O-Chem? More like No-Chem

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.

A Tale of Two Grocery Stores

H-E-B

When an H-E-B grocery store lost power in Austin, they didn’t throw food out or make people put back their purchases.

From the Washington Post:

Around him were a couple hundred shoppers, some with only credit cards, trying to stock up during a statewide emergency. The power had been going on and off in this Austin suburb as cold weather overwhelmed the Texas grid. But no one told shoppers to put their items back if they couldn’t pay cash.

When Hennessy got to the cashier, he said, she just waved him on, thanked him and told him to drive home safely.

Compare that to a similar incident in Portland where a Fred Meyer lost power. From The Oregonian:

The food continued to sit unrefrigerated as the power outage dragged on at the store in Northeast Portland, prompting employees to toss out boxes of packaged meat, cheese and juice, whole turkeys, racks of ribs and other items they feared had spoiled.

The mound of discarded food in two large dumpsters attracted a crowd of 15 to 50 people at times who started taking some of it. Employees called police when they felt the scene got tense. Activists said police were “guarding” the food. Police said they were responding to “restore order.” National media picked up the story.

Two very different ways of handling similar problems. And while I am sure there is more to the Fred Meyer story, the idea that the store had to call the police to “restore order” is preposterous. What I would have liked to have seen from Fredy Meyer, which is a Kroger owned brand, is them to create order themselves by having food that would have no problem out of refrigeration for a little while, cheese and other dairy products, packaged cold cuts, etc. and hand them out in a reasonable fashion. Throwing it all in a dumpster while people watch and then throwing your hands up when there is a commotion is disingenuous. At the same time, the Portland Police should have shown up and immediately said “you created this problem, fix it”.

Looking at the Austin story, I have to wonder if corporate will back up the store managers. Sure it is good press, but it is also a lot of product that is leaving the store. Even if there was no story, it would be tough at the corporate level to come down on store managers for doing what is right for the community, regardless of the cost. The situation in Texas was and continues to be dire for a number of individuals, a few thousand in expenses for a company the size of H-E-B is small potatoes.

The team at Fred Meyer needs to take a good look at the H-E-B story and the reasoning behind it and learn something.