…ask him/her how you fell short. Most professors are super-impressed that a student is actually taking the class seriously

Thank you for the addition. Your three observations are particularly relevant to my readers. I should have included this general “ask the professor” strategy in the original article as I often suggest it to students. The other addendum I provide — which I’m sure you agree with — is to be 100% clear that you’re not complaining or hoping to improve your grade.

I’m a part-time college professor (other part = stay-at-home dad), and students doing worse than they expected actually happens a fair amount. A self-assessing post-mortem is good — but what would be even better is to meet with the professor, and (in a non-confrontational!) way, ask him/her how you fell short. Most professors are super-impressed that a student is actually taking the class seriously, and wants to do better (as opposed to “simply passing”).

Broadly speaking, students tend to under-perform in one of three ways:

1) They’re just plain wrong. (i.e. They **think** they know their stuff. But they’ve learned it wrong. This also includes reversing or confusing similar concepts. Doh!)

2) They don’t elaborate or clarify sufficiently. (i.e. They say stuff which, yeah, is correct. But they don’t go far enough. [e.g. "The American Revolution took place in 1776, and pitted the American colonists against the British. The End."])

3) They don’t answer all parts of the question. (E.g. “Explain Social Disorganization Theory, and briefly explain a crime-reduction intervention consistent with that theory.” Students define it, but then forget to create an intervention.)

This probably applies to the humanities and social sciences. May not apply to math-based things, like Chemistry or Stats.

–GG

zatexolin…

Lavaca Port Wave …

Wow, Cal, finally! I wonder what is next for you in your life…

People tend to hold overly favorable views of their abilities in many social and intellectual domains. The authors suggest that this overestimation occurs, in part, because people who are unskilled in these domains suffer a dual burden: Not only do these people reach erroneous conclusions and make unfortunate choices, but their incompetence robs them of the metacognitive ability to realize it. Across 4 studies, the authors found that participants scoring in the bottom quartile on tests of humor, grammar, and logic grossly overestimated their test performance and ability. Although their test scores put them in the 12th percentile, they estimated themselves to be in the 62nd. Several analyses linked this miscalibration to deficits in metacognitive skill, or the capacity to distinguish accuracy from error. Paradoxically,improving the skills of participants, and thus increasing their metacognitive competence, helped them recognize the limitations of their abilities.
http://www.apa.org/journals/features/psp7761121.pdf

Like they say sometimes – In order to be able to study successfully, one needs to be humble.

Black Box’s can be dangerous. The post-mortem method is good and I think its a good strategy with a lot more things than just tests, like papers. If you think you put in 100% and you get out 55 the best thing you could do is step back and evaluate. A lot of people forget this though and look for a quick fix. Nice post.

What will you be doing in Boston, working or doing post-Doc?