For a long time, I have been adamant that I would not use facebook for classroom instruction. While I do accept student friend requests and maintain a page for Xtreme Writing that students can like and follow on facebook, I have felt strongly that facebook's purpose is not formal instruction. I do post a lot on both my personal and Xtreme Writing page about teaching and writing, but I do not teach, at least not in any formal way, on facebook. Like my students, I use facebook for primarily personal reasons. I don't particularly like it when the few students who have friended me send me class-related messages or attempt to monopolize my free time by holding conferences about essays or homework via chat. Facebook is my space. (lol)
However, I have decided to bring facebook into my teaching at least for a trial run. Beginning next semester, I will set up either a group or a page for each of the courses I teach. Use of and interaction on this page will not be a required part of the class, but it will provide students an informal space to connect with their classmates in order to help each other with questions about assignments, post class notes, or chat with each other in a semi-private setting. I want to remain mostly out of the scene, but I have considered making myself available via the chat feature of group pages for virtual office hours.
My hope is to create a stronger sense of community and help my students see the limitless possibilities for using the technology most of them use everyday to enhance other areas of their lives. I also want them to see that we learn everywhere, not just in the classroom. I fully support my college's mission of lifelong learning. I practice it myself, and I hope to instill that philosophy in my students. But I don't want them taking classes forever--unless, like me, they need to avoid student loan payments. No, I want them to see that knowledge and creativity are everywhere if we are open to the possibilities all around us.
I'm not sure how many students will actually utilize the facebook page for the course. I hope that many of them do. I would think that since most of them are already on facebook, they would be more likely to use a class facebook group than the currently unused discussion forums I have set up on Blackboard for some of my classes. Blackboard isn't a place students go to hang out. Facebook is. I want my students to have a place where they can hang out together. Even if they don't use the page for helping each other with homework or working on group projects, I would consider my experiment a success if they just got together to share links, watch YouTube videos, and chat. The sense of community they might build would certainly have positive effects that would carry over into the classroom. They would be more likely to engage in discussion with each other, contradict each other's ideas, and work productively in small groups.
At this point, I'd rather set up groups than pages. The groups feature has a unique chat option where all online members of the group can chat privately with each other. The only problem is that it appears I can only add friends to a group page, and I don't want all of my students adding me as a friend in order to participate in this. They wouldn't like that either. I would also want to automatically add all my students to the group. Of course, they could remove themselves if they wanted to, but the initial add is the step most of them would likely be hesitant to take--some out of a lack of desire to participate, others out of laziness or apathy. But if they were already added to the group and started getting notifications of group activity, I think they would be much more likely to join in.
I will be researching my options over winter break, and hopefully I come up with some viable solutions. All I can do is try it and wait to see what happens. I must admit, though, I have high hopes and will disappointed if I don't get positive results.
Monday, December 5, 2011
Wednesday, October 19, 2011
Computers & Writing Proposal
This is probably the fourth or fifth completely rewritten draft of my proposal for the Computers & Writing Conference. Proposals are due by the Oct. 22, but I really want to get mine in at least a couple of days early. If you have any feedback on content or presentation, I'd love to here your comments.
iWrite Cool:
Teaching Academic Writing through Conventions of Social Media Discourse
Up until this semester, I, like many of my colleagues, have taught students how to write for the web via the conventions of academic discourse. After four years’ teaching this way, I’ve concluded that this approach is backwards. The way to bridge the gap between the language of the academy and that of the Web is not by beginning with academic discourse. By merging conventions of electronic discourses with those of the academy we can more effectively teach students both communication styles.
Students don’t understand academic discourse. Their daily reading and writing are more grounded in the conventions of social media discourse. They recognize the value of hyperlinks. They don’t question Twitter’s citation style. They understand the ways in which images and symbols, communicate meaning. They understand the concept of audience because they are constantly adjusting the privacy settings on their facebook statuses. They don’t understand how MLA citation works or why they must adhere to its standards instead of just linking to a source, they don’t understand how to create mood in their writing without the symbols they’ve come to rely on, and they have a hard time imagining that they are writing to anyone other than their teacher or classmates.
When we talk about “cool” writing, cool cannot merely be the subject of the writing classroom nor the location where writing takes place; cool should be the very means by which we compose. This enhances the effectiveness of both our teaching and our writing.
Students don’t understand academic discourse. Their daily reading and writing are more grounded in the conventions of social media discourse. They recognize the value of hyperlinks. They don’t question Twitter’s citation style. They understand the ways in which images and symbols, communicate meaning. They understand the concept of audience because they are constantly adjusting the privacy settings on their facebook statuses. They don’t understand how MLA citation works or why they must adhere to its standards instead of just linking to a source, they don’t understand how to create mood in their writing without the symbols they’ve come to rely on, and they have a hard time imagining that they are writing to anyone other than their teacher or classmates.
When we talk about “cool” writing, cool cannot merely be the subject of the writing classroom nor the location where writing takes place; cool should be the very means by which we compose. This enhances the effectiveness of both our teaching and our writing.
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
Making the Grade
In my first-semester freshman composition course, the second writing project my students are assigned asks them to reconsider the purpose of higher education and present an argument in response to a pop culture "text" against the current condition of higher education. One of the issues my students sometimes choose to write about is grading. I always offer up articles I've read, some of which propose some pretty radical ideas about grading. What would college be like without grades, asks "Imagining College Without Grades", an article published in January 2009 by Inside Higher Ed.
College without grades? Preposterous!
Indeed, many view this as impossible but a lack of grades doesn't have to mean a lack of performance evaluation, and some educators are pushing for a move away from traditional letter grades for written performance evaluations. While I like this idea in theory, the amount of work it would add to already overloaded teachers makes it unfeasible as far as I can see. On the other hand, my beef with traditional letter grades, as they exist in the current system we all know and hate, is that they typically measure proficiency only and not the actual learning that is taking place. Thus, a student could earn an A in a class and not really have learned anything. Likewise, a student could earn a failing grade but have learned quite a bit. Where's the fairness in that?
Traditional letter grades don't have to be all bad, though. After all, it is a system all teachers and students alike are familiar with. We don't have to entirely redefine our grading system in order to make it work better to measure both learning and proficiency. What I propose is a tripartite grading system using the traditional letter grade we are all already familiar with that measures proficiency, progressive learning, and work ethic. I believe such a grading system would challenge all students to invest themselves more in their education and begin a shift in the students' focus from the end result--the degree--to the immediate and long term goals of learning.
This system could work one of two ways. The first is far superior, in my opinion, allowing for a much greater effect on students, teachers, and employers but would require significant changes at the university and possibly even the state level, making it incredibly difficult to implement. The second, though less effective, is more easily implemented as any teacher who wanted to adopt this practice could most likely do so simply by changing his or her grading policy in the course syllabus.
The most effective way to use this tripartite grading system would be for colleges and universities to adopt it as the means of calculating GPA, representing all three grades for each course on students' transcripts. Let's say Johnny Student works hard all semester in his freshman composition class. He reads critically, takes notes in class, meets with a writing tutor once, sometimes twice a week, revises his drafts multiple times, meets with his professor during office hours.... His writing skills greatly improve over the course of the semester, but it's still not enough. At the end of the semester, his proficiency with college writing is still 'D' work. I firmly believe Johnny deserves to be rewarded for his effort and the learning that took place. In fact, if johnny earned A's for work ethic and progressive learning, he'll probably be more inclined to approach retaking the course with a positive attitude because he knows he is capable of improving his proficiency with this particular skill. If, however, Johhny simply eans a 'D' in freshman writing course, he enters the next course feeling discouraged, as if no matter how hard he tries, it will never be good enough. Johnny is much more likely to give up.
Of course, I often have students at the other end of this spectrum. Susie Pupil makes straight A's. She doesn't try very hard because she doesn't have to and, as a result, she doesn't learn much either. Students like Susie are often bored in class becuase they aren't being challenged as much as the rest of the class. My proposed changes to the grading system would likely motivate Susie to work beyond the minimum requirements for her target proficiency grade becuase she must demonstrate that she has progressed in her learning and exerted effort in order to achieve that learning. Students like Susie typically don't like to compromise their 4.0 GPAs, so while they might resent it, they will most likley put in the necessary work to succeed in this system.
Of course, I don't believe this system would work this way for every student. Some A students might sacrifice their GPA for C's in effort and/or demonstrated learning. That's certainly their perrogative. I do believe, though, that this system would work best for the greatest number of students, especially those that fall in the middle of this spectrum. This type of grading is the best way I can think of to combat the apathy of the C student who believes that is all the better s/he can do. Knowing he can raise his overall GPA simply by putting in more effort is likely to motivate many C students to try harder, which in turn will also likely improve those students' grades in proficiency and progressive learning.
While the potential of this grading system greatly excites me, I understand that its implementation isn't the most likely thing to happen any time soon, so I have been exploring ways of implementing it just in my classes by changing my grading personal grading policies. One-third of students' grades in my classes for each proficiency, work ethic, and progressive learning. It would essentially work the same way as described above except that only one grade--the average of the three parts--would appear on a student's transcript. This method could certainly motivate students while they are in my class, but there are two significant downfalls. First, students could pass the course and move on to the next level without demonstrating passing proficiency, which only sets them up for future failure. Second, if a student still earns a failing grade, there isn't the same positive reinforcement because the work ethis and progressive learning grade are not public, i.e. not published on the transcript. Seeing only that D or F proves just as defeating as the current grading system.
Because of the drawbacks, I do not feel comfortable implementing such a grading system in my own classrooms, at least not until I find a more productive means of implemntation; however, the power of this system to reverse the apathy of today's students is undeniable, and because of this, I think we owe it to ourselves as teachers to continue exploring alternate methods of evaluation.
College without grades? Preposterous!
Indeed, many view this as impossible but a lack of grades doesn't have to mean a lack of performance evaluation, and some educators are pushing for a move away from traditional letter grades for written performance evaluations. While I like this idea in theory, the amount of work it would add to already overloaded teachers makes it unfeasible as far as I can see. On the other hand, my beef with traditional letter grades, as they exist in the current system we all know and hate, is that they typically measure proficiency only and not the actual learning that is taking place. Thus, a student could earn an A in a class and not really have learned anything. Likewise, a student could earn a failing grade but have learned quite a bit. Where's the fairness in that?
Traditional letter grades don't have to be all bad, though. After all, it is a system all teachers and students alike are familiar with. We don't have to entirely redefine our grading system in order to make it work better to measure both learning and proficiency. What I propose is a tripartite grading system using the traditional letter grade we are all already familiar with that measures proficiency, progressive learning, and work ethic. I believe such a grading system would challenge all students to invest themselves more in their education and begin a shift in the students' focus from the end result--the degree--to the immediate and long term goals of learning.
This system could work one of two ways. The first is far superior, in my opinion, allowing for a much greater effect on students, teachers, and employers but would require significant changes at the university and possibly even the state level, making it incredibly difficult to implement. The second, though less effective, is more easily implemented as any teacher who wanted to adopt this practice could most likely do so simply by changing his or her grading policy in the course syllabus.
The most effective way to use this tripartite grading system would be for colleges and universities to adopt it as the means of calculating GPA, representing all three grades for each course on students' transcripts. Let's say Johnny Student works hard all semester in his freshman composition class. He reads critically, takes notes in class, meets with a writing tutor once, sometimes twice a week, revises his drafts multiple times, meets with his professor during office hours.... His writing skills greatly improve over the course of the semester, but it's still not enough. At the end of the semester, his proficiency with college writing is still 'D' work. I firmly believe Johnny deserves to be rewarded for his effort and the learning that took place. In fact, if johnny earned A's for work ethic and progressive learning, he'll probably be more inclined to approach retaking the course with a positive attitude because he knows he is capable of improving his proficiency with this particular skill. If, however, Johhny simply eans a 'D' in freshman writing course, he enters the next course feeling discouraged, as if no matter how hard he tries, it will never be good enough. Johnny is much more likely to give up.
Of course, I often have students at the other end of this spectrum. Susie Pupil makes straight A's. She doesn't try very hard because she doesn't have to and, as a result, she doesn't learn much either. Students like Susie are often bored in class becuase they aren't being challenged as much as the rest of the class. My proposed changes to the grading system would likely motivate Susie to work beyond the minimum requirements for her target proficiency grade becuase she must demonstrate that she has progressed in her learning and exerted effort in order to achieve that learning. Students like Susie typically don't like to compromise their 4.0 GPAs, so while they might resent it, they will most likley put in the necessary work to succeed in this system.
Of course, I don't believe this system would work this way for every student. Some A students might sacrifice their GPA for C's in effort and/or demonstrated learning. That's certainly their perrogative. I do believe, though, that this system would work best for the greatest number of students, especially those that fall in the middle of this spectrum. This type of grading is the best way I can think of to combat the apathy of the C student who believes that is all the better s/he can do. Knowing he can raise his overall GPA simply by putting in more effort is likely to motivate many C students to try harder, which in turn will also likely improve those students' grades in proficiency and progressive learning.
While the potential of this grading system greatly excites me, I understand that its implementation isn't the most likely thing to happen any time soon, so I have been exploring ways of implementing it just in my classes by changing my grading personal grading policies. One-third of students' grades in my classes for each proficiency, work ethic, and progressive learning. It would essentially work the same way as described above except that only one grade--the average of the three parts--would appear on a student's transcript. This method could certainly motivate students while they are in my class, but there are two significant downfalls. First, students could pass the course and move on to the next level without demonstrating passing proficiency, which only sets them up for future failure. Second, if a student still earns a failing grade, there isn't the same positive reinforcement because the work ethis and progressive learning grade are not public, i.e. not published on the transcript. Seeing only that D or F proves just as defeating as the current grading system.
Because of the drawbacks, I do not feel comfortable implementing such a grading system in my own classrooms, at least not until I find a more productive means of implemntation; however, the power of this system to reverse the apathy of today's students is undeniable, and because of this, I think we owe it to ourselves as teachers to continue exploring alternate methods of evaluation.
Sunday, September 18, 2011
The Problem With Teachers
Anyone who teaches writing, especially argument, knows the importance of ethos. In order to effectively communicate with an audience, one must evaluate that audience's values, beliefs, and interests and cater to them, build common ground--in order for that audience to be able to trust the author's credibility to inform, persuade, or entertain them.
One of the biggest mistakes many teachers make is assuming that they have no need to establish their credibility, that their audience somehow already owes them their trust and respect because they're the teacher and they have a MA or PhD. But that doesn't mean anything to students. All they see is another adult proving to be an obstacle to getting where they want to be.
If you want students to care about what you're trying to teach them, you first have to establish your credibility, which has little to do with what you know about the subject you teach. It has everything to do with what you know about your audience. You have to present the material in a way that takes into consideration your stduents' value systems and their interests. You might think that because they're in college that appealing to their desire to get an education and a "good" job would work. Wrong. They're in college because adults like you have told them their entire lives that college is the only option. How do I know this? My students spend weeks discussing this issue in class and writing about it.
My students have no qualms about laying out the truth in regard to this issue. They want the things a college education can get them, but they don't care so much about the college education itself. As far as they see it, college is a huge waste of time, a repeat of high school (shame on professors who teach this way and reinforce this unfortunate belief). If we want to change this, if we want them to value the learning and not just the diploma, we have to connect that learning to things they do care about, the everyday parts of their lives, the music they listen to, the movies they watch, the language they converse in, the hardships they face, the relationships they're in, the experiences they've had (sometimes traumatic).
Too often teachers' efforts to make class more interesting is to cater to their own interests instead of their students. You're never going to win them over that way. They need to experience you showing interest in what they care about and making an effort to connect what you teach to that.
I certainly don't consider myself to be the best at this, but I am aware of it and I certainly try--every day, every class period, every time I interact with a student. I do not expect their respect, nor demand it...I put in the effort to earn it.
One of the biggest mistakes many teachers make is assuming that they have no need to establish their credibility, that their audience somehow already owes them their trust and respect because they're the teacher and they have a MA or PhD. But that doesn't mean anything to students. All they see is another adult proving to be an obstacle to getting where they want to be.
If you want students to care about what you're trying to teach them, you first have to establish your credibility, which has little to do with what you know about the subject you teach. It has everything to do with what you know about your audience. You have to present the material in a way that takes into consideration your stduents' value systems and their interests. You might think that because they're in college that appealing to their desire to get an education and a "good" job would work. Wrong. They're in college because adults like you have told them their entire lives that college is the only option. How do I know this? My students spend weeks discussing this issue in class and writing about it.
My students have no qualms about laying out the truth in regard to this issue. They want the things a college education can get them, but they don't care so much about the college education itself. As far as they see it, college is a huge waste of time, a repeat of high school (shame on professors who teach this way and reinforce this unfortunate belief). If we want to change this, if we want them to value the learning and not just the diploma, we have to connect that learning to things they do care about, the everyday parts of their lives, the music they listen to, the movies they watch, the language they converse in, the hardships they face, the relationships they're in, the experiences they've had (sometimes traumatic).
Too often teachers' efforts to make class more interesting is to cater to their own interests instead of their students. You're never going to win them over that way. They need to experience you showing interest in what they care about and making an effort to connect what you teach to that.
I certainly don't consider myself to be the best at this, but I am aware of it and I certainly try--every day, every class period, every time I interact with a student. I do not expect their respect, nor demand it...I put in the effort to earn it.
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
Q: Why is it that most students feel entitled to grades they haven't earned?
We watched Adaptation today, and my students thought it was awful, which means they are still judging the quality of films entirely on how entertained they are and how well films measure up to their personal likes and dislikes. Hrmph! Frustration!
This film class I'm teaching this semester makes me feel like a complete failure, not because of the way I have presented the course content but because of my inability to reach any of my students in a significant way. It's just a gen ed requirement. I know they feel this way. I have always measured my success with any course I have taught in terms of making what my students might have initially thought of as a pointless class mean something important to them. At the very least, I want my students to learn how to be better students, but this semester I can't seem to break most of them from their entitled attitudes. Of course, it's always the teacher's fault, right? She grades unfairly. She just doesn't like me. Give me a break! Newsflash for all you students out there: Your teachers don't invest their time and energy in disliking you. They have much more important things to worry about.
This line of reasoning is completely illogical (which implies much more about any student relying on it than I ever need to articulate. If I were to award grades based on my personal opinions about students, wouldn't the students I didn't like be getting F's? The only students who have ever received F's in any of my classes suffered from a chronic inability to turn in their homework. In contrast, my favorite students would be getting A's. I only have two students out of three classes getting A's right now, and they have worked their asses off all semester. Great effort doesn't always earn great grades though. Students don't seem to understand this. One student might spend an hour writing a paper that earns an A while another student might spend fifteen hours on the same assignment and only earn a C. Grades don't measure effort; they measure the level of proficiency you demonstrate. For some students, being able to demonstrate a higher level of proficency requires much more effort.
I have broken almost all of my personal policies this semester in my efforts to help them succeed. Every student who has turned in the assigned work has improved his or her grades. Part of the problem is our public education system, which has trained our high school graduates to expect A's for C work. How is it that all of my students feel entitled to A's? Grades are not awarded for effort but for demonstration of mastery of the course content. Mastery. No one is there right now. How could they be when 75% of them admit to only "sometimes" reading the assigned material and 13% "never" read? According to the anonymous survey I conducted at midterm, 25% don't take notes on the assigned reading or during lectures, nor do they look up definitions of words they don't understand. The remaining percent do these things only "sometimes." Not one student has sought help from the campus' free tutoring services and only 13% have sought help from me. (This last percent has increased to 25% since midterm, but that's still only 2 students). Gee, I wonder why they aren't happy with their grades? Oh yeah, it's because I don't like them.
If you are one of my students or are considering taking one of my classes in the future, you should know this: It is not my job to entertain you, nor is it my job to like or dislike you. It is my job to show you how to learn. I cannot fill your head with right answers, not to the questions raised by this course nor those raised by life. No teacher can do that. Education is about interpretation, creating new knowledge, and forming opinions based on evidence not emotions and personal preferences. All I can do is show you the tools (critical reading, writing, research, analysis) and provide you with some guidance on how to use them. The rest of the work is up to you. You will never get more out of any class than what you invest in it.
This film class I'm teaching this semester makes me feel like a complete failure, not because of the way I have presented the course content but because of my inability to reach any of my students in a significant way. It's just a gen ed requirement. I know they feel this way. I have always measured my success with any course I have taught in terms of making what my students might have initially thought of as a pointless class mean something important to them. At the very least, I want my students to learn how to be better students, but this semester I can't seem to break most of them from their entitled attitudes. Of course, it's always the teacher's fault, right? She grades unfairly. She just doesn't like me. Give me a break! Newsflash for all you students out there: Your teachers don't invest their time and energy in disliking you. They have much more important things to worry about.
This line of reasoning is completely illogical (which implies much more about any student relying on it than I ever need to articulate. If I were to award grades based on my personal opinions about students, wouldn't the students I didn't like be getting F's? The only students who have ever received F's in any of my classes suffered from a chronic inability to turn in their homework. In contrast, my favorite students would be getting A's. I only have two students out of three classes getting A's right now, and they have worked their asses off all semester. Great effort doesn't always earn great grades though. Students don't seem to understand this. One student might spend an hour writing a paper that earns an A while another student might spend fifteen hours on the same assignment and only earn a C. Grades don't measure effort; they measure the level of proficiency you demonstrate. For some students, being able to demonstrate a higher level of proficency requires much more effort.
I have broken almost all of my personal policies this semester in my efforts to help them succeed. Every student who has turned in the assigned work has improved his or her grades. Part of the problem is our public education system, which has trained our high school graduates to expect A's for C work. How is it that all of my students feel entitled to A's? Grades are not awarded for effort but for demonstration of mastery of the course content. Mastery. No one is there right now. How could they be when 75% of them admit to only "sometimes" reading the assigned material and 13% "never" read? According to the anonymous survey I conducted at midterm, 25% don't take notes on the assigned reading or during lectures, nor do they look up definitions of words they don't understand. The remaining percent do these things only "sometimes." Not one student has sought help from the campus' free tutoring services and only 13% have sought help from me. (This last percent has increased to 25% since midterm, but that's still only 2 students). Gee, I wonder why they aren't happy with their grades? Oh yeah, it's because I don't like them.
If you are one of my students or are considering taking one of my classes in the future, you should know this: It is not my job to entertain you, nor is it my job to like or dislike you. It is my job to show you how to learn. I cannot fill your head with right answers, not to the questions raised by this course nor those raised by life. No teacher can do that. Education is about interpretation, creating new knowledge, and forming opinions based on evidence not emotions and personal preferences. All I can do is show you the tools (critical reading, writing, research, analysis) and provide you with some guidance on how to use them. The rest of the work is up to you. You will never get more out of any class than what you invest in it.
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
Frustrated!
Days like today make me want to throw my hands in the air and go back to retail management. I have assumed that many of my students just haven't read the instructions. The work they've done certainly doesn't address all (if any) of the instructions. I am not completely convinced that this isn't at least part of the problem. But for some of them there is a much bigger problem related to reading comprehension.
In a college-level literature course, I shouldn't have to explain the difference between identifying and describing. This is pretty basic vocabulary. On the first take-home quiz, 1/2 the class identified the cookies Harold eats in Stranger Than fiction as a symbol of change. (Based on the number of students who used this response, I can only assume they were sharing answers or they all decided to copy from Yahoo Answers or Ask.com). I'm willing to set aside the fact that in no way are the cookies a symbol of anything. I'm willing to entertain their interpretation (if this is, in fact, their interpretation and not some bull shit website not even written by anyone with real credibility) so long as they demonstrate through evidence from the textbook and the film that their interpretation has some validity. This defense is not present in their responses.
I wonder how many students in this class will not return next week. I know I lost at least one for sure. I want to know how many hours these students invested in this assignment. I want to know how many of them sought assistance via the Writing Center or a tutor in the Learning Lab. I don't expect to be impressed by these revelations.
I am thoroughly enjoying teaching this course, but I am just as frustrated as my students when it seems to me that they lack basic reading comprehension and writing skills. I can't make them get help in the Learning Lab. I certainly can't spend class time addressing such basic skills. I'm at a loss. I know what other faculty would advise. Let them fail. I can't accept that. So I've spent the evening so stressed out that I am physically ill. I know some of my students don't think I care. But I do. More than many in my position would. But I am also limited in the amount of time I have to give them. I'm at a loss. I don't know what to do.
A few students stayed after class, and we brainstormed some ideas of ways we could make some minor changes to the course that would help them learn better. We're implementing some of these changes we discussed effective as soon as we get back from spring break, including moving from class discussions to small group discussions where they'll begin work on these take-home quizzes together. They don't realize this, and most won't read this blog, but I am also paring the midterm down to just the scantron portion. They aren't prepared to do anything but fail the extended response portion of the exam. This and essay questions will be on the final. We'll spend the rest of the semester preparing for it. I hope the changes will help them in valuable ways.
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
Gen eds: What are they accomplishing, really?
My students and I spent the last week and half watching the film Accepted and discussing various issues surrounding higher education in the US. I do this every semester as part of their second essay project, and every semester students lament being forced to take "pointless" general education courses. I present them with a brief history of the university and brief them on what it means to be an "educated" person. We discuss what value various general education courses have to their lives, their future careers, their role as citizens in a democracy, and to being just generally an "educated" person. It's difficult for them to buy into it.
Students don't understand the purpose and value of gen eds. They see no reason to be informed about history. Many say "I don't need to write for the career I'm going into, so I shouldn't have to take this course." Art majors see no value for knowing math. (What?!) Nursing students see no value in taking psychology. (Are you kidding me?) Business majors see no point to studying literature, music, art.
I am not surprised by this. I am concerned. I'm concerned, especially, because it's not their fault that they think this way. This is the way our educational system has trained them to think. Subjects are taught as if they are independent areas of study completely isolated from one another. I'd like to say this ridiculous division of disciplines is limited to the public education system but it is the way most educational institutions function, at every level.
I am thankful that my daughter's school is highly inter-disciplinary. If the students are learning about ancient Roman history, they learn that content in every class. Social studies addresses the objective historical background, literature addresses the same content through the subjective, experiential history recorded in poetry and novels, and art asks them to recreate what they're learning in creative, visual ways. When she learned about the digestive system in science, she was also writing a short story for language arts that illustrated the digestive process from the perspective of the food that was eaten. My daughter will never question why she needs to take a wide variety of courses unrelated to her major, because she will know without doubt that all knowledge is an important, integral part of learning any one thing in depth.
I do my best to help my students see this. In fact, I used this very example in class today. Some of them get it. Most do not. I'll see what happens as they begin interviewing faculty, deans, administrators, advisors. A few more eyes will likely be opened. I worry, though, about those who continue to view their education in terms of a buyer/seller exchange. I worry about what happens when they find themselves in the work force, unemployed or working a low-paying job they didn't need a degree for. All because they didn't learn the skills their desired professions wanted from that college degree: written and oral communication & critical and creative thinking.
Students are required to take gen eds. But when they approach the course with the attitude of "getting it over with," they store enough information in their short term memory to get them by. When the course is over, it and its content are forgotten. Are gen eds achieving their intended purpose? When employers expect college education as preparation for the work force, when students only go to college to be trained for a job, should the purpose of higher ed change to meet the demands of our changing world?
I'm afraid that college simply for the sake of learning is a thing of the past for the vast majority of the US population.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)