#bad profs

[allthebestscreennamesaregone63]

Real Talk:

Anti-intellectuslism in academic spaces is RISING.

At least, as of 2019, possibly in later years. (It is 2023 as of this writing.)

I saw a post to the effect of, "if you interrupt the lecture from a phd professor, with an opinion you formed based on a five minute google search, I am going to break your kneecaps, uwu."

Y'all, I get a person coming up with an incorrect opinion via google, but you gotta wonder, if the prof's argument can be decimated with a five minute search, if the prof actually knows what's up.

Google isn't always reliable, true, but I have had BAD profs.

Most were in the "intro to x" classes/just starting to teach, to be fair, but some were tenured.

Like, I could RUIN their arguments without even pulling up Google/an academic search site, in under five minutes, without breaking a sweat.

Exhibit A:

My Intro to Media Studies professor. This is the same prof who had us watching Citizen Kane, The Graduate, and Mount Rushmore, in their ENTIRETY, and only played a teeny clip from Psycho. (Shower Scene, to examine "match on object" camera tricks, no further analysis.)

For those unfamiliar, the last one in particular strongly does, "women don't have the right to say no" and pedophilia. Kane was the most boring shit I've ever seen, and the less said about The Graduate, the better. (This movie made me HATE Simon and Garfunkel. Do you know how hard it is to hate those guys, if your friend groups like alternative music AT ALL?)

Further, on Kane, the woman said, and I quote, "This is the first time we have ever seen a tracking shot-" LIKE, BITCH WHAT?!

So, I, media illiterate, raised my hand and went, "uh, no??? Tracking shot was literally invented in 1931 for Tod Browning's Dracula, starring Bela Lugosi??" I had LITERALLY just seen the behind the movie featurette, and having seen the movie, you can TELL there were tracking shots. Kane wasn't released until the 1950s. That's 20 years later, bitch!

She tried to hum and haw, that, "yeah but it combined a tracking shot with a deep perspective shot, that's what I meant!" Like, that is NOT what you said. At all. When I said as much, all I got back was a, "well I don't like horror movies." Which, ok, not everybody likes them, I get it, but you are literally teaching INTRO TO MEDIA STUDIES! Literally, the "movie class". if you're gonna sit there and preach to us, do your FUCKING research!

She proceeded to talk over me, and my classmates were all like, "shush!" Meanwhile, I am actually doing what I'm supposed to be doing, questioning that which seems factually incorrect, and actually thinking for myself!

And you're gonna tell me, *I'm* the bad guy? To the point of wanting to "break my kneecaps"??? No.

[eltsia]

don't pay too much attention to how metallic that metal looks. I iust wanted to draw their Russia reconnaissance outfits and Erik with white hair....

[cpericardium]

Student wrote "I have no interest reading about bad people doing bad things" in their response to the book

[amygdalae]

Talk abt second hand embarrassment u ever see a "No stupid questions" professor attempt to navigate a question that is in fact pretty stupid

[ketto-art]

Amit getting a B+?? aintnoway.

comms | prints

[river-gale]

i think non-STEM people beat themselves up too much for being bad at math. partially i think this bc shame will never help you learn and everyone is capable of improving at math with patience and practice

partially i think this bc i’m still grading these applied calculus exams from a class of 3rd-5th year engineering students and several of them have said 1 - 6 = -4. two of them have said it’s -7

[mountmortar]

it IS kind of funny to me how professor oak is constantly framed as this great benevolent amazing professor to the point where they were even like "let's give this guy a cousin in alola who looks almost exactly like him because THAT'S what everybody wants to see in the games right" and then you pick up r/b/y or fr/lg and see how he treats blue and it's like Wow. This old man sucks. Somebody should kill him for sport. is he as bad as, say, ghetsis or lusamine? no. but he is DEFINITELY objectively awful. the games and professor oak framing blue as a bad trainer and person when he quite LITERALLY did NOTHING wrong (r/b/y has as many examples of blue being genuinely helpful towards his childhood friend as it does of him being an arrogant little twat, which is fine because. hello. he's 11. have you ever interacted with an 11-year-old) is soooooo irritating sometimes because like. in the VERY NEXT GENERATION you have a very clear example (silver) of what a kid mistreating their pokémon looks like (to the point where npcs are quite literally commenting on it left and right) and absolutely none of that is there with blue. glad to see he's flourishing now that he's fully moved to alola with red to run the battle tree and i hope he's blocked professor oak's number

[froggtogs]

sketchbook shadow that i lined today

[okartichoke]

au where godot gets therapy and becomes a math professor after getting out of prison

no cuz i had so much fun with this

he either teaches 13ish year olds Algebra 1 or OR he teaches adults who are learning mathematics later in life! He’s trying to lay off the coffee at his therapist’s insistence. He’s gotten down to only 3 cups on a good day.

Pearl/Maya channels Mia the day before his very first lesson, and he practices the whole lesson plan on her because he’s actually nervous. </3 That’s the last time he’s seen her.

ngl i really love math teacher godot HAHA im genuinely so endeared to this idea???? putting many more hcs in the tags >:3

erm uh yeah but then i doodled squirrel godot and had fun with that too so here’s him HAHA

and yknow what sure here’s some cat lawyers from like 3 weeks ago that i’m never gonna post otherwise. epic post, artichoke, you’ve done it again. 😎😎😎👍👍

[venti-death-watch]

with all his phds and all you can pretty much make dr ratio whatever you want and i know everyone does physics/math/medicine in some form and all, but that man is so fucking history humanities coded it’s like… embarrassing to see

[collieii]

one line in trimax that's always stuck with me is from chapter 65, right after wolfwood's death. when vash is sticking the punisher by his grave and he says "it was part of his life". that phrasing is so interesting to me. the neutrality of it is one thing that gets me, i think. it was part of his life. for better or worse, whatever it was, the punisher was wolfwood's.

It's pretty easy to think that the punisher might represent violence, the eye of michael, the role of assassin that was forced onto wolfwood, the loss of childhood. but it's not really presented that way, not overtly anyways. we never see wolfwood shun the punisher, he's not conflicted by his use of it. he never considers abandoning it for some other weapon. it's his weapon. he doesn't discard it when he eventually decides to take a more vash-like approach and actually let people live. he pretty easily accepts it as his own, a tool he can use. (to be fair, at least part of that is probably because the punisher is a very good gun.)

the punisher can still represent the harsher aspects of wolfwood's character, the violence he's committed, that he's capable of. that's an important part of his life! and the idea of it as representative of his violent adolescence, childhood that was stripped away, goes along with this - it's literally a cross to bear. but besides showing his past as a burden, i think of the punisher as being a cross of responsibility. when you have a gun you have power, agency - you have a responsibility to make a choice. that's what wolfwood tells vash in chapter 4.

the ability to take a life, the burden of it, is literally his cross to bear. that ability - and that responsibility - was given to him by the eom, literally in terms of the gun, and in terms of his skills. but the eye doesn't think twice about killing people. for them it's not really a choice, a responsibility, it's just a given. but wolfwood can't accept that. he's constantly considering the choices he makes.

so the punisher isn't only a symbol of the eye of michael, of the path that he was forced onto. it's also a way of expressing autonomy. the eye gave wolfwood the gun, but he decides how to use it and what it means. for much of the story wolfwood struggles to decide what to do, he's a very conflicted character. but eventually he resolves to use it against chapel, against knives, to help vash, and protect the orphanage. the gun gives him agency.

so the punisher was part of his life. it was the tool that he used to commit acts of violence, acts that he was forced into, but also the tool he used to break free.

it's heavy for vash, too. he's not exempt from that idea, the idea of responsibility. as wolfwood said much earlier in the story, vash has always been able to sidestep the question of "what do i choose?", because he's only ever given himself one option - everybody lives. and he's always succeeded. but as wolfwood says, "the day will come when you'll have to choose". one day, it's not going to work.

and of course the story progresses, the stakes ramp up, and vash learns more, goes through more, and is pushed to his limits. i think by this point, by wolfwood's death, and maybe because of it, vash has realized that he might have to make that difficult choice in the near future. that's one reason why he wants to "do him proud". he has a lot of reasons to say this of course - to not let wolfwood's sacrifice go to waste, for example. but if we're thinking of the cross as responsibility, then vash is saying he doesn't want to forget the lessons he learned because of wolfwood. wolfwood has always grappled with responsibility, with what the right thing to do is. and the right thing is often not easy. vash hopes that when the times comes for him to make a choice, he'll make a good one, one that does right by wolfwood's memory.

[transgenderlabrat]

I'm actually livid about this and I've lost a lot of respect for this prof, which makes me sad because I liked her a lot up to now. But this was just malicious and terrible test design. Like I get that tests are difficult sometimes and as a student, it's my responsibility to ensure I'm familiar with all the content, which I know I hadn't totally done and I expected there to be a few questions I couldn't answer and I'd just take that L. But reasonable and good test design would suggest that if you spend 20% of class time on this particular topic, it should make up roughly 20% of a test. It should definitely at least be on the test. Moreover, if you explicitly tell your students "you need to know all the names and structures for intermediates and all the enzyme names for glycolysis," and you spend so much time talking about the specifics of glycolysis, you, as a prof, should know that students are going to focus on studying that. Because that's scary and overwhelming, that's a lot of names and structures and you have to get them in the right order. Same goes for naming everything in the TCA. Those are HUGE topics and hugely important to metabolism and we talked about them extensively. If you tell students to know all the names, they're going to focus on that hugely daunting task. To then not include anything about those processes and instead ask strange questions about NAD+ precursors and the name of a transport protein and to have the big, long answer question not involve discussion of those processes isn't making a difficult test, it's genuinely cruel. Like that is quite literally some "ha ha gotcha" shit.

On top of that, we were explicitly told "you don't need to memorize numbers except these ones." And then she asked about a different number. That was just straight up lying. Like. You lied. What the fuck.

I'm not mad that I lost a couple marks on detail questions I didn't study well enough. I expected that. I'm mad that the prof hit us with a bait-and-switch. I cannot fathom how you can possibly think it's ok to do something like that. It's disrespectful and it's bad teaching and I'm actually really really mad about it.

It also makes the test an even worse assessment of our understanding of the course. Tests are already flawed to begin with but when your test excludes literally at least half of the content up to that point, you're not even giving us an opportunity to demonstrate the full range of our knowledge, especially when you mislead us as to what parts are going to be most important. This was a test out of 34.5 marks. Each mark is worth 2.89%. Fair and effective ("effective") test design would dictate that something worth 2.89% should cover about that much course content. Instead, something that was on literally one slide was worth this 2.89% and content on dozens of slides was worth 0%. That is not assessing my knowledge of the course content, that's assessing whether or not I committed every single slide to memory. This test is even less reflective of my knowledge and understanding than tests usually are and that's horribly unfair.

Biochem midterm this morning. 😬

[sophapop]

[bara-izu]

Maybe this was answered somewhere once already, but how did Griffin and Toma meet? I adore your art and ocs sm ;_;

I don’t think I’ve ever posted about it to be honest! These idiots met through a case of hunter becomes hunted and identity theft :) also thank you so much 😭

[bruhstation]

some draws of the bwba newbies + lady

[lilacandladybugs]

hey mathblr does anyone know why math textbooks explain things using the most convoluted language known to man. im out here rewriting passages in my own words so my brain doesnt explode cant they just talk normally. who writes this stuff