Advisor rant
So I got chewed out by my advisor this morning. The class had a lecture exam this past Wednesday, and they came into lab that afternoon bitching about the essay question. I have to back them up in saying that the prof didn't spend enough time on the material in question in lecture to justify doing an essay question on it. So pretty much the entire class bombed the question.
So when the prof (also my advisor, kind of a double-jeopardy thing) came to me this morning, his attitude wasn't belligerent, that's too strong a word, but I can't come up with a better one at the moment. He was saying that he spent a lot more time on it than the students or I remember, and that they should bloody well have known it. What's more, he was trying to ram down my throat that I've failed them and him by not covering the material in lab as well.
When I took over doing the Comparative Anatomy lab, I thoroughly rearranged it. Previously, it had been done by organ system, dissecting a lamprey, a shark, and a cat in tandem throughout the semester. This parallels the lecture, and I will admit that it corroborates better than what I'm doing, but it also means that we've got semi-preserved fish sitting around in the lab throughout the semester. In addition to adding a unit covering taxonomy and identification of skulls, I switched it so that we dissect a shark, salamander, and cat (I tossed the lamprey as being redundant with the shark, and inserted the salamander as an intermediate between fish and mammal), each in discrete blocks. While this doesn't necessarily parallel the lecture as well, it does have the advantage of completing each critter in a timely fashion and getting rid of them. There's no actual reason, though, that all of the same material wouldn't be covered with both formats.
The material in question I did touch on briefly at the beginning of the semester in connection with the skulls, and I'm coming back to in a week and a half to two weeks, when we get to the cat muscles. No big deal. But apparently since it didn't coincide with this test, that's a major failing. But then that kinda goes against something else that he said, that he only tests on the lecture, not on things from the lab or the textbook. So why is it that big a deal that I didn't cover it in lab during the block for this lecture test? Even if I had, he'd be pulling material from lab to test in lecture, which (as he said this morning) he explicitly stated at the beginning of the semester he wouldn't do.
Independently, he also said that the stuff is in the book as well, and that they should have gotten the info from there, even if not from the lecture, which kinda negates the other half of the above statement.
So he made a comment to the effect that he wants me to go back to teaching it the old way, by organ system, so that the lecture and lab run in parallel throughout. He didn't want to let me change it in he first place, because, by his own admission, he's old and afraid of change. I gotta wonder if he's just using my alternative format as a scapegoat for this current problem.
He also said that he doesn't have enough time in lecture to cover everything, and (not in these words)that I should be picking up the slack in lab. I don't have a problem with using lab time to fill in and expand upon things that he talks about in lecture. I actually tend to do a lot of that anyway. I think the key here is communication, with me talking about in lab what he explicitly wants me to, and not leaving it to my guesswork.
He also said this morning that last year he got the worst evaluations he's ever had, and tried to say that he thinks it's because I'm not backing up his lecture with my lab. I'm leaning more toward the fact that last year's crop of students were the worst group he's ever had. While that wouldn't necessarily mean that they'd trash him on the evaluations, it's made a lot more suspicious by the fact that he told them in class that they were the worst bunch he'd ever had.
I also can't help thinking that part of the reason he got such bad evaluations is that he's kinda by default being compared to me. :)
I'm also a little annoyed that I can only pick a single "mood" for the post. There are half a dozen that all apply right now, to varying degrees, including depressed, frustrated, and pissed off. Nor can I come up with any other word that encompasses them. Oh well. The failings of the English language.
So when the prof (also my advisor, kind of a double-jeopardy thing) came to me this morning, his attitude wasn't belligerent, that's too strong a word, but I can't come up with a better one at the moment. He was saying that he spent a lot more time on it than the students or I remember, and that they should bloody well have known it. What's more, he was trying to ram down my throat that I've failed them and him by not covering the material in lab as well.
When I took over doing the Comparative Anatomy lab, I thoroughly rearranged it. Previously, it had been done by organ system, dissecting a lamprey, a shark, and a cat in tandem throughout the semester. This parallels the lecture, and I will admit that it corroborates better than what I'm doing, but it also means that we've got semi-preserved fish sitting around in the lab throughout the semester. In addition to adding a unit covering taxonomy and identification of skulls, I switched it so that we dissect a shark, salamander, and cat (I tossed the lamprey as being redundant with the shark, and inserted the salamander as an intermediate between fish and mammal), each in discrete blocks. While this doesn't necessarily parallel the lecture as well, it does have the advantage of completing each critter in a timely fashion and getting rid of them. There's no actual reason, though, that all of the same material wouldn't be covered with both formats.
The material in question I did touch on briefly at the beginning of the semester in connection with the skulls, and I'm coming back to in a week and a half to two weeks, when we get to the cat muscles. No big deal. But apparently since it didn't coincide with this test, that's a major failing. But then that kinda goes against something else that he said, that he only tests on the lecture, not on things from the lab or the textbook. So why is it that big a deal that I didn't cover it in lab during the block for this lecture test? Even if I had, he'd be pulling material from lab to test in lecture, which (as he said this morning) he explicitly stated at the beginning of the semester he wouldn't do.
Independently, he also said that the stuff is in the book as well, and that they should have gotten the info from there, even if not from the lecture, which kinda negates the other half of the above statement.
So he made a comment to the effect that he wants me to go back to teaching it the old way, by organ system, so that the lecture and lab run in parallel throughout. He didn't want to let me change it in he first place, because, by his own admission, he's old and afraid of change. I gotta wonder if he's just using my alternative format as a scapegoat for this current problem.
He also said that he doesn't have enough time in lecture to cover everything, and (not in these words)that I should be picking up the slack in lab. I don't have a problem with using lab time to fill in and expand upon things that he talks about in lecture. I actually tend to do a lot of that anyway. I think the key here is communication, with me talking about in lab what he explicitly wants me to, and not leaving it to my guesswork.
He also said this morning that last year he got the worst evaluations he's ever had, and tried to say that he thinks it's because I'm not backing up his lecture with my lab. I'm leaning more toward the fact that last year's crop of students were the worst group he's ever had. While that wouldn't necessarily mean that they'd trash him on the evaluations, it's made a lot more suspicious by the fact that he told them in class that they were the worst bunch he'd ever had.
I also can't help thinking that part of the reason he got such bad evaluations is that he's kinda by default being compared to me. :)
I'm also a little annoyed that I can only pick a single "mood" for the post. There are half a dozen that all apply right now, to varying degrees, including depressed, frustrated, and pissed off. Nor can I come up with any other word that encompasses them. Oh well. The failings of the English language.