• Monday, May 28, 2012

Previous

Next

Read Ahead To Get Ahead? Not So Fast.

July 25, 2011, 11:13 am

We seem to have reached the point in the summer when the emails start to come in from students asking for the reading lists for their fall classes. At first glance, such requests might seem welcome—after all, who wouldn’t welcome such signs of enthusiasm and eagerness?  The desire to read ahead is supposed to signal ambition and achievement. The early bird catches the worm; the first to the buzzer wins the round; the first to the table gets the bacon, etc., etc., etc.

And yet, I find myself deeply ambivalent about such requests not because I think that my students should bow to my every whim or because I refuse to acknowledge that they have other responsibilities and obligations, but rather because the act of reading ahead is often exceptionally damaging to our work together in the classroom.

Such a claim probably seems counter-intuitive. How can trying to get a head start be a bad thing?  Why would any educator be resistant to a student’s desire to learn? Shouldn’t I be pleased that these students will come to class having done the reading?  What difference does it make whether they have read in July or October?

The answers to most of those questions are as you might expect: Getting ahead is a good thing; I want to foster such a desire to learn, and having a group of students who have done the reading is obviously infinitely preferable to having a group who haven’t. But the final question, the “what difference does it make when they read?” question, is much more difficult to answer.

On the one hand, as I have mentioned, I want my students to read.  In fact, the more they read, the better.  But on the other hand, it seems to me that one of the essential components of studying literature in a brick and mortar class setting is the act of communal reading: reading texts together at the same time in the same place. Reading ahead is fundamentally incompatible with reading communally, at least it is in the way that comes across in the student emails I mentioned above.  These students, it seems, want to read ahead so that they can get it out of the way and devote their time to other responsibilities (and possibly other courses) in the fall.  Put another way, if they read now, they don’t have to read later.

The problem here is that by reading now instead of later, or by reading ahead instead of reading communally, these students are quite likely to miss something that matters in the books.  In fact, in many cases, they are likely to miss a great deal more than just “something.”  Hopefully, they’ll get the plot, and they will likely be able to remember basic details about the whos, whats, and wheres.  They may even be able to remember important passages and quotations.  All of these elements are important, and they are obviously critical pieces to acknowledge and remember.

But the study of literature is more than just the sum of these parts. It’s not only reading a certain selection of texts in a particular order.  Instead, a good class takes the book list as a foundation and collaboratively generates an extended conversation through discussion and debate, analysis and critique. The themes and issues which emerge from our collective experience and conversation are not always (or even often) ones that can be predicted ahead of time.  In fact, the best of these are ones that cannot be anticipated precisely because they arise organically from the confluence of time, place and participants.

In essence, by reading ahead, these students deprive themselves of the absolute most important aspect of the class: the insights generated by our discussions over the course of the semester. Put another way, the student who thinks she is giving herself an advantage by reading ahead can actually be doing the exact opposite.

Ultimately, my point here is not to condemn those who want to read ahead.  Obviously, there are only so many hours in a day, and we all have to make choices about how to spend our time in accordance to our many obligations and responsibilities, academic and otherwise.  If the choice is between reading ahead and not reading at all, I think most faculty would agree that reading ahead is the better option.

At the same time, if students do decide to read ahead, they should do so with the awareness that that might not be getting ahead as much as they might think.  In fact, they may well be setting themselves at a disadvantage rather than an advantage. There is one exception: if the student reads ahead but then reads again with the rest of the class, and by “read again” I mean close careful reading rather than skimming through to remember the basic plot points.

What do you tell students who want to get a head start of their reading for the semester? Do you encourage them or caution them or take some other approach? Please share in the comments section.

 

[Creative Commons licensed image by Flickr user o5com].

This entry was posted in Productivity, Teaching and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

  • Print
  • Comment
  • drnels

    When I was an undergrad English major, we would get together and share booklists early and do some of the reading together, which gets at your point about communal reading.  We wanted the lists early for two reasons.  One, you could go to the used bookstores in town and get cheap copies (this was way before being able to buy anything online), and it was fun to go in a group, find five copies of Beloved, and pass them around.  Second, we actually would read ahead because there were going to be those weekends in the coming semester when we’d have five novels to read at once.  And, to be blunt, we knew which profs actually cared that we read and which wouldn’t notice, so we’d read for the first group of profs (who all happened to be the fun ones, too).  It did become a communal act because we’d talk about upcoming books throughout the semester.  But that is a different time than now.

  • anon847

    When I was a student, I asked for reading lists early so I could buy the books used from somewhere cheaper than the campus bookstore, not so I could read ahead.  But while I agree with your points about the value of reading the book together with the class, I think it’s important to recognize that students with disabilities or learning disorders might need more time to read the course texts, and they might need to read the texts multiple times.  Honestly, I haven’t had too many problems with overly diligent students like this, but when I have, I tell them that they’ll be expected to read the text with the class, but that they’re welcome to read ahead in addition to that if they need or want to.  

  • http://ryan.cordells.us Ryan Cordell

    I tend to agree with you here, Erin. I would also worry that a student reading a novel in July may have a hazy memory of it come October. I remember reading for orals – those books I read months ahead of the exam were far less clear in their details than those books I read in the weeks just before the exam. If the students’ goals are simply to get the reading “done,” I would push back against that goal a little bit.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=706000209 Chris Piuma

    As an undergrad, I would occasionally ask profs for reading lists in advance, but it wasn’t to read them ahead of time, it was in order to get a better sense of what the class would be about. I emailed a prof asking about her “Canadian Lit” class — which is just about as vague a title as you could hope for — and got back a tentative list of six novels, five of which were about immigrants going through hard times in rural British Columbia. Which was fine — but since I didn’t really want to read five such books, I decided not to take the class after all.

    But yes, as far as reading ahead goes, I quickly learned in undergrad that it did me no favors whatsoever to read ahead. It’s probably fine for students to figure that sort of thing out on their own, though.

  • 5768

    As it is unclear to me why students are so eager to tell me they want to get the textbook and read it over the summer (do they want to impress me?  are they about to sell themselves short by contemplating too heavy a course load the coming term?) I tell my students to enjoy their vacation.

  • eetempleton

    @facebook-706000209:disqus You make a very good point, and I have no qualms about sharing the titles either so that students can get a clearer sense about what a course might actually involve (our catalogue descriptions are about a general as they come).  I also completely understand the desire to shop around and find the best prices on books–I do the same thing!  It’s the “I’d like to get started on the reading” remarks that discomfort me.

  • 11196496

    Besides trying to get the books somewhere at a lower price that the campus bookstore, there is one good reason to read ahead in some classes. In introductory history courses where the student has no previous background it can be wise to read a general introduction to thee period to get a sense of where the class material is going. When I teach a survey course in a particular period of the history of Christianity and a student asks about reading ahead, I recommend reading a survey of the history of the period and taking notes, highlighting, etc. Then the student can review these notes week by week before launching into individual primary source documents where the communal reading and discussion are the real focus.

  • drnels

    In defense of students who do read ahead, I will never forget getting a booklist in July for a course and being attracted to “The Life and Death of Artermio Cruz.”  I read it over the summer like any summer read and loved it.  When it came time to read it during the semester, I noticed a lot more about the book and how it was working since I then knew where the book was going and could notice more than plot.  I decided to use it as the subject of my research essay and read it a third time and wrote one of the best papers I ever wrote as an undergrad because I had time to do research and had a pretty specific, detailed angle before even going into my research.

    Hey, I have students who have already earned their degrees and email me for books I’m teaching because they are bored and want to read something like X that we read in class three years earlier.

  • fullprof99

    As others have mentioned, there are lots of reasons for students to want to see the book list.  I always email mine ahead of time to pre-registered students sometime in early summer. It lets some people get a head start on the readings and everyone start looking for books and thinking about what the course will be like.  In an ideal world every student would be paying attention to only one course and perfectly up to date on the readings, with the benefits that Templeton suggests.  In the world as it exists providing reading lists in advance is an appropriate courtesy. 

    Incidentally, the federal regulations related to financial aid/college costs are requiring that book lists be available if at all possible at the time students register, aren’t they?

  • nickhaydock

    The last bit saved this piece for me. No reason to suspect that those who read early wouldn’t participate in the class experience– quite the reverse, I suspect. I tell my students that reading something once, quickly, the night before class is scarcely better than not reading at all. I ask them to read short works two or three times before we discuss them and longer works once before we begin, and again as our discussions of a work progress. The approach here sounds almost as if the teacher were worried about reactions independent of the “collective experience.” Time, I think, is better spent teaching students how to read than attempting to influence when they read. In my experience the collective is often composed of a number of students who haven’t read at all. If they ask (and if the booklist is ready), I always send it along. More than an early bird syndrome may be at work. They might not want to have to buy all their books the first week of classes.

  • drfiup

    I find my students want to know about the books is not to read (!) but to try to find the best deal they can (Amazon, rent…).  Our bookstore now lists the books ordered for classes as soon as the orders are in. Our problem is that we are so short of faculty and need to rely on adjuncts, that sometimes changes are made.  We are also doing a lot of Custom Books with Pearson which limits their options.
    I personally would be thrilled if the students wanted to get into the subjects (mainly Special Education).  I would be thrilled if they read the books during the semester!  I just want them to read!

  • judithryan43

    Obviously I constructed my entire career wrongly. As a student, I always read ahead and then re-read the text in synchrony with the other students. I don’t think texts should be read just once, but read and reread throughout one’s lifetime. Of course, I’m one of those people who love reading.

  • eetempleton

    As I mentioned in the final paragraph, if students are willing to reread the texts with the class, I’m thrilled to have them get started earlier.  Unfortunately, that seems to often be the exception rather than the rule. 

  • eetempleton

    The only reactions I am interested in controlling are the ones that spoil the reading for the rest of the class: spoilers.  These wouldn’t be an issue in many other disciplines, but in literary studies, there’s nothing quite like having an ending revealed prematurely to wreck one’s enjoyment of a text.

    But you make a good point about how vs. when–thanks!

  • eetempleton

    Yes, I believe you are correct about the new regulations requiring booklists to be posted.  

  • 20ahabs

    Last spring I had a couple of students, both seniors, who decided to read the novels over Christmas break and get ahead (although the didn’t ask for a book list…I’m not sure how they did it, to be honest).  In any event, they were non-majors and so weren’t used to annotating, underlining passages, writing marginalia while reading, and so reading ahead not only hurt them during periodic unannounced reading quizzes but it also hindered their participation in in-class discussion AND their essay writing.  They had very little interest in going back through and rereading the works they eventually wrote about, and so their analysis was brief and based mostly on in-class conversation, not on the text itself; there was also very little in the way of direct quotation in the final projects, and so the essays were chock full of paraphrase, plot summary, and unsupported conjectures/argumentation. 

    Had I known that that would have been the result of “getting ahead” I would certainly at least have recommended that they underline and annotate and keep some kind of reading journal and to at least go back over the text with the class.  Students are going to do what they want so I wouldn’t actively discourage getting ahead, but I would at least strongly recommend and try to guide how they might get ahead but still keep up with the class.

  • megginson

    I’d like to thank everyone who contributed to this discussion, since it has been rich, illuminating, and saved me from giving up altogether on reading responses to blog posts. At my university, I was involved closely in a discussion of summer reading programs, in which one concern that arose was that asking incoming first year students to read certain works, without providing context in real time for what they were reading, is inviting them to draw simplistic conclusions without the opportunity to examine those conclusions more closely before they became entrenched. While that argument seemed fairly compelling to me, this discussion (while not specifically about summer reading programs) has convinced me that the matter of independent early reading has many more dimensions than that, and I’m rethinking my position on it.

    I had come to this discussion right after reading the one following “Brainstorm: Thinking about  Norway and Colorado”, which provides a classic example of the other kind of exchange: folks just haul out their axiom systems and hurl them at each other. I had just about decided never again to read past the end of the original author’s post, so thanks again to all for a good discussion here.

  • electronicmuse

    Guess I don’t get the author’s reservations at all.

    Isn’t it quite possible that any number of students might have already read something on his “list” of their own accord? And how does that spoil their ability to participate in class discussions? Why does it matter so much as to the timing of their having read a text? A month previous-or yesterday?

    There is also the rather unfortunate undertow here that somehow students might not be able to come to their own conclusions about what they read-sans participating in the author’s class.

    I’m always grateful when students come to my classes with as much prior knowledge as is possible.

  • v8573254

    Literature teachers I know lament that students do not read more carefully and more than once.  I can imagine particular students who read in advance and then raise issues or display attitudes that disturb the class community a professor seeks to establish.

  • eetempleton

    It is absolutely possible that students will have already read something in the class, but comments by @chronicle-4dd0bab0f523db41d02fe1a9c9039180:disqus  and @chronicle-3324b7dba63dd4da3f8d73789b62d597:disqus  provide great follow-ups to my initial reservations.  To my mind there is an important different between drawing upon prior knowledge in active participation and prior reading to avoid it. 

    And while certainly students can read and come to their own conclusions without taking my class (or anyone else’s for that matter), I do feel strongly that the whole point of taking a course is because that course provides a framework which enriches the reading and critical thinking experience in ways that simply reading a list of books in isolation generally won’t.

  • juneparsons

    Devil’s advocate here. So taking this line of thought to its extreme conclusion, are we to say that for students to get the most out of the class, they should not have read books on the reading list; they won’t be admitted to the class if they have read any of the  books; and for the best communal reading experience why not read aloud in the class? This model is quaintly reminiscent of the one-room school house.

    Aren’t we doing authors a disservice when we (essentially) say that for full appreciation, their work must be read communally and within the context of a course. Hmmm. 

    I understand that Professor Templeton’s point is more subtle, but society today is not. Envision the headines: “Reading Ahead Puts You Behind.” Another disincentive for students already buffeted by a society that celebrates mediocrity.

  • kpisana

    Could this be an opportunity to put together pre-reading reading lists of associated texts for students to peruse prior to the start of the semester?

    If students are asking to learn before formal learning begins, perhaps they’re sending a much more important message than just indicating that they want to get ahead. Perhaps Twitter isn’t entirely satisfying their literary appetites after all.

    http://www.virtuallyscholastic.com

  • teachfordamasses

    I often suggest to students that they consider beginning the reading in demanding classes ahead of time (particularly fact-laden topics like nat sci or history) because the student and I both know the student is academically at risk in the class.  When a student is taking a larger than ideal number of classes (because it saves money per credit hour or because they work) or when a student has stressors/reading problems/emotional issues/poor record, etc., I make this suggestion simply to improve their odds of passing the class.  The point is to give them a longer period of time to work on learning the material.  I think very few do this, but for students of limited ability/time/proficiency, etc., it makes a difference in retention and success.

  • dpmccain

    I am going to don the blackhat.  With many classes, instructors use their exams over many quarters, and they are designed based upon reading a selected number of chapters each week.  Discussion is driven by students who have actually read the chapters, and in many undergraduate and graduate classes in which I have been a student, those of us who even read the assigned chapters were in the minority.  Students in the class would parasite with comments like, “oh, I agree” but when challenged to expand, it would be revealed that he/she had not even read the chapters. 

    Now, as a post secondary instructor, I applaud students who read ahead (fiction or non-fiction). This act keeps me on my toes.  Too many instructors rely on their memories quarter to quarter, and if a student reads in advance, the instructor is “tested” as to whether said instructor has only read the assigned chapters. 

    Whle it may not be a popular stance, the number of students who actually embrace reading is dwindling more each day.  It is unpopular to be seen reading, Kindle or otherwise.  While the pencil protector computer nerd was once isolated as a geek, a student who actually reads what has been assigned (or beyond) is accused of currying favor. 

    A friend of mine graduated as an English major, and he shared stories of class discussions where Engish majors relied on the on-line tools available that provided excerpts and the synopsis of a novel.  My stepdaughter dropped ot of community college where she was taking classes to eventually transfer as an English major, because there was too much assigned reading.  Cripes.

    Perhaps in a class where students choose to read ahead, these students should be formed in a satellite of a class, and provided with different exams and allow discussion based upon their reading.  It would soon be discovered whether the student had truly read the book, retaining the information through constant review, or did, like so many, skimmed and scanned to “get it over with.”

     As a high school student, my son was chastised for reading ahead in the assigned novel.  The instructor informed me that my son, and several of his friends, made the other students feel “dumb” because the other students could not read with the same proficiency as my son, and his questions and comments were outside the norm, thereby hurting the self-esteem of some other students.   Shame on that instructor. He left teaching a few years later…thank goodness. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/KathyJohnson726 Kathy Johnson

    These are certainly points worth considering. When I was in high school and as an undergraduate, I always wanted to read the books ahead of time. Primarily because I disliked how often times the very nature of the book was ruined by an overly pedantic approach. In particular fiction, biographies, or anything with a something more than dry facts. I always re-read the books during the appropriate time, but reading ahead of time,, simply to -enjoy- the art of the literature, has meant that I very much enjoy many classic texts to this day that my peers only loathed.How we read a book very much shapes and mold our impression of it. I would offer as one mild counterpoint that a student who has read, and given thought to, a text on their own, will bring a different lens to the classroom, broadening the potential learning, not limiting. As with most issues like this, there are no absolutes. Much will depend on the individual student.
    I would suggest that any book list sent out in advance be accompanied by a clear and firm statement that reading ahead can be useful but that it will be very important to RE-READ the text with the class at the appropriate time.

  • johnbarnes

    Mostly I taught plays and historical evidence of theatre practice (pictures, source documents, etc.) so reading ahead was always desirable; there was so much close reading to do that the more familiar they were, the better.  I’m happy to see from Professor Templeton’s responses to other commenters that she doesn’t have a problem with the student who reads early and then re-reads.  The few — well, three, actually — literature professors I knew who objected to students reading ahead were big fans of words like “community” and “collective” by which they meant “agreeing with me,” and one important thing reading early does is to empower the student to see things s/he wasn’t supposed to, approach/embrace/reject as desired, and in short, defend him/herself from community when necessary.  I’ve seen some fairly perverse readings from the eager beavers, but never one that didn’t ultimately improve the discussion.  (Some blogger here at CHE should blog upon “perverse readings I have known” as I suspect we all have a few thousand tales of them).

  • chrisaldrich

    I certainly understand the point of view of withholding a reading list for the reasons mentioned, though I would personally tend to use the spectacular advice given in the last paragraph. Unfortunately, for the broader topic of textbooks, I think it’s disingenuous to take such a narrow view as fiction (and similar) classes are a small segment of the “market.” If nothing, the headline certainly makes for excellent link-bait as the blogosphere would define it.

    From the broader perspective, it’s more than once been my experience that the professor chooses the worst text available for a particular course – perhaps because she doesn’t care, because it was the cheapest, because she liked the textbook salesperson, because it’s the “standard” text used by everyone in the field despite its obvious flaws, because it’s the text she used in graduate school, because she wrote it, or simply because the deadline for ordering for the bookstore was looming and wanted the task out of the way.  It used to be the case that one of the first jobs the student faced was to do some research to choose their own textbook! Sadly – particularly as most courses have dozens of excellent texts available for use – this concept has long since disappeared. Often when taking a course myself, I’ll visit the library and pull every text and some supplemental texts about a particular topic and spend a day browsing through them to judge their general level of sophistication, the soundness of their didactic presentation, the amount of information they contain, what other texts they cite, are there excessive typos, is it well edited, do the graphs, charts, or diagrams assist in learning, find out if the third edition is really better than the second to justify the eighty dollar price differential, and a variety of other criteria depending on the text, the class, and the level of difficulty. In short, I do what I would hope the professor would do herself, as one can’t always trust that they’ve done their own homework.

    Doing this research gives me a much broader perspective on what I’m about to learn: what are the general topics? what are the differing perspectives? what do alternate presentations look like? what might I be missing? Finally I choose my own textbook for personal learning throughout the semester. I may occasionally supplement it with those I’ve researched or the one recommended by the professor or may read library reserve copies or take the requisite homework problems/questions from them. I find that in doing this type of research greatly enhances what I’m about to learn and is far more useful than simply taking the required text and bargain hunting for the best price among five online retailers. In fact, one might argue that forcing students to choose their own textbooks will not only help draw them into the topic, but it will also tend to enhance their ability to think, rationalize, and make better decisions not only as it relates to the coursework at hand but later on in life itself.

    For the student, doing this type of research also has the lovely side effect of showing them where they stand in a particular subject. If they need remedial help, they’re already aware of what books they can turn to. Or, alternately, if they’re bored, they can jump ahead or use an alternate and more advanced text. The enterprising student may realize that the professor requires text A, but uses text B to draw from for lectures, and text C for formulating (often read: stealing) quiz and test material. 

    Finally and fortuitously, it also doesn’t take more than a few moments to realize what wonderful and profound  effects that such a competitive book choosing strategy will have on the textbook industry if it were widely adopted! And this doesn’t even take into account the time teachers could save in not dealing with textbook salespeople!

    I hope that others might take this concept and use it as they see fit.

  • chrisboyatzis

    and I tell my students that to enjoy their vacation means to spend some/much of that time “reading good books.”  I’d rather have them read the novels that Erin Templeton assigns than any textbook I use.

  • chrisboyatzis

    Yes, and the listings sometimes (always?) carry the prices of the required books.

  • tophfoo

    I take the comments of the author and appreciate their intent, but I think the concern might apply primarily to humanities courses. As a student who recently emailed my upcoming chemistry professor to ask for the title of the text he’ll use this fall, I don’t see how “communal reading” is likely to help me in that course. I know that I’m likely going to struggle with chemistry, and I want to do what I can to become familiar with the subject and the vocabulary in advance so that I can make the most of my course (and the money I’m spending to take it.) In the sciences we don’t read texts communally anyway. That may be a lamentable subject in its own right, but I digress.
    This article focuses primarily on the perspective of the instructor; from my perspective as a student, I see a different concern: my professors seem to teach at a pace that meets the knowledge and preparedness of the students that are at about the 75th percentile for the course. I don’t only want to take courses where I’m confident I’ll already be at the top of the class, and I don’t mind doing some extra work (namely, reading ahead) to ensure that I can keep up with the pace of the course. If this is a problem, I’d ask whether we might revisit our philosophy regarding the purpose of a liberal education.

  • eetempleton

    You are absolutely correct that my concern is humanities-centric, and you make some very good points about difficulties introduced by my focus on communal reading” when we step away from the literary classroom into different disciplines, especially STEM ones.  Reading ahead might be much more advantageous in a Chemistry, physics, or economics class where the nuances of language and expression are less the focus of attention/analysis.  Thanks for your comment!

  • http://twitter.com/profkrg Kenna Griffin

    I always wonder how many of the students who request this information actually read in advance. It just seems to create more work, in my opinion. Students ask for the syllabus or reading list in advance, but then don’t have the books when it’s time to review them. I think it’s one of those “good intentions” situations. They want to get ahead before the wave of the semester crashes in on them, but it doesn’t actually happen that often.

  • madamesmartypants

    My experience using technology in the classroom at a local community college suggests that we would do better to improve on access, speed and accessibility in what we already have than focus on developing better assessment tools. While I would like to use more technology in the classroom, there are a number of issues that make this difficult, such as the fact that my classroom computer is slow; tech support is virtually non-existent; and there’s no cables or set-up to use my own, more advanced laptop. The library is similarly crippled; ereserves, for example, are limited to 50 pages.  

  • history_grrrl

    What on earth do these corporate types know about how to help students learn in a higher education setting? They’re hawking products, not educating students.

  • ehmurray

    Eventually, I believe that we will have thinking machines with infinite patience and subject matter expertise. These machines will interact with humans and determine exactly the connection that the learner is not grasping and then be able to drive it home to the learner. Many modalities will be used: sight, sound, role playing, game playing, etc. This will be the old programmed learning from the 1960s and 1970s on steroids. Thus will learners progress to higher and higher levels of understanding, until they reach the natural limits of their ability.

  • clementj

    Why is technology still being touted as the answer?  This has been around for a long time, and it hasn’t had any effect.  The answer is NOT technology, but having the teachers do what research has shown works.  See: “The implications of a robust curriculum in introductory mechanics”, Am. J. Phys. 79 5 May 2011.  But don’t be decieved by the title.  Gain in learning went from 13% to 50% by changing what was done in class, and the content was essentially the same.  Jerry Epstein has found the same thing in his math studies.Using a research designed inquiry method produces much better results. Such methods can be used with or without a lot of high tech.  In the case of science appropriate tech is helpful in expediting the method.  But fancy presentations and multimedia is seldom part of the methods that really work.  Research of this type has been going on for over 40 years, so why isn’t it used?????  Thinking Science by Shayer & Adey can dramatically improve student thinking, but it requires NO high tech.  It requires a trained teacher who knows hos to use the materials that are all supplied.  And it is NOT scripted, but it does follow a set sequence.  But the teacher has to know how to react and ask the right questions.The claims of high tech are just advertising, and as such should be suspect.  When used for conventional pedagogy, it only increases the cost.  And when courses go online, there is now evidence that they are inferior.The claims of high tech are just advertising, and as such should be suspect.  When used for conventional pedagogy, it only increases the cost.  And when courses go online, there is now evidence that they are inferior.

  • clementj

    Why is technology still being touted as the answer?  This has been around for a long time, and it hasn’t had any effect.  The answer is NOT technology, but having the teachers do what research has shown works.  See: “The implications of a robust curriculum in introductory mechanics”, Am. J. Phys. 79 5 May 2011.  But don’t be decieved by the title.  Gain in learning went from 13% to 50% by changing what was done in class, and the content was essentially the same.  Jerry Epstein has found the same thing in his math studies.Using a research designed inquiry method produces much better results. Such methods can be used with or without a lot of high tech.  In the case of science appropriate tech is helpful in expediting the method.  But fancy presentations and multimedia is seldom part of the methods that really work.  Research of this type has been going on for over 40 years, so why isn’t it used?????  Thinking Science by Shayer & Adey can dramatically improve student thinking, but it requires NO high tech.  It requires a trained teacher who knows hos to use the materials that are all supplied.  And it is NOT scripted, but it does follow a set sequence.  But the teacher has to know how to react and ask the right questions.The claims of high tech are just advertising, and as such should be suspect.  When used for conventional pedagogy, it only increases the cost.  And when courses go online, there is now evidence that they are inferior.The claims of high tech are just advertising, and as such should be suspect.  When used for conventional pedagogy, it only increases the cost.  And when courses go online, there is now evidence that they are inferior.

  • cmorrissey

    The dearth of rigorous research on measuring learning outcomes will forever plague the answer to this important question.  Higher ed continues to fund ‘learning management systems” with litttle or no justification.  The full employment act is alive and well in higher ed IT management.

  • richarddeu

    Illinois’ new mandated mantra is “60 by 25″; so all those hawking goggles should apply here! The sad reality is found in a colleague’s comment to a sub-committee of the Illinois Board of Higher Education: “The only possible way to reach 60 by 25 is if China puts a woman on Mars, and even then it’s a slim chance.”  Of course we’re old and remember Sputnik.

  • chemistry_guy

    The headline implies the author knows much more than any one person is likely to know about the state of technology in education.  I’d suggest toning things down a bit. 

    If the author truly knows all there is to know about technology and outcomes in education, perhaps he can tell us what has happened at Illinois and Texas (and 50 other major universities) with respect to grade distributions in Calculus over the past four years. And perhaps the author knows what effect this is having on retention in STEM education?  I doubt this could be the case, since even the administrators at these schools struggle to find causation in outcomes and connect that directly to the amazing AI technology they are using to improve things.

    But there is no doubt that things are improving, and technology is playing a central role in the improvement.  

  • http://twitter.com/omamed Otis

    Student success would improve if we stopped looking for technology to improve it, or constructing  yet another way to assess their learning… and started teaching them without assuming they are all college material.

  • fasteddie

    Always fascinating reading; 3-to-5 years really? Won’t this always be the mousehole? What happens in the gap in the meantime; same pirates different boats. Whether a typewriter or a laser, the tools as props can’t be mistaken for the learning experience. I say godspeed with the data and the analytics if they can open more doors to the kids I’m working w/ who can’t quite remember how to make change for a dollar. 

  • http://twitter.com/AiPODFaculty AiPODFaculty

    Interesting article.

  • Prof_truthteller

    I’m not sure if you honestly believe that or if you are being sarcastic. What you describe (infinite patience and subject matter expertise; interact with humans; 
    determine exactly the connection that the learner is not grasping and then be able to drive it home to the learner; use of multiple modalities) sounds to me like what real, live human teachers do every day. 

  • peitho

    I’m quite certain that the students are found to be reading the textbook are the ones who will performing well, and I don’t need a study to tell me that.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Earl-Token/20714130 Earl Token

    Good point Paul. However, I still feel education is worth it despite cost and the return investment. It really depends on what type experience you get in college. Jobs are looking for students who are finishing up their degree with real-world experience in the field. If you can hold a degree plus real-world experience in a form of intensive internships (more than one), than I believe a student right out of college can be very competitive in the job market.

  • http://twitter.com/rpetersmauri Rebecca Petersen

    This headline is cringe inducing for many of the reasons mentioned below. I was dismayed that learning analytics was mentioned at the end of this article. This piece would be stronger if learning analytics was the focus. There is a missed opportunity to weave in how emerging technologies and practices are supporting the growth of this approach and its significance to the future of both classroom and online teaching. Perhaps a future story??? 

  • hohleman

    “Socrates said: ‘…for by telling them of many
    things without teaching them you will make them seem to know much, while for
    the most part they know nothing, and as men filled, not with wisdom, but with
    the conceit of wisdom, they will be a burden to their fellows.’” (Plato,
    Phaedrus, 275 a-b).

    Posted not by a neo-Amish, but by a guy who owns an iPad, iPhone, and uses technology in the classroom. Advice: Just keep perspective on what technology can and cannot do for education.

  • ohsully7

    Three Years?  Do I have a surprise in store for you guys…..Stay Tuned

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1382989019 Eric Pierce

    http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/97/consultants.html

    The Once / Future Consultant
    By: Lucas ConleyAugust 1, 2005

    excerpts:
    …Dave Ulrich sees systems. Not just in the typical places — our offices, our halls of government, our sports fields — but in places you’d never expect. It started in college, at Brigham Young University. For his honors thesis, he examined the organization of the entire English department and asked: “Was the department designed to deliver value to its students?” The fall before he was to graduate, he presented his findings to the faculty. His conclusion: BYU fell woefully short in teaching its students how to write, and the university’s practice of hiring its own graduates reinforced the problem. They kicked him out of the department. Or, as the dean put it the next morning in his office, “We don’t think you should graduate with an English degree.” Ulrich’s diploma, unframed and stacked away, is for something called “university studies.”
    BYU’s professors may not have appreciated Ulrich’s diagnostic eye for organizational flaws, but today’s business leaders tell a different story. In 2000, Forbes named Ulrich “one of the top five business coaches in the world.” Business Week disagreed, ranking him the world’s number-one management consultant a year later. As a sounding board to CEOs at such corporations as GM and GE, Ulrich built his career listening to (and ultimately resolving) complex organizational problems. He has published eight books on organizational behavior, human resources, and change. Rather than relegate HR to mundane chores such as benefits and company picnics, Ulrich calls for strategic systems that instill a deeper feeling of culture and community. Such intangible assets, he believes, motivate workers to produce tangible returns like revenue and market value. “Dave really takes a problem down to its generic roots,” says Steve Kerr, a former professor and colleague of Ulrich’s who is now the managing director and chief learning officer at Goldman Sachs. “He frames things in a way that makes them susceptible to solution.”

  • 11272784

    “Technology Is at Least 3 Years Away From Improving Student Success.”

    Gee, that’s a big surprise to us, as we’re using various online technologies to extend education to thousands of students who wouldn’t have access to it otherwise.  We only will make $30 million this year doing it.

    I guess if it ever catches on, we might actually make a buck doing it!

    Seriously, technology is a moving target and technologies like radio have been used for education since the 1920′s. What we need to do is keep improving the way we use them – which in higher ed MOSTLY means that we need to get faculty to stop using teaching approaches that are 40 years out of date, and learn to actually use the technologies which are available. The biggest limiting factor today isn’t the technologies, it’s the way we use them.

  • mcphersonjan

    mixing learning with practical experience may provide better statistics for evaluating learning in the classroom.  learning a second language does not really mean either fluency or understanding the culture(s) of the language until one ‘dives’ into one of the cultures of that language, however that language is acquired.  going top Graz, Austria is quite different from spending -at least a year – in Hamburg, for example.  wouldn’t a similar approach of evaluation apply to many fields of learning?

  • x7c00

    Thank you 5768. I seem to remember the purveyors of audio visual technology making the same educational promises that the IT – Ed complex is making now. Fabulous teachers and involved parents turn out fabulous citizens.
    When I worked in A/V in the seventies I noticed that the really wonderful teachers had an almost mesmerizing effect on the students. The rest ordered movies, film strips, califones, opaque projectors, slide projectors – anything to kill the time. It worked. Time was killed.
    I work in IT now. Computers are really marvelous instruments but I think, for the most part, they just kill time. They are beautiful, marvelous, time killers.
    Many computer people feel the same way. Take a look at the NYT article from October 22, 2011 by Matt Richtel called “A Silcon School That Doesn’t Compute”. The CTO of EBay and many SV employees send their kids to a school without computers.
    While I’m at it let me thank all the beautiful, marvelous, teachers who who taught me how to write better than this. Please forgive me. My only excuse is that I’ve spent too many years talking to computers.

    Th

  • x7c00

    Thank you 5768. I seem to remember the purveyors of audio visual technology making the same educational promises that the IT – Ed complex is making now. Fabulous teachers and involved parents turn out fabulous citizens.
    When I worked in A/V in the seventies I noticed that the really wonderful teachers had an almost mesmerizing effect on the students. The rest ordered movies, film strips, califones, opaque projectors, slide projectors – anything to kill the time. It worked. Time was killed.
    I work in IT now. Computers are really marvelous instruments but I think, for the most part, they just kill time. They are beautiful, marvelous, time killers.
    Many computer people feel the same way. Take a look at the NYT article from October 22, 2011 by Matt Richtel called “A Silcon School That Doesn’t Compute”. The CTO of EBay and many SV employees send their kids to a school without computers.
    While I’m at it let me thank all the beautiful, marvelous, teachers who who taught me how to write better than this. Please forgive me. My only excuse is that I’ve spent too many years talking to computers.

    Th

  • sorem

    One of my assignments at my university is to coach instructors whose overall rating is less than 3 out of 5 (quantitative).  When I look at student comments,however (qualitative), it is not clear whether the instructor was superb or irresponsible.  How will technology help us with this.

  • The Chronicle of Higher Education
  • 1255 Twenty-Third St, N.W.
  • Washington, D.C. 20037