A humble audience?

[enders_shadow]

I spoke with a professor at my uni, and she gave me a book to read titled: What the best college teachers do (can be found here: http://www.amazon.com/What-Best-College-Teachers-Do/dp/0674013255Read more... )

Comments

[dirty_eskimo]

Ugh, I had to read that book for a pedagogy course and it's TERRIBLE. I finished the book and could only think, "well, duh. You mean the best college teachers actually enjoy teaching, are good scholars, and are responsive to student needs? Wow, what an insight!"

[enders_shadow]

That seems fair. It's somewhat intuitive at points like, "Treat your students with respect and dignity"

But at other points, it's sorta anti-intuitive. For example, the idea that intrinsic student motivation actually decreases when extrinsic rewards are given. Maybe that's just anti-intuitive for me, cause I'm silly like that.

[dracsmith]

For example, the idea that intrinsic student motivation actually decreases when extrinsic rewards are given.

Srsly? Obviously the author was not present the time I actually forgot the Smarties to give out during Greek Alphabet Bingo (an exercise I traditionally conducted for Elementary Greek students very early in the semester). I had always figured that the real prize was their pride in showing off or something, not a piece of candy that cost about a nickel, but they practically howled out loud. I had to promise to bring some next time and to keep track of the winners. It was very important to the students that the winners get more Smarties.

(American Smarties - tiny discs of sweet/sour sugar candy in a roll. Not to be confused with Canadian Smarties, which are something like M&M's.)

[enders_shadow]

In the book, the author says, "If, for example, students have a strong curiosity about what causes wars and we offer them extrinsic rewards in the form of grades to motivate their learning and then they later graduate, what will happen to their interests? They actually go down. Research subjects tend to lose some or all of their intrinsic fascination once the extrinsic motivator is gone, at least under certain conditions." The author cites a study done by Edward Deci, and draws conclusions from their study.

I am no expert (i bet that made you gasp!), I am merely reading this, and it seems to make sense to me. In a parallel sense: in chess there are aged tournaments. In the tournaments that are held for children, there are almost always trophies or medals awarded, whereas adults just have cash prizes. Often, the kids stop playing when they stop getting medals or trophies (as the cash prizes are far fewer in number--medals and trophies are far cheaper for the tournament organizers to provide)

[hafren]

How do they treat students?

I don't usually hit mine hard enough to require treatment, but if necessary I would send them to the medical bay.

[enders_shadow]

What weapon do you use? Are you a fist or foot sort of person? You might think of bringing a copy of the OED and hitting them with that. Maybe they'll learn something along the way.

[enders_shadow]

I am somewhat surprised at the negative response to the book. The prof who gave it to me has a great reputation, and heads the "center for teaching effectiveness" at our school. I'm sure she knows much more than that book can teach me--but she seems quite informed and succesful at what she does.

As for the fourteenth student--sure, they might learn. But isn't that what the mandatory restraints are for?

neither wise, nor learned, nor a professor

[poldy]

Those questions strike me as silly. People expend far too much effort thinking about teaching.

Re: neither wise, nor learned, nor a professor

[enders_shadow]

Correction: People expend far too much effort thinking.

Re: neither wise, nor learned, nor a professor

[poldy]

Considering the results of much of this thinking, that may be true.

Re: neither wise, nor learned, nor a professor

[hafren]

People expend far too much effort thinking about teaching.

Not guilty, m'lud! I hardly ever think about it even when I am teaching.... I'm too busy thinking about retirement.

The answers should be obvious:

[max_ambiguity]

1.What do the best teachers know and understand?
Nothing

2. How do they prepare to teach?
By hastily wolfing down breakfast while wondering what to do in class in thirty minutes.

3. What do they expect of their students?
Apathy, runny noses, and bribes

4. What do they do when they teach?
Scratch themselves and tell anecdotes.

5. How do they treat students?
As if they were not even there.

6. How do they check their progress and evaluate their efforts?
They don't.

Re: The answers should be obvious:

[vlion]

Suppose that this is true: The more you know, the more you realize that you don't know much. Take the logical limit: the most knowledgable person realizes they know nothing.

Therefore, they come to class and teach the realization of knowing nothing. This includes the realization that since, they know nothing, they definitely don't know that students are really there...

:-)

More seriously, the best profs I've had were hardcases, but who cared about the students learning to think. Good ole Dr. H and the blood I sweated for that B...

Re: The answers should be obvious:

[max_ambiguity]

The thing is, I've had a lot of great teachers and most of them were very different from each other, even in the way they approached teaching. Sure, all of them cared about students learning to think, but I'll bet a lot of bad teachers care.