Enough! A persons perspective is their right. This mailbase belongs to its users who are encouraged to use it to voice that perspective. It is in the nature of a professional service that we users and owners should , if we feel the need, question that same view. It is not a medium through which we subject the owners of that view to abuse and sarcasm. If it is to degenerate into that, then I for one will no longer own and use it.
I have been an avid reader of Dr Siffs postings, which have always been provocative, and educational because of that. Wether or not I agree with his views on student abuse of learning resources is irrelevant - If I have a view it would be based on the SUBJECT--- NOT the sender.
Please tell me this will cease.
----------
From: Mark Kaizik
Sent: 01 October 1998 14:06
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: STUDENT REQUESTS
Dear Mcsiff,
What's your point? Was that your pathetic attempt at an apology?
Why are you wasting my time with your whingeing about the job you find
yourself in?
Your job is to teach, from what I gather, and if your patience has waned
over the years so that you now only have an interest in educating the
articulate, then it is probably a good time to move on.
"My case rests!"; what rubbish is this? You sound like an angry old
man, not a health professional at all. Get off your soapbox, Mcsiff,
and let's start talking about some real issues in physiotherapy, not
some gripe a teacher has about his students.
(PS: I've just done an extensive search through Medline, CINAHL and
EMBASE and I still can't find the study that shows a high correlation
between how articulate one is and how diligent or dedicated to a cause
one is. If you can find it, please forward it on to me as I know of a
few politicians in my country at the moment that could use it to boost
their credibility coming up to the Federal Election).
Mark Kaizik
Sydney, Australia.
[log in to unmask]
>Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 06:37:38 EDT
>Subject: STUDENT REQUESTS
>From: [log in to unmask]
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
>
>In a message dated 9/30/98, Sheri Mitchell<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>>. . . . I am sorry you have come to the conclusion that the students
who are
>requesting information are lazy and have not "done their homework"
prior to
>using this service to request information.
>
>***My original letter very specifically did not make any generalisation
that
>students who ask members of user groups for help are lazy. It stated:
>
>"There seems to be a very disquieting increase in the number of
students
>requesting help with preparing projects at undergraduate and
postgraduate
>level without displaying any evidence at all that they have first tried
>sincerely to obtain information from libraries".
>
>As a matter of fact, my sample letter with which I introduced the topic
was
>only slightly modified from two actual student posts to this user
group. The
>emphasis was on students who do not display ANY evidence of prior
efforts to
>obtain information. My comments on this increasing trend are not
unique, but
>reflect the observation of many others on this group and of university
staff
>with whom I have had considerable contact in physical therapy.
>
>In sharp contrast, the letters from other students clearly show that
they have
>put a great deal of thought and effort into their problems before
rushing off
>to the Internet just before their processes of creative thinking had a
chance
>to intensify.
>It is quite simply this attitude which I was hoping to encourage by
writing
>that letter, which I knew would seem harsh and judgmental to some.
>
>Judging from her clearly articulated letter, I would tend to conclude
that
>Sheri Mitchell is precisely one of those more diligent and meticulous
students
>who would hesitated to have written a lazily constructed, weakly
disguised
>demand for help. Any fears that she may have of requesting information
in the
>same manner as her letter should be laid immediately to rest and I am
sure
>that she is well aware of that fact, despite what she may say to the
contrary.
>After all, she remarked:
>
>"......I agree that having someone else do the research is totally
uncalled
>for..."
>
>She then went on to make this conclusion:
>
>" .....but I feel it is unfortunate that you have grouped all these
requests
>together as a nuisance".
>
>***Again, Sheri has misrepresented what I wrote. Never once did I
mention
>anything about nuisance - I continually stressed the importance of
showing
>that students had done SOME groundwork first. I simply exhorted
students as
>follows:
>
>"So, before any students dash reflexively to the user groups for help,
may we
>encourage them to use some of the above resources first, impress the
rest of
>us that you are not lazy to do some serious groundwork first and that
you have
>already put a lot of determined effort into undertaking a research
project
>which you want to do to the best of your ability. You will be
pleasantly
>surprised to see how much more help you obtain via this approach! "
>
>Instead of being destructively critical, as is so often the case, I
went to a
>great deal of effort to constructively compile a list of guidelines and
>websites to help students who are stalemated in their quest for
information.
>I wrote:
>
>"HINTS TO ENCOURAGE RESPONSE
>
>While it is a pleasure to assist any dedicated students and seekers
after
>knowledge, professionals on the web always tend to respond more rapidly
and
>helpfully if students: . . . . <list of HINTS follows>
>
>Sheri's letter regularly alludes to rules and structure and once again
saddens
>me to see how much she has distorted the intention of my letter. I very
>explicitly stated that these were HINTS or guidelines.
>
>> Personally I do not feel it is necessary, nor required, that a
reference
>>list is included with the request for information in order to validate
>>the request.
>
>***My letter did not say that references were necessary or required. I
said
>that it was helpful if the student:
>
>5. Posts a summary of information and/or a list of references obtained
from
>list
> members
>
>This is regarded as the sole 'payback' on most academic and
professional user
>groups AFTER list members have submitted info to anyone else asking for
it.
>Once adequate discussion has taken place, the original requester
summarises
>all information and references received so that everyone can benefit
from the
>exchange of ideas.
>
>CONCLUDING EXAMPLE
>
>It may be appropriate to conclude by presenting the original example of
a
>student request and following it with another one (also based on an
actual
>letter submitted by a student) which takes a somewhat different
approach. I
>leave Sheri and any others who support the sentiments of her letter to
judge
>which letter would be more likely to attract the unhesitant attention
of list
>members.
>
>Letter A
>
>"Hi, guys, I have to do a research topic on something in sports physio
and I
>cannot think of any suitable topic. Can you help? I'm also looking
for some
>good books on that topic, so let me have your suggestions on that, as
well.
>Oh, can you do that as soon as possible, because the project is due
next week.
>Thanks". No name.
>
>Letter B
>
>"I am a final year physical therapy student at ABC University in LA. We
have
>to complete a four month long major research project on a topic of our
own
>choice, but few of us know which fields offer the most useful and
pressing
>opportunities for such research. The general field of sports physio
interests
>me the most, with disability issues a close second. Maybe a topic
which
>integrates both fields would be possible, such as sports training as
part of
>post-acute rehabilitation. I would be most grateful if anyone could
suggest
>possible topics in this field which may be of definite practical value
to
>physical therapy.
>
>Jeanette Brown
>Address etc "
>
>My case rests.
>
>Dr Mel C Siff
>Littleton, Colorado, USA
>[log in to unmask]
>
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
