zenicurean ([info]zenicurean) wrote,
@ 2009-07-17 17:33:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Share this!  Next Entry
Current music:Rachid Taha - Barra Barra

I wonder how they got that far not using the word, though?
In breaking news today, several British eighteen year olds have gotten angry over despotic tyranny. Immediate debate has arisen all across the UK regarding the students' blatantly inadequate familiarity with the Sid Meier's Civilization game franchise.


(50 comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]Daniel [oeconomist.com]
2009-07-17 03:18 pm UTC (link)
Cor! 'Ow could they 'spect me to regurgitate somethin' Oi'd not seen before? Bloody stuck-up tossers!

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]zenicurean
2009-07-21 01:14 pm UTC (link)
What gets me is the terrifying fact that these kids are supposed to be the ones who take an exceptional interest in the subject.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]hellmutt
2009-07-21 01:37 pm UTC (link)
No, they're the very very VERY few we could persuade to take history instead of cookery and media studies (SLAY SLAY SLAY).

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)
(no subject) - [info]zenicurean, 2009-07-21 01:56 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]hellmutt, 2009-07-21 02:00 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]zenicurean, 2009-07-21 02:12 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]hellmutt, 2009-07-21 02:13 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]zenicurean, 2009-07-21 02:26 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]hellmutt, 2009-07-21 02:30 pm UTC (Expand)

[info]Daniel [oeconomist.com]
2009-07-21 07:31 pm UTC (link)
Here's a theory: These students don't so much have a special interest in history as an inability or unwillingness to engage in much more than rote. That made many subjects inaccessible or unattractive to them; but, in high-school courses on history, taught by mediocre instructors, these students received high marks, and formed their plans and expectations accordingly.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]vonheston
2009-07-17 03:37 pm UTC (link)
Wow. Some of the comments make it even worse.

"in all the wider reading I did in preparation for the exam, written by leading Historians, I did not once come across the phrase "despotic tyranny" when describing Hitler's rule"

"This exam was not intended to test our knowledge of the English Language; it was a test of our knowledge of the Third Reich in the years 1933-45. As a higher ability student, i did a considerable amount of background reading leading upto this exam, and not once did i come across the phrase "Despotic Tyranny"."

"Only a couple of students actually got the correct answer and one of those was a lucky guess. Many of these high ability students will now probably loose their places at Uni because of this one very badly worded question."

High level students...Not knowing what despotic tyranny means...There are no words.

The question is very fair. We have the do essays on things like this all the time in my history classes and I don't go to a high level university by any means. Obviously the purpose was to evaluate the students' comprehension of the material they've supposedly studied, not their ability to regurgitate names and dates. The real dilemma is not that the question was poorly phrased but the sadly inadequate vocabularies of the students taking the exams (neither 'despotic' nor 'tyranny' are particularly obscure words) and the failure of their high school history teachers to help them to develop a proper understanding of history as a discipline which is more than just a list of 'facts' but rather one of various perspectives and arguments.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]hellmutt
2009-07-17 04:56 pm UTC (link)
a proper understanding of history as a discipline which is more than just a list of 'facts' but rather one of various perspectives and arguments.

That was wholly lacking in my history lessons (one of the reasons I never developed an interest in it, and gave it up ASAP for science and maths). And my school was a good (read: paid) one!

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]vonheston
2009-07-17 05:42 pm UTC (link)
Where do you live? I'm in the USA and I have found that this is sadly lacking in many history classes around our great country.

I attribute part of my success at learning history in college to the fact that my professor is not American and does not follow the American model of teaching history. (he is in fact English, but now I question whether or not England is any better ;P Maybe he is just a great professor!)

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)
(no subject) - [info]kadeshaderow, 2009-07-17 06:15 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]vonheston, 2009-07-17 06:56 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]kadeshaderow, 2009-07-17 07:28 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]hellmutt, 2009-07-18 10:12 am UTC (Expand)

[info]zenicurean
2009-07-21 01:52 pm UTC (link)
What gets me is that they were A-level students dealing with terminology that was most definitely not in any meaningful sense specialist terminology. If it turns out everyone agrees they had no way of knowing the word, I'm going to take it as an admission of a much bigger problem.

I might've put down the question a little differently for them, but that's only because I'm much too merciful. It's a good question. It's within the material, it requires the student to open it up, just a little, to identify what it's about, and it clearly requires an analytical answer. The only mistake the exam writers made was to expect the kids would know their own language.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]hellmutt
2009-07-17 04:55 pm UTC (link)
HALP

I R ILLITERIT MORON

MUST SOO GUBNMENT

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]zenicurean
2009-07-21 01:15 pm UTC (link)
SO NO FAIR THEES NOT EXUM FUR KNOWINN BASECS OF ENGELESH LANGITSH

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]hellmutt
2009-07-21 01:33 pm UTC (link)
y ther no exam 4 knoin lolcat?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)
(no subject) - [info]zenicurean, 2009-07-21 02:09 pm UTC (Expand)

[info]kadeshaderow
2009-07-17 05:12 pm UTC (link)
In fairness, you shouldn't give that question a grade based on a Likert scale answer.


"Hmm, this person only agreed instead of strongly agreed. FAIL."

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]vonheston
2009-07-17 05:40 pm UTC (link)
How do you know that is how it would have been graded (on the thesis versus the content)? It is possible to disagree with an argument being made while still recognizing that the facts and/or the line of reasoning being used to form the argument are basically correct and coherent.

I will repeat, history is not simply a collection of facts (names, dates, figures) but a collection of human interpretations of and interactions with/recollections of facts and events. A true knowledge of history involves taking a position on a given situation and being able to argue for/against that position. This shows not only a knowledge of the factual information of the time period but an ability to apply that knowledge and thus demonstrates some level of comprehension of what has been learned beyond rote memorization. If you just memorize a bunch of dates it doesn't mean anything and is useless information.

That so many students at that particular institution where unable to argue for/against whether or not Hitler was a despotic tyrant only proves that they deserved the low scores they received. Their supposedly vast knowledge of the time period should have given them ample material to work with in forming an argument one way or the other. I have no sympathy for the fact that they were unable to parrot something they had read beforehand rather than forming their own impression of the material they studied. This shows not only a deficiency in their knowledge of history but in their general ability to learn and apply what they have learned; If anything, the biggest flaw with the test is that students with such a deficiency were able to score well on any humanities section.

In fairness, this comment is not directed at you per say but at anything who actually agrees with the "memorize names/dates/places" teaching of history. XP

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)
I misread the article
[info]kadeshaderow
2009-07-17 05:49 pm UTC (link)
I thought that it was a multiple choice exam question (I didn't know they still did high school essay questions!). So it would have been like

“How far do you agree that Hitler’s role 1933-45 was one of despotic tyranny?”

And the answers would be:
A. Strongly Disagree
B. Disagree Somewhat
C. Not sure
D. Somewhat Agree
E. Strongly Agree.

(and the answer would be E.)

I beg your pardon, I just came out of a public opinion & polling class two weeks ago. (I got a B!)

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)
Re: I misread the article - [info]vonheston, 2009-07-17 05:59 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]hellmutt, 2009-07-18 10:15 am UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]zenicurean, 2009-07-21 01:40 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]hellmutt, 2009-07-21 01:50 pm UTC (Expand)
Re: I misread the article - [info]terva, 2009-07-18 01:17 pm UTC (Expand)

[info]androgylicious
2009-07-17 05:21 pm UTC (link)
Context clues, much?

Ok, so maybe I could get them not knowing what "despotism" meant, but what 17-18 year old does not know the word "tyranny"? And surely most could've seen the words "tyranny" and "Hitler" and put two and two together.

These kids need to listen to more punk rock.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]androgylicious
2009-07-17 05:22 pm UTC (link)
Then again, it was sort of a retarded test question.

OMG TO WHAT DEGREE DID HITLER SUCK?

"HE SUCK'TH MAJORLY!!!!"

OMG A+++

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

[info]Daniel [oeconomist.com]
2009-07-17 05:57 pm UTC (link)
Well, let's hope that they weren't grading based upon whether the student chose some proper level of suckiness for Hitler, but rather on how well the student defended the assignment of suckiness that he or she made.

(Reply to this) (Parent)
(no subject) - [info]terva, 2009-07-18 01:14 pm UTC (Expand)

[info]zenicurean
2009-07-21 01:26 pm UTC (link)
Definitely. They should've known it, or they should've been able to infer it from the bleeding obvious. What gets me is that the writers likely had the "unlawful ruler" angle of tyranny also in mind, so it's actually the trickier of the two, and yet they exclusively complained about the "despotism" bit.

I would've given them a simplified question like "To which degree was Hitler's rule autocratic, and to which degree was it illegitimate?" or "To which degree was Hitler's rule autocratic, and based on violence and coercion?", but they'd probably still have bitched about not knowing what an autocrat is.

Edited at 2009-07-21 01:36 pm UTC

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)
(no subject) - [info]ankewehner, 2009-07-21 05:22 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]zenicurean, 2009-07-21 06:35 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]ankewehner, 2009-07-21 07:42 pm UTC (Expand)

[info]terva
2009-07-18 01:12 pm UTC (link)
Perhaps the question should have been “How far do you agree that Hitler’s role 1933-45 was one of one selfish, big meanie?"

I'm kinda worried. 18-year olds should really understand a question like that without a problem, and if they have indeed understood the exam-material, they should be able to answer fluently. I think that if 'high-level' students fail to answer, they shouldn't be high-level at all. I could've answered that question when I was 16, and english isn't even my mothers tongue.

(despotic tyranny made me use this icon.)

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]zenicurean
2009-07-21 01:32 pm UTC (link)
They should absolutely have known it. It isn't a specialist term, and they need it. What gets me is that "tyranny" is the more ambiguous of the two words, because it may mean harsh and cruel rule, as in by threats of violence, but it also can involve a notion of illegitimacy.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

(Anonymous)
2009-07-18 02:06 pm UTC (link)
OMG! I cant unnerstan teh artical! What duz it sey, using ordnery werd ordnery ppl can read?

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]zenicurean
2009-07-21 01:33 pm UTC (link)
i donno! thear r wurdz everywher!

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]ghoststrider
2009-07-19 01:13 am UTC (link)
Oh.

My.

GAWD.

A country whose students are dumber than typical American students. I'm not sure whether to be impressed or disappointed.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]ghoststrider
2009-07-19 02:27 am UTC (link)
PS: Looks like this community's resident liberal dork thinks its "relatively reasonable."

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)
(no subject) - [info]zenicurean, 2009-07-21 01:35 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]ghoststrider, 2009-07-22 01:15 pm UTC (Expand)

[info]zenicurean
2009-07-21 01:33 pm UTC (link)
For what it's worth, I'm pretty sure they're not a representative sample.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)
(no subject) - [info]hellmutt, 2009-07-21 01:39 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]zenicurean, 2009-07-21 02:16 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]hellmutt, 2009-07-21 02:27 pm UTC (Expand)

(50 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Log in with OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…