The thing is, as I'm discovering while trying to get grading done on 70 finals and 20 term papers, it does not seem to slow down when you're not having fun.
We had to write short literature reviews for a comparative public policy class. Mine was ~15 pages long, and I'm sure the average was ~11-12 pages. The class was larger than usual, but let's say there were 20 people. I feel bad for any professor who has to read through ~220-240 pages, of material written by either senior undergrads or first year masters students, in a couple of weeks.
I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose...
We had to write short literature reviews for a comparative public policy class. Mine was ~15 pages long, and I'm sure the average was ~11-12 pages. The class was larger than usual, but let's say there were 20 people. I feel bad for any professor who has to read through ~220-240 pages, of material written by either senior undergrads or first year masters students, in a couple of weeks.
ReplyDelete