The truth is out there

Garrett and I have gone Mulder and Scully. We're growing our own crop circle! A modern day Chia, the crop circle begins as a "crop-growing mat," sprinkled with seeds and misted with water. Here is a photo from Day One. Thank you, Amanda and Ben, for helping us to become occultivators.

I have been pondering my last post some more, after watching Garrett and his classmate study furiously this weekend for the second part of their qualifying exam. They have been pulling their hair out for the last six months, teaching themselves the complex material that was never adequately taught to them and agonizing over the possibility of failing the exam. Why, I wondered, is there less accountability at the PhD level than at the elementary level? If Garrett were taking the PhD TAKS, his professors would actually be invested in this exam. They would teach the material on their syllabi, giving clear and precise lectures and offering insightful feedback on meaningful assignments. They would care about their PhD students and how they performed on this exam, because their bosses would expect them to put in 100% effort and would take the PhD TAKS results into consideration when evaluating the professors. Heck, they might even give a nice little bonus to the professors if their students do well on the test! If the statistics department had to demonstrate Adequate Yearly Progress under the No PhD Candidate Left Behind Act, they would have to show that each year, more students pass the qualifiers. Garrett and his classmates shouldn't worry about failing -- their professors should be worried if their PhD students fail, and it should be seen as a reflection of the professors' teaching abilities and not the students' ability to learn or to take high-stakes tests.