The Final Day
It's 10:25 am. I have now been up for 25 minutes.
Yesterday was the final day of regular classes. I have my first final exam tomorrow. I've already put about 4 1/2 hours into studying for it, and I'll finish up today and part of tomorrow on it.
We got more materials in Dr. N's class. Some problem sets in intro probability to do.
I spoke with a couple of the undergraduates regarding the class -- the usual before-class chatter. (They always have a lot of questions about the actuarial exams.)
At our university, we are required to rate our instructors before we get our grades. So I'll give you the plusses and minuses of each of them.
Dr. N
Plus: A very nice man. The quizzes every week keep students focused and studying. Seems helpful.
Minus: His command of English is not that great. A lot of the undergraduates found it annoying. I am not claiming that you have to have a masterful command of English to be a good professor -- some of the best professors out there are English-as-a-second-language speakers. But I think it's paramount to have a good English speaker for an introductory level course.
Furthermore, we "ran out" of course material, covering only the first five chapters of Hassett and Stewart, and then treading water for the last three weeks of classes. We not only ran out of course material, but this lack of planning was reflected in the syllabus. (In short, it was built into the course.) I don't know if the earlier instructors did it this way, but the class loses focus when they know that nothing new will be covered for the last three weeks.
Dr. S
Plus: Brilliant in math, probably the best of the mathematicians. Very smart in finance as well. Does not build his test around the "90=A, 80=B" scale but is willing to curve and recognize effort.
Minus: I like the man. I can see what he's trying to get at. As Robert Pirsig might have said, he's trying to turn us into thinkers instead of grade-grubbing robots on automatic pilot. The problem is, it's hard on the first class that gets challenged that way. Since no one knows where the grading scale is, or how well they have to do on a test to succeed, it creates panic in every grade-driven individual in class -- including myself. He's introduced interesting material -- proof of "expected loss", hedging, filtering, an intro to ruin theory in our final class -- but most students, me included, unfortunately only want to know one thing -- "is this going to be on the test?" And if it isn't, they lose interest.
Furthermore, some of the work he puts on the board is...well...wrong. He thinks like a brilliant person, "I can go back and fix the details later". Unfortunately, since we've never been exposed to some of this material, the details have to be done right. It can be very confusing.
Dr. Z
Pluses: An expert in his field. Homework is automatically checked with a "100 percent" as I think he's too busy to look at it. Tests are multiple choice, review is very easy. No surpises.
Minuses: No surprises. He rarely, if ever, diverges from the course material or tries to present it in a new light. No new philosophy is represented. In short, if you can read and understand the text, there's no reason to attend any of his classes.
Tomorrow, I'll probably report on one of the obstacles I'll face in a successful graduate career. A clue is in the first line I've typed.
Yesterday was the final day of regular classes. I have my first final exam tomorrow. I've already put about 4 1/2 hours into studying for it, and I'll finish up today and part of tomorrow on it.
We got more materials in Dr. N's class. Some problem sets in intro probability to do.
I spoke with a couple of the undergraduates regarding the class -- the usual before-class chatter. (They always have a lot of questions about the actuarial exams.)
At our university, we are required to rate our instructors before we get our grades. So I'll give you the plusses and minuses of each of them.
Dr. N
Plus: A very nice man. The quizzes every week keep students focused and studying. Seems helpful.
Minus: His command of English is not that great. A lot of the undergraduates found it annoying. I am not claiming that you have to have a masterful command of English to be a good professor -- some of the best professors out there are English-as-a-second-language speakers. But I think it's paramount to have a good English speaker for an introductory level course.
Furthermore, we "ran out" of course material, covering only the first five chapters of Hassett and Stewart, and then treading water for the last three weeks of classes. We not only ran out of course material, but this lack of planning was reflected in the syllabus. (In short, it was built into the course.) I don't know if the earlier instructors did it this way, but the class loses focus when they know that nothing new will be covered for the last three weeks.
Dr. S
Plus: Brilliant in math, probably the best of the mathematicians. Very smart in finance as well. Does not build his test around the "90=A, 80=B" scale but is willing to curve and recognize effort.
Minus: I like the man. I can see what he's trying to get at. As Robert Pirsig might have said, he's trying to turn us into thinkers instead of grade-grubbing robots on automatic pilot. The problem is, it's hard on the first class that gets challenged that way. Since no one knows where the grading scale is, or how well they have to do on a test to succeed, it creates panic in every grade-driven individual in class -- including myself. He's introduced interesting material -- proof of "expected loss", hedging, filtering, an intro to ruin theory in our final class -- but most students, me included, unfortunately only want to know one thing -- "is this going to be on the test?" And if it isn't, they lose interest.
Furthermore, some of the work he puts on the board is...well...wrong. He thinks like a brilliant person, "I can go back and fix the details later". Unfortunately, since we've never been exposed to some of this material, the details have to be done right. It can be very confusing.
Dr. Z
Pluses: An expert in his field. Homework is automatically checked with a "100 percent" as I think he's too busy to look at it. Tests are multiple choice, review is very easy. No surpises.
Minuses: No surprises. He rarely, if ever, diverges from the course material or tries to present it in a new light. No new philosophy is represented. In short, if you can read and understand the text, there's no reason to attend any of his classes.
Tomorrow, I'll probably report on one of the obstacles I'll face in a successful graduate career. A clue is in the first line I've typed.
posted by James at 7:28 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home