The Barometer Story: A Superfical Learning Environment

In response to the discussion started in class about the current educational system, I have thought about my personal experiences with it. One frustration I have with the educational system, especially in the sciences at a University level, is the closed-ended way everything is taught. From the very beginning, I have been taught that there is a "right" answer to every question the teacher asks, and if you can replicate the "right" answer, you get high scores. This may be the best way we have to measure how well someone learns material, but I believe there is a need for a different kind of learning in University-level science and engineering programs. The truth is, in the real world, it is rare that someone actually knows the "right" answer to the problems you'll be solving. The easy problems have already been solved. In order to have a more successful transition into the "real world" from the superficial "learning environment" of a University course, I think students need more training in handling open-ended problems. Ones that the TA can't just tell you how to solve. I admit that I don't know how this could be graded fairly, but I believe from my own experience with an engineering internship last summer, there is a need for this.

Linked here is a funny story by Alexander Calandra about a student thinking outside of the box when answering a test question. (snopes.com says it is actually "Legend", but it's a good story anyway.) This illustrates the typical "closed-minded" approach of the traditional educational system.

I also feel that the problems I am solving in my courses are pointless. They have already been solved hundreds of times. While it is true that the way to mastering anything is practice, which is the point of these check-your-answer problems, I'm just saying it's not enough in today's world. We are in a world where the problems keep getting more complicated. We--who the world is depending on to solve it's problems--need something more in our tool set than what the University experience is currently giving us. Miriam Burton called this educational "cannibalism". As far as I understand it, this is the idea that in today's classroom, we are expected to regurgitate material without enough room for independent exploration and creativity. While it is true that in practice, the scientific and engineering worlds do not consider this cannibalism useful, I feel it makes up a great deal of my classes in Chemical Engineering.

As a note, the Chemical Engineering program has made efforts to give more of this "open-ended" learning experience to students. There is 1 credit of "creativity" experience required (research, etc.), and 3 credits required of EMSB, which can be anything in the Engineering, Math, Science, and Business fields. In defense of the program, it is difficult for the major with the most required credits on campus (101.5-103.5 credits required) to make any more room for classes that would fill this need. It may therefore require a change in the way classes are taught, rather than the classes required.