next »

[mountainguy]

I haven't seen the article (http://chronicle.com/jobs/news/2008/07/2008072901c.htm) discussed anywhere else on the fora, so I figured I'd start a new topic for it.

While I concur with the way Professor Lemuel diffused the situation after the initial exchange, the key lesson I take from this column is not to allow such situations to develop in the first place. I teach on a large campus and often can't stick around after class to answer student questions. In such scenarios, I think it's vital to inform students about this policy in advance, preferably on the course syllabus. Presumably, Professor Lemuel would not have given a snarky answer had he been under less time constraint to answer the student.

Any thoughts?

[erictho]

I agree. The best way to solve a problem is to avoid it in the first place. Any question that requires thought rather than a straight factual answer (e.g., "when's the midterm?) or else privacy (discussions of a student's concerns or problems) should be answered during office hours or via email if the student has that particular loathing of office hours that I don't understand but often see, rather than in the few minutes when one is rushing between classes.

[inthelab]

I agree, MG.
However, I do debate the notion that college students, at least freshmen, are legal adults (many are 16 or 17; 18 year olds cannot sign contracts, rent cars, and so forth).
No excuse for the mother but it's understandable.  The kid never heard of highlighting (I hadn't until I went to college), and disliking reading is not uncommon (have a brother-in-law who had to be nagged by his wife to do required reading to finish his degree; he hasn't cracked a book since as far as I know).

Do think the title of the article could be modified to reflect the content better. Just an opinion here.

[larryc]

From the article:

"See, reading's not really my thing," he continued, "and you assign a lot of it, so I was wondering, do you have any suggestions for me?"
....

I blurted out that he was possibly in the wrong place and should either make reading his thing or look into other career options. He persisted, and before dashing off I described a few reading and time-management strategies, urging him to experiment and see what works.

You say heartless, I say candid.

No, I say that you are a dick.

[spork]

From the article:

"See, reading's not really my thing," he continued, "and you assign a lot of it, so I was wondering, do you have any suggestions for me?"
....

I blurted out that he was possibly in the wrong place and should either make reading his thing or look into other career options. He persisted, and before dashing off I described a few reading and time-management strategies, urging him to experiment and see what works.

You say heartless, I say candid.

No, I say that you are a dick.

As the anti-LarryC, I'll take the opposite view, though first I must confess I haven't read the article.

I used to work in a multidisciplinary department -- history, politics, etc.  Basically all fields in which information and knowledge is transmitted via text.  We faculty members would regularly encounter students who would regurgitate "multiple intelligences" jargon in an attempt to be excused from having to read.  It was not that they were necessarily unable to read, but that they were unwilling to read.  The standard response was essentially "and you are here why?"

[kedves]

...
[T]he key lesson I take from this column is not to allow such situations to develop in the first place.

It's a nice goal, and worth striving for at all times.  One should act with civility and patience, of course.  To do otherwise demeans the student, one's role as a teacher, and the purpose of education.  The abilities to bite one's tongue and keep one's face expressionless are important skills when dealing with students.  You absolutely can not say what you're thinking.

However, I know from my own and other people's experiences that student grudges are not always related to anything the teacher has done wrong, and in some cases are directly related to something the teacher has done right.  I have seen extraordinarily considerate, patient teachers (I'm not one of them!) get blasted by a dean simply to satisfy an upset parent or student.  For some students, hurt feelings are unattached to anything the other person did.  Adjuncts and other non-TT/non-tenured people get hit with this most often because they are the flak-catchers of the system and because they deal with the masses of unprepared but sensitive first- and second-year students, the ones complained about in the "column on stupidity" article.  This is a "customer satisfaction" model of higher education.  Sometimes the student is right--but not always.  My university has shifted in this direction in relation to admissions and funding pressures, not for ideological reasons.

This type of student occurs in various varieties.  There are the "I hate to read" types, but also the "I hate to write," "I like to work at my own pace," "I have a hard time waking up in time to come to class," "I just don't like school," and many others.  My own strategy for dealing with them is to put on a super-nice, caring persona:  "I understand what you're saying.  That must be hard for you.  But college does require a lot of that.  How are you doing in your other classes?"  That gets them talking and I can usually toss the responsibility for a plan back to them.  I offer to go over their lecture or reading notes with them, for them to email me a summary of what they read,  and so on, and that usually does the trick.  Often, they are merely anxious or venting, not lazy.

I know, though, that my way of interacting with students is not the reason I haven't gotten into trouble of this type.  I've been lucky, that's all.  I have seen it happen too many times to believe that it can be completely avoided by doing a good job.

[inthelab]

This type of student occurs in various varieties.  There are the "I hate to read" types, but also the "I hate to write," "I like to work at my own pace," "I have a hard time waking up in time to come to class," "I just don't like school," and many others.  My own strategy for dealing with them is to put on a super-nice, caring persona:  "I understand what you're saying.  That must be hard for you.  But college does require a lot of that.  How are you doing in your other classes?"  That gets them talking and I can usually toss the responsibility for a plan back to them.  I offer to go over their lecture or reading notes with them, for them to email me a summary of what they read,  and so on, and that usually does the trick.  Often, they are merely anxious or venting, not lazy.

A nicer way of saying "And you are here because ...?"  Absolutely essential to point out to them that they don't hate to read, they hate to read the assignments (how many hours a day do they spend reading blogs or usenet items?).  Same for writing- they probably fill out tomes on line but clam up once it has a name-essay- and a deadline- next week, month, year.

[larryc]

For the record, I have certainly used blunt answers to shock a student to attention. But if you leave it there, if you don't use that opening to try to actually help the student, you are just being a jerk.

Student: "I don't like to read."

Professor: "Do you like to graduate? Because there is a lot of reading between here and your diploma. Look I have to run to my next class but I do have some suggestions. Can you come to my office at 2:30? How about 4:00? Great, see you then."

It is common courtesy, and it is our job.

[kedves]

Inthelab and LarryC, I understand your approaches, and if they work for you, then I'm all for them.  I could never get away with being that direct; my students would react defensively.

I have many students who are not suited to college intellectually or temperamentally.  Some feel resentful at being made to go to college.  Many are over their heads, and they know it.  They are sensitive to slights, real or imagined.  It is what it is, and my job is to work with them where they are.  I suspect that this is the type of student the author was dealing with. 

But even going many extra miles to help in the gentlest, most constructive way possible, we can be harassed, reprimanded, and punished because a student felt that their instructor didn't like them.  My point was that even the most patient, inoffensive method--the opposite of the author's approach--can not prevent completely a student's taking offense and making a big deal about it.

[inthelab]

Inthelab and LarryC, I understand your approaches, and if they work for you, then I'm all for them.  I could never get away with being that direct; my students would react defensively.

I have many students who are not suited to college intellectually or temperamentally.  Some feel resentful at being made to go to college.  Many are over their heads, and they know it.  They are sensitive to slights, real or imagined.  It is what it is, and my job is to work with them where they are.  I suspect that this is the type of student the author was dealing with. 

But even going many extra miles to help in the gentlest, most constructive way possible, we can be harassed, reprimanded, and punished because a student felt that their instructor didn't like them.  My point was that even the most patient, inoffensive method--the opposite of the author's approach--can not prevent completely a student's taking offense and making a big deal about it.

That is unfortunately true.  documenting your contact with the student- sending a follow-up e-mail to student and cc yourself may be a way to cover yourself.

[scienceprof]

For the record, I have certainly used blunt answers to shock a student to attention. But if you leave it there, if you don't use that opening to try to actually help the student, you are just being a jerk.
...

It is common courtesy, and it is our job.

LarryC, I agree that a blunt answer (for shock value) does require follow-up.  However, the writer of the article does state that he immediately followed up with suggestions on time-management and reading strategies.  He also said in the article that he had mentioned his office hours numerous times.  How, then, is that being  a jerk?

I am not being snarky, I seriously want to know how your follow-up differs from that of the article writer.

[mended_drum]

I used to respond with feigned confusion to this sort of question:

Student: "I don't like to read, and you assign a lot of reading.  What should I do?"
Me: "Hmmm...you know, I'm really not sure.   It's never occurred to me that someone who doesn't read would enroll in my class.  Maybe you should try one of the study skill or time management workshops."

However, I now refer them to Chapter 5 of Keith Hjortshoj's Transition to College Writing, "Reading--How to Stay on Top of It," which I always have on electronic reserve.  The students who are seriously having trouble always come back praising this chapter.  Those who follow the advice in it do substantially better, and those who don't never blame me for it.

As for the article, I made my share of unconsidered comments to students when I first started teaching.  Hopefully, I make fewer of those mistakes every year.