2008 Woodie Awards
IN THE LOOP: Core needs more critical thinking
Editorial Board
Issue date: 12/5/06
Last Updated: 12/29/07
This translates to how students study for the tests. Instead of gaining an understanding of the material, students set up a grid with all the philosophers on the left side and the five categories on the top. To study, students fill in the grid with the information from lectures and then memorize it. If a philosopher does not fit in the categories, teach the philosopher without categorizing them.
The reading responses in Core 250 are one of the strengths of the class. They challenge students by presenting philosophers in the original text which forces students to read and understand the material.
However, this semester students were required to relate every reading response to the philosophers' anthropology. While anthropology is important, it does not fit with every philosopher. The Core 250 team needs to analyze which of the five categories best fits the given philosopher and then assign a reading response that asks the student to respond using that category. Sometimes use epistemology, other times anthropology and other times ethics. Not every philosopher's anthropology is essential to understanding that philosopher. Also, the repetitive nature of examining anthropology 15 times in a semester does not inspire critical thought.
Core 350 is an examination of policymaking and contemporary issues. The course actively attempts to inspire critical thought about real world issues and brings up different perspectives effectively. With a foundation of memorization and regurgitation, how can students be expected to step up and think critically about concepts in Core 350?
For students who care, Core 350 begins to pull them toward being deeper thinkers about policy issues. However, it seems that most students can succeed by just going through the motions.
Both students and faculty on the Core teams must push through this cloud of apathy and strive to challenge one another.
The reading responses in Core 250 are one of the strengths of the class. They challenge students by presenting philosophers in the original text which forces students to read and understand the material.
However, this semester students were required to relate every reading response to the philosophers' anthropology. While anthropology is important, it does not fit with every philosopher. The Core 250 team needs to analyze which of the five categories best fits the given philosopher and then assign a reading response that asks the student to respond using that category. Sometimes use epistemology, other times anthropology and other times ethics. Not every philosopher's anthropology is essential to understanding that philosopher. Also, the repetitive nature of examining anthropology 15 times in a semester does not inspire critical thought.
Core 350 is an examination of policymaking and contemporary issues. The course actively attempts to inspire critical thought about real world issues and brings up different perspectives effectively. With a foundation of memorization and regurgitation, how can students be expected to step up and think critically about concepts in Core 350?
For students who care, Core 350 begins to pull them toward being deeper thinkers about policy issues. However, it seems that most students can succeed by just going through the motions.
Both students and faculty on the Core teams must push through this cloud of apathy and strive to challenge one another.
For this reason, The Whitworthian asks readers to be responsible and respectful in any comments posted. The responsibility for statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not the whitworthian.com. Readers are also encouraged to report questionable comments by e-mailing editor@whitworthian.com.
Be the first to comment on this story