1. Make the Class Too Hard
I'm not complaining about a course that is challenging. It's not about a subject being difficult to master. That's the point of higher education- to stretch your mind and give it a chance to grow. What I'm talking about is when a professor intentionally makes things hard. We've all had that class where the average score on an exam is somewhere around 52%. I had an American Heritage class my freshman year that was known for this. At our first midterm, you could score in the thirties and still pass. The highest scores might have made it into the sixties.
Professors who do this love to show how hard their class is. I don't know, maybe they like to flex their authority. Like somehow, by tearing every student down, that makes the professor super smart. My eighth grade science teacher was awesome. He was super funny, and everybody loved his class. But he took pride in the fact that the slightest error on an assignment would knock your grade down a whole letter. For the rest of my education, all the way through college, whenever I had an awesome teacher, it would mess with my head, and I'd be terrified to make mistakes. The man had screwed me up psychologically.
What's the point? The fact is, if most of the class is getting failing grades, the problem isn't with the students- it's with the teacher. The whole reason people are taking your class is so they can master the subject you're teaching them. So teach it to them, and stop jerking them around.
2. Have the TA Teach the Class All the Time
What's the point of teaching a class if you don't actually teach it? Some professors have their TAs do all of the actual teaching, and the professors focus on their own research. What kind of joke is that? Why is Dr. Schlotzky's name on the syllabus if Tyler and Katie are the ones who do all the lecturing and grading? I don't get it.
3. Make Attendance Part of the Grade
I know that often, a student will realize that he has this new freedom to skip class whenever he wants. He is no longer required by law to be in class. So he might not show up. But one thing I realized in my time in college was that while I didn't have to go to class, I really needed to. I came to understand that when I went to class, I learned more. And when I learned more, I got better grades. So I went.
College students are adults. They should be allowed to decide whether it's worth their while to go to class. If they do poorly in the class because they didn't attend lectures enough, then that's their own fault. Let them reap what they sew. Don't make attendance a part of their final grade. Don't have this nonsense where if you miss more than three lectures, then you automatically fail.
I'm fine with having quizzes and other graded assignments that require you to be present in order to get the points. It's ok to have these graded things take place on any random day, which would encourage the student to go every time. But when I decide whether I want to go to class, it should be up to me to decide if it's worth the sacrifice.
Like I said before, the point of taking the class is to master the subject. Your final grade should be an assessment of how well you have done so. Not whether you actually attended class every single Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. If I can miss two thirds of your lectures and still ace my final exam, I deserve that A.
4. Dock Points Based On Your Opinion
Someone once told me they got a bad grade on a paper because their teacher didn't agree with their interpretation of Hamlet. That's right, Hamlet. An incredibly complex piece with countless interpretations. One time I saw a show where several different performers did the "To Be Or Not To Be" monologue, each with a different tone and emotion. What I'm saying is that Hamlet can't be interpreted just one way.
It's fine if you disagree with the thesis of the paper. But if the point of the assignment is to display critical thinking skills and an ability to formulate and effectively defend an argument, then grade the student on that. A debate team takes an assigned position on an issue, and has to defend that side with all they have, regardless of their actual opinion. You don't award the win to the team that you agreed with. You give it to the team that did the best job arguing their side.
Obviously, many assignments require the student to explain specific facts and show that they understand the principles taught. There is only one correct answer, and they are supposed to give it. But for others, the student is expected to show what they found in their research, and even if the professor disagrees, if the student clearly did a good job researching and formulating their argument, you've got to give them due credit.
5. Testing Students on Nitpicky Things
I don't know how else to say it. Getting an education means attaining a masterful understanding of a field of study. If, as a professor, your objective is to help your students do that, then great. You're doing your job. If, however, you want to trick your students and see exams as a way to win a battle of wits against them, then you're a manipulative jerk.
I've had classes where I've been tested on specific pages of a text. The worst have been religion classes. The Doctrine and Covenants are organized into numbered sections. When taking a course on the Doctrine and Covenants, you're trying to grasp the message of the scripture. So it helps nobody if a quiz question asks you to match certain quotes to their specific section number. If I can get a good understanding of the Word of Wisdom, what does it matter if I know whether it's found in Section 12, 89, or 130?
Professors who do this don't care about teaching as much as they care about proving they're more clever than their students. It's incredibly immature and unprofessional, and it has no place in a place of higher learning.
Friday, December 14, 2012
Wednesday, August 1, 2012
A Few This's and Thats
Several things on my mind recently.
Today I had the unfortunate experience of watching a trailer for an upcoming talkie called The Big Wedding. Apparently Katherine Heigl really is the patron saint of terrible romantic comedies, because this one looks incredibly, and predictably, stupid. The premise: A young couple is getting married, and one of them's parents (I forget which, and I don't hate myself enough to watch it again to find out) are divorced, and the dad is remarried. But I guess he (it was the groom-to-be's parents. I remember now) was adopted, and he has for some reason decided to invite his birth mother to the wedding.
His birth mother lives in Colombia, where she's from. Now, I'll buy that he could conceivably still maintain contact with his biological mother, and even want to invite her to his nuptials. But the fact that he would fly her all the way to another continent for it is kind of a stretch to believe. But it gets way more contrived. You see, she's very Catholic, and so she frowns very sternly upon divorce. So in order to not offend her, this young man demands that his adopted parents pretend to be still married to each other, and his stepmother has to pretend she's someone else. She could be a family friend, an aunt, a former teacher, anything- but they decide she's the waitress or something.
We all know Hollywood is out of ideas. Battleship: The Movie and Step Up 17 tipped us off. But there have to be simpler ways to come up with a bland romantic comedy with the intention of humor. Since when in the known history of mankind is a birth mother's archaic views regarding divorce more important than letting the actual parents enjoy their son's wedding like normal people? She might not like the idea of his parents being divorced and remarried, but guess what? People do that, even in Colombia, and even Catholics, so she'll get over it.
Speaking of terrible movies and Catholics, have you seen these commercials for this Mel Gibson movie that just came out? It's straight-to-DVD. Let that sink in. Mel Gibson's career has died so completely that he's the star of a movie that is going straight to DVD. Mel Gibson. Mel. Gibson. You guys.
I have to say, the Olympic Opening Ceremony in London was brilliant. It was made fun of a bunch leading up to the big day, since the rumors about what was going to happen kind of sounded ridiculous and hilarious. But they pulled it off, and it was incredible. A few of my favorite parts:
1. The industrial revolution part was kind of sad, seeing all of that wonderful green countryside get ripped up and smokestacks rise up out of the ground. But it was also really cool to watch. That part where they forged the ring that rose up to join the other four in the sky and create the Olympic rings? So cool.
2. "Abide With Me" was strangely beautiful. I didn't get exactly what they were trying to convey with the dancing, but I still thought it was great.
3. Mr. Bean. Oh my gosh. I've probably watched that part alone around 30 times. Also, the "Queen" jumping out of a helicopter and parachuting into the stadium with James Bond.
4. People complain about the seven non-Olympian kids lighting the torch, but I liked it. I thought it was very cool to see the older generations of Olympians literally pass the torch to the future competitors.
(Also, I couldn't help but think of the Hunger Games when I saw those kids.)
5. The Olympic Cauldron has to be the best cauldron I've ever seen. Breathtaking. I can't think of one more beautiful, and I love the symbolism of a whole bunch of smaller flames joining together to burn in unity as one flame. I hear there's one bronze petal for each participating nation, and each country gets to take theirs home once the games are over.
Today I had the unfortunate experience of watching a trailer for an upcoming talkie called The Big Wedding. Apparently Katherine Heigl really is the patron saint of terrible romantic comedies, because this one looks incredibly, and predictably, stupid. The premise: A young couple is getting married, and one of them's parents (I forget which, and I don't hate myself enough to watch it again to find out) are divorced, and the dad is remarried. But I guess he (it was the groom-to-be's parents. I remember now) was adopted, and he has for some reason decided to invite his birth mother to the wedding.
His birth mother lives in Colombia, where she's from. Now, I'll buy that he could conceivably still maintain contact with his biological mother, and even want to invite her to his nuptials. But the fact that he would fly her all the way to another continent for it is kind of a stretch to believe. But it gets way more contrived. You see, she's very Catholic, and so she frowns very sternly upon divorce. So in order to not offend her, this young man demands that his adopted parents pretend to be still married to each other, and his stepmother has to pretend she's someone else. She could be a family friend, an aunt, a former teacher, anything- but they decide she's the waitress or something.
We all know Hollywood is out of ideas. Battleship: The Movie and Step Up 17 tipped us off. But there have to be simpler ways to come up with a bland romantic comedy with the intention of humor. Since when in the known history of mankind is a birth mother's archaic views regarding divorce more important than letting the actual parents enjoy their son's wedding like normal people? She might not like the idea of his parents being divorced and remarried, but guess what? People do that, even in Colombia, and even Catholics, so she'll get over it.
Speaking of terrible movies and Catholics, have you seen these commercials for this Mel Gibson movie that just came out? It's straight-to-DVD. Let that sink in. Mel Gibson's career has died so completely that he's the star of a movie that is going straight to DVD. Mel Gibson. Mel. Gibson. You guys.
I have to say, the Olympic Opening Ceremony in London was brilliant. It was made fun of a bunch leading up to the big day, since the rumors about what was going to happen kind of sounded ridiculous and hilarious. But they pulled it off, and it was incredible. A few of my favorite parts:
1. The industrial revolution part was kind of sad, seeing all of that wonderful green countryside get ripped up and smokestacks rise up out of the ground. But it was also really cool to watch. That part where they forged the ring that rose up to join the other four in the sky and create the Olympic rings? So cool.
2. "Abide With Me" was strangely beautiful. I didn't get exactly what they were trying to convey with the dancing, but I still thought it was great.
3. Mr. Bean. Oh my gosh. I've probably watched that part alone around 30 times. Also, the "Queen" jumping out of a helicopter and parachuting into the stadium with James Bond.
4. People complain about the seven non-Olympian kids lighting the torch, but I liked it. I thought it was very cool to see the older generations of Olympians literally pass the torch to the future competitors.
(Also, I couldn't help but think of the Hunger Games when I saw those kids.)
5. The Olympic Cauldron has to be the best cauldron I've ever seen. Breathtaking. I can't think of one more beautiful, and I love the symbolism of a whole bunch of smaller flames joining together to burn in unity as one flame. I hear there's one bronze petal for each participating nation, and each country gets to take theirs home once the games are over.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)