The Raw Content
The paragraph I show below refers to my personal experiences TAing chemistry students and their relative preparedness for college material. Although they come from diverse backgrounds in terms of chemical knowledge, a large majority of them have the toolkits necessary to learn. Some spend more time on chemistry and thereby succeed, whereas others don't care as much. However, very few of them are incapable of understanding chemistry if they sit down and make an effort.
The Final Cut
As both a student and chemistry teaching assistant at the University of Arizona, I have seen the effects of this trend in action. When my class starts their introductory course, their foundation in chemistry varies widely. Some students have never taken a chemistry course before, whereas others have completed an entire Advanced Placement curriculum. In the first lab report, those with the strongest background tend to do best, and those with little experience in chemistry fare poorly. By the end of the semester, background knowledge in chemistry is a terrible predictor of success in the lab. What this suggests is that different high schools may have different curriculums, but they graduate students who can think and learn. College freshmen have the toolkits to study, learn material, and think about science in ways they haven’t done before. These toolkits are far more important than the random knowledge they did or did not collect while in high school. The ability of students to overcome a deficit in chemistry and ultimately do well in a tough college course demonstrates that many of them are arriving with these toolkits already intact.
- As you can see, my paragraph became far more developed. Earlier, my intended audience was almost more directled at myself and what I planned to do with the paragraph. By this point, I have adjusted my audience to more directly represent peers, Sean, and others who may read this at large.
No comments:
Post a Comment