←back to thread

903 points tux3 | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
jerf ◴[] No.43546861[source]
One of my Core Memories when it comes to science, science education, and education in general was in my high school physics class, where we had to do an experiment to determine the gravitational acceleration of Earth. This was done via the following mechanism: Roll a ball off of a standard classroom table. Use a 1990s wristwatch's stopwatch mechanism to start the clock when the ball rolls of the table. Stop the stopwatch when the ball hits the floor.

Anyone who has ever had a wristwatch of similar tech should know how hard it is to get anything like precision out of those things. It's a millimeter sized button with a millimeter depth of press and could easily need half a second of jabbing at it to get it to trigger. It's for measuring your mile times in minutes, not fractions of a second fall times.

Naturally, our data was total, utter crap. Any sensible analysis would have error bars that, if you treat the problem linearly, would have put 0 and negative numbers within our error bars. I dutifully crunched the numbers and determined that the gravitational constant was something like 6.8m/s^2 and turned it in.

Naturally, I got a failing grade, because that's not particularly close, and no matter how many times you are solemnly assured otherwise, you are never graded on whether you did your best and honestly report what you observe. From grade school on, you are graded on whether or not the grading authority likes the results you got. You might hope that there comes some point in your career where that stops being the case, but as near as I can tell, it literally never does. Right on up to professorships, this is how science really works.

The lesson is taught early and often. It often sort of baffles me when other people are baffled at how often this happens in science, because it more-or-less always happens. Science proceeds despite this, not because of it.

(But jerf, my teacher... Yes, you had a wonderful teacher who didn't only give you an A for the equivalent but called you out in class for your honesty and I dunno, flunked everyone who claimed they got the supposed "correct" answer to three significant digits because that was impossible. There are a few shining lights in the field and I would never dream of denying that. Now tell me how that idealism worked for you going forward the next several years.)

replies(46): >>43546960 #>>43547056 #>>43547079 #>>43547302 #>>43547336 #>>43547355 #>>43547446 #>>43547723 #>>43547735 #>>43547819 #>>43547923 #>>43548145 #>>43548274 #>>43548463 #>>43548511 #>>43548631 #>>43548831 #>>43549160 #>>43549199 #>>43549233 #>>43549287 #>>43549330 #>>43549336 #>>43549418 #>>43549581 #>>43549631 #>>43549681 #>>43549726 #>>43549824 #>>43550069 #>>43550308 #>>43550776 #>>43550923 #>>43551016 #>>43551519 #>>43552066 #>>43552407 #>>43552473 #>>43552498 #>>43553305 #>>43554349 #>>43554595 #>>43555018 #>>43555061 #>>43555827 #>>43676296 #
npongratz ◴[] No.43547355[source]
> From grade school on, you are graded on whether or not the grading authority likes the results you got.

I took an exam in a high school science class where I answered a question with the textbook's definition exactly as presented in the textbook, complete with the page number the definition was found on. I knew a bit about the topic, so I then cited outside scientific sources that explained why the definition was incomplete. There wasn't enough room to complete my answer in the space provided, so I spiraled it out into the margins of the exam paper.

My teacher marked my answer wrong. Then crossed that out and marked it correct. Then crossed that out, and finally marked it wrong again. During parent-teacher conferences, the science teacher admitted that even though I answered the question with the exactly correct definition, my further exposition made him "mad" (his word), and because he was angry, he marked it wrong.

replies(2): >>43547807 #>>43548409 #
ninetyninenine ◴[] No.43547807[source]
> he was angry, he marked it wrong.

That’s grounds for termination to me. Seriously. I would put this man out of a job and endanger the livelihood of him and his family for this kind of shit.

replies(3): >>43547896 #>>43548265 #>>43549451 #
tomrod ◴[] No.43547896[source]
And if you CAN'T terminate because of admitted emotional grading, the system is too tightly captured by outside interests to the detriment of the client: the student and society.

A teacher is a professional entrusted with the most important responsibility society can offer: training and educating the next generation. It must adhere to the highest of professional standards and expectations.

That we don't pay enough to require that without reserve is a statement on our societal priorities, and disconnected from the expectations that should hold.

EDIT: clarification/word choice

replies(2): >>43548005 #>>43548041 #
ninetyninenine ◴[] No.43548005[source]
Agreed. Like this is fraud level bs that’s happening and people are voting me down.

I think it’s because this kind of stuff is common. People have done fraudulent stuff and they don’t agree it’s a fireable offense. Understandable. I still would endanger someone’s livelihood for this. Poor performance I would think twice and go through all measures possible to improve performance including putting them in a position where they can excel. Poor performance does not justify endangering the livelihood of a person or their family but this fraudulent bs of being angry and marking something wrong. That’s just malice.

replies(2): >>43548675 #>>43548823 #
wholinator2 ◴[] No.43548675{3}[source]
You seem very angry yourself, and willing to let that anger guide you to harming someone. Are you so different from that teacher? In fact, you might be worse, while he only gave a grade (one of many surely, likely to have no long term impact on life prospects or survival), you would have this man made homeless? Don't be so quick to assume a teacher (at least in the us) has been able to accrue sufficient savings to endure a ruined livelihood. Sounds very, very extreme to me. Might there be a more charitable interpretation of the words, might there be information that we don't have that would, say, humanize the human being you'd like to ruin? Maybe we could take the time to understand these impulses in ourselves and be the example we want rather than reflecting the pain we hate to ever increasing magnitudes.
replies(2): >>43549894 #>>43555241 #
1. ninetyninenine ◴[] No.43549894{4}[source]
I would. Small things like this add up to overall corruption.

Also im not killing him. Just firing him. Find a new job and don’t do shit like that again.

replies(1): >>43559913 #
2. alterom ◴[] No.43559913[source]
Side note: the parent's entire argument boils down to this:

"Look at how hurt the teacher would be by being fired, you are a bad person for suggesting that.

Setting aside the Ad-Hominems¹ like "Are you better than the teacher"?, this is a textbook example of the logical fallacy known as Appeal to Emotion².

Which is delightfully ironic given the numerous people accusing you of being overly emotional in the point you're making that a teacher who willfully breached trust and abused their authority over children shouldn't have such authority.

This says much more about the people criticizing you than they realize.

_____

¹ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

² https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_emotion