I just wanted to say few things about my experiences on reading students' ratings on ratemyprofressor.com.
First, professors who consistently get good ratings are usually very good lecturers. They are not necessarily easy profs. But they do give great lectures and explain things more thoroughly. On the other hand, professors who get consistently low ratings are usually not good. For example, last term, I took a course with a prof who got 2/5 on ratemyprofessor and her lectures indeed suck although she is a kind person. She doesn't explain the math materials she is teaching; just barely writes down notes on the board. And all the students I have talked to also think she is not a good teacher. The term before I took a course a prof who got 4/5 on ratemyprofessor. She is indeed a great prof and explained everything so clearly. Our class wrote the same exams as the sections but our average was 7 percentage higher overall.
Of course, the ratings from that website may not be equivalent to the ratings profs get from their actual teaching evaluation. But from my experience, I think the students do have the ability to distinguish between good profs and bad profs. And students' ratings are not only based on how easy the course is but also based on how interesting the lectures are and how approachable the prof is.
Does anyone who has an opposite experience from what I have experienced? That is taking a course who a prof who got high ratings on ratemyprofs but felt the prof was bad.
But everything you say is what everyone believes is "common sense." If all you want are clear lectures well delivered, great, follow the advice on some random rating website.
The research, however, says that the student evaluations are negatively correlated with subsequent ability in the subject. In other words, you are repeating the common sense view that is flatly contradicted by careful research.
What should I trust: your anecdata, or published research?
I have definitely had life-changing professors who taught be extremely valuable lessons who were poorly rated on that site. And one of the worst professors I ever had (like if I build a time machine I'm going back to tell myself not to take his class) was highly rated on that site.
I had to relearn calculus because I decided to study stats after finishing my BA in psychology. I was good at Math before but now I have to relearn it.. What did I do???? JUST LEARN IT AGAIN! I listened to lectures online; read the textbook.. I really don't think there is any shortcut to this. Also I am sure you didn't forget everything. You will surely learn faster the second time around.
The short story "Runaway" by Alice Munro. Alice Munro is very good at depicting the complex emotions of people in a relationship. This story has given me insight about my own relationship.
I don't think it is your case..But I just want to tell you my personal story about why my dad kept on complaining that the camera is bad on Nexus 4. It turns out that there is a screen protector on his Nexus 4's back that actually COVERS the camera. The other two Nexus 4 I bought for myself and my bf also had screen protectors on its back but it was not covering the cameras.... So yeah..
This makes me really sad because I really like this guy a lot..Watched some of his speeches for young people..He seems to be a really kind and easy going person.
If left untreated, a typical major depressive episode may last for about six months, while about 20% of these episodes can last two years or more, with 50% of depressive episodes ending spontaneously.
I can probably find you an article reference if you want. But I have learned this kind of research findings in psychology class.
There's also a such thing as chronic depression, and reason to think that major depression follows a relapsing-remitting course, at least in some people, and may turn into or be a warning sign of developing chronic depression.
Which says nothing about the effectiveness of psychiatric treatments. But it does argue for aggressive early treatment, whatever that might mean, in the hope of halting the progression before it could become chronic.
Mental illness is fundamentally hard to study scientifically, and I'm not convinced that any of the treatments we have actually work. But it's humane to make the attempt.
If you think interview is really a measurement of one's professional ability, then like any measurement, it has measurement errors. To me, it seems that this person has some sort of interview anxiety because of previous bad interview experiences.. So the anxiety kind of feeds back onto itself. In this case, the interview can't really measure his ability accurately. But this brings another question... How valid and reliable are those interviews? I really have no idea about that since I have never had a tech interview. Just a question to think about when it comes to evaluating a measurement
The following quote didn't really inspire me. But I still love it because I think what it says is really true.
“Love is a temporary madness, it erupts like volcanoes and then subsides. And when it subsides, you have to make a decision. You have to work out whether your roots have so entwined together that it is inconceivable that you should ever part. Because this is what love is. Love is not breathlessness, it is not excitement, it is not the promulgation of promises of eternal passion, it is not the desire to mate every second minute of the day, it is not lying awake at night imagining that he is kissing every cranny of your body. No, don't blush, I am telling you some truths. That is just being "in love", which any fool can do. Love itself is what is left over when being in love has burned away, and this is both an art and a fortunate accident.”― Louis de Bernières, Captain Corelli's Mandolin
First, professors who consistently get good ratings are usually very good lecturers. They are not necessarily easy profs. But they do give great lectures and explain things more thoroughly. On the other hand, professors who get consistently low ratings are usually not good. For example, last term, I took a course with a prof who got 2/5 on ratemyprofessor and her lectures indeed suck although she is a kind person. She doesn't explain the math materials she is teaching; just barely writes down notes on the board. And all the students I have talked to also think she is not a good teacher. The term before I took a course a prof who got 4/5 on ratemyprofessor. She is indeed a great prof and explained everything so clearly. Our class wrote the same exams as the sections but our average was 7 percentage higher overall.
Of course, the ratings from that website may not be equivalent to the ratings profs get from their actual teaching evaluation. But from my experience, I think the students do have the ability to distinguish between good profs and bad profs. And students' ratings are not only based on how easy the course is but also based on how interesting the lectures are and how approachable the prof is.
Does anyone who has an opposite experience from what I have experienced? That is taking a course who a prof who got high ratings on ratemyprofs but felt the prof was bad.