Suspicious statistics
http://www.cnn.com/2007/EDUCATION/02/27/self.centered.students.ap/index.html
The article is all about how much more narcissistic and self-centered college students are today. Um, yeah. Okay, yes, some of the stuff you see geared to increasing kids' self-confidence can go overboard. And yes, there are some kids who think they are, for example, entitled to a 4.0 in a class without doing any of the work.
But I teach these kids. The ego-maniacs are the exceptions, not the rule. I don't see any major, substantial difference between the kids I teach (mostly freshmen and sophomores) and myself and my classmates from back when I was an undergrad. The negatives aren't any different. Sure, there are some who never come to class and are utterly bombing because of it. Gee, I can think of a couple of people I knew in undergrad who did the same thing. Sure there are some who want to be spoonfed information and not have to think. And again, I remember people I knew in undergrad who were just like them.
This article strikes me as another "kids these days" bit of balderdash, with a side order of "look, we've got NUMBERS to prove it!" Yeah, and the sample questions in the article are visibly skewed to give you what you want to see, and did you forget the Mark Twain quote about statistics? People have been slagging off the younger generation for time immemorial. This is nothing new. They just try to make it look as if it is.
The article is all about how much more narcissistic and self-centered college students are today. Um, yeah. Okay, yes, some of the stuff you see geared to increasing kids' self-confidence can go overboard. And yes, there are some kids who think they are, for example, entitled to a 4.0 in a class without doing any of the work.
But I teach these kids. The ego-maniacs are the exceptions, not the rule. I don't see any major, substantial difference between the kids I teach (mostly freshmen and sophomores) and myself and my classmates from back when I was an undergrad. The negatives aren't any different. Sure, there are some who never come to class and are utterly bombing because of it. Gee, I can think of a couple of people I knew in undergrad who did the same thing. Sure there are some who want to be spoonfed information and not have to think. And again, I remember people I knew in undergrad who were just like them.
This article strikes me as another "kids these days" bit of balderdash, with a side order of "look, we've got NUMBERS to prove it!" Yeah, and the sample questions in the article are visibly skewed to give you what you want to see, and did you forget the Mark Twain quote about statistics? People have been slagging off the younger generation for time immemorial. This is nothing new. They just try to make it look as if it is.