Search Views


Browse Archives

Views

Classroom Realities

April 21, 2006

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

When I was first given the chance to teach an English composition class
at night for a business college, I labored over my syllabus. After looking at colleagues' examples, I crafted my own somewhat spartan version to guide my thoughtful and committed students. By the end of the first night, I had answered questions about attendance, assignments, quizzes, tests, and papers due more than once. Exhausted, I drove home with a notepad full of questions. Later I clarified through handouts and other materials. I started to get the impression that many of my students were simply interested in getting a grade and getting out. Still, I tried not to stamp the whole class with this label; surely there would be standouts that would be transformed by the educational process.

By my second semester, I was getting more specific on paper. My attendance policy seemed clear to me -- as did my requirements for rewrites. I had even made up an in-depth course outline, which listed due dates for papers, late due dates for papers which included a 10 percent grade penalty, quiz dates and test dates. I reasoned that any person accepted to college would surely be able to understand my course objectives and see how they could accomplish those goals. I was wrong.

Students still flooded the podium with questions about what exactly constituted an excused absence, what the penalty was for late papers, and whether they could make-up work when they didn't come to class. And, one student asked, her tone petulant, exactly how late was late anyway? Sigh.

Finally I attended a valuable workshop on high- and low-context learners. Suddenly I could understand why certain students wanted to know about the whole semester's work at the start of the first few classes. And why other students were happy to have information parceled out at two-week intervals. Desperate to improve retention, I rewrote my class materials again. I drafted a day-by-day course outline that provided not only important due dates, but guidelines of what we'd be doing in each class. Some were general ideas; others were specific instructions, listing handouts and work to be done.

My high-context students were thrilled. They immediately skimmed the course outline and highlighted certain dates. Armed with knowledge, they started to feel more accountable. Many spent more time on assignments, saw tutors, and turned in better work. My low-context students, of course, were not affected. They simply read what was immediately due the next day and accomplished that one piece. A few read ahead -- if only to avoid scheduling problems with their busy social lives. Others only consulted the syllabus minutes before class
started.

My next semester was noticeably better, but a few students still seemed to have a difficult time understanding exactly what was expected of them in my English composition course. Several students complained that they didn't realize they were failing my course until they received midterm grades -- even though many of them had received failing grades on essays. And several seemed to think it appropriate to approach me after receiving their final in-class grade to ask if they could make up quizzes and work that they had missed that semester.

I finally started to wonder if this was more about grade-mongering than understanding. After all, the information they were seeking was spelled out on my syllabus. Still, I had a responsibility to my students --   and if clarifying this or that would help them work harder (or accept a grade for minimal effort), then I was willing to spend more time on my syllabus and class outline.

My biggest education was to come. When hired to teach part-time at a large community college system in northern California, I started to receive some real-life instruction on how to write a syllabus that would promote understanding --  and, most importantly, eliminate wiggle room for unmotivated students. After trying to teach English composition, closing up loopholes in my syllabus became my biggest objective.

Each semester taught me one more trick. In one case, I made a simple change that eliminated all the questions about when a student was supposed to have done the reading listed for that day's work. Some may find this hard to believe, but some students actually thought that a reading listed for Wednesday's class, for example, might be done during Wednesday's class -- or even after Wednesday's class. No matter how many times I announced in class that readings were to be done before that day, some students claimed they didn't understand that they needed to read ahead in the textbook in order to be ready for that day's class.

To make my expectations even more clear, I started grouping the readings required and listing them as "homework" for the previous class. On the next class day, when the students were going to be quizzed on those readings, I listed a "quiz" at the start of the hour and referred to the readings they read as "homework." Now under each class date, I had headings that instructed duties to be carried out at "start of class," "in-class work," and "homework." Curiously, my
students understood this system perfectly. The questions stopped and the majority of my students started coming to class prepared.

By the time I was hired on full-time to a university, I had classroom policies that seemed to keep the peace -- and avoid most of the chance for the dreaded "grade review." The truth is that any student who was unhappy with his or her grade could simply go to one's dean and ask for a review of their final class grade; this review could result in a review of one's syllabus and policies by the dean -- and in some cases be counted against an instructor seeking tenure or renewal. I also had a syllabus and course outline that were so specific that students could visualize their semesters by flipping through a few stapled pages. I even mastered "columns" in MSWord so that the assignments due on Monday, Wednesday and Friday were in neat, readable columns across the page. This helped visual learners to see how assignments built on one another. The other benefit was that the information could be worked into several pages, rather than a half dozen pages -- which was much more student-friendly.

No longer did I have to announce in class what was due on Monday. No longer did I have to outline what the procedure was for the in-class midterm essay exam. No longer did I have to tell a student exactly how their two absences and four tardies impacted their 10 percent participation grade. It was all spelled out.

And, better yet, when questions did arise, I often was able to write a short note, cut and paste some small portion of my syllabus into a student's e-mail message, and feel confident that I would not be waging an "e-mail war" with a disgruntled student about some miniscule detail which they felt would magically alter their grade. For the better, of course.

Still, there was more to do. After hugging a hardcover grade book to my chest for years, I finally realized that there was another way to do things. A better way. I had seen a colleague using grading software to generate class grades. Nervous, I watched over her shoulder as she plugged in numeric grades --  and printed off a sheet that told her exactly what her students' grades were at that point in time. Amazed, I downloaded the shareware program called Gradekeeper, and made the commitment to "try it for one class that semester." That night, I read through the easy instructions and started loading information for my first class. After 20 minutes, I had somehow transformed my hardbound, difficult-to-quantify grade book into an easy-to-read spreadsheet.

I loved it.

That night I loaded all five of my English composition courses into the software. I could now go to class with a print-out, check off attendance, hand-write in assignment grades and simply load them into the Excel-like spreadsheet every few days. The biggest advantage was that I could actually generate individual grade sheets that I could give to students. Students could now actually see what they were missing and how that affected their grades. They could actually see how their coming late was affecting their grade now -- not months later when it was too late to correct their behavior.

I became a big advocate for grading software; not only because it allowed me to let students know exactly how they were doing, but it also gave me instant access to how my class was doing as a whole. Surprisingly, I could also now see how classes did on particular assignments -- which gave me the ability to adjust workload or expectations, depending on the student population. And last, I could finally disengage from the coveted hardbound grade-book. No longer would I have to copy sections of my grade book and hide it in file cabinets, afraid that my book would be stolen or lost. After updating entries, I could simply print out attendance sheets and grades-to-date to bring to class each week. And at three- or four-week intervals, I could hand out computer-generated scores for each student. They could see what assignments they had done --  and what their grade to date was. Overachievers and underachievers alike seemed happier when they knew where they stood in my composition course.

Later, WebCT and Blackboard started offering online grading -- which many of my colleagues swear by. I will admit that I'm squeamish about letting students view their individual assignment grades and the resulting in-class grade to date. It seems to promote grade-mongering and keeps the teacher (or academic counselor) out of the process. Even still, Blackboard will allow instructors to "release" information as they desire -- for example, at a time when they are giving individual conferences with students. Having their grade in print, with details about how they earned that grade, seemed to diffuse students' concerns;
this seems to attest to the "authority of print." When used judiciously, technology-generated in-class grades can be an incredibly valuable tool for faculty.

I realize that planning a semester ahead of time may be impossible for many professors. For some, revealing this information in a course outline may be completely inappropriate for their discipline -- or ineffective with their teaching style. For this particular English composition instructor, however, this tactic has not only allowed me to manage my class time better, but also see my semester in a more holistic way. Instead of viewing my course as a series of individual
assignments, I have started to see the flow of concepts that make up a semester. And though some may see my spelling out class policies as petty, others may see the value of eliminating students' worries before they start. Instead of spending five minutes at both the start and end of class on "what was due yesterday" or what constitutes "lateness," I've been rewarded with a bit more focus on class work.

Students are apt to consult me on the credibility of a secondary source rather than argue about their participation grade. And my office hours are often spent helping with students' thesis statements and outlines, rather than finely-crafted presentations on why a student has not been in my class for four weeks.

And me? I'm lucky enough to be able to focus on developing more effective assignments, evaluating how my student population is reacting to my curriculum, and even reading a few journals with the hope of developing my teaching theory and technique. It feels like success to me.
  

Shari Wilson, who writes Nomad Scholar under a pseudonym, explores life off the tenure track.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Classroom Realities

  • Posted by CJO on April 21, 2006 at 8:30am EDT
  • I've long been plagued by a question, which this article reinforces: while certainly we instructors must clearly explain our policies and expectations, and perhaps increasingly need to take into account the fact that more and more students cannot be assumed to understand the culture of the classroom, when do we cross the line into providing too much? If students are handed everything, down to the nth detail, doesn't that rob them of a valuable aspect of learning--ie., learning how to adapt to different circumstances? Do places of employment detail all of those expectations, such as how late is "too late" when one's pay is docked for tardiness, or when one loses a contract for failing to meet a deadline? How late is "too late" to make a flight or train departure?

    If everything is spelled out and sounded out to students, aren't they robbed of the necessary learning experience of trying to seek out information on their own and figure things out?

    Yes, it may be annoying for us faculty to have to deal with some of these questions, but I see that as part of helping students learn how to negotiate life. (And if a college student can't figure out her or his grade if the grading policy is clearly spelled out--unless it's some kind of arcane policy--their math skills are most definitely pre-middle school! And if a student doesn't bother to keep track of their grades, heaven help them if they have to deal with an IRS audit!)

  • I'd love to see your syllabus
  • Posted by Tracy Ryan on April 21, 2006 at 8:55am EDT
  • Shari, I'd love to see your syllabus! I've tried to develop a syllabus that accomplishes what you describe, but you seem to have perfected it. Would you share an example? ttryan@vcu.edu Thanks!

  • Difficulties Remain
  • Posted by NIC on April 21, 2006 at 9:10am EDT
  • Thanks for a nice article. I've done pretty much all that is listed here. My main syllabus for some classes is almost 11 pages long. I hand out a small two page version in class, and send the big one via email, *and* I make CD-ROMS for students with notes, powerpoint presentations, readings, "homework", movies, etc. and include handouts and the syllabus as well. I also send things over the class email list. And still students do come and ask, and still they argue about dates, and still they complain if they don't feel they are getting enough stuff, and complain because I give them so much material that they feel they don't have to come to class. I think they want things just perfect. But I must admit, the work on the syllabus, the expansion of each unit, and so on has helped. I have taken to writing questions we are going to address in each unit right below the assigned readings, and I think that helps (perhaps me more than students, but I hope it does facilitate reading and preparing for students).

  • Culture
  • Posted by GAW on April 21, 2006 at 9:15am EDT
  • What references can you provide on high and low context learners? I am familiar with the concept of high and low context culture, which you seem to be misusing!? For instance, you write that high context learners were "thrilled" with very specific instructions, which they "immediately skimmed," highlighting "certain dates." This would be typical behavior of a member of a low context culture. Low context culture demands low of words; high context culture few words. Can you help me understand this, or did you err?

  • Posted by John Lobell , Professor at Pratt Institute on April 21, 2006 at 9:35am EDT
  • I find myself in sympathy with Shari Wilson. I have long advocated a strong, detailed course syllabus, although not all at my school agree. (I teach at Pratt Institute, an art, architecture, and design school.)

    Some colleagues and I put up a web site with our syllabi to stimulate discussion, although not much has occurred. The site is at:
    http://pratt.edu/~fac/syllabus/aboutus.htm

    Some of my syllabi are at:
    http://pratt.edu/~fac/syllabus/arch.htm

    I disagree with CJO. Sure, we have to be open and flexible in our classes, especially in an art school, but a structured class guided by a good syllabus helps a student develop as an organized person capable of accomplishing things.

    I find that faculty who object to detailed syllabi are often the product of elite graduate school where the students arrive already having strong organizational skills.

  • You’re Asking Too Much!
  • Posted by RWH on April 21, 2006 at 10:30am EDT
  • I don’t think I’m overstating the case that when it comes to my students, I’m “there for them” ... time after time after time after time. I really appreciate the fact that they’re paying a nice chunk of my salary. But, when it comes to my syllabi, CJO is asking too much. I am all for going to great pains to encourage students to assume full responsibility for their lives. When my sons were growing up, they were “not allowed” to criticize their teachers at home. The theory was, “A good student can learn in spite of his teachers.”

    CJO asks, “If everything is spelled out and sounded out to students, aren’t they robbed of the necessary learning experience of trying to seek out information on their own and figure things out?”

    Probably ... but my syllabi are 50% informational and 50% defensive measures. The point of each is to organize in a single location a body of information that, were it not spelled out there, would occupy hours of my time answering individual student’s questions. As it is, I respond “It’s in your syllabus.”

    My syllabi (for mathematics, statistics, and management “science” courses) tend to be approximately 12 – 15 pages long. Of course they’re posted on-line, giving my students almost instant access to them and destroying no trees.

    Each syllabus is divided into sections, to wit ...

    1. Background

    2. Course Objectives

    3. “Policy” Regarding Class Attendance

    4. Student Evaluation (Including Grading Policy)

    5. Preparedness, Participation, and Professionalism

    6. University Honor Code (as it applies to student honesty)

    7. Services for Students with Disabilities

    8. Course Schedule

    9. Problem and Project Assignments

    10. Addendum 1 (Taking Notes in Class)

    11. Addendum 2 (Communicating With Me By e-mail)

    12. Addendum 3 (Utilizing Office Hours Effectively and Efficiently)

    13. Addendum 4 (Why Study Mathematics and Statistics?)

    14. I Didn’t Say It!

    It is noteworthy that I don’t care whether students come to class or not ... the university requires me to observe and report every student’s attendance at mid-term and at the end of the semester.

    Section 8 outlines what will take place in each meeting of the class and specifies what reading the students must do in preparation. Section 9 tells the students precisely which problems they must work and when they must turn them in for review.

    In Addendum 1, I do my level best to discourage students from taking notes in class. I try to design my courses in a way that makes taking notes the remarkable waste of time it is. I have quite exceptional hand-outs that help me pull this off.

    As I’m certain you know, students are notorious for not reading their syllabi. On the second meeting of each of my classes I give a quiz on the syllabus ... and I count it. Guess what? ... my students not only read their syllabi; they study them.

    So, CJO, while I generally agree with your theme, I would never make an effort to teach those skills by leaving out various parts of my syllabi. I’m definitely anal retentive when it comes to my syllabi, but being so buys me so much additional time for activities that are so much more interesting I would never consider another option.

    Now ... I think I’ll just kick back and spend some time with my well-informed students.

  • Posted by prof/student on April 21, 2006 at 10:35am EDT
  • Throughout most of my teaching career, I took the attitude that students should take responsibility for organizing themselves and their studies. I assumed that if I announced something like a new deadline, they should be careful enough to write it down and themselves incorporate it into their schedules. I chalked up my students failure to do so to their laziness, stupidity, etc. Now, I find myself a full-time student again, and I can tell you that I HATE it when professors do not provide detailed schedules and don't stick to their schedules (except when they extend a deadline!). Why, because being a full-time student in and of itself is a LOT of work. Add on to that the fact that most students also have jobs, and it becomes very easy to appreciate how much they truly need as much clarity and structure as an instructor can provide.

  • Posted by Shari Wilson , Nomad Scholar at Midwest University on April 21, 2006 at 10:55am EDT
  • First, I'm so glad that instructors and professors are concerned about the syllabus and course outline question!! It has been something that has alternately made me happy--and made me frustrated, depending on the student population and how long I've been teaching.

    To CJO, I would like to say congratulations for being able to teach able students who have the ability and motivation to learn--whether it is in class or with your course outline! My experience, unfortunately, is not always along these lines. Six years of my formative teaching experience was with a large community college in California where not only students, but faculty and staff felt like numbers. No retention to speak of. And now I teach at a university with an open-door admissions policy. The good news is that this captures more students... the bad news is that instructors often find themselves having to carry (or drag) students through a semester simply to get a 40% pass rate. Hence our "babying" students by spelling out policies. And, again, I revel in your ability in getting students to reach (and learn)--as well as your student population's ability to do so.

    To GAW: I'm still pawing around for my notes on that workshop on low- and high-context learning styles. And I will say that my observations are limited--of course there are high- and low-context learners within any culture. For example, I had a German student that was very concerned with deadlines and points given; yet, many researchers define Germany as a low-context culture. My oversimplifications are only a result of time (and space) here.

    Research papers I've looked at do define those in high-context cultures, such as Japanese, Korean and Chinese, as less reliant on words to convey meaning--rather choosing to focus on physical, socio-relational, and perceptual environment for information. Although this seems to suggest that my Asian students (many first generation) at this particular college would need LESS information spelled out in print, my experience is exactly the opposite. Although I haven't yet found any research on this phenomenon, I can only imagine that American classrooms are less "readable" than Asian classrooms. Other than the teacher being identifiable in a "role," there are no other guideposts for my Asian students to read to find out how to perform. Print literally seemed to be substituted for what might be symbols of importance or status in their culture. This is compounded when in a community college where we had no funds for teacher's aides. If we had, I suspect many of these students would have flooded his or her desk, constantly seeking the "right" way to do assignments. Intimidated by an instructor's perceived power, many sought out written instruction. I also had many first generation students who were not completely proficient in speaking English yet--this may have made them even more apt to take home written instruction to read, reread and have family reread, rather than ask instructors directly. Many of these students were also moving from a collectivist culture to an individualist one. I noticed that many of my high-context students formed informal groups to help each other assimilate information--in this case, too, the clearly spelled out instructions seemed to help. As I mentioned, this is only based on my six years teaching at a large community college in California; I'm sure to find out more as I continue to teach.

    In the teaching situation I described, my students from low-context cultures seemed to do exactly what is described in research papers--they relied almost primarily on "verbal code." In one case, I had a Latino student tell me that an assignment was not due on a particular date. Even though it had appeared on the first-day's syllabus, I had not "warned" the class; therefore, it was not due. This may be an isolated case, but it does suggest that some low-context students do not look to written pieces for information; rather, they rely on spoken word. Although more helpful in class discussion, these students often considered in-class comments as more important than information given out on handouts--which could be frustrating. In the worst case scenario, I noticed that these students seemed to rely on in-class discussion rather than actually read the assigned articles and essays. I'm hoping that this was a misperception on my part... I always hope that students really do the work!

    Ms. Ryan, my syllabus is on its way! Hope you find bits and pieces useful. And I do agree with Mr. Lobell from Pratt; we need to help students develop organizational skills. A detailed syllabus and course outline can be a model that they can draw from. Happy teaching all!

  • Posted by Cindy Munson at Western Technical College on April 21, 2006 at 11:30am EDT
  • All of these things are great ideas-if you want to turn your classroom into a police state. I welcome student questions about the syllabus because it gives me one more opportunity to communicate with my students. When we evaluate student performance, are we atempting to understand where the student is on their educational journey or is it an attempt to heap vengence on the students we deem incapable of reading a syllabus? Remember:"The law killeth but the spirit giveth life."

  • Posted by John Marlin at The College of St. Elizabeth on April 21, 2006 at 12:00pm EDT
  • I'm afraid that my memoir as an author of syllabi follows the reverse track of Shari's. I used to have fairly detailed, rule-laden documents which I have long since given up for simpler texts with broader guidelines.

    That's because I've found that trying to "take all of the loopholes out of a syllabus" is only slightly harder than trying to keep squirrels out of my birdfeeder -- so I no longer try.

    If you try to come up with a rule for every imaginable contingency, those clever students will always find one that you'd never imagine. Meanwhile, you'll have overlegislated yourself into a inflexibility, and turned yourself more into a referee-scorekeeper than a teacher.

  • To spoonfeed or not to spoonfeed?
  • Posted by CJO on April 21, 2006 at 1:20pm EDT
  • Apparently, my post caused some readers to infer that 1) I'm opposed to providing specificity to students and 2) that I teach able and motivated students. Neither is true.

    My course syllabi (not including the weekly or daily assignment schedules) consist of one double-sided sheet, single-spaced, tightly-packed; I choose to keep the syllabus to one page--and have photocopied it on non-white paper--to facilitate the students' use of it. (In addition, I have yet another handout that contains all of the general policies and information that administration wants us to convey to students but that are not specific only to that particular course--such as course withdrawal dates, early registration dates, information on disability policies, on getting help from the learning center, etc. etc. etc.)

    On my syllabus, I identify format requirements for papers (which I repeat on every single paper assignment), penalties for late submissions, make-up test policies, behavioral expectations, definition of plagiarism, as well as other issues. I also include the grading policy, which I do by percentages: so, for example, if I taught a course with, say, five different papers/tests/projects, each of which were worth 20%, I'd identify and list each paper/test/project on a separate line, and identify it as worth 20%. I'd align the %s to form a vertical addition equation, so that students could see that 20% + 20% + 20% + 20% + 20% = 100.
    Yet, I'll still have students who, having taken two tests, one with a grade of 75% and the other with a grade of 85%, who come up to me and want to know what their current grade in the course is. What more am I supposed to do for adults who should know how to average in two numbers together to determine what their grade is at that point? And how far should I go when students want to know what grade they need to get in subsequent work in order to get an A in the course?

    Or how much slack should I cut the student who, despite the format requirements that I identify for papers both in the course syllabus and on each and every paper assignment (on the latter, often in 14 point bold-faced font, enclosed in a heavily-bordered word processed-box, and in itemized list form), nevertheless turns in a paper that doesn't even come close to the requirements?

    By the way, I also put electronic copies of all of the above on our ANGEL (which is like Blackboard and Web-CT) course page--and on those, I use background color highlighting to further emphasize dates and particularly critical aspects of the requirements.

    Yes, we need to provide clear and detailed information in a format that makes reading and comprehension easy. We need to consider the complexity and competing demands of our students' lives, as well as their varied cognitive structures and skills.

    But don't we also have to expect them to take responsibility for paying attention, for learning to organize themselves, for acquiring self-discipline, for bothering to read--or read carefully? And if a student blows an assignment in terms of lateness, in terms of unacceptable format, in terms of not addressing the central question of the assignment--despite reasonable (and maybe even more than reasonable) efforts at clarity and detail on the part of their instructors)--can't their low or failing grade for that assignment serve an educational function?

    Again, I have to ask: what kind of slack is cut by agencies/firms that set a firm deadline, content requirements, or format requirements for a proposal? Does someone in the workforce get to complain to that agency or firm and demand a second chance, or claim that their careless reading of the requirements should enable them to turn in the proposal late?

    And in the academic world, what about the students who do read things carefully, who do bother to fulfill assignment requirements--like getting things in on time? What do they learn when they see that others who claim ignorance of the law get second or third chances?

    Again, please note that I am most certainly not advocating cutting students loose and letting them fend for themselves: we as instructors do have the responsibility to detail our expectations and policies clearly and in a verbal and visual manner that promotes. However, don't we also have an educational responsibility to expect our students to take responsibility for themselves? If we, for example, continue to fill out our students' registration forms for them (as some of my colleagues have believed is appropriate to do) throughout their college experience, when will they ever learn to fill out forms like that for themselves?

    And people wonder why studies show that there are college graduates who can't even fill out forms or balance checkbooks!

  • A response to Ms Wilson
  • Posted by CJO on April 21, 2006 at 1:20pm EDT
  • Ms Wilson, you said that at your open-admissions institution "instructors often find themselves having to carry (or drag) students through a semester simply to get a 40% pass rate. Hence our “babying” students by spelling out policies."

    What then, is the purpose of "higher education"? If students in college can't get through without the kind of skills that are increasingly expected of 9th graders, are they, indeed, getting a "higher" education?

    How much of the low pass rate might, in fact, be caused by the fact that they are carried through? Yes, many people going to open-admissions institutions (like the one at which I teach) may be trying to put their lives back together after substance abuse or prison terms; some are trying to put their lives back together after horrible experiences of abuse. However, while support and understanding are vital (especially for students in the latter situation), spoon-feeding is nevertheless not helpful to them because if they don't learn how to do for themselves--including gaining the confidence and realizing the necessity of taking some initiative--they won't be able to do for themselves.

    And while I won't go into detail, I will note that I myself had to pull myself back together after having experienced marital abuse, so I'm quite sympathetic especially (but not only) to students in that kind of situation. (I was also a first-generation college student from a blue-collar background.) I am not an "ivory tower" type, by any means.

  • Posted by Soon to be a teacher on April 21, 2006 at 1:55pm EDT
  • I would also like to disagree with CJO, but on different grounds than most have. CJO's comments reflect a perception in academia that I have observed many times, and of which I myself have often been guilty, that when a student fails to understand something, it is the student's fault, and that student ought to be punished accordingly, in this context by not receiving the right to make up a paper, raise a grade, etc. What this point of view fails to understand, however, is that (for better or worse) both the demographics and the purpose of higher education in this country have shifted dramatically in the last 50 years. Whereas a high school diploma was once the only thing necessary for a prosperous career and family life, while college was a fairly exclusive institution reserved only for academics and a certain few professionals, a shift in (among other things) global economic balance and trade practices has caused college to replace high school in America as the "certifying institution" of choice. It is very difficult to support one's family in modern America as, for example, a plumber; middle-class jobs now tend to require a college degree.

    This, in turn, has led to a gross shift in the university population. (I believe it has, anyway. I haven't actually done any statistical research to back it up, and I have no idea if anyone else has, either, since it's out of my field of study; this analysis is based entirely upon my own limited observations) Now, many of those students who would have stopped at high school for whatever reason (life goals, learning styles/disabilities, economic factors) must, through economic necessity, continue into college. This population of people has vastly different needs and desires than the "traditional" members of the college population. And, whether we like it or not, the education system has accomodated said population. If you look at universities in the Los Angeles region (where I'm based) you'll notice that the community colleges don't normally offer programs in Classics, while UCLA doesn't have a certification program in Aircraft Maintenance, no matter how necessary air travel is to our modern society. Enough students at UCLA

    (Nor, for that matter, does UCLA have a monopoly on the so-called "bright" students. As a former TA there, I have had many students sleep through my classes, try to wrangle an undeserved grade increase out of me, or exhibit what appears to me to be a complete inability to comprehend a syllabus, and these are supposed to be the "cream of the crop." Meanwhile, less advantaged students whom I've met who have risen up from the community college system demonstrate the exact opposite characteristics.)

    With that in mind, I feel that it is unfair to demonize these students who don't meet what we consider to be the "necessary academic standards," or even the basic math skills to which CJO refers. It is our duty as educators to do our best to teach every student, and if that means that we need to make certain compromises in order to appeal to their learning style or their life goals, the hope is that they will meet us in the middle, that this will encourage/enable them to learn the material far better than they otherwise would have. Don't look at it as dumbing down higher education, look at it as opening up higher education. Perhaps they'll even be inspired to become one of the more organized, or scholarly, or whatever adjective you'd like to insert here, that many of the other commentators have discussed. But it is always important for us, as educators, to remember that we do two things: first, we serve a market, and if we insist on limiting that market by placing unnecessary and arbitrary restrictions on it, we risk destabilizing and destroying the very careers to which we aspire; and second, we perform a service to humanity, and it is incompatible with that aim to limit our services based upon the aforementioned arbitrary standards.

  • Posted by CJO on April 21, 2006 at 2:40pm EDT
  • In response to "Soon to be a teacher"--and others:

    Again, I have to ask--what constitutes "higher education?" Does the fact that demographics have shifted change the definition of what "higher education" is?

    At what level should one be able to read if one carries a high school diploma? Has that changed with demographic shifts? Should that change?

    At what level should one be able to read at the end of 8th grade? Has that changed? Should it change?

    Further, far from "demonizing" students who have to overcome weak academic preparations, prior traumatic experiences, or prior counterproductive acts (crime, substance abuse), I believe we do them a grave disservice by merely "hoping" that "they will meet us in the middle." We have to teach them how to do so--and not asking them, and helping them, to take responsibility for themselves is that grave disservice.

  • Explicitness has its place
  • Posted by NV , Educator on April 21, 2006 at 3:05pm EDT
  • To those of you who think that articulating specific expectatins in great detail is "spoon feeding" and, by implication, "dumbing down" I have a simple task for you.
    Compare the length of the longest syllabus of which you are aware to that of the document on your campus which spells out tenure requirements and procedures. Which is longer? Who is being spoon-fed? Do/did you want to know the expectations for receving rewards for your work? What, precisely, is the formal difference of this example to students in your classes?

    Another analogy. If I were to ever have to undergo some unusual surgical operation for a rare affliction that my sureon had never seen, I would want the resources she was referring to be VERY EXPLICIT. I would want as much as possible spelled out. But shouldn't our students who go on to become doctors be able to "figure out" these things? To be sure, but shouldn't we be able to "figure out" ways of being explicit about what matters without dumbing down or sapping what's engaging from our courses? Explicitness has its place.

    As to the argument that students need learn to figure out expectaions and read between the lines to make it in the world, I ask, "What do you think your students are doing when they are not in class all of 15 hours per week?" They have and/or will learn that (or not some cases), but is that really high on your course objectives? If that goal is of higher priority for you than learning to think critically using the key concepts and methods in your field, then by all means, be opaque in your syllabus and assignments as a method for realizing that goal. But if your higher goal is the former, be specific about the questions critical thinkers ask and discuss, and like Ms. Wilson, make them explicit. We can be explicit about expectaions without being utterly didactic in regards to the conent and process of learning.

    And, if syllabi are crafted as mere legal documents as defenses against students' inquiries--as was suggested abve--is it any surprise that students read them jurisprudentially and take a litigious stance toward them and us, e.g. "how late is late?". Do you really want to promote in your classroom an environment in which all of your students are prosecuting attorneys and you are the lone defense lawyer?

    By the way, police states are characterized, in part, by those in power having and withhholding information. That is, not sharing and being explicit. Being explicit AFFORDS students control--perhaps that's why some are opposed to it--without, in my view, taking it away from faculty.

  • Posted by Soon to be a teacher on April 21, 2006 at 3:55pm EDT
  • CJO, those are fair questions. As for the question of "what is higher education," and should the definition change, I believe that there are two possibilities. If the definition is to remain the same, then we need to better enforce the existing standards; otherwise, we will continue to have underprepared, underachieving students who create unnecessary work at the level of "higher education." However, the current round of education budget cuts and political decisions strongly suggests that, whatever might be the moral high ground, the current political will is not there to enforce the existing standards. The other option, then, is to change how we understand the term “higher education.” In any case, since the population has essentially voted with its feet (or wallets, in this case), doesn’t that mean that, whatever standards may exist, the definitions and value of “higher education,” “high school diploma,” etc., has in fact already changed?

    This analysis implies, incidentally, that the current standards were ever actually valid; I’ve never thought to research this question until now, but I wonder if anyone actually surveyed reading levels among eighth-graders in, say, 1955 to see if they were consistently also reading at what we define as an eighth-grade reading level, or if there were just as many students who fell through the cracks then. In the latter case, the supposed decline in the reading level of our college students would the result of increasing numbers of students who otherwise wouldn't have gone to college, and who wouldn't have met the college-level reading standards back in 1955, either, flooding the system on account of the factors that I mentioned in my previous email. The other possibility (so, my first suggestion in the above paragraph) is that students in 1955 did read at the standard levels but, on account of dwindling budgets, inner-city poverty, increasing class sizes, etc., students in the modern primary and secondary school system are just not receiving as good of an education at they did in 1955. In both of these cases, the fault isn’t with the students, it’s with the system. Therefore, it is the system that needs to change.

    Another thing to point out in this context: I went to a very expensive, college-prep high school in Los Angeles. No one there ever bothered to teach me how to balance my checkbook. That was something that my parents did. A question to put back to you: is it the educators’ responsibility to make up for the failings of the parents? What skills ought to be taught in schools, and what ought to be taught in homes? Incidentally, I don’t intend that confrontationally; I think that you and I would probably agree on that point, and others, if we sat down to discuss them. My point is that these are questions that society needs to answer, and that society is avoiding answering, and therefore, we can only react to them.

    To return to the main argument about syllabi, and to quote from your first posting: “If everything is spelled out and sounded out to students, aren’t they robbed of the necessary learning experience of trying to seek out information on their own and figure things out?” I agree with you that this is at the core of the debate; how much is too much? As you say, how late is too late for a plane flight? But it is something of a false analogy: teachers REGULARLY give extensions on assignment due dates, for example, and REGULARLY forgive absences if students ask. So, the culture in academia is already very accommodating. In that case, I think that, if one intends to be very stringent in your deadlines (as I think that both you and I agree one OUGHT to be), then it is absolutely necessary to lay that out in the clearest and most basic terms possible. This is both for the students, since it will discourage many of those who might try to take advantage of the teacher, and it is for the teacher, since it will protect him or her not only from students trying to weasel out of work but also from an administration overly concerned with student lawsuits (you’d be amazed how often the administration sides with a student at UCLA in order to avoid a lawsuit from the student over something like a grade on a final; or, perhaps you wouldn’t). As for learning organization, etc., let the actual performance of the course work over the quarter or semester teach that to the student. To succeed in a class, with or without a clear schedule, is education enough in said skill, in my opinion.

  • Good points, "Soon to be a teacher"
  • Posted by CJO on April 21, 2006 at 9:55pm EDT
  • Perhaps my choice of words was inadequate when I mentioned spelling and sounding out every little thing for students. I hope my other comments made clear that I believe that not only clarity and specificity are of paramount importance, but so is redundancy as a pedagogical tool. The question is, of course, is how much is too much. When an instructor has repeated more than once, both orally and in writing, the exact format specs that the instructor expects--and makes clear that the instructor will not read the paper or consider it having been handed in on time if the format specs aren't followed--and yet still faces surprise and anger when the instructor sticks to her policy, the instructor wonders where the problem is.

    Your comments made clear to me something which I may have known in the past, or may never have "gotten" even after several years of teaching: perhaps, even when students do read the handouts, they may not pay attention to them 1) because other instructors have different policies and they may assume that if one will accept late papers or handwritten papers or papers in all sorts of formats then all will or 2) because if they've encountered instructors who don't enforce the policies they list on their handouts, they may assume that other instructors won't either.

    Nevertheless, I still don't know how far we should go--and I certainly am not loathe to be very specific with my expectations; I try not to assume too much, and keep learning that less and less background knowledge should be assumed nowadays. For example, even though I hand out reading/assignment lists--for courses for which these are appropriate--that identify assignments, tests, and papers by week or class date, I never assume that anyone would automatically read ahead--one reason being that we might not stick to the tentative schedule I'd constructed at the beginning of the semester. So, I always announce what the students are to have read before the next class).

    Yet, I'll still hear someone saying that they didn't know that this was due for today. Further, especially regarding matters of formats and late submissions, no matter how many times a policy is stated, if a student doesn't bother to read the several handouts on which the policy may be stated, and if a student doesn't come to class or pay attention to announcements in class, are we supposed to go further?

    If I tend to announce assignments at the end of class, should I stop class when a student leaves before class is over to tell them personally what the assignment is, since they're not staying until the end of class? If I make certain announcements at the beginning of class, should I also make them at the end of class to cover those who wander in late? Should I put in my course syllabus a statement about when in a class session I normally make certain announcements, and about whether I'm willing to make second or third announcements for the benefit of those who enter late, leave early, or pop in and out of class to go to the bathroom, take a cell call, or whatever? And when a student has missed class because they had a hangover, or went away early for a weekend, or even if their boss called them in early for work, should I be expected to give them a private lesson when I've already said in the syllabus (said only once, however) that if a student misses class it is her or his responsibility to get notes for that class period from a classmate?

    Yes, you're hearing a lot of frustration, which is unfortunately made worse when a suggestion is made that overexplicitness--perhaps beyond the point of reason--is what a good teacher should engage in. Myself, I don't know how much of the problem is the result of a shifting socio-economic/intelligence demographic, and how much is the result of a more general tendency to have things handed to one without having to do much if any work for it.

  • Posted by RWM on April 22, 2006 at 4:55am EDT
  • I actually have to agree with CJO. In a day and age of National Standards, it is an adequate expectation that students will know basic skills to live their lives. The issue isn't that every person needs to attend college for a job, the issue is that over the years people have slowly come to believe that everyone can and should go to college.

    Some people are just not the academic types. Even in a lot of the technical jobs that are out there, the employees do not need to know the theory behind the technology just know how to use it (even with my car that has an on board computer, I do not believe that the mechanic needs to know the chemical reaction for the combustion that occurs in the engine or how a CPU works in order to fix my car).

    There are however certain basic items that people need to know (like balancing a check book) before they get out of 9th grade. And going back to the concern that so many instructors have about their jobs, its only because too many of us are lowering our expectations for our students (that way those of us who do not lower these expectations are looked on as bad instructors).

    This is sadly the direction our entire education system is going, and as mentioned above, its because we have this belief that any one can pass college and should be able to (basically buy their degree) regardless of their ability level.

  • To Spell Out or Not to Spell Out
  • Posted by Shari Wilson , Nomad Scholar at Midwest University on April 22, 2006 at 4:50pm EDT
  • Lots of good points from all my online colleagues. I will add one narrative experience. I took a grad class from a colleague last year--simply to brush up on the topic and see how my mentor taught. He made the choice NOT to spell out dates on his syllabus, instead preferring "class one," "class two," and so forth. Some believe he had been using this exact syllabus for a decade. What happened was, of course, confusion. There was a holiday. Students assumed that they would skip a day and the next day would be "class ten." They were wrong. He informed them that they should have been doing the reading even though the campus declared this a legal holiday. And then he started to "split" work on different days to accomodate students who didn't know whether to read for that day or the next. The result was chaos. For each 75-minute class, he spent 10 minutes answering questions about what was due, what "class" day we were on, and so on. Sometimes I was frustrated with these questions (and it was obvious that he was, too)--but on other days, I was glad that someone asked because I simply couldn't figure out what he expected of the class... and I'm an instructor! You can imagine how confused the students were.

    As a realist, I don't believe this is good use of class time. In fact, I think this professor, as much of a genius as he is, lost credibility because he simply would not plug in dates to his course outline and stick to it.

    Maybe part of my attitude comes from my corporate background. As a purchasing agent in Silicon Valley during the heydey, you had to spell everything out--or you would get the wrong parts... resulting in lost customers and downed production lines. As a copywriter and art director in advertising, we had to be very careful to use exactly the right words and order the right space in newspapers or we would lose clients. I realize that business is not academia, yet don't our students often move into businesses? By spelling out simple expectations rather than asking students to make educated guesses, aren't we setting them up for success in the business world?

    I think there is a world of difference between something as simple as putting dates on a syllabus and "dumbing down" material. Yes, I list all quiz dates and assignment due dates on my course outline. But I don't order a 9th grade reading level book for my freshman class. And yes, I do let students know how their participation grade will suffer if they are late one more time--but I still require them to write a certain number of papers and receive a certain grade to pass my course. I have noticed that on Rate My Professor (yes, a very flawed assessment tool), students often mention that I require a lot of work from them--but they NEVER complain that they didn't understand what the goals of my class were or how to achieve them. And for me, that's good enough.

  • Posted by Some professor on April 22, 2006 at 4:50pm EDT
  • I'm with CJO too. Students need, in numerous ways, to be taught to take responsibility for their own learning. I've had students who were in class e-mail me two hours later asking what the assignment was. Why? They didn't write it down. So I e-mail them back with the assignment and tell them that I expect them to write down assignments in class. Problem solved. Another favorite: If an assignment involves, say, reading to page 120, does that include page 120? Sheesh.

    Incidentally, the plumbers I know make very good livings and are a lot better at thinking through and solving problems independently than most "collitch" students (that's Daniel Pinkwater's wonderful spelling).

  • Posted by DML on April 23, 2006 at 3:45pm EDT
  • I would also like to see your syllabus. I teach at both a community college and a business college. Your article touched on several areas that I have dealt with as I taught. Please send the syllabus, if possible, to dawn@hctc.com. And, thanks for sharing experiences we all have.

  • So teach them!
  • Posted by Pamela Womack , Professor at Tomball College on April 24, 2006 at 12:30pm EDT
  • I have a syllabus that spells out the details. When a student asks a question that is answered on the syllabus, my response is, "I'm glad you are asking that so that you will get it right. The answer is in your syllabus. Take it out now and find the ________ section and see what it says." If the question is one that I think several students are confused about, I have everyone get the syllabus out and we read the info out loud and take a few minutes for class discussion. If not, I'll go on with whatever the class was doing while giving the questioner a couple of minutes to read the syllabus, the come back to him or her and verify that the question is cleared up.

    This serves the dual purpose of both getting the questions answered and training the students to go to the syllabus for answers.

  • Posted by ageorge on April 25, 2006 at 10:25am EDT
  • My colleagues and I have debated many of the issues that have been discussed here. I have adopted some of your approaches and would appreciate getting a copy of your syllabus (if possible) at georges_ga@yahoo.com. Thanks.