I'm going against everything I said here and for the purposes of this post, talking about Collo as what happens inside the classroom. In looking over the evaluations again, there were a few particular classes that got consistent, positive feedback--the discussion about grad school, Dr. Koterbay's session on writing a creative thesis, and the current events round table discussions. Others classes got mixed feedback, but feedback on these classes was all positive.
So what went right in these classes? A slightly more arrogant version of myself might note that I am featured in most of them and call it a day. I doubt that's the real story, though. My guess is that these classes filled a gap. They covered things or offered something that you don't or can't get elsewhere. I know from teaching Foundations of Research that there are a lot of questions about doing a creative thesis. I also know that Dr. Wachs and I are not great at explaining it. So having Scott come in and talk about that filled a real gap. A lot of you are planning to go to graduate school of some sort and having a forum for discussing a range of issues associated with that filled a real gap. The current events discussion is trickier to fit into this. You can talk with others about current events any time. But these discussions brought together a slightly more diverse group and were at least loosely moderated, which is perhaps not something you get elsewhere.
In addition, these particular classes were fairly small and I think that makes a difference. For the most part, you don't have a need for someone to come lecture to you about anything for an hour. Even though we got the size down a bit, I think the numbers were still a barrier to the career services sessions being more effective. They ended up being lectures instead of discussions. The smaller classes, overall, seem to have gotten more positive feedback.
If this is right, then at least one thing we need to do to improve Collo is aim for smaller classes that satisfy a real need or fill some gap. Class size is its own logistical issue that we'll have to figure out when we get to the nuts and bolts of designing the course. But what kinds of classes would actually fill a need for you is something I need your help with. (That means at some point I need some actual suggestions.)
One idea is to have some classes that cover some really practical things or "life skills." We could have classes on financial literacy, buying a car/house, doing taxes, navigating health insurance, basic car maintenance, home maintenance, etc. Obviously we wouldn't cover all or these in a semester or a year, but we could do a few classes like this a year and not repeat the same ones every year. I have no idea if people would be interested in classes like this or not.
Other ideas? Would it be helpful to have more opportunities to talk about study abroad with folks from International programs? Would career focused sessions be more helpful if they were smaller? Are there other things we should be devoting some class time to? Other gaps we can fill?
Wednesday, May 28, 2014
Thursday, May 22, 2014
Keeping time
I first read this article by Joel Marks years ago when I was just starting to teach. As a teaching assistant, I could implement exactly none of these ideas. By the time I got my own classes, I had forgotten most of what was in the article. I discovered it again after some of those first classes crashed and burned. I was never brave enough to fully implement this kind of scheme in a philosophy class, but I did adopt the use of self-reporting and some other elements of contract grading. I was reminded again of the article while thinking about Collo and I think the course might be well suited for something like this approach to grading.
There is a lot of interesting stuff in the article, but the part that interests me here is the strategy of determining grades based entirely on the number of hours spent on the class. I like that idea a lot. It works by having a variety of assignments and a number of hours that need to be spent on each to earn a particular grade. Students are in charge of keeping up with and reporting the hours they spend on the class. For Collo, I imagine this would work by establishing broad goals for the course and a certain number of hours you need to spend on each and in total to receive various grades.
I see a number of benefits here. One is that it is a way of implementing the menu approach I mentioned in a previous post. You could choose where to put your time and energy. You could go to more classes, work on a group project, do more service, go to more outside events, talk about those with others, etc. You would not all have to do the exact same thing and you could alter what you spend time on from semester to semester. Hopefully with more flexibility on how you spend your time, less of your time will be "wasted."
Another benefit is that it provides an easy way to spread things out over the entire semester instead of allowing you to ignore Collo until you can't ignore it any more and then scramble to meet all the requirements. We could divide the hours required for certain grades into weeks or quarters or some other subset of the semester and require at least some minimum number of hours throughout the course.
One challenge is figuring out exactly how many hours you should be spending on Collo. According to this document, "the rule of thumb" is that you should count on spending "an average of two hours per week for every hour spent in a reading or lecture class." I know that's a bit of a joke as a general standard, but for Collo, that would mean 3 hours/per week, or 45 hours/per semester. I really have no idea if that is a crazy number or not. What say you? Could an approach like this work? If so, how many hours is it reasonable to require you to spend on Collo related tasks (keeping in mind that I would like to expand the definition of "Collo related task.")?
There is a lot of interesting stuff in the article, but the part that interests me here is the strategy of determining grades based entirely on the number of hours spent on the class. I like that idea a lot. It works by having a variety of assignments and a number of hours that need to be spent on each to earn a particular grade. Students are in charge of keeping up with and reporting the hours they spend on the class. For Collo, I imagine this would work by establishing broad goals for the course and a certain number of hours you need to spend on each and in total to receive various grades.
I see a number of benefits here. One is that it is a way of implementing the menu approach I mentioned in a previous post. You could choose where to put your time and energy. You could go to more classes, work on a group project, do more service, go to more outside events, talk about those with others, etc. You would not all have to do the exact same thing and you could alter what you spend time on from semester to semester. Hopefully with more flexibility on how you spend your time, less of your time will be "wasted."
Another benefit is that it provides an easy way to spread things out over the entire semester instead of allowing you to ignore Collo until you can't ignore it any more and then scramble to meet all the requirements. We could divide the hours required for certain grades into weeks or quarters or some other subset of the semester and require at least some minimum number of hours throughout the course.
One challenge is figuring out exactly how many hours you should be spending on Collo. According to this document, "the rule of thumb" is that you should count on spending "an average of two hours per week for every hour spent in a reading or lecture class." I know that's a bit of a joke as a general standard, but for Collo, that would mean 3 hours/per week, or 45 hours/per semester. I really have no idea if that is a crazy number or not. What say you? Could an approach like this work? If so, how many hours is it reasonable to require you to spend on Collo related tasks (keeping in mind that I would like to expand the definition of "Collo related task.")?
Monday, May 19, 2014
Burden shifting
I've been mulling over Rebecca Schuman's "Confessions of a Grade Inflator" for a few days now. It's honest and insightful and I can relate to a lot of what she says. I don't, however, share her admiration for those professors with the "intestinal fortitude" to give out 'C's. Some of them, sure. But the mere willingness to make it difficult to get an 'A' is not by itself admirable, and the reason it isn't connects with another reason I sometimes tend towards grade inflation.
My worry with teachers who pride themselves on giving out 'C's is that they sometimes lack the self-awareness to realize that students aren't succeeding because they are not teaching effectively. Poor performance is automatically attributed to some failure on the student's part and never as a reflection of poor teaching. That is not admirable.
My own tendency is to take things in the opposite direction. I see disengaged students not doing well in a class and immediately think I must be doing something wrong, that I have somehow failed in the design or implementation of the course. This inclines me to give students a break on grades since I'm nagged by the feeling that it isn't their fault but mine.
Obviously the truth is likely to fall somewhere between these two extremes, but given my tendency towards the latter extreme, I have tried a lot of things over the years to mitigate its effects. I've settled on some version of contract grading as my favorite. The basic idea is to establish at the beginning of the course exactly what is required for attaining various grades and allow students to essentially choose the grade they want and then proceed down the path to attaining that grade. Most assignments are graded pass/fail and, if done right, no student should ever have any doubt about exactly where she stands and what grade she will get. All of this goes a long way towards eliminating the kinds of complaints that often lead to grade inflation.
It has a lot of other benefits as well, not least of which is that it gives some power back to students. To some extent I've already implemented something like this approach in Collo. Grades are spelled out clearly, assignments are basically pass/fail and there are a variety of ways to achieve the various grades. While I think this has in general been an improvement, it doesn't quite work as well as I would like it to. One problem is that the "menu" that is currently available is too short. We need more options. I would actually be fine with a more genuine contract each semester where what you do for Collo is entirely up to you (subject to my approval, of course.) I'm skeptical that that can work, at least immediately. But we can get closer to that if we can expand the classes offered and the range of things you might do that count for some kind of Collo credit.
I also think this is the key to making Collo less repetitive. If you think Collo wastes your time--and many of you do think that--then figure out how to do something with it that isn't wasting your time. There's a good chance I'll be open to that. As a bonus, I get to shift the burden back to you--not just for grades, but the direction of the course itself. Nifty trick, that burden shifting.
My worry with teachers who pride themselves on giving out 'C's is that they sometimes lack the self-awareness to realize that students aren't succeeding because they are not teaching effectively. Poor performance is automatically attributed to some failure on the student's part and never as a reflection of poor teaching. That is not admirable.
My own tendency is to take things in the opposite direction. I see disengaged students not doing well in a class and immediately think I must be doing something wrong, that I have somehow failed in the design or implementation of the course. This inclines me to give students a break on grades since I'm nagged by the feeling that it isn't their fault but mine.
Obviously the truth is likely to fall somewhere between these two extremes, but given my tendency towards the latter extreme, I have tried a lot of things over the years to mitigate its effects. I've settled on some version of contract grading as my favorite. The basic idea is to establish at the beginning of the course exactly what is required for attaining various grades and allow students to essentially choose the grade they want and then proceed down the path to attaining that grade. Most assignments are graded pass/fail and, if done right, no student should ever have any doubt about exactly where she stands and what grade she will get. All of this goes a long way towards eliminating the kinds of complaints that often lead to grade inflation.
It has a lot of other benefits as well, not least of which is that it gives some power back to students. To some extent I've already implemented something like this approach in Collo. Grades are spelled out clearly, assignments are basically pass/fail and there are a variety of ways to achieve the various grades. While I think this has in general been an improvement, it doesn't quite work as well as I would like it to. One problem is that the "menu" that is currently available is too short. We need more options. I would actually be fine with a more genuine contract each semester where what you do for Collo is entirely up to you (subject to my approval, of course.) I'm skeptical that that can work, at least immediately. But we can get closer to that if we can expand the classes offered and the range of things you might do that count for some kind of Collo credit.
I also think this is the key to making Collo less repetitive. If you think Collo wastes your time--and many of you do think that--then figure out how to do something with it that isn't wasting your time. There's a good chance I'll be open to that. As a bonus, I get to shift the burden back to you--not just for grades, but the direction of the course itself. Nifty trick, that burden shifting.
Friday, May 16, 2014
Friday open thread...
So I've read through the SAIs and there was some really good feedback and suggestions. Thanks for that. I would love to hear more and be able to have a conversation about some of the suggestions/worries/criticisms of the course. So here is an open thread where we can do that, provided you leave some comments. (My prediction is that you won't, but here it is anyway, in hopes that you will. I think anonymous comments are enabled if that helps.)
Tuesday, May 13, 2014
The differential gear
The differential gear is a beautiful, elegant solution to the problem created by the fact that the wheels on a car need to rotate at different speeds. When you turn, for example, the outside wheel needs to rotate faster than the inside wheel. The differential gear allows that to happen.
I came to appreciate the differential gear in an undergraduate class I took on pragmatism. I don't remember much else from the class--C.S. Pierce's name is pronounced like 'purse,' William James is a nut, and that's about it. By far the most memorable thing about the class was the differential gear. I don't remember exactly how the conversation started, but it ended with the professor pulling out a laminated piece of paper he kept in his front shirt pocket that had a diagram of a differential gear on it. He put it in his pocket every morning and had done so for decades. It apparently really bothered him that he couldn't keep straight exactly how the gear worked--how the gears meshed, turned, etc. So he made a cheat sheet and kept it with him for all those times he happened to think about the differential gear and couldn't quite get a handle on how it worked.
Other than confirming that philosophers are in general a strange bunch, this episode resonates with me because I think it embodies what it means to be curious, motivated, self-directed, etc. He found something he was interested in, was bothered by the fact that he didn't understand it, figured out how it worked and made sure this knowledge wasn't just fleeting. He didn't learn it in a automotive mechanics class and there was no test he needed to memorize the workings of the gear in order to pass. It was born out of a desire to understand something and the motivation to do so.
As a bonus, it helped make him one hell of an interesting person. (He also had an obsession with the Levitron and had three different ones on his office desk, each of which he was happy to demonstrate if you visited.) I seem to recall him being a bit embarrassed by the fact that he had revealed his laminated differential gear diagram and, in response to the laughter, telling us we needed to cultivate more eccentricities. I think he was right.
I'm not exactly sure what the point of all of this is, except that I would love to teach a class where I could give some credit for deciding to carry a laminated diagram of a differential gear with you everywhere you go.
I came to appreciate the differential gear in an undergraduate class I took on pragmatism. I don't remember much else from the class--C.S. Pierce's name is pronounced like 'purse,' William James is a nut, and that's about it. By far the most memorable thing about the class was the differential gear. I don't remember exactly how the conversation started, but it ended with the professor pulling out a laminated piece of paper he kept in his front shirt pocket that had a diagram of a differential gear on it. He put it in his pocket every morning and had done so for decades. It apparently really bothered him that he couldn't keep straight exactly how the gear worked--how the gears meshed, turned, etc. So he made a cheat sheet and kept it with him for all those times he happened to think about the differential gear and couldn't quite get a handle on how it worked.
Other than confirming that philosophers are in general a strange bunch, this episode resonates with me because I think it embodies what it means to be curious, motivated, self-directed, etc. He found something he was interested in, was bothered by the fact that he didn't understand it, figured out how it worked and made sure this knowledge wasn't just fleeting. He didn't learn it in a automotive mechanics class and there was no test he needed to memorize the workings of the gear in order to pass. It was born out of a desire to understand something and the motivation to do so.
As a bonus, it helped make him one hell of an interesting person. (He also had an obsession with the Levitron and had three different ones on his office desk, each of which he was happy to demonstrate if you visited.) I seem to recall him being a bit embarrassed by the fact that he had revealed his laminated differential gear diagram and, in response to the laughter, telling us we needed to cultivate more eccentricities. I think he was right.
I'm not exactly sure what the point of all of this is, except that I would love to teach a class where I could give some credit for deciding to carry a laminated diagram of a differential gear with you everywhere you go.
Friday, May 9, 2014
Collo is everywhere
There seems to be a burgeoning (by which I mean two people) movement on Twitter to make Collo "online." This got me thinking about what that would possibly mean, and that got me thinking about a more fundamental question--where is Collo?
My sense is that we tend to think of it as existing in a classroom and since many of you don't particularly like having to be in the classroom once a week, you suggest making it online. Then Collo would exist on D2L, I guess. So the options are whether Collo should exist in a classroom or on D2L, or maybe some combination of the two. I don't really like those options.
I don't think a lot of what Collo attempts to accomplish is well suited to a large lecture hall. There are times when it is beneficial to get everyone in one room, but those times are not abundant. There are some things I think we can do in smaller classes, though that raises a number of logistical problems. In general, though, I don't think the essence of Collo (does Collo have a haecceity? Colloqueity?) is in any classroom.
It also doesn't (and can't) live entirely online. My sense here is that there was a time when the D2L discussion boards dominated Collo (they shouldn't) and that inclines some of you to think of Collo as existing there (it doesn't.) Other than that, there isn't a lot of the course or the objectives that are really conducive to being online.
I think the desire for Collo to be online is really just a desire to not have to come to class at 5:15 on Tuesdays in Rogers-Stout. I'm actually sympathetic to that, but that is a lot different than moving it online. A lot of what Collo is or should be about can and should happen outside of the classroom and D2L. It should happen when you meet with each other, when you go to campus events/lectures and just generally when you're being "consciously Honors." That is, Collo is everywhere. It's in and out of the classroom, it's on and offline, it's (I need a third thing because lists are better in threes but, alas, I don't have one.)
So instead of trying to move Collo online, let's think more holistically about how to frame and structure the class so that it no longer tempts you to think that it exists in Rogers-Stout at 5:15 or on a D2L discussion board.
(Note to self: use fewer parentheses.)
My sense is that we tend to think of it as existing in a classroom and since many of you don't particularly like having to be in the classroom once a week, you suggest making it online. Then Collo would exist on D2L, I guess. So the options are whether Collo should exist in a classroom or on D2L, or maybe some combination of the two. I don't really like those options.
I don't think a lot of what Collo attempts to accomplish is well suited to a large lecture hall. There are times when it is beneficial to get everyone in one room, but those times are not abundant. There are some things I think we can do in smaller classes, though that raises a number of logistical problems. In general, though, I don't think the essence of Collo (does Collo have a haecceity? Colloqueity?) is in any classroom.
It also doesn't (and can't) live entirely online. My sense here is that there was a time when the D2L discussion boards dominated Collo (they shouldn't) and that inclines some of you to think of Collo as existing there (it doesn't.) Other than that, there isn't a lot of the course or the objectives that are really conducive to being online.
I think the desire for Collo to be online is really just a desire to not have to come to class at 5:15 on Tuesdays in Rogers-Stout. I'm actually sympathetic to that, but that is a lot different than moving it online. A lot of what Collo is or should be about can and should happen outside of the classroom and D2L. It should happen when you meet with each other, when you go to campus events/lectures and just generally when you're being "consciously Honors." That is, Collo is everywhere. It's in and out of the classroom, it's on and offline, it's (I need a third thing because lists are better in threes but, alas, I don't have one.)
So instead of trying to move Collo online, let's think more holistically about how to frame and structure the class so that it no longer tempts you to think that it exists in Rogers-Stout at 5:15 or on a D2L discussion board.
(Note to self: use fewer parentheses.)
Tuesday, May 6, 2014
Consciously Honors
So what is Collo and why is it here? We can start with what it currently does or attempts to do and work backwards from there. It serves as a kind of orientation for freshmen and transfer students. It encourages you to prepare for your future both as a student and after graduation. It encourages you to be engaged with the wider intellectual community. It encourages you to foster a sense of community within the Honors College. It encourages you to serve the community in some way. (And it gives us a time every semester that we know all of you are available.)
I don't think those are terrible things for a course to (attempt to) accomplish, but it's a pretty long list and such a list encourages thinking about the course as a series of boxes you must check every semester. Grading all your checked boxes also encourages me to think of it this way, and I don't like the idea of the course being a bunch of boxes to check. So we need to consolidate the list and put it under some larger umbrella that makes better sense of it all.
Some aspects of the course are unlikely to change--the orientation-type stuff, e.g., but those things comprise only a small part of the course. The rest of your time is largely filled with all the other things and it's those things that we need to make sense of. So here's a first stab at a unifying theme--be a more interesting person. Be curious, ask questions, try new things, learn new things, develop new skills, experience new things, etc.
I think that's what education should do. There is a lot you can learn outside of class. There is a lot you can learn from your classmates. There is a lot you can learn from others on campus. There is a lot you can learn by serving the community. In short, there are a lot opportunities to do new things, learn new things and develop new skills. The current syllabus attempts to capture some of this, but it only captures a fraction of the things you could be doing to meet this goal. Ultimately I would like to widen the scope of the requirements and use this course as a nudge towards doing those things.
As I've said from day one, this class gives you credit for doing things you should be doing anyway. I think you should be curious, inquisitive and motivated to make yourself a more interesting person and I think, at bottom, that's what an honors education is about. That's still really broad, but it gets close to what I think the course can and should do. It should encourage and motivate you to take advantage of all the opportunities you have to engage, experiment, interact and learn. To put things even more concisely, maybe we can think of Collo as an attempt to make you consciously Honors. That is, it's an attempt to get you to think about what you're doing, what you could be doing, why you're doing it and how it relates to your education, broadly construed.
So that's a start to answering the Stockdale questions. Maybe it's kooky talk, but for now it's spring and I'm pretending the tomatoes I plant aren't going to once again be decimated by blight.
I don't think those are terrible things for a course to (attempt to) accomplish, but it's a pretty long list and such a list encourages thinking about the course as a series of boxes you must check every semester. Grading all your checked boxes also encourages me to think of it this way, and I don't like the idea of the course being a bunch of boxes to check. So we need to consolidate the list and put it under some larger umbrella that makes better sense of it all.
Some aspects of the course are unlikely to change--the orientation-type stuff, e.g., but those things comprise only a small part of the course. The rest of your time is largely filled with all the other things and it's those things that we need to make sense of. So here's a first stab at a unifying theme--be a more interesting person. Be curious, ask questions, try new things, learn new things, develop new skills, experience new things, etc.
I think that's what education should do. There is a lot you can learn outside of class. There is a lot you can learn from your classmates. There is a lot you can learn from others on campus. There is a lot you can learn by serving the community. In short, there are a lot opportunities to do new things, learn new things and develop new skills. The current syllabus attempts to capture some of this, but it only captures a fraction of the things you could be doing to meet this goal. Ultimately I would like to widen the scope of the requirements and use this course as a nudge towards doing those things.
As I've said from day one, this class gives you credit for doing things you should be doing anyway. I think you should be curious, inquisitive and motivated to make yourself a more interesting person and I think, at bottom, that's what an honors education is about. That's still really broad, but it gets close to what I think the course can and should do. It should encourage and motivate you to take advantage of all the opportunities you have to engage, experiment, interact and learn. To put things even more concisely, maybe we can think of Collo as an attempt to make you consciously Honors. That is, it's an attempt to get you to think about what you're doing, what you could be doing, why you're doing it and how it relates to your education, broadly construed.
So that's a start to answering the Stockdale questions. Maybe it's kooky talk, but for now it's spring and I'm pretending the tomatoes I plant aren't going to once again be decimated by blight.
Thursday, May 1, 2014
The Stockdale Questions
In the 1992 vice presidential debate, Admiral James Stockdale--Ross Perot's running mate--began by asking, "Who am I? Why am I here?" This was later parodied by Phil Hartman on SNL, but they're good questions we should all ask more often. I give them as advice for writing and revising papers--if you can't answer those questions about a sentence or paragraph, it shouldn't be there. It now strikes me that they are equally good questions to ask about a class and about a syllabus, especially a class as nebulous as Collo. So to open what will hopefully be an extended conversation (or soliloquy) about what this class can and should be, I'm starting with the Stockdale questions.
Let me ruin the surprise and say upfront that I don't have (good) answers. The easy answer is that it's a class UHS, Midways and FPAs have to take every semester because someone put it in the curriculum, but that's not very helpful. I think the better answers will involve thinking about the goals of an Honors education and how what we do (or could do) in Collo contributes to those.
These are big questions that we aren't going to answer any time soon. For now, let these questions serve as an invitation to join the discussion (or at least follow along.) Whatever Collo ultimately becomes, I want that process to be transparent and for those who will have to live with the results to at least have an opportunity to be a part of those changes. I make no promises about the frequency, relevance, originality or linearity of the posts to come over the course of the summer, but I hope those of you in Collo will occasionally check in and play along.
Let me ruin the surprise and say upfront that I don't have (good) answers. The easy answer is that it's a class UHS, Midways and FPAs have to take every semester because someone put it in the curriculum, but that's not very helpful. I think the better answers will involve thinking about the goals of an Honors education and how what we do (or could do) in Collo contributes to those.
These are big questions that we aren't going to answer any time soon. For now, let these questions serve as an invitation to join the discussion (or at least follow along.) Whatever Collo ultimately becomes, I want that process to be transparent and for those who will have to live with the results to at least have an opportunity to be a part of those changes. I make no promises about the frequency, relevance, originality or linearity of the posts to come over the course of the summer, but I hope those of you in Collo will occasionally check in and play along.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)