I am a theological lecturer. I believe in the content of my course material.
Since I have returned to teaching, I have had repeated requests from students for full-text notes of my lectures.
I have refused these requests, on the grounds that I do use a text-book and allocate set-readings, and that my lecture 'notes' are not of publishable standard. The notes are actually for me, as a prompt to my oral delivery of the course content.
Futhermore, I think giving out a set of full-text notes is not that way I want to teach. I think it encourages 'bulimic learning' - the rote learning of information for an exam which is quickly forgotten. I would like to encourage what they call 'deep learning' - and to regard the lecture itself as not an injection of information but an educational experience.
Am I missing something?
22 comments:
Mike,
I think that the alternative is to give a hand-out (A4 page of dot-point notes or power-point slides) to students. This gives them the outline and forces them to think through the specifics!
Well of course - and this is my prefered method. But this isn't what (some) students prefer. They are anxious that they don't get everything said down. Some of those with laptops type fast enough to produce a verbatim set of notes! And while ever some of my colleagues DO provide a full text, the pressure will stay.
Partly I think this is driven by assessment anxiety - and the fact that people don't do the set reading for whatever reason. So the pressure is then on the lecture and the lecture notes to do the job of the text book.
"and to regard the lecture itself as not an injection of information but as an educational experience" — yeah, I reckon that's the main point: the lecture as a speech-act. If it was anything else, it would be completely redundant, since students would be better off spending their time at the library, reading texts that are far better and richer than whatever the lecturer has prepared.
By the same token, I'm a firm believer in lecture non-attendance — where you've got a very bright student and a very dull lecturer who is merely recycling lectures from an earlier year, the student should be positively encouraged to skip lectures and go to the library instead...
I think you're on the right (track?). The problem is partly your context - Students do want verbatim copies of everything you say (and clearly your notes wouldn't provide that), mainly because they're in an environment where that is what they will cram for exams based on. The fact that you have set readings and a textbook, also renders full-text notes redundant. Stick to your guns..
Trouble is Ben that we can't teach based on the requirements of the most able student when we have a class of 80+ like we do at MTC.
Seumus - I think partly the culture of assessment drives everything, especially for adult learners. This is a habit we pick up from high school, but we can help change this pattern by thinking more creatively about assessments. My feeling is that adults on the whole want to be reassured that they can do what is required assessment wise before they will relax and begin to learn. Hmm.
i think if you asked students how they would prefer to learn then they would all be on board with your thinking about deep learning verses bulimic learning.
but when you have 8 subjects all with their own list of set readings, ancients languages to learn, student minister jobs to keep, meetings with ministers & small group members not to mention somehow having a precious day of rest - what sounds good in theory doesn't always work in reality.
there are some people who God has gifted in such a way that they can balance all of those things and obtain a deep level of learning at college as well. i'm not ones of those people but i have come to a happy satisfaction that even though i am probably guilty of bulimic learning at times, God is slowly teaching me more about himself and teaching me to love him more and more.
while it would be nice to live up to the standards of lecturers and students alike their standards cannot be my yardstick. if i finish a year knowing more and loving more than i did when i started i feel like its been a good year. if i can honestly say i did my best to bring glory to God through my studies i have no higher standard than that.
i think if you asked students how they would prefer to learn then they would all be on board with your thinking about deep learning verses bulimic learning.
I agree with Kate, Michael. And I would add that you can't have it both ways.
Either you provide full text notes, so students can listen well and not worry about getting verse references down, OR you provide a very good educational experience.
It may be that sometimes there isn't much of an educational experience, and students are left to wonder what they were supposed to get out of the lecture, left without anything 'concrete' like a full text to reflect on.
Nice one Kate!
A big part of the issue is that the majority of the students have come through the NSW Educational system which spends the two senior years of High School drilling people to pass exams. At its worst the whole school and course structure is focused on exam technique and achieving results - its a hard habit to shake for a lot of students. (it's also nasty if, like me, you didn't do the HSC - you feel the pressure but don't have any exam technique)
My experience at MTC has been that the Lecturers who get the best class interaction and "deep thought" are those who provide full text notes but then don't just read them. (I'm thinking George Athas - Church History/OT, Richard Gibson - Church History) It seems counter-intuitive but I think they are doing is allaying the fears of the 'bulimic' learners, assuring them that all the information they will need has been captured and is easily retrievable. People are then encouraged to take a deep breath and actually have a conversation about the topic. Students who would normally be anxious that questions in class are taking too much time away from the scheduled lecture programme can relax, maybe even enjoy the discussion.
George Athas' classes are far and away the best example I've seen of this - the best discussions combined with the fullest text, including lengthy extracts from primary documents.
I'm sympathetic to your desire for a deeper learning experience that aims for thoughtful integration rather than regurgitation. I stopped taking notes at the start of the year because I found that I wasn't ever thinking through what we were considering in class. But I wasn't schooled to do well in exams (and consequently I don't). The problem is that a lofty desire to produce 'thinking Christians' can easily result in a teaching methodology that just makes students anxious and frustrated. And when people feel like that they don't learn well. Please don't think that full-text notes are selling out.
Also Ben, I'm sure your comment was at least partly flippant, but a few wise lecturers at our College have aimed a well-directed boot to the effect that Theological Education is a one-for-all, all-for-one experience. Good, deep, learning requires the bright students to be in class, to take part in discussions, study groups, to work hard at articulating difficult concepts to their peers, and to learn humility. We're not producing Oxbridge dons, we're training servants of the Church.
Sorry guys, touched a raw nerve.
Hey michael,
until the method of assessment changes you are always going to have anxious bulemic students.
my experience of good lecturing was actually your father.
he provided full text notes (which I still have) but he rarely if ever spoke from them.
I reckon full notes are good, or exact readings set out in a reader.
students need to be expected to have read them before they come in order to fully benefit from your lecturing.
if they don't have time - they can blame theri indigestion on a ridculous curriculum, and all your hard work will be foiled by the board of studies who set the curriculum.
one oakhill lecturer I had gave full text notes in the prior lesson and requested that if you have not done them you either came and listened without participating or stayed away and read them.
those who read and participated invariably benefited the most in indepth learning.
one other thing about PFJ lectures - it was the experience of learning as much as the content of learning which i enjoyed (I never missed a lecture and did exceptionally better in doctrine than any other subject as a result).
sounds like you need to sit in on some George Athas lectures. Everyone raves about him.
Michael - I think you are dead right about the culture of assessments. *How* a student is assessed will ultimately drive how they study and prepare throughout a course. I notice that most prominently in listening to language teachers talk about their classroom experience, but I suspect it is more broadly true. Students will tailor their learning to their assessments.
Thanks - this is all helpful. Personally, as an Arts graduate, I cannot fathom the need for an authoritative 'text' to pass the exam from!
I am hearing from Dan and others that a text of the lecture is very helpful to allay the stress of students. But I am also hearing that this is true in the context of an assessment-driven and very very busy course. I am not trying to blame the students of course!
It seems to me that this is duplicating the work of a text-book, however - a book that may be better written and more helpful than my 'notes' could ever be.
I think people have quite different expectations from a full text set of notes than a text book. What people are looking for in a set of notes is the standard against which they will be assessed. It tells people the right line to take on a question; it orients them to the readings; and it reassures them by giving a quantifiable dimension to what they need to know. (Sure, that's a horrid debasement of the learning experience but it's what people think)
People have a different expectation of a textbook. Most of the set textbooks are more comprehensive than the material covered in lectures, or (if the text is especially good) say something particularly interesting and subject to debate. Students will generally interpret the textbook through the lecture material (I also think that this is why textbooks that don't get regularly referred to in class don't get read until the week before exams).
In this sense, I don't think full-text notes do/should duplicate the work of a textbook.
Again, maybe it's a travesty of learning but you don't want to just lecture the students you wish you had.
In an ideal situation perhaps you would select a landmark work as the text, divide it into readings, and everyone would show up each week having done the reading, ready for the cut and thrust of an academic discussion. Assessment would be based on participation in discussion, essay papers, maybe you could have an end of year oral presentation (10min presentation, 10min responding to questions). People would be challenged to think not just regurgitate. I really hope that's where we are heading.
Assessment is a major obstacle but I can't see MTC getting rid of exams anytime soon. We can dream.
I don't think you are missing anything. Maybe you are also in tune with the notion that there is a rhetorical impact of a lecture that goes beyond mere understanding. We downplay the role that emotions play in learning.
I really like the Oxford method very essay based (1-2 a week)that aren't assesed but have to be done then either Finals (not so good) or (better) 4 long essays/dissertations/exams a year that add up to the final grade.
The essay based assesment takes a lot of the anxiety out of it for those who are prone to that. It also alows students to find their interest area that means that students are driven by love for a subject rather than fear of failure.
Actually even when I was doing exams the fact that I could choose 4 questions out of 30 or so meant that I developed interest areas that I thought would be useful to me in ministry...
I guess this style is quite heavy on tutors time though and might not be possible in places with as many students as Moore... however I do wonder if more choice generally means more motivation.
As an interesting aside: I hardly ever read the full notes, mainly because I believed in working my own way around the subject, using the lectures as a guide. So I guess as a student I adopted the approach that you would advocate.
BUT
Since leaving college I have actually found how useful the full notes are as a resource. The quality is much better than many text books on the same subject (I'm thinking of Andrew Cameron's philosophy and ethics notes, and some of the stuff from the Bib. Studies lecturers - particularly their theological notes as opposed to their exegetical ones). So if lecturers are willing to spend the hours getting sets of notes together, then they're worth handing out and worth reading, espescially if they do a good job summing up masses of secondary and primary material.
Further to my comment re MTC notes:
For what it's worth, I found the exegetical notes too darn atomistic ... their excruciating detail was a hinderance rather than a help at times, and added nothing to the commentaries that were also set for reading.
However, their [the Bib studies lecturers] theological notes were often better than the introductory essays found in the front of the commentaries and proved to be useful compliments to the material in OT/NT surveys/theologies.
as for 'Christian thought' notes ... Andrew Camerons stuff is always gold. It ought to be published.
Doctrine stuff was interesting ... but only when comprehensible (let the reader understand!). One set of notes we recieved was in serious need of updating ... the lecturer had left in a footnote saying "see forthcoming title...", and the book mentioned was subsequently published in 1991!
Mark Thompson's stuff on the doc of revelation was helpful and well set out, but incomplete. I'd like to see him complete it and get it published.
I also think the Doc people at MTC need to do some more publishing (an area where the Bib studies people have done more work)...maybe 'codify' (?!?) and defend some of our particular theological convictions: 4 star, (err, I mean 4 point) Calvinism, etc etc.
I like the full text notes. They allow me to scan ahead in a lecture and come to grips with it. They also allow me to 1. Have some time to think about questions I might need to ask, rather than realising hours later than I should have and 2. Stop me from asking questions that will be covered later in the lecture.
The fact that they are not as polished as a text book also encourages students to struggle with the ideas themselves, rather than feeling intimidated about writing, encountering only tightly edited text-books.
Turn your lecture notes into a textbook. :-)
Michael I'm all sympathy with your plan and the rationale: if you do have a textbook and set readings, and your lectures (as I assume) are your way of providing the students with a way into the topic and the material, then the demand for written notes is grounded in a misunderstanding.
But in my day (getting to be ancient history now) the misunderstanding was something that the college curriculum tended to foster. Given the arts-style material and approach I think you're aiming for, college had a lot of contact hours, and for people themselves coming from technical rather than humanities backgrounds --- myself included --- this was a cue to interpret things according to a more technical model. And in technical work, "well, at least at minimum I've got all of the stuff we did in lectures" is a reasonable strategy for someone with competing pressures.
Many of us were also guided by the expectations of classmates, and the habits of previous years, which I think were similarly confused. Part of the problem here was that there wasn't much of a realistic, engaged attempt by faculty to challenge these expectations, or explain what they were about. (Or if there was, I didn't see it.) I take it that this is what you're trying to do at the moment.
The problem is that you're in an Anglican institution. I recall one instance during a lecture wherein the lecturer did hand out full-text notes and simply read them to the class when I was reprimanded for reading along with the lecturer. I thought it'd be OK because he was Anglican (I'm not, I was just trying to fit in) and that's how you do it with the Prayer Book.
At a different institution, when I did hand out full text notes a couple of times, I had complaints about that. So you can't please all the people! I no longer provide full text notes, partly because I find it too restrictive. I like to leave scope for allowing some amount of freedom in the direction the lecture can take.
For what it's worth...
I am all for the learning experience in class. I agree with Marty that I want notes simply as a future reference, not as the means of answering the exam.
But I fully understand why others feel insecure. I still don't understand MTC exams. In class I feel free to interact. And I get positive feedback from lecturers both in class and through essay feedback. But when I get exam results I pass, but at times little more than that. So I think I don't understand the genre of Arts degree exams. And that's what creates my exam prep stress. Knowing no matter how well I know the subject, my final results will barely reflect that.
Maybe the pre-req for MTC should be an Arts Degree, not just a Bachelor. Or maybe we need to be trained more on how to do exams. I had heaps of people asking each year after running the course on writing essays. And I had nothing to offer them. What Bill and Gibbo's seminar does is teach people the form-guiding technique avowed by many lecturers. Which leads to resentment when those lecturers write exams to catch out form-guiders.
They're my parting observations.
Post a Comment