Just a tad pissed off

Discussion in 'Off-Topic Discussions' started by Jack Tracey, Aug 11, 2001.

Loading...
  1. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    Okay, this seems to have been going on for more than this thread but, what I've seen. Lewchuck expresses what seems to me to be what is really a subjective opinion. When asked to support it he provides evidence that his opinion may be an informed subjective opinion.

    Before I can believe that this is anything more than a disagreement over differing opinions then I think we need a better definition as to what the debate is about. For example, maybe at least an agreement on what is meant by a better education.
     
  2. BillDayson

    BillDayson New Member

    I can only speak to how things are done in "shitty" American universities. But usually when people want to convince other people of something, they try to give reasons why others should believe them. And if the other person disagrees, he or she will present a counter-argument.

    Often it goes back and forth like that. Point and counter-point. In the US we call it an "intellectual debate".

    Are things done differently overseas?
     
  3. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    So my personal opinion in the big debate is that for undergraduate studies, RA is an excellent indicator of the quality of education you can expect. That means that my experience indicates that for undergraduate studies lower tier RA schools are very close to upper tier RA schools in actual quality of education. I believe the upper tier schools have the better reputations based more on graduate studies, school age, and stricter entrance requirements.

    Here's my experience.
    3 years at a California Community College (I believe this would be considered lower tier.)
    2 years at UC Berkeley (I believe this would be considered an upper tier school.)

    I believe that the actual quality of education for me was higher at the community college. The reason is that at the college I had teachers that were only interested in teaching. At Berkeley it was frequently very large classes and instructors that were more interested in graduate studies/research or the instructors were new PhD's that were hoping to get hired on permanent or get assigned to reseach.
     
  4. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator

    There is no debate between Lewchuk and I, as much as he is trying to create one. Very simply, he made the assertion that the US has the majority of the world's worst schools. I asked him to provide evidence of this, he stated there was plenty of evidence. I asked him again to post it, he ignored me. I kept pressing him to provide the evidence, he comes up with some pathetic excuses that he was going to post it, but then decided against it because it was me asking, because I was "the dark side", I didn't care about the issue, I was getting "patriotic jollies"....anything and everything to duck and dodge the question. He even tried asking me to provide evidence that US schools weren't inferior, as if I was the one making assertions w/o evidence. Cute, but no cigar.

    Lewchuk can debate whoever he wants, but I'm going to keep pressing him for this phantom evidence that he allegedly has until he either supplies it (doubtful), admits he was expressing an opinion with no supporting evidence, or just admits that he was full of crap. I just got very tired of seeing him take baseless swipes at US schools, and this was the last straw.

    Bruce
     
  5. Gary Bonus

    Gary Bonus New Member



    Now this is the one thing I agree with. This nondebate in the manner of "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?" reminds me of what my wife thinks of any distance ed. news group. She says it boils down to this:
    "Accredited!" "Unaccredited!" Your school stinks!" "No, you're school stinks!"

    My synopsis of this nondebate is:
    "You're full of crap!" "No, you're full of crap!" By the way, isn't this back on topic? Oh, oh . . . another nondebate starting up:
    "It's on topic!" "No, it's off topic!"

    Finally, seriously, to see an administrator chase a poster down from thread to thread with the same damn "where's your evidence?" or "you're full of crap!" variation of posting is ridiculous. Seems to me to be the definition of harassment, and why irregular posters stay that way. There are fools, and there are educated fools (not naming names). Don't you think it's time to take your private feud to private Email? I ask that rhetorically. If you must answer, I suppose "I'm a tad pissed off!" (and I'm a little teapot!) can go to three or four looong pages. C'mon, there are enough interesting posts to wade through (like my few posts)without this BS. Maybe, I was a tad pissed off. . . oh, well, better than the other way around. Hey, this off-topic BS is kinda fun. Get to see your ramblings in a post. Gee whiz.

    Gary
     
  6. Caballero Lacaye

    Caballero Lacaye New Member


    Hey, Gary!

    I understand your concern, but what better solution do you propose? Bruce is not creating any debate; he is just asking for evidence. Thus, if you affirm to me, "Your school stinks", and I answer you back, "Where is your evidence?", is that a debate? You see, the former is what Lewchuk has been saying, critizising all non top-tier US schools. I am not saying that Lewchuk is right or wrong; however, I would be very interested in reading his evidence.

    Best wishes,


    Karlos Al "El Caballero" Lacaye
    [email protected]
     
  7. Guest

    Guest Guest

    For one who lists Bible study as an interest (and hopefully more), these descriptive terms seem to go beyond the limits of productive dialogue. Perhaps I am wrong, but I thought mature educated adults could communicate effectively without such crude terms.

    Russell
     
  8. And as I was about to get indignant and wave around my notes, I re-read your post.

    My figures are for *entries* into the U.S. by students with F-1 visas (or by students with I-20s who are visa-exempt.. Canadians, landed immigrants in Canada of "common nationality," and Bermudians.) Although it didn't occur to me at first rant, this is different from the raw number of students because it's conceivable (even likely, depending on the source country) that a student would make multiple entries/exits within the year. From that angle, you may be right.

    What I'd really like to do (but can't figure out how to manipulate the data) is "pull" the actual number (and distribution) of schools with foreign students enrolled. The problem is that once a student is in the country, changes in the school of attendance aren't "on the radar screen" until the next entry, when a copy of the new I-20 is collected for data entry. But it might be a clearer picture anyway.

    I suspect you'd see a particular trend, but I'd like to do the homework before I open that can of worms.

    Regards,

    DM
     
  9. Caballero Lacaye

    Caballero Lacaye New Member


    Dear DM,

    Thank you for your message.

    To be honest with you, I don't completely understand what you are saying, but I trust you are right.

    About the data you are trying to pull, the only thing that I can tell you is that Miami-Dade Community College in South Florida (Miami, Homestead, Hialehah, Little Havanna, Kendall, NorthWest, etc.) is/was the institution of higher learning with more international students than any other in the nation. At some point, I think that the figures were about 60% international students.

    Stay well,


    Karlos Alberto Lacaye
    [email protected]
     
  10. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    Perhaps this is impart due to a misunderstanding in terms? For example, I don't really consider unaccredited schools part of the USA education system. If Lewchuck is considering USA unaccredited schools to be the majority of the worst schools in the world then, it might make a good argument as long as the numbers added up to indicate that.

    Lewchuck, I think the ball is really in your court to explain what it is that you're actually saying. If you think the discussion has digressed from your original intent then I suggest you correct it now.

    And since I don't want to wander off-topic in the off-topic discussions forum. The topic is "Just a tad pissed off". So exactly who is Tad and why is he pissed off?
     
  11. BillDayson

    BillDayson New Member

    I don't understand you, Bruce. Why are you so adamant that you are not debating Lewchuk and that he is trying to debate you (but you are having no part of it)?

    If you aren't trying to engage him in debate, then what exactly are you doing? Why do you even care whether he has evidence to back up what he says? And if he gives evidence you think is no good, how will you respond?

    You repeatedly tried to engage Lewchuk and insisted that he present his evidence. Lewchuk whined that if he gives his evidence, you will only attack it. I replied that presenting arguments and defending them against criticism is what happens in debate. And I pointed out that (at least ideally) that's how intellectual disputes are addressed in "shitty" American universities.

    Then both you and Karlos unexpectedly jumped in and denied that you were interested in debating at all. That confused me since that seems to be exactly what you are doing and that it is Lewchuk who will have no part of it.

    Now I'm all confused.

    You may just want to kick Lewchuk's ass, I don't know. But since you can't lay a fist on him without breaking your computer monitor, you are gonna *have* to do it with words.
     
  12. Lewchuk

    Lewchuk member

    I had dinner last night with an old friend who was in town... an academic with international experience. I posed this question to him and this was his response.

    The large public American universities compare very favorably with the British universities. He would not support the general statement that British unis are superior to these US schools.

    In the US you have a plethora of not-for-profit, for profit schools and very small public schools who need to be very concerned about finances and will easily adjust academic standards to facilitate economic realities. Many of these schools are not up to the standards of the British unis but neither are they up to the standards of the large American public unis.

    The "name" private schools are also coming under pressure to lower standards due to students demanding "As" for their big tuition payments but standards are still high.

    He is disappointed the way he sees DL being handled in some public systems. He is in favor of integrating DL programs within the traditional system. He sees some systems spinning of the DL programs as "stand-alone" cash cows to generate extra revenue which often have standards lower than those typically accepted within the traditional system.

    He does not beleive that RA guarantees the same level of quality as the UK system.

    Regarding whether the US has the majority of the worst schools. He said if you took all the UK unis (100 or so) and took the top 100 or so American schools the US schools would be as good or better. However if you took the thousands of US schools vs the UK unis you probably would not find any of the UK schools at the lower levels... so he would agree with that statement.





     
  13. BillDayson

    BillDayson New Member

    This isn't evidence, Lewchuk. It is just the apocryphal opinion of one anonymous individual (who may or may not exist and may simply be you). But his opinion is just as empty as yours unless he can support and defend what he says. If he has arguments and evidence, please post them.

    That's simply an assertion. What we need are the reasons why we should believe it. And it's odd that this anonymous informant of yours shares your own peculiar quasi-socialist educational politics, favoring large state universities and distrusting private ones.

    Is there really any evidence that private unversities have lower academic standards than public universities? Or that size is the determinant in public university academic quality? (Setting aside the embarrasing fact that we have yet to define what we even mean by academic quality or how we are measuring it.)

    Why should we believe that private and smaller public schoools "will easily adjust academic standards to facilitate economic realities"? Why should we assume that most or all of them have already done so? Why should we assume that the adjustment, assuming it even occurred, was not to improve standards rather than lower them?

    This is just a restatement of Lewchuk's basic assertion. What we need, again, is some reason to believe it.

    How are those "thousands of US schools" being defined? The number of regionally accredited colleges and universities offering bachelors degrees and above is something more than 1500. There are another 1200 or so RA community colleges. Plus there are the non-RA schools at all levels from vocational associate degree programs to doctorates, and from recognized but non-RA accreditation to degree mills. So what are we talking about here?

    And are you suggesting that British universities equate roughly one-to-one with American universities from the top down. So that the #100 British university equates roughly to the #100 American USNews "national unversity"? And all the rest of the American schools are blithely dismissed as inferior? I think that's ridiculous.

    I'd suggest that the top British universities compare very well with the top American ones. Oxford and Cambridge can compare with any American school. And I'd suggest that the lowest ranked school on the Times list is roughly comparable to the lower ranked schools on the USNews lists.

    In particular, I'm not prepared to write off all of America's small private liberal arts colleges as inferior. In this country they are widely known for providing superior undergraduate education. Many students choose them over the research universities for exactly that reason. So on the undergraduate level they overlap the "national" universities, and hence (I'm arguing) British and Canadian universities.

    Despite being small and private, Amherst compares well with the top British universities on the undergraduate level. And an obscure lower tier regional university or liberal arts college can stand comparison with a less prominent former polytechnic or with many an HE college.
     
  14. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    This is reasonable. And it is why other countries' educational systems suck. One hundred universities cannot possibly serve the higher education and research needs of a world power. But then they don't, do they?

    I would not at all be surprised to find--if such evidence existed--that the worst U.K. school is better than the worst U.S. school. Who cares? The U.S. attracts scholars from all over the world. It graduates a great number of people in all sorts of fields. Our system is one of inclusion, not exclusion. And graduates from even the most modest of universities can go on to great things, largely because they were not excluded from their career paths by an elitist system.

    Rich Douglas, noting that the new Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is a graduate of a public university. Go Air Force!
     
  15. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    If we included the US unaccredited schools in the thousands of US schools then, I would have to agree with you. However, if we also included the UK schools that are "unaccredited" (i.e., can't claim to offer UK degrees and must sell their diplomas off shore) then I would have to disagree.

    Thanks for clarifying your position (and sorry for misspelling your name).
     
  16. Gary Bonus

    Gary Bonus New Member

    No authoritative source in sight eminating these objective judgements. Therefore, yes, agreement to disagree on respective opinions would be healthy and appropriate. This thread is beyond understanding.

    Gary
     
  17. Gary Bonus

    Gary Bonus New Member

    My point exactly, minister. My satirical piece used precisely the terms, i.e., crap and BS, used by one of our esteemed administrators. He must have just lost his head when he ran off after Lewchuk with a harassing passion after Lewchuck threw the "asshole" term into this thread. "Pissed off" is in the title of our thread. And surely you are familiar with damnation! Perhaps I should not have brought myself down to the level of the "nondebate" in this thread, and I apologize if I offended anyone's sensibilities. Let's not start any "holier than thou" debate, although I agree that the level of dialogue should be on a reasonably high level. My satirical piece was simply a small "step back and look at what you're doing" message. That's all. Can't we all just get along? (Rodney King). I can't get no respect! (Rodney Dangerfield).

    Gary
     
  18. Lewchuk

    Lewchuk member

    So tell me, what evidence do you have to back up this assertion?


    I'd suggest that the top British universities compare very well with the top American ones. Oxford and Cambridge can compare with any American school. And I'd suggest that the lowest ranked school on the Times list is roughly comparable to the lower ranked schools on the USNews lists.
     
  19. Lewchuk

    Lewchuk member

    Not an entirely irrational position however some individuals evidently care greatly cause they sure are upset over the fact.

    I would not at all be surprised to find--if such evidence existed--that the worst U.K. school is better than the worst U.S. school. Who cares?
     
  20. Lewchuk

    Lewchuk member

    Actually, this is not "my" opinion... it is the opinion of a fairly well accomplished accademic whose career includes "jumping the pond"

     

Share This Page