next »

[snowbound]

Gah!  I’m teaching an online summer school class (literature topic), and am getting infuriated about students who post comments without doing the reading.  While in a f-to-f class, they would just keep their mouths shut, here they have to post comments or be deemed “absent.”  So, these bottom-of-the-classers usually restrict themselves to re-phrasing exactly what the previous poster said, or giving personal anecdotes loosely related to the text at hand.  Doesn’t contribute anything, but doesn’t do any harm.  Problem is now we’re at a text that has been adapted into a cute movie (think Muppets Christmas Carol)—with, of course, all the ambiguities neatly pruned away, hero’s more troubling qualities cleaned up, subtle suggestions made boringly sledge-hammer obvious, conventional moral inserted, cuteness quotient ratcheted up, etc.  The usual Hollywood fare.  Here’s a chance for bottom-of-the-classers to boost their participation grade by making unusually substantive comments, because (drum roll . . .) here at last is a text that they know!  Done the reading?  Well not exactly, but they’ve seen the movie!  Close enough!  So I get a series of comments, answering my analytical discussion questions with copious examples—NONE of which actually happens in the assigned novel!  I know these texts very well indeed, and know the difference between Jim Henson and Charles Dickens (or whoever), but what about the rest of my students?!  The serious students (and I have some excellent ones) will likely think, “Gee! I don’t remember the scene happening like that, or the character saying those words.  I must have missed it.”  And they may re-think (and most likely dumb down) their impressions and analyses based on the FALSE information posted by the bottom-of-the-classers.

This reliance on Hollywood has happened before, due to the nature of the literature in this class, but never in such lengthy, confident, at-first-glance-fairly-impressive contributions.  I have been reduced to publicly shaming the culprits: “But most of the events you discuss don’t occur in the text that we’re reading,” and posting an announcement asking students who have not done the reading to refrain from posting.

[burnie]

Fantasy:  "According to my rubric, your contributions are a waste of my time.  Zero."

Reality:  "Please refer to the assignment for posting guidelines.  Remember, you must reference the text and provide substantive insights and critiques.  Contact me during office hours if you need more guidance regarding the types of responses that will earn full credit.  Zero."

But then, my rubric is pretty specific regarding what will earn points and all of what you described is listed in the zero column.  My first semester teaching online the majority of the class was doing what you describe (despite my rubric) so I had to throw an elbow in comments that were visible to the class and break down what wasn't okay with the general quality of the comments and why (with examples!).  I think I might have engaged in more sarcasm than was appropriate for an online course, BUT the quality of their work improved and I only had to say it once.  I think word got out because subsequent classes weren't surprised by the expectations.

[elsie]

So forestall this sort of thing by bringing up the movie and pointing out ways the movie doesn't match the literature.

I'm toying with the idea of podcasts that are my commentary track to a movie that I'm having students watch.

[snowbound]

Forestalling by discussing the movie . . .  Problem is that the class I'm referring to is Children's Literature, so nearly all of the texts (various Grimms' fairytales, Alice in W, Secret Garden, Treasure Island, Little Mermaid, etc) have been adapted as movies a number of times.  I just don't have the time to discuss differences between the original and the various film adaptations (which are usually pretty trite) for every text--and that's not what the class is about anyway.  We spend ur very limited time doing serious in-depth literary analysis of a number of texts, chosen for their surprising (to students) depth.  One of them is indeed a movie, but the rest are written texts.

In my regular f-to-f class, if confusion between original and dumbed-down version arises, I can deal with it with a droll roll of the eyes, saying "But this is NOT Disney's Little Mermaid, is it!" or "Treasure Island--not to be mistaken for Muppet Treasure Island!" But I really don't have the time for that in my 6-week online summer class.  I can't say nearly as much in my lectures and the classes can't be nearly as interactive, as in a class where we're all in the same room at the same time.  I have to be very economical with words.  I have too many important concepts and analytical approaches to get students thinking about to spend time on texts that are not assigned.  

THe participation rubric. . .   Actually I do have something like that this year.  Unfortunately, since I posted it about halfway through the course, this particular problem has gotten much worse than it's ever been.  The do-nothing students, who used to post worthless but harmless comments, now are alarmed (by the rubric) at the low grade their "me-too"type comments will earn them.  So a couple of them are posting long relatively substantive comments with concrete examples--but obviously using  Muppets Treasure Island as their source, rather than the classic Stevenson novel. If they were honest about it, no harm done, but they're not.  So I;m afraid they are confusing the students who read the novel but don't now it well enough to know that, no, the hero certainly did NOT say that or do that.  

  

[larryc]

Make an announcement on the front page that you have had enough empty comments fro students who have not some the reading. Go into detail, tell them what you told us. Rip them a new one and make it clear that a post that highlights the fact that they dis not do the reading will both earn a zero and cause you to look upon all their other work with suspicion. Maybe do the announcement as a Youtube video.

[burnie]

Make an announcement on the front page that you have had enough empty comments fro students who have not some the reading. Go into detail, tell them what you told us. Rip them a new one and make it clear that a post that highlights the fact that they dis not do the reading will both earn a zero and cause you to look upon all their other work with suspicion. Maybe do the announcement as a Youtube video.

*chime*

Throw an elbow.  Do it once.  Do it publicly (video would be great - especially if you have clips from the film in question right there to contrast with the text).  Name names, if you want.  Rip them a new one and you'll probably never have to do it in an online class again.  Get all Bill Russell on them, and enjoy every second of it!

[larryc]

Make an announcement on the front page that you have had enough empty comments fro students who have not some the reading. Go into detail, tell them what you told us. Rip them a new one and make it clear that a post that highlights the fact that they dis not do the reading will both earn a zero and cause you to look upon all their other work with suspicion. Maybe do the announcement as a Youtube video.

*chime*

Throw an elbow.  Do it once.  Do it publicly (video would be great - especially if you have clips from the film in question right there to contrast with the text).  Name names, if you want.  Rip them a new one and you'll probably never have to do it in an online class again.  Get all Bill Russell on them, and enjoy every second of it!

And next year, put it in your syllabus more explicitly.

[elsie]

Yeah, children's literature would be a nightmare this way.

[kaysixteen]

You could require them to cite page numbers from the book.

[voxprincipalis]

Well, I mean, I didn't, like, read the OP or anything, but I think commenting is very important because we have to make our opinions heard, and stuff. I saw a movie once in which some guy was all talking about how we have to, like, say what we think, cause it's important.

(what do you mean, D-minus? That's not fair!!)

VP

[blackadder]

You could require them to cite page numbers from the book.

This! I do this with any films my students have to watch too. They must provide the exact minute:second section with time length. It has helped a great deal.

Plus, I've almost given up on having a real discussion with back and forth exchange with undergraduates. Either I cannot structure the discussion in such a way to foster my ideal or they don't want to discuss online. Now I'm moving to very specific instructions on 3 posts, required critique of previous poster, f/u posts, etc. Hope it works!

[ejb_123]

I'm not sure what your course is like, but perhaps you could ask specific response questions that focus primarily upon issues found only in the texts and not in the movies. It's been years since I've watched Disney's Little Mermaid, but I'm guessing that it doesn't cover the theological issues and character motivations that Andersen's fairy-tale does. (I'm thinking primarily of the discussion concerning the immortal soul of human beings and how mermaids, even though they live for hundreds of years, become sea foam upon death, and how the mermaids think that their actual lives are far happier than those of humans.) This is what I do when I teach fairy-tales to my middle school students. Those who will try to rely on only their knowledge of the Disney versions (of the Little Mermaid, of Rapunzel [i.e., Tangled], etc.) will either have to make a wild guess and probably get the question wrong or actually read the text in order to accurately answer the response questions.

Another possibility would be to require the students to watch a specific Disney or Muppets version and have a specific response question that focuses on one aspect of the movie. For instance, even though Disney's Tangled diverges in many ways from the Grimms' "Rapunzel" and is extremely goofy at times, I do think that the Disney version does a good job of portraying Rapunzel's solitude in her tower and her resulting naivete, which could in itself lead to an interesting discussion.

[baphd1996]

Unfortunately I'm not a reader.  It takes me too long.  Two speed reading courses later I have gotten as fast as most of the people just starting the course.  Watching the movie got me through high school.  I just wanted to mention a scene from "Heaven Help Us".  Kevin Dillon was doing a book report on "David Copperfield".  Instead of referring to Micawber he referred to W.C. Fields (from the movie).

[snowbound]

If someone's reading skills are that poor, they shouldn't be taking my class--an upper-level literature class (or should take special measures, like getting the reading list months ahead of time and reading ahead).  Sure, a movie that sticks fairly closely to the book will make you familiar with the broad outlines of the plot and main characters and can do a good job with setting, but those are not what a college-level literature class is about. To the extent that we discuss plot/character/setting, it's the subtleties that we focus on. And that's something that is embedded in the writing. In fact, first and foremost a literature class is about the writing itself.  Not simply what the author says, but how she says it, what the effect is of saying it this particular way, and how saying it that way helps to create meanings and connections.  It's about learning to read deeply. So, no, a movie doesn't cut it.

Should a student whose brain just can't handle numbers take an upper-level college math class? Should a blind student take an art appreciation class?  For such students to really learn something, the classes would have to be geared to their disabilities--and such art of math classes might be a worthwhile addition to the curriculum. But that's not what a regular 300-level literature class is about.

[proftowanda]

If someone's reading skills are that poor, they shouldn't be taking my class--an upper-level literature class (or should take special measures, like getting the reading list months ahead of time and reading ahead).  Sure, a movie that sticks fairly closely to the book will make you familiar with the broad outlines of the plot and main characters and can do a good job with setting, but those are not what a college-level literature class is about. To the extent that we discuss plot/character/setting, it's the subtleties that we focus on. And that's something that is embedded in the writing. In fact, first and foremost a literature class is about the writing itself.  Not simply what the author says, but how she says it, what the effect is of saying it this particular way, and how saying it that way helps to create meanings and connections.  It's about learning to read deeply. So, no, a movie doesn't cut it.

Should a student whose brain just can't handle numbers take an upper-level college math class? Should a blind student take an art appreciation class?  For such students to really learn something, the classes would have to be geared to their disabilities--and such art of math classes might be a worthwhile addition to the curriculum. But that's not what a regular 300-level literature class is about.

This.

And I don't know what to think of the previous comment.