• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Teaching Philosophies

kyuuei

Emperor/Dictator
Joined
Aug 28, 2008
Messages
13,964
MBTI Type
enfp
Enneagram
8
I know this sounds like an angry fit, but I really do want some input as to the different thought processes when it comes to teaching, as I've noticed a total lack of efficiency in my classes this semester in comparison to other classes in previous semesters.

I'm under the impression that students take classes because it's difficult to learn it on your own in comparison to having someone with expertise teaching you. That's why people take classes normally instead of reading and testing out of courses.

Since this, to me, is the primary function of classes, students should succeed with an A every time if they 1. Attend every class and participate by taking notes, paying attention, and completing classwork. 2. Do all homework assigned. and 3. Study these two things before tests.

Here's what I don't understand. Why do teachers bother to set things up in a non-straight forward way? I understand challenging students, but why do things like this:
- Read entire chapters for homework assignments.
- Don't assign homework or require any readings but have these things on the test
- Give notes in class in length and depth that are not at all covered on tests.

If it's important, it should be on the test. If it's not, there shouldn't be much note-taking on it. If you assign entire chapters and then go over the chapter in class, fine.. but why assign entire chapters and never bother to go over it? This is the reason I go to classes, to avoid reading and attempting to comprehend these things on my own. Why not make things on the test (like assignments online with quizzes pulled verbatim for the test) required homework or classwork?

These points are, in my opinion, attempts to trip up students and lower success, which is the opposite of what I thought education was all about and I don't know why teachers do these things. This is especially true for the first tests of the semester, which give you a feel for how following tests will be conducted.. But test scores are a major deal, so knowing what to expect for the first one should be included in detail in comparison to future tests.

Two examples: We have to write an essay on Obama, Hannity, and Maddow on healthcare. The essay needs to be at least two pages, and we have to watch hours of videos throughout the course of a couple weeks to create this essay. ... It's world religion class, and none of it pertains to neither world religion itself or the test we need to have it done by. We also took lengthy notes on different philosophers on religion, tons of vocabulary, and none of any of it was on the test. Infact, the only thing that was on the test was questions taken straight out of a chapter. We never talked about feminism once, but had questions about it on the test. The class average was a 70, with only one A at 90.

Biology class never required chapter reading, masteringbiology.com's assignments, etc. as homework. We take extensive notes in the class, the teacher talks in tantrums and gets off subject, tells the class that the tests are more lecture based and note-based, and gives a review sheet covering the four chapters. Many questions were lifted directly from the book and the website's quizzes and weren't covered in class, and many questions on the review never made it to the test.. but there were plenty of questions omitted from the review. Class average was a 59, with the highest score an 82.

Why would teachers set things up in a way where the students are going to struggle and fail so much?

To summarize: I understand challenge is good and all, but where do you cross the line between the professor being lazy and undedicated, and where students want their hands held?
 

Blank

.
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
1,201
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Because all of life is a test and we skip over the things which are unimportant and/or irrelevant, rather than taking the sum of all of our experiences and learning from them.
 

Cimarron

IRL is not real
Joined
Aug 21, 2008
Messages
3,417
MBTI Type
ISTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
Something a professor said to our class during freshman year, and I thought it was a cool way of looking at it: He said he is not going to teach "down to" us. He is hoping to bring us up to his level of knowledge. (This seems to be reasoning for setting high standards.)

There are also time-constraints, I guess, coupled with if the professor/teacher has an ideology of "these students should become experts in this subject." This results in students being expected to cover a huge range of material, but only time for a one-hour test means only hitting a few points in that body of material. Professors make this known--sometimes they admit they like this method because it "forces" the students to "cover their bases" by study everything, not knowing which few topics will be chosen on the tests.
 
Joined
Sep 18, 2008
Messages
1,941
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
512
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
I'll try to answer some of your questions as someone who teaches 2nd year uni students biochem.

I'm under the impression that students take classes because it's difficult to learn it on your own in comparison to having someone with expertise teaching you. That's why people take classes normally instead of reading and testing out of courses.

Since this, to me, is the primary function of classes, students should succeed with an A every time if they 1. Attend every class and participate by taking notes, paying attention, and completing classwork. 2. Do all homework assigned. and 3. Study these two things before tests.

I disagree. I don't hand out As unless I'm really impressed. Understanding the bare minimum for class is - as I've said - the bare minimum. Showing an ability to evaluate that information and critique it, as well as link it to other fields and paradigms... That is what makes an A student.

IMHO, students take classes to get a starting point for that particular subject. You find that as you go to higher levels, what you "learn" or memorise for tests isn't actually "right", or even particularly accurate. That is why I am not impressed with students who turn up to class hoping to get all of the answers from the teacher. Being able to evaluate and decide what is the "right" answer - that is what university is supposed to teach you.

Here's what I don't understand. Why do teachers bother to set things up in a non-straight forward way? I understand challenging students, but why do things like this:
- Read entire chapters for homework assignments.
- Don't assign homework or require any readings but have these things on the test
- Give notes in class in length and depth that are not at all covered on tests.

If it's important, it should be on the test. If it's not, there shouldn't be much note-taking on it. If you assign entire chapters and then go over the chapter in class, fine.. but why assign entire chapters and never bother to go over it? This is the reason I go to classes, to avoid reading and attempting to comprehend these things on my own. Why not make things on the test (like assignments online with quizzes pulled verbatim for the test) required homework or classwork?

1) You read entire chapters to get a global picture. If all you need are the dot-points, what for do the assignment? It's the equivalent of the teacher giving you the answer.
2) I don't understand what you mean.
3) Again, for the global picture.

It is up to you to decide what is "important". That is why the scope of the reading is always larger than what will be tested. Why are you so test-focussed? The point of university is to get an education and learn as much as possible, not to do well on tests.

These points are, in my opinion, attempts to trip up students and lower success, which is the opposite of what I thought education was all about and I don't know why teachers do these things. This is especially true for the first tests of the semester, which give you a feel for how following tests will be conducted.. But test scores are a major deal, so knowing what to expect for the first one should be included in detail in comparison to future tests.

The guy running the class that I teach has tried for years to lower the average to just under 75. I have grown to agree with his philosophy - that As lose their value if too many people get them. Also, if covering the requisite points was all that was needed to get an A, there would be no separation whatsoever between students who REALLY understood the material and thought critically, and those who simply memorised what would get them through the test.

Biology class never required chapter reading, masteringbiology.com's assignments, etc. as homework. We take extensive notes in the class, the teacher talks in tantrums and gets off subject, tells the class that the tests are more lecture based and note-based, and gives a review sheet covering the four chapters. Many questions were lifted directly from the book and the website's quizzes and weren't covered in class, and many questions on the review never made it to the test.. but there were plenty of questions omitted from the review. Class average was a 59, with the highest score an 82.

*shrugs* There are incompetent teachers everywhere. Most of them just want to get paid and go back to their research. My previous supervisor was known to turn up to class to tell the lecture hall "I didn't prepare for your lecture because I was out golfing this weekend".

Why would teachers set things up in a way where the students are going to struggle and fail so much?

To summarize: I understand challenge is good and all, but where do you cross the line between the professor being lazy and undedicated, and where students want their hands held?

I would say, as someone who came from an Asian cram school where the average mark was 50 - that it made me a stronger person and less grade-focused. I hate holding my students' hands and giving them the answer, because I KNOW that most of the information is out there. They just don't want to have to read 1 extra word beyond what they ABSOLUTELY NEED TO. That, to me, defeats the entire purpose of going to university.

I've been told that as a teacher I care "far too much" about whether the students are really learning or not. I've also been told to stop bending over backwards for them. But I think if you don't care, and just feed them the answers, they will not grow intellectually. In which case, I will have failed in my job as a teacher.

God, that was a lot more repetitive than I thought it would be.
 

JocktheMotie

Habitual Fi LineStepper
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
8,491
I'll try to answer some of your questions as someone who teaches 2nd year uni students biochem.



I disagree. I don't hand out As unless I'm really impressed. Understanding the bare minimum for class is - as I've said - the bare minimum. Showing an ability to evaluate that information and critique it, as well as link it to other fields and paradigms... That is what makes an A student.

IMHO, students take classes to get a starting point for that particular subject. You find that as you go to higher levels, what you "learn" or memorise for tests isn't actually "right", or even particularly accurate. That is why I am not impressed with students who turn up to class hoping to get all of the answers from the teacher. Being able to evaluate and decide what is the "right" answer - that is what university is supposed to teach you.



1) You read entire chapters to get a global picture. If all you need are the dot-points, what for do the assignment? It's the equivalent of the teacher giving you the answer.
2) I don't understand what you mean.
3) Again, for the global picture.

It is up to you to decide what is "important". That is why the scope of the reading is always larger than what will be tested. Why are you so test-focussed? The point of university is to get an education and learn as much as possible, not to do well on tests.



The guy running the class that I teach has tried for years to lower the average to just under 75. I have grown to agree with his philosophy - that As lose their value if too many people get them. Also, if covering the requisite points was all that was needed to get an A, there would be no separation whatsoever between students who REALLY understood the material and thought critically, and those who simply memorised what would get them through the test.



*shrugs* There are incompetent teachers everywhere. Most of them just want to get paid and go back to their research. My previous supervisor was known to turn up to class to tell the lecture hall "I didn't prepare for your lecture because I was out golfing this weekend".



I would say, as someone who came from an Asian cram school where the average mark was 50 - that it made me a stronger person and less grade-focused. I hate holding my students' hands and giving them the answer, because I KNOW that most of the information is out there. They just don't want to have to read 1 extra word beyond what they ABSOLUTELY NEED TO. That, to me, defeats the entire purpose of going to university.

I've been told that as a teacher I care "far too much" about whether the students are really learning or not. I've also been told to stop bending over backwards for them. But I think if you don't care, and just feed them the answers, they will not grow intellectually. In which case, I will have failed in my job as a teacher.

God, that was a lot more repetitive than I thought it would be.

I agree with everything you say here.

It seems, Kyuuei, that you're expecting university to emulate not only the SJ centered education style of K-12, but emulate your military experience as well. University is far more centered upon the individual taking things into their own hands, with the teachers more as a tool to help you learn and understand the material, than as a gatekeeper that holds all the answers. Obviously, there are exceptions, but I find that is the general experience.
 

Venom

Babylon Candle
Joined
Feb 10, 2008
Messages
2,126
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
1w9
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
The guy running the class that I teach has tried for years to lower the average to just under 75. I have grown to agree with his philosophy - that As lose their value if too many people get them. Also, if covering the requisite points was all that was needed to get an A, there would be no separation whatsoever between students who REALLY understood the material and thought critically, and those who simply memorised what would get them through the test.

thats great in a vacuum. The problem is that uni is not in a vacuum. We dont pay 25+ grand a year "for the learning experience". People do it so they can get a job. If I have to compete with a bunch of kids whose GPAs are built on the idea of "perfectly understanding everything covered in the book + class = A"...and meanwhile my GPA gets ruined the teacher who throws bullshit questions on the test unrelated to the course material covered, just to lower the avg, thats not going to make me a happy customer who paid 25 grand a year.

I know you dont agree with me though. This is part of what Kuyeii is saying though.

Uni is basically built to create university professors right now, rather than functioning workers. This is a problem, because 98% of us, dont want to be uni professors and are being evaluated in ways that really aren't relevant to our employers. Its kind of like an unknown philosophers response to plato's "philosopher King" who would go under years of schooling: if our leaders had to do that much schooling, it would be like "rule by school masters".

Kuyeii, keep perspective. You need these grades to get a job. So just play their dumb game and pretend that you too, want to be a school master someday :D
 

kyuuei

Emperor/Dictator
Joined
Aug 28, 2008
Messages
13,964
MBTI Type
enfp
Enneagram
8
I disagree. I don't hand out As unless I'm really impressed. Understanding the bare minimum for class is - as I've said - the bare minimum. Showing an ability to evaluate that information and critique it, as well as link it to other fields and paradigms... That is what makes an A student.

I don't think participating actively in class daily, showing up to class daily, doing all homework and classwork assigned, and studying said material is at all bare minimum. Perhaps we'll just have to agree to disagree here.

IMHO, students take classes to get a starting point for that particular subject. You find that as you go to higher levels, what you "learn" or memorise for tests isn't actually "right", or even particularly accurate. That is why I am not impressed with students who turn up to class hoping to get all of the answers from the teacher. Being able to evaluate and decide what is the "right" answer - that is what university is supposed to teach you.

Idealistically, I entirely agree. But the thing is, I'm not getting a degree to be an expert in Biology. I'm getting a degree because I NEED one to get ANY job. There are students in my class forced into a biology-majors class because the total amount of students in the college exceeds the slots for non-major science alternatives. These students' GPA are suppose to suffer so that some teacher can have an idealistic impression of their careers as a university instructor?? It doesn't seem to fit imo. I don't pay $600 dollars to be told I'm a shitty student because I don't want to be an expert in a field, I just want to know more about it and get a good grade while I do.

It is up to you to decide what is "important". That is why the scope of the reading is always larger than what will be tested. Why are you so test-focussed? The point of university is to get an education and learn as much as possible, not to do well on tests.

I'm test focused because the standards for how professors grade, and how my GPA in turn looks, is test-focused. I hate tests, I'd rather not take one at all if it were up to me. They're inaccurate, stress-inducing, and all-too-often they don't accomplish their primary objective.

If the point of university was to get an education, GPAs wouldn't be so damn important. People could go to whatever university they wanted, be it community college or Havard regardless of their grades and scores. I dunno where you teach at, but please let me know so I can go there for school if this is their philosophy.

Also, if covering the requisite points was all that was needed to get an A, there would be no separation whatsoever between students who REALLY understood the material and thought critically, and those who simply memorised what would get them through the test.

I'll refer to my point above when I say I don't need to be an expert in biology. I'd rather not be an expert in World religion, and I definitely have no desire to critically think in the religious world. I take this class because I HAVE to, not because I choose to.. If college was about being an expert in a subject, getting your bachelors would be two years of class-specific, intensive work.. not 120-130 hours of filler courses and bullshit.

*shrugs* There are incompetent teachers everywhere. Most of them just want to get paid and go back to their research. My previous supervisor was known to turn up to class to tell the lecture hall "I didn't prepare for your lecture because I was out golfing this weekend".

Disgusting, imo. I'm sorry to hear that. Students pay a lot of money to keep these professors and get their grades and education from them. He might as well have slapped them all in the face.

I hate holding my students' hands and giving them the answer, because I KNOW that most of the information is out there. They just don't want to have to read 1 extra word beyond what they ABSOLUTELY NEED TO. That, to me, defeats the entire purpose of going to university.

Well, no, part of the awesome part of university is to stop holding hands, guiding them step by step, and make them run instead of crawl, or at least get to walking. I get that.

Why assign things that have nothing to do with anything though? Why give out a review and mislead students into what MAY be on the test, then put hardly nothing from said review on it? It's not that I don't want to read more than I need to, but that with the amount of work assigned, and with the goals I want, I don't have the TIME to go off on a tangent in Biology. I can barely make the hours I need to study for what's necessary now. And that's just ONE class, I have 4 hours just like it. I know we're not babies and all, but we're not exactly computers either.

I appreciate your input, and I entirely agree on a lot of your points. I feel the education system SHOULD work the way you describe. The problem is, it doesn't. and Professors failing to recognize that because they want that idealized approached in their teachings shouldn't make the grades near impossible to obtain. I shouldn't have to cry myself to sleep because I won't get an A that I ABSOLUTELY, WITHOUT DOUBT *NEED* just so I can go to the school I WANT to go to so I can do the REAL learning. Because the bottom line is.. Ritzy colleges don't go "Oh. World religion, she really understood the material but made a B because of x and y..." They just see a B and not an A in a supposedly "easy" class.

I consider myself a decent student. I do my homework, I study, I show up to class and actively participate and ask questions as needed. I make myself understand the material as far as I possibly can given the instruction so that I can hopefully do well on the tests, which measures that comprehension. I don't know why there should be anymore effort than that required to be an A student.

To Jock: I don't want college to be like K-12. I thought the entire primary school thing was a joke, and Im glad to be out of it for good. I just want college to be possible for someone that isn't JUST a full-time student. That's all. It's not unreasonable to say "Make an A *possible for me to obtain, instead of some label in the distance like "Altruism", where a human cannot truely be altrustic, but can only strive to be as close to it as possible."

We dont pay 25+ grand a year "for the learning experience". People do it so they can get a job. If I have to compete with a bunch of kids whose GPAs are built on the idea of "perfectly understanding everything covered in the book + class = A"...and meanwhile my GPA gets ruined the teacher who throws bullshit questions on the test unrelated to the course material covered, just to lower the avg, thats not going to make me a happy customer who paid 25 grand a year.

Exactly. Absolutely. Thank you for writing this. The problem is, it isn't JUST education. You're exactly right. Pretending this is anything much more than a business now a days is ridiculous and naive. I WISH it weren't that way, but it IS.

Everyone and their dog is getting a degree now, and people have to to catch up with them and have a job. They have to have bigger, better grades, they have to compete for whatever stable jobs they can, and jobs look STRAIGHT at the scores and GPAs for their foundation in how 'well' I did in school.

:hug:
 

The_Liquid_Laser

Glowy Goopy Goodness
Joined
Jul 11, 2007
Messages
3,376
MBTI Type
ENTP
I used to teach math at a university, so I can speak about my personal teaching philosophy. Let me first say that you should keep in mind that I taught math, because that had a significant impact on how I established my teaching philosophy. Math courses are very vertical in nature. Course A is a prerequisite for course B which is a prerequisite for course C and so on. There is very little freedom in the order you can take math courses compared to other subjects.

This is my philosophy on teaching. I grade based on how well a student demonstates on the tests their understanding of the curriculum. I am handed a list of topics from a curriculum committee, and I know that the students need to understand this list of topics to be prepared for the next course. That is why demonstrated ability is all that matters. An "A" is awarded for demonstrated mastery. A "C" is awarded for demonstrated proficiency. A "D" or "F" is awarded for lack of proficiency, and the student will have to repeat the course.

The amount of effort the student puts in does not affect my grading process. One student may master the concepts just listening in class. Another may have to study several hours a night to achieve the same level of comprehension. Effort does not matter to me, only ability.

Likewise my ability to teach the concepts does not affect my grading decision. The first time I teach a course I will not do as good of a job explaining things as the second time I teach a course. However the first group is responsible for learning the exact same list of topics as the second group. They will both be graded according to ability even if the first group has to put in more effort to achieve the same level of ability. The tests are not modified if there are snow days, instead the topics are progressed through more quickly and the same material is tested. The tests were not modified to compensate for 9/11 attacks even though the students missed a class or two because of them. The students were still responsible for knowing the same material regardless of what the terrorists did. If I modify my tests, then the terrorists win! ;) The curriculum was set, and I taught and tested to the curriculum. If I did not test on the whole curriculum then the students would not be prepared for the next course.

Let me address some points brought up in the OP:
Here's what I don't understand. Why do teachers bother to set things up in a non-straight forward way? I understand challenging students, but why do things like this:
- Read entire chapters for homework assignments.
- Don't assign homework or require any readings but have these things on the test
- Give notes in class in length and depth that are not at all covered on tests.

- Read entire chapters for homework assignments.
This is not the type of assignment I would give in math class, but I can understand why a professor would do this. They want you to know the whole chapter. They don't tell you which parts they are going to test on, because they want you to know everything from the chapter.

- Don't assign homework or require any readings but have these things on the test
I don't understand this as well. It is one thing not to talk about a subject in class, but it is another thing if you don't even tell the students where to find the proper materials. I chalk this up to forgetfulness or just plain incompetence.

- Give notes in class in length and depth that are not at all covered on tests.
The only explanation I could have for this is that the professor disagrees with the decisions of a curriculum committee. The professor wants you to know X, but a committee has already decided you need to be tested on Y. Barring that it could also just be incompetence.
 

Gewitter27

New member
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Messages
651
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Our district has a policy that pretty much states that EVERY STUDENT must do ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING in a group.

Being a 96% I is no easy task in a world of 100% Es who haven't ever even HEARD of an I before.

- Don't assign homework or require any readings but have these things on the test
I guess those who don't pursue knowledge actively are screwed.
 

lamp

New member
Joined
Jul 8, 2009
Messages
528
I am unsure what to draw from the 'school as knowledge' vs 'school as job qualification' contradiction.

Perhaps, with increasing numbers of degrees, employers will look beyond degree / GPA. Portfolios and experience will become more important, GPA less so. This allows for idealistic teachers. And perhaps I am being too idealistic.
 

kyuuei

Emperor/Dictator
Joined
Aug 28, 2008
Messages
13,964
MBTI Type
enfp
Enneagram
8
First off, thank you for posting your input Laser, it was highly appreciated. To clarify this "read entire chapters for homework".. I don't understand this at all not because I don't want to read chapters. But because if that's all I needed to do for this class was read a bunch of chapters and take a test, I could have done that on my own and tested out of the course. The reason I take a class at all is to get someone to TEACH me the book, not to study the book and ask a lazy teacher an occasional question. If an entire chapter is necessary, fine.. but I'm reading a book and getting no input from the teacher. The book is teaching me then, not the teacher, which I feel is wrong. I pay for a teacher, I should get teaching. That's why that's on my list of "wtf"s.

I am unsure what to draw from the 'school as knowledge' vs 'school as job qualification' contradiction.

Perhaps, with increasing numbers of degrees, employers will look beyond degree / GPA. Portfolios and experience will become more important, GPA less so. This allows for idealistic teachers. And perhaps I am being too idealistic.

I hope you're right. I feel the same way, I hope my experience gives me edges over degrees, because I don't intend at his time to get my bachelors. I dislike school thus far and it stresses me out so much.
 

Haphazard

Don't Judge Me!
Joined
Apr 14, 2008
Messages
6,704
MBTI Type
ENFJ
A teacher not pointing you to the right materials for a question just to lower the GPA is just... wrong.
 

Kyrielle

New member
Joined
Apr 26, 2007
Messages
1,294
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
4w5
First off, thank you for posting your input Laser, it was highly appreciated. To clarify this "read entire chapters for homework".. I don't understand this at all not because I don't want to read chapters. But because if that's all I needed to do for this class was read a bunch of chapters and take a test, I could have done that on my own and tested out of the course. The reason I take a class at all is to get someone to TEACH me the book, not to study the book and ask a lazy teacher an occasional question. If an entire chapter is necessary, fine.. but I'm reading a book and getting no input from the teacher. The book is teaching me then, not the teacher, which I feel is wrong. I pay for a teacher, I should get teaching. That's why that's on my list of "wtf"s.

Ideally, what should be happening after you read a chapter in the text is the professor and class should discuss what was read to ensure understanding.

If this is not done, then reading from the book and never discussing it is rather pointless. Because I can't tell you how many times I was asked to read a chapter and had a really hard time understanding the material on my own because:

-It was written in an extremely dry, round-about manner and in spite of my best efforts to focus on the words, I kept losing my place and would re-read the same sentence five times and not take anything in.
-The material was simply way over my head and without further discussion, I would have never completely understood the specific subject.
 

lamp

New member
Joined
Jul 8, 2009
Messages
528
I don't intend at his time to get my bachelors. I dislike school thus far and it stresses me out so much.
I do not know what your interests are, but I would guess you will want to return at some point. I do. I enjoyed school and ultimately found it useful but it slowly tore me apart. Which was bad.
 

Tiltyred

New member
Joined
Dec 1, 2008
Messages
4,322
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
468
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
When I was in school (she said, leaning on her cane ...) and a professor did this, I would go to their office during their office hours and point it out. And if they argued, I would go over their heads. You're right, you're paying good money and you're doing the work. Getting jerked around should not be part of it.

Can you opt out of some of these classes? For example, I took logic instead of math, and my science was geology...is there wiggle room to drop/add and take something else?
 

kyuuei

Emperor/Dictator
Joined
Aug 28, 2008
Messages
13,964
MBTI Type
enfp
Enneagram
8
-It was written in an extremely dry, round-about manner and in spite of my best efforts to focus on the words, I kept losing my place and would re-read the same sentence five times and not take anything in.
-The material was simply way over my head and without further discussion, I would have never completely understood the specific subject.

:blush: These tend to be my problems as well. Sometimes I do okay, but this is few and far between.

I do not know what your interests are, but I would guess you will want to return at some point. I do. I enjoyed school and ultimately found it useful but it slowly tore me apart. Which was bad.

Well, I have another 2 years (including this semester) to go, so I'm not going anywhere fast :laugh:

When I was in school (she said, leaning on her cane ...) and a professor did this, I would go to their office during their office hours and point it out. And if they argued, I would go over their heads. You're right, you're paying good money and you're doing the work. Getting jerked around should not be part of it.

Can you opt out of some of these classes? For example, I took logic instead of math, and my science was geology...is there wiggle room to drop/add and take something else?

Usually for students there are, but for myself once I start a class I must finish it due to my financial aid from the army. My work schedule is what placed me in the classes I am in.
 

Little Linguist

Striving for balance
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
6,880
MBTI Type
xNFP
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Perhaps my perspective as a teacher is uninteresting/irrelevant, but this is what I always tell my pupils/students at the beginning (first day) if they are not already adults (sometimes then, too, depending on the group).

Question: "So what is the point of homework anyway?" (Question throws them off guard, as they are probably wondering the same thing themselves).

Answer: (grumble, mumble, rumble)

Answer 1: "Because the class is too big?"

My answer: "That's true. But I sometimes teach individuals, and they also get homework."

Answer 2: "To piss us off?"

My answer: "You may get pissed off, but that is not my intention, no."

Answer 3: "To keep us busy for no reason?"

My answer: "Hope you don't ever feel my homework is to keep you busy for no reason. The reason is as follows:

There is interesting work, and there is boring work. Why waste precious class time - YOUR time - for boring stuff you can do at home? You have a native speaker here, and this is your time to talk to one. The boring writing and reading - that stuff you can do at home."

(Stunned silence).
 

FDG

pathwise dependent
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
5,903
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
7w8
Wow, this topic sucks. It seems pretty normal/right to me that a professor will make the test difficult by inserting complex questions that aren't necessarily stricly included in the curriculum. That's part of university, isn't it? If you didn't want to do something complicated, you could have started working straight out of high school. If you can't manage, that's too bad - you can drop out.
 

Little Linguist

Striving for balance
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
6,880
MBTI Type
xNFP
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Hiya, Kyuuei! As you know, I am a teacher and we have fairly similar ways of looking at things, including education, so please allow me to address your concerns.

I know this sounds like an angry fit, but I really do want some input as to the different thought processes when it comes to teaching, as I've noticed a total lack of efficiency in my classes this semester in comparison to other classes in previous semesters.

I'll do my best. :D

I'm under the impression that students take classes because it's difficult to learn it on your own in comparison to having someone with expertise teaching you. That's why people take classes normally instead of reading and testing out of courses.

Yes, this statement is often true. People either lack the motivation, the structure, the self-discipline, the willpower, or the stamina to work on their own; in addition, I would say extraverts like the opportunity to share and work with others.

Since this, to me, is the primary function of classes, students should succeed with an A every time if they 1. Attend every class and participate by taking notes, paying attention, and completing classwork. 2. Do all homework assigned. and 3. Study these two things before tests.

Hmm, now this is a tricky thing. Attendance is, of course, very important. It shows that you are engaged, and sometimes you can miss important details if you are not there.

I grade participation depending not only on frequency, but also on quality, which I am sure you do well.

Completing classwork is important because it enables you to 'test out' your skills in a 'safe' way that is not graded. It's sort of a test run before the test, and it amazes me that people do not take advantage of it unless they are so great that they do not need the practice, but then they would not be in my class, soooo....

Ideally people should review their homework and corrections (which will ideally be filled with constructive criticism with improvements if teachers do their work right), study their notes (which should be relevant), and pay attention to get an A. However, not all people possess the same retention ability; many people cannot sift the right/important things from other unimportant matters, or they do not possess the ability to take those facts/ideas and implement them in a new situation. So, no, not everyone who does these things gets an A.


Here's what I don't understand. Why do teachers bother to set things up in a non-straight forward way? I understand challenging students, but why do things like this:
- Read entire chapters for homework assignments.
- Don't assign homework or require any readings but have these things on the test
- Give notes in class in length and depth that are not at all covered on tests.

I think, though I am uncertain, that some teachers want to give additional information outside of the written material. In other words, if they just spit out what the reading says, what is the point of class? You could have figured that out on your own. Perhaps they give examples to illustrate the concepts. Or they give information that might not be basic info, but might still prove interesting. Since they cannot go over every single concept on the syllabus (time factor) they focus on the most basic elements and expect you to 'fill in the gaps' and ask questions if you have concerns during office hours? (Just a guess).

If it's important, it should be on the test. If it's not, there shouldn't be much note-taking on it. If you assign entire chapters and then go over the chapter in class, fine.. but why assign entire chapters and never bother to go over it? This is the reason I go to classes, to avoid reading and attempting to comprehend these things on my own. Why not make things on the test (like assignments online with quizzes pulled verbatim for the test) required homework or classwork?

Although I agree that all major concepts should be tested one way or another, it is impossible for them all to be covered on a test. For example, we covered letter writing in English class, but I informed the class that due to time concerns, we would not be able to write a letter during the test. Nonetheless, I believe it is a skill we should practice over the course of the year because it is not something that should be crammed into one bit.

These points are, in my opinion, attempts to trip up students and lower success, which is the opposite of what I thought education was all about and I don't know why teachers do these things. This is especially true for the first tests of the semester, which give you a feel for how following tests will be conducted.. But test scores are a major deal, so knowing what to expect for the first one should be included in detail in comparison to future tests.

I always indicate what they should expect on the test, although it seems bizarre to me that students do not know what will be on there!!! It is like, well what have we been talking about for the past month??? That's probably going to be on there lol. Amusing. Anyway, despite that crazy fact, I always tell them the form and topics to expect so that there are no bad surprises.

Two examples: We have to write an essay on Obama, Hannity, and Maddow on healthcare. The essay needs to be at least two pages, and we have to watch hours of videos throughout the course of a couple weeks to create this essay. ... It's world religion class, and none of it pertains to neither world religion itself or the test we need to have it done by. We also took lengthy notes on different philosophers on religion, tons of vocabulary, and none of any of it was on the test. Infact, the only thing that was on the test was questions taken straight out of a chapter. We never talked about feminism once, but had questions about it on the test. The class average was a 70, with only one A at 90.

I *could* see how this is relevant if you are talking about Catholicism and/or Christianity and the sense of 'social justice' and whether or not that is applicable in the various policy programs of these officials. However, it is rather vague, I agree....It's probably relating to the policies, the religious stances, and how they correlate or do not....Or posing other alternatives relating to other philosophies and/or religions you have discussed.

Biology class never required chapter reading, masteringbiology.com's assignments, etc. as homework. We take extensive notes in the class, the teacher talks in tantrums and gets off subject, tells the class that the tests are more lecture based and note-based, and gives a review sheet covering the four chapters. Many questions were lifted directly from the book and the website's quizzes and weren't covered in class, and many questions on the review never made it to the test.. but there were plenty of questions omitted from the review. Class average was a 59, with the highest score an 82.

Regarding review: The professor is not allowed to say what is on the test, so he/she must include relevant things that would be test material (perhaps on another test) however are not on it. I don't pull that kind of crap, but some teachers do.

Regarding pulling questions out of the book: That is just bullshit. Doesn't this person have any creativity? Jesus Christ.

Oh well, some teachers/profs are just lazy.

Why would teachers set things up in a way where the students are going to struggle and fail so much?

Shit, I'm wondering in another thread how come my students are struggling and failing so much when I:

a) Specifically stated what would be tested and in what way/form
b) Practiced with them countless times in concrete and abstract forms, in a structured and free way
c) Given them so many opportunities to ask for extra help or ask questions, etc.

LOL Damn, you should be my student! :p


To summarize: I understand challenge is good and all, but where do you cross the line between the professor being lazy and undedicated, and where students want their hands held?

Damn, that is a good question. When you figure out the answer, let me know (the other way around, I mean).

As a teacher, we can often be just as frustrated over a situation. I have four classes that I love, and two classes that drive me nuts. The dynamic is bullshit - 5% of the class is under-challenged, which makes them disturb my class; 70% is over-challenged, and they just fall down; 25% of the class is okay and doing fine.

Dilemma: Reduce the expectations and you lose 30% of the class, who will disrupt the others; raise the expectations, and 70% of the class fails. Keep the expectations the same and 75% of the class is unhappy.

ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
 

Usehername

On a mission
Joined
May 30, 2007
Messages
3,794
I know this sounds like an angry fit, but I really do want some input as to the different thought processes when it comes to teaching, as I've noticed a total lack of efficiency in my classes this semester in comparison to other classes in previous semesters.

I'm under the impression that students take classes because it's difficult to learn it on your own in comparison to having someone with expertise teaching you. That's why people take classes normally instead of reading and testing out of courses.

Since this, to me, is the primary function of classes, students should succeed with an A every time if they 1. Attend every class and participate by taking notes, paying attention, and completing classwork. 2. Do all homework assigned. and 3. Study these two things before tests.

Here's what I don't understand. Why do teachers bother to set things up in a non-straight forward way? I understand challenging students, but why do things like this:
- Read entire chapters for homework assignments.
- Don't assign homework or require any readings but have these things on the test
- Give notes in class in length and depth that are not at all covered on tests.

If it's important, it should be on the test. If it's not, there shouldn't be much note-taking on it. If you assign entire chapters and then go over the chapter in class, fine.. but why assign entire chapters and never bother to go over it? This is the reason I go to classes, to avoid reading and attempting to comprehend these things on my own. Why not make things on the test (like assignments online with quizzes pulled verbatim for the test) required homework or classwork?

These points are, in my opinion, attempts to trip up students and lower success, which is the opposite of what I thought education was all about and I don't know why teachers do these things. This is especially true for the first tests of the semester, which give you a feel for how following tests will be conducted.. But test scores are a major deal, so knowing what to expect for the first one should be included in detail in comparison to future tests.

Two examples: We have to write an essay on Obama, Hannity, and Maddow on healthcare. The essay needs to be at least two pages, and we have to watch hours of videos throughout the course of a couple weeks to create this essay. ... It's world religion class, and none of it pertains to neither world religion itself or the test we need to have it done by. We also took lengthy notes on different philosophers on religion, tons of vocabulary, and none of any of it was on the test. Infact, the only thing that was on the test was questions taken straight out of a chapter. We never talked about feminism once, but had questions about it on the test. The class average was a 70, with only one A at 90.

Biology class never required chapter reading, masteringbiology.com's assignments, etc. as homework. We take extensive notes in the class, the teacher talks in tantrums and gets off subject, tells the class that the tests are more lecture based and note-based, and gives a review sheet covering the four chapters. Many questions were lifted directly from the book and the website's quizzes and weren't covered in class, and many questions on the review never made it to the test.. but there were plenty of questions omitted from the review. Class average was a 59, with the highest score an 82.

Why would teachers set things up in a way where the students are going to struggle and fail so much?

To summarize: I understand challenge is good and all, but where do you cross the line between the professor being lazy and undedicated, and where students want their hands held?

The important things to keep in mind as a premed are:
1. Physics/orgo/biochem as prerequisites--note the difference between these classes being hoops to jump for medical school and these classes being foundational for their academia purposes (people who are going to graduate studies in physics or chemistry)

2. You're in hoop-jump mode because your goal is grades. There are actually people who want to learn the material because they're interested in it--the latter is the objective of university. This is no longer high school. (Not meant as an insult, meant to contrast your understanding of the education system to what it was before and what it is now.)

3. Good profs want you to form a complex mental architecture about the topic. You simply can't do this if you're not sinking deep into the material (namely, reading the book thoroughly, engaging with the topic in a number of ways like lab work or tests).

Your goals are to hoop-jump, which fits with the high-school system well, but it is not the point of university. Anyone complaining about reading extra material in university than what is tested is completely missing the point of university (forming complex mental architecture on the subject). If your goals are different, you should learn to game the system for your purposes (and recognize that complaining about this gives the impression that you don't value the purpose of your education beyond what your transcript can do for you, which is annoying to people who value uni for its given purpose).
 
Top