Need Re-admission. Please Help!

[allabouteyes]

I applied for admission into optometry school exactly one year ago, for the entering class of 2010 and graduating class of 2014.
I had a 3.2 cumulative undergrad gpa. Psychology major + Biology minor.
Roughly 310 New Scale OAT scores (don't remember the numbers exactly anymore).
About 500 hrs of hospital volunteer work
Shadowed with two different ODs (one in private and one in corporate)
Applied really early - all LORs and applications filled out by early august
Got quite a few interviews.
Didn't do well on some interviews. Did well on some others.
Finally got an acceptance letter.

Have now been enrolled in optometry school for the last one year.

Anyway long story short, I was on academic probation my first semester in optometry school. Had a 1.98 gpa, just shy of the required 2.00. And despite my best efforts, I was not able to meet my 2.02 gpa requirement second semester to stay in school. I anticipate now I will be getting a dismissal letter within the next week or so.

The admission committee knows about my learning disability. And the admission committee also knows about my car wreck during finals week. I dont know how, but right when the exams are all bunched up together an amazing idiot decides to reverse into me.

I am not sure where to go from here. I don't want the rest of my life to be shaped around one dismissal letter. Optometry is still something I want for myself and something I believe I can be good at one day.
But I am not sure how competitive of an applicant I will be anymore or what admission committees will think when they see that I failed one whole year of optometry school before.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[KHE]

I applied for admission into optometry school exactly one year ago, for the entering class of 2010 and graduating class of 2014.
I had a 3.2 cumulative undergrad gpa. Psychology major + Biology minor.
Roughly 310 New Scale OAT scores (don't remember the numbers exactly anymore).
About 500 hrs of hospital volunteer work
Shadowed with two different ODs (one in private and one in corporate)
Applied really early - all LORs and applications filled out by early august
Got quite a few interviews.
Didn't do well on some interviews. Did well on some others.
Finally got an acceptance letter.

Have now been enrolled in optometry school for the last one year.

Anyway long story short, I was on academic probation my first semester in optometry school. Had a 1.98 gpa, just shy of the required 2.00. And despite my best efforts, I was not able to meet my 2.02 gpa requirement second semester to stay in school. I anticipate now I will be getting a dismissal letter within the next week or so.

The admission committee knows about my learning disability. And the admission committee also knows about my car wreck during finals week. I dont know how, but right when the exams are all bunched up together an amazing idiot decides to reverse into me.

I am not sure where to go from here. I don't want the rest of my life to be shaped around one dismissal letter. Optometry is still something I want for myself and something I believe I can be good at one day.
But I am not sure how competitive of an applicant I will be anymore or what admission committees will think when they see that I failed one whole year of optometry school before.

Ask yourself this......

If the school you attend now were to offer you a chance to repeat your first year, would you be able to succeed?

If the answer is no, then optometry is probably not the career for you.

If the answer is yes, then you have to ask yourself why. Because a fender bender during finals week won't cause a whole year's worth of work to go down the drain. You were obviously teetering on the edge well before that.

 

[Shnurek]

The last thing I'd want is for the person that is taking care of my most precious sense is for them to have a mental disability. I'm sorry. I also do not agree with accommodations on standardized testing. It should be a pure meritocracy.

There is a counterpart to this in the allopathic forums, although this one is a lot more extreme.

This is an article about a woman that was given accommodations for the USMLE because of dyslexia and ADHD: http://masslawyersweekly.com/the-do...dge-finds-against-mother-in-breast-pump-case/

Apparently that wasn't enough for her.

Here is the original allopathic thread I found it in: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=446733

 

[eyesee123]

I agree with the advice of KHE.

However, as far as the above poster I would be apprehensive of ever going to an optometrist with that type of mentality towards individuals with "mental disabilities." People who have ADHD just have different brains. With testing accommodations, they are allowed testing environments (in a quiet room, sometimes extra time) which level the playing field because of their learning disabilities. It's fair...and it's the law. It's like saying someone is not allowed to wear glasses to help them read their exams.

I worked at an optometrist office which was very successful, and specialized on individuals (mainly kids, but there were several adults) with ADHD, reading comprehension, dyslexia, etc learning disabilities. The doctor also had ADHD himself, was very smart, did excellent in undergrad and in optometry school. And he was empathetic towards his patients.

 

[Commando303]

People who have ADHD just have different brains. With testing accommodations, they are allowed testing environments (in a quiet room, sometimes extra time) which level the playing field because of their learning disabilities. It's fair...and it's the law. It's like saying someone is not allowed to wear glasses to help them read their exams.

Eh... It's pretty gray, as I see it. "A.D.D." (throw in the "H," if you want) strikes me as an almost-bull**** "condition": Ask anyone in any school, and she or he will casually claim to suffer from the problem. For most people, a bit of A.D.D.-medication will help increase focus-cum-performance, and most also would do better on examinations with a little more time and silence.

Now, as I said, it's gray, to me: I'm not suggesting people don't have problems, and I don't recommend we all turn a cold heart to those who might need help to accomplish certain things. I just can't buy the idea, however, that those who "can't," given the rules, but "might," if you bend them enough, simply have "different brains" that need to be embraced. Everyone can do anything, if you manipulate the standards enough.

So, what's ideal? A test and a testing-system that well correlate with success in the field in which they're examining competence, I suppose. In other words, if you're unable to pass given the set-up, there's a strong likelihood you will be poor in doing the thing we're testing your ability to do. Scenarios like that really don't exist, but they're a nice thought, I think... .

 

[Commando303]

I applied for admission into optometry school exactly one year ago, for the entering class of 2010 and graduating class of 2014.
I had a 3.2 cumulative undergrad gpa. Psychology major + Biology minor.
Roughly 310 New Scale OAT scores (don't remember the numbers exactly anymore).
About 500 hrs of hospital volunteer work
Shadowed with two different ODs (one in private and one in corporate)
Applied really early - all LORs and applications filled out by early august
Got quite a few interviews.
Didn't do well on some interviews. Did well on some others.
Finally got an acceptance letter.

Have now been enrolled in optometry school for the last one year.

Anyway long story short, I was on academic probation my first semester in optometry school. Had a 1.98 gpa, just shy of the required 2.00. And despite my best efforts, I was not able to meet my 2.02 gpa requirement second semester to stay in school. I anticipate now I will be getting a dismissal letter within the next week or so.

The admission committee knows about my learning disability. And the admission committee also knows about my car wreck during finals week. I dont know how, but right when the exams are all bunched up together an amazing idiot decides to reverse into me.

I am not sure where to go from here. I don't want the rest of my life to be shaped around one dismissal letter. Optometry is still something I want for myself and something I believe I can be good at one day.
But I am not sure how competitive of an applicant I will be anymore or what admission committees will think when they see that I failed one whole year of optometry school before.

Answer a few questions (even only for yourself, if you don't want to do so in this thread):

1. Did your school provide you with adequate accommodations to suit your needs, per your learning disability?

If so, the situation really can't be cited as a reason for your poor performance, and any school to which you apply likely also will be unwilling to accept it as such.

2. Why (do you feel you) have you done poorly in your first year of O.D. school?

You mention you were in a car-wreck, but that was just toward the end of your second semester (if I'm not misreading); your G.P.A., you say, was below the cut-off for retention in the program even at the end of your first. So, what is the problem, and, can it be fixed so you succeed if given another chance? If it can be, how? And, why was it not fixed during your first year?

3. Why do you feel optometry is something at which you can one day be good?

Do you simply not want to accept that the path has ended, or has something in your first year of school made you feel this way? If it's the former, that's understandable, but, by doggedly pursuing something only because you don't want to admit failure, you might be setting yourself up for a worse fate (consider the additional financial burden you'll incur by taking on more loans that don't pan out to a career by which you can re-pay them).

Best of luck.

 

[Shnurek]

Eyesee123, I have no issues with anyone that has ADHD, dyslexia, or a myriad of other "conditions" as many psychologists like to over-diagnose, that pass all of the required optometry exams under FAIR conditions. I also have no problems at all helping treat people with such conditions. Don't get the wrong idea. But hampering normal, intelligent individuals from becoming doctors and catering to people that can't handle the intellectual challenge that is needed throughout this career is ludicrous in my opinion.

So by using your logic, people such as Einstein who had 73% more glial cells and a 15% larger inferior parietal lobe should be penalized and given a shorter time period to take board exams. Yea, lets punish them for having a superior brain!

Thank God this country isn't a democracy but a constitutional republic. Otherwise all the stupid people would create even more laws like this and rule this country. As there are a lot more stupid people than there are smart people. Remember, only 3% of the population over age 25 has a professional/doctorate degree, and only ~1/3 even have a college degree.

-I can source all my facts if you wish.

 

[Commando303]

Thank God this country isn't a democracy but a constitutional republic. Otherwise all the stupid people would create even more laws like this and rule this country. As there are a lot more stupid people than there are smart people. Remember, only 3% of the population over age 25 has a professional/doctorate degree, and only ~1/3 even have a college degree.

-I can source all my facts if you wish.

. Sounds like a pretty snide, élitist, supercilious position. I won't get into battling politics — what works, what doesn't; how I feel about the U.S.'s "non-democracy" set-up — as that really wasn't your point, but your words carry a deep stench of superiority that has nothing to do with simply wanting "fair treatment."

 

[Shnurek]

. Sounds like a pretty snide, élitist, supercilious position. I won't get into battling politics — what works, what doesn't; how I feel about the U.S.'s "non-democracy" set-up — as that really wasn't your point, but your words carry a deep stench of superiority that has nothing to do with simply wanting "fair treatment."

Bro I grew up in the hood, I am not elitist lol. I just think that everyone should be given a fair chance. That's exactly the system that the NYC specialized high school system has enacted. I'm sure you know of Stuyvesant High School since you are from the city. The ONLY requirement was to be in the top 3% of SHSAT test takers and be a NYC resident. No accommodations, no racial quotas, no BS.

 

[imemily]

Eyesee123, I have no issues with anyone that has ADHD, dyslexia, or a myriad of other "conditions" as many psychologists like to over-diagnose, that pass all of the required optometry exams under FAIR conditions. I also have no problems at all helping treat people with such conditions. Don't get the wrong idea. But hampering normal, intelligent individuals from becoming doctors and catering to people that can't handle the intellectual challenge that is needed throughout this career is ludicrous in my opinion.

So by using your logic, people such as Einstein who had 73% more glial cells and a 15% larger inferior parietal lobe should be penalized and given a shorter time period to take board exams. Yea, lets punish them for having a superior brain!

Thank God this country isn't a democracy but a constitutional republic. Otherwise all the stupid people would create even more laws like this and rule this country. As there are a lot more stupid people than there are smart people. Remember, only 3% of the population over age 25 has a professional/doctorate degree, and only ~1/3 even have a college degree.

-I can source all my facts if you wish.

lol....wow.

 

[KHE]

Thank God this country isn't a democracy but a constitutional republic. Otherwise all the stupid people would create even more laws like this and rule this country. As there are a lot more stupid people than there are smart people. Remember, only 3% of the population over age 25 has a professional/doctorate degree, and only ~1/3 even have a college degree.
-I can source all my facts if you wish.

For what it's worth, I've never found any correlation either way between having degrees and stupidity.

 

[Shnurek]

Yes, I have some extreme viewpoints I used to be very interested in neuroscience and intelligence measurement.

 

[Shnurek]

For what it's worth, I've never found any correlation either way between having degrees and stupidity.

I was an neuropsych intern for an ongoing alzheimer's disease study. They found a strong correlation between years of education and ability to retain cognitive function in older age. I don't think the results have been published yet as it is a long term study.

 

[KHE]

I was an neuropsych intern for an ongoing alzheimer's disease study. They found a strong correlation between years of education and ability to retain cognitive function in older age. I don't think the results have been published yet as it is a long term study.

Cognitive Function is completely unrelated to the point I'm making which is that I've known hundreds of people with degrees, advanced degrees and they were dumber than a sack of hammers.

I've also known hundreds of people who never made it past 8th grade and they were as smart as Ken Jennings.

 

[Shnurek]

Cognitive Function is completely unrelated to the point I'm making which is that I've known hundreds of people with degrees, advanced degrees and they were dumber than a sack of hammers.

I've also known hundreds of people who never made it past 8th grade and they were as smart as Ken Jennings.

I've seen the opposite in my life but hey standardized tests that allow for degree attainment don't test emotional intelligence, visual intelligence and other forms. Also people that have degrees usually tend to have better crystallized intelligence (aka many hours of studying) vs. fluid intelligence (abstract intelligence on-the-go).

 

[Jason K]

The last thing I'd want is for the person that is taking care of my most precious sense is for them to have a mental disability. I'm sorry. I also do not agree with accommodations on standardized testing. It should be a pure meritocracy.

I have to admit, I totally agree here. I have nothing against folks with valid learning disorders, but just because someone wants to become an "insert profession here," doesn't mean they should be. I'd love to be an NFL quarterback, it would be fun, well paid, and I'd get to play football for a living. I'm also 5'9" and I weigh in at about 145. Should I complain that the NFL only takes those athletes that can perform at the acceptable level? I could argue, "Hey, I can't quite run fast enough, react fast enough, or throw very well in the time alloted, but it's because I was born with this average build and marginal reflexes - it's not my fault."

Do you want the guy who graduated last in his MD class to be a viable candidate for neurosurgery residency? I don't want that guy cutting into me or my family member's head. I want the guy who kicked everyone else's butt in clinic, classroom, and proficiencies. I don't want the person who needed extra time, extra this, extra that to be operating on my brain - and they don't since those folks don't get accepted to neurosurgery residencies. That's the way it should be for professions in which you make decisions about other people's well-being and health, in my opinion.

Sorry, I hate to be blunt, but it's frustrating when you're busting your balls to cram for 7 finals and 3 proficiencies, all of which are timed, and your ADHD classmate gets to spread them out over a week and take them un-timed. Not doing anyone any favors, in opinion.

What's going to happen when there's an oversight due to ADHD when out in clinical practice? If it can affect someone during a written exam or proficiency, it can certainly affect him/her during a stressful day at the office with 30 patients on deck. I think there should be one set of minimally acceptable standards that everyone is held to. As it is, I think our standards for clinical practice are way too lenient. It's not necessarily about being fair to the students, it's also about being fair to the patients. Maybe I'm not being very sensitive to people's feelings, but there are some situations in which people's feelings take a "back seat."

 

[Jonbrout]

I have to admit, I totally agree here. I have nothing against folks with valid learning disorders, but just because someone wants to become an "insert profession here," doesn't mean they should be. I'd love to be an NFL quarterback, it would be fun, well paid, and I'd get to play football for a living. I'm also 5'9" and I weigh in at about 145. Should I complain that the NFL only takes those athletes that can perform at the acceptable level? I could argue, "Hey, I can't quite run fast enough, react fast enough, or throw very well in the time alloted, but it's because I was born with this average build and marginal reflexes - it's not my fault."

Do you want the guy who graduated last in his MD class to be a viable candidate for neurosurgery residency? I don't want that guy cutting into me or my family member's head. I want the guy who kicked everyone else's butt in clinic, classroom, and proficiencies. I don't want the person who needed extra time, extra this, extra that to be operating on my brain - and they don't since those folks don't get accepted to neurosurgery residencies. That's the way it should be for professions in which you make decisions about other people's well-being and health, in my opinion.

Sorry, I hate to be blunt, but it's frustrating when you're busting your balls to cram for 7 finals and 3 proficiencies, all of which are timed, and your ADHD classmate gets to spread them out over a week and take them un-timed. Not doing anyone any favors, in opinion.

What's going to happen when there's an oversight due to ADHD when out in clinical practice? If it can affect someone during a written exam or proficiency, it can certainly affect him/her during a stressful day at the office with 30 patients on deck. I think there should be one set of minimally acceptable standards that everyone is held to. As it is, I think our standards for clinical practice are way too lenient. It's not necessarily about being fair to the students, it's also about being fair to the patients. Maybe I'm not being very sensitive to people's feelings, but there are some situations in which people's feelings take a "back seat."

I approve of this post.

 

[imemily]

You really can't compare the competence of two different individuals, without first giving them an equal chance.

Thus, all this talk about wanting academic nerds as surgeons is really ignorant.

 

[thecgrblue]

Capitalism vs. Socialism.

 

[Jason K]

You really can't compare the competence of two different individuals, without first giving them an equal chance.

Thus, all this talk about wanting academic nerds as surgeons is really ignorant.

So should we just let anyone into optometry, medical, dental school,etc? Why not let they guy with the solid 1.5 gpa and see how he stacks up against the rest of the field? By your "let's give everyone a chance" mentality, we should do just that. Can't perform on the OAT? No worries, we'll just let you take it untimed or with an open book, that way, everyone can be an optometrist, no matter their ability. We should just let anyone with a pulse and desire into medical school too, I suppose. We can't know how someone will do until they are given a chance, right?

We have minimum standards which need to be met in order to earn our respective degrees and to be professionally licensed. Creating exceptions for those without the ability to adhere to those standards helps the practitioner, not the patient. If we were experiencing a nation-wide OD shortage that caused hundreds of thousands of people in all parts of the US to go without eye care, I might be willing to see how we might want to squeeze a few more people through the system and balance the good with the bad. Since that is hardly the case, I'd say we do just fine without exceptions. We need to start thinking of the public first and the candidate second. The FAA does it. People who have had a history of even a single migraine headache have almost no chance of being licensed as a commercial airline pilot. Why? Shouldn't we take a "wait and see" approach? Maybe they'd be fine and never have a migraine again. Or, maybe they would and you'd have a guy with a physically incapacitating condition at the wheel of a passenger jet. Some folks are not cut out to be airline pilots due to their physical condition. It's not their fault, but it's the way it is. Some folks are not cut out to be ODs, MDs, & DOs as well.

Please note that I am not saying that people with disabilities (who pass the minimum standards) should not be admitted to or passed through programs. There were two people in my graduating class with quite severe physical limitations who made it through the program without asking for or receiving any allowances. They took the same timed exams and took the same timed proficiencies that the rest of us did. I'd see either of them as my doctor without hesitation.

Finally, regarding my comparison to the admission process for neurosurgeons, you clearly missed the point entirely. An "academic nerd" is hardly the person I'd want as my doctor, surgeon or otherwise. As you will discover if and when you start clinical training, there are those who excel in the classroom and have very poor clinical skills (your "academic nerds"). There are those who excel in clinic while performing very poorly in academics. And there are those who excel in both the clinic and the classroom - those are the folks I was referring to. You will discover that those students are rarely "nerdy."

I could be wrong on all of this and maybe I'm not very sensitive to those with learning disabilities, but that's how I feel on the matter.

 

[thecgrblue]

I agree. Unfortunately the bi-product of "No Child Left Behind" and other programs is passing on the mentality that everyone should have the same educational opportunities so we don't hurt their feelings.

 

[netmag]

Well, the OP apparently got in under the same rules as everyone else and was apparently expelled under the same rules as everyone else as well. So what is there to argue about really?

If anyone is saying they should've been blocked from applying in the first place then obviously that person is wrong. They can apply just like anyone else can apply as long as they can meet the same pre-requisites for admission.

As to whether the OP can apply to get back into school again or get into another school, I'm not going to say that they can't do it because it's within their right to do so. However, my personal feeling is that the schools should not let the OP back in again because he/she was already given a good opportunity and was already given the standard chance to avoid getting kicked out. I personally think there's other pre-opts who are waiting in line for their chance to get in now so the wheels of opportunity need to keep moving forward. Despite my personal thoughts, hopefully things work out for the OP.

 

[DrSpontaneouz83]

I applied for admission into optometry school exactly one year ago, for the entering class of 2010 and graduating class of 2014.
I had a 3.2 cumulative undergrad gpa. Psychology major + Biology minor.
Roughly 310 New Scale OAT scores (don't remember the numbers exactly anymore).
About 500 hrs of hospital volunteer work
Shadowed with two different ODs (one in private and one in corporate)
Applied really early - all LORs and applications filled out by early august
Got quite a few interviews.
Didn't do well on some interviews. Did well on some others.
Finally got an acceptance letter.

Have now been enrolled in optometry school for the last one year.

Anyway long story short, I was on academic probation my first semester in optometry school. Had a 1.98 gpa, just shy of the required 2.00. And despite my best efforts, I was not able to meet my 2.02 gpa requirement second semester to stay in school. I anticipate now I will be getting a dismissal letter within the next week or so.

The admission committee knows about my learning disability. And the admission committee also knows about my car wreck during finals week. I dont know how, but right when the exams are all bunched up together an amazing idiot decides to reverse into me.

I am not sure where to go from here. I don't want the rest of my life to be shaped around one dismissal letter. Optometry is still something I want for myself and something I believe I can be good at one day.
But I am not sure how competitive of an applicant I will be anymore or what admission committees will think when they see that I failed one whole year of optometry school before.

As others have suggested on this forum, really look into what happened during your first year. There will always be "excuses" as to why your year ended the way it did, but only you know what really happened. I am not being judgemental by any means, nor should anyone else, because it has and can happen to anyone! Sadly, entering GPA is not the best indication how you will perform in a professional program. I know of several optometric students from various schools entering with strong undergrad GPAs and being held back a year, failed a couple courses, or academically dismissed.

Optometry school is a WHOLE different ball game..and frankly, those who do really well are those with great memories. As KHE mentioned, there are many "dumb" people with doctoral degrees..and it's true! Just because you can regurgitate facts on paper does not mean you know how to apply it in clinic...in clinic is where you will differentiate the clinically proficient ODs vs ODs with an enlarged hippocampus (short-term memory).

To be quite honest, sometimes the school you thought was fit for you, really isn't. For some people the quarter system works better than the semester system, or vice versa. For others, the physical environment can be depressing or you don't have a strong network within your colleagues. Some may have large classes vs smaller classes thus changing the student-professor ratio. But ultimately, wherever you go, there is hard work to be done to successfully complete the program. And regardless of where you go, we will all have to inevitably pass the NBEO.

For people in your predicament, second chances have led to more grounded, successful students. But for others it has led to accumulated student debt and a loss of time. Regardless, these are all life experiences that build character and maturity. Deeply think about your next move and best of luck on your decision.

 

[eyesee123]

I agree. Unfortunately the bi-product of "No Child Left Behind" and other programs is passing on the mentality that everyone should have the same educational opportunities so we don't hurt their feelings.

The bi-product of No Child Left Behind is not what you mentioned. Also, everyone should have the same educational opportunities! It's elitist to say otherwise. Whether or not every student (I'm thinking high school level and college opportunities) has the will, volition, and motivation is another story. But to say that not everyone should be at least be given the opportunity is harsh.

No Child Left Behind is about closing the achievement gap, not about hurting feelings. Also one could argue that a bi-product of No Child Left Behind is just studying to the test. There is already research of professors in medical schools seeing this happen with the No Child Left Behind generation. Students constantly demand to know what's on the test, and skip over the critical thinking aspects...which is crucial in medicine. A good documentary on this subject: http://www.racetonowhere.com/home In this film is where I saw professors at UCSF medical school talk about recent wave of medical school students and how they are so different than any other because of the ramifications of No Child Left Behind.

And I also think having an excellent memory really does help with optometry too!

 

[thecgrblue]

The bi-product of No Child Left Behind is not what you mentioned. Also, everyone should have the same educational opportunities! It's elitist to say otherwise. Whether or not every student (I'm thinking high school level and college opportunities) has the will, volition, and motivation is another story. But to say that not everyone should be at least be given the opportunity is harsh.

No Child Left Behind is about closing the achievement gap, not about hurting feelings. Also one could argue that a bi-product of No Child Left Behind is just studying to the test. There is already research of professors in medical schools seeing this happen with the No Child Left Behind generation. Students constantly demand to know what's on the test, and skip over the critical thinking aspects...which is crucial in medicine. A good documentary on this subject: http://www.racetonowhere.com/home In this film is where I saw professors at UCSF medical school talk about recent wave of medical school students and how they are so different than any other because of the ramifications of No Child Left Behind.

And I also think having an excellent memory really does help with optometry too!

That is exactly what was on my mind. Forgive my lack of elaboration and explanation.

The comment came directly from what I saw in middle school and high school. Washington state was HEAVY on passing their standardized exam. We would work the material over and over again so that we could get the scores. Often I'd hear the teacher say, "This is going to be on the WASL." We would take diagnostic tests and until almost every single student passed that diagnostic we didn't move on. The issue caused quite a problem with the parents in the area and at a board meeting it was stated by the school board, in summary "We don't want to hurt the feelings of the students who aren't prepared..." etc. etc.

I am in no way taking an 'elitist' opinion on education. Hell, the American Dream is about improving your status and my Grandpa would be rolling in his grave cursing me to high-heaven if I were to ever take that position. All I was saying is that taking a "Harrison Bergeron" approach to academics is a terrible idea.

The 'memorize for the test' mentality is what college and getting into graduate school is all about. I have a B.S. in Memorization. However, I am constantly grateful for the classes that I did have where the professors (young might I add) knew this mentality was creeping in and basically said. "I will tell you what to memorize, everything else, if you ever need to know it, Google it." Then they proceeded to test us on heavy concepts and critical thinking.

Thank you for pointing out that documentary. I will surely watch more of it when I have the time. This idea is deserving of another thread.

 

[eyesee123]

That is exactly what was on my mind. Forgive my lack of elaboration and explanation.

The comment came directly from what I saw in middle school and high school. Washington state was HEAVY on passing their standardized exam. We would work the material over and over again so that we could get the scores. Often I'd hear the teacher say, "This is going to be on the WASL." We would take diagnostic tests and until almost every single student passed that diagnostic we didn't move on. The issue caused quite a problem with the parents in the area and at a board meeting it was stated by the school board, in summary "We don't want to hurt the feelings of the students who aren't prepared..." etc. etc.

I am in no way taking an 'elitist' opinion on education. Hell, the American Dream is about improving your status and my Grandpa would be rolling in his grave cursing me to high-heaven if I were to ever take that position. All I was saying is that taking a "Harrison Bergeron" approach to academics is a terrible idea.

The 'memorize for the test' mentality is what college and getting into graduate school is all about. I have a B.S. in Memorization. However, I am constantly grateful for the classes that I did have where the professors (young might I add) knew this mentality was creeping in and basically said. "I will tell you what to memorize, everything else, if you ever need to know it, Google it." Then they proceeded to test us on heavy concepts and critical thinking.

Thank you for pointing out that documentary. I will surely watch more of it when I have the time. This idea is deserving of another thread.

Oh, ok!

It is a very good documentary. I personally feel it is unfortunate that in education today things like the WASL, and other state tests are SO important. Some first graders, barely learning to hold a pencil correctly...and some still using those fat pencils to help with dexterity, are subjected to standardized tests! And how they determines whether or not they have a good teacher?! And with the education reform going on in the country, thinking that improving standardized test scores will directly mean that education is improving is a scary notion! Creativity and critical thinking (both of which are subdued in standardized tests) is what has the U.S. so great! You are absolutely right, this is deserving of another thread!