next »

[rattusdomesticus]

I have to make a conscious effort not to compare my undergraduates' study habits to my own--as I remember them--when I was an undergraduate. It just makes me depressed and anxious. Especially when I think that these "minimum effort" types will be the ones running politics and business when I'm an old woman.

What brought this to mind was a current assignment I have assigned to my students. That is, of course, writing a research paper. To show my students research writing techniques, I choose to write a paper with them. I use an alternate topic, of course--or my students would simply copy down the skeleton of my work and use it as their own. After my first few lessons on research, with handouts and exercises for students, it became increasingly obvious that my undergraduate students are unable or unwilling to do anything beyond the simplest (and quickest) effort. For example:

> if it doesn't come up first, second, or third with a simple search on "Google," it doesn't exist.
> even though our university library offers free use of full-text article databases, it is simply too much effort to go online (!), find out how to use the simple search boxes, and scroll through the slightly more complex academic and journalistic articles offered.
> if they do come across anything that is not in bullet points or short simple sentences, it is not worth reading. Online sources with pictures or illustrations, or cartoons are even better.
> a bulletin board posting or blog is good because it's fun to read. Any information that is not peppered with the "F" word is considered "boring."
> if an irreverent commercial website has some superficial information on their topic, that's all you need. Students will paraphrase (and refuse to cite) the same bits of information from this one source over and over. Usually they cannot even determine any bias with the information given, or if the author is credible authority. Websites that sell natural male enhancement supplements with a 1-800 number have the same weight as an in-depth academic article by experts in the field, based on primary research.   

Sigh. I have done lesson after lesson on how to do actual research. I've brought students to the university library, had them given custom lessons by the staff, given them exercises and found one-fourth of my students at the reference desk, shooting questions at the staff... literally asking them to do the work for them, rather than look up a book or source. When working in a lab, I've given hands-on lessons on how to access information and still had students reverting to the "easy" way out--i.e., Googling instead of using real sources. I've given PowerPoint lessons on what kind of sources are better than others--and students still want to reference personal e-mail or chat rooms rather than academic or trade journals.

Don't get me wrong. I love the internet. I use it constantly. I just think students should learn to use it well--just like any other source. Then I have to remind myself (over and over) that I was interested in English as an undergraduate. They are not. That I was an overachiever. And they were not. That I was not only interested in getting a good grade, but in actually learning. And most of them are not.

It's painful. 

[threadkiller]

My students are only allowed to have a third of their sources from the internet, and when they turn in their prelim. bibs they have to turn in a sheet that asks them to "grade" the websites they have selected.

It is hard not to compare; I have to agree.  And I was an indifferent undergrad.  So when these students slack off even more than I did, then I am shocked.

[walker]

We often forget that the Internet did not exist when most of us were in college. The Internet was just getting started when I was in college, and there wasn't much information there anyway. I never even thought about using the Internet for a paper until 2nd semester senior year, when I used it for one term paper. If I remember correctly, it felt kind of weird and uncomfortable using the Internet.

I recently looked back at some of my unergraduate papers and senior thesis, and I was amazed at how much I relied upon secondary sources for my work, compared to my work now. 

[smart_e_pantz]

My students are only allowed to have a third of their sources from the internet, and when they turn in their prelim. bibs they have to turn in a sheet that asks them to "grade" the websites they have selected.

It is hard not to compare; I have to agree.  And I was an indifferent undergrad.  So when these students slack off even more than I did, then I am shocked.

You're generous.  I don't allow my students to use internet resources at all--unless those internet resources are also (a) from an official government source and (b) are also available in print form.

[case_insensitive]

We often forget that the Internet did not exist when most of us were in college. The Internet was just getting started when I was in college, and there wasn't much information there anyway. I never even thought about using the Internet for a paper until 2nd semester senior year, when I used it for one term paper. If I remember correctly, it felt kind of weird and uncomfortable using the Internet.

I recently looked back at some of my unergraduate papers and senior thesis, and I was amazed at how much I relied upon secondary sources for my work, compared to my work now. 

I must be really old.  The Internet (by which I'm sure you mean the World Wide Web, not really the "Internet") or rather hypertexted linked widely available and searchable information... did not exist at the time I completed my dissertation (I was a few years too soon).

The problem now is that students don't seem to know how to do any primary source research or even how to use the library, except perhaps of using ABI-Inform or the equivalent easily searchable databases...

Frankly, I don't think students bother to read much of anything.  They scan at best (thus the OP's comment about bullet points).  

For example, 10 or 12 years ago, a tax student trying to research a tax question would have to go to the library and live in the tax stacks of CCH or whatever tax service - many shelves of information to search and reference and such.  I bet not 1 in 10 students could complete that sort of task today.  But they have no problems (they think) doing a 30 second search of Lexis-Nexis... and thinking they have thoroughly examined the issues.

I have similar problems with students who think ANYTHING on the Web is authoritative and therefore worth citing... even if they cannot identify an author (person or organization) or a date of publication/posting...

I do try very hard to explain all these things to students, but they fall on mostly deaf ears.

[larryc]

Oh God, another "back in my day" post.  There is a recipe for these:

• A. Take one part idealized view of the past
• B. Take another part cynical and stereotyped view of the present
• C. Use A to beat B over the head, while moaning "Oh woe is me."

[francie_]

I recently looked back at some of my undergraduate papers and senior thesis, and I was amazed at how much I relied upon secondary sources for my work, compared to my work now. 

That just shows how much you've grown as a scholar.  An undergraduate should be relying on secondary sources, AND learning how to evaluate and utilize them correctly.

My policy on internet sources has been that I must approve the source before the student can use it in her/his paper.  I do find that the concept of going to the library to look up journal articles is lost on many of them.  Interlibrary loan?  Forget it.  Of course, I'm sure there were many students who also failed to use such resources when I was an undergrad, back in the dark ages before the internet.

[avaya]

The answer is simple.  Don't let them use internet sources, except for the library's journal searches.  For my students' research papers, they have to have a minimum of 10 "academic" sources, and I define academic as a book, a journal article, or anything from our library's electronic database search.  For every academic source you are missing, you lose 5%.  I spell this out in great detail for them and give them handy tips for using our database search.  I still have students turn in papers with only 5 academic sources.  Fine, that's 25% of the grade off the top, plus their paper is going to be of poor quality anyway since they didn't use good sources to begin with.  Also, students are not allowed to use Wikipedia at all even if they have 10 academic sources.

This has really solved the problem for me.  Do it or your grade suffers dramatically.  It's amazing how quickly they become experts in using the library's electronic databases (Proquest, Project Muse, etc.).

[oldie]

You seem to be stressing yourself out for the function that a librarian could do. Most librarians should be knowledgeable on electonic database searches. I tend to use Internet loosely, meaning that I include the online academic database searches in it; you must be implying the commerical/news articles not the academic searches in your internet  concern.

[dr_crankypants]

Thanks, LarryC!  I was thinking that myself.  The big problem with comparisons to the past (especially for those of us who have not been teaching for three decades), is that we're comparing our own behavior against the behavior of the more typical student.  People who become academics were rarely typical students in college.  We're the type who might actually have heard of interlibrary loan (maybe even used it), who knew how to flip through the paper library catalog, and who knew the difference between a journal article and an encyclopedia article.  And, even taking all this into consideration, it's easy to forget how much we didn't do (I rarely used journal articles or interlibrary loan in college, something I'm prone to forget today).  As students, I don't think we were aware how little our classmates really did.  I remember (from being a graduate student) finally understanding why I got As on papers that, frankly, weren't that good.  I just didn't realize how much less other people did.     

But I also think that part of the problem falls back on us.  How many people actually assign research papers?  Many of my upper-level history students tell me that I'm the first professor to assign them a research paper.  If they haven't been writing research papers, they're not going to know how to research, and that's not primarily their fault.  I've started to realize that they just need certain kinds of guidance, and they need certain kinds of restrictions to knock them out of their comfort zones.  There's nothing like HAVING to use certain kinds of sources to teach them how to use them. 

I agree that part of the solution is making your requirements part of your grade, and making it very clear that certain kinds of sources are not acceptable (banning, for example, all internet sources other than library databases).  I'm moving in this direction myself.

[assocpolysciprof]

But I also think that part of the problem falls back on us.  How many people actually assign research papers?  Many of my upper-level history students tell me that I'm the first professor to assign them a research paper.  If they haven't been writing research papers, they're not going to know how to research, and that's not primarily their fault.  I've started to realize that they just need certain kinds of guidance, and they need certain kinds of restrictions to knock them out of their comfort zones.  There's nothing like HAVING to use certain kinds of sources to teach them how to use them.

Dr_crankypants hit the nail on the head: We, the faculty members, have to teach our undergraduates how to actually conduct research (in our respective fields). This process needs to begin with our introductory level courses (if feasible) and continue throughout the undergraduate curricula. (I realize that teaching basic research skills or asking students to write an original paper using primary and secondary sources may not be feasible in introductory courses across all disciplines).

However, at the same time, we need to recognize that most undergraduates will not be able to produce the kind of research that we would expect of graduate students, let alone colleagues. An undergraduate student taking four or five courses per semester (in addition to a part-time job, involvement in several clubs, or a varsity team) cannot devote as much time to a research paper as a graduate student.

I teach political science at a well-regarded, mid-sized university. In my second year as an assistant professor, I was offered the chance to teach a senior seminar. These seminars are supposedly the capstone of the undergraduate major and require students to write an original research paper. I was horrified to learn than at least seven of the fifteen seniors enrolled had never written a research paper during college. One of the students withdrew from the class and another almost had a breakdown when the due date arrived. Since that time, I have required research papers in all of my classes. I have about 15 pages of guidelines on each step of the research process on Blackboard. Luckily, many of my departmental colleagues have instituted similar requirements in their classes. Over the past several years, there has been a noticeable improvement in our students' research and writing skills.

[thundering_m]

If writing is simply talking on paper for people you can't see face to face, it is helpful to back up the process and have students talk face to face. I find the writers' workshop model improves the quality of their inquiry and raises the sense of accountability.

It involves frequent peer conferences in which the students must express their ideas, make their connections, ask for feedback, and choose words that are part of the vocabulary of the topic. It means that a part of every class session is spent in earnest one on one conversations while I circulate, overhear, intervene, establish a support role.

I do provide prompts, e.g. a 'sounds like' conference for making sense, a 'looks like' conference after it makes sense and it is time to look at the superficial conventions. I do coach them in how to ask for feedback and how to focus on the purpose of helping the author better express his or her original thoughts (as opposed to an opportunity for the peer partner to hold forth and turn it into something else).

I have many many mini 'tell the person next to you' events, such as "Find out what primary sources the person next to you is citing." or "Show the person next to you the connections between your introduction and your conclusion."

Thus, it is true that their conversations may tend to be superficial and their hope is that there is one, simple right answer to discover instead of a complex labyrinth of connections to be sorted out and organized into a linear path of prose. But it is also true that when the opportunity (and the direction) to communicate is provided, they rise to the occasion, and this elevates the quality of their assigned products. For the point is not to demonstrate that they have received wisdom transmitted via print or lecture, but that they have integrated the knowledge base with their own schema and they have improved their skills of investigation and expression.

As far as initiative to seek out information, it is all well and good to introduce them to the library's many sterling resources. But the main obstacle is whatever makes them hesitate in sharing their ideas, whether out of fear of looking too geeky nerdy or not smart enough or simple avoidance of the heavy lifting. Regarding the last, it is useful to take time to acknoweldge that it is dfificult, for I find students are more likely to respond to a challenge than an admonition that they have been provided all opportunities and therefore have no excuse.

As far as the insurmountable task of getting all students to emerge from their coccoon of oblivion and passivity, it is fair to point out to them that your life is much easier if they don't bother to polish their first efforts, because you are not expected to have all A's. Therefore, any essay that cites weak sources, makes no connections or worse, makes no sense, is easy to dismiss as the baseline, and it makes  other efforts to investigate thoughtfully with some depth and breadth that much easier to recognize. To that end, when students ask about length requirements, I typicallyh respond that "If you have a lot to say and a lot to think through, this is a good opportunity to do so. But when it stops making sense, I stop reading."

Finally, it seems quite effective to say "It's all rehearsal, my friends. This is an exercise to connect the dots, to find the hidden picture, to complete the puzzle. We wouldn't bother with it except the rest of your life will be (guess what) connecting the dots, finding the hidden picture, and completing the puzzle. You are rehearsing the strategies that will serve you well when you succeed in your life's work."

[bkhound]

Thank you TM - this is excellent. I really like how you use the peer conferences. In fact, I am printing this out so that I will remember to incorporate it into my classes. Also those who suggested making refereed source materials part of the grade - another great idea! So glad I "procrastinated" today by reading this forum!

[medievalisttoo]

Dr_crankypants hit the nail on the head: We, the faculty members, have to teach our undergraduates how to actually conduct research (in our respective fields). This process needs to begin with our introductory level courses (if feasible) and continue throughout the undergraduate curricula. (I realize that teaching basic research skills or asking students to write an original paper using primary and secondary sources may not be feasible in introductory courses across all disciplines).

My department has a wonderful system in place: the first semester after declaring the major, students are required to take a discipline-specific course in research methods.  I've taught this course three times now, and I'm really pleased with the results: by the end of the semester, we have walked students through the research paper process, from developing the rough topic to turning in a final 12-15 page paper and doing a brief in-class presentation of their findings.  They learn the difference between primary and secondary sources, between scholarly and non-scholarly sources (print and digital), how to take notes, outline a paper, revise a draft... and they also write 10 1-2 page reading responses in which we beat up on their grammar.  I've never met a student who liked the course, but it gives them the basic skills they need to succeed in other courses.  Plus, it washes out the would-be majors who really don't want to work.

I've told friends at other universities about the course, and the response is always the same: "What a great idea!  [pause]  It would never work in my department."  Why? Because the faculty need to be committed to taking part in teaching it.  Yeah, it's a pain; yeah, it means one content course fewer that you can teach every couple of semesters... but the benefits are enormous.

[smart_e_pantz]

you must be implying the commerical/news articles not the academic searches in your internet  concern.

It's worse than that Oldie.  Many students think just because something is posted on a blog, it must be a great source.  I could live with it (to a point) if they were actually citing newspaper articles.