I'm just pissed off about my crappy colleagues, a slow moving and dull group who have lowered standards so much in our major intro courses that I seem to be the only remaining faculty member who's actually requiring students to work.
Here are some of my most recent student evaluations:
- Dr. P makes us do more work than the other classes have to do.
- P doesn't know what the course is supposed to cover, he covers way too much.
- My roommate takes this course with Dr. D and there are only half the assignments, and there are 500 points
available instead of just 100. I've been screwed.
And I hear the same kind of comments every semester shortly after syllabus day. Students somehow join up in a confab on campus to determine who's getting screwed and who's in the section where things are peachy and where there are 500 points available...like that means something.But what really irritates me is I'm just following the written standards for the course. I've even visited some of my colleagues and asked them: "Do you offer at least 4 major written assignments?" and they've admitted they don't. "What about the guidelines?" I've asked. One brave soul said, "The version of my class is more of an honors class, so my syllabus was grandfathered
in."I've raised the idea of standards at departmental meetings and everyone nods their heads. "Yes, standards, must keep the standards."
I am 2 years from the start of my tenure process, and my student evaluations (I teach MOSTLY intro level stuff) are lower than the department average. I KNOW how to get better scores, but I don't want to dumb down my course. I know the right answer to my problem. I know what I should do, what I shouldn't do, but I need the job, need the security, need the money, etc.
I just wanted to see if I was alone.
This is precisely why I lose sleep whenever I get student complaints that my class is the "first that required use of the library," etc.
ReplyDeleteSuch claims SOUND ridiculous.
They should be de facto proof of flakery.
I continue to do my best to fight the "good fight" to keep college level writing and discourse, well, college level.
However, my strength is sapped, my enthusiasm withered. (See my recent Narcissist Nate post.)
When the least common denominator in retaining standards is likely a colleague, really, what's the point in holding fast any longer?
Alone? No.
ReplyDeleteI hear you. My evals have sunk recently as my class is "too hard." I think I'm teaching the basics, but then, once you've earned a doctorate do you still have a good grasp of what constitutes "the basics."?
ReplyDeleteI'm trying to reframe how students view the material from "hard" to "challenging" mainly by changing the way I present it in class, including making the students think more about implications. I have no real clue if it's working yet but we'll see when the evals come in.
Set aside your principles for two short years, get tenure then double down on your standards.
ReplyDeleteOr, if you are bringing in the research moola, don't sweat it.
This is why student evals need to go.
ReplyDeleteWhy can't we get rid of student evaluations? I have challenged my Chair and Dean to actually come to one of my classes and see what I do. I have taught for 15 years and not once has a fellow faculty member spend even 5 mins in my classroom. How hard is it to substitute peer review for student evaluations. Just have everyone sit in one course for 10 mins, read the syllabus, and write a one page review. We are such lazy fucks.
ReplyDeleteWhen I used to work at a unionized campus,
ReplyDeletemy experience has always been that admin-flakes observe my class, only because the contract requires them to. But then when it comes time to write up the actual evaluation, it's as if they were never there.
The first rule of tenure is to fit in. You fit in by making your senior colleagues think you are one of them, and you do things the way they do. You do not speak out at meetings talking about "upholding standards" as if they don't do this, because especially if they don't, they will resent you for it. You don't go from office to office, quizzing them on whether or not they are adhering to guidelines. They will turf your ass when the time comes. The good will of your colleagues can go a long way to offsetting mediocre evaluations. But if your colleagues think you're a pain in the ass, your bad teaching evals will just make them think you suck as a teacher as well. "So there!" they will say.
ReplyDeleteBefore tenure, don't even raise a critical eyebrow at a senior colleague. New people that come in basically asserting "U R DOIN' IT RONG!" get their asses handed to them.
Amen, Stella.
ReplyDeleteYou should be happy your course evals aren't higher than the dept. average, because then those of your colleagues who are phoning it in and get evals lower than yours would be pissed at you. I learned that the hard way (my vote was a squeaker even with way above average evals). I once had the nerve to question aloud why our department was schizoid when it comes to evals--it seemed like the colleagues with lower scores considered them "popularity contests" and discounted them completely (even though mine also had high "tough class" and "learned a lot" scores too). Others set quite a store by them (and coincidentally had higher evals..hmmm...)
To support Stella's statement, if you don't "fit" with what their idea of a department is, they will shit-can you without a qualm, and they will make up some BS excuse to do it even if you are a way better teacher than any of them are. So do yourself a favor and STFU about standards until you're in a position to do something concrete about them.
The responses to this thread have been a wake-up call for me, albeit one that makes me very sad. I suppose that's what happens when we've been disillusioned. So, the standards go, and I get to stay. There is something wrong with the system that makes this the acceptable norm.
ReplyDeleteMestopholita--
ReplyDeleteIt's not an "acceptable" norm. It's just they way things are. And I mean in a broader sense than just the particular issue of academic standards.
Often a new prof comes in bursting with new ideas and criticisms about their particular department. But usually things are the way they are for a reason. Sit down, shut up, and find out what those reasons are before you survey the entire department to see if they're meeting standards.
The simple fact is that people hate being told someone else is working harder than they are, and that they're not doing their job. They hate this when it is their chair doing it. If it's someone junior to them, that junior person will possibly make an enemy. Because no one wants to give tenure to the person that's showing up in their office telling them that they're not assigning enough work. People tenure those that fit in and make their lives easier.
Is this acceptable? No. But again, that's the way it is. Junior faculty that forget this, or don't know it to begin with, do it at their own peril.
No, you're not alone, and for those of us on the contingent "track" (i.e. long road to nowhere, or perhaps a dead end), the problem doesn't go away. In your situation, I'm with Ben and Stella and Chrome: do what you need to to get tenure, then do what you can to uphold/reestablish standards. You'll help more students in the long term than you will if you don't get tenure.
ReplyDeleteI'm in a somewhat similar position, except that my colleagues are not, by any definition of the term, dumbers-down. The great majority of them are very dedicated to their teaching, and they do it very well. But I have realized, during recent conversations about a big-project-in-progress, that I ask students to do more things for the first time in my class than many of my colleagues do; I tend to think of the sophomore/junior level writing in the disciplines class we all teach as the beginning of the second half of my students' college careers, rather than as the end of the gen ed sequence (which, by catalog standards, and, I'm sure, in many of the students' minds, is what it is; on the other hand, it's on the same numerical level as the research methods and other intro-to-being-a-major classes). Add to that the fact that I'm short, fat, female, and visibly middle-aged, and you get someone who looks like mom (or maybe grandma), who, rather than clapping and cheering and handing out As and saying "oh, you did that perfectly! See how much you've learned from your gen ed classes!" is saying "you're making real progress; in fact, you've got this skill, and this one, down pretty well. As you continue with courses in your major, you'll want to keep working on this skill and this skill, which I know were new to you this semester, so you really have them down by the time you graduate. Oh, and by the way, the various levels of skill you've demonstrated in this class work out to about a B." This approach does not, for the most part, produce miserable evaluations; I'm usually somewhere between 4.25 and 4.5 on a 5-point scale, occasionally rise above 4.75 in a section when the planets align just right, and occasionally fall below 4 (usually when one or two members of the class hold fast to the belief that doing everything satisfactorily should result in an A, and try to reinforce that belief by giving me straight zeroes or ones, which, in a relatively small class, can have a disproportionate effect). But my scores are a bit lower than, and definitely more variable than, some of my peers'. (continued below)
All of which I can live with, especially since my department has always included various kinds of peer review (visits, examination of syllabi and assignments, etc.) in our annual reviews, and is in the process of trying to make that more systematic. Student evaluations play a role, but only a small one. But I still worry about the Dean, who seems very fond of spreadsheets with student eval numbers, and who make the final decisions on contract renewal.
ReplyDeleteI really wish I could hear what said Dean has to say about the recent study by Carrell and West (http://www.nber.org/papers/w14081 ), which found, among other things, that "academic rank, teaching experience, and terminal degree status of mathematics and science professors are negatively correlated with contemporaneous student achievement, but positively related to follow-on course achievement. Across all subjects, student evaluations of professors are positive predictors of contemporaneous course achievement, but are poor predictors of follow-on course achievement." While I know there are things I could do to make my teaching still better, and I continue to try out new approaches and refine existing ones (and, yes, borrow freely from those higher-evaluated colleagues when I think I can successfully incorporate one of their approaches into my own teaching), I think I might, right now, fit the profile of the professor whose students get a lot out of his/her classes, but don't realize it for several semesters, pretty well.
Very interesting discussion, CC; I'll have to read that paper. I think I fit that profile too.
ReplyDeletePerry, the advice about fitting in is right on the mark in my experience, though I do hope that eventually you'll have the pull to enforce some standards. You're not alone.
On the practical side, why not have a total of 500 points in your syllabus the way Dr. D does? As you said, it's meaningless, but it might give the Little Dears (and your dept. chair and dean) less ammunition against you.
Here's something that I think no one has raised. Newly minted profs tend to have higher expectations than veterans about students and the amount of content coverage warranted by the level of an introductory class.
At least I did. As new profs, we've recently been caught up in excelling and competing in graduate school, and raise the bar accordingly for students who are, like, new to the whole higher education thing.
This is anecdotal, BTW. I'd love to see a study done.
Think back to when you were a freshman, Perry, especially if you attended a college of the same caliber as the one that employs you. How much reading or writing was assigned for an intro course? How generous was the grading curve? How often were you grateful for getting cut some slack by a professor?
Maybe at least some of your colleagues have shed some of that grad-school competitiveness and have a more relaxed view of the role of the intro course in a student's education.
Finally, consider these phrases:
"Dr. P. . . covers way too much."
"I learned so much."
The former focuses on the prof spewing info from the rostrum, perhaps with many PowerPoint slides. It's been called "teaching by mentioning" (http://ozpk.tripod.com/0depth).
The latter focuses on what the student actually learns. Sometimes the students learn more if the prof "covers" less. As the years go by, I find myself pruning "coverage" from my classes in favor of quick, informal polls (jargon alert: classroom assessments) about how well the Little Dears understand the key concepts and skills we expect from them at the next level of the major.
If your grad program didn't include courses in how to teach, consider signing up for a workshop or getting a couple of Jossey-Bass books to browse occasionally in your office. (Try starting with "Tools for Teaching" by Davis; or "Classroom Assessment Techniques" by Angelo and Cross.)
You are not alone. Even after tenure, I can't shake the feeling of the pressure to dumb it down. It's utterly demoralizing and it does not go away. I blame lowered admissions standards (among other things).
ReplyDeleteI was avoiding saying what Stella said, because it made me feel bad. But it's really true. Nobody likes a junior person who's running around telling everyone else how lame they are.
ReplyDeleteAlso, sometimes good teaching isn't setting a bar really high, making them jump, and watching them fall on their faces. Sometimes it's setting the bar just past their reach, and moving it up incrementally, class by class, to where the standards actually are.
And who cares if it's 500 or 100 points? I have 1000 points, but the final grade is that divided by 10. It's not possible to score 350% on something is it?
"And who cares if it's 500 or 100 points? I have 1000 points, but the final grade is that divided by 10. It's not possible to score 350% on something is it?"
ReplyDeletePeople like big numbers. That's why, when you hop onto the mean turtles in a Mario game, you get something like 200 points per turtle.
Proffies need to make their courses more like video games.
I've always thought this RYS post about a new method of evaluation makes sense. Of course you have to have the weight to carry it off, and you probably need to be at the right institution.
ReplyDeleteIf they fire you, you can have the last laugh by tipping off the accreditation board.
ReplyDelete@ Burnt Chrome: Your STFU remark almost makes it seem that you are getting defensive on behalf of the people that Perry is unhappy with.
I agree with the other posts. This is a very sad state of affairs. The curriculum says one thing, yet you are being pressured to screw the curriculum. Never mind the fact that stuff written in the curriculum determines things like transferrability! In my humble opinion, schools are comitting fraud whenever they do this.
This may be the "status quo", but that is irrelevant.
@EMH: No, I'm not defending them. I'm giving him the advice I wish I would have taken, because it might have made the last two years of my tenure bid a bit less of a nightmare. I opened my mouth and offended almost half of the committee. My vote was ultimately positive, but it might not have been so close had I just kept my mouth shut and my head down.
ReplyDeleteI'm glad the word fraud came up because I'm in that group that believes some colleges (maybe many) are perpetrating a kind of fraud by taking money from kids, parents, and the government, and then giving them this sometimes shoddy product created by under prepared teachers, lowered standards, and a seemingly ignorant view of the worth of a degree on the job market.
ReplyDeleteWow, a syllabus that has been grandfathered in! I've never heard of such a thing. Sounds like your department has some slackers in it, and it's not the students. Did he beg the dean to let him keep his syllabus by claiming to be allergic to change? It's like a proffie's version of "I have a learning disability so kiss my a-- and hand me everything on a silver platter!"
ReplyDeleteSend him to sick bay. A good dose of chordrasine followed by the reversing of the polarities on the medical tri-corder should cure his hypochondria.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, this brings out the bitter side of me....
ReplyDeleteIf you are part-time, adjunct or expendable (i.e. non-tenured), don't offer any "advice." I was accused of trying to tell others how to teach and got on the wrong side of a prick who was new to teaching and didn't know shit. Unfortunatley, I was the "adjunct" and he was the "full-time." My 20+ years of experience meant nothing. After a few years, I was "let go" and all the ideas I suggested are now part of the curriculum. His ideas, of course.
Unfortunately, you have to know how to play the game with whatever department you are in. On a tenure track in another U, I figured out how to do that and still kept my high standards. However, my other collegues also had high standards and commiserated with the student whining. But, if it becomes a popularity contest, and you have standards (and low evals), unless you make some changes, you're screwed.
Those of us who really struggle with this are usually too hard on ourselves. I don't care if I'm the hardest class they've ever taken or ruin their fucking G.P.A. (my personal LEAST favorite argument...my G.P.A. is a 3.5 and I'm a GOOD student, therefore _______________ (fill in your stupid-ass excuse for being an idiot here.) I have a minimum standard or quality that I will always adhere to no matter what. But, I'm willing to "fluff" other things to make things APPEAR easier. You can be more accomodating and "sweet" without actually compromising your standards.
1. Drop low scores. Take the top 5 out of 8 scores, for example. This helps with make-up excuses as well. It actually makes your life much easier, boosts students scores and really does take into account life problems such as car accidents, family emergencies and illnesses. YES, there will be an occasional student who doesn't want to drop any scores. I just show them mathematically how that will make their grade go down and they shut up.
2. Make Study Guides and Practice Tests. Helps me focus on what needs to be on the Quizzes/Tests, can be used again and again, and students demand/request them if you don't and call you mean and inhuman. Really, once you make them, they just get recycled.
3. Throw in some minor Bonus Points here and there (but never Extra Credit). These can be justified in so many ways, and you're not selling your soul as in Extra Credit where two "D" assignments add up to a "B."
4. Do those required Written Assignments but make them "fun." Call them something else (project vs 5-page paper), tweak the assignment so that it is contemporary, include graphics and animation (text not reduced, but "fun" stuff allowed). I still grade grammar and content and require citations, but once I changed the focus a bit, I stopped getting so many complaints. Keep in mind, though, I'm not teaching writing.
These are just a few suggestions. I don't change the hardness or complexity of my Quizzes/Tests/Assigments; nor do I change the scope of what I'm teaching. Packaging is everything.