What do honors students need?

So here's one person's definition of what an honors student should be:

a highly motivated, academically talented, intrinsically motivated, advanced, and curious student who has broad interests, a passion for learning, and excitement about ideas. The student should also be sufficiently different or unique from the institutional norm to need, indeed require, a different, more challenging curriculum and other learning opportunities to satisfy his or her drive to learn, know, and do. 

Obviously the definition is not necessarily descriptive, and certainly not universally so. Still, as the Platonic form of an honors student, it seems pretty good.

For Collo purposes, it's the second part of the definition I really like. I think the way to think about the curriculum in general and Collo in particular is to think about what needs the ideal honors student has and how we can best satisfy those needs. We need to identify needs that aren't being met through other courses and figure out if and how we can satisfy them through Collo. That's what it's there for.

This is really just another way of stating and maybe partially answering the Stockdale questions. Collo is here to help meet the needs of a unique population of students. That's the criteria by which we should measure assignments, requirements, classes, etc. We need to be clear about what needs we are addressing and how the requirements are attempting to do that.

June was for rumination, July is for action. It's time to start making the syllabus and thinking about the concrete particulars of the course. That means now is an excellent time to break the impressive streak of not commenting at all. Knowing is better than guessing and it would be great to know what needs you think Collo could satisfy. What's happened in the past that has met the criteria above? What's happened that clearly hasn't? Keep in mind that we're dealing with the ideal version of you. So pretend you are instantiating the Form of an honors student and think about what you want or need in this course that you are not or cannot get elsewhere.    

Putting the colloquy in colloquium

col·lo·qui·um  (k-lkw-m)

n. pl. col·lo·qui·ums or col·lo·qui·a (-kw-)

1. An informal meeting for the exchange of views.

2. An academic seminar on a broad field of study, usually led by a different lecturer at each meeting.

col·lo·quy  (kl-kw)

n. pl. col·lo·quies

1. A conversation, especially a formal one.

2. A written dialogue.

Dictionaries don't solve real problems and I instantly hate papers that begin with dictionary definitions. So with that understanding...

It would be nice if Collo were actually more of a colloquium, with a bit more colloquy. 

I'm not sure how to make that happen. In its current incarnation, the current events requirement seems to get closest to this, but I'm not sure it does a particularly good job of it. The informal round table discussions we had were fairly successful, I think, and we could do more of those, and in general, expand the discussions to a wider range of topics. Maybe we can redefine 'current events' as anything that currently interests you. But the logistics of doing that with 160 people are a problem. 

This is an area where moving things online seems to be a good solution, and in part we do that with the D2L discussion boards. I don't think they quite work, though. I take at least partial responsibility for that. I hate D2L. Passionately. That probably keeps me from trying harder to improve things on D2L. But more than that, I think the format is not particularly conducive to real engagement.  

So I like the idea of the discussion boards in theory. There exist plenty of vibrant online communities where really good discussions take place. I have no problem with online colloquy. But we need a better avenue for that. Suggestions welcome. It doesn't have to be one place or one thing. Everyone doesn't have to participate. Ideally these would be discussions initiated and led by you and driven by your interests, and hopefully we end up with pockets of good, engaging, ongoing discussions on a variety of issues and topics. 

For those who want more of Collo to be online, here's your chance. How do we make this happen? 

  

If you build it

One of the enduring Collo complaints is about the actual time spent in class. One way to deal with that is to make the classes better and more worthwhile. That's certainly something I've tried and will continue to try to do, at least in part by shifting the burden to you.

But there are two parts to this equation. The complaint, I think, is that you are required to attend classes that you find not worth your time to attend. In addition to making the classes themselves better, it might also be worth thinking about the attendance requirement. I would like to think that if we offer valuable classes, we don't also need to require attendance. Of course, there is the danger that you won't realize beforehand that a class is valuable and you'll not attend when you would have gotten something out of it.

The price of avoiding that, though, is a lot of folks in class who don't want (and maybe don't need) to be there. Having people there who are there entirely of their own volition tends to make the class better, I think. Apathy and resentment can be contagious and minimizing their presence in the classroom is important. Giving you more choices about the classes you attend was a step in that direction. Better classes would accomplish some of that, too. And maybe that's enough. Or maybe we need to pare down the requirement even more.

The big worry with not requiring attendance is that there will be classes where no one shows up at all, or that we have many classes where very few people show up. That's obviously not ideal. On the other hand, twisting arms to get people in the seats is also not ideal. What would be ideal is for you to come to classes as often as you would if they were required, only you come because you want to and not because you have to. I guess my hope is that if we get the classes right, we won't need the requirement.

All of this would depend upon trust and maybe a little faith, which is definitely not my strong suit. You'd have to trust me that the classes are designed with your wants and needs in mind and I'd have to trust you to recognize that and act on it. Maybe someone can play the role of Terence Mann and convince me that people will come.



  

The "selfie generation?"

There is a lot to like here (possibly behind a paywall now). If more universities are attempting to change curricula so that they better connect with students' lives, yea for them. But...

(1) "Selfie generation?" Really? I'm not a millennial and I'm pissed off for them. It seems pejorative and about a breath away from yelling at those kids to stay off your lawn. I also doubt that students today are any more "me-centric" than the generations before them were at 18 years old. Hell, I'm in my 30s and I'm blogging and tweeting, which on the narcissistic scale is somewhere just below looking at your reflection in every window you walk by.

(2) The article has a lot of non-millennials talking about what this generation wants and needs in a curriculum. Speaking for others is always fun, and guessing what others want is good sport, too, but maybe somebody should actually talk to students about what they want and need. There is surprisingly little of that here. The older I get the more I realize that I suck at guessing what students want. It's much easier to just ask. (Though, of course, they might not answer. Yes, I'm talking to you.)

(3) My guess (see, it's fun) is that the changes these universities are making are for the better, but mainly because they are taking the time to think about the curriculum at all and to make thoughtful changes. I'd guess it doesn't have much to do with some revelation that kids these days are so me-centric. Curricula get stale. They need to be rethought and revised from time to time. This needs to happen even if the next generation happens to be incredibly other-centric.

(4) On a less critical note, this seems absolutely right to me:

Some curricular experts note that students' professional preparation, academic training, and personal development need not be separated as much as they often are.

Part of what we're trying to do with Collo is help connect all of these dots. Easier said than done.

So I'm on board in general with rethinking the curriculum along the lines suggested here, but I doubt that this has much at all to do with the unique needs of this generation. These students need what all students need--a curriculum that makes sense and teachers who can teach it effectively.