[HPforGrownups] Re: What's wrong with being bad ?

[Shaun Hately]

No: HPFGUIDX 101995

On 19 Jun 2004 at 5:29, kyntor70 wrote:
 
> Dreadnought wrote:
> 
> > But is he concerned about them doing well in them? Yes, he is - if 
> > for no other reason than their results reflect on him. And that is 
> > the reason he teaches them.
> 
> Kyntor replies:
> 
> I think you are ascribing more nobility to Snape than he deserves.  I 
> think Snape would be more than happy to have no Gryffindors in his 
> NEWT class whatsoever.

It's not nobility - it's self interest. He's a teacher - his 
students performance makes him look good, their lack of performance 
makes him look bad.

I somehow don't think Snape would enjoy being criticised by 
Dumbledore - and I do think Dumbledore would be likely to do so if 
whole Houses started failing a subject.

I don't think Snape would enjoy having to answer to outraged 
parents either.

A less than perfect teacher, even a cruel teacher, may be tolerated 
while he is achieving decent results - but I doubt he would be if 
he wasn't even discharging the most basic function of his 
profession satisfactorally.

I've no way of knowing where the lines are for Snape, of course - 
but it's certainly possible they are at a point which requires him 
to teach.
 
> Dreadnought wrote:
> 
> > I learned plenty from classes I was incredibly unenthused about, 
> > and from classes I *dreaded* attending. I would have rather they 
> > were different - but it wasn't critical that they were.
> 
> Kyntor replies:
> 
> I have also learned in classes that I was unenthused about.  However, 
> being unenthused about a class is a lot different from the Professor 
> purposefully sabotaging your results.

Yes, it is - but how often has this happened? Is the Snape's 
general teaching practice, or are we talking specific instances 
again.

Let me make it clear in case I haven't been. Snape's treatment of 
Harry is, in every instance where it differs from his treatment of 
other students, indefensible and reprehensible. But Harry is a 
special case, IMHO - Snape's hatred of him is separate to his 
treatment of his other students.
 
> Dreadnought wrote:
> 
> > Now, do I think Gryffindors may learn well from Snape?
> > 
> > Yes, I do - because one of the natural reactions to being goaded in 
> > the way Snape does is to defy that person. If a harsh teacher tells 
> > you are too stupid to learn something, sometimes that can make you 
> > learn it *just* to prove them wrong. The major problem with such 
> > methods is that they certainly *can* damage children is overused, 
> > or used with the wrong child.
> > 
> > But if you have a group of children selected for their personal 
> > bravery, it's fairly unlikely they are going to be damaged by such 
> > methods (this is why I have had concerns about Snape's methods with 
> > regards to Neville - because until Order of the Phoenix, I wasn't 
> > convinced Neville could handle this treatment - now I think he can 
> > - he does have the resilience and courage he needs to do so).
> 
> Kyntor replies:
> 
> I find it hard to believe that the "piss them off so they do good 
> just to spite you" approach to teaching would be very effective.  And 
> I find it especially difficult to believe that it would work at all 
> against 11 year olds.  The rebellious mindset needed for this method 
> to work isn't present until the children mature a little.

Well, it was effective with me and my classmates, but we weren't 
11. The youngest I know of when this method was used (with my 
classmates) was when they were 12 (I didn't join the school until 
we were all 13) when the first Snape-teacher I encountered was 
their Form Master and teacher for three subjects. It seemed to work 
for them from my observations the following year, but I didn't 
observe that year directly.

But please note, I just said that *one* of the naural reactions to 
be goaded in the way Snape does was defiance - that's the specific 
reaction I think is most relevant to Gryffindors specifically (and 
your question asked me about Gryffindors specifically). It isn't 
the *only* reason. And while I can agree to an extent that that 
specific reason might not apply that much with 11 year olds, some 
of the others certainly could.

For younger students, the possibility of avoiding some of Snape's 
biting comments might well be the main reason for working harder in 
his class. Classic operant conditioning involing a punishment 
stimulus ('Snape might target me'), or if you prefer classic 
operant conditioning involving negative reinforcement ('if I do 
better Snape might stop targeting me!').

There's also less intensive version of the goad response - in some 
cases, the desire isn't so much direct defiance of the teacher, as 
to convince those around you that the teacher is wrong - or to 
convince yourself.

There's multiple factors at work.

> Dreadnought wrote:
>  
> > Is it the best way to teach the Gryffindors? I doubt it. But is it 
> > the best way that *Snape* is capable of using - possibly.
> 
> Kyntor replies:
> 
> Actually the best way he would be capable of would be to treat the 
> Gryffindors exactly as he does the Slytherins.  I don't think it is 
> about what he is capable of, but what he chooses to do.

Well, no, because I don't think treating the Gryffindors in the 
same way he treats the Slytherins would necessarily be the most 
effective way of teaching the Gryffindors.

Effective teaching does *not* involve treating all children in 
exactly the same way. That idea is the *single most important 
reason* why my own education was such a horrible experience when it 
involved methods that many people would find quite attractive. 

When you do that, you always wind up neglecting some children's 
educational needs in favour of the others.

We don't see too much of how Snape teaches the Slytherins - it's 
possible the methods he uses with them are good methods (although 
it also seems possible he lets them get away with not learning if 
they don't want to). But even if they are good methods for the 
Slytherins, that would not automatically make them good methods for 
the Gryffindors.
 
> Dreadnought wrote:
>  
> > Is it ideal? No - but if it has happening, then at least two 
> > methods are in use in the class, rather than just one - and that is 
> > some degree of improvement.
> 
> Kyntor replies:
> 
> Not neccessarily.  If the two different methods aren't chosen 
> carefully, they could be less effective.  For instance,  I believe 
> the grades would be much better in Snapes class if he treated all the 
> house the way he treated Slytherins.  Being abusive to students 
> doesn't provide any advantage that other methods don't include 
> (except of course Snapes twisted enjoyment of bullying children).

OK, you're right - using two methods is not *automatically* an 
improvement - the methods do need to be chosen carefully.

But we're not in a position to tell whether the methods Snape uses 
with the Slytherins are effective or not.

As far as I can recall, the only indication we have that allows us 
to compare class performances between the Slytherins and the 
Gryffindors is Lucius Malfoy's statement "'I would have thought 
you'd be ashamed that a girl of no wizard family beat you in every 
exam.'"

And that involves a non random sample size of 2 - and one of the 
sample is Hermione Granger who could probably come top of her 
classes if sewn into a sack and left in the Chamber of Secrets for 
the entire term.

We can't see Snape's marks book - so we can't know if the methods 
he uses with the Slytherin's are more effective or not than those 
used with Gryffindor.

Personally I wouldn't be at all surprised to find that the 
Gryffindor's marks are, on average, higher than the Slytherins - 
because I think they are generally more likely to work harder, and 
they also don't have Crabbe and Goyle.

But we don't know one way or ther other.
 
> I see Snapes behaviour as a very necessary part of the story.  I 
> believe JKR wants us to be shocked at his behaviour.  She wants us to 
> be outraged at not only how he treats his students but also by the 
> fact that he gets away with it.  I believe that she is using this 
> situation to reflect the darkness inherent in wizarding society.  A 
> darkness represented by prejudice, abuse, apathy, and moral 
> ambiquity.  A darkness created and perpetuated by the members of that 
> society.  Just about every wizard that I have seen in this story is 
> infected by at least some part of this disease, even Dumbledore.

Interesting perspective - personally I look at the Wizarding World 
and see one that's far healthier than our own.

It has problems, certainly - but I'd choose to live there.
 
> I also believe that this was one of the reasons that JKR had Harry 
> raised by muggles.  Modern society (muggles) is making great strides 
> to eliminate these behaviours; something wizarding society has yet to 
> do.  Harry, being on the outside of society and looking in, is better 
> able to see and avoid this darkness.  The moral outrage and 
> indignation brought to the wizarding society by Harry and the 
> muggleborns is very important.  Without these precepts, wizarding 
> society has no impetus to change.  And if wizarding society doesn't 
> change, it will keep producing an abundance of dark wizards.

Somehow... I'll have to think about this... I find it hard to 
personally believe that JKR believes the Wizarding World she has 
created is morally inferior to the Muggle World.

Have we seen a single decent Muggle in any detail in any of the 
books? Even Hermione's parents seem to be become estranged from 
their daughter.

Harry and Hermione - raised by Muggles, both. Which would they 
choose given the choice? The Wizarding World, or the Muggle?

I could believe that JKR might have something like what you 
describe in mind if if five books, she'd ever given us the 
impression that the Muggle world was a better one than the 
Wizarding World.

But for the life of me, offhand, I can't think of a single case.

The two Wizards we see most with real experience of both - Harry 
and Hermione. I'm pretty sure I know what they would choose.

That doesn't mean they might not like to see a few things changed - 
Hermione would definitely like to liberate the House Elves, of 
course. But overall I think we are presented with a Wizarding World 
more attractive than the Muggle one.


Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia