http://www.onlineuniversities.com/blog/2011/02/20-startling-stats-on-minorities-in-our-schools/
Another interesting article worth considering.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Rev. Harry Scott Coverston, J.D., Ph.D.
Member, Florida Bar (inactive status)
Priest, Episcopal Church (Dio. of El Camino Real, CA)
Instructor: Humanities, Religion, Philosophy of Law
University of Central Florida, Orlando
http://pegasus.cc.ucf.edu/~ncoverst/
frharry@cfl.rr.com
If the unexamined life is not worth living, surely an unexamined belief system, be it religious or political, is not worth holding.
Most things of value do not lend themselves to production in sound bytes. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Sunday, June 26, 2011
http://www.onlinecollegecourses.com/2011/06/22/15-most-controversial-academics-of-all-time/
Interesting article here.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Rev. Harry Scott Coverston, J.D., Ph.D.
Member, Florida Bar (inactive status)
Priest, Episcopal Church (Dio. of El Camino Real, CA)
Instructor: Humanities, Religion, Philosophy of Law
University of Central Florida, Orlando
http://pegasus.cc.ucf.edu/~ncoverst/
frharry@cfl.rr.com
If the unexamined life is not worth living, surely an unexamined belief system, be it religious or political, is not worth holding.
Most things of value do not lend themselves to production in sound bytes. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Interesting article here.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Rev. Harry Scott Coverston, J.D., Ph.D.
Member, Florida Bar (inactive status)
Priest, Episcopal Church (Dio. of El Camino Real, CA)
Instructor: Humanities, Religion, Philosophy of Law
University of Central Florida, Orlando
http://pegasus.cc.ucf.edu/~ncoverst/
frharry@cfl.rr.com
If the unexamined life is not worth living, surely an unexamined belief system, be it religious or political, is not worth holding.
Most things of value do not lend themselves to production in sound bytes. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Time to grow up, boys.
ST. PETERSBURG, Russia (AP) – Russian police on Saturday detained 14 gay rights activists trying to hold an unsanctioned demonstration in St. Petersburg, as well as one person suspected of attacking the protesters.
Police detained two groups of activists protesting their lack of rights in two central districts of the city. An Associated Press photographer saw unidentified individuals attack the demonstrators, trying to seize their banners before police moved in.
Attempts to hold Gay Pride rallies almost always end in violence in Russia. Authorities habitually refuse gay rights activists their constitutional right to assemble, particularly in Moscow, on the grounds that other people find it offensive.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/25/russia-gay-pride-demonstrators-attacked-detained-_n_884510.html#s298183
A couple of thoughts here.
First, isn’t it the job of the supposed keepers of the peace to protect people from violence? Isn’t arresting the victims of such violence a rather bass-ackwards failure on the part of the cops? Who defends us from the defenders?
Second, the refusal of “authorities” (and who would see boneheads like this as actually having any real moral authority?) to honor the constitutional rights of gay people because “other people find it offensive” is really childish. Fundamentalist John Hagee is patently offensive on a lot of fronts, not the least of which is his willingness to impose his religiously-legitimated homophobia on the general public in the form of discrimination. But I’d hardly subject him to violence and arrest because I find his message so vile.
The idea that nameless, faceless “other people” somehow have an ongoing trump card over the human rights of another segment of the society based on the former seeing the latter as “offensive” is not worthy of adult moral reasoners or a modern democratic nation-state. This argument is no more compelling than the Muslim societies in which patriarchy (if not misogyny) is confused for religion and women are required to keep themselves covered because the men cannot restrain themselves otherwise. What nonsense.
If the men have a problem in Muslim cultures, focus on the men. If the homophobes have a problem in Russia, focus on them. It is, of course, ultimately THEIR problem. It only becomes the problems of their victims when they are allowed to indulge their misanthropy with impunity at the expense of other human beings.
Time to grow up, boys.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Rev. Harry Scott Coverston, J.D., Ph.D.
Member, Florida Bar (inactive status)
Priest, Episcopal Church (Dio. of El Camino Real, CA)
Instructor: Humanities, Religion, Philosophy of Law
University of Central Florida, Orlando
http://pegasus.cc.ucf.edu/~ncoverst/
frharry@cfl.rr.com
If the unexamined life is not worth living, surely an unexamined belief system, be it religious or political, is not worth holding.
Most things of value do not lend themselves to production in sound bytes. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
ST. PETERSBURG, Russia (AP) – Russian police on Saturday detained 14 gay rights activists trying to hold an unsanctioned demonstration in St. Petersburg, as well as one person suspected of attacking the protesters.
Police detained two groups of activists protesting their lack of rights in two central districts of the city. An Associated Press photographer saw unidentified individuals attack the demonstrators, trying to seize their banners before police moved in.
Attempts to hold Gay Pride rallies almost always end in violence in Russia. Authorities habitually refuse gay rights activists their constitutional right to assemble, particularly in Moscow, on the grounds that other people find it offensive.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/25/russia-gay-pride-demonstrators-attacked-detained-_n_884510.html#s298183
A couple of thoughts here.
First, isn’t it the job of the supposed keepers of the peace to protect people from violence? Isn’t arresting the victims of such violence a rather bass-ackwards failure on the part of the cops? Who defends us from the defenders?
Second, the refusal of “authorities” (and who would see boneheads like this as actually having any real moral authority?) to honor the constitutional rights of gay people because “other people find it offensive” is really childish. Fundamentalist John Hagee is patently offensive on a lot of fronts, not the least of which is his willingness to impose his religiously-legitimated homophobia on the general public in the form of discrimination. But I’d hardly subject him to violence and arrest because I find his message so vile.
The idea that nameless, faceless “other people” somehow have an ongoing trump card over the human rights of another segment of the society based on the former seeing the latter as “offensive” is not worthy of adult moral reasoners or a modern democratic nation-state. This argument is no more compelling than the Muslim societies in which patriarchy (if not misogyny) is confused for religion and women are required to keep themselves covered because the men cannot restrain themselves otherwise. What nonsense.
If the men have a problem in Muslim cultures, focus on the men. If the homophobes have a problem in Russia, focus on them. It is, of course, ultimately THEIR problem. It only becomes the problems of their victims when they are allowed to indulge their misanthropy with impunity at the expense of other human beings.
Time to grow up, boys.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Rev. Harry Scott Coverston, J.D., Ph.D.
Member, Florida Bar (inactive status)
Priest, Episcopal Church (Dio. of El Camino Real, CA)
Instructor: Humanities, Religion, Philosophy of Law
University of Central Florida, Orlando
http://pegasus.cc.ucf.edu/~ncoverst/
frharry@cfl.rr.com
If the unexamined life is not worth living, surely an unexamined belief system, be it religious or political, is not worth holding.
Most things of value do not lend themselves to production in sound bytes. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Sunday, June 12, 2011
Transparency and Wants v. Need
Another contributor to the Mama Ph.D. column this week writes the following:
“While I don’t subscribe to the commercial model of education … I do want to know what my students want and expect. After all, if I don’t know what they are hoping for, or expecting, my approach may confuse or disorient them. The more transparent we can all be about our expectations, the more likely we are to achieve at least some of them—or revise them, if necessary.”
Here’s my response to her:
Two responses. First, the goal of transparency is absolutely laudable. I agree wholeheartedly that explaining one’s pedagogical decision making is valuable not only for the student but for the instructor as well. In the former case, students are provided with assurance that the requirements of the course are not arbitrary and that they have been chosen for their educational potential. In the latter case, it requires instructors to be mindful of their pedagogy, to consider why they do what they do.
I have for years created links on my course webpages with titles like “Methods to the Madness” to explain assignments. I often provide further links to articles about student study habits, the connection between time spent preparing and grades and the value of various skills such as critical thinking, effective expository skills and the ability to work with others in the wider society. I often create preliminary quizzes to test these readings to insure students have actually taken the time to read them and, hopefully, understand them.
However, I wonder about the value of inquiring too deeply into “what my students want and expect.” Certainly student preferences can be taken into consideration in the preparation and perhaps even alteration of any given syllabus. But what a good instructor must ultimately discern is the difference between what students want or expect and what they actually need.
The reality is that increasingly many students expect very little in the way of challenge or work. And most are not inclined to do more than is absolutely required of them. The recent publication of Lowering Higher Education and Academically Adrift are merely the latest of a long line of studies indicating that students may make good consumers but they often prove to be mediocre at being students on a good day. Coté and Allahar (Lowering Higher Education) provide a very helpful paradigm when they note that decreasing requirements for prep time in high schools and colleges coupled with grade inflation seen at all levels of academia result in a perhaps self-evident sense of entitlement.
I observe that my students have very strong sense of what they want but little sense of what they need. My own end of term surveys indicate that 80%+ expect at least an A- coming into my class but less than 15% report preparing two hours or more for each class and only one in three see such a requirement as reasonable. The lesson here? Take student desires and expectations seriously but always in context. And bear in mind that even the best explained pedagogy may not be well received by consumers with a sense of entitlement.
Between the time I posted that response at the Mama Ph.D. link to Inside Higher Ed, I came across a site by accident that purports to provide students with the lowdown on courses taught at the university. The site, http://myedu.com/, which purports to provide the means for students to “manage college,” offers some data for courses I teach which is fairly incomplete but interesting nonetheless.
In looking at the overall statistics of the intro humanities courses I teach, I note that grade inflation is alive and well. In the Humanistic Traditions I course I am scheduled to teach this fall (assuming students at the honors college can overcome their aversion to actually working for their grades and fill the class) the chances that any given student walking in the door of the course will make an A are 36%. Indeed, As and Bs account for 71% of all the grades. Those numbers are closer to three quarters of all students when you do not include the 4% of students who withdraw for whatever reason.
Clearly, students come expecting high grades because, in fact, that’s a fairly safe expectation. But that’s not all they expect. Only one instructor received a five star rating at this site. Here are the comments that accompanied that rating:
Pros: I love [this instructor]! All you have to do is attend lectures and copy overhead notes and you will get an A easily. Lectures are fascinating and engaging. I've taken two courses with [this instructor] and will gladly take another!
Cons: [This instructor] does not post the notes online so you have to attend the lectures to get them.
For the record, 60% of all students who rated this rating said they found it "helpful."
So what gets an instructor a five star rating? Low demands – “All you have to do is….” Insured As – “you will get an A easily.” Entertainment – “fascinating and engaging” but not so engaging that the student would not skip class to watch them online if given the option – “you have to attend the lectures to get [the notes].” Low intellectual engagement – “attend lectures and copy overhead notes.”
This is an incredibly minimalist investment demanding an inordinately maximal return. And it is precisely this sense of consumerist entitlement that makes inquiry into “what my students want and expect” a generally unproductive use of limited time and energies for professional educators.
Again, as I said above: The lesson here? Take student desires and expectations seriously but always in context. And bear in mind that even the best explained pedagogy may not be well received by consumers with a sense of entitlement.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Rev. Harry Scott Coverston, J.D., Ph.D.
Member, Florida Bar (inactive status)
Priest, Episcopal Church (Dio. of El Camino Real, CA)
Instructor: Humanities, Religion, Philosophy of Law
University of Central Florida, Orlando
http://pegasus.cc.ucf.edu/~ncoverst/
frharry@cfl.rr.com
If the unexamined life is not worth living, surely an unexamined belief system, be it religious or political, is not worth holding.
Most things of value do not lend themselves to production in sound bytes. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Another contributor to the Mama Ph.D. column this week writes the following:
“While I don’t subscribe to the commercial model of education … I do want to know what my students want and expect. After all, if I don’t know what they are hoping for, or expecting, my approach may confuse or disorient them. The more transparent we can all be about our expectations, the more likely we are to achieve at least some of them—or revise them, if necessary.”
Here’s my response to her:
Two responses. First, the goal of transparency is absolutely laudable. I agree wholeheartedly that explaining one’s pedagogical decision making is valuable not only for the student but for the instructor as well. In the former case, students are provided with assurance that the requirements of the course are not arbitrary and that they have been chosen for their educational potential. In the latter case, it requires instructors to be mindful of their pedagogy, to consider why they do what they do.
I have for years created links on my course webpages with titles like “Methods to the Madness” to explain assignments. I often provide further links to articles about student study habits, the connection between time spent preparing and grades and the value of various skills such as critical thinking, effective expository skills and the ability to work with others in the wider society. I often create preliminary quizzes to test these readings to insure students have actually taken the time to read them and, hopefully, understand them.
However, I wonder about the value of inquiring too deeply into “what my students want and expect.” Certainly student preferences can be taken into consideration in the preparation and perhaps even alteration of any given syllabus. But what a good instructor must ultimately discern is the difference between what students want or expect and what they actually need.
The reality is that increasingly many students expect very little in the way of challenge or work. And most are not inclined to do more than is absolutely required of them. The recent publication of Lowering Higher Education and Academically Adrift are merely the latest of a long line of studies indicating that students may make good consumers but they often prove to be mediocre at being students on a good day. Coté and Allahar (Lowering Higher Education) provide a very helpful paradigm when they note that decreasing requirements for prep time in high schools and colleges coupled with grade inflation seen at all levels of academia result in a perhaps self-evident sense of entitlement.
I observe that my students have very strong sense of what they want but little sense of what they need. My own end of term surveys indicate that 80%+ expect at least an A- coming into my class but less than 15% report preparing two hours or more for each class and only one in three see such a requirement as reasonable. The lesson here? Take student desires and expectations seriously but always in context. And bear in mind that even the best explained pedagogy may not be well received by consumers with a sense of entitlement.
Between the time I posted that response at the Mama Ph.D. link to Inside Higher Ed, I came across a site by accident that purports to provide students with the lowdown on courses taught at the university. The site, http://myedu.com/, which purports to provide the means for students to “manage college,” offers some data for courses I teach which is fairly incomplete but interesting nonetheless.
In looking at the overall statistics of the intro humanities courses I teach, I note that grade inflation is alive and well. In the Humanistic Traditions I course I am scheduled to teach this fall (assuming students at the honors college can overcome their aversion to actually working for their grades and fill the class) the chances that any given student walking in the door of the course will make an A are 36%. Indeed, As and Bs account for 71% of all the grades. Those numbers are closer to three quarters of all students when you do not include the 4% of students who withdraw for whatever reason.
Clearly, students come expecting high grades because, in fact, that’s a fairly safe expectation. But that’s not all they expect. Only one instructor received a five star rating at this site. Here are the comments that accompanied that rating:
Pros: I love [this instructor]! All you have to do is attend lectures and copy overhead notes and you will get an A easily. Lectures are fascinating and engaging. I've taken two courses with [this instructor] and will gladly take another!
Cons: [This instructor] does not post the notes online so you have to attend the lectures to get them.
For the record, 60% of all students who rated this rating said they found it "helpful."
So what gets an instructor a five star rating? Low demands – “All you have to do is….” Insured As – “you will get an A easily.” Entertainment – “fascinating and engaging” but not so engaging that the student would not skip class to watch them online if given the option – “you have to attend the lectures to get [the notes].” Low intellectual engagement – “attend lectures and copy overhead notes.”
This is an incredibly minimalist investment demanding an inordinately maximal return. And it is precisely this sense of consumerist entitlement that makes inquiry into “what my students want and expect” a generally unproductive use of limited time and energies for professional educators.
Again, as I said above: The lesson here? Take student desires and expectations seriously but always in context. And bear in mind that even the best explained pedagogy may not be well received by consumers with a sense of entitlement.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Rev. Harry Scott Coverston, J.D., Ph.D.
Member, Florida Bar (inactive status)
Priest, Episcopal Church (Dio. of El Camino Real, CA)
Instructor: Humanities, Religion, Philosophy of Law
University of Central Florida, Orlando
http://pegasus.cc.ucf.edu/~ncoverst/
frharry@cfl.rr.com
If the unexamined life is not worth living, surely an unexamined belief system, be it religious or political, is not worth holding.
Most things of value do not lend themselves to production in sound bytes. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Checking Our Presumptions at the Door
A contributor to the Mama Ph.D. column (an always provocative column at the Inside Higher Ed site) wrote the following last week:
My dance teacher had been absent the previous week and had engaged a substitute. A number of students had reported for the class, noted the sub, and left. "That was incredibly rude," he admonished us. "She [the sub] was so offended, I don't think she'll be willing to take the class again."
My improv class starts at 6:30; students tend to trickle in until around 7. Last week, the teacher announced, "Look, this is a real problem, and it's unprofessional. Six-thirty means just that -- not 7:00 or even 6:35!"
I was surprised, initially, at the level of my teachers' frustration. After all, I thought, we are adults with busy lives. We pay good money for these classes; shouldn't we be allowed to decide, on learning that a favorite teacher is out, that our time would be better spent catching up on paperwork or walking in the park? And shouldn't we get the benefit of the doubt re lateness? Many of my fellow students have demanding day jobs and aren't always in control of when they can leave work. And it's not as though the teachers were earning less because of the students who come late or leave early--nobody is demanding a refund or prorating for time missed. What is the problem?
The problem, I realized, is that I have started to think of these classes as purely commercial transactions, rather than the transmission of knowledge, and even wisdom, from a dedicated expert to an enthusiastic pupil, which it is necessary to support financially.This is exactly the sort of attitude that drives academic friends to despair. I have always been sympathetic to their stories of arrogant, entitled students who think that their tuition payments give them carte blanche to abuse or dismiss the teacher and subject. This is no different.
How did I fall into this trap? I'm still asking myself that question. The best I've come up with so far is that the commercial model is everywhere, it is insidious, and it infiltrates the consciousness of even those of us who know better. But that seems more like an excuse than an explanation.
The fact that students of any age are able and willing to be this critically self-reflective in the commercialized context of higher education today is gratifying. And the insight that perhaps the problem in both of these situations lies in the presumptions that students bring to the situation is particularly encouraging. Hence, my response to the columnist:
I appreciate your ability and willingness to reflect on these questions, Mama Ph.D. That, alone, sets you apart from the vast majority of your classmates.
Clearly, the bottom line in this story is respect. And this is not even necessarily the deferential kind of respect that should be shown our teachers as a matter of course (see Confucius’ Analects). Rather, it’s a matter of common courtesy, the kind that should be shown anyone, the kind that is, sadly, more often observed in the breach than in practice. Where did we ever get the idea that we had no duties to demonstrate common courtesy to those we encounter?
But what struck me was the comment about the substitute. You ask “We pay good money for these classes; shouldn't we be allowed to decide, on learning that a favorite teacher is out, that our time would be better spent catching up on paperwork or walking in the park?” As you note in your reflection here, that evidences a major presumption that this interaction is strictly a commercial transaction with consumers deciding what they will consume with no regard for anyone or anything else.
Of course, such a presumption is based on yet another major presumption: that these self-styled consumers have the knowledge and expertise upon which to make such a decision. Of course, that is not the case in the scenario you laid out. While this may not be the student’s favorite teacher, the substitute may well be at least competent if not perhaps skilled in teaching the subject matter at hand. The student may well learn from a different teaching style, a different set of skills and expertise. This might well be a real gift before it’s all over. The bottom line is simply this: the student doesn’t know. And therefore, making a decision based in ignorance is a risky if not stupid move from the beginning.
This is the same problem that underlies the consumerist approach to instructor evaluations. Upon what basis does a college student evaluate the pedagogy of a college instructor? Clearly there are aspects that can be evaluated by students – Was the instructor intelligible? Did the instructor demonstrate punctuality in class appearance and regularity in office hours? Did the instructor engage in ad hominem attacks on students? These are all issues that go to the professional conduct of teaching that are observable by anyone. And feedback on such questions might prove helpful to both instructor and student.
Unfortunately, most instructor evaluations are consumerist in nature and therefore of limited value for instructors. Questions about workload presume that students have an adult work ethic and the experience of being required to live into it. Studies suggest that neither is the case hence comments about “too much work” will reflect this. Questions about perceived respect for students often produce responses grounded in resentment over being required to think critically. Students often cannot distinguish critique of their ideas from attacks on their person. And questions about grading often produce responses based in entitlement. End-of-term surveys in my classes over the past three years show that over 80% of all my students come into my courses believing they should get at least an A-. In cases where grading reflects this expectation, what do As even mean?
If we instructors teach students nothing else than the need to consider their presumptions, as Ph.D. Mama did here, we will have taught them something of value. Thanks for your thoughtful reflection.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Rev. Harry Scott Coverston, J.D., Ph.D.
Member, Florida Bar (inactive status)
Priest, Episcopal Church (Dio. of El Camino Real, CA)
Instructor: Humanities, Religion, Philosophy of Law
University of Central Florida, Orlando
http://pegasus.cc.ucf.edu/~ncoverst/
frharry@cfl.rr.com
If the unexamined life is not worth living, surely an unexamined belief system, be it religious or political, is not worth holding.
Most things of value do not lend themselves to production in sound bytes. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
A contributor to the Mama Ph.D. column (an always provocative column at the Inside Higher Ed site) wrote the following last week:
My dance teacher had been absent the previous week and had engaged a substitute. A number of students had reported for the class, noted the sub, and left. "That was incredibly rude," he admonished us. "She [the sub] was so offended, I don't think she'll be willing to take the class again."
My improv class starts at 6:30; students tend to trickle in until around 7. Last week, the teacher announced, "Look, this is a real problem, and it's unprofessional. Six-thirty means just that -- not 7:00 or even 6:35!"
I was surprised, initially, at the level of my teachers' frustration. After all, I thought, we are adults with busy lives. We pay good money for these classes; shouldn't we be allowed to decide, on learning that a favorite teacher is out, that our time would be better spent catching up on paperwork or walking in the park? And shouldn't we get the benefit of the doubt re lateness? Many of my fellow students have demanding day jobs and aren't always in control of when they can leave work. And it's not as though the teachers were earning less because of the students who come late or leave early--nobody is demanding a refund or prorating for time missed. What is the problem?
The problem, I realized, is that I have started to think of these classes as purely commercial transactions, rather than the transmission of knowledge, and even wisdom, from a dedicated expert to an enthusiastic pupil, which it is necessary to support financially.This is exactly the sort of attitude that drives academic friends to despair. I have always been sympathetic to their stories of arrogant, entitled students who think that their tuition payments give them carte blanche to abuse or dismiss the teacher and subject. This is no different.
How did I fall into this trap? I'm still asking myself that question. The best I've come up with so far is that the commercial model is everywhere, it is insidious, and it infiltrates the consciousness of even those of us who know better. But that seems more like an excuse than an explanation.
The fact that students of any age are able and willing to be this critically self-reflective in the commercialized context of higher education today is gratifying. And the insight that perhaps the problem in both of these situations lies in the presumptions that students bring to the situation is particularly encouraging. Hence, my response to the columnist:
I appreciate your ability and willingness to reflect on these questions, Mama Ph.D. That, alone, sets you apart from the vast majority of your classmates.
Clearly, the bottom line in this story is respect. And this is not even necessarily the deferential kind of respect that should be shown our teachers as a matter of course (see Confucius’ Analects). Rather, it’s a matter of common courtesy, the kind that should be shown anyone, the kind that is, sadly, more often observed in the breach than in practice. Where did we ever get the idea that we had no duties to demonstrate common courtesy to those we encounter?
But what struck me was the comment about the substitute. You ask “We pay good money for these classes; shouldn't we be allowed to decide, on learning that a favorite teacher is out, that our time would be better spent catching up on paperwork or walking in the park?” As you note in your reflection here, that evidences a major presumption that this interaction is strictly a commercial transaction with consumers deciding what they will consume with no regard for anyone or anything else.
Of course, such a presumption is based on yet another major presumption: that these self-styled consumers have the knowledge and expertise upon which to make such a decision. Of course, that is not the case in the scenario you laid out. While this may not be the student’s favorite teacher, the substitute may well be at least competent if not perhaps skilled in teaching the subject matter at hand. The student may well learn from a different teaching style, a different set of skills and expertise. This might well be a real gift before it’s all over. The bottom line is simply this: the student doesn’t know. And therefore, making a decision based in ignorance is a risky if not stupid move from the beginning.
This is the same problem that underlies the consumerist approach to instructor evaluations. Upon what basis does a college student evaluate the pedagogy of a college instructor? Clearly there are aspects that can be evaluated by students – Was the instructor intelligible? Did the instructor demonstrate punctuality in class appearance and regularity in office hours? Did the instructor engage in ad hominem attacks on students? These are all issues that go to the professional conduct of teaching that are observable by anyone. And feedback on such questions might prove helpful to both instructor and student.
Unfortunately, most instructor evaluations are consumerist in nature and therefore of limited value for instructors. Questions about workload presume that students have an adult work ethic and the experience of being required to live into it. Studies suggest that neither is the case hence comments about “too much work” will reflect this. Questions about perceived respect for students often produce responses grounded in resentment over being required to think critically. Students often cannot distinguish critique of their ideas from attacks on their person. And questions about grading often produce responses based in entitlement. End-of-term surveys in my classes over the past three years show that over 80% of all my students come into my courses believing they should get at least an A-. In cases where grading reflects this expectation, what do As even mean?
If we instructors teach students nothing else than the need to consider their presumptions, as Ph.D. Mama did here, we will have taught them something of value. Thanks for your thoughtful reflection.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Rev. Harry Scott Coverston, J.D., Ph.D.
Member, Florida Bar (inactive status)
Priest, Episcopal Church (Dio. of El Camino Real, CA)
Instructor: Humanities, Religion, Philosophy of Law
University of Central Florida, Orlando
http://pegasus.cc.ucf.edu/~ncoverst/
frharry@cfl.rr.com
If the unexamined life is not worth living, surely an unexamined belief system, be it religious or political, is not worth holding.
Most things of value do not lend themselves to production in sound bytes. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Monday, June 06, 2011
A Sermon for the Feast of St. Aelred
I was invited to celebrate the eucharist for Integrity USA at the Gay Days event at Disney World this past weekend. It was an honor to do so. Integrity is the LGBTQ ministry of the Episcopal Church. I have been a member for some 25 years now. It is banned in this Diocese of Central Florida where I reside which often confuses homophobia with the tenets of the faith. Hence, though the eucharist could not be held in a parish, that did not stop Integrity whose members simply rented a ball room at the Lake Buena Vista Palace Hotel and Sunday eucharist went on as usual.
As a part of the eucharist, I delivered the following sermon. I offer it for your consideration:
May I speak in the name of G-d who [+] creates, redeems and sustains us. AMEN.
It is no small consolation in this life to have someone you can unite with you in an intimate affection and the embrace of a holy love, someone in whom your spirit can rest, to whom you can pour out your soul, to whose pleasant exchanges, as to soothing songs, you can fly in sorrow… with whose spiritual kisses, as with remedial salves, you may draw out all the weariness of your restless anxieties. A man who can shed tears with you in your worries, be happy with you when things go well, search out with you the answers to your problems, whom with the ties of charity you can lead into the depths of your heart; . . . where the sweetness of the Spirit flows between you, where you so join yourself and cleave to him that soul mingles with soul and two become one.
These are the words of Aelred of Rivaulx whose feast we celebrate this day. The actual day assigned for the celebration of this saint’s memory on our church’s calendar is January 12. But given that this eucharist is celebrated on behalf of Integrity, USA, the LGBTQ ministry of the Episcopal Church, it is proper and fitting that Integrity’s patron saint be celebrated this day by the members of Integrity. I am indebted to the blogsite Sacred Pauses for much of the following.
Aelred seems, at first, an odd choice for our patron. He was a celibate, a monk in the Cistercian order living in Rievaulx, England. He entered the order in 1134 at the age of 24; in 1147 he became abbot of Rievaulx until his death 20 years later. In his Rule of Life for a Recluse, written for an unnamed hermitess, he warns in strident tones about safeguarding her virginity from defilement either with men or with women. He never felt his own sexuality was entirely in his control, either. As novice-master, responsible for the training of impressionable young men, he found it necessary to build a concealed tank in which he could immerse himself in icy waters to bridle his physical passions. Even in his final days, sick and aged, he felt his celibacy was in need of vigilant protection.
But Aelred had a deep appreciation for friendship, and by that is meant the particular love between two individuals. Our tradition teaches us much about universal charity, the love of all humankind. We hear far less about the worthy love between two people, as exemplified by the love between David and Jonathan, Naomi and Ruth, or between Jesus and John, the “beloved disciple.”
Of all the gifts Aelred has given the Church, the one most uniquely his is the joyous affirmation that we move toward God in and through our relationships with other people, not apart from or in spite of them. It is important, too, to remember who those particular individuals were, those whose love taught Aelred of the love of God. Aelred himself speaks of losing his heart to one boy and then another during his school days. He was a man of strong passions, who spoke openly of the men for whom he had deeply romantic attachments. After the death of one monk whom he clearly loved, he wrote:
The only one who would not be astonished to see Aelred living without Simon would be someone who did not know how pleasant it was for us to spend our life on earth together; how great a joy it would have been for us to journey to heaven in each other’s company . . . .Weep, then, not because Simon has been taken up to heaven, but because Aelred has been left on earth, alone.
So how did Aelred become the patron saint of Integrity?
At the 1985 General Convention in Anaheim, CA, at the suggestion of Howard Galley, Integrity/New York, the Standing Liturgical Commission recommended Aelred, along with a number of others, for inclusion in Lesser Feasts and Fasts. When this resolution came before the House of Bishops, one of the bishops arose to inform the house that, according to John Boswell, the eminent gay church historian, Aelred of Rievaulx had been gay--implying this might somehow disqualify his inclusion.
With little discussion the House of Bishops approved the others on the list but sent Aelred back to the commission for further study, a tactic anyone who has ever worked a General Convention on behalf of Integrity causes knows only too well. Amazingly, the Standing Liturgical Commission sent Aelred back to the House of Bishops the next day where, in spite of his being gay, and with the bishops' full knowledge that he was, he was admitted to the calendar.
Now what makes that story particularly interesting is the identity of the adamantly opposed bishop. His name was The Rt. Rev. John Shelby Spong. Yes, that Bishop Spong, the Bishop Spong who would very soon thereafter come to a crushing recognition – that he had been wrong on gays and lesbians and that his opposition had harmed some of the most vulnerable members of the Body of Christ. Thereafter, Spong would make it his mission to dismantle the structures of discrimination which have prevented LGBTQ people from being ordained and from being married. Anyone who has been familiar with church politics in the past three decades knows how indebted Integrity is to Jack Spong.
I’m not coming back until they say they’re sorry….
When I was pondering my vocation to the priesthood years ago, I told a friend of mine that I was thinking about becoming a priest. His face clouded over and he looked away from me when he said, “The church has hurt me deeply. And I will never go back to the church until they admit they were wrong and tell me they are sorry.” Some 21 years later, I’ve never forgotten those words. And I have come to realize that my friend was right.
What Integrity is asking the Episcopal Church to do, along with our brothers and sisters in virtually every religious tradition around the world today, is very difficult. We are asking the church to do exactly what my friend said they must do - recognize that its teaching has been wrong and admit that it has harmed many children of G-d in the process. In the words of the confession we will use today, it means being able and willing to admit that “We have denied your goodness in each other, in ourselves, and in the world you have created.”
But that is only the first step. It also means, in the words of the Confession, that we must “repent of the evil that enslaves us, the evil we have done, and the evil done on our behalf.” Having lived through the painful process of desegregation in Central Florida in the 1960s, I know only too well how difficult it can be to admit that you were wrong, that your understandings, words and behavior have been harmful to others and to realize that you had no choice but to repent, to change your mind, change directions, change your life if you were to live a life of intellectual honesty and integrity. The cognitive dissonance that arises from such a realization is painful and incredibly disorienting. When one realizes that one of their basic ways of making sense of the world is no longer tenable, everything one knows about the world comes up for grabs.
Jack Spong provides a living example that such cognitive dissonance can be survived and can become the catalyst for repentance and new life. It has been one of my great privileges in life to know Jack Spong. And one of the most encouraging things I have ever heard him say was that the outcome of our long struggle for gay and lesbian equality has not been in doubt for some time now, only the time table for the goal of full inclusion.
The long arc of justice is getting closer
The road from here to that goal will no doubt be full of bumps and setbacks. But I have come to believe that the long arc of justice toward which Martin Luther King, Jr. pointed is coming closer and closer to reality for all of the children of G-d. Indeed, I find myself in the surprising position of believing I may actually see the dismantlement of LGBTQ discrimination in the wider society, perhaps even within my church, during my lifetime. For that I am grateful. My gratitude extends to people like Paul Woodrum, a founding father of Integrity whose eloquent collect we prayed this morning, people like Jack Spong, who found a way to admit he was wrong, say he was sorry, and whose theological depth and political determination has nudged the church ever closer to its date with the apology for which my friend awaits.
But it also extends to people like you whose hard work, sacrifice and endless hope provide the energy for the machinery of justice needed to achieve our final goal. And so I thank you for the opportunity to speak to you this day and for the even more rare opportunity to exercise my priestly ministry in a diocese where openly gay priests are forbidden to do so. I pray that G-d will bless you in your life journeys. And I pray that we may all be constantly aware of G-d’s presence with us – as close as the very breath that we breathe – as we continue our struggle for justice in our nation, our world and in our church.
I close with the words of our collect for the Feast Day of St. Aelred:
Pour into our hearts, O God, your Spirit's gift of love, that we, clasping each the other's hand, may share the joy of friendship, human and divine, and with your servant, Aelred, draw all to your community of love. We ask in the name of Jesus, our brother, who with you and the Holy Spirit are one God, now and forever. AMEN.
Sources:
• Rev. Paul Woodrum, “How St. Aelred Became the Patron of Integrity”
• Sacred Pauses, Meditation and Prayers for Life’s Spiritual Highs website, found at http://sacredpauses.com/saint-aelred-the-patron-saint-of-integrity/ accessed June 5, 2011 quoting Aelred Squire, Aelred of Rievaulx (1981) and Raymond Maher, “Friendship,” Sermon delivered to Integrity/New York ( Jan. 14, 1988.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Rev. Harry Scott Coverston, J.D., Ph.D.
Member, Florida Bar (inactive status)
Priest, Episcopal Church (Dio. of El Camino Real, CA)
Instructor: Humanities, Religion, Philosophy of Law
University of Central Florida, Orlando
http://pegasus.cc.ucf.edu/~ncoverst/
frharry@cfl.rr.com
If the unexamined life is not worth living, surely an unexamined belief system, be it religious or political, is not worth holding.
Most things of value do not lend themselves to production in sound bytes. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I was invited to celebrate the eucharist for Integrity USA at the Gay Days event at Disney World this past weekend. It was an honor to do so. Integrity is the LGBTQ ministry of the Episcopal Church. I have been a member for some 25 years now. It is banned in this Diocese of Central Florida where I reside which often confuses homophobia with the tenets of the faith. Hence, though the eucharist could not be held in a parish, that did not stop Integrity whose members simply rented a ball room at the Lake Buena Vista Palace Hotel and Sunday eucharist went on as usual.
As a part of the eucharist, I delivered the following sermon. I offer it for your consideration:
May I speak in the name of G-d who [+] creates, redeems and sustains us. AMEN.
It is no small consolation in this life to have someone you can unite with you in an intimate affection and the embrace of a holy love, someone in whom your spirit can rest, to whom you can pour out your soul, to whose pleasant exchanges, as to soothing songs, you can fly in sorrow… with whose spiritual kisses, as with remedial salves, you may draw out all the weariness of your restless anxieties. A man who can shed tears with you in your worries, be happy with you when things go well, search out with you the answers to your problems, whom with the ties of charity you can lead into the depths of your heart; . . . where the sweetness of the Spirit flows between you, where you so join yourself and cleave to him that soul mingles with soul and two become one.
These are the words of Aelred of Rivaulx whose feast we celebrate this day. The actual day assigned for the celebration of this saint’s memory on our church’s calendar is January 12. But given that this eucharist is celebrated on behalf of Integrity, USA, the LGBTQ ministry of the Episcopal Church, it is proper and fitting that Integrity’s patron saint be celebrated this day by the members of Integrity. I am indebted to the blogsite Sacred Pauses for much of the following.
Aelred seems, at first, an odd choice for our patron. He was a celibate, a monk in the Cistercian order living in Rievaulx, England. He entered the order in 1134 at the age of 24; in 1147 he became abbot of Rievaulx until his death 20 years later. In his Rule of Life for a Recluse, written for an unnamed hermitess, he warns in strident tones about safeguarding her virginity from defilement either with men or with women. He never felt his own sexuality was entirely in his control, either. As novice-master, responsible for the training of impressionable young men, he found it necessary to build a concealed tank in which he could immerse himself in icy waters to bridle his physical passions. Even in his final days, sick and aged, he felt his celibacy was in need of vigilant protection.
But Aelred had a deep appreciation for friendship, and by that is meant the particular love between two individuals. Our tradition teaches us much about universal charity, the love of all humankind. We hear far less about the worthy love between two people, as exemplified by the love between David and Jonathan, Naomi and Ruth, or between Jesus and John, the “beloved disciple.”
Of all the gifts Aelred has given the Church, the one most uniquely his is the joyous affirmation that we move toward God in and through our relationships with other people, not apart from or in spite of them. It is important, too, to remember who those particular individuals were, those whose love taught Aelred of the love of God. Aelred himself speaks of losing his heart to one boy and then another during his school days. He was a man of strong passions, who spoke openly of the men for whom he had deeply romantic attachments. After the death of one monk whom he clearly loved, he wrote:
The only one who would not be astonished to see Aelred living without Simon would be someone who did not know how pleasant it was for us to spend our life on earth together; how great a joy it would have been for us to journey to heaven in each other’s company . . . .Weep, then, not because Simon has been taken up to heaven, but because Aelred has been left on earth, alone.
So how did Aelred become the patron saint of Integrity?
At the 1985 General Convention in Anaheim, CA, at the suggestion of Howard Galley, Integrity/New York, the Standing Liturgical Commission recommended Aelred, along with a number of others, for inclusion in Lesser Feasts and Fasts. When this resolution came before the House of Bishops, one of the bishops arose to inform the house that, according to John Boswell, the eminent gay church historian, Aelred of Rievaulx had been gay--implying this might somehow disqualify his inclusion.
With little discussion the House of Bishops approved the others on the list but sent Aelred back to the commission for further study, a tactic anyone who has ever worked a General Convention on behalf of Integrity causes knows only too well. Amazingly, the Standing Liturgical Commission sent Aelred back to the House of Bishops the next day where, in spite of his being gay, and with the bishops' full knowledge that he was, he was admitted to the calendar.
Now what makes that story particularly interesting is the identity of the adamantly opposed bishop. His name was The Rt. Rev. John Shelby Spong. Yes, that Bishop Spong, the Bishop Spong who would very soon thereafter come to a crushing recognition – that he had been wrong on gays and lesbians and that his opposition had harmed some of the most vulnerable members of the Body of Christ. Thereafter, Spong would make it his mission to dismantle the structures of discrimination which have prevented LGBTQ people from being ordained and from being married. Anyone who has been familiar with church politics in the past three decades knows how indebted Integrity is to Jack Spong.
I’m not coming back until they say they’re sorry….
When I was pondering my vocation to the priesthood years ago, I told a friend of mine that I was thinking about becoming a priest. His face clouded over and he looked away from me when he said, “The church has hurt me deeply. And I will never go back to the church until they admit they were wrong and tell me they are sorry.” Some 21 years later, I’ve never forgotten those words. And I have come to realize that my friend was right.
What Integrity is asking the Episcopal Church to do, along with our brothers and sisters in virtually every religious tradition around the world today, is very difficult. We are asking the church to do exactly what my friend said they must do - recognize that its teaching has been wrong and admit that it has harmed many children of G-d in the process. In the words of the confession we will use today, it means being able and willing to admit that “We have denied your goodness in each other, in ourselves, and in the world you have created.”
But that is only the first step. It also means, in the words of the Confession, that we must “repent of the evil that enslaves us, the evil we have done, and the evil done on our behalf.” Having lived through the painful process of desegregation in Central Florida in the 1960s, I know only too well how difficult it can be to admit that you were wrong, that your understandings, words and behavior have been harmful to others and to realize that you had no choice but to repent, to change your mind, change directions, change your life if you were to live a life of intellectual honesty and integrity. The cognitive dissonance that arises from such a realization is painful and incredibly disorienting. When one realizes that one of their basic ways of making sense of the world is no longer tenable, everything one knows about the world comes up for grabs.
Jack Spong provides a living example that such cognitive dissonance can be survived and can become the catalyst for repentance and new life. It has been one of my great privileges in life to know Jack Spong. And one of the most encouraging things I have ever heard him say was that the outcome of our long struggle for gay and lesbian equality has not been in doubt for some time now, only the time table for the goal of full inclusion.
The long arc of justice is getting closer
The road from here to that goal will no doubt be full of bumps and setbacks. But I have come to believe that the long arc of justice toward which Martin Luther King, Jr. pointed is coming closer and closer to reality for all of the children of G-d. Indeed, I find myself in the surprising position of believing I may actually see the dismantlement of LGBTQ discrimination in the wider society, perhaps even within my church, during my lifetime. For that I am grateful. My gratitude extends to people like Paul Woodrum, a founding father of Integrity whose eloquent collect we prayed this morning, people like Jack Spong, who found a way to admit he was wrong, say he was sorry, and whose theological depth and political determination has nudged the church ever closer to its date with the apology for which my friend awaits.
But it also extends to people like you whose hard work, sacrifice and endless hope provide the energy for the machinery of justice needed to achieve our final goal. And so I thank you for the opportunity to speak to you this day and for the even more rare opportunity to exercise my priestly ministry in a diocese where openly gay priests are forbidden to do so. I pray that G-d will bless you in your life journeys. And I pray that we may all be constantly aware of G-d’s presence with us – as close as the very breath that we breathe – as we continue our struggle for justice in our nation, our world and in our church.
I close with the words of our collect for the Feast Day of St. Aelred:
Pour into our hearts, O God, your Spirit's gift of love, that we, clasping each the other's hand, may share the joy of friendship, human and divine, and with your servant, Aelred, draw all to your community of love. We ask in the name of Jesus, our brother, who with you and the Holy Spirit are one God, now and forever. AMEN.
Sources:
• Rev. Paul Woodrum, “How St. Aelred Became the Patron of Integrity”
• Sacred Pauses, Meditation and Prayers for Life’s Spiritual Highs website, found at http://sacredpauses.com/saint-aelred-the-patron-saint-of-integrity/ accessed June 5, 2011 quoting Aelred Squire, Aelred of Rievaulx (1981) and Raymond Maher, “Friendship,” Sermon delivered to Integrity/New York ( Jan. 14, 1988.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Rev. Harry Scott Coverston, J.D., Ph.D.
Member, Florida Bar (inactive status)
Priest, Episcopal Church (Dio. of El Camino Real, CA)
Instructor: Humanities, Religion, Philosophy of Law
University of Central Florida, Orlando
http://pegasus.cc.ucf.edu/~ncoverst/
frharry@cfl.rr.com
If the unexamined life is not worth living, surely an unexamined belief system, be it religious or political, is not worth holding.
Most things of value do not lend themselves to production in sound bytes. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Friday, June 03, 2011
Hidden Costs – Who Pays?
It’s late, much later than I want to admit being up. I couldn’t sleep and so I’m checking my online course site. While I tell my students I’m not on call, in reality I do check my site regularly throughout the day during summer sessions when I’m not in real classes (and yes, I am one of those stalwarts who have not drunk the koolaid about online classes being just as good as face-to-face versions).
So, I’ve just read a student discussion posting which included a link to an interesting website. I punch up the website on my google search site. OK. I see what he was getting at. Now I go back to the Discussion post and hit reply. Nothing. I click to close the window. Nothing. I wait, thinking I must be patient. Nothing. Finally I do the Delete+Control+Alt routine to escape Webcourses altogether. A couple minutes later, I’m back on the Discussion function reopening the student’s post.
At this point, I’ve probably wasted only three minutes. But that’s three minutes of my time. I am a college instructor, not a computer programmer. I am not paid to play technological games with sometimes working websites. I’m paid to teach.
But there is absolutely nothing pedagogical about those lost three minutes. I am paying for someone else’s incompetence and irresponsibility. And if those were the only three minutes I was going to lose in the next 24 hours, it would be no big deal. But it’s not.
The mail system on Webcourses is so flakey that I often copy my responses to students before trying to send them because I am anticipating it probably will not send the first time. I’m probably going to have to click out of the response and the original mail post, reopen the mail and try again. Usually works the second time. Another three minutes.
I may spend up to five minutes this day when a student alerts me that the grades are not showing for a given assignment. You see, computer people think in terms of security. So they don’t make grades available. You have to actually set the assignment to show the grades after you’ve created the assignment. But they also don’t tell you that when you’ve set up an assignment to provide those grades to the student, it won’t happen unless you know to actually go into the grades control panel and reset the settings to actually do that because they’re set not to show the grades. And you won’t know you haven’t remembered to do that until the student complains.
I long ago gave up on trying to put musical excerpts into Webcourses to test on exams. I’ve uploaded the excerpts several times now, uploaded the most recent players (both Realplayer and Quicktime), changed my directions to the students, recreated the questions with new inserts, and each semester I can anticipate that the music won’t work and if it does, I’ll field any number of complaints from students about how long they take to download. It’s simply more trouble than its worth regardless of the pedagogical value of requiring students to become familiar with some of the world’s most famous music as a part of their humanities course.
I also long ago gave up on relying on the assurances I got during my training for then WebCT that there would be people in tech support to help me. Initially, we were assigned a specific agent to help us with our questions. Today we’re doing good to get a live human being on the phone. What I have discovered is that the techs are rarely by their phones, often do not have the answers I need on the spot and frequently don’t return calls when messages are left. In short, I can depend on being on my own, generally. And I can usually depend on whatever the problem is ultimately being my fault, or so I will be told.
For the record, the current version of Webcourses was not the system on which many of us were trained, it was simply imposed upon us when Blackboard bought out WebCT. I had spent one miserable week in a face-to-face training for WebCT (isn’t it ironic that the training for teaching courses online must be taught F2F?) the first two days of which were spent enduring PR speaker after PR powerpoint on the greatness of “delivering services” online. One must always suspect that a product which feels the need to so intensely reassure you of its value up front must not be terribly certain that such value will be readily apparent to its consumer.
Webcourses was simply announced two years ago at about the same time that any semblance of technical support dried up and blew away. And the Help function online is simply an insult to injury for anyone trying to figure out why in the hell Webcourses won’t play your musical except or allow you to change your grades or why your discussion folder must either continue to be open for anyone to add late posts or totally unavailable or……
This is a great deal for someone. While the system does provide a basic means of placing materials online (and the greatest and highest use of all online course software is as an adjunct to a real class) it is poorly designed and constructed. Of course, you get what you pay for and most universities aren’t paying for much instructional these days. One must be a contractor for a new stadium or a Club Med dorm to be on the university gravy train. That or be one of the many, constantly proliferating administrative staff who feel the need to micromanage every aspect of the teaching their graduate educated instructors are trying to accomplish for larger and larger sections with totally unpredictable technologies for lower salaries than public school teachers.
What a poorly engineered and operated system like Webcourses means in real terms is that the cost of production is shifted onto the instructors. The three minutes here and five minutes there of our time is not instructional in nature, the job we are actually paid to do. What we are doing when we fiddle with nonresponsive response posts or multiple uploads of musical excerpts is paying the costs for shortcuts in design and production of computer systems out of our own life energies and personal time. And as more and more classes are forced onto the online venue because overenrolled universities have no space in actual classrooms for such students, that means instructors pay more and more of the cost of production of educational credentials for future worker drones out of their own pockets.
Cui bono? Good for whom? And at whose cost? It’s a good deal for someone, but it’s not us.
Of course, what this means is that those of us who are required to use these sloppy systems are inclined to do only the very bare minimum when it comes to using them. My students this summer no longer have to buy the musical CD that comes with the text for the humanities course because I simply cannot find a way to actually test the music online. So students save money. They are responsible for less material on the exam. The tech folks don’t have to be responsible for their system. And the university makes money on mass produced online classes that don’t require actual classrooms to hold actual classes which actual students actually have to attend. And as an added bonus, instructors are required to pay for the remaining shortcomings of the system out of their life energies and personal time.
Such a deal!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Rev. Harry Scott Coverston, J.D., Ph.D.
Member, Florida Bar (inactive status)
Priest, Episcopal Church (Dio. of El Camino Real, CA)
Instructor: Humanities, Religion, Philosophy of Law
University of Central Florida, Orlando
http://pegasus.cc.ucf.edu/~ncoverst/
frharry@cfl.rr.com
If the unexamined life is not worth living, surely an unexamined belief system, be it religious or political, is not worth holding.
Most things of value do not lend themselves to production in sound bytes. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
It’s late, much later than I want to admit being up. I couldn’t sleep and so I’m checking my online course site. While I tell my students I’m not on call, in reality I do check my site regularly throughout the day during summer sessions when I’m not in real classes (and yes, I am one of those stalwarts who have not drunk the koolaid about online classes being just as good as face-to-face versions).
So, I’ve just read a student discussion posting which included a link to an interesting website. I punch up the website on my google search site. OK. I see what he was getting at. Now I go back to the Discussion post and hit reply. Nothing. I click to close the window. Nothing. I wait, thinking I must be patient. Nothing. Finally I do the Delete+Control+Alt routine to escape Webcourses altogether. A couple minutes later, I’m back on the Discussion function reopening the student’s post.
At this point, I’ve probably wasted only three minutes. But that’s three minutes of my time. I am a college instructor, not a computer programmer. I am not paid to play technological games with sometimes working websites. I’m paid to teach.
But there is absolutely nothing pedagogical about those lost three minutes. I am paying for someone else’s incompetence and irresponsibility. And if those were the only three minutes I was going to lose in the next 24 hours, it would be no big deal. But it’s not.
The mail system on Webcourses is so flakey that I often copy my responses to students before trying to send them because I am anticipating it probably will not send the first time. I’m probably going to have to click out of the response and the original mail post, reopen the mail and try again. Usually works the second time. Another three minutes.
I may spend up to five minutes this day when a student alerts me that the grades are not showing for a given assignment. You see, computer people think in terms of security. So they don’t make grades available. You have to actually set the assignment to show the grades after you’ve created the assignment. But they also don’t tell you that when you’ve set up an assignment to provide those grades to the student, it won’t happen unless you know to actually go into the grades control panel and reset the settings to actually do that because they’re set not to show the grades. And you won’t know you haven’t remembered to do that until the student complains.
I long ago gave up on trying to put musical excerpts into Webcourses to test on exams. I’ve uploaded the excerpts several times now, uploaded the most recent players (both Realplayer and Quicktime), changed my directions to the students, recreated the questions with new inserts, and each semester I can anticipate that the music won’t work and if it does, I’ll field any number of complaints from students about how long they take to download. It’s simply more trouble than its worth regardless of the pedagogical value of requiring students to become familiar with some of the world’s most famous music as a part of their humanities course.
I also long ago gave up on relying on the assurances I got during my training for then WebCT that there would be people in tech support to help me. Initially, we were assigned a specific agent to help us with our questions. Today we’re doing good to get a live human being on the phone. What I have discovered is that the techs are rarely by their phones, often do not have the answers I need on the spot and frequently don’t return calls when messages are left. In short, I can depend on being on my own, generally. And I can usually depend on whatever the problem is ultimately being my fault, or so I will be told.
For the record, the current version of Webcourses was not the system on which many of us were trained, it was simply imposed upon us when Blackboard bought out WebCT. I had spent one miserable week in a face-to-face training for WebCT (isn’t it ironic that the training for teaching courses online must be taught F2F?) the first two days of which were spent enduring PR speaker after PR powerpoint on the greatness of “delivering services” online. One must always suspect that a product which feels the need to so intensely reassure you of its value up front must not be terribly certain that such value will be readily apparent to its consumer.
Webcourses was simply announced two years ago at about the same time that any semblance of technical support dried up and blew away. And the Help function online is simply an insult to injury for anyone trying to figure out why in the hell Webcourses won’t play your musical except or allow you to change your grades or why your discussion folder must either continue to be open for anyone to add late posts or totally unavailable or……
This is a great deal for someone. While the system does provide a basic means of placing materials online (and the greatest and highest use of all online course software is as an adjunct to a real class) it is poorly designed and constructed. Of course, you get what you pay for and most universities aren’t paying for much instructional these days. One must be a contractor for a new stadium or a Club Med dorm to be on the university gravy train. That or be one of the many, constantly proliferating administrative staff who feel the need to micromanage every aspect of the teaching their graduate educated instructors are trying to accomplish for larger and larger sections with totally unpredictable technologies for lower salaries than public school teachers.
What a poorly engineered and operated system like Webcourses means in real terms is that the cost of production is shifted onto the instructors. The three minutes here and five minutes there of our time is not instructional in nature, the job we are actually paid to do. What we are doing when we fiddle with nonresponsive response posts or multiple uploads of musical excerpts is paying the costs for shortcuts in design and production of computer systems out of our own life energies and personal time. And as more and more classes are forced onto the online venue because overenrolled universities have no space in actual classrooms for such students, that means instructors pay more and more of the cost of production of educational credentials for future worker drones out of their own pockets.
Cui bono? Good for whom? And at whose cost? It’s a good deal for someone, but it’s not us.
Of course, what this means is that those of us who are required to use these sloppy systems are inclined to do only the very bare minimum when it comes to using them. My students this summer no longer have to buy the musical CD that comes with the text for the humanities course because I simply cannot find a way to actually test the music online. So students save money. They are responsible for less material on the exam. The tech folks don’t have to be responsible for their system. And the university makes money on mass produced online classes that don’t require actual classrooms to hold actual classes which actual students actually have to attend. And as an added bonus, instructors are required to pay for the remaining shortcomings of the system out of their life energies and personal time.
Such a deal!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Rev. Harry Scott Coverston, J.D., Ph.D.
Member, Florida Bar (inactive status)
Priest, Episcopal Church (Dio. of El Camino Real, CA)
Instructor: Humanities, Religion, Philosophy of Law
University of Central Florida, Orlando
http://pegasus.cc.ucf.edu/~ncoverst/
frharry@cfl.rr.com
If the unexamined life is not worth living, surely an unexamined belief system, be it religious or political, is not worth holding.
Most things of value do not lend themselves to production in sound bytes. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)