Really stupid people who end up with PhDs?

I worked in lab with several people like you described. Straight A students but complete morons. The only reason they had the grades they had is because they spent every waking moment doing homework or studying. 0 life outside of school. When it came time to do something in lab none of them could apply it. Even basic mass and energy balances they had no idea how to apply it. All those kids were going to get jobs right out of college or go on to grad school. What happens then? I'm genuinely curious how these peoples careers turn out because they cannot perform outside of a classroom environment.

The problem is that colleges reward students too much for simply working hard. It is never about how much you know it's about how much you're willing to work. I guess that's what most companies in the industry really want though.

Anybody can get good grades if they put in the work which allows for these idiots to get through. Hell I had several classes reward students for just showing up to class with like 15-20% of the semester grade. It's such a joke. Every class should only have 1 grade which is a final exam on the entire semester. Nothing else should matter. 1 test and 1 grade. No curve. Just show me what you know at the end of the semester. Instead It's homework worth 40% which half the class cheats on anyways. Also since the large majority of kids in college nowadays are dumb as shit, the curves on the exams are ridiculous. I've been in several classes where people can average less than 70% on exams and still easily get an A in the class. Everybody just laughs and cheers when they see a curve on the exam. This makes college tailor made to these dummies. All they have to do is

1.show up to class

2.copy your buddys homework (who copied it from someone else)

3.bomb the test but it's ok because everybody else did too - your 60 will end up being a B

I would honestly estimate maybe ~4/100 kids in my classes did the homework on their own and performed well on the exams and earned the grade they got. Yet somehow there were wayyy more kids getting A's. It's a terrible system. this is coming from somebody who went to a state school so it may be different, but if you ask me college education is a sham. And to answer your question on why universities allow these students to be pushed through it's obvious. Money. The universities aren't ALLOWING them to be pushed through, they ARE pushing them through.

At this point I think more and more people realize what a joke college is, but at this point it is too late to stop.

You are wrong, wrong, wrong and wrong. There are MANY non-technical, non-engineering fields that require master's level education as the point of departure. Your assertions otherwise render much of what you said non-credible in my book. Freaking counselors and social workers must attain master's level credentials to get paying jobs, not exactly technical fields, but you knew that already, or should have. In order to begin any kind of meaningful second career, one along a different track form my previous expertise, there were none I had interest in that didn't require at least the master's degree. So, as I said, I'm sucking up the horse shit that people like you shovel day in and day out, and putting the checks in the boxes so I can get started, as far away from any campus, in a couple of years.Your statements are condescending and false, but what else would I expect from a professor in the first place? As far as being a "good" master's student, rest assured that I've been performing at a level far above that required, probably the best-scoring student in my cohort, so again, wrong on your part. Lastly, I expect nothing but the same continued shit from the university experience, so your assertion that I expect anything but this horse shit is way off base. Nice try spinning it around though. You miss the point entirely that academia should exist to educate, to train, that the entire point of your professional existence is to prepare your students and to genuinely advance the state of useable knowledge in your field. Your own arguments prove that you're another self-serving, cloistered academic who believes it appropriate and worthwhile to generate more meaningless lists, expecting your students to toe your line, with minimal connection to what is happening in the real world. That's shitty on your part; none of that should you be proud of.

Wow, another post proving that you are part of the problem. Nice level of introspection there professor. Always remember that you are there to serve the students, not the other way around. The students are essentially your customers. Your arguments shine a bright light on why tenure should be much more tightly controlled and revisited periodically. You just don't get it.

What I've learned from this post:

As with most of college, reading these posts was a waste of time.

The more you know about one thing the less you know about another.

Modern academia is filled with lefty liberal commie pinkos. Actually, I didn't learn this from this post, learned from real life.

Hey dipshit, you're arguing against me by...making the same points about academia? Brilliant.

Trump2020OP wrote:

What I've learned from this post:

As with most of college, reading these posts was a waste of time.

The more you know about one thing the less you know about another.

Modern academia is filled with lefty liberal commie pinkos. Actually, I didn't learn this from this post, learned from real life.

As one who has tenure and teaches these guys, I agree with almost everything you say.

I'm responding to your heavy criticisms in a direct manner. Your sensitivity to an alternative viewpoint and attempt to call my views condescending is the reason that American Universities have so many issues with identity politics. You are a true masters student. I am far from a cloistered academic. I am a recent academic with 15 years of previous work experience in two industries.Licensed counselors and social workers in states that need masters degrees create their curriculum with heavy input from state regulators/stakeholders in those industries and professions. I have sat through many of these kinds of meetings and am 100% aware of this. Couple this required curriculum with state and university requirements to separate masters degrees from "credentials" or "certificates" and status/ranking issues that require accreditation... and you have the makings of many classes you find boring, required papers, etc. Trust me, the professors would ideally love to sit around and have stimulating conversations and not require tests and papers. Everyone knows that you are paying for a credential in those fields, that is not up for debate.I don't even want to engage on your other points, because again they reflect the broken customer service model of University education. If all students have to pass, the classes and dreg will have to be easiest for the least hard working, most entitled, least intelligent student to pass. That is what has happened. You'll get your degree - good luck with the next phase of your career!

Whiite Trash wrote:

Wow, another post proving that you are part of the problem. Nice level of introspection there professor. Always remember that you are there to serve the students, not the other way around. The students are essentially your customers. Your arguments shine a bright light on why tenure should be much more tightly controlled and revisited periodically. You just don't get it.

I just saw this, so let me make my point a bit clearer. Faculty are not customer service representatives meant to serve at the pleasure of students/customers who are always right. I'd argue that this line of thought is responsible for out of control amenities, out of control costs of attendance, textbooks, etc.

When faculty treat students as customers they sacrifice rigor in order to make satisfaction guaranteed by all. Students that believe they are customers that are meant to be served at their desired standard will often not take accountability to educate themselves. Education is created by the learner in an environment conducive to learning. It is not consumed.

I sympathize with you because you're used to being a customer that is served after shelling out money. If there is anything that you are purchasing it is a well-structured opportunity to educate yourself and a signal to the next profession you enter that you have done so. You should not expect to be served.

We need smart people in this world, but the right kind of smart people. Probably more smart-alecks and fewer lawyers. What worries me is that Bernie Sanders received so much support from young people. This young demographic educated in a system that doesn't promote American exceptionalisim and the values of God given liberty this country was founded on.

Having a PHD doesn't make one smart or wise. A perfect example is Noam Chomsky, an idiot in my book.

Trump2020OP wrote:

Having a PHD doesn't make one smart or wise. A perfect example is Noam Chomsky, an idiot in my book.

Naom Chomsky is a terrible example. His PhD is in mathematical linguistics and his work is important to both this field and theoretical computer science. His often criticized political views have nothing to do with his research in linguistics and he only started writing about politics years after he received tenure and published his most important works.

I only know two people with phds (you don't tend to do them in my field).

One has severe difficulties with writing skills and the ability to express themselves clearly due to dyslexia.

The other is a political bigot.

Both post one-sided politics posts on social media, cant structure logical arguments and seem unable to critically analyse competing viewpoints. Both are unaware and unable to comprehend what this actually means. I cannot see what points worthy of phd research the have been able to add, since their comprehension, writing and research skills are remarkably poor.

hht add hjjcd wrote:

I only know two people with phds (you don't tend to do them in my field).

One has severe difficulties with writing skills and the ability to express themselves clearly due to dyslexia.

The other is a political bigot.

Both post one-sided politics posts on social media, cant structure logical arguments and seem unable to critically analyse competing viewpoints. Both are unaware and unable to comprehend what this actually means. I cannot see what points worthy of phd research the have been able to add, since their comprehension, writing and research skills are remarkably poor.

If you were to mesh these two superior beings into one, you would have the majority of posters to LRC, especially if you add in some very strong anti-black bias. I wonder if most of the people on these message boards have PHDs since their criticisms seem mainly to describe themselves.

OP

Most phd people are intellects. This does not mean they know how to install a pre hung door or change a tire. More than likely, these people are very bright and very centered on their specific study. Most would struggle in stressful situations like a car accident or to immediately turn off the main water line if there is a water leak in their house. My friend is very bright, but calls me often to help him do basic handyman chores at his house

Go away. You ruin everything and are deeply disliked by everyone on these boards.

MurderDubs wrote:

Go away. You ruin everything and are deeply disliked by everyone on these boards.

That is false.

A lot of candidates suck, but get churned through. Not enough are counseled out of the program, or the advisor who admits the candidate does a terrible job screening applicants.

One candidate in my wife's class wanted a PhD just so she could be called "doctor". She has little to no research skills, and no desire to do research. My wife graduated with her PhD in 4 years; this candidate is just now finishing (about 7 years). The school didn't want a black mark of someone not making it through. Letting candidates like this graduate devalues the name of the institution and does a disservice to the candidate, as s/he will be unemployable.

Ah, but there is the falsehood, which is your assumption that she will be unemployable. Academia will merrily find a place for her within the vacuous world of fluffery and financial fraud that is modern higher education.

Why is this dichotomous? wrote:

A lot of candidates suck, but get churned through. Not enough are counseled out of the program, or the advisor who admits the candidate does a terrible job screening applicants.

One candidate in my wife's class wanted a PhD just so she could be called "doctor". She has little to no research skills, and no desire to do research. My wife graduated with her PhD in 4 years; this candidate is just now finishing (about 7 years). The school didn't want a black mark of someone not making it through. Letting candidates like this graduate devalues the name of the institution and does a disservice to the candidate, as s/he will be unemployable.

Don34 wrote:

OP

Most phd people are intellects. This does not mean they know how to install a pre hung door or change a tire. More than likely, these people are very bright and very centered on their specific study. Most would struggle in stressful situations like a car accident or to immediately turn off the main water line if there is a water leak in their house. My friend is very bright, but calls me often to help him do basic handyman chores at his house

No, they are not. That was precisely my point. Very few PhD students can think critically or on their own, and even fewer are anywhere near what I would consider intellectual. They are hard-working students who just want the title. They don't spend their free time reading intellectual works. Their identity is wrapped up in scholastic achievement, and that is the only real reason they're in graduate school. They are often great at regurgitating things from a textbook but fail miserably any time they're asked to think on their feet, let alone actually DO something original on their own.

I must stress again this doesn't apply to every PhD student out there, but it does to many, and there is a significant minority of PhD students and grads who can barely do anything.

pretty clear you have no idea what phd students do. usually has very little to do with classes or textbooks and is primarily geared towards original research