I had two completely different experiences in December while engaged with educating Irish minds - granted one was lecturing in a university context and one was teaching Arabic to the Irish Defense Forces, but the contrast has shocked the teacher in me! The experience has raised many issues for me personally in terms of what I take to heart and that which I must learn to let go, but what is truly blinding and what I want to address here is how structure HELPS. GIven my abhorrence of exams this need for structure may seem strange to you my blog reader, but it is structure of a different nature.
First though I must frame the context for you:
I have been working as an occasional lecturer since completing my PhD, and it was my immense pleasure that I was responsible for delivering a module with a strong theoretical focus. Although emphasising how the theory is then applied in the 'real world' so to speak. I channelled my excitement into organsing guest speakers and a panel discussion so that the students could see the theory at work. The unfortunate fact of the module, and one I inherited, was that the assessment at the end of the semester was 100% exam. Hence I kept this in mind while avoiding teaching exclusively to the exam. None of this mattered however as the root of all discontent was to come from the students lack of interest in 'theory'. There was little or no engagement throughout the module aside from complaints about the volume of readings. My disillusionment grew when the exam grew closer and students began sending emails complaining and voicing concerns about their graduating based on their grade on the module. That was it the basis of it all - they really wanted to know how their future job would be affected by my theory course! I was so deeply saddened by the stark realisation that students were no longer interested in learning about the world and society (both social and physical) any longer, and that third level was about a job at the end. Maybe I am naive but when I was in university we all wanted a job when we graduated, but we also LOVED being there in college and learning.
I turn to my second experience in order to offer a comparison and frame my argument about structure and education. For the past 3 years I have taught the Irish Defense Forces different levels of Arabic for use when they are stationed in Arabic speaking UN posts. I have always found them to be polite, hardworking and diligent students. It was however the 'improvers' course in December which coincided with my third level experience. Although my teaching is for the purpose of giving the soldiers the ability to speak with the local people, they are also expected to learn the grammar basis of the language as well as the alphabet. I have often found myself in the past almost apologising or at least attempting to justify this requirement to the students soldiers. However, this justification fas been unfounded as their desire to truly understand the foundations or the 'theory' of the language is clear.
Hence my dear blog reader I thank you for your patience and bring you to the argument of my post. The main difference in my mind is two-fold: (1) the loss of respect, for general knowledge in our materialistic world has infiltrated even my beloved third-level education, and has meant that students are essentially no longer interested in truly learning - the sole aim being to gain employment so they can make money. You may criticize and say the difference is that the soldiers have a job so they have the luxury of learning - I say to you that just strengthens my argument further with a job being my control variable for comparison. (2) There has been a decay in the respect for authority and establishment. Again I am drawn back to my own undergraduate years where we held our lectures (although not all of course!) in high regard not because we feared them but because they earned it and it was what we had been taught to do. The army is based around structure and authority, sometime harshly I agree, but my plea for third-level is not to copy the frame of an army but rather to acknowledge that we need to once again return to a place where educators are respected.
"Knowledge is Power" Francis Bacon
First though I must frame the context for you:
I have been working as an occasional lecturer since completing my PhD, and it was my immense pleasure that I was responsible for delivering a module with a strong theoretical focus. Although emphasising how the theory is then applied in the 'real world' so to speak. I channelled my excitement into organsing guest speakers and a panel discussion so that the students could see the theory at work. The unfortunate fact of the module, and one I inherited, was that the assessment at the end of the semester was 100% exam. Hence I kept this in mind while avoiding teaching exclusively to the exam. None of this mattered however as the root of all discontent was to come from the students lack of interest in 'theory'. There was little or no engagement throughout the module aside from complaints about the volume of readings. My disillusionment grew when the exam grew closer and students began sending emails complaining and voicing concerns about their graduating based on their grade on the module. That was it the basis of it all - they really wanted to know how their future job would be affected by my theory course! I was so deeply saddened by the stark realisation that students were no longer interested in learning about the world and society (both social and physical) any longer, and that third level was about a job at the end. Maybe I am naive but when I was in university we all wanted a job when we graduated, but we also LOVED being there in college and learning.
I turn to my second experience in order to offer a comparison and frame my argument about structure and education. For the past 3 years I have taught the Irish Defense Forces different levels of Arabic for use when they are stationed in Arabic speaking UN posts. I have always found them to be polite, hardworking and diligent students. It was however the 'improvers' course in December which coincided with my third level experience. Although my teaching is for the purpose of giving the soldiers the ability to speak with the local people, they are also expected to learn the grammar basis of the language as well as the alphabet. I have often found myself in the past almost apologising or at least attempting to justify this requirement to the students soldiers. However, this justification fas been unfounded as their desire to truly understand the foundations or the 'theory' of the language is clear.
Hence my dear blog reader I thank you for your patience and bring you to the argument of my post. The main difference in my mind is two-fold: (1) the loss of respect, for general knowledge in our materialistic world has infiltrated even my beloved third-level education, and has meant that students are essentially no longer interested in truly learning - the sole aim being to gain employment so they can make money. You may criticize and say the difference is that the soldiers have a job so they have the luxury of learning - I say to you that just strengthens my argument further with a job being my control variable for comparison. (2) There has been a decay in the respect for authority and establishment. Again I am drawn back to my own undergraduate years where we held our lectures (although not all of course!) in high regard not because we feared them but because they earned it and it was what we had been taught to do. The army is based around structure and authority, sometime harshly I agree, but my plea for third-level is not to copy the frame of an army but rather to acknowledge that we need to once again return to a place where educators are respected.
"Knowledge is Power" Francis Bacon
No comments:
Post a Comment