Thursday, March 8, 2012

The plugged-in and the unplugged: Is there a great divide in the classrom?

The discussion about computers in the classroom has provoked a lot of thought and discussion. A former student disagreed strongly with my position on the subject, which generated a long discussion thread on my Facebook page. I talked to classes about the issue, as well as some trusted colleagues. The discussion continues to evolve, but let me tell you a little about where it stands right now.
The most important thing I learned for the discussion with my former student was that she wants to know up front, before the class starts, what kind of a classroom the teacher runs. She thinks it’s unfair that she has to register for the course and pay her money sight unseen, and then she can’t get a refund if the class isn’t what she wants. I see her point there. Classes vary widely in terms of method. Some teachers proscribe the use of personal electronic devices, some tolerate them grudgingly, and some encourage them. But classes also vary widely in a lot of ways. Some are lecture based, some are discussion based, some are experiential. Is the College to advertise every professorial quirk, every tendency, every change? (“Professor Gray occasionally tells the same anecdote twice to the same class in the same semester. He also makes frequent mawkish reference to his children. Those who are offended by references to hunting and fishing are advised to avoid his classes.”)
I don’t know the answer for all of this. But right now, a see a big split in the classroom: those who want to use electronic devices during class, and those who are offended by the use of electronic devices in the classroom.
Some might be tempted to jump to the conclusion that it’s older “non-traditional” students who are bothered by surfing, texting, Facebooking in class, and that younger “traditional college-age” students are pro-electronics. T’ain’t necessarily so. When I took this discussion to the classroom, I learned some surprising things.
The most interesting discussion was in a small class (about seven students) that is a really good class. All members of the class participate, and the discussions are… animated is a mild word. Sometimes everybody is talking at once and I have to shout to be heard. I love the class because it’s a free-for-all, and exciting things happen. When I opened the subject of electronic devices in class all hell broke loose. Turns out I have one student in that class who is devoted to her electronic devices, especially her Smartphone, and is a “multi-tasker” i.e. a person who wants to be on her phone texting and surfing during class. I also have student who refuses to have a cell phone because she believes that cell phones and other technologies are making humans stupider and stupider. Both students are traditional college age students.
The rest of the students fall in the middle: those who own and use technology, but also have questions about where the technology path leads. The most interesting thing I learned from this discussion is that the main reason students are bothered by smartphone use in class is that they feel it is rude to the instructor, and rudeness upsets them, so this anxiety disrupts their learning. The student who loves to surf during class COULD NOT understand how this could be true. She kept repeating that her activity only involved HER, and that her actions could not affect others. No matter how many ways it was explained to her, she could not understand it.
This discussion led me to wonder if there is a significant split in the students I see in my classroom. If this split exists, then I would call it the plugged in vs. the unplugged; those who want to be involved with electronic devices during class, and those who think electronic device use during class is disruptive and a negative influence on learning. Note that it doesn’t necessarily follow that those who find electronic devices used during class disruptive are not adept users of these technologies. Nor does it follow that those who surf during class are the most proficient at using technology to enhance learning.
Thinking about this classroom split made me wonder if it would be useful to teach two different ways to two different groups. What if I could create two different kinds of classrooms, one for the plugged in and one for the unplugged? What if the student could know before signing up for the class what kind of a class he or she was getting? And could I do it? I know I can teach in the unplugged classroom, but how would the plugged classroom work?
I decided to run an experiment. I’ll let you know the results in the next post.

Wednesday, February 8, 2012

Is teacher a control-freak? Computers in the classroom.

Today I’d like to talk about computers in the classroom. Recently, the English Department at CWC asked to move all our classes into classrooms which did not have student computers. Ultimately our request was denied, but what’s important to this discussion is why would we want to do that?
I know that for many of our students, computers in the classroom have been as commonplace as chalk was when I was in grade school. For those of us who started teaching before the advent of the classroom computer, some of the changes have been a bit disturbing. It’s really difficult to teach a class when most of the students heads are buried in the computer.
Now there is nothing new about distractions in the classroom. I used to put my copy of MAD magazine behind my textbook so teacher couldn’t see it. Staring out the window was popular, as was doodling as a pretense of note taking. What’s different about a computer as a distraction?
Well, the computer is so darned compelling, for one thing. It’s hard to sit with it right there in front of you and not turn it on and make it do stuff. I have the same problem in my office. I should be reading the textbook, or grading papers, but here’s this amazing piece of technology right here in my face. Facebook and YouTube are just a couple of clicks a way.
It is also true that most students have this amazing technology in their pockets. Take away the classroom computer, it’s often argued, and they’ll just open their iPad or smartphone and do the same thing.
I’m not so sure of that. There is something about a school-owned computer on your desk that says “Go ahead and use this, we want you to. Help yourself, check the sports news, like your friends status, do whatever you want, it’s OK with us.”
The drag is that sometimes it’s great for students to have the computer on their desks. I love it when they go out and find more information about a subject, or look up a word, or get a picture of what their talking about. I hate to shut down this kind of activity, but, seriously, sometimes I can’t get a single student to look at me even though I am openly begging for their attention.
We have a new piece of technology that I am hoping will be the answer. If gives the instructor more control over the students computers, and what is really cool is that it allows the instructor to put individual student’s screens up on the big screen I front of the class. That means a student will be able to go find something interesting and be able to show it to the rest of the class. That would be great.
It also means I would be able to shut off student’s access to the internet at my discretion. I know that sounds like kind of a power grab, but I just don’t know how else to get a handle on the situation.
So, what do you think? Should teachers be able to control student's internet access?

Thursday, January 12, 2012

On "Niceness"

Am I a nice guy? Is your teacher a nice teacher? What is niceness?
I ask this question, because I sense some confusion about the role of “niceness” in teaching and learning situations. I mean “niceness” as opposed to “toughness.” I hear students referring to teachers by these terms a lot.
As near as I can tell, some students think a nice teacher is one who won’t flunk a student, no matter what. A tough teacher is one who will flunk almost everybody then, I guess.
How do you know if a teacher is nice or tough? Well, I guess a nice teacher smiles a lot, and is gentle –sounding, and encouraging. A tough teacher scowls, and demands that you do better.
Hmmm.
One of things I had to learn when I first started teaching was that I scare some people. I’m a large man, and I have big voice, and if you give me some authority and put me in front of a podium, I scare some people. I think I scared some people into doing better, and I scared some people into dropping the class immediately. This happened kind of haphazardly.
Later, as I started to learn more about teaching, I learned to most important lesson there is: listen to your students. In listening, I finally discovered that some were afraid of me. I am an actor as well as a teacher, so I decided to fix the problem of students fearing me by “acting” the part of a nice teacher. When I did that, I found something else was happening. Some students expected that I would pass them no matter what because they now considered me “nice teacher.” I got a lot of surprised emails and phone calls at the end of the semester from students who hadn’t turned much in all semester but were surprised to find that they had failed the course.
So, how do I send the right message? Some students like teachers who act tough, because if they pass the class, they feel like they accomplished something special. Some students like nice teachers because they need encouragement in order to do well. How do I be all things to all students?
I try to let students know that I like them (I do, I like students, why else would I do this), and that I care about their learning. I also try to help them understand that if I didn’t care about them, I wouldn’t flunk them.
What? I flunk because I care?
Well, yes. Believe me, it would be a lot easier to not give students failing grades. I could just pass them all through. But would that be helping anyone? Students really will need the skills that are taught in my classes. If they don’t have them, they are not going to do well in the rest of their college career, or in life. So just passing students on through would be harmful to students. Easy for me, but harmful for students.
So if I’m “nice” it might send the wrong message, and if I’m “tough” it might send the wrong message. I guess I’ll just have to be me, and do the best I can to help students understand that passing the course isn’t about whether I like them or not, or whether I’m “nice” or “tough.” It’s about what the student learns. My role is to help the student learn as much as possible.

Tuesday, January 10, 2012

The grading scale

It’s always difficult when it comes time to assign final grades. The individual grades on papers are easier, because the student gets another chance, no matter what. If a student gets a D on his or her first paper, there are more papers to be written, and more opportunities to improve. Final grades are so…final.
I try to be clear about what my expectations are in terms of grades, but it seems as though there are always some misconceptions. I think that sometimes students and teachers are working on different grading scales:
Grading scale as perceived by some students:
A = I did all the work that was expected of me at the minimum level. I turned in all the papers, most of them on time, even though a couple of them weren’t very good, because I didn’t have enough time to work on them. My attendance was pretty good. Also, I’m a nice person.
B = I did most of the work, but there was one paper I just couldn’t finish. Also I was sick a lot, but I called you to let know I was sick. My attendance was OK. Also, I’m a nice person.
C = I turned in half the papers. I’ve been really busy, and I didn’t know college was going to be so hard. I’m a really nice person.
D = I’m pretty sure I turned something in, at some point during this class. I really need a D so I can save my financial aid/eligibility for athletics /GPA. I am a very, very, nice person and I plan to be much better in the future.
F = I am so sorry. I completely forgot I signed up for this class. Can I get an incomplete? Can I get you anything? Can I wash your car?
Grading scale as perceived by some teachers:
A = Great job totally kissing my butt this semester.
B = Great job not bothering me all semester.
C = I want to flunk you, but I can’t find anyway to justify doing so based on my syllabus. Damn.
D = Nice try, Skippy.
F = Bwah hah hahahahah HAH!
OK, so maybe I’m exaggerating a little. It does seem that a little of both of these scales creeps into class from time to time. Here’s The Real Grading Scale, as honestly as I can write it..
The Real Grading Scale
A = A complete portfolio of outstanding work, far above normal expectations. It may not be perfect, but I enjoyed reading this. Wow.
B = A complete portfolio of work that you tried really hard on, some of which is really good, some of which could use a little work.
C = A complete portfolio of work that is OK, but I sense you could have done better if you tried, OR a complete portfolio of work that doesn’t quite measure up but I KNOW you worked so hard on it.
D = I can’t give you a better grade because your work is incomplete, or completely fails to meet the expectations of the course.
F = You didn’t do much this semester.
Now, this isn’t the grading scale I put in my syllabus, but it’s pretty much in my head. Am I expecting to much? Too little? What do you think?