Millennials

Dr. Cox and others who have noted this trend but are not familiar with the generational term “Millennial” should look it up in ERIC and other scholarly databases. You’ll find a fair amount of research in the student affairs field, and perhaps other areas, on this topic. Whether you agree with generaional theory or not, feeling special and deserving of recognition is one common characteristic of today’s students, as is being conventional in their thinking and eager to please authority figures. As Dr. Cox suggests, challenge them to stretch. While many may complain, if you can get their respect, connect with them just a bit, and make your class an interactive learning environment, they’ll thank you for the challenge. And you might be surprised at how well many of them can really perform.

David Eberhardt, Doctoral Student at Florida State University, at 6:45 am EST on February 10, 2006

it’s not the students’ fault

You bring up your child in an environment where they are taught that if they do not get the best grades in elementary school then they will not get into the right high school, then they willnot get into the right college, then they will not get into the right law/med/grad school, and then will never succeed in life. You build this pressure up, the kids get nervous responses (ADHD qualities? —If I avoid doing the work, I cannot fail), or, as one of the earlier commentors said, work to please authority— and thus will get the answer at all costs and never really understand how to get the answer, or what goes into getting it—no real learning in all truth—, and when they have low self-esteem you give them a trophy for showing up. Pardon the long sentence. But I don’t want a trophy for writing it that long, please.

The detriment that these “show-up trophies” has is horrible, and I completely agree with Mr. Cox. And this is nothing new—dodge ball is banned in gym classes because some kids get out first and feel left out of the activity. Darwin may lose the debate in schools, because the fittest aren’t surviving, everyone is and it makes for a pathetic, whiny college student who doesn’t understand that when you enter the real world, and show up for work and do a shoddy job, you aren’t going to get your paycheck every week and be told that coming in and “participating” is all that matters. And yet, as Mr. Cox points out, you cannot have a trickle-down effect happening when a part of the faculty and academia are just as infantile and don’t want to step up to the challenge themselves. Thank you Mr. Cox for writing this article.

zeitgeist, Edumicated at Youth, at 10:50 am EST on February 10, 2006

Do your homework

Here’s the most telling line in the whole piece, “Please do not e-mail me concerning self-esteem. I have heard the discussion and cannot grasp this concept.” I don’t doubt the veracity of this statement about the author’s inability to understand this basic notion one bit. Agree or not that this is a useful concept, that self-esteem considerations should figure (or not) centrally in analysis and design of teaching, this is a concept one must deal with in the study of teaching and learning. If you can’t do that, go back and invest all of that hard work you talk about into figuring it out. If that doesn’t work go back to chemistry.

Talk about a feeling of entitlement. Every professor of anything thinks they are in a position to pontificate about teaching and learning despite the fact they have virtually no studies or training in the subject. This article is a case in point.

BTW, I don’t like the trophy for everyone policy either. But, I don’t blame the problems of an institution in which administrators and faculty have virtually all of the power and resources on the least powerful members, the students. That’s pathetic.

Trung, Educator, at 12:40 pm EST on February 10, 2006

Who needs Bohr anyway

Ricky,Let me ask you this: If someone who had as much systematic training in teaching and as much background in the theories and issues of chemistry as you have with respect to education started telling you how to do chemistry, what would your reaction be?

So, you’ve read an article. So, you’ve read lots of articles. That puts in you the position of a first year graduate student in education or a precocious undergraduate. Do first year graduates in chemistry write pieces like this in chemistry journals? As you know from working with students, it’s not THAT one reads, it is HOW, how one brings to bear various kinds of knowledge to texts, issues, etc. That kind of knoweldge requires in-depth study, not mere reading.

You noted the gap in your knowledge, you said yourself you didn’t grasp the concept. What I find incredible is that you apparently don’t recognize that this matters. If you don’t grasp the fundamental concept, how can you come down on either side of the issue? Could you imagine someone saying the equivalent in your field of chemistry and having any credibility? “I never got the concept of molarity, but let me tell you about chemistry... Or, “this whole quantum thing is too tricky for me, but let me tell you why Bohr got it wrong...”

I will take your word that you read the article you cite, and will go further and assume you have read many more articles. However, I cannot discern from your piece that you possess a comprehensive and nuanced understandinng of the myriad of competing theories and approaches to motivation, teaching, learning, self-concept, etc. that bear directly on the issues you are discussing. That’s why I think you are a novice, your academic background notwithstanding.

Of course, you are not unique in this regard. As I said, many professors profess on particular educational issues or offer teaching tips without a solid theoretical foundation. And you are not alone in intentionally or inadvertently dismissing the need for such theoretical foundations. I’m reminded of a meeting in which a, by all acconts, excellent teacher and fantastic researcher in biology, said “I can’t make any sense of these theories in education” as a justification for acting without one, or simply picking any old one. He, too, failed to see the significance of his radical relativism. I wanted to say, “Darwin, Lamarck, whichever, let’s just pick a theory and move on.”

Ironically, this unnamed biology professor suggested we use Perry’s scheme of intellectual development stages because that he could grasp. Of course, this kind of relativism-without-warrants thinking actually placed him at the LOWER end of Perry’s scheme with respect to theories of teaching and learning. I see it all the time, enough already.

Trung, educator, at 3:35 pm EST on February 10, 2006

Reactions

Mike and Trung:

You two need to take a chill pill. I wrote this light-hearted commentary to make the point that the current environment in higher education will require professors to rededicate themselves to the principles of academic excellence that promote quality and standards and retard mediocrity (the last line of the piece, if you would read it closely). Let me address each of you with respect and not with name calling or over-reaction.

Trung:

I use the term “self esteem” once in the article. I will admit that I do not have a Ph.D. in self esteem. Maybe I should clarify my statement—I understand what is meant by self esteem, but I cannot understand why not giving a trophy at the end of a soccer season should damage one’s self esteem. Also, what theory of education or philosophy have I trashed in my article? I simply gave you my observations that more and more students want more credit for doing less work. I have not published this in a peer-reviewed journal. I am giving you my opinions based on real observations that apply to my life as a professor (on a web site!!). I did not present any type of analysis or argument that indicates that I am an expert in anything but chemistry. You have written thousands of words rebuking me on one line in the article. Am I a novice in educational psychological/philosophy—yes—a novice in teaching and learning—no (and we can debate that further if you like). You seem to think that you have to have a certain pedigree to “comment” on teaching and learning issues or make observations on the state of higher education—I disagree!!

Mike: As I said in the article, I think soccer has had a tremendous impact on kids. However, I simply do not like the idea of participation trophies (polemic or not). You seem to be venting at me but really talking to someone else. I am glad that soccer has had a positive influence in your family. I am sorry if you are offended by my analogy. Again, the point of the article was not a slap against soccer but a call to faculty to fight mediocrity. This was not an analysis (half-assed or not) of any sort. This was a commentary in which I made an analogy between participation trophies (which I do not like) and students wanting something they do not deserve (which I do not like). I stand by this analogy.

To sum up—mediocrity in higher education is bad and students getting rewarded for lousy work or no participation is worse. If someone wants to write a 1,000-word response on why I am wrong, let me know. If you want to discuss self esteem and soccer, give Trung and Mike a call.

Ricky, Associate Professor of Chemistry at Murray State University, at 6:55 pm EST on February 10, 2006

soccer trophies

Thanks to the commentators who’ve taken the author to task for using soccer as an analogy here. I coach in a non competitive youth soccer league in my spare time, and my kids have plenty of years ahead of them to learn about winning and losing. The point of youth sports is to TEACH SKILLS, not to classify them as winners and losers as six, seven, or eight year olds. And if my kids have worked hard for an entire season and have obviously improved and learned a lot, then what’s wrong with rewarding them and praising them?

Even setting aside my annoyance at the soccer example, I wonder what pedagogical theory involves having students “compete” for grades. “I only have five As to distribute this term, so you’d better work really hard to one-up all of your classmates!” I think it’s much sounder simply to set standards and assess whether or not your students reach them. I think it’s actually pretty easy to enforce high standards and encourage all of your students to try harder without resorting to sneering about self esteem. But then, some of us think that teaching is more important than grinding our various political axes on our students.

Prof and soccer coach, at 9:15 pm EST on February 13, 2006