The "Education" Thread

[unknown]

yeah. It bothers me because this is the college I'm really hoping to get hired on for full time. The dean knows me and is a super cool guy. I understand I probably should've waited until the scheduled meeting time for my lecture, but I figured it would be better than waiting around for an hour (especially since the lecture classroom was free)...they were more than 15 minutes late, so per my syllabus, they were absent.

 

[Dak]

As much as it sucks, the bottom line is (or more accurately means) that the school needs butts in the seats, and keeping butts in the seats means coddling. It wouldn't be like that, but the majority has been so coddled for so long, even the slightest non-coddling induces existential and institutional panic, directly or indirectly, with a side of contempt and loathing.

 

[unknown]

Yeah. Also, I don't know wtf the one student who was there and marked present was doing saying he missed both sections.

 

[Dak]

Because he probably didn't pay attention and didn't know what he did.

People have happenings man, not experiences.

 

[Einherjar86]

I hate to be the devil's advocate, but...

I would have waited until the regular scheduled time. I never drop students for being late on the first day since student schedules are often not finalized and sometimes students enroll in a course but sit in on another during the first week to see if they want to switch. This is perfectly acceptable in my opinion, and in fact I would encourage it. Lessons on the first day are never make-or-break, and more introductory than anything else.

Being absent entirely is a different story, but I'll usually reach out to those students via email; if I don't hear anything, then I feel more comfortable dropping them. Also, once you're a month into the semester and still missing classes, then shit needs to get addressed; but that early in the semester there are too many other factors.

I'm not saying you did anything wrong or have much to worry about. I'm just opining about first class/week attendance.

 

[Dak]

Dropping people for first day absences is pretty strict, but I think it is an acceptable backlash to the endless over-backwards-bending everywhere else.

It probably would have been wise to leave a note on the classroom door - but it wasn't a problem for everyone else except these two. This can be a valuable life lesson. Not being present at Point A might make getting to Point B impossible. But no, instead of learning we will go whine. It's like the grown ass man (like, 50s grown) who started yelling at a teacher last semester because she had no record of some of his work, and he couldn't fathom how his word that he did it wasn't good enough for her to conjure a grade.

 

[unknown]

Yeah I should've left a note on the door. However, the students are concurrently enrolled in both the lab AND the lecture. If they were absent from the lab portion, then I assumed they were going to be absent from the lecture. I've taught at 3 community colleges and 1 university. At all four places, the standard policy was to drop students on the first day. We actually had a discussion about this in a meeting the other day. The idea is we need to teach students how to be good students. They need to understand that you need to be in class on time (if not 5 minutes early) and with your materials. Some of the professors talked about dropping students who didn't have the textbooks by the end of the first month. If we get them trained in the first semester, then they shouldn't cause problems in subsequent semesters.

I generally give students a 24 hour grace period to email me if they miss the first day. Some email me...many don't. Those who do email me get to stay in the class, but it's not my job to babysit 150 students. When I was an academic advisor, yes I would reach out to students and make sure they were doing what they needed to. As a professor, it's my job to teach the material. If they're there, cool. If not, whatever. It seems like a dick move, but students have to understand the difference between high school and college. My favorite students are the older students who have been out working for 10, 20 years and decide to come back to school. They have their shit together.

I was talking to my aunt last night, who is a dean at a community college in NorCal. She told me they'll probably ding me on not meeting the lecture for the required time. She told me to go in there, be apologetic and "eat your shit". We'll see how it goes.

 

[Dak]

If they're there, cool. If not, whatever. It seems like a dick move, but students have to understand the difference between high school and college.

What I don't understand is why this division even became a problem. Acceptable Age of Irresponsibility Creep.

My favorite students are the older students who have been out working for 10, 20 years and decide to come back to school. They have their shit together.

Not only do (we) have our shit together, we do so while juggling, usually, many more responsibilities than any of the traditional students.

http://terminallance.com/2014/08/12/terminal-lance-339-life-after-eas-college/

Another former Marine's view (with which I concur):

I was profoundly surprised when I got to college at how easy it was (granted, I did go to art school). Yet, somehow, I saw other students struggling and failing. This should come as no surprise to me, really. Prior to enlisting I attended Portland Community College to a less-than-favorable performance. For some reason, being 18 years young it was hard for me to grasp the concept of showing up on time, doing the work and being personable was the secret to college success.

It really is that simple. Even if you’re struggling with the material, most of your grade comes from just being there and turning things in on time. Like, really, how hard is that? I’m not going to sit here and claim that the Marine Corps graced me with some magical virtue of discipline, but when you’ve spent the last four years being yelled at and in situations where the stakes can literally be life or death, college feels exceedingly simple in comparison.

 

[Zephyrus]

This is one reason I schedule evening classes for teaching. After 5 PM all (or most) of the administrators, secretaries and faculty in the building have gone home for the day, so there's virtually no overhead. Not that I ever cancel class (that's a mortal sin, here), but teaching a 2-hour evening class that is highly discussion-based means some meetings may end 10 or 15 minutes early. If it were a Classics course I'd figure out how to use that time, but for Rhetoric, which I'm only doing as "TA Bootcamp" I don't give enough of a shit. Plus, the students like me better for not being that strict.

As for the discussion at hand, canning students for being absent the first day seems to be rather draconian. In fact, I've never heard of that policy. Here, I believe that no-shows after a week or so are dropped from the roster. Also, I do not email students who don't show up the first week as I'm more happy to have a shorter roster and fewer things to grade (while being paid the same). This is especially appealing to me this semester as I'll have 20 instead of 18 students.

I started here at the University of Iowa today. Third year of grad school. I'm taking a Latin seminar on Cicero's Letters, a Greek seminar on Antiphon and Demosthenes (oratory from the Classical period), as well as a Medieval Latin Paleography class in the history department. Very excited about all those.

Should be a productive year.

 

[Zephyrus]

Also, Mike. Aren't you violating FERPA by posting those students' names on this message board? Just imagine those students googling their names and finding this forum!

 

[unknown]

Yeah actually I probably am...I should see to that. My appointment is scheduled for 1pm tomorrow. We'll see how it goes. You would think having class on a Saturday morning would be safe, but I guess not. I generally try to get evening classes or classes located in odd buildings for the same reason

 

[Einherjar86]

What I don't understand is why this division even became a problem. Acceptable Age of Irresponsibility Creep.

Several factors play into this controversial topic.

At the high school level, it is generally accepted that students are still living at home and that the burden of responsibility - while it should be gradually shifted to the student - remains with parents and teachers.

At the college level, responsibility lies with students; however (and this is a big however), I personally feel that teachers still assume a fair degree of responsibility because these are "fresh" students, many away from home for the first time, and many without the immediacy of home care provided by their parents. If students suddenly stop coming to class a month into the semester, teachers shouldn't simply shrug their shoulders and move on; the issue of absence needs to be attended to. It may end up being nothing more than laziness, but it may be something more severe.

College teaching demands a level of babysitting, for lack of a better word. As much as I admit going for college-level teaching to avoid babysitting, I've discovered that it's required of all students at all ages. Younger students might require more looking after, more checking up on; older students (as I had when I taught community college) might require some extra assistance in learning concepts more familiar to younger students.

It's tempting, when we witness absences or poor student conduct/commitment, to exorcise the demonic presence on the spot; but reckless exorcism often takes the body with it. It is incredibly difficult to give students the benefit of the doubt, and I'm not saying that we always should; but, if we are going to treat them like adults, then we should always give them the opportunity to express their own interpretation of the situation.

 

[Dak]

The problem is, this shifting pretty much never occurs in high school, and increasingly it isn't occurring in college either. Not that I am suggesting a 1 strike and you're out policy, but it has to stop somewhere. High school shouldn't even require babysitting, but now even college does - and now I have to essentially babysit people much older than me at work. It is possible to be too sympathetic. Everyone has problems, not everyone turns them into excuses.

 

[unknown]

let me just clarify that the drop policy is only for the first day and has been mandated at all four institutions where I have taught/currently teach. After that, the attendance policy is they get to miss two classes for whatever reason, and absences after that result in a loss of points.

Once a student is in my class, I will give them copious amounts of feedback on their essays and make sure every concept is crystal clear. However, they have to show a willingness to learn. If they meet me halfway, then I meet them halfway. If an "A" student drops off the face of the earth for a few weeks, then I would contact them. But in my experience, most students who fail just stop coming to class and never withdraw.

 

[unknown]

So the meeting is over. The gist was to hold class for the entire class even if it is a first session one day a week class. Didn't even bring up the students, but I did and told the Dean I haven't dropped them and am happy to meet with them outside of class and bring them up to speed

 

[CF87]

I go to a GED class. I just have to pass math and than have my high school equivalency.

 

[Einherjar86]

"Then" have your high school equivalency.

"Responsibility" has been elevated into a value, hypostatized into an absolute. I'm not saying students shouldn't be responsible, but the more we insist upon it, the more our students will resist. The point isn't to draw a line in the sand and declare: "pass/fail." Rather, we should take the time and effort to allow our students to be responsible. As teachers, we can only give so much time, and if students fail to reciprocate then punishment is justifiable. But the whole "line in the sand" methodology is hopeless and harmful.

 

[unknown]

I would argue most teachers don't draw firm lines in the sand (again, see my clarification above...but some classes, namely remedial or "non-credit" courses are designed by the college-not the instructor-as Pass/No Pass) and most are genuinely interested in the student's progress and development. However, you do have to push them. Vygotsky argued that wherever your students' abilities are, you should be teaching just a bit above that threshold. He called this the "zone of proximal development". The idea being that if you encourage and push students positively and within reason, they will rise to the challenge and succeed. If they're able to comfortable write a 3 page paper, then make the next paper 4 pages, and so on... Not only will they reach new academic heights, but they will also understand they have the ability within themselves to reach such heights.

 

[Dak]

The point isn't to draw a line in the sand and declare: "pass/fail."

It isn't the point, but it is necessary. The point of driving isn't to avoid wrecks, but it is necessary. The reality is that students can fail, even if you don't ever officially fail them even with a score of "0". But what has been done is reward behavior that will be subsequently repeated until they are "so far up shit creek", no amount of overbackwards bending teachers can save them.

I'm not a strict behavioralist or anything, but it does play a contingent part.

Rather, we should take the time and effort to allow our students to be responsible. As teachers, we can only give so much time, and if students fail to reciprocate then punishment is justifiable. But the whole "line in the sand" methodology is hopeless and harmful.

Of course. This is done by being completely upfront about all requirements, and holding the students to them. The flip side of allowing students to be responsible is also allowing them to fail (to be responsible). Suffering the consequences of failure helps prevent a pattern of failure from taking hold.

I would argue most teachers don't draw firm lines in the sand (again, see my clarification above...but some classes, namely remedial or "non-credit" courses are designed by the college-not the instructor-as Pass/No Pass) and most are genuinely interested in the student's progress and development. However, you do have to push them. Vygotsky argued that wherever your students' abilities are, you should be teaching just a bit above that threshold. He called this the "zone of proximal development". The idea being that if you encourage and push students positively and within reason, they will rise to the challenge and succeed. If they're able to comfortable write a 3 page paper, then make the next paper 4 pages, and so on... Not only will they reach new academic heights, but they will also understand they have the ability within themselves to reach such heights.

.

 

[Einherjar86]

I agree that you have to push them, and pushing them is about NOT drawing a line in the sand. If a "wreck" does occur, it's important to retrieve the student from the rubble and ask what happened; not to throw them into prison for reckless driving. You say "it has to stop somewhere"; but if the student is responsible, then the student decides when it stops, not the teacher. I will always hear a student out, even if their excuses are insufficient. The point is to only end things after a discussion, unless the student makes this absolutely impossible.