34 Comments

1. Without having taken your class, it’s impossible to say whether or not the problem is you–but I doubt that it is.

   As you say, we have raised a generation of students who want (and expect) everything to be handed to them. Too bad. I heard many of the same complaints from other students when I was working on my degree a few years ago, and all of the problems they had could have been avoided had they made different choices. To wit:

   1. Don’t take notes by hand, invest in a laptop. I can type much faster than I can write, and my notes were always thorough and complete–and I had some fast-talking professors. As a bonus, you’ll have your notes readily available forever, something that came in handy more than once.

   2. Come to class, even the ones at 8 AM.

   3. Don’t drink the night before an exam–or the night before a class. Preferably, don’t drink at all.

   4. Get enough sleep. Studying until 2 AM never does any good anyway. If you haven’t learned the material by, say, 10 PM the night before, you won’t learn it. Besides, you can’t learn anything by cramming anyway. If you’ve been paying attention and taking notes, study sessions are nothing more than a review of material you’ve already learned.

   5. Eat decent food at normal hours, not half of a pepperoni pizza at 11 PM for dinner and a Coke for breakfast. It affects one’s mental capacity.

   By following the above strategy, I graduated from a University of California campus with a 3.95 GPA. Of course, I had it easy–I was married, in my 30s, and commuted 60 miles round-trip to school 2-3 times a week. It must be really tough to be 20, single, live across the street from school and be obligated to get falling-down drunk at every opportunity while mommy and daddy pay the bills…OK, a bit of sarcasm there, but I really do think that the cleaner one’s life, the easier said life is.

   Anyhow, just my two cents. Take it for what it’s worth.

   Comment by Larry — 4/14/2006 @ 6:54 pm

2. Grade inflation is probably an inescapable fact, given what are essentially market pressures to please undergrads. Nonetheless, it drives me crazy. When — as is now the case at most major universities, the upper third or so of every graduating class is clustered within a couple hundredths of a GPA point of 4.0, the grading system is failing at one of its primary missions: providing information about the relative performance of students during their college careers. In effect, the entire top third of each student body is unranked. It’s as if, in the pre-grade-inflation days, we had eliminated B, B+, A-, and A, and replaced them all with a grade called “Good Work!” As a consequence, students no longer have any concrete, immediate incentive for excellence…

   I’m sorry to hear about your experience, but it isn’t just you, Craig. I’ve had the same experience, and so has almost everyone I know in academia. I think the problem is simply that student culture is corrupted in some way… And, of course, the universities as an institution have been giving in to students on grading issues for decades because there’s no real incentive not to give in. Inflated grades make students happy, and parents happy. They cost the system some of its credibility, but that’s an abstract, intangible cost shared across many universities. In effect, it’s a tragedy of the commons…

   Comment by RoastedTomatoes — 4/14/2006 @ 7:07 pm

3. OK, I’ll stick my head in here, as well. I do think grade inflation happens, and I do think it has something to do with the average ability of students–we feel at times that we have to give somebody an A.
   That said, I also think that we sometimes give assignments that we expect students to be able to do when no one has ever taught that skill to the majority of our students. We have sometimes come to take certain skills so much for granted that we don’t realize they need to be taught. And I don’t think this is entirely the fault of high schools. I think there may be brian chemistry and life experience things that make it difficult to teach critical thinking, at least at the level of university competence, to high school students.
   So, while I do lament the work ethic of many of my students, and I think they tend to defer responsibility (One student told my whole class not to go to the writing center because she did and she still got a D. I felt too bad for her to point out in front of the class that she might have done worse if she didn’t go.) I also have been asking myself at times lately if I have been teaching the requisite skills. And while the answr has sometimes been yes, it has also been, at times no, and when that has been the case, a concerted effort to make expectations clear and teach the skills I want to see used on the assignment has occasionally showed a significant rise in the quality of the assignments I give.

   Comment by Steve H — 4/14/2006 @ 8:55 pm

4. I think the problem is simply that student culture is corrupted in some way…

   Hasn’t it always been? 🙂 I guess I shouldn’t be complaining, considering my educational pursuits, but I think alot of the problem is the death of the liberal education. As you say Craig, regurgitation is now prized over synthesis…and because it is easier for everyone. The university is now considered vocational training in most cases.

   I’m not sure what you could do to change it, besides being the bad guy.

   Comment by J. Stapley — 4/14/2006 @ 9:05 pm

5. …though Steve H. comes to the rescue with a very Christian take on addressing the issue.

   Comment by J. Stapley — 4/14/2006 @ 9:08 pm

6. Being a student, I agree that there is grade inflation. I have personally never complained to a teacher if I got a bad grade, though I sometimes feel like I complain that I got a good grade. I don’t know how many times I have received a higher grade than I know I deserved. Of course I’m not really going to complain.

   My take on the issue? I feel that there are several factors that has caused said inflation.

   For one, getting a degree has become almost a pre-requisite for getting a job that pays more than say, a burger flipper at McDonalds. It is so common for people to have degrees that it is like having a high school diploma anymore. In High School they will pass anyone, just to get ’em out of there. I think that sometimes this mentality bleeds over into the college campus.

   The main reason that I beleive that there is grade inflation is one thing, money, money money. A student that completes his/her degree is going to bring in more money to the college than a student who drops out the first year because classes are too hard. Not to mention, giving good grades is a lot easier than having to deal with angry students. Besides, the instructor gets paid whether or not his students get good grades or not.

   I also agree that many classes require skills that students don’t have. One thing that I have struggled with is writing papers. That was something that they never taught me in high school. I took writing 121 and 122 and it still didn’t prepare me for everything.

   I think that high schools could do a lot better at preparing kids for college if you ask me.

   Comment by Ian M. Cook — 4/14/2006 @ 10:00 pm

7. The concerns expressed here are adding to my fear that college education is devolving into little more than a status marker, somewhat as it was a century ago, but involving a bigger share of the population. (We all think we’re aristocrats now!) Ever rising tuition is another sign: education has a value that can be weighed and foregone if the price is too high, but status is priceless.

   Comment by John Mansfield — 4/14/2006 @ 10:43 pm

8. Play the tough. It’s simple. And in the end, it’s the kindest thing you could do for them.

   I have an uncle-in-law who retired as a very senior executive for a large corporation. He told me that he had fired or laid off over 1000 people in his career, and that he couldn’t remember one of them being for ‘technical competency’ reasons.

   Your waking them up at age 19-22 is far more generous than me having to fire them and pull their security clearance (or disbar them) at age 25-29.

   Comment by XON — 4/14/2006 @ 11:26 pm

9. The grade inflation is rampant at every level. I’ve taught from 2nd grade through 10th grade and I’m currently teaching middle school. At the beginning of this school year I started a new job and was tough — the bulk of my experience is working with high level kids. I expect a lot from my students, even the 6th graders. Well, guess what? When I gave them the grades they deserved, I had all sorts of complaints. My parent-teacher conferences were nightmares!! I had kids who were “under stress,” and who were really “shaken up” by their grades. Kids who had “never gotten lower than an A before”. Sixth graders, who in elementary school were breezing by, all of a sudden had to work. 8th graders were in shock. I spoke with a couple of my colleagues in the high school in my department (science), and several of us were having the same experience. It was so stressful to me, that I immediately lowered my standards, which really upset me, but I had to do it to save my sanity. I wouldn’t say I inflate my grades, but I have lowered my standards and dumbed down stuff so that my students aren’t all getting C’s and D’s. It’s so depressing, but until schools at every level get priorities straight and become empowered to not be bullied by students and parents (and this includes administrative support for teachers who are giving the grades and teaching the appropriate curriculum), it’s a bad situation.

   Comment by meems — 4/15/2006 @ 12:03 am

10. somewhat as it was a century ago, but involving a bigger share of the population

    This is another factor to consider here. We are, quite frankly, educating a larger share of the population. There was a time when thsoe who were exceptionally prepared went to college–usually the social elite. Now, there is a push to educate a wider range of studnets. Really, though I hear a lot about elitism in the universitites, the pressure I feel in terms of accountability from accrediting bodies is towards democratization.

    This means we have students who existed before, but because those students weren’t prepared, they simply didn’t go to college. They were under-prepared for a variety of reasons, cultural, economic, personal motivation. But whatever the case, they are now with us, and so any class at any given university might contain fewer of the students that once made up the A students, since they are spread throughout a larger number of universities (state schools have expanded and gained in prestige). What happens is that we tend to expect the same number of students to get A’s in the class, so it seems like students are getting worse, when, in fact, they are simply getting mixed in a bigger pool. In the end, it may not always mean that those new students aren’t intelligent–they may just not have any sense of what college is about because they haven’t got the background.

    Part of the question, then, is whether it is our responsibility to give it to them or to assume that background. The answer may seem obviuos, but it has serious consequences in terms of extending opportunities to a new demographic of student, and it has serious consequences for the student who responds to the promise of higher education on the good-faith assumption that success is possible.

    Don’t get me wrong, though, there are also those who are just out to get drunk and cruise chicks/guys. I really don’t have pity on the students who get drunk and arrested and can’t make it to class after homecoming weekend (The student wanted me to let him off the hook for a group presentation he missed–at Purdue, not BYUH, just so those who know where I work don’t get freaked out.)

    Comment by Steve H — 4/15/2006 @ 2:09 am

11. Craig, it’s not you, man. But being tough sometimes doesn’t teach much. I’ve had “easy” teachers before and they, like J said above (#4), taught synthesis, not just regurgitation of facts. Yes, the stuff was easy, but I learned to actually move outside of the facts and make some sense of the information. And there’s something else to the dimension of being tough as well — are we (I include myself as a tough teacher), as teachers, distancing our students from our respective fields by being tough on them? So, if I am teaching Aramaic or Greek courses, and I’m being very tough in my grading, am I upsetting certain students to the point of no return? By “weeding out the non-hackers,” am I also weeding out potential students who would be great?

    I think it’s a fine line to walk (one I haven’t found yet) when we have to balance toughness with motivation (via grades).

    Comment by David J — 4/15/2006 @ 8:34 am

12. Craig, you need to read a copy of Think! by Michael LeGault, which includes an extended reflection on the changing learning style and expectations of 21st-century students. In a nutshell, they now think in consumerist terms: profs and teachers are there to serve them. They have been taught (by example, not explicitly) that the proper response to a student problem (like an F on an exam or being told they are failing a class) is to take it to an authority figure (like a prof, a counselor, or a parent) who is supposed to explain to them that it isn’t their fault and find a way to “fix” it for them. Consider putting blunt and very plain explanations to the contrary in your syllabus. Read it verbatim in class. Slowly.

    Be prepared to have to explain to some idiotic educational administrator, before too long, that it’s not your job to make students happy, it’s your job to teach the material and evaluate students based on their performance; it’s the job of the students to actually do the learning. And it’s the mission of a university, college, or high school to teach, not to make students feel good.

    Comment by Dave — 4/15/2006 @ 2:12 pm

13. My older son is getting excellent grades at a Big State University, that has a reputation as a serious party school, where many, many freshman lose their state-supplied scholarships because they can’t keep a 3.0.

    He’s a bright guy, but I do worry a bit that these excellent grades are going to be meaningless when it comes time to look for work or go to graduate school – and that’s not that far away!

    Given that his grades are probably inflated, and that he’s possibly reall a B student and not an A student, and that everybody he interviews with/applies for grad school with is going to know this, how is he going to differentiate himself, if not through grades?

    Comment by Ann — 4/15/2006 @ 10:12 pm

14. how is he going to differentiate himself, if not through grades

    Ann, in the Biblical Studies department where I am finishing grad school, some of us students feel like our grades were inflated as well. There’s about a handful of us that are considered top-notch, but we don’t feel like our training was all that good (sometimes), and that compared to the students out in the wilds of the world, we actually kind of suck in comparison. In fact, any “stellar” performance or learning on our parts was probably not given to us by a professor, but rather through self-teaching on our own time. A really good book to read about mentoring and self-education is A Thomas Jefferson Education.

    So, to get to your question: what do students do who are excelling in the midst of a grade-inflation matrix? What some of us have done at school is go the extra mile in everything we can. We join societies (SBL, AOS, ASOR), join honor societies, learn extra languages, become teaching assistants, give seminars, hold extra-curricular reading groups, etc. etc. These sorts of things can be put on a CV, and can show our current and potential future professors that grades are only a sliver of the reflection of our academic acumen and interests.

    But like you said, it is quite sad that grading sometimes is relative to all the other students in a given class or educational entity. Sometimes that relativity makes people look a lot more stellar than they really are.

    Hope this helps. Good luck to your son.

    Comment by David J — 4/16/2006 @ 8:35 am

15. While it is widely recognized that standardized test results don’t correlated to success as a grad student, they still matter in admissions. One of the schools I was checking out (an Ivy), as soon as they saw my GRE results, offered me a position…and I hadn’t even having applied at that point.

    Comment by J. Stapley — 4/16/2006 @ 10:25 am

16. I think you are right to have high expectations and to warn your students of them. I wonder, though, did anyone get an A on your test? If someone did, I would say you should keep doing what you are doing. If no one did, however, perhaps a change is in order.

    In the US, we tend to grade on expectations, rather than on mastery (as is done in much of the rest of the world). If 75% met or exceeded our expectations, than we can happily give 75% of the students an A. If, however, mastery is your level (if you considre yourself a master of the topic), and no one in your undergrad class met it, it would not be a great shock that no one got an A.

    If you are grading on mastery, you need to tell your students, because they definitly are used to being graded on reasonable expectations for a student.

    My husband, who comes from a country that grades for mastery, is genuainly frustrated with his As in his university classes here–to him, they are not legitimate. To us, he has met the expectations.

    I am currently a graduate student in a program that suffers from grade inflation. Students who to me (and I have had many classes with the same cohort of students) don’t seem up tp par, who do not do their reading, etc. end up with the same A that I believe I earned. I can see how this would make some people lazy. I can also see that it somehow devalues my degree. Still, I don’t worry about it, because I know I am still learning.

    Many teachers (meaning people who have studied education, not people with PhDs that end up teaching) feel that tests are not reliable assessments. Efficient for teachers to grade: yes. An actual measure of a student’s understanding of the subject: no.

    Comment by a spectator — 4/16/2006 @ 2:29 pm

17. I’m graduating this May from OU, and I have to say I wasn’t too impressed with my college experience. It just wasn’t very challenging. All I had to do to make an A was go to class, participate in class discussion, read, and review for the tests. Despite being a Letters Major, I didn’t have to write that much either. Well, I wrote a lot, but there were several 5-7 page papers. I only wrote one big term paper that required me to do actual research. I didn’t even have to write a big paper for my senior capstone class! (I’ve decided to anyway, even though it doesn’t count for a grade.) I think that several shorter papers are the new trend in universities instead of the larger term papers. Has anyone else noticed this? If so, we students are getting the short end of the stick.
    I worry sometimes that my undergrad education has not prepared me for the rigors of law school. Like it has been said earlier, undergrad requires just regurgitation of facts. Law school requires synthesis and reasoning. I feel I’m ready. I always tried to be responsible for my own learning and to go above and beyond what is required in class. We’ll see though.

    Comment by Brett — 4/16/2006 @ 2:36 pm

18. a spectator, I’ll disagree that testing is superfluous. In the real world, it doesn’t matter what you know, it only matters what you can produce…and under pressure. I do believe that not all testing methods are equal, but the castigation of testing, I believe, is just another manifestation of the feel-good education.

    Comment by J. Stapley — 4/16/2006 @ 4:34 pm

19. I had several “A” grades. The problem is that many students expect to be able to get that A without doing the additional readings, synthesizing and analyzing.

    Brett, Cool about the OU thing, but sorry that your experience wasn’t great. I got my Ph.D. from there and I will say that there were some of both classes (the memorize and inflate and the synthesize and learn). I taught at OU for 4 years and on the whole, my students responded well to my teaching style. However, the student that lodged the complaint all the way to the dean because I hadn’t given enough bonus points was also an OU student.

    Comment by Craig S. — 4/16/2006 @ 5:23 pm

20. I don’t have cable TV — haven’t for years — so I rarely watch current TV shows (I watch series I like when they come out on dvd — so I have only picked up hints on season 2 of Lost from the media).

    This last week, I wound up in a situation to watch American Idol. I had heard lots about the show (having not lived under a rock the past few years). One of the key things I had heard was about the judges, particularly Simon, and how mean he was (by most) and how fair (by one that I tend to agree with). I found that his comments were incisive, but they were also very fair. As the person I trust mentioned, Simon is the more compassionate of the judges, because he will tell people who don’t have what it takes to be a top-tier performer that they should stop trying to be a top-tier performer, and he will tell those who can but aren’t what they need to do to get there. Gauzy praise and “stick with it” sound nice, but are cruel when it’s obvious to everybody with an ear that they’re just not cut out for this.

    Long way of saying that it’s important and compassionate for lazy students to be shown that they are lazy students, and for those who simply aren’t college material to learn that and get on with the things they can be successful at. And, for those who can be college level if they’ll get off their butts and work instead of partying and playing, it can be useful for them to have incentive for that to happen. Be fair, but not cruel, and if they don’t like it, tough.

    And wouldn’t it be wonderful if I could be sure that your school would back you up on that.

    Comment by Blain — 4/16/2006 @ 8:41 pm

21. As a student, I appreciated professors who provided excellent written supplements to the class. Unless note taking from an oral presentation is an important part of the discipline (as I imagine it might be in a legal education), I fail to see what harn there would be in providing the information both orally and textually.

    Comment by Bradley Ross — 4/17/2006 @ 8:42 am

22. I don’t think testing is superfluous, J., but I do think that it should be used in moderation and in conjunction with other assessment methods (such as papers, debates, presentations, oral interviews, etc.). Some disciplines lend themselves better to old fashioned testing than do others. Personally, I think multiple choice tests are worthless, but a “test” that is actually an in-class essay would be very revealing of a students’ understanding.

    Some teachers (American public school teachers largely fall into this category) feel that they are doing something wrong when not enough students do well. Other teachers (generally foreign teachers in a mastery-based system) feel that they must be doing something wrong if too many people pass or do well. I think ALL teachers need to refelct upon their teaching objectives and the methods they use to get their students to be able to meet them, as Craig is trying.

    Comment by a spectator — 4/17/2006 @ 11:25 am

23. Ah, I understand better and agree.

    Comment by J. Stapley — 4/17/2006 @ 11:38 am

24. I have to say I wasn’t too impressed with my college experience. It just wasn’t very challenging. All I had to do to make an A was go to class, participate in class discussion, read, and review for the tests

    If the school is consistent, I don’t have much problem with anyone.

    The real problem is when a program treats some students like that, and some get knocked 40% on a test if a formula is backwards (e.g. if you write down mc^2=e instead of e=mc^2 they take 40% off).

    Comment by Stephen M (Ethesis) — 4/17/2006 @ 12:40 pm

25. As for the testing issue, I think we only get in trouble when we make distinctions based on small gaps in scores. For example, a student that scored a GRE of 1490 is not necessarily smarter than the one who got a 1480. However, when we start talking about two and three hundred point gaps, we can make a meaningful statement about achievement and aptitude. While we aren’t seeing huge correlations between GRE scores and success in grad school, there’s a big question of variation in the independent variable (the only GRE scores that we’re examining are the ones that were good enough to get someone into a grad school that he/she actually went to).

    I feel quite confident that the group of students that hangs a 1600 SAT is not just a little bit smarter, but a lot smarter than the group who averaged a 1200. Obviously, this doesn’t measure aptitude and intelligence as well as we want, but it provides a decent indicator. I agree with J. Stapley that most rejections of testing don’t propose real alternatives that actually involve ranking and measuring.

    Comment by D-Train — 4/17/2006 @ 3:03 pm

26. Testing all the way. Although my GRE score was only slightly above average, I lost out in my postgraduate pursuits to guys and gals who were just as learned and qualified as I was, but who took more time and put in more effort to master the GRE than I did. I simply didn’t have time. Oh sure, I could run through a bunch of excuses regarding why I didn’t do as hot on it as my same-high-GPA peers, but what it really boiled down to was lack of preparation on my part. That’s what the standardized tests like the GRE measure. Well, it really measures two things: 1) how well one deals with pressure (dude, the clock is the biggest enemy on the verbal section), and 2) preparation skills. So these schools use that as a measure of how well the student will do at their institution, and to tell you the truth, most of the time they’re spot-on with their assessment of a student’s potential graduate or postgraduate ability based on the GRE score, if you ask me. Usually, things like GPA, extra-curricular involvement, reputation, etc. go hand-in-hand with the GRE score, based on what I’ve observed. Yeah, I hate the test, I’ve taken it three times (and won’t ever have to take it again, TG!), but it is, IMO, a decent measure of the skills I mention here.

    The best professor I had during the M.A. incorporated everything: HUGE tests (with m.c. questions, true & false questions, essay questions, matching, and map questions), 2 big research papers, 1 book review, 3 exams, and a big-a$$ final exam. It was great because it allowed each student the opportunity to flex his/her muscles in those areas in which he/she represents his/her skills the best.

    Comment by David J — 4/17/2006 @ 3:36 pm

27. RE #21 Bradley,

    I think that the ability to listen to a presentation and analyze it and then synthesize the cojent points in the form of notes is essential to any discipline. I feel that providing an outline or my notes is basically a crutch. Let face it, Most students use that outline then as a crutch, they take to notes beyond those provided. Further, they do not learn the skills that will be essential in the future in any walk of life.

    Comment by Craig S. — 4/17/2006 @ 3:59 pm

28. I agree that note-taking is actually a complex skill involving listening (which is greatly aided by pre-class reading), evaluating, and summarizing. It is true that many kids no longer learn or exercise these skills in secondary school, which seems a shame.

    Comment by a spectator — 4/17/2006 @ 10:54 pm

29. The other problem with notes being available is that there is no way to reproduce in notes the interactive environment of a well-run classroom. Students, however (and I wouldn’t exclude myself as a student) just want what will be the most efficient use of their time in terms of getting through–not just because of laziness, but also because they may be working long hours, have children, be taking too many credit hours because they are being pressured to graduate soon by their advisors, etc. I still believe in the classroom dynamic as a real and valuable part of education.
    The one thing that disturbs me about this conversation is that it has taken a bit of an us and them turn. I don’t know about the rest of you, but I did what I had to. I eaked a few grades. I knew how many points I needed, and I got them, most of the time. But I never felt cheated. I think there is always a tendancy to base the A standard on what we felt we feel ourselves capable of. If there are some who are either so brilliant that they don’t have to work as hard or who are just not as smart as I think I am, and if someone gets an A that was alightly less achieving, I don’t know how bad I feel about that. It’s not like I’m not handing out anything but A’s, and I don’t think most profs are. I don’t know about the top third being almost 4.0 thing. I certainly don’t give As to 33% of my students, and I can’t think most of my colleagues do, so the math doesn’t work at this institution.

    Comment by Steve H — 4/18/2006 @ 2:38 am

30. I think a combination of written and lecture materials would be great in practice, but Craig’s right that students just don’t listen to anything you have to say if you write stuff down for them. I’ve found that my best lecture method is to give the lecture that I would give with little visual stuff and then give three to five “takeaway” points at the end that summarize the biggest issues. Students always write these down. They help the students contextualize all of the information that I gave and they’ll get the big picture if they listen and do the reading.

    Comment by D-Train — 4/18/2006 @ 1:03 pm

31. Steve, I can heartily and regretibly concur that I sloughed throw some of my classes. I imagine that to a greater or lesser extent, everyone has had this experience. It is kind of like the natural man…in a way, perhaps these mechanisms we are talking about are necessary to fight him.

    D-Train, I agree with the lack of A/V. I am not teaching but I present alot of technical material and I only bring a pen for a white board. After one presentation, our CFO who teaches at USD, commented at how refreshing it was to see something that wasn’t 1) completely canned 2) based on the real knowledge of the presenter and 3) focused on interaction. I don’t know that I will ever go back to PowerPoint.

    Comment by J. Stapley — 4/18/2006 @ 2:19 pm

32. Craig,
    A teacher who lectures, and expects students to take notes, is asking for them to excel at auditory learning.
    TV has turned most of America’s kids into visual learners.
    My son has a language disorder (he’s in kindergarten) and it is extremely hard for him to process oral information. He’s in the top 10% of his class in reading ability and math skills (so it is obvious he’s smart), but he will have to use compensating skills in order to get along in the world. Luckily, many things in school will be written, and have written instructions and since he should be a fast reader, that will help.
    Obviously everyone has strengths and weaknesses, and there are weak auditory learners and strong auditory learners in every class. But it is something to think about if your teaching style caters only to a certain group, especially if the the average has shifted due to TV.

    Comment by JKS — 4/23/2006 @ 5:58 pm

33. Students are not expected to just come to class and take good notes. The lectures are based on texts that, when used in conjunction with those things discussed in class make for opportunities for people with all sorts of learning styles to come away with the necessary information.

    Comment by Craig — 4/23/2006 @ 6:29 pm

34. The problem is that college students are lazy and they expect a hand out. This is the hand out generation. Instant gratification is the only way. Not to mention, our standards have gone down considerably when evaluating high school students. The goal now is to get them through, not to let them earn it.

    Comment by Thomas Hobbes — 5/17/2006 @ 12:41 pm