next »

[mountainguy]

I had a disheartening encounter with a former student today. The student was polite enough (both today and when he took my class last spring) but seemed to have little interest in the subject matter. While in my class, he rarely contributed to class discussions, quibbled for points on several assignments, and made no bones about frequently saying that he "needed an A for law school applications." Eventually, he earned an A- in the class by the skin of his teeth. I ran into him today in an elevator and asked him how his classes this semester were going. He replied that it was going well, but that most of his classes felt like "games." I told him I was sorry to hear that and wished him the best of luck with the end of the term.

Anyway, the encounter got me thinking about how we can better motivate students to be intrinsically interested in the subject matter (rather than simply focusing on their grades as rewards/punishment). Most of the education literature that I've read seems to say "Be enthusiastic!" and "Show how the material applies outside of the classroom!", which can both be difficult and vague maxims to implement, especially for those of us in the humanities. Any ideas about how to make enthusiasm and application concrete? What other ways do you promote intrinsic learning?

[frogfactory]

Drop the general education requirement, and admit students by interview to their major only (with transfers possible but arduous).  Only admit the qualified, enthusiastic and interested (that is, students that exhibit all three traits).

Or move to Europe.

[hegemony]

It's a standard assumption that we should be motivating the heck out of our students.  Which is exhausting.  But you know, learning can still do them good, even if they weren't particularly motivated.  If the student earned an A-, he still has that knowledge.  He doesn't have to be interested in it.  He can still benefit from it.

[mountainguy]

It's a standard assumption that we should be motivating the heck out of our students.  Which is exhausting.  But you know, learning can still do them good, even if they weren't particularly motivated.  If the student earned an A-, he still has that knowledge.  He doesn't have to be interested in it.  He can still benefit from it.

Yes, but what's sad about the situation is that I wouldn't be able to say anything unique about this particular student in a letter of recommendation other than "he has conscientious work habits." The obsession with grades seems to have come at a social cost that the student doesn't recognize. Or at least that's my perception of the situation.

[keineidee]

Well, in my humanities-oriented courses I try to find ways for the students to pursue their interests as much as possible within the parameters of what I'm trying to teach. If I want them to understand a literary text, or an historical period, or a theoretical position, I try to give them room to approach it from a multitude of directions, leaving room for the open-ended prompt amidst the more guided options. This is partly because I hate reading boring, nearly interchangeable papers, but it also works for blogs and presentations if the course doesn't have that much leeway on the major assignments.

When preparing for class, or seeking an essay topic, I tell them explicitly to observe themselves as they engage with the "text" (whatever that might be), and to notice where they get snagged mentally. There's the hook. (Suddenly, I realize I lifted this concept from yoga class!) What do they like, dislike, agree with, disagree with, want to remember, want to forget? What parts do they want to skip, and why? Anything to make them more aware of their interactions with the text, and to find ways in that are relevant to their interests.

In a broader sense, whatever puts them in the "zone" is almost by definition going to have some kind of value as an indicator of where their true interests and capabilities lie, if approached without judgement. I almost don't care what it is, as long as they pursue it with zeal and attention. Though, I suppose this could lead to 3 days of unbroken Halo fanaticism...

[bread_pirate_naan]

Humanities? Creative project valued at 10% of the final grade. 

They can't blow it off and they have no ability to game it.  It is humbling, humiliating, or exciting for them.  Works every time.  The toughest nuts will hate it and try to write a paper.  You should see the sad sacks (only aspiring lawyers)* who will take the alternate assignment and write a 10-15 page research paper using none of the bibliographic resources of the class and no more than 1 of 10 required sources from the internet; instead of make a paperbag puppet or macaroni craft.  (these are creative projects, if they engage the material, but the amateur filmmakers and hardcore poets go the distance and then some)  It also gives others an opportunity to shine that may not come to the fore other ways.  Hugely effective in getting students to think about the material and put it to work.  If the material is distant from their own cultural context they can take themes from the course content are redeploy them through their own worldview.

One page write-up explaining how the project related to the class and a very short proposal at the beginning of term to get them thinking about it.  The day the project is due they do a 2-3 minute show and tell, or reading/interpretive dance/screening, generally just before we are ready to review for finals.  I don't keep the project, just the documentation.  They are welcome to sketch, photograph, or provide a disc in addition to the text.  I always let them change the project proposals during the term because some get very inspired, and others who have never painted before discover oil paint is a hard medium to work in.  Who knew?

I do not grade the work on its execution unless they did it 5 minutes before class, but on hitting all the marks (proposal, project, write-up) and using course content. I often take a vote to see if the class is enthusiastic for such an assignment, but it was mandatory in the courses of the professor I taught under, and from whom I adopted/adapted the assignment.

Obviously this only works with a class of a certain size, but it is a lot of fun.  Last year one of my courses was full of creatives from all disciplines and most of my 2 sections came voluntarily during finals week to exhibit and talk about their projects(informal critique).  They stayed 5 hours.

*generally spawn of lawyers, too

[biologist_]

Yes, but what's sad about the situation is that I wouldn't be able to say anything unique about this particular student in a letter of recommendation other than "he has conscientious work habits." The obsession with grades seems to have come at a social cost that the student doesn't recognize. Or at least that's my perception of the situation.

This student sounds like a great candidate for law school.  You can commend him for having conscientious work habits and performing well despite having no intrinsic interest in the assignments.  Lawyers have to do that all the time.  That's part of the reason they get paid more than professors.

[melba_frilkins]

Hmm...that's a big question and an important one. To some degree I've copped out and gone in the opposite direction. I figure if earning points is what motivates students, then I'll assume that's important to them. And whatever learning experiences I think are important, they've got to do those to earn the points. Not saying this is the best approach, but it's what I've ended up doing.

But looking at increasing intrinsic motivation, I think one thing is the enthusiasm that you always see people promoting. However, it's not about making an attempt to be artificially enthusiastic. Instead, choose course content that you find most interesting and exciting, and you will have natural enthusiasm--especially if you have lots of cool or odd examples, or can give the "inside scoop", even about esoteric issues. In my first years of teaching I taught a lecture on topic-of-my-dissertation. I thought I ended up giving too many details and it was way too over specialized. Then a few years later, I ran into a student and she told me that lecture had changed her life, mostly based on the fact that I was so darned excited about it.

I think too that turning over responsibility to the students gets them more interested in the material. This is something that you can do in very small concrete ways. It doesn't have to be a wholesale change to the structure of your class. For example, give students a quiz to work on in class (in small groups is best) on material that you have not lectured on. All of a sudden they are asking things like "can you tell me about this", "can we please use our books?". 

[call_me_al]

Drop the general education requirement, and admit students by interview to their major only (with transfers possible but arduous).  Only admit the qualified, enthusiastic and interested (that is, students that exhibit all three traits).

Or move to Europe.

Move to Europe -? But not to my middle-range, middle-size uni, because students sure ain't "intrinsically motivated" here. I have these arguments with my colleagues where I say we need to keep away the duds by prior interviews or a harder test (we do have an entrance test, but it's rather one-dimensional). But they say that our brief is to absorb the school-leavers from this region and turn them into teachers-to-be, because that's what 80% of them (think they) want to be. And I do see the justification of that argument, too.
I am trying to accept that only the top 15% of students (in Arts & Humanities) will have any genuine interest for their field of study. The rest are just in it for the credit points and a piece of paper. And the introduction of what they call the "Bachelor" system here has only made it worse. Many of my students do not want me to motivate them. My attempts to embed the course material in larger cultural contexts or even - *gasp* - in Real Life is met by hostility. Not indifference, but hostility.
Either this shows that I am a crap teacher (and don't think I haven't considered that possibility...), or it shows that They.Will. Not. Be. Moved. - Maybe it's both.

[fishbrains]

My attempts to embed the course material in larger cultural contexts or even - *gasp* - in Real Life is met by hostility. Not indifference, but hostility. Either this shows that I am a crap teacher (and don't think I haven't considered that possibility...), or it shows that They.Will. Not. Be. Moved. - Maybe it's both.

Maybe we are both crap teachers then, alas.

Nothing gets students here in the Bible-Belt more riled-up in a lit class than when I relate the readings to the Bible or Christianity, especially if it challenges their notions of what makes for a functional or cognizant Christian. As in noticing that Bradford and other Puritans didn't come to their high level of literacy by accident or by googling Bible passages (or texting)--that they were children of the Renaissance and Humanism, just like Americans used to be. As in T.S. Eliot's "Journey of the Magi" could apply to any believer (of any faith really) who can actually read the poem. As in Flannery O'Connor calls herself a Christian writer for reasons that really can be seen in her short stories.

[kedves]

Yes, but what's sad about the situation is that I wouldn't be able to say anything unique about this particular student in a letter of recommendation other than "he has conscientious work habits." The obsession with grades seems to have come at a social cost that the student doesn't recognize. Or at least that's my perception of the situation.

This student sounds like a great candidate for law school.  You can commend him for having conscientious work habits and performing well despite having no intrinsic interest in the assignments.  Lawyers have to do that all the time.  That's part of the reason they get paid more than professors.

Almost everyone has to do it all the time if they want a paycheck.  I'm not intrinsically motivated to grade. 

Interest in the work gives me the goal, but the need to do the work pushes me along when I don't feel like it--which might be often or for long stretches of time.   (And when it doesn't, I know I am bad.)  Conscientiousness, using one's conscience, is what carries one along the journey--of work and of life.  I'd rather work with a conscientious, uninspired, competent student than the one in my office yesterday who is going to hand in the paper a week late, with deductions, because she "needs to be passionate about my topic."  No you don't, sister.  The purpose of the paper is learning, and learning is never wasted.  Pick a topic and go.  I would say that your particular student is not conscientious; he has an attitude.  A conscientious student wouldn't tell you his main focus was an A, wouldn't argue about points, and would help out at discussion time.  Not being sufficiently challenged can be boring, but it doesn't sound as if that is the student's problem.  If he is not at the top of every class yet thinks most of his classes are "games," something is going on.  Unless it is in his nature to be self-absorbed and superior to his surroundings, he might have soured on school because he is afraid of graduating in this job market, depressed, or something else.   Who doesn't like games?  Someone who doesn't enjoy learning as a form of play isn't going to develop into a really interesting educated person.  They might be a wonderful person in other ways, of course.

But if your student is graduating, I can understand it.  I lost interest in most of my undergrad courses by my senior year, as I realized that I was en route to a rough time.  I graduated at the end of a much milder recession. I had a career goal, but I had to wait a year for it to develop into a full-time job.  In the year after graduation, I had three part-time jobs and depended on a boyfriend for rent.  (The low point came when a nice old lady on my paper route asked me, "What grade are you in, dear?"  I didn't have the heart to tell her I wasn't a high-school student.)  I knew better than to go to grad school or law school just because, but I knew that life after graduation was not going to be as good as college and it affected how I felt about the last classes I took.  Ten years later, I again felt as your student might.  I was bored and work seemed pointless.  I knew myself well enough at that point to know that I needed to be challenged and to never run out of things to learn, and that I was willing to sacrifice income, job security, and location to get it.  But that sort of knowledge takes time.

I connect class material with everyday real-world situations not so much because I want to motivate my students but because I want it to be useful for them--to help them remember the idea, skill, or research finding for when it can do them some good after the grade has come and gone.  But I am only one among five or six courses and instructors they have that semester, plus team or work and family and all the rest of life.  It's easy to overestimate our impact.  Be glad when you can make it happen in the moment and hope some of it sticks. 

Many of my students do not want me to motivate them. My attempts to embed the course material in larger cultural contexts or even - *gasp* - in Real Life is met by hostility. Not indifference, but hostility.

That surprises me.  Can you say anything about what you try to connect, and how they show their hostility, or would that be too specific?

[polly_mer]

Anyway, the encounter got me thinking about how we can better motivate students to be intrinsically interested in the subject matter (rather than simply focusing on their grades as rewards/punishment). Most of the education literature that I've read seems to say "Be enthusiastic!" and "Show how the material applies outside of the classroom!", which can both be difficult and vague maxims to implement, especially for those of us in the humanities. Any ideas about how to make enthusiasm and application concrete? What other ways do you promote intrinsic learning?

If you figure this one out, let me know.  I have been trying to do this in my classes and the results have been mixed, even after I started putting a relevant "education is more than gaming the school system" quotation on the board every class period and making the conscious effort to say, "And this particular activity will be of benefit for X, Y, and Z in your likely future lives as teachers".

For example, on Wednesday, I gave a lecture on magnetism that had the coolest applications of magnetism that I could think of including a nifty bit on using magnetic domains to date archaeological finds.  If I had lectured with any more enthusiasm, I would have been bouncing off of the walls.

On Friday, I put magnets in my students' hands.  I showed them the coolest things that I could think to do with magnets.  I made them try the activities themselves as I stood over them so that I know they had first hand experience of some of these things.

Yesterday, we did in class activities on electricity including how to calculate what running a light bulb for given amounts of time will cost you on your electrical bill.  One student flat out refused to do any of the activities yesterday because, "I don't understand any of this material.  I didn't understand any of Friday's material.  Without a lecture that spells out exactly what you want us to know, this class is hopeless.  I'm not learning anything and this is a waste of my time."  When I pointed out that there was nothing on which I could lecture that would make those activities any easier because these were the kinds of activities for use in elementary school classrooms that merely require following the directions to get hands-on experience in a safe way, she glared at me.  However, when I volunteered to answer any of her questions right then and there on any topic that was covered in anything in the past week because I want her to understand, she gave me the same pouty look that my toddler does when he doesn't get his way and then refused to even look at me as I stood there for three minutes (by the clock) patiently waiting for a question or comment about material instead of a flat statement of "I'm not going to try.  Spoonfeed me."  

Kedves, that's the kind of hostility that Call_me_Al means.  The conscientious ones will go with the program and do what needs to be done to get a good grade.  The ones who are less bright, less conscientious, but have great gaming skills in particular areas will greet all attempts to do something outside of the gaming skills arena with hostility.  They are so caught up in the game aspect that they steadfastly refuse to face the idea that school is for the acquisition of skills and knowledge later in life instead of jumping a hoop to get an A so that they can make progress toward a magic piece of paper to be able to jump the next hoop.

[fishbrains]

Yes, but what's sad about the situation is that I wouldn't be able to say anything unique about this particular student in a letter of recommendation other than "he has conscientious work habits." The obsession with grades seems to have come at a social cost that the student doesn't recognize. Or at least that's my perception of the situation.

This student sounds like a great candidate for law school.  You can commend him for having conscientious work habits and performing well despite having no intrinsic interest in the assignments.  Lawyers have to do that all the time.  That's part of the reason they get paid more than professors.

Almost everyone has to do it all the time if they want a paycheck.  I'm not intrinsically motivated to grade. 

Interest in the work gives me the goal, but the need to do the work pushes me along when I don't feel like it--which might be often or for long stretches of time.   (And when it doesn't, I know I am bad.)  Conscientiousness, using one's conscience, is what carries one along the journey--of work and of life.  I'd rather work with a conscientious, uninspired, competent student than the one in my office yesterday who is going to hand in the paper a week late, with deductions, because she "needs to be passionate about my topic."  No you don't, sister.  The purpose of the paper is learning, and learning is never wasted.  Pick a topic and go.  I would say that your particular student is not conscientious; he has an attitude.  A conscientious student wouldn't tell you his main focus was an A, wouldn't argue about points, and would help out at discussion time.  Not being sufficiently challenged can be boring, but it doesn't sound as if that is the student's problem.  If he is not at the top of every class yet thinks most of his classes are "games," something is going on.  Unless it is in his nature to be self-absorbed and superior to his surroundings, he might have soured on school because he is afraid of graduating in this job market, depressed, or something else.   Who doesn't like games?  Someone who doesn't enjoy learning as a form of play isn't going to develop into a really interesting educated person.  They might be a wonderful person in other ways, of course.

But if your student is graduating, I can understand it.  I lost interest in most of my undergrad courses by my senior year, as I realized that I was en route to a rough time.  I graduated at the end of a much milder recession. I had a career goal, but I had to wait a year for it to develop into a full-time job.  In the year after graduation, I had three part-time jobs and depended on a boyfriend for rent.  (The low point came when a nice old lady on my paper route asked me, "What grade are you in, dear?"  I didn't have the heart to tell her I wasn't a high-school student.)  I knew better than to go to grad school or law school just because, but I knew that life after graduation was not going to be as good as college and it affected how I felt about the last classes I took.  Ten years later, I again felt as your student might.  I was bored and work seemed pointless.  I knew myself well enough at that point to know that I needed to be challenged and to never run out of things to learn, and that I was willing to sacrifice income, job security, and location to get it.  But that sort of knowledge takes time.

I connect class material with everyday real-world situations not so much because I want to motivate my students but because I want it to be useful for them--to help them remember the idea, skill, or research finding for when it can do them some good after the grade has come and gone.  But I am only one among five or six courses and instructors they have that semester, plus team or work and family and all the rest of life.  It's easy to overestimate our impact.  Be glad when you can make it happen in the moment and hope some of it sticks. 

Many of my students do not want me to motivate them. My attempts to embed the course material in larger cultural contexts or even - *gasp* - in Real Life is met by hostility. Not indifference, but hostility.

That surprises me.  Can you say anything about what you try to connect, and how they show their hostility, or would that be too specific?

I think sometimes when we relate material to "real life" we--perhaps accidentally--point out information that the students know they should know but haven't bothered to learn, and this creates some backlash. It's surprising how many students in the Bible Belt haven't read the Bible. They know passages, but can't relate them to much else in the Bible or actually discuss them. If their dopey English teacher gets too far into the Bible for a minute or two, they get upset. And God forbid I don't read out of the KJV--aka the "inspired" version.

I get the feeling that sometimes they want literature to be something separate from their lives, something that only English teachers should care about, something that they discard after the class is over and they have their grade.

[reener06]

[/quote]

I think sometimes when we relate material to "real life" we--perhaps accidentally--point out information that the students know they should know but haven't bothered to learn, and this creates some backlash. It's surprising how many students in the Bible Belt haven't read the Bible. They know passages, but can't relate them to much else in the Bible or actually discuss them. If their dopey English teacher gets too far into the Bible for a minute or two, they get upset. And God forbid I don't read out of the KJV--aka the "inspired" version.

I get the feeling that sometimes they want literature to be something separate from their lives, something that only English teachers should care about, something that they discard after the class is over and they have their grade.
[/quote]

I run into the same thing. I'm amazed how many of them have not read the entire Bible either, and they seem surprised I have. I try to teach understanding the cultural context in which the Bible was written and how the message of Christianity changed over time as influenced by cultural context. They look at me as if I am blasphemous, which I suppose I am in their eyes. Funny, because in looking at the cultural context they might find it more relevant to their lives.

[mad_doctor]

I see this way more often with my snowflakey undergrads that I do with my grad students - no surprise there.  I agree that the times have changed much in that now a lack of student motivation os treated as if it's a problem with the professor.  I'll start pulling my hair out if I have to read one more mail-bomb from the administration about the importance of keeping the students motivated.  I try to lecture the snowflakes at least once per term that they need to get off the grade-wagon and start pursuing their own interests.  I tell them I was a B student in grad school mostly on account of my tendency to spend a lot of time reading the interesting stuff and blow off the boring stuff, and writing papers that weren't necessarily "what the professor was looking for" (I hate that phrase), but something I wanted to indulge.  They usually resent having to listen: "But we'll lose our financial aid", "I've never gotten anything but As", "That's easy for you to say", and of course some pretty ridiculous stuff they save for their evaluations, like, "mad_doctor treats us like we're stupid", "mad_doctor is disrespectful to students", or "mad_doctor lectures about stuff that has nothing to do with the class".  I try not to think about how much better my evals would be without consistently getting dinged by two or three resentful students per term.  Out of a class of twenty students, maybe three or four are genuinely interested in the message, and will approach me after class to ask how they can do that.  Maybe one or two of those three or four are asking because "it's what the professor wants", but still.