Recently, a group of students from New York University (NYU) signed a petition expressing their grievances towards an organic chemistry professor Maitland Jones Jr.
Stephanie Saul, “At N.Y.U., Students Were Failing Organic Chemistry. Who Was to Blame?,” The New York Times, October 3, 2022,
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/03/us/nyu-organic-chemistry-petition.html
The grievances focused on the class's difficulty, the high level of students flunking the course, and the rude, dismissive mannerisms of the professor.
The university noted he had one of the worst ratings from student evaluations from the entire university.
After the petition, the university didn't renew Jones's contract.
This brought up debates over academic standards, "weed-out" courses, and "the kids these days".
Obviously, we shouldn't be passing students who haven't mastered the course materials.
That is magnified when it comes to organic chemistry, one of the prerequisites for entry into medical school.
Yes, it is dangerous to have unqualified people in the health-care industry.
But ideally, professors should be doing as much as they can to help more students master the material. Why would you not want more students to become well-qualified?
This "sink or swim", "throw them to the wolves" mentality does a major disservice to the students and the society they plan to work in.
Being a professor that gives out a lot of F's isn't something to be proud of.
Having 1 or 2 failures per class could be a sign that maybe those students were either slacking or having too many outside distractions to focus.
But having a majority flunking the class means that the teacher is failing. That means the teacher is not being effective.
It doesn't matter that the teacher is smart enough to write textbooks (which Maitland Jones was), if by the end of the semester, the majority flunk, that means the teacher failed to effectively teach the majority of the students.
It's like the saying in coaching sports, it doesn't matter how much the coach knows, it matters how well the coach teaches the athletes how much he/she knows. After all, it's the athletes who have to play the game.
Using another sports metaphor, a coach that won championships in the past, but is now having consecutive losing seasons is still getting fired. You're no longer getting paid to coach the players of the past, you're getting paid now to coach the players of now.
The same is true of professors. You may get a lot of praise from past students, but if you're not adapting to the students of today, then you are past your prime or you need to adjust to regain your prime.
You can complain about "the kids these days" all day and all night. But that's exactly who you're paid to teach. That's who you have to adjust to when you're conducting classes.
The "kids these days" want a great teacher who can make the class interesting. They're not interested in posers trying to be "cool", they're interested in teachers who make the subject matter exciting for them.
I should know. The "kids these days" entering college now are the same generation I was substitute teaching in their younger years. Some may be drama kings/queens, but most just want a teacher who can guide them to success. You as a professor can be that teacher that guides them to success.
----
As for this "sink or swim", "throw them to the wolves" mentality, this is part of why we have a doctor shortage.
Instead of just "weeding out the weak", why not figure out how to make the weak strong? If we can make more of the weak strong, we can have more people passing organic chemistry and other medical courses, and more doctors available to assist the public.
-------
In the next few years, professors will be having many students whose education was interrupted by the pandemic. That means they'll be coming in without the knowledge base of the students of the pre-pandemic era. That means professors have to do more to get the students up to speed. Maybe being present on campus during non-instructional hours, splitting the students into study groups, whatever it takes.
This article had some good pointers on that.
Jessica Calarco, “The N.Y.U. Chemistry Students Shouldn't Have Needed That Petition,” The New York Times, October 7, 2022
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/07/opinion/nyu-professor-fired-maitland-jones.html
Fixing these kinds of inequities would take a huge shift in the way the country supports families and funds both public K-12 schools and higher education.
Even in the absence of that kind of shift, though, universities can do more to help students succeed in their classes, regardless of the level of privilege they bring with them or the types of majors they pursue. That means investing more in faculty hiring, to allow for smaller class sizes, and in academic advisers and other student support staff members, who are often deeply underpaid.
It also means ensuring that students aren’t facing pressure to try to overload on courses in order to graduate early and save on tuition, room and board. That they don’t have to worry about having enough food to eat or a place to live or access to health care (including mental health care) or reliable technology. That they don’t have to juggle class work with working long hours for pay. And that they don’t have to circulate formal petitions to get the support and respect they deserve.
----------
Looking back in my college days, I was a graduate student in the university's Library and Information Science (LIS) program.
The introductory course LIS 601(Introduction to Reference & Information Services) was considered by many to be a "weed out" course. It was an intensive course that focused on learning about many library information sources, information searching, and on reference services. In my opinion, we could've split the class into 2 separate courses (1 on information resources and searching, 1 on reference services).
I took the class back in Spring 2013. At the time, it was 8 years since I last took a college course. I had basic tech knowledge (I already had a blog, and a Facebook account), but I didn't have a home computer or a smartphone and was reliant on libraries to use a computer. In the same class, I had a classmate who was working for Apple, and I had classmates who admitted they don't go online. That's a huge disparity in tech knowledge. I also had a classmate who dropped out because he had a full-time job on the other side of the island.
The professor (Dr. Diane Nahl) did do her best in teaching us how to best approach the assignments. She taught us how to use Google Docs, how to do screenshots, how to search databases, and how to do citations, how to do Lib Guides, and much more.
And the thing was, at the time I didn't properly appreciate her efforts. Little did I know, it was her last time teaching. Right after the semester, she retired without any fanfare.
The students who took LIS 601 after me told me horror stories about the professors who took over the class. The new professors didn't teach the students what my professor taught my class. The new professors had a "sink or swim", throw them to the wolves" mentality and were very rude to the students. One of the professors (Dr. Vanessa Irvin) was even alleged to discriminate against a student with a disability.
Because of that, right before I graduated I decided to email my LIS 601 professor Dr. Diane Nahl to thank her for her efforts and to note that at the time I took her course, I didn't properly appreciate her efforts but now I do. She acknowledged my gratitude! :)
