as well.
Posts: 4655 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
See now, if I did zero work outside of class the highest I'd get in my history/English classes would probably be a D-.
When I have to write 10-15 pages a week for each class I spend a lot of time doing homework (add however many pages I have to read, too). The amount of pages also isn't especially important. I find writing a 1 page precis to be just as difficult as writing a 25 page research paper - it doesn't take as much time, but it can be very challenging.
Posts: 367 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:And let's be honest: most science and math types do have a disdain for us liberal arts majors and in a way it's even a bit justified.
I know what you mean by "justified" but by gum this is one of the things that really makes me angry. My father is always putting my chosen majors down, while, at the same time exhibiting a total ignorance (sometimes a laughable one) of understanding about History, Philosophy and English.
I respect scientists because I think they are very clever to do what they do. I love science.
I think humanities courses are easy to be good at, if you work hard and take advantage of the help offered. I think science classes are hard to even get a foot in the door.
However, I do not think that this makes them unequal, or that it makes me somehow "less smart" than a science student. I choose to do humanities because I love it, not because I'm lazy. I understand history and words better than I understand numbers. That's all there is to it.
Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The time spent outside of class is a good point - my humanities classes have required a lot more time outside of class. For biology, all I did was show up, listen to the lecture, go to lab, and study a bit before each test. Got an A.
In my math classes I spent very little time outside class, there were assigned homework problems but once you go the concept down it was pretty easy to do them all.
For my humanities classes, I never could have gotten away with that little out-of-class time - I spent hours upon hours of time outside class doing research and writing papers. Same story with upper level courses in communications - and believe me, I know that my chosen major is considered to be the "easiest" one on campus. But the people who are in communications because it's easy usually are in for a wake up call when they get past the 100 level survey courses.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I spent less time on homework than many of my English major peers because I can write fast. This allowed me to procrastinate and stew over ideas for papers in my head much longer than they could, which often meant I came up with a unique and interesting paper idea two weeks before the paper was due. Then I would frantically research and write and think of nothing else for two weeks. I always did feel somewhat guilty for being able to do that, though. I know for many people, writing is like wading through molassas.
My senior year, I got to read the abstracts for all the papers in one of my classes. I was surprised that so many of them were about topics I had rejected myself for being unoriginal or boring. Maybe my quest for uniqueness was just putting myself through unnecessary torture. But I couldn't have gone to all the trouble of writing a paper that wasn't at least interesting to me.
Posts: 1903 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am a freshman music performance major this semester. I was talking to someone about how I am taking 17 credit hours this semester. They seemed to think that 17 was too many. When I told them that 11 of them are in music they said that it really shouldn't be that hard. I sort of was annoyed by that. I would like to see them practice 3+ hours a day, learn theory, ear training, sight singing, piano, and do handle their academic work.
Posts: 1015 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't have much to add to the science vs arts degrees debate. Different people find different subjects easy.
I relate to the original topic though... I started my family while in university doing my degree. I remember being quite pregnant when I took a fourth year lecture in 'Reproduction'
Some other student walked in and asked if I was a "specimen" or a student. Whippersnapper indeed.
At least once I had my son people stayed away from the crazy woman with "the sling that moves!" Posts: 251 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Belle: The time spent outside of class is a good point - my humanities classes have required a lot more time outside of class. For biology, all I did was show up, listen to the lecture, go to lab, and study a bit before each test. Got an A.
In my math classes I spent very little time outside class, there were assigned homework problems but once you go the concept down it was pretty easy to do them all.
For my humanities classes, I never could have gotten away with that little out-of-class time - I spent hours upon hours of time outside class doing research and writing papers. Same story with upper level courses in communications - and believe me, I know that my chosen major is considered to be the "easiest" one on campus. But the people who are in communications because it's easy usually are in for a wake up call when they get past the 100 level survey courses.
I call foul! You are comparing upper-division humanities courses with basic introductory science/math courses.
Anyone who can get through an UPPER-division science or math course without putting in many hours of work each week is unlikely to pass (let alone do well). The very few who can are in that special group that I hate (along with women who have had several children, yet maintain their beautifully trim and slim figure without any effort).
I majored in General Chemistry, which is a major UCLA offers for those who are interested in a chem major that is not quite the traditional one. Many of the requirements are the same as the regular Chemistry degree, but in place of three of the upper division chemistry classes, the student must come up with six upper-division courses (from any field(s)) and explain why/how these will be a good preparation for your future career.
I chose two upper-div math courses (linear algebra and combinatorics) and four upper-div English courses (20th century UK poetry, which looked at 3 British poets and three Irish poets, and was wonderful; poetry from 1400-1700, which was tedious (although I think that was the professor); and a couple lit courses I don't remember specifics of). I also took a couple other upper-div English courses that I couldn't apply toward my major (one was a seminar, for instance). Only reason I didn't minor in English was the first of the 10 series almost killed me. I got all As in English 3 and 4, but they wanted something entirely different in 10A -- and I couldn't do it (and thought it was truly idiotic). No way I was taking 10B and 10C!
Anyway, even with that experience, I would say that generally speaking it was a lot easier to get an A in an English, history, or psych class. (That is NOT to say it was actually easy in any of them.) So I laugh when I hear things like "And if any science or math major gives you a hard time, tell them to come over here and take a poetry writing class and we'll see how sharp they really are."
I loved my poetry classes. Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The sciences and maths are terrifying for me -- and I never got below a B in any of my high school math/science classes.
But now that I've decided to go into a science field -- Veterinary Technology -- with virtually no interest in science or math...I'm petrified.
I'm three weeks into the courses, and already I know I don't have the studying skills I'm going to need. Because i never needed to study more than, say, two or three hours the night before a test to do well. Now, I have 3 hour labs where they don't teach the information, they just give it to you and there's A LOT.
So how does a girl who had it way too easy in high school and her first year of college learn how to honestly, truthfully study??
Posts: 3516 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
The battle between the sciences and humanities has become an issue at my university to the point of professors on each side fighting one another.
I attend a Liberal Arts college where all students are required to take 5 semesters of a literature/history class and 3 semesters of scientific writing. Because of this, we don't have much bickering between the students. The English kids whine about the scientific writing while the Science kids whine about all the humanities studies. We understand each other.
I only take 13 academic hours (with 6 hours of dance.) I spend more time working out of class than I do in class. On a good week, I'll spend atleast 3 hours a night reading for my various classes. Add in all the papers and seminar research and things get really crazy. I try not to think about the 50-page thesis I have to write my senior year.
I've taken alot of math and science classes and aside from the advanced research classes, there wasn't nearly as much work. It depended on how good a person was, but I never spent more than an hour a night doing physics problems. But then again, I like physics so that helps.
Posts: 1733 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think twink's got it. The difference between where our talents are and where are interests are. Sometimes you end up interested in something where your natural talent isn't as strong as your natural talent in something you find incredibly boring.
I do like the sciences. When I entered college, I was actually pre-med and nearly became a biology major. But at the end of my senior year of high school, I had a fantastic AP Lit teacher and creative writing teacher and got into English instead. Analyzing literature and writing is like breathing for me. Mathematics, however, can kick my ass. I have to work at them. A friend of mine who is an actuary is the opposite. Numbers and computations and other math-things are like his life's breath, but when it came to literature, he was like a monkey with a math problem.
Posts: 14745 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
I am naturally talented at English Literature. But I chose to do a physics major - which for me was a *huge* struggle.
But there were kids in my class who just "got" quantum dynamics - they understood it, they intuited it. I had to work at it, far more than I would have had to work if I had chosen a Lit major. But they didn't get lit - so it all evens out.
Posts: 4393 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Rivka, there is no foul. I'm comparing classes at the same level. History 101 took a lot more time outside class than biology 101, because my history 101 class required three papers.
Posts: 14428 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Allegra: I am a freshman music performance major this semester. I was talking to someone about how I am taking 17 credit hours this semester. They seemed to think that 17 was too many. When I told them that 11 of them are in music they said that it really shouldn't be that hard. I sort of was annoyed by that. I would like to see them practice 3+ hours a day, learn theory, ear training, sight singing, piano, and do handle their academic work.
Allegra, don't let ANYONE give you crap about the music degree. There is so much work involved in a music degree, it's simply absurd, and people just don't realize it. Music schools like to nickel and dime you to death with 1 and 2 hour courses that take up 5-6 hours a week, not to mention practicing, ensemble, chamber work, piano class, and concerts.
Being a music major is hard work at any school.
Posts: 4077 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
We had the COOLEST woman at my college. She was probably in her late fourties and graduated a year ahead of me (I'm 26). She was married and I went to a woman's college. She decided to LIVE ON CAMPUS. Her husband spent lot's of time with her each day, and she went home at weekends. She was awesome, and probably one of the hardest workers we had at the school. Posts: 1214 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Music Degrees I remember my freshman year, when people asked me my major and I said, "Music Ed" people taking double majors replied, "I'm sorry." Not because a music degree was a soft option, but because to major in Music Ed we had to do more work for one major than most people had to do for two. Posts: 1214 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: Music schools like to nickel and dime you to death with 1 and 2 hour courses that take up 5-6 hours a week, not to mention practicing, ensemble, chamber work, piano class, and concerts.
Not to mention things like recital credits which are 0 credit hours and end up costing you at least 30 hours per semester assuming that you can go to all one hour performances.
Posts: 1214 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
)![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)
Philosophy is scary.![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Hail]](graemlins/hail.gif)
![[Wall Bash]](graemlins/wallbash.gif)
![[Party]](graemlins/party.gif)
