I like the idea that we let students pursue the topics that interest them, but I have two concerns. First, what if some students aren’t really interested in any of them, or not in enough of them to gain an acceptable level of coverage of the topic? You might ask why that student is in the class in the first place, but an example would be calculus or statistics for a student in the sciences. These courses are usually taught in the Math department, not the department of the specific sciences where the content could be put into the appropriate and more motivating contexts. Second, shouldn’t we teach students how to learn things that they really aren’t that interested in? It seems like this is a necessary life skill.

Given that many great researchers are not great teachers and that good teaching is very time consuming, it seems like in an ideal scenario, we’d have teachers that mostly teach and researchers that mostly research so that individuals in both roles can be more successful. There is likely some benefit of doing both, but it seems like it wouldn’t outweigh the benefit of being able to devote 100% of your time to either research or teaching.

Didn’t mean to post anonymously. Post above by Ben Augustine!

LikeLike

Midnight Rescue! I loved that game! The game music was running through my head while reading your blog. I played Battle Chess, too, but unlike you, the gimmick of the battles did not get me interested in Chess and I lost interest quickly. But on a serious note, I question the idea that much of the content we need to teach can be made into an interesting game. Battle Differential Equations? Probably not!

Yes! We’re on the same page about expectations from students–the fact that attention spans aren’t consistent with the length of lectures does not imply that we should coddle the students and cater to their short attention spans. Perhaps they need to be taught how to pay attention longer to maximize learning. But how do you do that? Is this something that can be taught? Or do we just weed out the students with shorter attention spans as we progress through lecture-based college curricula? Do we need a college course in how to maximize learning from lecture-based college courses? And would this course be lecture-based?

I agree the tools available to students in the digital age can help encourage a passion for knowledge. But as an undergrad in a Wildlife Science program, my passion came from my love for the natural world and being out in it. In classes, we got to go explore nature and gain a deeper understanding of how it works. I realize that the digital tools can complement the inspiration from other sources, but I worry that time spent online is at the expense of time doing other important things. I guess moderation is the key.

Thanks for the post! I think your experience is common, but I feel that some students thrive in this system and I’m one of them. I was very competitive about my grade (with myself) and actually enjoyed taking tests because it allowed me to know whether or not I sufficiently mastered the material. But it wasn’t really about the grade itself, it was about how well I knew the material and the grade was a signal of this. I didn’t only provide enough information to get an A, I provided enough information to show myself I knew it better than necessary to get the A. If I missed a question, I wanted to know why, because it wasn’t the grade, it was about knowing the correct answer. But the grade was the signal. Would lengthy feedback serve the same purpose? Probably, but I just want to see the grade and move on!

I agree with the advantages and disadvantages of rubrics, but I wonder to what extent the disadvantages could be tackled by making smarter rubrics. If you find that the grades some students get according to the rubric don’t reflect the quality of their submission, it seems like you should be able to identify why and make a new category to capture that in the future. One potential category could be something related to creativity or thinking outside the box. If this was valuable, you could make it worth a lot of points. However, students might try to be creative to get those points and not do well on the others. In this case, you can make the creativity and other metrics multiplicative rather than additive so you can’t get a good grade without doing well across the board.

One question I have about assessment based on feedback is how do you deliver bad feedback in a constructive manner? Some teachers will be better at this than others, but it seems like a difficult task to me. “Your performance in class is not sufficient to pass this class?” “You have not put sufficient effort into your coursework to pass this class?” “Tommy, you suck at math and I’m not passing you?” Ok, probably don’t say that. Also, how do you justify your decision to students and parents that challenge whether or not they pass? With grades this is straightforward. But without, it’s based on your subjective assessment of their work throughout the semester.

LikeLike

That sounds like a reasonable metric for success. I think this comes down to individual goals.