Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 79
  1. #51
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    The North Country
    Posts
    3,607
    Racism!

    Sent from my SM-G930T using TGR Forums mobile app

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Golden BC
    Posts
    3,652
    Quote Originally Posted by mtngirl79 View Post
    So.. you have

    You really sound like you are wanting to close doors to any one disadvantaged.

    Well off kids aren't "better" or "smarter" or more deserving than poor kids.
    No they are not , I agree. I'm sorry if I left that impression. I think that social mobility is a very important thing to have in an country. Most western countries are way ahead in the numbers than the US. Way more money should be spent on public education in the US so that rich kids going to private schools do not have a big advantage. They already have a big advantage just being middle class.

    Her position is that minority and female researchers should not have to meet the same standard of rigor. And that rigor is a bad thing in its self. That rigor is a white male thing . So she is saying that , in a round about way , that women and minorities have a difficulty with math and rigor so the requirement should be removed. That's racist in my opinion to make that generalization.

    What I brought up was her comment about work load. There is a bit of truth to it in that it would be a barrier to lets say single parents. Ok go to a school that you could spread out your course load and take longer time to graduate. My school didn't allow that but it was all co-op so took longer but it was much easier to fund school. Everyone I went to school with paid for their own education. Want money money for school work at a steel mill, they paid students the best.
    Mrs. Dougw- "I can see how one of your relatives could have been killed by an angry mob."

    Quote Originally Posted by ill-advised strategy View Post
    dougW, you motherfucking dirty son of a bitch.

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    The Cone of Uncertainty
    Posts
    47,904
    Doug what's the definition of "rigor" here? Amount of work? The way the work must be performed? Or something else?

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Golden BC
    Posts
    3,652
    I can define for myself a lack of rigor better. Not doing an analysis or design to enough detail to assure that the right answer will be achieved.

    Too much rigor would be performing analysis that it inconsequential to arriving at the right answer.

    For the lady or Ze in question, rigor is having math or evidence based research in papers on Engineering Education.
    Mrs. Dougw- "I can see how one of your relatives could have been killed by an angry mob."

    Quote Originally Posted by ill-advised strategy View Post
    dougW, you motherfucking dirty son of a bitch.

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    2,178
    Quote Originally Posted by DougW View Post
    I can define for myself a lack of rigor better. Not doing an analysis or design to enough detail to assure that the right answer will be achieved.

    Too much rigor would be performing analysis that it inconsequential to arriving at the right answer.

    For the lady or Ze in question, rigor is having math or evidence based research in papers on Engineering Education.
    Seemingly unwittingly you just agreed with her.

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Golden BC
    Posts
    3,652
    I have a good anecdote on rigor. In Engineering getting what assumptions you can make is a important part of the work. What can you ignore that won't effect the answer. We were doing a handover to another company to finish the waste treatment work. This old fuck , a chemist really but was a guru and really acting as an Engineer, lets call him Mike B. Anyway Mike was describing the water streams going into the pond. On the line was the world wide expert on this particular type of pond. When he was finished, I asked what effect the anti scalents would have as he hadn't addressed it. Well the expert on the line from Florida started freaking " what do you meant there are anti scalents" . Everyone else was just stunned. It turns Mike had thought about it, but as he didn't know what the effect would be decided to ignore it. A 5 minute call by me resolved the matter. They last 24 hours. So the size of the pond was doubled which is not a small matter going from 10 acres to 20 acres. Mistake are mistakes, that was a lack of rigor.
    Mrs. Dougw- "I can see how one of your relatives could have been killed by an angry mob."

    Quote Originally Posted by ill-advised strategy View Post
    dougW, you motherfucking dirty son of a bitch.

  7. #57
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Golden BC
    Posts
    3,652
    Quote Originally Posted by dunfree View Post
    Seemingly unwittingly you just agreed with her.
    really how?

    ok doing high level math for the sake of doing it is "wrong" or inefficient , but how can not having evidence in a paper ever be good
    Mrs. Dougw- "I can see how one of your relatives could have been killed by an angry mob."

    Quote Originally Posted by ill-advised strategy View Post
    dougW, you motherfucking dirty son of a bitch.

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Not Brooklyn
    Posts
    6,343
    I see. First I'd point that while the words "evidenced based" is generally a good sign in the fields of law and psychology/social work, in the education world, it tends to indicate quantitative analysis that inadequately accounts for social/cultural/historical factors. Ed businesses selling allegedly teacher-proof products often make empty claims that their products are evidence-based. High quality quantitative studies in education tend to have tiny effect sizes and raise as many questions as they answer, but politicians and policy makers love cut-and-dry results, so a lot of bad research gets funded and publicized.

    This is a critique of rigor as a social construct, as opposed to rigor as an objective goal. Rigor, as it is used here, is socially constructed not purely in favor quality, but also as reflection of the dominant culture of engineering. This is not exactly ground breaking stuff. It can't really be any other way. Most engineers are white/east asian/south asian heterosexual men. The culture of engineering "looks" like the people who dominate it. This is probably to the detriment of training as many good engineers as possible, and almost certainly makes it harder for members of other groups to become engineers. This is not bigotry. But it is bias.

    We fall into this trap in all sorts of contexts by conflating the qualities that are common in people who do a particular job with the qualities that actually matter for doing that job. Here's an analogy: The Patriots have had quite a few small but excellent receivers in recent years. More than a few have been white. How does Belichick keep pulling this off? His best strength as a GM is identifying types of players who over or undervalued. He recognizes that A) tall receivers are overvalued, and B) white players are generally assumed to be less athletic. So highly skilled short receivers are a better value than tall ones, and white ones are a better value yet.

    It's interesting that she excludes race and socioeconomic status. This is a clue about her intended audience, as is the tone she takes. I'd guess this was written as a rallying cry to queer theorists and feminists, urging them to start looking more closely at schools of engineering, as opposed to providing concrete suggestions as to what could be done better. That's probably somebody else's job.

    The case that Viva describes, in which he acted as a mentor, is, in fact, a well tested solution to the author's critique. Mentoring works. In these relationships students/junior employees are viewed more positively by professors/bosses, and the students/junior employees develop clear understanding of expectations much more quickly. Bias is mitigated by people working closely together.

  9. #59
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    2,178
    Go back to your first post. She encouraged an emphasis on criticality & reflexivity.

    Criticality is, roughly, the concept that there is more than one answer to the question and more than one approach. In the real world this is usually true.

    Reflexivity is an acknowledgement of how your environment shapes your approach. In the real world this is always true.

    Both of those, imo, are more crucial for business success these days than rigor. There are outsourced workers to slave away rigorously to solve shit.

  10. #60
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Golden BC
    Posts
    3,652
    I think you are confusing business success with Engineering to get to the right answer. If you replaced rigor in designing airplanes or producing drugs how would that go? One of the ethics of Engineering is to to protect the public from harm. You do that by being rigorous. The first step is to be rigorous then you can be all the criticality & reflexivity you want.

    For example if you are designing a pressure vessel there are codes you have to follow by law ( other than Texas) . In Alberta they will check your work by doing their own design. If you are not rigorous it will not get built.
    Mrs. Dougw- "I can see how one of your relatives could have been killed by an angry mob."

    Quote Originally Posted by ill-advised strategy View Post
    dougW, you motherfucking dirty son of a bitch.

  11. #61
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Not Brooklyn
    Posts
    6,343
    Quote Originally Posted by DougW View Post
    One of the ethics of Engineering is to to protect the public from harm.
    I think that she would say that part of rigor as it is enacted, has nothing to do this or other pure ideals of engineering. You might say that you are talking about "R"igor as an ideal, while she is talking about "r"igor as practice and that the practice is disconnected from the ideal.

    The suggestion that we abandon rigor is intentionally provocative. Seems like it worked. But it also highlights a central problem with education research: It is not written for practitioners. And writing for practitioners doesn't help you get the most desirable jobs even if you think it's important.

    Edit to add: education researchers frequently draw upon theoretical frameworks that originated in other fields including philosophy, law, sociology, psychology, anthropology and engineering. They do this for good reasons: education is interdisciplinary by nature, and drawing upon the best of a variety of fields lets you more precisely describe learning environments. But when you want the outside world to pay attention to your work it helps if you can express it in the parlance of the practitioner you hope it would inform. If you want engineers to take up your ideas about training engineers, you should probably do your best to write in a way that makes sense to engineers who have every reason not to trust someone saying "down with rigor!"

    Of course, Donna Riley is an engineer with degrees from Princeton and Carnegie Melon. And she's gone from founding an engineering program to being in charge of engineering education at Virginia Tech and Purdue, which makes me think she probably has another, very different way of talking about this issue with the professors she works with day to day.
    Last edited by I've seen black diamonds!; 02-26-2018 at 08:18 PM.

  12. #62
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    'Merica
    Posts
    2,157
    Quote Originally Posted by mtngirl79 View Post
    So.. you have student 1, white middle class male. School tuition and supplies covered. Rent covered. Food, covered. Ski pass? Sure for xmas. Mountain bike? Happy birthday!

    Some issue happens.. roommate bails, no biggie, parents help get a new place. Gets sick? Has insurance. Breaks leg on ski trip? No big deal. Mom flies in to help.

    Basically dude has nothing to worry about except school.. he's expected to succeed. He's been told his whole life that this will be his path. The books were written by people like him for people like him.

    Take a minority, low income student. They have a job.. not to make beer money, but rent money. Take a single parent.. should there not be a path where a single parent or a person who needs to work full time can succeed?

    You really sound like you are wanting to close doors to any one disadvantaged.

    Well off kids aren't "better" or "smarter" or more deserving than poor kids.
    I don't give a flying fuck if an engineer was disadvantaged in school. I don't want a bridge to collapse and kill 200 people because he skipped class to take care of his sick kid the day they taught them to add the weight on the bolts.

    Sent from my Moto G (4) using TGR Forums mobile app
    Quote Originally Posted by Smoke
    Cell phones are great in the backcountry. If you're injured, you can use them to play Tetris, which helps pass the time while waiting for cold embrace of Death to envelop you.

  13. #63
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Golden BC
    Posts
    3,652
    Here is a link to where Donna got into pissing match with the group working with the Flint water crisis. Which is weird as she is a huge proponent of social justice and I would think this group would fit that mold. I guess they were not SJW enough though?? The more I read up on her the crazier she sounds.

    http://flintwaterstudy.org/2018/01/b...to-measure-up/

    here's a quote
    "The problems faced in rectifying diversity disparities in STEM are of utmost importance and urgency. But Freudian interpretations of slide rules, lack of due diligence in fact-checking colorful quotes lifted from the internet, or recklessly live tweeting about “structural bullying” and “#metoo” in relation to our scientific and humanitarian mission in Flint is not a solution. Social scientists frequently complain that their quantitative STEM colleagues do not listen to them, but this is a clear case where we were repulsed in horror because we did listen. We only wish it were possible to completely ignore such unprofessional provocations. Riley’s paper and the ASEE presentation should be carefully studied by all STEM faculty to better understand the logic and motives of postmodern science anarchists before they become ingrained into positions of power in modern academia."

    There area lot of art. on this whole rigor thing so it seems like a lot off people have taken issue with her.

    Shit Milo is even in on the act!!
    Mrs. Dougw- "I can see how one of your relatives could have been killed by an angry mob."

    Quote Originally Posted by ill-advised strategy View Post
    dougW, you motherfucking dirty son of a bitch.

  14. #64
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Golden BC
    Posts
    3,652
    Quote Originally Posted by I've seen black diamonds! View Post
    ....

    This is a critique of rigor as a social construct, as opposed to rigor as an objective goal. Rigor, as it is used here, is socially constructed not purely in favor quality, but also as reflection of the dominant culture of engineering. This is not exactly ground breaking stuff. It can't really be any other way. Most engineers are white/east asian/south asian heterosexual men. The culture of engineering "looks" like the people who dominate it. This is probably to the detriment of training as many good engineers as possible, and almost certainly makes it harder for members of other groups to become engineers. This is not bigotry. But it is bias.
    .
    Ok but isn't it a sign of bias to assume that the reason why that the field is dominated by white/east asian/south asian heterosexual men in north America that ":

    a probably to the detriment of training as many good engineers as possible - That would mean one would have to displace part of the existing stream of white and yellow with better qualified brown and black assuming the number of spots remains the same. Rather than looking at the Engineering schools and profession maybe look at public education and the bias of those in those minorities?? Maybe look at all things?

    b almost certainly makes it harder for members of other groups to become engineers- Isn't there a lot of bias in this assumption?? I've worked in other parts of the world and they don't seem to have a problem. They don't have to import white and yellow people to fill theri Engineering Schools??

    For instance the % of female computer science grads is only 12%. But in 1987 it was 37%!! Starting in 1987 was there a program to stop girls from taking CS by hunting them down and forcing them to study medicine??or to be come Vets. Vet has gone from 95% male to 90% female . Is there now bias in vets only to allow females. No we know that girls are smart and are more motivated to become Vets than boys are.
    Mrs. Dougw- "I can see how one of your relatives could have been killed by an angry mob."

    Quote Originally Posted by ill-advised strategy View Post
    dougW, you motherfucking dirty son of a bitch.

  15. #65
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Not Brooklyn
    Posts
    6,343
    Quote Originally Posted by DougW View Post
    maybe look at public education and the bias of those in those minorities?? Maybe look at all things?
    This is without a doubt a bigger issue that what is going on in engineering schools. School funding is fucked along both race and class line pretty much any way you look at it and it won't change any time soon. Brown v. The Board of Education turned out to be a great symbolic victory that led to no practical increase in equity. But black and hispanic students drop out of engineering programs at much higher rates than others, especially during the first year. There is also evidence that those who struggle academically in that first year, but receive mentoring and stick it out, perform nearly identically to their peers in later years and professionally. Programs designed to support minority engineering students work extremely well, and don't require a lot of resources.

    almost certainly makes it harder for members of other groups to become engineers- Isn't there a lot of bias in this assumption??
    The assumption is that bias already exists in how we evaluate engineers and potential engineers. Frankly, this is hardly contestable unless you believe in some form of racial superiority. We know that standardized tests like the SAT are better predictors of race, and especially social class, than they are of academic success. Engineering schools aren't unique in this way. Riley's job is to scream this to the high hills (focusing on women).

    Is there now bias in vets only to allow females? No we know that girls are smart and are more motivated to become Vets than boys are.
    What about in 20 years? If veterinary schools are dominated by women long enough, bias will emerge. That's how human roll. However, this will be likely mitigated by larger power structures that favor men.

  16. #66
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Golden BC
    Posts
    3,652
    Quote Originally Posted by I've seen black diamonds! View Post

    What about in 20 years? If veterinary schools are dominated by women long enough, bias will emerge. That's how human roll. However, this will be likely mitigated by larger power structures that favor men.
    Do the easy one first. But following your logic. That if there is a disparity of outcome then there must be bias. So even though most Vet Profs are men including Deans in charge , if 90% of the undergrads are female then there must be a bias against males and for females?? I would contend that there is no bias in the process but girls just want be Vets... oh girls just want be Vets. So girls have for a variety of reasons a motivation to be girls just want be Vets. So the number of girls available with the intelligence and drive to complete an Engineering program is reduced as they all want to be Vets ( or MDs)??
    Mrs. Dougw- "I can see how one of your relatives could have been killed by an angry mob."

    Quote Originally Posted by ill-advised strategy View Post
    dougW, you motherfucking dirty son of a bitch.

  17. #67
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Golden BC
    Posts
    3,652
    Quote Originally Posted by I've seen black diamonds! View Post

    "almost certainly makes it harder for members of other groups to become engineers"- Isn't there a lot of bias in this assumption??

    The assumption is that bias already exists in how we evaluate engineers and potential engineers. Frankly, this is hardly contestable unless you believe in some form of racial superiority. ....
    won't touch racial superiority with 10 foot pole

    I have no experience with that failure rate difference you speak of as my class as all white with fewer yellow than females in ME. But could it be that while the stat for drop out is higher for minority students compared to the average dropout rate, if you were able to normalize completely for marks going in , so a 90% from a crappy school is rated an 80%. We did that at our school based on a database of the average drop in grades from each HS. Lets say everyone is 80 to 100. If all of the minority students were grouped in the lower range 80-85.( crappy schools , social econ factors) Would it not be fairer to compare their dropout rate the average drop out rate for all the 80-85 students?? Leave the rockstar 95%s out of the comparison.
    Mrs. Dougw- "I can see how one of your relatives could have been killed by an angry mob."

    Quote Originally Posted by ill-advised strategy View Post
    dougW, you motherfucking dirty son of a bitch.

  18. #68
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Missoula, MT
    Posts
    20,431
    What up, my rigor!
    No longer stuck.

    Quote Originally Posted by stuckathuntermtn View Post
    Just an uneducated guess.

  19. #69
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    The Land of Subdued Excitement
    Posts
    5,450
    Quote Originally Posted by DougW View Post
    won't touch racial superiority with 10 foot pole

    I have no experience with that failure rate difference you speak of as my class as all white with fewer yellow than females in ME. But could it be that while the stat for drop out is higher for minority students compared to the average dropout rate, if you were able to normalize completely for marks going in , so a 90% from a crappy school is rated an 80%. We did that at our school based on a database of the average drop in grades from each HS. Lets say everyone is 80 to 100. If all of the minority students were grouped in the lower range 80-85.( crappy schools , social econ factors) Would it not be fairer to compare their dropout rate the average drop out rate for all the 80-85 students?? Leave the rockstar 95%s out of the comparison.
    Not really because you have a lot of people going to top schools with all advantages getting top grades and succeeding.

    Then you have the few from lower schools with no advantages and a lot of challenges succeeding anyways.

    That person might start out below the pack, but is probably smarter and a harder worker and has the potential to bring valuable, unique prospective over the regular middle class white guys.

    So by all means. Find ways to encourage and assist success for under represented groups in all academic fields. Thanks.

  20. #70
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Golden BC
    Posts
    3,652
    The other thing about first year that I remember was that for some kids from very good private schools, some courses were somewhat review and not that challenging. Having one or two bird courses for them really took the pressure off. By the end of first year everyone was on the same playing field.

    Yes and by all means minority students should be given extra support to really even the playing field so they can finish first year. From that point it would be a fair comparison of accomplishment.
    Mrs. Dougw- "I can see how one of your relatives could have been killed by an angry mob."

    Quote Originally Posted by ill-advised strategy View Post
    dougW, you motherfucking dirty son of a bitch.

  21. #71
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Not Brooklyn
    Posts
    6,343
    Quote Originally Posted by DougW View Post
    If there is a disparity of outcome then there must be bias.
    I think I wasn't clear.

    I would contend that there is no bias in the process but girls just want be Vets.
    I agree. What I'm saying is that if a certain group dominates a certain space, the norms of that groups are likely to become conflated with what constitutes merit within the space. We see this in schools that are dominated by white women, and as result behavior that doesn't conform to a "culture of niceness" is viewed as deviant. The result is that boys, especially the most physically active ones, like me, are pathologized because we don't behave like my grandmother.

    When the group that dominates a space also happens to be the dominant group within a society, you start to see results that are undemocratic. An extreme example would be history textbooks in Texas that don't contain the words "slave" and make no mention of the KKK. But inequity doesn't require anything quite so obvious. And it doesn't require malicious intent.

  22. #72
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Not Brooklyn
    Posts
    6,343
    Quote Originally Posted by DougW View Post
    Would it not be fairer to compare their dropout rate the average drop out rate for all the 80-85 students?
    Absolutely. My understanding is that when you control for all other predictors of academic success, there still tends to be a disparity based on race. When you have some some sort of mentoring program, or system of social support, that disparity goes down.

    I can't say much about women in engineering. I suspect it has been studied much less, and this is why Riley is doing what she is doing. The way girls are perceived in middle and high school math and science classes has been studied extensively. The results? Teachers (including female teachers) tend to underestimate female students. It follows that this is likely to decrease the number of women who become interested in STEM careers.

  23. #73
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Not Brooklyn
    Posts
    6,343
    Quote Originally Posted by DougW View Post
    The other thing about first year that I remember was that for some kids from very good private schools, some courses were somewhat review and not that challenging.
    Yup. What happens before people show up at engineering school is real. But by the time you graduated had those private school kids maintained that knowledge gap?

  24. #74
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Golden BC
    Posts
    3,652
    Quote Originally Posted by I've seen black diamonds! View Post
    Yup. What happens before people show up at engineering school is real. But by the time you graduated had those private school kids maintained that knowledge gap?
    Not that I can remember. It pretty much evened out by Xmas. Though except for the ones who went to U of Toronto School they just seemed to stay rockstars until the end. Very competitive to get in there.

    I remember talking to a new grad when I was on my first work term. He said he really had to work hard coming from a small town New Brunswick school to complete with the kids from my HS which was pretty middle class and had a University. For him by 2nd year he was not disadvantaged .
    Mrs. Dougw- "I can see how one of your relatives could have been killed by an angry mob."

    Quote Originally Posted by ill-advised strategy View Post
    dougW, you motherfucking dirty son of a bitch.

  25. #75
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    9,300ft
    Posts
    17,900
    Vaguely relevant
    Name:  purity.png
Views: 85
Size:  31.5 KB
    Quote Originally Posted by blurred
    skiing is hiking all day so that you can ski on shitty gear for 5 minutes.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •