Stephan Segraves

Stephanie Saul for the NY Times:

Students said the high-stakes course — notorious for ending many a dream of medical school — was too hard, blaming Dr. Jones for their poor test scores.

The professor defended his standards. But just before the start of the fall semester, university deans terminated Dr. Jones’s contract.

N.Y.U. is evaluating so-called stumble courses — those in which a higher percentage of students get D’s and F’s, said John Beckman, a spokesman for the university.

“Organic chemistry has historically been one of those courses,” Mr. Beckman said. “Do these courses really need to be punitive in order to be rigorous?”

I’m sorry, what? Later on in the article it’s made clear that a large number of students taking Organic Chemistry are working towards going to medical school. Yes, I want O-Chem to be a weed-out course. This professor literally wrote the book on Organic Chemistry. I want the person learning the thing to understand the thing they are learning before they take it out in the real world and apply it (in this case, to someone’s body or medicine). This mentality of a class being too hard has seeped down into high schools and middle schools, with kids receiving passing grades either because a parent complains or because the teacher is tired of defending themselves. The cost though is real, that student that didn’t earn a passing grade doesn’t understand the material and is less likely to succeed when such material is built upon later in their school career.

What’s even worse is the recent opinion piece by Dr. Jessica Calarco in the NY Times:

The N.Y.U. students’ willingness to challenge this kind of pedagogical gatekeeping is a sign of how power dynamics are shifting at colleges and universities in the United States. To some degree, that shift reflects a rising sense of entitlement on the part of students and their parents. But that’s not the only factor at play. Another is the increasing diversity of student bodies, which casts many higher education traditions in a new light. One of those traditions is the weed-out mentality. Courses that are meant to distinguish between serious and unserious students, it has become clear, often do a better job distinguishing between students who have ample resources and those who don’t.

I am sure there are students who do not have ample resources, but is that what actually happened in this particular case? We have no idea. If it did, those students without ample resources approach the professor or teaching assistants to let them know they needed more resources? The op-ed goes on to talk about equity with empathy, which I definitely think is needed in education. If a student is failing but a teacher notices that they are falling asleep in class or knows they have a crazy home life, then yes, empathy should be shown. However, in the case of this professor at NYU, students didn’t approach him one-by-one or even in a group. Nope, they wrote a petition because it’s easy and it avoids an actual discussion.