 |
 |
 |
| 24小時(shí)熱門(mén)版塊排行榜 |
- >論壇更新日志 (1114)
- >考研 (100)
- >導(dǎo)師招生 (90)
- >蟲(chóng)友互識(shí) (61)
- >基金申請(qǐng) (30)
- >休閑灌水 (15)
- >碩博家園 (12)
- >博后之家 (9)
- >教師之家 (7)
- >找工作 (7)
- >論文投稿 (7)
- >經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué) (6)
- >微米和納米 (6)
- >考博 (6)
- >文獻(xiàn)求助 (6)
- >公派出國(guó) (4)
 |
 |
 |
||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| 2 | 1/1 | 返回列表 |
| 查看: 4387 | 回復(fù): 27 | |||||
| 當(dāng)前只顯示滿足指定條件的回帖，點(diǎn)擊這里查看本話題的所有回帖 | |||||
[交流]
（轉(zhuǎn)載）為什么“B”學(xué)生搞科研比“A”學(xué)生更容易成功 已有25人參與
|
|||||
|
最近在實(shí)驗(yàn)室輪換，感覺(jué)非常不好，大家對(duì)我的評(píng)價(jià)都不是太好。不知道哪里出了問(wèn)題。我是個(gè)比較笨的學(xué)生，本科的GPA也不高，實(shí)驗(yàn)動(dòng)手能力也差。應(yīng)該是C類(lèi)學(xué)生，老老實(shí)實(shí)做人踏踏實(shí)實(shí)做事，努力吧，像我這樣不聰明的，就只能實(shí)驗(yàn)多失敗幾次，多被罵幾次才能做得差不多。但愿老板還給我機(jī)會(huì)。 下面就是轉(zhuǎn)載的一個(gè)老師的博文，與蟲(chóng)友共享 這個(gè)學(xué)期我負(fù)責(zé)一門(mén)生化專(zhuān)業(yè)本科生的閱讀寫(xiě)作課BMB511。明天中午就是給學(xué)生打分并公布成績(jī)的最后期限，可是其中一個(gè)非常聰明且學(xué)習(xí)成績(jī)幾乎全A的學(xué)生還沒(méi)有把我交待的作業(yè)交上來(lái)。為啥？她竟然是因?yàn)楦杏X(jué)作業(yè)不夠完美，不想讓我看。換句話說(shuō)就是，不怕得F，但怕得B！碰到這樣的學(xué)生真要命，給F感覺(jué)對(duì)不起她的聰明努力，但給A憑什么啊？ 由此想到關(guān)于“A”學(xué)生和“B”學(xué)生長(zhǎng)久以來(lái)的爭(zhēng)議�！癇”學(xué)生一般屬于那種對(duì)什么都不夠精通但都知道一點(diǎn)兒的學(xué)生。這種學(xué)生一般還能按時(shí)完成任務(wù)，雖然很多時(shí)候有這樣或那樣的缺陷。換句話說(shuō)，“B”學(xué)生很多時(shí)候不能把所有事情做到盡善盡美，但可以做到足夠好（到可以得B）。“B”學(xué)生可以在還沒(méi)完全弄清楚實(shí)驗(yàn)原理的情況下，敢于先動(dòng)手試試，在實(shí)驗(yàn)中積累經(jīng)驗(yàn)并取得成功。 反之，“A”學(xué)生一般會(huì)對(duì)所做的事情非常非常精通，比如學(xué)習(xí)、考試、或?qū)?lái)要從事的某些職業(yè)。而且他們想把所有的事情都做到完美。如果不能做到非常完美，他們通常會(huì)很煩惱。嚴(yán)重的會(huì)分不清主次，像我碰到的這個(gè)學(xué)生一樣，感覺(jué)作業(yè)不夠好就不交，即便是Deadline就在眼前。對(duì)搞科研來(lái)講，這個(gè)品質(zhì)很多時(shí)候是成功的絆腳石。 之所以有此番感慨，是因?yàn)檫�有另外一個(gè)“A”學(xué)生在實(shí)驗(yàn)室的表現(xiàn)。這個(gè)學(xué)生非常認(rèn)真，也像本文開(kāi)頭的那個(gè)一樣是追求完美的人。如果你看他的筆記，你會(huì)感到非常吃驚，那個(gè)仔細(xì)，那個(gè)完美，沒(méi)話說(shuō)！當(dāng)他把實(shí)驗(yàn)結(jié)果拿給我看的時(shí)候，我就納悶怎么本來(lái)應(yīng)該處理1小時(shí)的實(shí)驗(yàn)看上去怎么變的象是處理5小時(shí)的啊？反復(fù)幾次后我才發(fā)現(xiàn)他為了一絲不差地實(shí)施實(shí)驗(yàn)步驟和記錄實(shí)驗(yàn)細(xì)節(jié)，把本來(lái)一個(gè)小時(shí)的實(shí)驗(yàn)處理不得不延長(zhǎng)到5個(gè)小時(shí)。第一次實(shí)驗(yàn)這樣還有情可原，可他次次都這么做！當(dāng)然了我不是想說(shuō)這種態(tài)度完全不對(duì)，我想說(shuō)的是“A”學(xué)生們一定要在任務(wù)質(zhì)量、任務(wù)要求、任務(wù)期限等之間掌握好平衡。因?yàn)榱粝峦昝拦P記而不顧實(shí)驗(yàn)要求就走得太偏了。 網(wǎng)上看到一篇FemaleScienceProfessor寫(xiě)的文章：In Praise of B Students。感覺(jué)對(duì)想搞科研的“A”學(xué)生和“B”學(xué)生都有些幫助，原文如下。在讀此英文文章之前先把這個(gè)女“A”學(xué)生的事情做個(gè)了斷：為盡一個(gè)老師的職責(zé)，我只能把學(xué)生約到辦公室進(jìn)行面試，以便了解她的學(xué)習(xí)情況。雖然我會(huì)根據(jù)她的表現(xiàn)打分，但我現(xiàn)在傾向于最多給B，大家說(shuō)有沒(méi)有道理啊？ Supervising undergraduates in research is of course different in many ways from supervising graduate students -- e.g., expectations, scope of project, amount and type of interaction between student and advisor -- but there are also some similarities. For example, selecting undergraduates as research assistants or advisees based on their grades in classes does not automatically lead to a fulfilling research experience for all concerned. This is a hazard of the admissions process for graduate school, but it also afflicts the selection of students for undergraduate research experiences, even when we have taught these students in our very own classes. This is (mostly) not a rant about supposedly smart students who can't or won't do research, or who can do research but are such incredibly high maintenance that the research experience becomes a serious burden for everyone within a 5 kilometer radius of their research project. This is instead a prose poem of praise for the hard-working B students who excel at research and with whom it can be very enjoyable to work. Some of my undergraduate research assistants are chosen after a competitive application process. Summer interns, for example, are from a highly-selective pool comprised of the top students from the top universities in the country. In this case, "top student" is typically defined as the students with the highest GPA. Most of these students are in fact excellent interns, but some of them are mediocre and some of them are abysmal. It is fascinating in a semi-disturbing kind of way that the same situation applies for selecting students from my own institution. These are students I have met in person before I hire them as undergraduate research assistants or sign on as their advisor for a thesis or research project. In some cases these are the students who got top grades in rigorous courses taught by me and others, yet some of them, however bright, are not so smart when it comes to research. When choosing undergrad research students from my own university, I don't always select the A students. Don't worry -- the hard-working and talented A students are not going without research experiences. In fact, every student who wants such an experience can find an advisor. But sometimes I select a B student who seems to be motivated and smart, but who just doesn't do as well in some classes as some other students. In my experience, the success or failure of these B students at undergraduate research projects is indistinguishable from that of A students -- I have had experiences ranging from outstanding to ghastly with both -- but there are some mutual benefits to working with B students. For the student, a successful research experience as an undergraduate may in some cases offset a modest GPA in graduate admissions efforts. For the advisor, the B student might be easier to work with in some ways. An unscientific hypothesis some of my colleagues and I have recently discussed is that many B students might have the advantage of being less high-maintenance than some A students because they tend not to be so anxious. I think we are perhaps not the first to propose this; for example, see the cartoon in the 9 January 2009 Chronicle Review by V Hixson. In the cartoon, one professor says to another "Actually, I like the B+ students best.. bright, but still humble." And many B students do just as well as A students in research. Reasons for this include: Doing well in a classes, even really difficult ones, does not mean that someone has the skills necessary to do research. Of course we don't expect that students, however stratospheric their GPA, will automatically know how to do research -- as advisors we try to teach this -- but some students learn and thrive as a project evolves, and others do not, no matter how 'smart' they are. The same is true of graduate students. Random example: An apparently top student with A's in difficult courses worked with me on a straightforward bit of research, but it quickly became clear that he had no ability to make connections between different observations or thoughts, could not visualize phenomena, and only understood basic concepts if they were repeated to him many times. He had a great attitude about the work and eked out some results (with lots of help), but he never really understood what he was doing and never went beyond a 'problem set' kind of approach to the research. Doing research as a student typically means you have to be willing to interact with at least one other person (the advisor) and possibly others as well (other students, other faculty, postdocs, technicians). Some people can do this well and some people can't, even with experience, no matter how high their GPA. Random example: One of my A-student interns needed to learn and use a not-complicated technique. Others in the group were experienced with this technique, and several of us were available to answer her questions. After a day or so, A-student came to me, clearly upset, and said "I had some questions and X (an undergrad) and Y (a grad student) helped me a lot, but it is obvious that they care more about their own research than they do about mine." I replied "Well, I should hope so", a comment that shocked her. Her voice quavered as she said "But what about me?". Heroically resisting saying something sarcastic and/or insensitive, I gave her a gentle mini-lecture about being a part of a community of researchers driven by individual curiosity and working together but also independently etc. etc. She was not happy to learn that the major focus of all our efforts and interests was not her. Alas, this realization did not change her world view, but we somehow got through the rest of the summer and she returned in the fall to her home institution and the professors who wrote her rave letters of recommendation and later admitted to me that they didn't like working with her either. It would save a lot of time, money, stress, and grief if we could predict in advance which students would do well in a research experience, but in the absence of a reliable method of prediction, we'll just have to continue with the classic trial-and-error approach. Most of the time this works out well, especially if the students are mostly sane. |
回復(fù)此樓» 收錄本帖的淘帖專(zhuān)輯推薦
 學(xué)習(xí)資源 | 知識(shí) |
» 本帖已獲得的紅花（最新10朵）
millor9» 猜你喜歡
求調(diào)劑院校信息
已經(jīng)有4人回復(fù)
-
085600材料與化工306
已經(jīng)有4人回復(fù)
-
286求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有10人回復(fù)
-
328求調(diào)劑，英語(yǔ)六級(jí)551，有科研經(jīng)歷
已經(jīng)有9人回復(fù)
-
一志愿北京化工大學(xué)070300 學(xué)碩336求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有4人回復(fù)
-
286分人工智能專(zhuān)業(yè)請(qǐng)求調(diào)劑愿意跨考！
已經(jīng)有8人回復(fù)
-
資源與環(huán)境 調(diào)劑申請(qǐng)(333分)
已經(jīng)有5人回復(fù)
-
280求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有12人回復(fù)
-
269專(zhuān)碩求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有5人回復(fù)
-
材料學(xué)碩301分求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有7人回復(fù)
» 本主題相關(guān)價(jià)值貼推薦，對(duì)您同樣有幫助:
- 管理理論每日談更新
已經(jīng)有65人回復(fù)
冼亮淀粉酶
專(zhuān)家顧問(wèn) (知名作家)
生物大分子降解酶
-
專(zhuān)家經(jīng)驗(yàn): +248 - BioEPI: 73
- 應(yīng)助: 257 (大學(xué)生)
- 貴賓: 0.272
- 金幣: 19459.9
- 散金: 1704
- 紅花: 121
- 帖子: 6586
- 在線: 2777.5小時(shí)
- 蟲(chóng)號(hào): 856414
- 注冊(cè): 2009-09-25
- 性別: GG
- 專(zhuān)業(yè): 環(huán)境微生物學(xué)
- 管轄: 微生物
17樓2011-12-20 06:56:38
相關(guān)版塊跳轉(zhuǎn)
我要訂閱樓主 粥香可愛(ài) 的主題更新
| 2 | 1/1 | 返回列表 |
| 最具人氣熱帖推薦 [查看全部] | 作者 | 回/看 | 最后發(fā)表 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
