this student was supposed to write a short position piece on the benefits and/or drawbacks of animal protein in diet. they are quoting jordan peterson and say that even though producing meat is worse for the environment, the problem is overpopulation.
to be clear, i don't think this student is knowingly being malicious, but is obviously finding bad shit online. how would you approach this with the student? it's an online course so we've never met in person, but i have written about a thousand emails to the entire class since september, so they know who i am.
for context, i didn't design the course, just doing the grading.
I teach middle/high school agriculture in rural Iowa. Lot of kids are Trump supporters.
If they say they love Trump or hate socialism or whatever, I always just ask them "why?" And don't stop asking until they give an answer beyond "my parents do" or shit like that.
And I know you said you're just the grader, but if you ever teach a class have a lesson or unit on it. I wasn't teaching at the time of the election, but I would've had them do a research project on ag policies of each of the top 4 candidates. Then have a discussion on it and see who they would vote for based on ag policies alone.
You can't erase years of mindless Trump support overnight but you can at least maybe get them thinking critically and challenging their beliefs.
I really like this advice. You can't turn them into a comrade in one conversation, just try to plant a seed of awareness and alternative viewpoints.
thank you. i was kind of panicking for a moment there. really appreciate the perspective.
I wish I could add a profile pic (on mobile, idk if there's any profile pics in general on browser) so I could have the iconic Dukakis tank pic.
thank you... it's a science paper. if it were a different time, i just would have written "see me" on top.
this is the approach i'm taking, definitely firm but gentle redirection with the emphasis being on finding appropriate sources and representing them correctly in your analysis. thank you again.
it seems pretty simple to me. Reactionary views tend to come from a short list of sources, those being things like racism, misunderstanding of anthropology, outright historical fabrication, misapplied feelings of national pride, etc.
Those don't hold up under the most basic application of academic scrutiny, so grade the students on the basis of having extremely poor sources backing up their claims. The student is citing Jordan Peterson, a clinical psychiatrist who notoriously has a shaky grasp on subjects outside of his expertise, to talk about environmental and nutritional issues. Tell the student to find better sources.
Also apply some very light mockery. Keep asking "Why?" with reactionary stuff because it will inevitably end up resting upon racism, lies, some kind of nascent cultural attitude, etc.
Yeah i think critiquing their sources is the best way to go about it; showing them how to find properly academic sources and how to critically evaluate a source would be more helpful than a well deserved dunk. Taking the piss when they might already be agreeing with a hack like Peterson might just make them cling to it more and dive further in, but showing how to find proper research and letting them realise that nothing Peterson writes would show up is a better lesson.
One of my favourite profs loves to tell the story about how through shoddy research a college student wrote a paper denying the holocaust simply because the student searched for sources poorly; she talked to the kid after class and he was mortified to learn that he was literally using Nazi talking points where he thought he just followed research since a few of the blogs and books they cited were by supposed doctors or professors instead of using anything peer reviewed.
If the kid is a full committed lobster, then they'll probably write OP off as part of the Cultural Bolshevik Postmodern Neomarxist whatever the fuck cabal.
Why arent they citing peer reveiwed papers?
There's a ton of them on the subject https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=diet%20climate%20land%20use
that was the purpose of the assignment, learning to use scholarly sources in an argument.
Other commenters have already posted this, but I'll echo them here. Quality of sources is the obvious place to approach the problem. Does your school/institution have library access to academic data bases? Point the student to those search functions, and encourage them to seek sources there. Many libraries will have explanatory videos showing how to navigate databases, so linking those would be good too. Maybe even talk to the professor about giving the student a low grade, but an opportunity to rewrite the paper using academic sources for a better grade after the fact. Let the student know that they can still argue the same point if they so choose, but it must come from reliable sources.
imma be real with you, i just insult them in a lighthearted way
i used to tutor a lot and that got the best results. dont cite peer reviewed articles or use any deeper logic beyond base emotions, kids are stupid. treat them like adults with zero practical experience.
had a kid randomly go on a rant about communism while i was tutoring him on math shit. i was like 'my grandparents were communists and idk making sure homelessness doesnt exist is the exact opposite of lame, which you are. youre a lame weirdo going on a rant against communism while im teaching you what a parabola is. in fact why do you think you or your parents are experts on communism when they cant teach you what a parabola is and you dont know what a parabola is' i know a tutor guy that went way harder than me on dealing with reactionary shit because he was a civil rights guy back in the day and im mostly dead on the inside
if i thought i could pull it off i might take this tack. having all the communication online makes it kind of risky though. and my advisor will have to be on board with any comments i make to the student.
someday, though. someday.
ah yeah true. didnt consider the all online bit. the kid actually asked me constructive questions about it after he realized he was being a dip. definitely did not convince him entirely (though i did give him a better conception of what communists want) but if i didnt lead with jeers he wouldnt have taken anything i said seriously.
Mark them down for using a hack for a source and explain why in the margins.
