I’m really struggling to understand my teaching self.
I started my college teaching career trusting that students would read the text, think about the ideas, and be prepared for class. After having many experiences which eroded my trust, I’ve tended to become frustrated and even angry. There’s nothing I hate more than discussing an essay or chapter and it becomes apparent that no one has read it. It kills what I love about teaching—the give and take, the clash of ideas, the on-the-spot melding of differing views. To avoid being angry at students, I’ve tended to create more and more little assignments (busy work?) to “ensure” that students are prepared for class, that they have something to add to the discussions. I mean I don’t want to sit up there are lecture—many studies show this is not effective. Yet…
The unintended consequences are huge—one, students feel and report that they are too rushed, confused, etc. And I know this kind of feeling does not contribute to learning or thinking carefully—it just can’t. Also, I’m overwhelmed with the number of assignments coming in—I have three huge piles of the stuff next to me right now. Should I check them off in class? Give feedback? If they are important enough to assign shouldn’t I evaluate them? When I start looking at a batch of assignments it’s often clear that some students totally missed the point or merely wrote down some BS to get the points. So what am I really accomplishing with these little assignments?
It seems clear, then, that I should allow students to choose—agency!--to engage in the course; if they don’t then that’s their own problem and it will show up, generally, in the big papers. And I think I could get ok with this idea. I’m really not a control freak. But then what do we do in class? My pedagogy centers around having students share their responses to readings and the textbook in small groups and pairs. I like this because it pushes students to articulate the concepts to their peers, rather than just listening and writing notes. If they haven’t been given a specific assignment which forces (or at least invites) them to really consider the issues, then what will they talk about?
Also, while I always get dinged on my evaluations for expecting too much work, 99% of my students indicate that they were intellectually challenged by my course and many specifically mention this in their comments on evaluations. In a recent evaluation a student said, “He didn’t expect us to write papers in which we can b.s. our way through them. He expected us to actually delve into an issue and prove it! I love it! Way to go! About time!” Can I maintain this kind of rigorous atmosphere without these small, checking in, forcing to engage kind of assignments?
And that last comment introduces a whole other layer of complication. Even if I can decide for myself what the correct approach is with all this, some teachers clearly are asking for something else (“About time!”). Should what other teachers do and expect impact how I run my courses? Maybe what it means is that I must choose my battles. I know the battle I can’t give up on (pushing students to think, the intellectual challenge, the difficult texts) so then it seems simple—the battle I might need to give up on is workload. Sometimes, they say, less is more. And, for me personally, something has to give because I no longer have the energy to fight this battle on multiple fronts.
BTW I use the war metaphor knowingly (I just reread two articles by Lakoff) albeit uncomfortably. Maybe my whole construction of teaching needs revamped; maybe I need a new metaphor.
12 comments:
I think you keep assigning the small thing (or give them quizzes!) and just check them off. (Don't collect them!!) No, you don't need to evaluate everything. Plus you can't. It's not possible. Just making them do it is enough. (This is my opinion) And if they are just doing BS on their notebooks, it will show up in the longer papers.
I also get frustrated with the students who don't read. But what can you do? You can't force them. And they aren't getting an education if they aren't reading. So they suffer. Now. And later. So you do win!!
I often get frustrated with students who don't read or procrastinate their work and then I remember me as a student. I was perpetually behind on my reading or purposefully chose not to do some of it. I wasn't an ideal student--not anywhere close--in terms of keeping up with day to day assignments, but I was engaged and attentive to class discussions. I worked hard, but in my own way. I was bothered my teachers who made me do little bits of work because it got in the way of my individual learning process. I try to remember myself as a student when I get annoyed with my students now. They have a lot to manage and I don't think they always can keep up with the work we envision. So, if they are good students they will do the best they can. If they don't care, then I don't really care either.
I appreciate hearing that lis because I wasn't that kind of student at all so I need successful role models to create empathy :) For better or worse, certainly sometimes worse, I was always prepared for class, quite anal about it in fact. And sometimes I should have been less anal, should have trusted my own sense of what I needed to learn, should have read all of Thoreau instead of reading Smollet just because it was assigned. These kinds of students seem easy to spot but maybe I fool myself.
Still, my anger subsides quite quickly at even a hint of engagement; it's the figuring out how to run a class that is both challenging and yet not hectic that gets me.
I've abandoned the small assignments. I now teach a relatively streamlined class. 1) I think our teaching load requires it. I'm not going to look at what you wrote on a post-it note. I would say that I am post-process, but that would imply that I was ever interested in process in the first place. 2) I don't want to become a burn out.
Here's what I see my colleagues do all of the time. They interpret student performance as a commentary on them, on their worth as teachers. They take it personally. I think it's important to become relatively dispassionate as a teacher. Of course, this is advice I offer without always following it. But I have become better at it.
I think mb has something there. For myself, I try to design classes that will be beneficial to everyone who's there, and that doesn't depend on everyone being completely prepared in the Platonic idea of preparedness. That's because I started to feel that the fits I'd pitch about them not being prepared were a kind of theater--the theater of the Socratic teacher. I realize, though, that I may have gone too far in what I expect from my students in terms of preparedness. So one thing I will be thinking about is how to infuse a little more reading/discussion of texts into my writing classroom. It's a balance that's always shifting. Next week, I hope we'll have a good discussion of a piece by Asim. I hope.
I'm going to rant so prepare yourselves...
So, streamlined is best? It's about efficiency? No messiness? And you agree that MB has something here Lisa B? I guess I have a hard time believing that your classes are streamlined. And if I were a student taking a class from you that's the last thing I'd want for you.
I see your, MB, practical point and it's an important one. It's about survival; it's about doing something instead of giving up and doing nothing because you get burned out. But I'm leery of the notion that we should be dispassionate as possible. I think that some important learning must come through passion; I think sometimes students need a passionate plea to read and learn something and even, at times, a passionate rebuking--you can do better.
And, MB, you are not interested in the process students are going through to understand the concepts you are teaching? How can we not be interested in this? Isn't that the essence of teaching as we readjust our approach based on our engagement with student process?
Well, I don't mean to sound overly critical and I'm all too aware that as I make these arguments I begin to sound like the martyr teacher. I just can't seem to let go of the messiness of teaching that I so badly would like to let go of. And there's my badge of martyrdom.
Maybe that's part of my answer: teaching is highly personal and must work within the needs and limitations of one's own psyche. Ultimately what works best for one teacher will never work for another. But if that's true how the hell do we evaluate what good teaching is?
I would contend many of us secretly or not so secretly, believe our colleagues are not quite getting it right: "I can't believe how disorganized that class is!" or "If she would just write a clear assignment sheet." or "He misses the larger point--sure students know exactly what they are supposed to do but they are just jumping through the hoops."
But are any of these sideline evaluations fair? informed? Certainly not but we still, at least I do, like to pretend, at times, that it's that simple.
Each of us confronts new classes each semester alone, confined to the imaginations of our own mind and needs; there's no quick fix or perfect pedagogy. God that sounds dramatic but maybe there is a grain of truth too.
I love this topic, but, in order to respond appropriately, I'll have to give an extremely lenghty explanation about my philosophy of education. And then, since The Man won't let me teach according to my philosopy and keep my job, I'll have to explain what concessions I make to at least approximate the kind of teaching I want to model.
But, unfortunately, I don't have the time to do all that right now. So, when I have more time, if this discussion hasn't completely died by then, I'll get back to you. Deal?
I will say this much right now, though. I completely agree with you that important learning--and important teaching--has to come through passion. Truth!!!
I take your point counterintuitive, but I would again simply emphasize the institutional reality in which we work.
How can you place such an emphasis on teaching as personal when you also help administer a course curriculum? You don't go into an adjunct forum and say, "We'll, this is my personal way of doing the course, but I think you should do what you think is personally best for you because teaching must be conducted within the frame of one's personal psyche." At least, I'm pretty sure you don't say that.
I'm not against the expression of the personal in the classroom. I even occasionally indulge in forms of personal expression. But the more I teach, the more dispassionate I become. But dispassionate isn't the same as uncaring.
While I recognize that I have a different style than many of my colleagues, I don't generally think my colleagues are doing things wrong in their classes. I do think that they often (and this includes you counterintuitive) work themselves too hard and suffer way too much anxiety on behalf of their students.
counterintuitive - having taken one of your classes, all I can say is that anyone who thinks that you assign too much work is a whiny bitch! The reading assignments and response writings were engaging, if one wanted to devote the effort. One thing that did tempt me was that the response writings were not worth much of the grade, thus, if I wanted to skip one, or two (which I didn't) it was OK because it was not going to kill my grade.
I agree with you that those students who don't engage themselves in the assignments, they're papers will reflect that and I feel at that point you have every right to be as ruthless as possible in your grading. Not being a teacher, but having thought of the possibility of that profession, I have asked myself what I would expect from students. My answer is often a cynical acknowledgment that many students will not care about what I'm trying to teach them, but there will be some who will care, and it is for those few, those who are going to make a difference in this world, that I would teach and structure my class.
As I said, I loved your class. I see how it can be frustrating, dealing with kids (and students who don't care usually are) usually is.
Remember that more students than not are willing to settle for a B or a C if they don't have to work that hard for it. Unfortunately, more teachers have decided to "dumb down" their classes so that more students get A's and therefor give them better reviews. Not everyone wants (truly) the A and not everyone deserves it.
Give 'em Hell Ron!
Thanks MB for not ripping my head off with the sharp edges of the words I know you can write.
One comment but then I would really like to hear others weigh in on this because I'm not pushing some point of solidified view; I'm truly perplexed about all this and want to see how others work through it.
My one comment: in reality visiting adjunct classes has made me ultimately, though this isn't always expressed in official venues, more leery of prescribing a particular kind of pedagogy (note I'm not saying content even though of course these can't be completely separated). I would say the personal comes out no matter what official guide we are following. Now I'm not saying we shouldn't have the official guide (this goes back to your, MB's, very sound practical advice about the institutional constraints). But I don't think one can make a class anything other than personal. The personality, the feelings the instructor has about learning and teaching, will come out whether the teacher is using the dept syllabus or not. The personal comes out even if one decides that teaching should be dispassionate. I don't think we want to conflate personal with passionate. Ok, enough of my one thing.
I want the student who calls other students whiny bitches.
As a non-educator professionally, I would wonder why you are a teacher. Is it the exchange of ideas and flow of information that has you motivated? Is it the honorable notion of improving the minds of students to better prepare them for life and the world? Is it that professionally teaching seemed like a good, stable career path when you were younger, where employment could always be assured, and where you'd never be wealthy from it but always be able to provide?
Perhaps it's a combination of several things. I've had professors who could have cared less if I was ever there, who were just "killing time" being teachers. Judging from your comments and also because I know you, I don't think you're the dispassionate factory worker type of teaching professional.
To me, the question is really two-fold: 1) What do I want my students to get out of this class? and 2) What do my students want to get out of this class? Perhaps this can provide some guidance as to methodolgy, work load, etc.
stg
Post a Comment