I think the whole "low rated" teachers, food etc in various surveys comes down to the lack of choice. ie eat whats in front of you , no choice of picking from 5 different cafes each with many items on the menu, like they do at a"typical college" Also when I went to school (way back when )you got to pick the proof you wanted AND the day you wanted to take the class. No such luck at KP. But after 4 years, they end up employed. So does the lack of choices (and low ratings..) really matter?
I read this post yesterday and wondered how so many mids could be getting such low grades. I was looking at The Princeton Review's "The Best 371 Colleges 2010 Edition" and in the front of the book they rate "academics, student satisfaction, campus life, dorms, etc...". They also rate professors either high or low. Under the heading, "Professors Get Low Marks", USMMA was rated #1 of 371 by the students. I know nothing about all of this, but it makes you wonder what the problem is.
in a way, yes, youre right. eating what is essentially the same menu every 2 weeks gets HORRIBLY old. but that doesnt make up for the fact that the food itself is, in essence, BAD. i would say that the quality does in fact play more of a part in the "low rating" of the food than the lack of variety.
as for the teachers, i disagree completely. most of the mids at the academy understand that, due to the choice they (we) have made, we're not entitled to the same sort of flexibility in curriculum as our counterparts at "normal" college. but, for a Service Academy, i really dont think that its too much of a stretch to get professors that we can UNDERSTAND when they speak, or that spend more time teaching rather than finding "creative", 5-minute long ways to wake up plebes, or going ballistic because someone whispered something to their neighbor, or threatening to take points off of a students grade if they dont know the verbatim definition of 'production possibility curve' off the top of their head. another issue is that, while alot of our professors are absolutely BRILLIANT in their respective fields from a knowledge standpoint, they are terrible at teaching it. You can actually sit and watch certain instructors struggle to find the words to describe even the basics of a subject that they obviously know inside and out themselves. so, in conclusion, yes the lack of variety may play a part in the low ratings of both of these fields, but a greater variety of poor options would not happier midshipmen make
I think most of the mids setback or disenrolled were taking calculus. What will happen to the mids that take calculus next term? I think some forget they are there to teach......
Food is a great motivator.
As a "VETERAN" AC PRO ranger...I can fully concur with this!As a general rule, SAs are tough. And, IMO, that's a good thing. In my day at USNA, going into our final EE exams, ~80% of the class had a D or below. I must admit that the final was quite easy if you'd studied. I think they feared having 800 rising firsties in summer school.
It IS a shock for most plebes/doolies first semester at SAs. Almost all have been tops in their class and suddenly they're getting Cs and Ds. I was no exception and my mother (a former teacher) was almost in complete shock. Trust me, 99% of them will get through it and their grades will improve as they become more efficient at studying and juggling all of the things a SA throws at them.