University ups and downs

melancholly

sunflower_rainbow wrote:

It is after all our education, that we are paying for and as such i believe we are entitled to the best.

firstly, this isn't meant personally btw!!

this is the root of most of the problems with undergrads - they're now paying lots and lots for their degree, and (pretty understandably) can't see how 3 hours of lectures a week, one lab class, 2 bits of feedback a term and some exams is worth the price they pay..... so they want more! the system wasn't ever set up for more, so expectations and reality are separated some distance, so students and lecturers all get frustrated. the system isn't going to miraculously change for this year (or this decade!) so it's best to work with what you can rather than banging your head against a brick wall!!

as an undergrad, i was terrified of all lecturers, and even more terrified of looking stupid in front of them. i never emailled them with any quetsions, tried to avoid all contact and just found other ways to get my questions answered - just because i didn't want to be seen to be struggling. now i think i went too far on this and should have contacted them a bit more, BUT the most important thing you can learn at uni is how you can learn.

you have to work out what are the best ways for you to get your head around the facts in front of you. mine ranged from miming actions of bacteriophages and plasmolysis (they're very funny - maybe only to a few people!) to creating Gulcocorticoid Man, a superhero with a bizarre range of powers!! (these are obviously not the most useful methods for other people!). if you wait for everything to be given to you then you will never spend the trial and error time needed to find the most effective learning strategy for you.

other helpful things can be books on your topic that are aimed at a very layman-type audience. i'm a big fan of the 'Very Short Introduction' books. they didn't contain anything i would quote in an exam, but set the scene and have clear, simplistic overviews which I could understand and use as a context to build up with info from lectures and my own reading.

phil - in your position, i would avoid reading pdfs on the computer with MSE on. print them out, go sit somewhere without distractions and scribble on them as you read. then to really prove whether or not you get it, try to write a paragraph to summarise what the paper has said. this may take multiple readings (and often does - that's normal!). it is often better to have a full, solid understanding of less work, that you can talk about coherantly, than a superficial knowledge of lots which you cannot discuss in any detail. but this is what would work for me............ what you're doing right now isn't really working so something needs to change.

since you're up to date with essays, get some introductory reading done for the lectures next term/semester. they don't even have to be recommended texts - just something so that when you sit in the lecture, the information isn't completely new and confusing.

anyway, lecture over! but think about all the multitude of ways you can change your working style so that you're more confident in your work.

studentphil

You might get two 60 to 80 page readings for a tutorial, so it really is not practical to read each of them many many times. I know people say read it again and again but time wise and the volumes of reading it is not really possible. It is pretty much commonly agreed that papers are written in a style that is designed to be not very easy to read, so it is not like reading the Sunday paper.

studentphil

cupid_stunt wrote:

Hi phil.
As you know I demonstrate to students. I don't take tutorials - there aren't really any on science courses but sometimes I see people who I know are out of their depth here. You have said you didn't pick a course that was well suited to your abilities, so if you don't understand something often it might take a long time to explain. Sometimes people ask me things and I have to refer them to someone else because just from watching them for a few hours I can pick up that they're quite slow it'll take me a good hour of explaining. And doing a PhD is very time consuming - myself and numerous other postgrads just don't have an extra hour to explain something to a student.

Unfortunately the fees everyone pays still doesn't cover everything, nowhere near. And there aren't enough lecturers for all tutorials to be taken by someone more highly qualified than a postgrad. If there were enough lecturers fees would have to go up by thousands and if that were the case chances are you and most other students wouldn't have bothered to go to uni in the first place because of the expense.

I look that it's better to get some help of someone more highly qualified than you who has been through the whole process themselves, than to not have the tutorials etc in the first place.

You said for many things you're getting around average marks. So it's obvious not everyone is perfect. Probably 40% (a guess) are worse at things than you are so you can't be doing that badly. Get some perspective! But on the other hand many people are doing better than you. They manage and therefore (as you've kinda admitted) the problem surely lies with you moreso than the staff

I have no problem with post grads as such but some of them really can not teach and even though they are meant to be given some sort of training, some of them just can not teach. I know that is in part because having a 1st does not give you the gift of being able to teach and for some reason some departments think it does. But then again lecturers and PHD students are recuited on research ability and not teaching skill, so it is natural they might not be good teachers.

I was doing really well and I was almost getting firsts, but I got a 45 in one essay, so I have blown any chance of a 2.1 now. So you can see why it all feels a waste of time from now on.

jamtart6

I have read this thread with interest as a tutor of undergraduates. Being "entitled to the best"...... what makes you think young academics aren't the best in their field? How do you know you aren't being taught by a pioneer in their field or someone at the top of their game very early on??

I believe (as do many lecturers in our dept) that you get a much better tutorial from postgraduates, they put in the preparation, they put in the time, and the effort, and often do not "ad-lib" like i've seen many lecturers do. The smaller age gap and the understanding of what its like to be an undergrad (believe me the older lecturers forget easily), is a real advantage to any student.

First and foremost, the department wouldn't employ us if they didn't think that they were up to the job and secondly......the key thing every lecturer has ever told me about being a post graduate tutor, is that we know a damn sight more than undergrads do in our specialist field, and broadly across the subject as a whole.

No single lecturer would EVER be able to tell you a complete in depth account of EVERY aspect of their subject...only their specialist area.....so why expect postgrads to know everything too? Lecturers are still learning, post grads are still learning, and undergrads can learn from them, people learn from each other.

I for one, give FAR more time than I'm paid to students who need help, because once upon a time, I was a student who needed help, and always appreciated it.

Idiophreak

I think it's a good idea.

One of my friends was a PG tutor to some UGs. I think that was almost a "joint" tutorship though, a lecturer took the first couple of tutorials, then my friend took over, then if the students had a problem he couldn't answer there was a fallback mechanism so the tutor could help.

My personal experience of tutorials was that I'd turn up every couple of weeks, they'd say "any problems?" everyone would say "no" and then the lecturer would try and think of something to talk about for the rest of the half hour - I don't think I'd have missed out in this case if it was a PG student rather than a lecturer.

Wrt whether lecturers have a better chance of answering questions, I'd suggest not.

Lecturers are very specialised - if I were to try asking my Tutor about a subject other than his he'd probably have known less about it than I did.

On the other hand, my friend, who got an average of 86% throughout university, and sat the same modules the UGs were sitting now 3 years ago, had a pretty good chance of being able to answer all questions in the core modules and would be hit or miss with the selected modules. And lets not forget that having completed 3 years of a degree, the stuff covered in the first year is usually kinda easy.

Also, even if my tutor did know, he'd have been reluctant to discuss it with me - it would be pretty poor if he told me something that I relied on and then the other lecturer marked it as wrong etc, so he'd always recommend I talked to the lecturer in question.

Finally, a PG student will get paid a fraction of what the tutor would for the same job - and every little saving on tuition fees has got to help.

cupid_s

studentphil wrote:

I have no problem with post grads as such but some of them really can not teach and even though they are meant to be given some sort of training, some of them just can not teach. I know that is in part because having a 1st does not give you the gift of being able to teach and for some reason some departments think it does. But then again lecturers and PHD students are recuited on research ability and not teaching skill, so it is natural they might not be good teachers.

I was doing really well and I was almost getting firsts, but I got a 45 in one essay, so I have blown any chance of a 2.1 now. So you can see why it all feels a waste of time from now on.

Obviously I have no idea how much that one essay was worth. But if you've been getting almost firsts then one low mark isn't necessarily going to stop you from getting a 2.1. In my masters I got 54 for one essay. I still averaged 73 overall.

And even if you don't get a 2.1 the actual mark you get does matter. You could choose to include the actual mark on things if you wanted. For example if you got 58 tell people that, don't just say 2:2. And you never know things may be moderated and if you're really close to the border you may go up a grade. But if you let one stupid mark dictate what you do from now on there's no way you will get a 2:1. In fact you'll probably keep going downhill and find in 2 months you're on here saying you'll have no chance of getting a 2:2.

If you were getting high 2:1s you must be doing something right so don't get so worried.

If there are certain post-grads who are awful tell the staff there were areas of the tutorial that could be improved. Similarly if there are great ones tell the staff and these might get given more tutorials. It may sound harsh and tell-taley but I'm sure the lecturers will act on any feedback given and you might get better postgrad teachers next time. I know some people probably are crap at the teaching part, but not all students or lecturers are recruited on their research ability. Unfortunately the uni seems to focus far too much on the lecturing first and foremost (which annoys many people I know who don't like the lecturing bit, but makes me happy as I prefer that to research).

Just remember hard work accounts for an awful lot. Myself and OH had almost the lowest A level grades on both our courses. We both graduated top of our class through hard work alone and it's not always really easy and takes a lot of time. But you have to give total attention to your studies. It's only 6 months of hard work and then you can do whatever you want and spend 24 hours a day here (until you get a job obviously). Skim reading something on the computer whilst being on here isn't giving it the attention is needs and deserves and you would no doubt understand it better with a small amount of note-making or annotating. You can make excuses but that's what they are - excuses and I know you know you could do more to help yourself and you could put more effort into your work.

studentphil

I know the basic problem woth me not getting stuff is that I just am not cut out for reading philosophy as it is very complex and hard to read. You are meant to be able read 160 pages sometimes for each tutorial and I frankly shattered after 10 pages. I am not sure if there is an answer to that. I know it is the subject as I read other journals in other subjects purely for interest and I can feel engaged with and able to read them.

jamtart6

what year are you in studentphil?

studentphil

jamtart6 wrote:

what year are you in studentphil?

Third year

jamtart6

There is a lot that you can still do. I appreciate you find it exhausting reading all that, who wouldn't, but for another 5months if you work as hard as you can then you can have done your best....and you cant do better than that.

Good luck