Studying subjects at university and college is a long process that must be integrated into the student on a long-term basis. Convergence of exam sessions will increase the gaps.
In addition, this reform of primary and secondary education desired by psycho-pedagogues is based more on the concern for “rest” and rhythms than on the need to transmit solid knowledge and teach students the value of hard work. turn them into future adults.
Ongoing deep knowledge transfer
If we can congratulate our colleague on the practice of examination outside the regulatory time limits (while regretting the illegal nature of the thing, at the risk of appeal!), we can neither endorse the arguments he advances nor the hasty generalizations on the one hand. his hand testifies to the ignorance of the students about the cognitive processes, and also criticizes the faculties, which he does not know deeply, except for himself.
When he writes, “with two close sessions, on the second attempt, the material is still in the mind, if it comes six or eight months later, everything has to be started from scratch and it takes too much time to be used for other exams”, he says that the knowledge that our students have to adapt ( (it is not “transmitted” by a process of psittacism; it is built up through courses, practical work, assessments) must be deep knowledge. superficial knowledge that dissipates as soon as an exam is passed. Such knowledge is supposed to be sustained through continuous and relentless assimilation work (including professional internships in faculties) . Moreover, it does not take into account the “understanding” of the discipline. For example, physics and mathematics require perception rather than memorization. The subject I teach, morphological sciences, requires the acquisition of three-dimensional, even four-dimensional vision when it comes to embryonic development. Appropriate thinking in June A student who doesn’t get the techniques will not have mastered them in July because it takes time and practice I dare to imagine that this thing also passes for historical criticism. Moreover, many failures can be explained by the lack of a student’s work method. Do we believe it will get better in 2 or 3 weeks? Simply put, the key to success is also and above all, hard work. If we haven’t done anything during the year, we will offer the student the time he needs to correct his deficiencies, rather than retaking the exam almost immediately.
Encourage smart memorization
When our colleague stigmatizes the faculties of medicine or pharmacy, condemns the “thousand-page” courses there, or the “memorization” of drug components, we are clearly misinformed. First, no lesson should require “rote” learning, but rather intelligent memorization based on understanding the lesson. Then the course is measured not by “pages” as we often hear, unfortunately, but by the integration of theoretical, practical, procedural concepts based on writings, oral courses, self-study, directed or individual exercises. Limiting these processes to “pages” is not only reductive, but also completely negates the role of the teacher and his teaching team, whose goal is to facilitate learning and make the material comprehensible. We talked about rote; our colleague suggests using the internet to find the ingredients of medicines. First, we can inquire about Professor Lagrow’s expertise in the field of health sciences. What, then, would he think of a physician or pharmacist who, in front of a patient, picks up basic concepts of anatomy or pharmacology essential to his practice from a computer in front of a patient, ignoring the fundamentals necessary for his practice?
A demagogic view of education
When our colleague bemoans the high failure rate of first-year university students, he misses the real causes of the problem: the poor state of our secondary education (and the “excellence pact doesn’t help”), the decline of education. the demands placed on our high school students, the gradual limitation of imparted knowledge, the standardization of tests, and people coming to university who have no business there. In short, it is the result of a demagogic view of education and the illusion of “success for all” that ignores the unequal and irreplaceable distribution of talents (evidence that everyone accepts in the fields of sports and music).
In short, most of our colleagues who are interested in pedagogy, we cannot unhesitatingly accept this superficial and reductive analysis, aggravated by misinformation, published by our colleague who seems indifferent to the specificity of teaching processes in higher education. Some remarks criticize his colleagues, and this is reflected in the entire university.