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.

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.