So, I'll post!
Ok, that might not be true, but I recently concluded my last final . . . I got one of the problems right (out of 4), at least. Apparently, I'm the only person who did Casey's problem (out of 6 people in the class who took the final exam), so he graded it and was done with his grading responsabilities.
Don't fret, all you people in the working world. Come Monday, I'll be back at school, working on something - most likely the validation of the CG and DG ADCIRC codes to experimental results . . . apparently, a bug has been discovered in the DG code (which didn't work on small domains), so that one (hopefully) will be fixed soon. The CG is working pretty well, but I haven't had much time lately to do the work to determine how well the experimental and model results match.
Since there are so many academic related people who contribute to the blog (Roy, Tanya, Nicole, Meredith, etc.), I think I'll bring something up that troubled me a little bit about this semester. In my Hydrology class, I missed 2 points the entire semester (and one was bogus). Now, I'm not saying I got a 98 % . . . no, I missed 1 pt on one hw assignment (out of 10) and 1 pt on the midterm exam (out of 100) . . . so I was probably around a 99.7 % for the class. This bothered me a little bit, not because I did well, but because it shouldn't be THAT easy. On the other hand, my advisor graded a little harshly on our OCF projects, so it isn't an OU thing. I didn't study much for hydrology or spend much time on the homework. If you didn't do well in the class, I'm fairly certain that you probably didn't put in any studying time . . . Casey did poorly on the midterm because he, like a lot of the class, ran out of time because he didn't pay attention in class or study for the test. Jenn seems to think that I am the genius of geniuses, so I shouldn't complain about such things - other people probably had trouble. I think, it has to be hard enough that I could miss a couple points, right? It's a graduate level course.
As for weird things . . . a couple nights ago, I heard one of the door stops springing, like someone had kicked it, or stepped on it. However, I don't think anything/anyone was in range of one . . . I was sitting on the couch, I think Jenn was too . . . or she may have been on her lateral thigh trainer . . . and I think both the dogs were laying on the rug. So, I don't have any explanation, unless Jester snuck off and stepped (or laid) on the one by the front door . . . I hadn't thought of that.
Almost equally as strange and frightening, was Jenn wearing make-up the other night! j/k One of the young ladies in out neighborhood sells Mary Kay, so she came over (for 2.5 hrs) and they, apparently, had a fantastic time . . . or were, at least, productive.
So, that's all I have at the moment. Happy strange occurrences . . . being Friday the 13th and all . . . there was a fun thunder/lightening/rain event last night/this morning . . . Jester doesn't particularly care for thunder, although he does believe in Justice.
-Et
Friday, May 13, 2005
Don't have anything better to do!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
I have to say, Evan, that is one of the finest posts I have seen lately! Just thought someone needed to comment . . . get things rolling. If new comments are around, people will be encouraged to browse around and add comments as well, right? Or, answer question, like the previous one.
I don't think you should be too surprised by the difficulty of your class. I have had similar experiences in the class I am taking this semester. It is a course in Stochastic Processes offered by the Department of Applied Math and Statistics. I expected some very strong mathematical ability from graduate students in that department. But, it just seems to be the case that the efficiency with which we manipulate mathematical constructs is a rare occurrence. And most courses in engineering schools require a lot of such work. The real mystery, I think, is how we got this way. Anyone care to speculate?
What? I understood up until you started talking about manipulating mathematical constructs . . . lost me there. Care to expand (or simplify)?
Are there not things that could be done to challenge you more in that course, or more difficult problems/concepts that could be explored?
I wasn't really surprised by the difficulty, since I'd had a class (Water Quality Management) from the same professor the semester before. However, it didn't really bother me last semester . . . for whatever reason. Why just cover easy stuff? It doesn't make sense to me . . . have students read outside of class about simple topics and cover more difficult ones in class . . . or something. Maybe my class on college teaching has ruined me?!?
I may have been speaking about my class and assuming that yours was similar. So I won't bother to clarify the mathematical constructs comment.
I will ask for clarification from you, though. What is it that bothers you about this? Is the difficulty of the course really measured in terms of scores on assignments? Easy things can be graded strictly and difficult things loosely.
But am I wrong in assuming there was math involved? Because my experience has been that as soon as abstract symbols are introduced, people start to have trouble. And that could explain why more isn't covered.
Well, it's engineering . . . so . . . it's math (kind of) and there is a right answer, and a wrong answer. If you get the correct answer, you get all the points, if you don't, well . . . then you don't get all the points. Right? Sure, you could give people points for doing the assignments or accept close answers (grade really easily), but that's not really the case. There has to be something more complex that can be covered . . . if there isn't, then we should be covering more material or learning more software, etc. That's probably my biggest complaint . . . I think lecturing on basic material is ridiculous, especially if you've seen similar things in other courses that are fairly common among students in the course. In finite elements, the coursework (homework, tests, projects, etc.) wasn't all that difficult, but there was enough complexity that it wasn't just plug and chug and there were places where you had to stop and think in order to make sure that you were applying everything correctly, and . . . along the way . . . you make mistakes, which you learn from. Zeta and eta are now my friends. I could argue that the homework in open channel wasn't all that much harder (although it took more thought) than the hydrology, but there were substantially more problems, and it was a senior level class, so I understand that maybe the material shouldn't be as advanced. There is some math involved in hydrology, but it isn't anything really exciting like you encounter in finite elements, although you can use finite elements for hydrologic applications, obviously. Mainly just simple integration and differentiation . . . senior level and graduate engineering and meteorology (there were quite a few in hydrology and 2 in open channel) students should be able to handle this . . . or need practice. It seems like we (engineering students) take all this calculus and diff EQ, then forget it and shy away from it, rather than using it and developing expertise (or competance) with it.
I think the difficulty of the course is hard to pin down exactly, but I use scores and time devoted to a course (as well as just a general personal feel) to determine my evaluation. Obviously, there are errors that come in, like when I took advanced mechanics of materials and I wrote a formula down wrong on my note card that I got to take to the class . . . I knew it was wrong, but the professor wasn't there (a TA was administering the test), so I was SOL . . . so I didn't score well on the second midterm.
I think you need to give at least a little weight to Jenn's opinion. You two guys are NOT the norm, even for grad schools! And the ease with which you do math and science stuff is a bit unusual -- you've never really had to work at that kind of stuff. It's probably all my fault, but I don't know what I did -- must be something I ate when I was pregnant. I remember one time when Evan was in preschool and we were driving to SuperBear in the car. He asked, "How long until HeMan?" And I said, "Three hours." and he immediately said, "That's 180 minutes." Now, your normal 3 year old has no idea that there are 60 minutes in an hour, let alone be able to multiply that in less than 10 seconds and get the right answer -- and they wouldn't care to, anyway.
We aren't debating our relative brilliance, that's undebatable . . . however, there are things that even Roy and I have some level of difficulty with, right Roy? Ok, you don't have to admit it . . . and if you don't, neither do I!
I'm not going to get into the issue of your brilliance. I do have to agree with you about the way your class was seemingly organized. What's the point of lecturing on simple stuff? It seems like professor-student time could be used more wisely. If anybody ever got 20/20 (or almost) in France it would be because the sky was falling down, the person is smarter than Einstein, or the professor was high and grading too easily!
Perhaps there's a level of abstraction from the problems you're given or an inventive way of applying them in new situation that would make things more interested...Anwyl who loves math maintains that simply doing problems doesn't mean one has a firm grip on the underlying concepts. Not sure how this applies the advanced studies you're involved in, but maybe you're poised to make a hydrological discovery of some sort since you're so comfortable with the material...
xo Meredith
Post a Comment