Anonymous #4 5w

There’s a difference between a teacher marking you down bc a difference of opinion and a teacher marking you down bc you are unable to provide good sources to substantiate a point in an argumentative essay

75

Anonymous #4 5w

When you are writing a research paper and your research is flawed bc you used bad biased sources you should receive a low grade

54

Anonymous OP 5w

But what constitutes a good source? Is the teacher individually looking through the studies provided in the sources you used?

8

Anonymous #4 5w

Or is a good source just one that the teacher has a positive bias towards

2

Anonymous OP 5w

I think this goes against the spirit of the scientific method and argumentation. The skill the professor should be aiming to build is the skill of critical thinking and presenting a viewpoint that builds off of some basic truths. Because if people only argue for the “correct thing” what’s the point of arguing at all? That’s my perspective, and with that lens, the source doesn’t really matter as long as the person builds logically off of their set of truths provided.

2

Anonymous #4 5w

No a good source is one that has little to no media bias everyone is taught that,

43

Anonymous #4 5w

That’s not teaching how to critically think that’s teaching how to make like conspiracy theories off bad sources😭 obviously a research essay is going to be graded on the quality of your research

24

Anonymous OP 5w

The quality of research has nothing to do with the outcome of the research is the viewpoint I’m proposing

7

Anonymous #4 5w

And im saying regardless professors should be grading based on the quality of the research bc that’s what actually teaches students how to find factual information and build opinions off such

26

Anonymous #4 5w

You want students to get a participation award for coming up with any idea based of any source, I want students to be graded on accuracy so we stop having full grown adults blatantly disregarding facts based off good evidence

23

Anonymous #4 5w

The point is, we can only progress if we have people who can form strong cases for each side of any given problem, because if all you’re doing is reciting statistics with the same interpretation as everyone else and saying this is why I’m right, you’re not arguing a point at all, youre regurgitating. The same way people thought it was ridiculous for the earth to revolve around the sun. Everything is a conspiracy until it’s proven with evidence

0

Anonymous #4 5w

Except people didn’t have good factual sources for the sun revolving around the earth, that’s my entire point…🤣

24

Anonymous #4 5w

People need to be graded on the quality of research😭💀💀 jfc ran smack into the point

24

Anonymous #5 5w

from then*

9

Anonymous #4 5w

I agree with u except can you please elaborate on what you mean by “the quality of research has nothing to do with the outcome of the research” ? I personally believe academia is corrupt (people with decent research have been blacklisted from being published, for example) but I feel like generally the quality of research can definitely accept what the results are, quantitative or qualitative.

0

Anonymous #7 5w

*affect lol sorryyyy type

0

Anonymous #10 5w

Very well said

3

Anonymous #4 5w

what exactly do you think the point of scientific research is?

14

Anonymous #11 5w

To explore different ideas, and test them thoroughly. I also just don’t believe scientific research in the humanities is very rigorous, I’m not saying people using bad sources are correct, im saying the logic after reasonable assumptions are picked should be the portion that’s graded, because quality of sources is hard to get a quantitative score for. I think the line between narratives and facts is blurring and academia sometimes reinforces narratives as facts.

-2

Anonymous #4 5w

Wrong opinions are just as important as correct opinions, so we can analyze why they’re wrong. And where they go wrong. Proof by contradiction…

-3

Anonymous OP 5w

An example topic might be easier to have this discussion about, because the line between factual sources and biased data interpretation is blurred imo, ESPECIALLY in the humanities

-2

Anonymous OP 5w

At the time people thought their sources were factual… is my point, hence the need for alternate *incorrect* viewpoints

-3

Anonymous #4 5w

The lines are not blurred😭 there’s a major difference between using observational evidence to say that the world is flat vs using data and analysis to say that the world is spherical, just bc the flat earner backed up their claim doesn’t mean they are right

18

Anonymous #4 5w

There are objective ways to judge a sources reliability

20

Anonymous #4 5w

your first sentence is very telling. the point of scientific research is to come to accurate conclusions about the natural world based on a rigorous set of processes designed to demonstrate the falseness and trueness of claims about said natural world the purpose of humanities classes is to teach students how to apply this process to the humanities. being unable to provide strong evidence means you cannot "form strong cases". the bad grade IS "test[ing] them thoroughly". that is education

15

Anonymous #4 5w

your second sentence is also telling, especially in combination with the first. scientific research in the humanities is rigorous, you just fundamentally misunderstand the process and consequently underestimate it and the people who steward said knowledge

9

Anonymous #5 5w

transphobes are masters at ignoring the overwhelming scientific consensus. there are reasons why ever major medical organization recognizes trans people as valid and recognizes the importance of gender affirming care. transphobes have no argument that doesn't involve obfuscation of the truth

21

Anonymous #4 5w

not all views are equal. some opinions are bad, in the sense that they don't stand up to scrutiny. regardless of if you label it "political" if your perspective is not rationally sound, it is not valid, and views that are rational and found in the data, are valid. not all opinions are intrinsically equal in value.

7

Anonymous #11 5w

You literally just restated to explore ideas rigorously with more detail as to how that’s done. I don’t think I misunderstand the scientific process.

-2

Anonymous #13 5w

It depends on the metric you use to measure the value of opinions.

1

Anonymous #13 5w

I agree some opinions are truer than others.

0

Anonymous OP 5w

The flat earther example isn’t the one I’m talking about, it’s a simplified idealistic example. Also it’s not a humanities subject, so it’s more objectively measurable by nature

1

Anonymous #14 5w

Wild assumption why would I be okay with that lmao

14

Anonymous #4 5w

"explore ideas rigorously" is meaningless. plenty of people think they're "exploring ideas rigorously" while using poor rationale to analyze insufficient evidence and come to inaccurate conclusions the *purpose* of research is to find truth. the scientific process does that. college teaches you that process and grades you on your application of it. these are not debate clubs ironically you're criticizing the academic rigor while claiming they're not rigorous

4

Anonymous #11 5w

It’s meaningless? But it’s just a condensed version of what you said

-1

Anonymous #4 5w

You gotta be trolling

4

Anonymous #4 5w

Aren’t you in university? A good source is peer-reviewed, written by an expert/expert in the relevant field, recent and published in a legitimate journal…

8

Anonymous #16 5w

I was exploring ideas earlier, but here’s my final take: when research isn’t settled, grading should reward how students navigate contested evidence - not punish them for taking the minority view, as long as they argue critically and with evidence.

0

Anonymous #4 5w

The social sciences are inherently debate-driven; every major discipline in them was built through argument between competing schools of thought. Pretending they’re cut-and-dry “science” like the natural sciences is an oversimplification.

0

Anonymous #4 5w

Their rigor comes from critique and competing perspectives, not laws of nature - which is why debate should be central and celebrated, not punished. Appeals to authority through citing legitimate publications and experts make grading easy, but they also risk ignoring systematic bias in those systems. Rigor means interrogating authority, not just deferring to it.

0

Anonymous #11 5w

Implying that the phrase “Exploring ideas rigorously” is meaningless because people do it and fail at it, is akin to arguing that the scientific method is meaningless because people enact it improperly.

0

Anonymous #4 5w

Usually looking through the sources. Bc academic integrity

1

Anonymous #14 5w

Look at you, not understanding anything about GAC. Cute.

4

Anonymous #4 5w

the phrase is a meaningless answer to the question of what the purpose of research is because it literally doesn't describe it. the purpose, condensed, is to find truth. "explore ideas" is what a redditor does when scrolling on the toilet. "explore ideas" describes every elementary class. it's vague and meaningless because i genuinely don't think you understand what research is intended for

2

Anonymous #4 5w

the point is not to learn how to argue for something that isn't evidenced. if something isn't evidenced, we go and find the evidence. we can't just submit work without evidence and expect the teacher to reward us the same as a student who provided it just because we think we made a good argument. these are not debate classes. scientific argument is not about style and form, it's about substance

6

Anonymous #4 5w

we don't start with conclusions. we don't start with truth claims. we don't start with persuasion we start with a hypothesis, find the evidence, *then* seek a conclusion/truth claim. your idea of how these classes should reward students is a perversion of the scientific process. it's crazy to think a person meant to grade your use of the scientific method should reward you for making baseless arguments no matter how well structured it might be

2

Anonymous #4 5w

nobody is stopping you from exploring niche topics btw. they're just not rewarding you as if that is itself good enough to demonstrate mastery if you want to use poorly researched topics you can but the onus of proof is still on you. basically you're shooting yourself in the foot, playing on hard mode, and upset the teachers aren't patting your back for it. there are environments for doing this kinda exploration sans grades my friend. no need to demand lower standards

2