[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
On the "berkeley" comment at the end of the class..
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: On the "berkeley" comment at the end of the class..
- From: "Subbarao Kambhampati" <email@example.com>
- Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2006 19:49:34 -0700
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:x-google-sender-auth; b=ETG9VZWQ2W6KkkA5b5/CMNpgbBqaIOogguvtIn0Pvw3y5wOZPL015sTYY9gZdSEgx/nc2VPAOW9mTo5vE99zY+9Eiy6MbNcsp4ofxH0zc9U3wCK2yNg6owCM2TQa53CjcKvbSUzRi0zCedmSgY8IVk1aO26rezKkqNls6Le2Rco=
- Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org
My comment comparing 471 to the berkeley intro to AI may have come across a bit more jarring than I intended.
Looking beyond the bluster, I think I do have something serious to say here, so let me try once more.
My philosophy is that *what* is taught in a course shouldn't depend on *where* it is taught. The demands and
coverage of the course should not be diluted based on anyone's reduced expectations of a student population
(since this is a vicious slippery slope and is ultimately detrimental to the students themselves).
Your grade may well depend on who else took the course with you, but the material and demands should not.
I should also make it clear that there was no real deluge of students requesting me to reduce the demands or coverage.
In all the semester, I probably heard about one and a half comments of this vein. Most others seemed to take it in stride;
and I respect that immensely.