Failademics

The particular subject I am writing about today has come up in several conversations I’ve had through the years since my college years. I want to talk about failure teaching at the highest level of collegiate academics. Thus, I have coined the phrase Failademics. I don’t know how many college educated readers are here or what degree path they have chosen, but that doesn’t matter. The theory I have holds true in several environments, not just academics. But, let’s not get too far ahead of ourselves. Let’s focus on the initial concept within our institutions of “higher learning.”

Once you reach college, the first 2 years for everyone is basically the same routine. You take your general education classes, some electives, and some prerequisites that mostly every single student has to pass before they enter classes which define their major during their junior and senior years. The first 2 years of college is, let’s face it, the weeding out process. Can a student show the dedication necessary to succeed in school? Can the student begin to mature as a young adult with a drastic change in supervision and rules (severe reduction in both)? Can the student balance school (and possibly work) with social life in an arena where the decision making is done with limited advice and experience? Lots of very important questions and there are thousands of failures every year. Colleges do not cater to student needs and whims as a high school would. You are there to learn a trade and become a young adult. You are there to begin the maturing process of becoming a dependable and responsible adult.

This is but a portion of failademics. This portion falls entirely upon the student and responsibility for failure resides within their own hands and decision making. They have no one to blame but the person in the mirror. However, there is a turning point in college academics where failademics becomes thrust upon them and not by their own doing. You may have no idea where I’m going here or what I’m going to write about. That’s good. I don’t want to write a general knowledge article. What I am talking about here is that point where you begin taking core classes for completion of your degree. Some classes are very difficult and some are just background building classes that will be utilized in the future. After the 2 year weeding out process, we now have a fertile ground of students who have passed the first tests of young adulthood. They have managed to bypass the serious roadblocks and have made it to the next cornerstone of their growth.

The turning point I am talking about comes in the form of teachers who profess that they are teaching their students, but in fact, they are failing their students. I’m not talking about failing them as in not passing them through their class. I am talking about teachers who are not nurturing the minds of their young students or providing a necessary platform supporting success. These teachers are teaching failademics. There are several degree plans that are very difficult to successfully complete even with the dedication and help of capable teachers. If we alter the playing field with “teachers” promoting failure within their classroom, it creates an unnecessary hurdle for students to face.

Let me explain what these teachers are doing. I’m sure that most of us have heard about “grading on the curve.” If not, it’s a system where you take the highest student score and make that the top score and then grade everyone else appropriately. So, if the top student scores an 80% that is the equivalent of an A. Follow suit through the remainder of the grading system. That is “grading on the curve.” That in itself is not the problem. The problem lies in the fact that certain teachers have classes where their top student scores less than 50%, sometimes as far down as 30%. Top score, equivalent of 100%, is less than half. Does that sound like a realistic grading system here? What exactly does this prove? Are we really learning anything here? If we have classes where passing is in the 20% score range, are we actually teaching ANYTHING? Better yet, are we actually LEARNING anything?

Some teachers are proud of how difficult they can make their tests. That is fine, difficult is not impossible. The teachers subscribing to failademics are creating tests that they KNOW students will fail and fail miserably at. They enjoy the fact that they are viewed as the most “difficult” teachers on campus. They enjoy the fact that students “fear” their classes. They feed upon this knowledge. Are these teachers trying to help their students succeed in their path to adulthood or are they trying to facilitate their own needs of superiority here? Once again, show me a rational argument for creating a testing situation where 70% failure is good enough for an A. Is that successful? No, not in any way can it be viewed that way. This isn’t a baseball average where .300 is the cutoff to be a great hitter. This is real life where we are trying to learn something. I’m not supporting the creation of “cake” testing either. There is a large area between very difficult and near impossible.

How does the student react in these situations? Does the student feel like they have learned a great amount? Do they feel like they are adequately prepared for future classes and the requirements of the working world? I can say that I was in some of these failademic classes during my college tenure and I had roommates and friends in other similar situations. I was lucky enough to be the “curve buster” but that doesn’t make it right for every other student to be subjected to these testing practices. Of course the people involved feel like they know less than expected. They feel like they are not prepared for the next class which will build upon what you just “didn’t” learn making it extremely difficult to pass. I can even say that these students are left more unprepared for the working world than they were going into the classes. Teaching failure is a situation of reverse psychology. Teach them they don’t know everything, and they will focus on working harder. They will dedicate their time better to overcome the roadblock. They will understand that they don’t know everything and their thirst for knowledge will increase. Is that true?

Yes, to some that is a true method of motivation. The point being is that only some are led in this manner. The vast majority are taught in a much different manner. These failademic teachers have resorted to subjecting their students to consistent failure for the purpose of fulfilling their own desires, not to support and help their students succeed in their future. Learning is accomplished through both failure and success, but making success near impossible teaches nothing but failure. There are those in the world outside of higher learning that adhere to the theory of failademics in their everyday approach to living. They teach and promote failure to those around them. The failures of others make them feel good. However, the people around them are not being “graded on the curve.” Failure is failure in the real world. Be on the watch for the teachers and supporters of failure in your life. When faced with a teacher of failure in your life, confront the situation and don’t allow failure to become an accepted or agreeable outcome. Learn from your failures, but remove those promoting it from your life.