This semester is off to a terrible start... (Mostly a rant)

[MonkeySage]

I only have two classes, Physical Chemistry and Intro to Research. This is my second to last semester before I finally graduate (took me long enough...). My profs are pretty much opposites:

Physical Chemistry, he's often late for class, isn't always in his office during office hours, and I've been waiting since last week for him to post the practice exam he keeps saying he'll post. We have no real graded work beyond exams and lab reports, but the practice exam is for our benefit.

Intro to Research, he's no-nonsense, no excuses, everything on time and no make ups. Reasonable, except I have crappy memory and on this latest assignment I sent in homework we were assigned for a grade. I emailed it, as I was lead to believe he didn't want them written in pencil, and he got the email... A blank file. So he told me to resend it yesterday and he'd grade it then. But crappy memory plus a long drive home, I forgot to resend it, and I now have a zero on an assignment I technically turned in completed, but that he couldn't open.

If this is a preview of what the rest of the semester is going to be like, then I am not looking forward to it at all...

[darkrose50]

Go to the IT tech support people and inform them of the file error. If the IT tech support people can verify that the file is readable, then it is a win for you.

Talk to your teacher. If it is possible for the file to be corrupted, then let your teacher know that you do not want to deal with the flawed system. in class ask "should we not turn in homework online as it gets corrupted?" This may make the teacher think twice about his decision to be a pain in the ass, as having everything in one-place on the computer should be easier for him. Having everyone not use the computer submission method would likely be a pain in the ass.

Also you can ask if he wants you to hand in the homework via computer and as a physical copy. This setup would likely be annoying.

Remember to be polite, but also remember that your teachers have bosses. Remember that there are third parties to independently verify things.

[Peelee]

Go to the IT tech support people and inform them of the file error. If the IT tech support people can verify that the file is readable, then it is a win for you.

Do you mean moral or pyrrhic? Because if the professor couldn't read it, that grade ain't changing.

[darkrose50]

Do you mean moral or pyrrhic? Because if the professor couldn't read it, that grade ain't changing.

If the file was corrupted, then it is not the fault of the student. If the teacher does not have the program needed to open an approved file type, then it is not the fault of the student. Sometimes files get corrupted, and this should not be the fault of the student.

At work I receive file types that I cannot from customers every once in a while . . . like a picture of a drivers license created in some video editing software. So it could be the fault of the student, but I would verify.

[Iruka]

If the file was corrupted, then it is not the fault of the student. If the teacher does not have the program needed to open an approved file type, then it is not the fault of the student. Sometimes files get corrupted, and this should not be the fault of the student.

At work I receive file types that I cannot from customers every once in a while . . . like a picture of a drivers license created in some video editing software. So it could be the fault of the student, but I would verify.

The teacher gave a chance to correct the error, which was then missed.


@Monkeysage
Don't let the rocky start drag you down! You have enough time to make up for it.
In case of the strict professor, I'd recommend setting alarms on your phone to make sure you do not miss any dates and always make sure you got the required formalities correct.

[Peelee]

If the file was corrupted, then it is not the fault of the student.

...and? Because that's not going to get a mulligan.

[Rogar Demonblud]

Yeah, good notes are going to be your best friend with that teacher.

Not sure what to suggest about the other one. Maybe ask the department secretary about the practice exam.

[Keltest]

...and? Because that's not going to get a mulligan.

Yeah. The corruption wasn't his fault, and he got a legitimate second chance on it.. which he then forgot to do. It would be one thing if it got lost in transit again and the professor just got tired of trying to fix it, but this was just honest human error.

[Willie the Duck]

In case things are heading that way, I'm going to point out that the OP never stated that they thought that the prof was being unfair or that he deserved to get credit anyways, just that it happened and it's not making them look forward to the rest of the semester. Given the statement "before I finally graduate (took me long enough...)," we can assume that the OP is a fully grown individual, capable of taking responsibility for their own actions.

MonkeySage, sorry that the semester is off to a bad start. As others have said, a notebook or the like for memory would probably be a good idea. Whatever career said degree is going for will undoubtedly require a lot of organizational skills, so this is a great learning lesson. Who knows, maybe the 'under the gun' nature of being a 0-pt assignment behind in the second class will make you all the more diligent and you'll end the year with an A.

[Knaight]

The upside here is that P-Chem is a fascinating course. It was one of my favorite courses, and given how hard you bounced off O-Chem I suspect you'll be with me there.

[razorback]

For memory, most people have a smart phone. Turn on Siri or Google Assistant and just "Hey Siri/Google, set a reminder in X to do Y".

[MonkeySage]

So I got lucky! Went into Dr. S's (Intro teacher) class today, first thing when he arrived, he said to me: "You need to resend me that email."

Soon as class ended, I took my flashdrive to the computer room down the hall, plugged it in, and sent him the email twice, just to make sure he got it. Then went down to his office to make sure he got them, and that the files weren't blank this time.

[Willie the Duck]

So I got lucky! Went into Dr. S's (Intro teacher) class today, first thing when he arrived, he said to me: "You need to resend me that email."

Soon as class ended, I took my flashdrive to the computer room down the hall, plugged it in, and sent him the email twice, just to make sure he got it. Then went down to his office to make sure he got them, and that the files weren't blank this time.

Congratulations, good fortune indeed!

[Peelee]

So I got lucky! Went into Dr. S's (Intro teacher) class today, first thing when he arrived, he said to me: "You need to resend me that email."

Soon as class ended, I took my flashdrive to the computer room down the hall, plugged it in, and sent him the email twice, just to make sure he got it. Then went down to his office to make sure he got them, and that the files weren't blank this time.

That's awesome!

Also, in the unlikely event you haven't already figured this out, always sit in the front row and try to ask questions. Professors are more likely to stretch their necks out or give the benefit of the doubt to students they know are trying, and those are super easy ways to show it.

[Rogar Demonblud]

Also, it harder to drift off and daydream if you're right by the teacher. And there will be days when you want to do that.

[Peelee]

Front row has a ton of benefits, really.

[Rogar Demonblud]

Like having room to spread out, and nothing in front of you so your legs are all cramped up (important if you're much over 6 foot).

[Peelee]

View of the boards are never blocked, none of your neighbors are going to be distracting, depending on class size you may have some free space besides you which is just all kinds of nice... I don't get why people gravitate towards the back.

[Rogar Demonblud]

Fear of the teacher, mainly. Often with experiences to justify it.

[MonkeySage]

Oh yeah, I always sit as close to the front as I can. :) Since my P.Chem and Int.Res teachers share a classroom, I'm even sitting in the same front row seat for both classes.

[Morbis Meh]

First issue is you're taking Phys Chem instead of O-Chem, secondly why is there even a course call an intro to research? Come on the best way to learn how to research is trial by fire! Glad your situation worked out for you though.

[Peelee]

First issue is you're taking Phys Chem instead of O-Chem, secondly why is there even a course call an intro to research? Come on the best way to learn how to research is trial by fire! Glad your situation worked out for you though.

He posted about O-Chem a year ago or more, P-Chem seems to be correct.

[snowblizz]

I don't get why people gravitate towards the back.

Because most classes won't let you sit with an opened umbrella.


Jokes aside, to misquote (misremember) a line from Legally Blonde, the law prof looks at the front row and goes something like, "welcome to the hotzone".

One professor I had would break this rather common pattern by going through the entire class systematically. Usually half way all the good/easy/obvious/only rational answers were used up. Sometime he started in the back, sometimes in the front. We'd try to hit the middle so there'd be some chance of having some good answers. Because this dude did not give up even when he should have known we were scraping at the bottom of the barrel for answers.

A good teacher can engage the class with questions, a bad teacher turns into a gestapo questioner.

[Peelee]

Because most classes won't let you sit with an opened umbrella.


Jokes aside, to misquote (misremember) a line from Legally Blonde, the law prof looks at the front row and goes something like, "welcome to the hotzone".

Which forces one to be more studious and prepared. And, I'd imagine especially in law school, that would only serve to help the student.

Theres an old joke, what do you call the person who graduated at the bottom of the class is med school? "Doctor." Me, I'd rather not get or be that person.

[Rogar Demonblud]

The point of the joke is that the title doctor doesn't mean anything except that they graduated medical school. It comes from a time before medical licensing and malpractice boards to try and weed out the worst.

[Peelee]

The point of the joke is that the title doctor doesn't mean anything except that they graduated medical school. It comes from a time before medical licensing and malpractice boards to try and weed out the worst.

The second sentence contradicts the first.

[Rogar Demonblud]

No, it doesn't. The joke is from a time before the medical profession decided to make an effort to falsify the joke. Sentence one explains the joke. Sentence two is why it doesn't really work any more.

[halfeye]

Theres an old joke, what do you call the person who graduated at the bottom of the class is med school? "Doctor." Me, I'd rather not get or be that person.

The main point about calling them "Doctor" is that they did pass. It's the guys who failed that we really, really don't want as doctors. They might not be that great at theory, or have a terrible bedside manner, but they are adequate doctors, and we need every one. The head of the class probably went on to become a surgeon or something whizzy, and we want those too, but general practicioners, the doctors you go to see when you have an ache or pain that's worrying and you don't know quite whether it's a fatal problem or something you should just live with, are the main entry point to the system, and we need them.

[Peelee]

No, it doesn't. The joke is from a time before the medical profession decided to make an effort to falsify the joke. Sentence one explains the joke. Sentence two is why it doesn't really work any more.
Both sentences explain why it doesn't work if you know about the medical field, but it still gets the generalized points across.

They might not be that great at theory, or have a terrible bedside manner, but they are adequate doctors

Wanna know how I know you've never seen or heard of a terrible doctor?:smallamused:

[halfeye]

Wanna know how I know you've never seen or heard of a terrible doctor?:smallamused:

It might have to do with where I live. I've met a few I didn't want to meet twice, but that's personal between me and them. I take the current direction of the thread to be about perfect being the enemy of good enough. If a guy (or gal or whatever) is good enough to be called "Doctor" he (or they) should be called "Doctor".

[Peelee]

It might have to do with where I live. I've met a few I didn't want to meet twice, but that's personal between me and them. I take the current direction of the thread to be about perfect being the enemy of good enough. If a guy (or gal or whatever) is good enough to be called "Doctor" he (or they) should be called "Doctor".

So you would classify the belief that women, as a whole, are "structurally inadequate for intercourse," and that that could be fixed via surgery (James Burt, MD (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_C._Burt), board-certified gynecologist), that's "good enough?" Or how about Cecil Jacobson, MD (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cecil_Jacobson), who was a fertility doctor and used his own sperm instead of the patients' spouses' or anonymous donors', in addition to numerable cases where he falsely told patients they were pregnant, only to tell them they miscarried later on, despite said patients never actually being pregnant? Imean, we need every doctor we can get, right? What about Andrew Holton, MD (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1444691/Hospital-doctor-misdiagnosed-618-children-as-epileptics.html), who erroneously diagnosed epilepsy in over 600 cases, of children, through simple gross incompetence. But hey, perfect is the enemy of good enough.

At no point was I saying we need perfect. I totally agree that perfect is the enemy of good. I'm just saying I'd rather have the top of the class doctor from Poor County Community College than a bottom-of-the-class doctor from Harvard (though the real terror is the one from wherever who got the Gentleman's C). I want the people who paid attention and wanted to learn, because they're not guaranteed to not be complete whackjobs, but the odds sure as hell seem better.

[halfeye]

So you would classify the belief that women, as a whole, are "structurally inadequate for intercourse," and that that could be fixed via surgery (James Burt, MD (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_C._Burt), board-certified gynecologist), that's "good enough?" Or how about Cecil Jacobson, MD (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cecil_Jacobson), who was a fertility doctor and used his own sperm instead of the patients' spouses' or anonymous donors', in addition to numerable cases where he falsely told patients they were pregnant, only to tell them they miscarried later on, despite said patients never actually being pregnant? Imean, we need every doctor we can get, right? What about Andrew Holton, MD (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1444691/Hospital-doctor-misdiagnosed-618-children-as-epileptics.html), who erroneously diagnosed epilepsy in over 600 cases, of children, through simple gross incompetence. But hey, perfect is the enemy of good enough.

At no point was I saying we need perfect. I totally agree that perfect is the enemy of good. I'm just saying I'd rather have the top of the class doctor from Poor County Community College than a bottom-of-the-class doctor from Harvard (though the real terror is the one from wherever who got the Gentleman's C). I want the people who paid attention and wanted to learn, because they're not guaranteed to not be complete whackjobs, but the odds sure as hell seem better.

I think the terrible doctors were terrible people, but largely adequate doctors before they went off the rails. There have been a few who've turned more than a bit nutty, but they are a rarity and most of the time other people pick up on their nuttyness before they do serious harm. It would be better if nobody was ever bad, but without tyranny that's not possible.

There has to be someone at the bottom of the class even if everybody in it scored 99.99%.

[Peelee]

I think the terrible doctors were terrible people, but largely adequate doctors before they went off the rails. There have been a few who've turned more than a bit nutty, but they are a rarity and most of the time other people pick up on their nuttyness before they do serious harm. It would be better if nobody was ever bad, but without tyranny that's not possible.

That's why I tossed in the doctor with 600 misdiagnoses. Because yes, doctors can be incompetent. As can judges, lawyers, ship captains, any highly skilled job can have (and DOES have) people who got in that are actually terrible at that job.

Ans even that aside, ethics is a pretty important part of being a doctor; operating on patients without informed consent, for example, is a massive breach of ethics, which does make one a bad doctor.

[Knaight]

Ans even that aside, ethics is a pretty important part of being a doctor; operating on patients without informed consent, for example, is a massive breach of ethics, which does make one a bad doctor.

That said, the assumption that it's the doctors that did worse academically that end up doing unethical things is pretty baseless - and even the incompetence side may or may not have a particularly strong correlation, especially when the incompetence manifests as being absolutely spectacular at medicine, circa 1970, where the last 50 years of medical advancements after med school have largely passed the doctor by.

[snowblizz]

If a guy (or gal or whatever) is good enough to be called "Doctor" he (or they) should be called "Doctor".

Provided they have an *actual* doctorate, right?:smallwink:

Not one of those practice based applied science people who get their hands dirty.:smallbiggrin:

[darkrose50]

Provided they have an *actual* doctorate, right?:smallwink:

Not one of those practice based applied science people who get their hands dirty.:smallbiggrin:

Out of pure coincidence I just mentioned a similar idea in another thread.

A while back Stephen Colbert was making fun of a senator (?) with a geology degree calling himself a geologist when he did not work in geology. I would think that you could call yourself a X if you have a degree in X, but not a job in X.

My friend the mud scientist (cat litter, oil rig lubricant, and whatever else mud scientists make) has a degree in biology, but a job in chemistry. I would think that he could call himself both a biologist and a chemist.

I really wish he would put "mud scientist" on a business card and hand it out.

[snowblizz]

Just as a clarification am doing spoof on the "oh, so not a real doctor" thing. Which annoys us with Ph.D.s a lot. Because most doctors aren't real doctors (and getting a PhD is not a simple matter, even in comparison to going to medical school).

I remember that politician not a gelologist thing (I think it was a state senator?). The important thing there was that the person in question was making authoritative statements as if he had qaulifications he did not have. A bit like Dara O'Brien making a joke about nutritionists vs dietists (the latter is a "protected professional term") and how he'd be a great nutritionist, "eat whatever you like, no go ahead have some more".


Basically, don't try and state stuff you don't really know. Like in your example, by virtue of your job you work as a chemist, might not make you qualified to say something deep about chemical reactions whereas your biologist training would enable you to comment on biological phenomena.

[Peelee]

Out of pure coincidence I just mentioned a similar idea in another thread.

A while back Stephen Colbert was making fun of a senator (?) with a geology degree calling himself a geologist when he did not work in geology. I would think that you could call yourself a X if you have a degree in X, but not a job in X.

My friend the mud scientist (cat litter, oil rig lubricant, and whatever else mud scientists make) has a degree in biology, but a job in chemistry. I would think that he could call himself both a biologist and a chemist.

I really wish he would put "mud scientist" on a biasness card and hand it out.

Eh, I'm with Colbert. A geologist is someone who studies geology. A senator with a geology degree is a senator.

[Willie the Duck]

It's almost as if trying to quantify what one does or what one knows with a simple "I am a ______" statement might be problematic. :smallbiggrin:

When discussing my role, I usually say, "I am a boss" or "I am a manager" although my education certainly informs my abilities, knowledge, and ability to understand the projects I'm assigning. When I'm making hiring decisions, certainly degree has weight, but if someone has a certain degree, but then never actually worked in the field*, it doesn't really tell me what you can do with that. Translating it to the geology degree-bearing senator, honestly it doesn't tell me if they're any better at understanding the actual downstream effects of a bill before them than any other senator or not.
*I'm not hiring entry-level, but this does highlight the issue of 'so how do you get that first job?'

[darkrose50]

Being an X is likely a sliding scale and/or a Venn diagram. It (often) is a vague agreed upon definition without a definition, like the words afternoon and evening.

Having a bachelors degree in X can be a contributing factor.
Having a masters degree in X can be a contributing factor.
Having a doctorate in X can be a contributing factor.
Having a license to practice X can be a contributing factor.
Earning a living doing X can be a contributing factor.
Having papers published in a peer-reviewed X publication can be a contributing factor.

Some people are more of a(n) X, then others.

-----

There is that guy Frank Abagnale (?) that the 2002 movie Catch Me If You Can was based off of. Evidently he studied to pass the bar exam without going to law school (in a short-ish amount of time and passed). That is quite impressive.

-----

It was also likely a good idea to hire a biologist that understands chemistry to get some well-rounded knowledge in the workplace.

[Peelee]

There is that guy Frank Abagnale (?) that the 2002 movie Catch Me If You Can was based off of. Evidently he studied to pass the bar exam without going to law school (in a short-ish amount of time and passed). That is quite impressive.

It is impressive, but much less than presented; at the time, you could take the bar exam multiple times, and if you failed, they would tell you what you got wrong. IIRC Abagnale failed three times before passing.

The Movie was based on a book Abagnale himself wrote, and it should come as no surprise that he portrayed himself in a rather favorable light.

[snowblizz]

{scrubbed}

[darkrose50]

I would think that he would have a low-level claim to the geologist title.

I am an insurance agent. Getting a license was not hard (the waiting to see if I passed the tests was the hardest part). Basically study some flashcards for a week or two. I think most of my studying was done in the car on the 1-hour to and 1-hour from my mothers house via my wife reading me the flash-cards.

Now I guess that passing the tests makes you an insurance agent, but you really do not learn what to do by passing the tests. The tests covered things, for the most part, that are never used (at least at my workplace). So even if you knew it all backwards and forwards I would guess that ~95%+ of the material on the tests would not help you do my job. Really just make sure that you (a) know what the insurance words mean, and (b) follow the law: pass HIPPA before giving out personal information, read the legal disclaimers, and do not lie, cheat or steal. You will then learn how to fill out paperwork, learn how the plans work, and what the procedures are after you pass the tests, and when you get the job.

At the end of annual enrollment when my department blows up from 16-24 agents to nigh 100-agents, we only keep maybe 20% - 25% when annual enrollment is over (we are growing). Some go to other departments, and some go to my department. Now after working for a few years you learn the job. I have been doing it for ~5-6 years, and I am still learning stuff. My place of employment does not have a manual that you can just read, you need to figure it out via oral tradition, practice, and time.

So yeah, there is having an insurance agent license, and then there is being an insurance agent for real.

[Rogar Demonblud]

I've been in my field pretty much since I graduated University a couple decades ago. I still learn at least two new things each month.