Topic: Bang Your Head on Your Desk - the thread of teaching despair!

[arcturus]

Ugh. Had the worst class I've taught in a while. The students were brain dead. I was brain dead. I handed out the wrong assignment information. I couldn't get things back on track.  I need a do-over.

My sympathies. We've all been there, done that. It will get better.

[Langue_doc]

Ugh. Had the worst class I've taught in a while. The students were brain dead. I was brain dead. I handed out the wrong assignment information. I couldn't get things back on track.  I need a do-over.

You need a stiff drink; the do-over can wait.

[teach_write_research]

I'm entering feedback on a short daily assignment where students need to apply what they are reading in the assigned required book to a journal article. I'm very tempted to post "Tell me you don't have the book without telling me you don't have the book." but I'll stick with "How is it going reading X?"

It's a very short, $15* e-book.

*acknowledging that $15 can be a lot for some.

[Anon1787]

Right.

What ever happened to minions?

We used to have several. Did they all graduate, or levitate, or whatever it is minions do for advancement?

(Or did they just not make it past the Great Divide Between the Fora?)

Or...maybe Dr. Evil could lend you a couple on a short-term contract?

M.

I've never had any minions. Having a couple around here could come in handy.

[mamselle]

I know the Fiona had one or more, and Pry had one....was it mountainguy?

I wasn't ever keeping track but it was mentioned from time to time.

Dr. Evil may have had a couple, too, and Vox was always in touch with a dicey character known as Igor, who liked sharp, rusty, pointy things....(polite shudder) but the suggestion was also made that Igor was a sock, too, I think.

But...we haven't seen those spirits at this hotel since 1974....

And snarks are boojums, and...and....anyway, I don't know how minions were even acquired, really, they were already in place by the time I'd joined (c. 2009 or so, I think).

Hmmm....

Should we start a thread? Or two?

"Minions Wanted," or "Minions for Hire," or...maybe just one as a clearinghouse?

And so as not to hijack this thread too badly, although perhaps despair is always seeking some kind of hijack.....

M.

[OneMoreYear]

Ugh. Had the worst class I've taught in a while. The students were brain dead. I was brain dead. I handed out the wrong assignment information. I couldn't get things back on track.  I need a do-over.

You need a stiff drink; the do-over can wait.

I came home to a new batch of punch in the fridge.  We were out of rum--apparently this batch is tequila.

[Caracal]

I "thematized" my undergraduate course of study--it was called a "Personalized Study Program," and my committee made it quite rigorous.

Which was fine with me, they required three added art history courses, one in aesthetics, and some other stuff, all of which I continue to be grateful for.

So focused, individualized work is not automatically the 'get out of jail free' card you fear it could be.

It's just different.

M.

I think the concern is that the students are deciding what themes get chosen, even if its through an administrative fiat. "We polled students and x% want to take the history of Wall Street and another y% don't want to take literature. Due to low enrollment, faculty lines in English have been cut, and the rest now grade for the new Business Writing course."

In theory, I wouldn't mind the idea of students being able to choose themes that are relevant to their majors and possible careers. The problem I see with the way our gen ed courses work is that the whole structure basically encourages students to see the whole thing as a pointless hoop to jump through. Mostly students seem to choose which classes they take based on convenience rather than any interest in the subject. That makes these classes pretty depressing. I'd much sooner teach the History of American Capitalism to business majors or the History of Health and Body Reforms to public health majors than something random to a bunch of people who have no investment in it.

As you say though, this all assumes this isn't just an excuse to water down requirements and marginalize less "profitable" majors. There's actually no reason you couldn't have a class about business in literature. Great Expectations, (or lots of Dickens Death of a Salesman, almost anything by Raymond Chandler, and that's just my crummy non-expert list.

[RatGuy]

I "thematized" my undergraduate course of study--it was called a "Personalized Study Program," and my committee made it quite rigorous.

Which was fine with me, they required three added art history courses, one in aesthetics, and some other stuff, all of which I continue to be grateful for.

So focused, individualized work is not automatically the 'get out of jail free' card you fear it could be.

It's just different.

M.

I think the concern is that the students are deciding what themes get chosen, even if its through an administrative fiat. "We polled students and x% want to take the history of Wall Street and another y% don't want to take literature. Due to low enrollment, faculty lines in English have been cut, and the rest now grade for the new Business Writing course."

In theory, I wouldn't mind the idea of students being able to choose themes that are relevant to their majors and possible careers. The problem I see with the way our gen ed courses work is that the whole structure basically encourages students to see the whole thing as a pointless hoop to jump through. Mostly students seem to choose which classes they take based on convenience rather than any interest in the subject. That makes these classes pretty depressing. I'd much sooner teach the History of American Capitalism to business majors or the History of Health and Body Reforms to public health majors than something random to a bunch of people who have no investment in it.

As you say though, this all assumes this isn't just an excuse to water down requirements and marginalize less "profitable" majors. There's actually no reason you couldn't have a class about business in literature. Great Expectations, (or lots of Dickens Death of a Salesman, almost anything by Raymond Chandler, and that's just my crummy non-expert list.

I think the concern is that the "tracks" will essentially be created by admin to placate students, based on some sort of poll or survey. And the idea isn't just that "you should offer a literature of Capitalism" course, but that there'll be an entire track through all gen-ed courses. With this comes a necessary drop in required hours at the 200 level, and the potentially reallocating those courses into other departments. So it may be that PHIL is required to offer X number of "philosophy of capitalism" classes, which are subsequently cancelled because the business school is offering their own version Business Ethics that satisfy the same requirements. I know that English is concerned that some of the soft-money lines for composition will be rerouted to the Business school, since under the new plan they'll be able to offer business courses that fulfill the freshman writing requirement.

[marshwiggle]

So it may be that PHIL is required to offer X number of "philosophy of capitalism" classes, which are subsequently cancelled because the business school is offering their own version Business Ethics that satisfy the same requirements. I know that English is concerned that some of the soft-money lines for composition will be rerouted to the Business school, since under the new plan they'll be able to offer business courses that fulfill the freshman writing requirement.

This issue is a complex one; when one department, such as math or English, teaches courses to serve other departments or faculties, there is often a point at which those other departments consider actually teaching the courses themselves.

Does it make sense for a department to exist primarily to provide very specific courses for others? If so, to what extent should the others dictate the content and approach in those courses?

Would this be a good discussion to have in its own thread?

[Caracal]

I "thematized" my undergraduate course of study--it was called a "Personalized Study Program," and my committee made it quite rigorous.

Which was fine with me, they required three added art history courses, one in aesthetics, and some other stuff, all of which I continue to be grateful for.

So focused, individualized work is not automatically the 'get out of jail free' card you fear it could be.

It's just different.

M.

I think the concern is that the students are deciding what themes get chosen, even if its through an administrative fiat. "We polled students and x% want to take the history of Wall Street and another y% don't want to take literature. Due to low enrollment, faculty lines in English have been cut, and the rest now grade for the new Business Writing course."

In theory, I wouldn't mind the idea of students being able to choose themes that are relevant to their majors and possible careers. The problem I see with the way our gen ed courses work is that the whole structure basically encourages students to see the whole thing as a pointless hoop to jump through. Mostly students seem to choose which classes they take based on convenience rather than any interest in the subject. That makes these classes pretty depressing. I'd much sooner teach the History of American Capitalism to business majors or the History of Health and Body Reforms to public health majors than something random to a bunch of people who have no investment in it.

As you say though, this all assumes this isn't just an excuse to water down requirements and marginalize less "profitable" majors. There's actually no reason you couldn't have a class about business in literature. Great Expectations, (or lots of Dickens Death of a Salesman, almost anything by Raymond Chandler, and that's just my crummy non-expert list.

I think the concern is that the "tracks" will essentially be created by admin to placate students, based on some sort of poll or survey. And the idea isn't just that "you should offer a literature of Capitalism" course, but that there'll be an entire track through all gen-ed courses. With this comes a necessary drop in required hours at the 200 level, and the potentially reallocating those courses into other departments. So it may be that PHIL is required to offer X number of "philosophy of capitalism" classes, which are subsequently cancelled because the business school is offering their own version Business Ethics that satisfy the same requirements. I know that English is concerned that some of the soft-money lines for composition will be rerouted to the Business school, since under the new plan they'll be able to offer business courses that fulfill the freshman writing requirement.

Ugh, that doesn't sound good. It's a shame because there is an actual opportunity there for meaningful engagement but it sounds like it is just being rerouted into professionalism.

[ergative]

Marking a master's thesis right now. Student did very nicely with Figures 3-5--straightforward bar plots with multiple crossed factors, all well and good.

And now, suddenly, in Figure 6, she's smacking me in the face with 3d bars. Why? why why why? Curse you, Excel!

[ciao_yall]

So it may be that PHIL is required to offer X number of "philosophy of capitalism" classes, which are subsequently cancelled because the business school is offering their own version Business Ethics that satisfy the same requirements. I know that English is concerned that some of the soft-money lines for composition will be rerouted to the Business school, since under the new plan they'll be able to offer business courses that fulfill the freshman writing requirement.

This issue is a complex one; when one department, such as math or English, teaches courses to serve other departments or faculties, there is often a point at which those other departments consider actually teaching the courses themselves.

Does it make sense for a department to exist primarily to provide very specific courses for others? If so, to what extent should the others dictate the content and approach in those courses?

Would this be a good discussion to have in its own thread?

At our CC we also have an issue of transferability. Our clear Math, English, History, Econ, etc courses articulate directly to the state 4-year system. But we are technically only a 2 year college so we can only offer lower-division courses.

So when other departments decide to make their own versions of Math, etc, they often don't transfer and the student is the one stuck with wasted units and time.

[Larimar]

Apparently, based on these papers I've been grading, students can now graduate from high school with absolutely no sense of what a research source is, much less ever having used one. Documentation is also a completely new word for them.

Argh!

[arcturus]

Apparently, based on these papers I've been grading, students can now graduate from high school with absolutely no sense of what a research source is, much less ever having used one. Documentation is also a completely new word for them.

Argh!

Based on the most recent student submissions for a scaffolding assignment (first stage, leading up to a final paper) where they were told to state their sources, my students will be using "trusted sources" and "credible sources". So, yes, I am totally confident that they will be able to complete their work with such awesome sources at their fingertips. [/sarcasm]

[downer]

Apparently, based on these papers I've been grading, students can now graduate from high school with absolutely no sense of what a research source is, much less ever having used one. Documentation is also a completely new word for them.

Argh!

I doubt that anyone really collects data on this stuff. From talking to a few people my impression is that the main motivation of administrators in HS is to get all the students graduated, no matter what.