Comment on Let’s Get Emotional! … ? by mohp

This is really interesting Kenneth. I certainly do not think being emotional implies being uncivil. The articles challenge us to be “as we are”, and if that means being emotional (as we all are) then so be it; but we should NOT assume that entering a classroom involves leaving out emotion at the door. However, that being said, people are going to be people, and students can often mis-understand “emotion” if placed on a syllabus. I would like to see examples of how we can talk about emotion positively in our syllabi without implying “uncivil”.

Your case on architecture is something to think about; fascinating, particularly your statement, “Just because there is no outward emotion does not mean the idea is flimsy or weak”. Too often we conflate “emotion” with “weakness”. Thanks.

Comment on Why I decided to attend Virginia Tech by mohp

I recently listened to a lecture by a famous historian who was reflecting on his career teaching history at Princeton. He said that he often scoffed at his graduate students who congratulated themselves for “making something more complex”. No doubt opening up simplicity and discovering complex entanglements is important, but it should bring us back to a certainly of some kind. He claimed that his natural disposition was “foggy” and he always pushed for clarity, lucidity and a relentless search for accuracy. Again, this is not a scientist, but a historian. I share your concern that classes in the humanities often seek to complicate rather than consolidate their students. I also really like how you share your humanities education with STEM folks and see a greater appreciation from them. As someone completing a doctorate in the humanities and social sciences, I may have to try that out. Thanks.

Comment on Teaching as Self-discovery by mohp

That is very creative to use paper airplanes as a way to discuss decision matrix theory! Goodness, how did you think of that? Fantastic, absolutely brilliant. It is precisely these type of imaginations and talents that we teachers need to bring out a few times a semester, just to keep things fun. Awesome Amy.

Comment on Is it just a “performance”? by mohp

Thanks for this post Yi. It is extremely reminiscent of my own experience two weeks ago teaching my first undergraduate course where I gave a presentation as a performance to cover up my nerves. I felt if I started “teaching” my nerves would come out. The Professor later told me I looked very comfortable up there, but I felt that the students did not ‘learn’ much. I saved myself, but left others out to try (or so I felt). The professor rejected my feeling and said I did a good job, but gave me other important advice.

The problem I felt is precisely what you elucidated here. I gave a performance, but did not teach. I took the “stage of a teacher” and acted the part. But I very quickly saw the following class that the professor was “teaching” (she didn’t speak for more than 15 minutes) while I gave a one hour presentation. Two very different modes of teaching; hers was far superior. Thanks for this post!

Comment on Robinson, Wesch and the politics of ‘risk taking’ as a teacher. by mohp

I agree with most of what you said regarding how both grassroots and top-down are necessary, but doubt whether ‘signaled intent’ and ‘support from staff’ ever really align themselves unless there is another tertiary factory involved. More often than not, that tertiary factor is ideological. Departments deal with this every day: internally between professors and externally with the larger school and administration. Pressures from within and without don’t always allow teachers to teach the way the want to.