<p>
You conveniently chose to ignore my point, which was that students should understand how they’re doing in a course beyond what their grade tells them. Come on, students know whether they are just showing up to class or are really learning the material.</p>
<p>
I admitted the possibility that there might be an acting course somewhere that’s being done in a non-academic way. That’s a far cry from agreeing that there’s no difference between academic and work experience!</p>
<p>
An American Studies professor certainly has the right to hold academic failures against students; not in the sense that they get unfair treatment in a course, but in the sense that American Studies departments should have the information when deciding who to allow to take courses or pursue a degree. If some departments choose not to exercise that option, so be it.</p>
<p>
Exactly. The department has limited resources; why should a student who has already failed at engineering be given an opportunity in lieu of a student who has not? More importantly, why should the new engineering program not be able to use information about past academic performance to predict future academic performance in whatever way they see fit? I find it entirely more reasonable to deny industry any records of past academic performance than to deny it to academia.</p>
<p>
Yes, I believe MIT is wrong in this matter, and that this practice represents a dangerous precedent I hope other well-meaning institutions don’t use as an excuse.</p>