It was an experiment. I wanted to see what would happen if I did not have the outlet of The Misery. Would I get all backed up, like my Aunt Edna used to suffer, or would my problems magically disappear into my subconscious. Or would I explode?
I thought I'd wander to the faculty lounge and expel my unhappiness there, but that's such an apologist convention down there. "Oh, don't you recall when you were a whippersnapper? Of course my students all got stoned on nitrous over the weekend and then broke out their dorm windows! Who didn't?" "Sure, I gave them another extension. Don't you know who they got stuck with for a president?"
Instead I sat in the lounge and wondered why everyone around me seems to want to coddle the customers. Everyone wants to be loved.
I don't. I don't give a shit what the students think of me. Of course my ego and vanity intrude sometimes. Everyone WANTS to be liked in some way. But as far as it relates to me being the professor and they the students, I'm okay with them thinking of me as a distant, uncaring drone. (With cool ties!)
So what happened when I didn't post? I felt worse. I felt more alone. My colleagues just don't DO IT for me. We talk in code about how "student-centered" we are, but I know I think that's bullshit, and I sorta pray they do, too.
But at CM, we don't have to hide. We can say it like we mean it. We can call bullshit on the bullshit and we can buck each other up. (At least that's how it works for me.)
I hate the feeling that the lunatics have taken over the asylum, too. Hiram, I'd like to see you try a little experiment: why don't you call your colleagues on their nonsense? Do they really sincerely believe the platitudes they're spouting? Or is it all a facade (nudge-nudge, wink-wink), made necessary by lack of administrative support, coupled with the seemingly unending stream of bad ideas from the ed school, together with strong incentives not to do what's right for your students' education and character?
ReplyDeleteTry this particularly with your more intelligent colleagues, people's whose minds you respect more than others' around you. I'd be curious to know what you find. One way to do this would be, the next time a colleague mouths a particularly silly bit of nonsense to you, for you to say, "Surely, you can't really seriously believe that?" If they say, "Don't call me Shirley," that's not good.
Another question to ask them may be, "What empirical evidence can you cite to support that?" These are academics you'll be talking to: anyone else might find that language strange, but academics should be used to it.
Trends in education at least since the 1960s, but some going back even well before the "reforms" of John Dewey in the 1920s, often strike me as very unscientific. A pattern I've noticed is for a new idea in education to be announced with buoyant enthusiasm and claims of great effectiveness, without much empirical support for it. The idea is then uncritically adopted and imposed on large numbers of students. Then they take a test. When they don't do so well on the test, the first explanation for it is that something is wrong with the test.
I've seen this over and over, with New Math, teaching machines, programmed instruction. whole language, educational television, self-esteem, process writing, writing about "feelings," and now, peer instruction, also called active learning, also called learner-centered teaching, also called student-centered teaching. Does anyone have any actual evidence that any of this is really more effective?
Or perhaps have all your colleagues been beaten into submission? Or have they drunk the Kool-Aid voluntarily? Or are they just not very good scientists? Remember Irving Langmuir's Laws of Science Practiced Badly:
1. The maximum effect that is observed is produced by a causative agent of barely detectable intensity, and the magnitude of the effect is substantially independent of the intensity of the cause.
2. The effect is of a magnitude that remains close to the limit of detectability, or many measurements are necessary because of the low level of significance of the results.
3. There are claims of great accuracy.
4. Fantastic theories contrary to experience are suggested.
5. Criticisms are met by ad hoc excuses thought up on the spur of the moment.
6. The ratio of supporters to critics rises to somewhere near 50% and then falls gradually to zero.
I will do it, Frod! And report.
DeleteI, too, have great ties: that counts for a lot. I have failed to make any genuine friends from outside my department, but that's always a place to look for support and companionship. Have you not met any like-minded folk on committees you can have coffee with?
ReplyDeleteIf that fails, try bow ties. In academia, they're kind of like necklaces of bones once were among the horse barbarians.
I think a lot of it depends on your college's governing atmosphere. Large Urban Community College has a large, vocal faculty, and our administration has no issue with dissent as long as it doesn't become about people as individuals personally rather than policies or professional behavior. While we do have some serious Kool-Aid drinkers and some curmudgeons who'd love to see the return of papyrus, most of us are in between. We call bullshit on stuff we don't find to be realistic, do what's asked of us anyway (though sometimes subversively to minimize damage to students), and try not to take it too hard when yet another year of work goes down the drain and we move on to the next fad. We also know a lot of this crap comes from higher up than our college, so we try not to be too hard on our admins, particularly when they've fought for us and lost.
ReplyDeleteAcross town at Small Urban Community College, I think the administration took lessons from Strel. They rule with an iron fist, and dissent is not tolerated. It leads to lower-level administrators being told to seek employment elsewhere, department chairs being deposed for frivolous reasons, and faculty being given the worst teaching assignments they could possibly imagine. Off campus, those faculty will talk; on campus, you will hear nary a peep for fear of The Inquisition showing up at the office door.
Meanwhile, at Happy Valley Suburban Community College, most faculty not only drink the Kool-Aid but help make it and serve it. They actually believe all that crap. You'll find a few who don't, but they usually get weeded out before tenure under the "not a good fit" clause. Their results are impressive compared to the rest of our system (and we do have several other colleges besides these three) when it comes to grades. Their transfer rate is also very high, but once those students reach State U, they crash and burn since many of them have never taken an essay test, done a project that required using the library, or undertaken a major assignment that wasn't done in a group and involved kinesthetic learning or some such nonsense. No, sugar lump, Dr. Hardass is not going to let you do a collage instead of a 20-page research paper.
"No, sugar lump, Dr. Hardass is not going to let you do a collage instead of a 20-page research paper."
DeleteDon't be so sure EnglishDoc. From The Globe and Mail the other day:
"We need to help students unleash their creative side in addressing their academic work. In addition to being given writing assignments, first-year students are also given creative assignments in which they can choose any medium that they wish to respond to a question or an issue. We get anything from a rap to a video to a piece of art work, to regular written material. "
Hmm. If I were nicer, I'd let my colleagues at Happy Valley know there's now a great Canadian school they can start recommending to their transfer students so their "student success" rates would be even higher. In the meantime, however, R-1 State U down the road a ways and wannabe Regional State U #1 and #2 nearby are not going to be taking dioramas anytime soon.
DeleteWhat is going on with all the leftie graphics?? IS ANYONE IN CHARGE HERE?!?!?!?!
ReplyDeleteI have been asked to sit on a task force regarding 1-1 computing and a move to e-texts(gods help me) precisely because I seem to be immune to the KoolAid.
ReplyDeleteHiram, I empathize with you. There are a lot of times that I feel like the only sane person in the asylum. And I'm not quiet, with the end result that I don't think I'm well-liked by some of those in charge. I don't much care, though. I refuse to be one of those people who either a)suffers in silence, or b) goes along with the dumbshow for fear of rocking the boat. As far as I'm concerned, the boat's got a leak and we've got one oar in the water, and anyone who wants to pretend differently is no friend of mine.
I have several colleagues with whom to commiserate. But they're not always as insightful or empathetic as this community. Plus, some of them are really tired of listening to me whine, and vice versa.
ReplyDeleteAnecdotal evidence in support of Hiram's thesis: my evals are better when I blog frequently.
ReplyDelete