Students at the University of South Dakota protest a stupid course – loudly. Bravo.
Look at this photo of the course in inaction. See the photo? Enlarge it and take a good look. Professor Phil Donahue doesn’t teach; he wanders hither and yon with a vague smile on his face asking if he can be of service. He tries not to notice that everyone’s dead or staring at their BlackBerry.
One student notes that the course “doesn’t have a purpose that students can appreciate. The university’s goal of instilling group work and critical thinking skills should already be achieved through general course work.”
Administrators’ defenses of the course are profoundly lost and confused.
“It takes all the best elements of a liberal arts education and helps show students that it has a real-world application.” One of them says this.
The best elements of a liberal arts education are sitting in a room with one hundred students staring at screens while a friendly ghost flitters among you?
****************************************
The real business world students are about to enter may indeed feature butt-numbing torpor in front of screens, and the constant need to tolerate unpleasant people; but is the purpose of a university to simulate these effects by way of preparing students for them?
Another administrator says: “Employers look for college graduates who can communicate, analyze and collaborate, which are all things the course is intended to teach.”
Look at the photo again.
And then the confusion comes in. Does the University of South Dakota create a curriculum based upon what educated people have always known and should continue to know? No. It makes two mistakes.
First it looks at the local accounting firm and says Hey what are they doing over there? Let’s do that over here.
Second, as another administrator says of the course:
“We’re still working on students’ needs.”
Not: What is the content of the liberal arts tradition in universities? But: What are our students’ needs?
********************************
Let’s review. The university has (1) looked outside for what it’s supposed to do, and then (2) has looked at its students for what it’s supposed to do. Like Phil Donahue up there: How can I be of service?
The University of South Dakota — assuming it is not aiming to be the University of Phoenix — is looking for a curriculum in all the wrong places; and in so doing it is insulting its students. Its students point out to the university that the foundation of a liberal arts education is to be found in general course work, not in Let’s make friends while playing together on our computers bull sessions.
——————————————————————-
UPDATE: Cool. UD’s gotten a comment from a student currently taking this course. Here it is:
As I am writing this, I am sitting in XDIS210: Success and Happiness aka, pain and suffering. I searched the course and found this blog. Kudos for the post!
Let me first say I am not an apathetic student.
The problem with the course is not the information, it’s the structure. I have done more work and spent more time on this course than any other class I have taken at this university. Keep in mind, I graduate next semester. The syllabus is 22 pages long. The standardization of the class has allowed for no wiggle room. Our class is behind but due dates aren’t moved because it “wouldn’t be fair” to the other classes.
I come to this class three times a week and all I can think about is what I will write when my professor hands me the class evaluation sheet. I have learned absolutely nothing in this class. My writing of this DURING the class is proof of that.
Its sad to think that I spent $700 to take a class because someone was “awestruck” about the technology used at another university. Can they not incorporate this technology in other courses? Is it necessary to require it?
Moreover, title is Success and Happiness?! Its a slap in the face and the university needs to hear our concerns, instead of being so defensive. I have yet to speak to ONE student in this or any XDIS class that has any interest in the course.
Again, what I’m picking up on here is a combination of too much technology and insufficient intellectual justification.
—————————————————
ANOTHER UPDATE: PLAYS WELL WITH OTHERS.
Another student heard from. This one took an earlier version of the course.
I sat in a large lecture hall with at least 80 other students and learned nothing. In all honesty, I barely went to the class.
What did I walk away with? The knowledge that in the real world, I’m probably going to have to do things that I don’t enjoy doing and working with people I don’t like or don’t know. At least then, I’ll actually get paid to do it.
I didn’t go to college to learn how to work well with others. I was taught that in elementary school. I came to learn about a specialized career field of my choosing. If I wanted to take class in the realm of job preparation (which is what I think the university is trying to get at with IdEA and XDIS) then I feel like I, as an adult and a senior about to graduate, should hold the right to choose to do so. Or not.
November 5th, 2010 at 6:57PM
And where did they get this great idea?
From the link:
“The XDIS remodeling of IdEA is due in part to a trip taken by former Student Government Association President Blake Alberts and Provost and Academic Affairs Vice President Chuck Staben to the University of Minnesota last year.
The two were awestruck by state-of-the-art interactive technology utilized in discussion courses. Now at USD, similar technology has been put to mixed use for the new course.”
Guilty as charged… Bill Gleason, U of Minnesota
November 5th, 2010 at 8:33PM
Bill: LOL.
November 5th, 2010 at 10:12PM
Another administrator says: “Employers look for college graduates who can communicate, analyze and collaborate”
“Educators” frequently make the assertion these days that collaboration is a “21st century skill,” just now beginning to be important. I wonder if they think the Empire State Building, the Hoover Dam, and the Liberty Ships did not involve collaboration both among the designers and the workers?
November 5th, 2010 at 10:45PM
I wonder to what extent that the quality of students at GW clouds your judgment. My experience at a community college is that most students simply don’t care. What is the cure for apathy? I know little about this course (it sounds dreadful) but I imagine that in many classes at USD one can take such a picture.
Perhaps it’s not the technologies being used that are to blame. At what point does student apathy not become something that can be blamed on the instructor?
November 6th, 2010 at 1:16AM
Excellent question, Y=X.
First off, it doesn’t sound to me as though the instructors for this course have much to do with things. It sounds like a course very much constructed by administrators and assigned to faculty.
Second, I think the core reason it has failed involves its intellectual randomness — it fits nowhere in the curriculum of USD, as students point out. Its topics seem any old thing, and — I’m just guessing here, but I’ll bet that the faculty teaching it is nowhere near USD’s best. So – Required course with an ambitious subject matter and a faculty member not necessarily up to teaching it, or at least up to demonstrating how that subject matter is in some way continuous with the architecture of a liberal arts education…
Add to this, yes, the technology, which in this course seem ubiquitous… structural, if you will, not at all a matter of personal choice on the part of students (some of whom like to use their laptops in class, and some of whom do not, etc.) and it does seem to me you’ve got a toxic mix.
As to student apathy: What’s funny is that the popular image of community colleges is that they’re dominated by hyper-motivated working mothers, returning adult students, and the like, with clear career goals and a sense of how their courses will serve them… Is this popular image wrong?
In any case, my interpretation of this story is that it’s about the opposite of unmotivated students. These USD students have gone to a good deal of trouble to register, via editorials, course evaluations, etc., their sense of this being a course unworthy of seniors at USD. Instead of suffering through the course, or being, as you say, apathetic about the course, they have rather determinedly raised a complaint about it. That’s not about being apathetic. On the contrary, it’s about the resentment of courses that make them feel apathetic.
November 6th, 2010 at 7:56AM
Student apathy & community colleges…someone who teaches at a community college…I think it was one of my ChicagoBoyz colleagues but can’t find the post or comment…observed that her students don’t follow a standard Bell Curve but rather a Bra Curve, ie some extremely motivated students and some extremely non-motivated ones, with relatively few in the middle. Those in the second category were those attending because their parents insisted they do so.
November 6th, 2010 at 8:17AM
I’m with david.
I have a friend who went to the University of South Dakota as an undergrad – next academic stop, the London School of Economics.
My sister is about sixty and has decided to get an undergrad degree. First stop, Austin Community College. I went down to help her jump through the hoops, and was very impressed. Reasonable prices, good courses, and caring faculty.
I think we owe students an opportunity. What happens next is up to them. UD continues to refer to online education as the poor white trash of higher ed. Sadly, it is even going to be incorporated at places like Berkeley.
Why is it that places like Carleton don’t seem to be very interested in online ed?
November 6th, 2010 at 8:21AM
I agree with what you wrote here. Particularly the last paragraph. I had not thought about this situation in this way. I was thinking more about my experiences at a community college.
At the community college there are motivated students. There are a lot of students who aren’t motivated and some who are motivated aren’t cut out for college. Two night ago I gave a test and a woman in her 40s asked me to postpone it for her. Her sons are high school football players and that has taken up all of her time. As a result she can’t find the time to study. This is what she told me.
I know this is only an anecdote but it is indicative of my experiences. Another student in my class is going to college now because her job as a hairstylist is a dead end one. Her hands are deteriorating too. I told her that to learn math one must do math. It requires practice and doing problems. Her response was, “I’ll do some problems but I have a life and I’m not going to sacrifice it.”
I try to motivate the students but have failed to do so. It’s clear that I care way more about their education than they do. I’m talking about the average student. I teach only online or web enhanced courses now. I failed the battle against texting in class, surfing the web, and general disinterest. For the most part, they don’t want to be engaged and I no longer want to try to engage them. Hence the retreat to online classes. I’ve got to look out for my sanity.
November 6th, 2010 at 8:41AM
Y=X: What you say helps me understand a great deal — in particular, the stages by which a motivated professor can withdraw from the classroom, discouraged. I wonder, though, about whether the community college administration gave you any support in your battle against texting, etc.
That is, I suspect that in your classrooms you had less independence than professors at universities have (here, less ability simply to state on your syllabi that no laptops, etc., are permitted); I also suspect that you had no support from the college in your efforts to make your students attentive.
But there may be, as you’re suggesting, an intellectual problem here as well. You can’t teach people math if they won’t/can’t/refuse to make the time to learn it.
November 6th, 2010 at 9:18AM
Speaking of community colleges, education blogger Joanne Jacobs now has a blog specifically devoted to that subject: community college spotlight.
November 6th, 2010 at 9:40AM
UD, I’m in a great system and have the authority to ban texting and whatnot. However, actually implementing it is too difficult. They can’t seem to pry their hands from their cellphones. Every semester was a battle. It only ended up making me look bad and mean by not wanting them to be used during class. Grandma was always in the hospital at death’s door and the student was waiting for the distressing news of her ultimate demise.
I finally figured out why the battle was a losing proposition. They don’t care about learning the material. Most of them hate math, don’t get it, and aren’t willing to put in the effort to learn it. I can ban everything except their apathy and disinterest.
My solution has been to make my classes hybrid courses. I have my own video lectures for every topic and accompanying homework problems. It’s on the web. Class is optional. There is no requirement to come and I tell them not to come if they aren’t willing to participate. In a class of 35 students I’ll get 8 – 10 regular attendees. It’s done wonders for my emotional well being.
November 6th, 2010 at 9:47AM
Electronic screens seem to exert a magnetic, almost hypnotic effect. A flight instructor told me that when he teaches in new airplanes with large GPS screens, many students have great difficulty pulling their eyes away from the screen–even on final approach–and focusing their attention out the window and on the airspeed indicator, where it should be. These are highly-motivated students, too.
November 6th, 2010 at 9:47AM
I wonder why we are quick to conclude that “..sadly, it is even going to be incorporated at places like Berkely.” I did my undergrad at a great liberal arts college, my graduate degrees at a state university. I teach at a land grant university. More than a decade ago, because I was interested in learning and needed a little cash as baby one arrived, I developed and taught an online course for a while. I still use some online learning in my classes, and have taught a full class at times.
I’ve seen engaged and disengaged students in every setting. I’ve seen students try to cheat in every setting. As Bill said, we owe students the opportunity (I think we also owe them our passion, our expertise, and a few other things). What they make of that, both online and in persons, is up to them.
I have no doubt that there is a significant amount of the online movement that is pure and total shite, pushed by administrators and profiteers. But, some of it is every bit as good as what happens in many of our classrooms, every day. And, there are definitely some passionate and engaged students out there who simply cannot be in our classrooms. Online, I’ve taught a monk from Europe and a private in Iraq, and had a blast learning from each other.
I haven’t made up my mind on all of this, but at first blush, I’d much rather have Berkeley and MIT trying to do this than Phoenix and Kaplan. So, sadly? Maybe, but like a lot in life, it depends on what we do with the opportunity.
November 6th, 2010 at 9:51AM
Y=X: 8 – 10 serious students sounds just about right for a good math seminar. You’ve actually run an intriguing experiment there: How many students are actually interested in any given (challenging) course?
But doesn’t this mean that one thing all that out of class technology is doing is (correct me if I’m wrong) allowing a certain (high?) number of those 25 online students to, er, cheat their way to a passing grade? There’s no way to confirm that they’re actually the people taking the course, is there?
Meanwhile, though, you’ve cleared space for the 8 -10 in-class students to almost certainly get a much higher level of instruction than they otherwise would have…
November 6th, 2010 at 11:21AM
UD, for my hybrid courses they have to come in once a week to take a short quiz. I don’t check ID cards because I figure it’s hard to get a friend to show up 16 times a semester to take a quiz.
My truly online classes have the requirement of proctored tests. I provide proctoring or they must use a paid proctoring service. IDs are required for all students to take a test. I don’t see them every week so I don’t recognize them by sight. They do fax or email me homework assignments each week. These are hand written problem sets and I have an electronic record of what their handwriting looks like. I compare the handwriting on the proctored tests with the handwriting of the homework assignments. I think the security of the system I have in place is pretty good.
In addition to the 8 – 10 who show up to class another 8 – 10 do just fine from watching my video lectures. About half of my students will pass a hybrid class. This semester around 40% will pass my fully online classes.
The hybrid option works best in my opinion. I’ve provided a means for students who don’t come to class to get the same lecture I would give in a face-to-face class. For those that come to class we work on the specific areas that they need help with. And I don’t suffer an existential crisis from having to look at a room of 20 bored, disinterested students every class.
November 6th, 2010 at 11:26AM
GTWMA, I do believe that online education is an OK option for some students. I have students that simply can’t come to campus everyday. They’ve got kids, full-time jobs, etc. Giving them an avenue to learn that meets their life situation is a good thing. It’s better to be done by real academics than by Kaplan or Phoenix.
However, I also believe online is a very bad way to learn for most people. I’ve been teaching online for 5 years now and the failure rate is higher for my online classes versus my face-to-face classes. I have no intention of ever teaching face-to-face classes again for the reasons I stated in previous comments.
November 6th, 2010 at 12:38PM
Y=X, I agree with you that hybrid has some real advantages, and I also agree that different modes work well or not so well for different things. Similar,y many of us learned that different teaching methods work well or not so well depending on content, facilities, class size, and more. But, I wouldn’t conclude immediately that failure rates prove much. There’s a lot of selection bias in who is in F2F versus hybrid versus fully online, so failure may not tell you much about the mode of instruction.
November 8th, 2010 at 4:39PM
As I am writing this, I am sitting in XDIS210: Success and Happiness aka, pain and suffering. I searched the course and found this blog. Kudos for the post!
Let me first say I am not an apathetic student.
The problem with the course is not the information, it’s the structure. I have done more work and spent more time on this course than any other class I have taken at this university. Keep in mind, I graduate next semester. The syllabus is 22 pages long. The standardization of the class has allowed for no wiggle room. Our class is behind but due dates aren’t moved because it “wouldn’t be fair” to the other classes.
I come to this class three times a week and all I can think about is what I will write when my professor hands me the class evaluation sheet. I have learned absolutely nothing in this class. My writing of this DURING the class is proof of that.
Its sad to think that I spent $700 to take a class because someone was “awestruck” about the technology used at another university. Can they not incorporate this technology in other courses? Is it necessary to require it? Moreover, title is Success and Happiness?! Its a slap in the face and the university needs to hear our concerns, instead of being so defensive. I have yet to speak to ONE student in this or any XDIS class that has any interest in the course.
November 8th, 2010 at 6:22PM
Frustrated student: Many thanks for the comment! If it’s okay with you, I’ll add it to my original post as an update. It’s terrific to have testimony from a student actually in the course (and writing the testimony DURING the class!). Many thanks. UD
November 8th, 2010 at 6:38PM
I am not currently taking the XDIS course at USD because I already participated in the former IdEA course that was once required. However, I can definitely relate to and understand the frustration students are feeling with this course.
My course didn’t get to use any new technology. I only worked with a group once. I sat in a large lecture hall with at least 80 other students and learned nothing. In all honesty, I barely went to the class.
What did I walk away with? The knowledge that in the real world, I’m probably going to have to do things that I don’t enjoy doing and working with people I don’t like or don’t know. At least then, I’ll actually get paid to do it.
I didn’t go to college to learn how to work well with others. I was taught that in elementary school. I came to learn about a specialized career field of my choosing. If I wanted to take class in the realm of job preparation (which is what I think the university is trying to get at with IdEA and XDIS) then I feel like I, as an adult and a senior about to graduate, should hold the right to choose to do so. Or not.
November 8th, 2010 at 7:28PM
Another Student: Many thanks for the comment! I’ve put part of it in the main post. I hope that’s okay.