RateMyProfessor

[UPSPOSI6]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I had a post about this last month but it remains a huge concern. A few people in classes have been complaining about how difficult/ impossible some professors are with their exams in chem and bio classes.

At the old age of 31, I can't seem to tell the diff. in general complaining from reality. I spent 3 hours on ratemyprofessor.com and researched responses from all around the country regarding biology and chemistry professors; every school had professors with the same remarks like "impossible", "unfair", regarding exams. So maybe all sciences are just difficult?

I don't mind working hard but 6 As in a class of 200? is this really normal? And these low grades are not in organic, their in lower div. bios like micro...

Or is it just a matter of truly mastering the material?

If you master the material can it prepare you for a so called "tricky" test? I imagine some of the comments are from some slackers but is it possible to score a 4.0? Self study?

any comments, success, thoughts?

 

[njbmd]

I had a post about this last month but it remains a huge concern. A few people in classes have been complaining about how difficult/ impossible some professors are with their exams in chem and bio classes.

At the old age of 31, I can't seem to tell the diff. in general complaining from reality. I spent 3 hours on ratemyprofessor.com and researched responses from all around the country regarding biology and chemistry professors; every school had professors with the same remarks like "impossible", "unfair", regarding exams. So maybe all sciences are just difficult?

I don't mind working hard but 6 As in a class of 200? is this really normal? And these low grades are not in organic, their in lower div. bios like micro...

Or is it just a matter of truly mastering the material?

If you master the material can it prepare you for a so called "tricky" test? I imagine some of the comments are from some slackers but is it possible to score a 4.0? Self study?

any comments, success, thoughts?

As a professor, I can assure you that grades are earned by students based on the expectations of the professor as outlined in course syllabus. No teacher "gives" grades or "withholds" grades. If you spent 3 hours on a website that rates professors, you were away from your studies for three hours and wasted valuable study time. These websites are based on subjective opinion and nothing more. I suspect that you could have made better use of that time by focusing on your coursework.

The material to be mastered doesn't care how old, what color or what sex you are. It's the material that needs to be learned and it's always going to be there. The greatest benefit of my English schooling is that our lecturers were NOT our examiners. It didn't matter if Satan was teaching, the material had to be mastered for exams and we could be examined in any manner.

Rather than worry about what you perceive is the "personality" or "hardness" of the professor, put all of your energy into thorough mastery of the material. Mastery takes preparation for lecture, listening in lecture and a thorough understanding both analytical and conceptually.

What you DO need to focus on is whether or not the course you paid tuition for, covers the material in sufficient depth so that you can do well on the MCAT. If the material is covered, close your ears to the "curriculum experts" around you that have no advanced degrees and dig into the task at hand. If your course is inadequate, then you need to get into one that is not inadequate. An "A" in a class that does not prepare you properly for the MCAT or for a medical school curriculum is useless.

Even if every person in that class of 200 earned an "A" there would always be someone who would believe that the professor was somehow "unfair". Descriptions like "easy" or "difficult" are very subjective. I can tell you from experience that most of my undergraduate courses were quite difficult especially things like history and philosophy but I got them mastered.

 

[SeaPanther]

It's a good resource but only eliminate profs that have about 80% negative ratings. If the number is that high, something is likely to be wrong. Although many ratings are BS, there are some real nutcases. Also, for pre-med classes that you will need for the MCAT, avoid profs that are described by something like "Slept through the whole semester and still got an A."

 

[Quix]

Just to piggyback on what njbmd wrote, I too am a professor, and don't weight rmp very heavily. These are subjective opinions bred from (usually) poor personal insight. I have yet to meet a student who doesn't feel that he/she deserves an "A", for any number of reasons. They ignore the fact that a "C" is regular progress towards completion; they ignore glaringly obvious differences in the depth and quality of their work relative to their peers; they have been raised on a diet of "You're special and better than anyone else" which has produced a narcissistic, entitlement mentality; etc. I have been called unfair (in fact, I just got back some reviews from last semester), but these accusations are groundless: they were based on a mid-term for which my students did not study, or studied other things than what I told them would be covered on the test. My class (Philosophy) was "too hard" (300 pages of text covered on the mid-term exam; oh heaven forfend - let's ignore the fact that that is par for the course (esp. in the sciences)), I talked about things that weren't on the test (like discussing findings from other disciplines like neuroscience, anthropology, genetics, etc., and their importance in philosophical questions like the mind/body problem, determinism, etc. to show how fields link together), etc. They wanted more homework - as if philosophy were comparable to math/science in the idea of repetition breeding familiarity. We'll also ignore the fact that no one came to office hours, no one approached me outside of class, and no one asked questions when I paused (every few minutes!) to make sure that we were all on the same page.

The point of this rant is that don't take rmp accusations of "unfairness" at face value - I've had plenty of students do well (B's and A's) who faced identical hurdles and challenges.

 

[Meatwad]

I had a post about this last month but it remains a huge concern. A few people in classes have been complaining about how difficult/ impossible some professors are with their exams in chem and bio classes.

At the old age of 31, I can't seem to tell the diff. in general complaining from reality. I spent 3 hours on ratemyprofessor.com and researched responses from all around the country regarding biology and chemistry professors; every school had professors with the same remarks like "impossible", "unfair", regarding exams. So maybe all sciences are just difficult?

I don't mind working hard but 6 As in a class of 200? is this really normal? And these low grades are not in organic, their in lower div. bios like micro...

Or is it just a matter of truly mastering the material?

If you master the material can it prepare you for a so called "tricky" test? I imagine some of the comments are from some slackers but is it possible to score a 4.0? Self study?

any comments, success, thoughts?

Just remember, too, that since these are intro level classes they attract lots of students that just need a D or whatever the school requires to fulfill a natural science requirement. I'm no genius by any stretch of the imagination, but I put some time into studying for my classes and it shows in respect to the class. Chemistry isn't easy, but it's not that hard when you read the material. I think the class average on tests in my school's General Chem courses are around a 50; with a decent amount of my time devoted to trying to truly understand the material, I've been able to pull in the high-90s (without a curve).

Don't worry too much about ratemyprofessor. That's more a personality rating than an effective professor rating. Averages are never high in intro science courses (save for Biology, perhaps?).

 

[QofQuimica]

I agree with previous posters that what you get out of your class (grades as well as understanding) is highly correlated to what you put in. The prof is largely irrelevant, because the major impetus for learning has to come from within YOU. It's also not usually an issue of intellect. I've had very bright students who blew off their assignments and didn't do very well. I've also had very average-intelligence students who showed up for all of my office hours, took advantage when I offered bonus questions and extra credit, and made a concerted effort to use my feedback on previous assignments to improve their work on their future assignments. You don't need to be a genius to do well in school. But you do need to put in the time and effort to master the material. My suggestions:

1) Study for each of your science classes for an hour every day. That's only seven hours per week, but it's far more efficient to do this than it is to not study all week and then study fourteen hours the day before the test. When I was in college, I'd actually go to the movies the night before my exams and just chill.

2) For your chem and physics classes in particular, focus on solving problems rather than just passively reading your textbook. You don't understand the material well enough yet if you haven't used it to solve problems. Don't copy the solutions out of the student guide; really make an effort to do the problems yourself first, and only use the student guide to give you a hint if you get stuck.

3) Read your assignments before class, and make a list of questions you have. Go to office hours for help on a regular basis. I always held a review before exams, and I would do practice problems that were quite similar to the ones that would show up on the exam. Plus, it's far better to go for help early on when you still have time to correct your study habits or other problems, rather than to realize at the end of the semester when it's too late to make adjustments that you're not going to do well.

4) Review your exams and make sure you understand all of the concepts. Many profs give cumulative finals, and this will help you prepare. But even if your prof doesn't test earlier material on subsequent exams, science knowledge is cumulative. You will not do well in Gen Chem II if you don't master Gen Chem I first. You will not do well in Organic Chem if you don't know the concepts from Gen Chem.

5) Don't listen to other students who are talking trash, and don't talk yourself out of succeeding. Literally thousands of people survive these courses every year. They are not all more intelligent than you are. The pre-med subjects *are* learnable, and you *are* capable of doing well.

to you. 🙂

 

[mshheaddoc]

While I agree with the above posters, I've found that this site and its sister site pick-a-prof did help me objectively choose some professors when I had a choice. Many of the reviews were just complaints (you can tell the griping), but many of them were honest answers. I found a spectacular professor who was known to be extremely hard to get an A but student said she was one of the best professors. And what do you know, I got an A in the class 😉

These reviews might help in finding a professor or weeding out some of the bad profs because there are some out there. There were a few that I wouldn't touch with a 100 ft pole after reading the reviews and talking to classmates who had these profs. But overall, its your ability that will determine how you do in these classes.

 

[DrMidlife]

A few people in classes have been complaining about how difficult/ impossible some professors are with their exams in chem and bio classes.

People always complain. In particular, in a selective process, people will always complain about how unfair the selection is.

I don't mind working hard but 6 As in a class of 200? is this really normal? And these low grades are not in organic, their in lower div. bios like micro...

It's normal at my school. You have to be one of those 6 if you want the A. There are schools that aren't this competitive, which is why we have to also take the MCAT. And it explains why you can see a 4.0 GPA with a 20 MCAT.

A good capable professor is a joy to appreciate. If your professor isn't good or capable, you still have to be good and capable.

Or is it just a matter of truly mastering the material?

If you master the material can it prepare you for a so called "tricky" test? I imagine some of the comments are from some slackers but is it possible to score a 4.0? Self study?

If a test is tricky, it's tricky for everybody. The people getting A's aren't cheating: they're learning and working really hard.

Somebody on here quoted a professor as saying "Study enough to learn the material. No more, no less." If there are problems in the back of the chapter that you can't solve, you didn't learn the material. If you need the book open to remember the material, you didn't learn it. If there are materials available (old tests, problem sets, review sheets, vocabulary lists) that you didn't study, you didn't learn the material.

It's incredibly hard material, from my perspective, and I'm still figuring out how to play the game. I had a 4.0 in computer science before I started post-bac. I then got my butt handed to me: I have a 2.8 in basic sciences so far. I never expected this, but it is what it is.

Best of luck to you.

 

[Quix]

I have a 2.8 in basic sciences so far. I never expected this, but it is what it is.

And I would remind everyone that a 2.8 indicates making *above average* progress in a class. The myth of "3.5+ or nothing" is foolish - I carried a 2.92 BCPM during my post-bacc (overall QPA of 3.24), indicating *above average* progress. And before anyone suggests that I don't know the material with a 2.9, I scored a 32T (11 PS & 10 BS), have gotten two studies through a research university/hospital IRB (including the prerequisite science reviews), and I'm writing the textbooks you will be learning from as med students and clinicians (so what I write has to make it through peer review and editors before you even see it).

The bottom line is that QPA isn't necessarily an adequate metric to judge understanding, ability, or quality of student. 4.0 means you learned the material well enough for your tests. It does not necessarily reflect your application of the material, recognition of the larger picture (i.e., the *meaning* of the material), or ability to recognize unfamiliar presentations of everyday problems (e.g., lateral thinking). I know more than my fair share of brilliant students who will make poor doctors for precisely these reasons.

 

[Anastasis]

While I agree with the above posters, I've found that this site and its sister site pick-a-prof did help me objectively choose some professors when I had a choice. Many of the reviews were just complaints (you can tell the griping), but many of them were honest answers. I found a spectacular professor who was known to be extremely hard to get an A but student said she was one of the best professors. And what do you know, I got an A in the class 😉

These reviews might help in finding a professor or weeding out some of the bad profs because there are some out there. There were a few that I wouldn't touch with a 100 ft pole after reading the reviews and talking to classmates who had these profs. But overall, its your ability that will determine how you do in these classes.

I remember when pickaprof was still free (I think it's $5 a semester if you register for my ugrad). I think the most helpful part of pickaprof over ratemyprof is that pickaprof usually has useful information about the class beforehand so you know want you're getting into (ie. We read this many books, we have a 25 pg term paper). For me, I avoided the English classes that had MC tests (MC in English? Are you insane?) And chose classes with term papers instead of exams (I tend to do better on papers and enjoy them more).

 

[UPSPOSI6]

Just to piggyback on what njbmd wrote, I too am a professor, and don't weight rmp very heavily. These are subjective opinions bred from (usually) poor personal insight. I have yet to meet a student who doesn't feel that he/she deserves an "A", for any number of reasons. They ignore the fact that a "C" is regular progress towards completion; they ignore glaringly obvious differences in the depth and quality of their work relative to their peers; they have been raised on a diet of "You're special and better than anyone else" which has produced a narcissistic, entitlement mentality; etc. I have been called unfair (in fact, I just got back some reviews from last semester), but these accusations are groundless: they were based on a mid-term for which my students did not study, or studied other things than what I told them would be covered on the test. My class (Philosophy) was "too hard" (300 pages of text covered on the mid-term exam; oh heaven forfend - let's ignore the fact that that is par for the course (esp. in the sciences)), I talked about things that weren't on the test (like discussing findings from other disciplines like neuroscience, anthropology, genetics, etc., and their importance in philosophical questions like the mind/body problem, determinism, etc. to show how fields link together), etc. They wanted more homework - as if philosophy were comparable to math/science in the idea of repetition breeding familiarity. We'll also ignore the fact that no one came to office hours, no one approached me outside of class, and no one asked questions when I paused (every few minutes!) to make sure that we were all on the same page.

The point of this rant is that don't take rmp accusations of "unfairness" at face value - I've had plenty of students do well (B's and A's) who faced identical hurdles and challenges.

Quix- I've read a lot of your posts and enjoy you as a fellow non-trad. but you seem to be bitter about something.

Seriously, I'm rooting for your application but wtf?

 

[Sol Rosenberg]

I will tend to disagree and discourage you (OP) from taking some of the advice of others in this thread (of course, mine is just one opinion, too.) For getting into Medical School, YOUR GRADE, not what you learn is of the most importance. If you need to choose between 2 "good" Professors where:

- Professor "A" hands out As like candy, but may not be as good at teaching/conveying the material

- Professor "B" may be the best teacher ever, but hands out grades according to a normal distribution, with the mean (average) at a C (where it is supposed to be)

YOU WANT PROFESSOR "A" EVERY TIME.

No one on the ADCOM cares how well you learned the material, they only care that you get the A. This is the message that Medical School ADCOMs send out again and again by prioritizing GPA so high (even in relation to MCAT score.) It is relatively rare for someone with a lower GPA, but above average/stellar MCAT to do better than someone in the opposite situation.

Therefore, I used pickaprof and ratemyprofessors to look at the distributions of grades from the classes that the professors in question teach. I only read the comments in the event of a "tie." If one Professor's grade distribution is skewed towards the A range, that guy/gal is a winner in my book. If the distribution ends up normal looking with few As and mostly Bs/Cs, I run away fast. Although a C is technically average, it's a loser where medical school applications are concerned.

So, my advice to the OP is to stay far, far away from that Prof. that only handed out 6 As in a class of 200. You may end up being one of those 6 if you take that class, but your chances are better with a Professor with better numbers.

Don't hate the player, hate the game. This is how you have to play it (IMHO, of course)

 

[Quix]

Quix- I've read a lot of your posts and enjoy you as a fellow non-trad. but you seem to be bitter about something.

Seriously, I'm rooting for your application but wtf?

Sorry - I've got a bunch of entitled students this semester, and it's bugging me. Add in some displaced frustration from RL drama and waitlists, and it amounts to angry posts. 😉

 

[UPSPOSI6]

I will tend to disagree and discourage you (OP) from taking some of the advice of others in this thread (of course, mine is just one opinion, too.) For getting into Medical School, YOUR GRADE, not what you learn is of the most importance. If you need to choose between 2 "good" Professors where:

- Professor "A" hands out As like candy, but may not be as good at teaching/conveying the material

- Professor "B" may be the best teacher ever, but hands out grades according to a normal distribution, with the mean (average) at a C (where it is supposed to be)

YOU WANT PROFESSOR "A" EVERY TIME.

No one on the ADCOM cares how well you learned the material, they only care that you get the A. This is the message that Medical School ADCOMs send out again and again by prioritizing GPA so high (even in relation to MCAT score.) It is relatively rare for someone with a lower GPA, but above average/stellar MCAT to do better than someone in the opposite situation.

Therefore, I used pickaprof and ratemyprofessors to look at the distributions of grades from the classes that the professors in question teach. I only read the comments in the event of a "tie." If one Professor's grade distribution is skewed towards the A range, that guy/gal is a winner in my book. If the distribution ends up normal looking with few As and mostly Bs/Cs, I run away fast. Although a C is technically average, it's a loser where medical school applications are concerned.

So, my advice to the OP is to stay far, far away from that Prof. that only handed out 6 As in a class of 200. You may end up being one of those 6 if you take that class, but your chances are better with a Professor with better numbers.

Don't hate the player, hate the game. This is how you have to play it (IMHO, of course)

I was waiting for someone to confirm my EXACT THOUGHTS

Indeed, getting the A and MCAT score is #1

The rest is just conversation.

Q gets a close 2nd place due to the fact she scored a frickin' 43 and the fact that she is very attractive.

Thanks All

 

[jason3278]

Just to piggyback on what njbmd wrote, I too am a professor, and don't weight rmp very heavily. These are subjective opinions bred from (usually) poor personal insight. I have yet to meet a student who doesn't feel that he/she deserves an "A", for any number of reasons. They ignore the fact that a "C" is regular progress towards completion; they ignore glaringly obvious differences in the depth and quality of their work relative to their peers; they have been raised on a diet of "You're special and better than anyone else" which has produced a narcissistic, entitlement mentality; etc. I have been called unfair (in fact, I just got back some reviews from last semester), but these accusations are groundless: they were based on a mid-term for which my students did not study, or studied other things than what I told them would be covered on the test. My class (Philosophy) was "too hard" (300 pages of text covered on the mid-term exam; oh heaven forfend - let's ignore the fact that that is par for the course (esp. in the sciences)), I talked about things that weren't on the test (like discussing findings from other disciplines like neuroscience, anthropology, genetics, etc., and their importance in philosophical questions like the mind/body problem, determinism, etc. to show how fields link together), etc. They wanted more homework - as if philosophy were comparable to math/science in the idea of repetition breeding familiarity. We'll also ignore the fact that no one came to office hours, no one approached me outside of class, and no one asked questions when I paused (every few minutes!) to make sure that we were all on the same page.

The point of this rant is that don't take rmp accusations of "unfairness" at face value - I've had plenty of students do well (B's and A's) who faced identical hurdles and challenges.

This is precisely the reason why sometimes I don't feel like I should be considered "non-traditional". Many of my younger classmates are like this. They sit in class, sneering like they are literally "too cool for school", staring blankly at the professor, and showing absolutely NO interest in what is supposed to be their field of interest. I almost think that people should wait a few years before starting college to get the "walking around in designer clothes, listening to an i-pod and having a physically aversion to anything that requires actual thinking"-phase out of the way.

 

[montessori2md]

I started college when I was 16 -I have had profs who seemed to forget english shortly after passing the TOEFL, I have had profs who spent the first day explaining they want to retire, were supposed to just administrate for the next ten years, and would not have office hours, I have had married lab instructors try to date me.

There are just as many lousy profs as there are lousy anything else. I was not the sort of student who whined about how hard courses were -I was a gunner my first time through -I've learned my lesson😉

But, and I think I've posted about this before...I am currently in a course with an lecturer who has taken obnoxious to a whole new level, essentially because she doesn't communicate effectively, and so the class lacks information necessary to performance. This is especially hard to swallow after the first semester was taught by a very thorough instructor -you essentially had to try to fail, his website was loaded with practice questions and power point slides and always answering his email and in his office, and carefully organized the schedule to allow at least a week to study material before a midterm. On the other hand, I don't think her class averages are substantially lower than other science classes -right around 50%

It's especially annoying as a nontrad, because having my schedule organized helps me stay ahead of the game. Disorganization wastes my time.

I keep telling myself, at least I don't work for her, she'll be out of my life in 6 weeks ; )

 

[sirdude]

I would just like to add my two cents. I believe that there are alot of tough professors out there and anyone that is particularly scared about their grades usually will try to avoid them. I didn't use to look through ratemyproffesor but I now wished I had because of 1 guy I took the beginning of my second year in UG. I just happened to find out half way through the year (after my first test came back, which just happened to be 1 week after the drop/add date) that the teacher I currently had was on "academic suspension" because he failed near 80% of last semester's class. I worked my ass off in that class, was above the class average and got a C (all A's besides that). This is horror story that I hope more can avoid by ratemyproffesor but seriously don't believe everything you read on there.

 

[sirdude]

I have had profs who spent the first day explaining they want to retire,

I feel you here, my second worst teacher had retired and came back to help out the school since they overaccepted the amount of students that needed calculus (note he never taught at this institution before). We had department written exams, which he didn't understand what all they covered. On the last week of class he told us all the material was for our own information and not on the final. Turned out it comprised about 30% of the questions on the final. Oppps. I didn't focus on the material, didn't know the answers and it dropped me down to a B.

 

[BeatrixKiddo]

hah banned

 

[MSTPbound]

I would just like to say, because it seems consistent with the theme of this thread, that I absolutely detested my 1st semester physics professor. I found him to be arrogant, at times inappropriate, and simply unfair among other things I care not share.

I got an A in the course. 😎

But I STILL trashed him on rmp because he was an AWEFUL PROFESSOR.

I've had too many WONDERFUL professors not to know the difference.

Suffice it to say, take what you read with a grain of salt, but so far, in my experience, even when the professor is AWEFUL, the grade you receive is the one you EARNED - not the one the professor "gave" you.

-MSTPbound

 

[Doctor Bagel]

I will tend to disagree and discourage you (OP) from taking some of the advice of others in this thread (of course, mine is just one opinion, too.) For getting into Medical School, YOUR GRADE, not what you learn is of the most importance. If you need to choose between 2 "good" Professors where:

- Professor "A" hands out As like candy, but may not be as good at teaching/conveying the material

- Professor "B" may be the best teacher ever, but hands out grades according to a normal distribution, with the mean (average) at a C (where it is supposed to be)

YOU WANT PROFESSOR "A" EVERY TIME.

No one on the ADCOM cares how well you learned the material, they only care that you get the A. This is the message that Medical School ADCOMs send out again and again by prioritizing GPA so high (even in relation to MCAT score.) It is relatively rare for someone with a lower GPA, but above average/stellar MCAT to do better than someone in the opposite situation.

Therefore, I used pickaprof and ratemyprofessors to look at the distributions of grades from the classes that the professors in question teach. I only read the comments in the event of a "tie." If one Professor's grade distribution is skewed towards the A range, that guy/gal is a winner in my book. If the distribution ends up normal looking with few As and mostly Bs/Cs, I run away fast. Although a C is technically average, it's a loser where medical school applications are concerned.

So, my advice to the OP is to stay far, far away from that Prof. that only handed out 6 As in a class of 200. You may end up being one of those 6 if you take that class, but your chances are better with a Professor with better numbers.

Don't hate the player, hate the game. This is how you have to play it (IMHO, of course)

We disagree about Texas, but I'm with you here. The most important thing for any premed is to make As, and professors who are miserly with giving them out are professors you want to avoid.

Also, as for the posts about a C being a satisfactory grade, that's really not true anymore at most schools. A C is viewed by adcoms, employers and everyone else is a below average grade. If a prof is handing out Cs like an average grade and treating Bs as above average, that prof is making life harder for his students. Grade inflation might be a bad trend, but it's a reality. Here in 2007, a B is an average grade, a C is below average, and a D or F is just unacceptably below average.

 

[sirdude]

Grade inflation might be a bad trend, but it's a reality. Here in 2007, a B is an average grade, a C is below average, and a D or F is just unacceptably below average.

Wow it's only been three years since I've been in UG and I have to admit that a C was the average grade for most of my classes. I do not remember too many teachers saying the average on a test was a nice 85 or anything like that...

 

[menaniac]

Grade inflation might be a bad trend, but it's a reality. Here in 2007, a B is an average grade, a C is below average, and a D or F is just unacceptably below average.

In fact, grade inflation is so bad, that at Princeton (where my husband is a professor of engineering) where they were giving out so many A's (67% of all grades given at the school were A's), the University had to make a new rule that only 35% of your total grades that you give out for a class can be A's of any type (A-, A, A+). Talk about freaking students out! People here feel that they are entitled to get an A just for showing up, and the stuff about "gentleman's C" is right on. You'd really have to *try* to fail here. In fact, as a professor to give a D or F, you have to jump through all kinds of hoops, and let the student try to remediate themselves in some way. If I had a dollar for every student who whined to my DH that they "needed" a better grade because they've "never gotten a B", my med school would be paid for!

BTW, pre-meds are the worst for this kind of behavior (though I'm embarassed to say so). I agree with the above poster that adcoms do put too much emphesis on GPA over other criteria such as letters, experience and even great MCAT scores. To play the game, take the profs that give the most A's. Or the ones that are push-overs for whiny students. Then be a great whiner when you have to be. Just don't let me hear it, though, 'cause I'll just hit you with a big stick!😀

 

[stiffany]

As a "non-trad" premed, I'd like to think that I don't feel entitled to grades and that I work darn hard for those that I get in addition to working full-time. However, I hate the mentality that says only x number of students in a given class can get A's. If each student who receives an A actually worked for it, why breed even more competition by setting arbitrary limits on grades?

While I know we're supposed to be learning for learning's sake, I can guarantee you that I'm not sitting in my 9 hr per week orgo lab for the sake of being excited about Grignard reactions or catalytic hydrogenation at 8am. Nor did I relish having physics every day for several hours last summer on top of work responsibilities and studying for the MCAT The fact is, I'm playing the game that is medical admissions and frankly, a 3.0 average or a 2.0 average isn't going to cut it. I didn't used to be the quibbling for every point student I am today until I had a class where 1 point out of 400 dropped me down to a B after I'd busted my bum the entire semester (A class where each exam I had a point or two that I likely could have gotten back, but didn't feel like bothering the prof with). Did I feel entitled for an A? Yea, maybe a little bit. Do I think it's sad that everytime I get an assignment back I now make sure I'm getting every darn half point I deserve? You bet'cha.

If med schools really valued learning over grades, the 3.5 GPA unspoken cut off for medical school wouldn't exist and instead, medical school admissions would be based on solely standardized tests and extra-curricular experience. Instead, we have our system, where, at the end of the day all that matters is whether you received an A, B, or C. No one cares if your professor thinks a C is average (At my school, science classes are generally set to a C+/B- for the mean but it still depends on the professor) so it really does behoove the average student to suck up, study hard, and quibble over those extra points. Otherwise, good-bye med school dreams.

I think professors also have to understand that students may not be truly interested in their subject material. While it may be important to the prof, there are just some required classes that just aren't that interesting for everyone. While it's important for the student to remain courteous and work hard, there's still going to be those times when grumbling about the workload or the boring nature of the course occurs, no matter what. I think if a large majority of the class feels a certain way, it's important to listen to concerns and at least consider them even if you don't think they're valid or just demonstrate student laziness. Maybe there's a way to restructure the class to be more in tune with student interests but still challenging so that students remember it as a good class instead of a boring pain in the bum. After all, while there's a certain amt of required knowledge for a given subject matter, college courses should be about learning and being exposed to new ideas and concepts, instead of beaten over the head with weekly exams or 400 pages worth of dense reading per week (the latter being more in line with some of my graduate seminars but occassionally still cropping up in upper-level courses).