Mandatory discussions and the participation points which are usually associated with them are absolutely unnecessary and downright silly in a collegiate institution of the University of Wisconsin’s caliber and price tag.
Every student has had those few discussion sections which they just cannot stand attending. Whether it’s the cliché bad teacher’s assistant or the material just is not difficult to understand, it’s safe to say that many discussion sections can become rather pointless at times. Yet here at the quite prestigious UW, many courses require weekly discussion attendance to earn the elusive participation points which make a relatively small contribution to the final grade.
Last semester, two of the classes I was enrolled in were Philosophy 101 and Chemistry 109. Attendance for my chemistry discussion Thursday afternoons was mandatory, but honestly was a huge waste of time. My TA literally just went over the same material the professor had taught us the day before, except I usually walked out of discussion more confused than when I had walked in. Similarly, I was required to attend a weekly philosophy discussion section Thursday mornings. Of course, this being a philosophy class, I also had to contribute to the class conversation to earn the most amount of points, but I ultimately liked my TA, so these two requirements weren’t too difficult to meet.
Then about halfway through the semester, the professor announced that participation in discussion sections would be graded on a curve. A curve, for participation points. It wasn’t enough to just be part of the conversation anymore; I had to out-talk the rest of my classmates to get the most points.
I don’t get it. Why is the university demanding participation points? What purpose do they serve? Is it just to make sure we go to class? The points rarely leave any major effects on the final grade, and we are paying thousands of dollars as students to enroll in these courses. It would be absolutely foolish not to make the most of every opportunity to receive the best education possible when we are paying so much for tuition. We are collegiate level students and are still being told when we have to go to class. Why is the university forcing us to attend discussions which we can benefit very little from, when we already have every incentive to go to these sections since they actually help us in our education?
Say what you will about the math department here at UW, but I think this is one area in which they’re actually doing something right. In my experience, math discussions don’t take attendance or ask for participation, but instead assign quizzes that eventually make a decent contribution to the final grade. This way the final grade relies less on exam performance, making things a little easier on students, and the university can ensure that students do attend discussion sections most of the time, and the students aren’t forced to make an appearance every single week. If the student would benefit from section that day, then they can go ahead and attend class. On the other hand, if the student wouldn’t really get much out of the class that day, then they could possibly use the time for other academics, or even catching up on some sleep because God knows that almost every student here could use more of that.
At this point in our academic careers, participation points are just plain silly. We are students at a prestigious academic university. We know what it takes to get the grades we need. I think it is pretty safe to say that we are responsible enough to know when we need to attend class and when there is really no point. So at last UW, as Mark Walhberg so gracefully put it in The Other Guys, I leave you with this: “I’m like a peacock, you gotta let me fly!”
Phillip Michaelson (pmichaelson
