accountabilitybloke (old blog)

we have moved to

Reflections on the semester….

The Spring semester is coming to an end at UNH, and although I had a relatively heavier-than-usual schedule of classes and “preps,” it was a bit more rewarding than most of my recent academic terms.

Part of that has to do with what I regard as a technological maturing of the students — each year more and more become adept at (and partial to) the online integration of course material and assignments. Perhaps we have finally hit that generational “tipping point” where students are now more comfortable with the intellectual engagement that thoughtfully designed online pedagogy can foster.

For example, weekly “Discussion Forums” — which have replaced the intermittent written assignment in my classes — have generated some very interesting, insightful and well-written comments and observations from both students at all levels. I find the commentary and exchange among the undergraduates in my introductory American government to be as engaging at times (if not moreso) as those of my students in graduate courses. Expressing opinions in an intelligent way with their colleagues (rather than regurgitating the textbooks or trying to anticipate what I want them to say) is an expanding norm. After several attempts, I’ve learned that my role is to set and enforce (actually, more like “monitoring”) parameters for the online “rules of engagement” while demanding coherent and organized writing. I am seeing some pretty impressive results on a regular basis. Yes, much of what they are doing in these “DFs” is driven by the desire for a good grade — but there is a point in the semester when some other motivation takes hold, and the quality and content of the writing seems take on its own value for many students.

At the same time, that same online technology has made it possible to facilitate the mundane factual regurgitation that is sometimes required in basic courses. While increasingly comfortable with the intellectual challenges and autonomy offered by a well structured DF assignment, there is still the urge among students to know what the instructor expects on exams and other assessment. “Is this going to be on the test?” mentality is fully present, and instead of dismissing or fighting it, I’ve learned to build on it by using the capacity of our instructional technology (Blackboard, in the case of UNH) for online “objective” exams — perhaps to an extreme.

Example: All my “objective exams” in my introductory course are given online at certain hours (often over the weekends), and all students have to do is sign on from wherever they are at the assigned time. Open book? Sure, why not. Taking exam in groups? No problem. What I do is structure a reasonably easy exam involving 30 to 40 questions that must be completed in an hour. That time limit — plus using the testing technology to randomize the order of both questions and answers for each question — tends to offset any effort to “cheat”. The results have been amazingly consistent for several years now — a relatively normal distribution of grades, skewed perhaps toward the a B- average (i.e., 80-82 range) grade. The lesson that I stress for students: those who prepare for the exam by actually reading and understanding the material do exceedingly well — and those who do not prepare/study in advance do poorly despite all the obvious possibilities for cheating.

As pleased as I am with how this semester has gone teaching-wise, I know that my students might not feel the same way. I am always disappointed with their assessments of my courses. I am still convinced there is a pedagogical “sweet spot” where both anxious students and instructors like me can find satisfaction with a course. The search continues on my part, and probably will until they carry me out of the (increasingly online) classroom….

May 8th, 2010 Posted by | accountabilitybloke | no comments

Of executioners and chimps….

It has now been a few days since “catching” this damn head cold, and each night is proving more difficult — so I plug in my iPod and lay there in the dark wheezing and listening to the backlog of podcasts (the wheeze is very musical — I find myself stopping the podcast to figure out whether it is me or some background music…)

It is now around 6AM and having just listened to (among other things) this week’s podcast of This American Life, I am compelled to post one of my intermittent blogs. The episode is titled “Human Resources” and it is (as Ira Glass organizes it) in three acts (with a nice Prologue). Each is (as is usual with this show) a small bit of genius….

The Prologue is about someone whose job was to fire folks — an HR professional who Glass calls “the executioner”. This (along with Act One) will certainly become part of my case in MPA courses (I really do not like to teach the HR portion — but this stuff makes it interesting). Since he has himself has been “executed” (more than likely through outsourcing), the conversation is a bit more interesting. What is fascinating to me is the management of words during the firing process — not so much to make someone feel positive about what is happening to them, but to make them acquiesce (shades of Murray Edelman).

Act One is about the “Rubber Room” (actually rooms) used by the New York City Department of Education for purposes of “reassigning” teachers determined (for a variety of reasons) to be problems at their former location. Put in perspective (only one percent of NYC teacher, and some are there for short periods, others for long periods), the rubber room arrangement seems very bureuacratically rationale. In that respect it is a great condensed case study of what Ralph Hummel describes in his The Bureaucratic Experience — and so still another instructional resource has fallen into my lap (but oh, those poor people….). (There is a documentary in the works on this…)

Act Two about “The Plan” seems a bit out of place among the segments (even more so than the Chimps segment that follows). It is, however, a terrific example of conspiracy theory thinking which many folks rely on when trying to make sense of the political world. I use the idea of “making sense” in a number of courses — from American government (have even integrated the idea in our textbook) to basic PA and organization theory. This is a keeper….

Finally, Act 3 — the Chimp segment — is a bit weird at first blush, but it can serve a number of purposes. There is, of course, the ethical dimension about our treatment of non-human species (see Nussbaum’s Frontiers of Justice), but there is also the interesting aspect of implementing a formal public policy — they refer to it as the Clinton Chimp Act. The intersection of ethics and policy are interesting enough, but then you add in the observations of a New York Times reporter (who is the main source in the segment), and you have the final reason why listeing to TAL is so valuable…..

Enough — I feel a chill coming on — literally…

March 9th, 2009 Posted by | accountabilitybloke | no comments