I am NOT even CLOSE to ready

Because I’ve been awfully busy with “life in general” and my textbook project in particular this summer, and also because I’m doing quite a number of new things in my teaching this fall, I am unusually ill-prepared for the upcoming term.

How ill-prepared, you ask? Here’s an embarassaing example:

I emailed my classes just the other day to tell them that while I didn’t have a syllabus and class schedule ready and available online, I could tell them what books they needed to order. Increasingly, I find that my students are doing what I consider to be the smart thing and buying their books online instead of dealing with the local textbook stores, which (IMO) are inefficient and over-priced.

I’m teaching two sections of a class I teach all the time here at EMU, “Writing, Style, and Technology:” one that is online (and that has represented its own preparation “challenges”) and one that I thought was on Tuesday nights. In fact, I was so certain I was teaching on Tuesday nights that I made all my plans around Tuesdays, I had told everyone I was teaching on Tuesdays, and, as I said in my email to my students in this section, “I’ll see you on Tuesday night in a couple weeks.” This wasn’t even a question in my mind.

One of my near-future students emailed me back and said something along the lines of “gee, I have this class down for Thursday nights; did they change the day of the class?” At first, I was going to email this student right back to correct this student. But I decided to double-check the class schedule online and what-do-ya-know, I was wrong. And had this student not emailed me, I wouldn’t have showed up to class for the first meeting and I would have arrived on Tuesday and said “gosh, where is everyone?”

Jeesh. Quite the bumpy start here….

More K-12 teaching jobs in the future? I wouldn't bet on it…

I haven’t been posting this week (and I won’t post much now) because I’ve been pretty busy with life things lately. But I have been meaning to post at least something about this article that was linked to the NCTE Inbox service, “40% of teachers plan to quit by 2010,” which was in the Chicago Sun-Times. Here’s a quote:

Forty percent of public school teachers plan to leave the profession within five years, the highest rate since at least 1990, according to a study being released Thursday.

The rate is expected to be even greater among high school teachers, half of whom plan to be out of teaching by 2010, according to the National Center for Education Information.

Retirement is the dominant factor, as the public teaching corps is aging fast, say surveys of teachers in kindergarten through grade 12.

Two quick thoughts:

  • I know this isn’t really the job of this article, but I have to assume that these retirement rates vary from region to region, and they might vary quite a bit. In Michigan right now, getting a job teaching English at the secondary level is kind of tricky, and I always tell prospective secondary school teachers that they might need to move to get a job.
  • You know, this is kind of what they used to say about teaching at the college-level, too. When I was in college in the mid-80’s, I was told by a number of college professors that there would certainly be jobs teaching in universities soon because all of these folks who were getting ready to retire. Well, guess what? A lot of these folks (at least in fields like English) either didn’t retire or they weren’t replaced with full-time professors. I don’t know if the powers that be could get away with that for K-12 schooling, but it is something to keep in mind: don’t count your retiring teachers until they actually hatch– er, I mean retire.

Teaching Online at EMU: The Learning Curves

Despite the fact that I’ve been involved in using technology to teach writing for a long time now, I’ve never taught an online class before, at least before this semester. There are a variety of reasons for this, but the big one for me is that at EMU, these courses are offered through Continuing Education and they tend to staff them with faculty who teach the courses as overloads. I wasn’t willing to do that, but then (for a variety of different reasons that really aren’t that interesting anyway) I was told that I could teach an online class as part of my “regular” teaching load after all and I’m going to start teaching one online class on in a couple of weeks.

After both procrastinating and working on other things I needed to do this summer, I’m finally starting to get my online class together. EMU Online uses eCollege to support their online classes, and eCollege is pretty decent software. I have some issues with it (see below), but it sure as heck is better than WebCT, which I tried to use for another class back in January. Incidentally, there’s actually some campus politics surrounding this because there are “forces” around here who want us to use WebCT to teach online. My hope is that the pro-WebCT people lose this battle.

So far, I’ve got three observations:

  • Once again, I am reminded that a little HTML goes a long LONG way. Every once in a while, I encounter colleagues at EMU or online or at a conference or whatever who say that there’s no real point in learning or teaching basic HTML skills, in part because software like Dreamweaver makes it easy to avoid messing with the code. And you can get away with not using an HTML with eCollege, too. But it sure helps to know at least the basics of HTML.
  • Despite what I do know about HTML and CSS and other computer geek things, I still have to get over a learning curve to make this software work, at least work for me. eCollege isn’t nearly as frustrating as WebCT, but it’s frustrating enough.
  • eCollege (and just about every other software I’ve seen for teaching online) isn’t really designed to teach a writing course, at least the way I tend to teach writing classes. This is kind of hard for me to explain just now, but I guess what I’m getting at is this: eCollege seems to me to assume that a college course is made up of individual units which students work through, more or less independently, and then take a test about to demonstrate knowledge. Sure, there’s plenty of opportunities for interaction between students and between the instructor with the software, but it doesn’t seem that easy to me to exchange drafts of essays in small groups. Of course, that might be just because I’m missing something in the instructions for how to do this.

Oh, and eCollege supports streaming audio and video. I still think I’m just going to upload mp3 files weekly or so. Eventually, I’m going to figure out how to post a “real” podcast for this class– one with an RSS feed and the whole bit– but I probably won’t publish it as part of the eCollege shell.

Are there any freshmen reading this?

The new school year is approaching and it’s approaching more rapidly than I would prefer. I keep getting email messages from students asking about the reading list and assignments for my classes, and I keep having to email them back and explain that I am still trying to figure out what the assignments and the reading list are going to look like. Interestingly enough, these “extra eager” students are enrolled in the online class I’m teaching.

Anyway, as is typical of the new year, there’s a discussion right now about the extent to which first year students do (or, as the argument goes, don’t) read. I say this is “typical” because usually about now, someone posts to the WPA-L mailing list and other places a list of “things entering college freshmen don’t know,” which lists stuff like “freshmen have never heard of Richard Nixon,” an assertion based on nothing and also one that doesn’t seem to matter a whole lot.

This year though, there’s a different twist: the posts are revolving around Tommy Lee Goes to College, the latest “reality” show about rock-n-roll guy Tommy Lee (who, like a lot of other celebrities nowadays, seems to be a lot more famous now for “being vaguely famous” in the past rather than actually doing something to make him famous in the present) going to college at the University of Nebraska. One of my colleagues posted a message to the WPA-L list reflecting on the show, noting with despair that “freshmen just don’t read.”

I posted back to the list about this, and as I said there, I think it’s worth remembering that the Tommy Lee show is A TELEVISION SHOW. Even though they say it’s about “reality,” it’s most certainly not really about reality. Thus is the nature of the genre, which I generally do not enjoy at all (though The Amazin Race was pretty cool). And while I haven’t seen the show (and I won’t, unless there is nothing else on TV and I have absolutely positively have nothing– and I mean NOTHING– else to do), I would have to think that it’s pretty heavily edited If you were going to make some choices about what to show Tommy and his new college pals doing, would you show them all studying?

And besides all that, it’s pretty hard to make any clear assumptions about the concepts of “freshmen” or even “reading,” at least around here. EMU is probably best described as a “comprehensive and opportunity-granting regional university,” and what that means in terms of freshmen here is we’ve got a mixed bag. Sure, we have “traditional” college freshmen– 18 or so years old, middle-class kids– but I’ll bet this group makes up just about half of incoming first year students here. We certainly don’t have as many “traditional” freshmen as that quaint liberal arts school in Ann Arbor; our students come in all ages, races, and socio-economic backgrounds.

Because EMU is an “opportunity granting” kind of school, we do admit a lot of dramatically underprepared students, and a lot of these students indeed “don’t read” or do much of anything else related to the college experience, largely because they never were asked to do this kind of work before. Some of them will get their proverbial “acts” together, taking advantages of various tutoring and support services and teachers and such and they’ll go on with their college career. Some won’t and they’ll leave college to go and do something else. And to tell the truth, I think giving students the chance to discover that college is not for them (at least in the moment they are in school) is in itself an “opportunity.”

On the other hand, because it is a bargain, costing literally half as much as U of M (and I like to think we’re a good school, too), we attract a lot of perfectly prepared and “normal” students who just don’t have a lot of money and/or who are working themselves through school.

As far as reading goes: well, this post is long enough without me going down that path. I guess I’ll just say that when we say that “freshmen don’t read,” it seems to me that it depends a lot on what you mean by “freshmen” (see above) and “read” (does skimming count? how about skipping around? what sorts of things do they have to read to count as reading? etc.).

Interestingly enough, literally while I was reading this conversation on WPA-L, Annette was telling me about a blurb for a book she saw in Newsweek. It was My Freshman Year: What a Professor Learned by Becoming a Student by Rebekah “not her name” Nathan. Here’s a blurb from that web site about the book:

Placing her own experiences and those of her classmates into a broader context drawn from national surveys of college life, Nathan finds that today’s students face new challenges to which academic institutions have not adapted. At the end of her freshman year, she has an affection and respect for students as a whole that she had previously reserved only for certain individuals. Being a student, she discovers, is hard work. But she also identifies fundamental misperceptions, misunderstandings, and mistakes on both sides of the educational divide that negatively affect the college experience.

By focusing on the actual experiences of students, My Freshman Year offers a refreshing alternative to the frequently divisive debates surrounding the political, economic, and cultural significance of higher education—as well as a novel perspective from which to look at the achievements and difficulties confronting America’s colleges and universities in the twenty-first century.

There’s a decent article in Inside Higher Ed about Nathan’s book and experience. In terms of the whole “freshmen don’t read” issue, here’s an interesting passage:

In the classroom, Nathan found that she sometimes engaged in the same behavior that had driven her crazy as a professor and that annoys faculty members everywhere: feeling tired or coming to class without a firm sense of the reading. These experiences have made her a different kind of teacher, she says.

“I really did not understand about the reading thing,� she said. “If you ask most professors at most schools, they will tell you that students don’t read.� Nathan said that she, like her fellow students, did the readings when there was a direct relationship between the readings and the course. Obvious ways to make that connection are quizzes and essay assignments. But Nathan says less obvious ways, in which readings are directly related to key themes, can work as well.

“You have to make it useful in the classroom,� she said, “not just reading for reading’s sake.�

Bingo.

In any event, Nathan’s book sounds like it might be interesting, er, reading.

That's done (sorta); now what do I need to do?

Monkey writer

I managed to meet the deadline that I had set up for myself with my textbook project just over a week ago– at least technically I met the deadline. This “on-again/off-again” project has been “on-again” in the past six or eight months, so I’m feeling confident about my progress and possibilities of finishing this project, or at least more confident than I have felt in the past. Of course, there’s still a fair amount of work that needs to be done, more revisions and such, it still has to be sent out to readers (yet again), if it’s approved it will take a year or more to actually publish, and even with all that, there is still no guarantee that this thing will ever actually appear as a textbook. Someday, when the dust for all this settles, I’d like to write something about the textbook writing experience. It’s been an education, no question about it.

Anyway, I worked on this a lot for the last 10 days or so, and this morning, the day after I emailed stuff to the editors, I have this odd “what now?” kind of feeling. Frankly, I know “what now”: I have to get ready for that pesky fall semester that is going to be starting here in about two weeks. I need to tidy-up my blogs and some other web projects. I should do at least a little thinking and reading about my longer-term project on the history or writing technologies before the computer (btw, thanks to Dennis Jerz to this link of Flickr picts of “writing machines,” mostly typewriters). And I am also interested in trying to focus some more time on actually trying to read the scholarship in my field and less time in trying to create more of it.

Not to mention I have a life, which includes a seriously neglected garden and a flabby body that needs to get to the gym. Immediately.

So I guess what I’m saying is that I know the answer to the question of this post. It’s just a matter of convincing myself that I need to go on to something else, I suppose. Okay contemplative monkey– get to work then!

"Downloading for the greater good"

Via Johndan’s blog, I found this amusing look at plagiarism, “Downloading for the Greater Good,” by Lauren Frey and available at her blog “The Morning News.” It’s a firmly tongue-in-cheek look at the “up-side” of students buying/getting papers off of the Internet. Like Johndan, I thought this was the most humorous passage:

Most tenured professors didn’t grow up with computers, so they’re not always that sharp when it comes to zeroes and ones. I used to work as an administrative assistant at a very reputable college. It is no exaggeration to say that many of the professors couldn’t handle making microwave popcorn, much less checking their email.

But since students started downloading papers, professors have been forced to catch up with technology. Skipping past the skills needed to operate a microwave, they now have to search the internet looking for proof that the papers are “plagiarized.� Professors have had to learn software such as the “Glatt Plagiarism Screening Program,� which blanks out every fifth word of a student’s paper and then tests how long it takes the student to fill them all back in. Also, many colleges maintain online anti-plagiarism databases that allow professors to type in any eyebrow-raising turn of phrase from a student’s paper to see if it was copied from another source.

This may sound like simple stuff to you and me, but keep in mind that about half of currently tenured professors were born before TV sets became common in American homes.

That popcorn bit got me. I don’t know about where you work, but every time one of my colleagues screws up making microwave popcorn in the faculty lounge, it stinks up the whole floor.

Anyway, two thoughts:

  • To be fair, I have plenty of junior colleagues, some born in the 70’s, who not only routinely burn the popcorn but who are still somewhat in the dark about this whole new-fangled “Internet thing.” Sure, they do email and they will look stuff up on the web, but I think that people of all ages find themselves in fields like English because they don’t want to become particularly computer literate. Of course, as Frey suggests, they ultimately have to become at least a little computer literate.
  • If you’re a student and you’re reading this blog right now and you are thinking that your teacher will never know if you just “copied and pasted” a paper and hand it in, you are probably wrong. Let me try to explain why:

    As I mentioned back in June, I had a student lift a paper from one of these sites with free papers last Spring term. I honestly think that this was the first time this has happened in one of my classes ever. I’m not suggesting that students have never passed any plagiarized material by me or they haven’t passed work by me where they have received maybe a little too much help from a friend or whatever. But I’m talking here about a paper that was pretty much lifted wholesale from a web site.

    The student who did this in June was clearly desperate. The student (I’ll leave the “he or she” thing up in the air) was going to fail the class because he/she was not able to write a passing essay the entire semester. His/her writing was simply that bad. How bad? Well, I was going to type a sentence from one of his/her essays, but I decided that wouldn’t really be that nice, even though this student did in the end cause me much grief. Let’s just say that I’ve been teaching for a long time, and I have had few college-aged students who demonstrated this lack of basic literacy skills. In short, passing off someone else’s writing was his/her last-ditch effort.

    How did I know it was plagiarized? Well, I was reading along in this student’s final research essay and it seemed like his/her writing for the first page or so. Then I came across the sentence “Since strict monitoring of diabetes is needed for the control of the disease, little room is left for carelessness.” That sentence struck me as being distinctly not this student’s writing, so I did a Google search. And the rest, as they say, is history.

    This is obviously an extreme example, but I tell this story because I have had any number of students who have inserted passages and quotes from their sources without giving them credit. This is technically plagiarism, but I usually attribute this sort of thing to not properly citing evidence. Sometimes, when I note in a marginal comment that a particular passage has come from a different source and needs to be properly cited, students respond as if I’ve performed some incredible mind-reading/magic trick in being able to spot this. I think this is because some students think they have seamlessly integrated the lifted writing into their own writing. And yet every college teacher I’ve ever met can spot most of these kinds of mini-versions of plagiarism the same way that anyone listening to the radio can tell when the station changes from classical to rock.

    Anyway, a long way to the moral, but here it goes: Students, better to cite your evidence too often rather than not enough, and if you’re going to steal from the Internet, do a really good job of it because most professors know how to do a Google search, too.

Nice list, dude…

Bradley Dilger has a really nice reading list on his blog for a course he’s preparing called “Computers and Writing.” I’m linking to it now because, in a few days at the latest, I’m going to have to start planning a revamped version of English 328, and I’m always looking for things to do with my Writing for the World Wide Web class and Computers and Writing, Theory and Practice.

Congress wades into "grading and ideology". Sorta.

Yesterday afternoon, I stumbled across this article that appeared in The Boston Globe, “Provision tells schools to grade students on subjects, not ideology: Measure aims to shield campus conservatives.” It’s one of those kind of slippery stories that I don’t quite understand, but I’ll give it a try.

Congress is debating reauthorization of the Higher Education Act, and one of the attached resolutions (undoubtedly, there are many such resolutions) “…tells colleges to grade students on the basis of their mastery of subject matter rather than on their political views.”

Ah, okay. I’ve always done that, and pretty much everyone I know, regardless of their political philosophies, does the same thing. Republicans can get an A in my classes and Democrats can get an F. It all depends on how well they do with the subject matter, not their political views.

Now, this doesn’t mean I’m a complete “blank slate.” I’ve had students write things that were, for example, blatently racist that I simply was not willing to tolerate. I’m thinking in particular of an essay a student handed in many years ago in which the student argued that Native Americans were lazy and self-destructive and deserved what they got, and he (this student) knew because he used to live next to a reservation. My response was pretty direct. “This is incredibly racist. You’ve got to rewrite this, and this time, do some research.” He did (and, to this student’s credit, I really believe that he didn’t even realize that what he was writing was as ignorant as it was), he did some modest research, and– surprise! surprise!– he learned through his research that in reality, Native Americans have been getting the shaft from the U.S. government for quite some time.

Anyway, I digress.

The Globe article goes on:

The provision makes no mention of specific political leanings, but represents a victory for conservative student groups who have been arguing for years that American universities are bastions of liberalism seeking to impose their liberal orthodoxy on dissenters.

The measure is not binding, but some higher education analysts caution that it is not to be taken lightly. Colleges and universities, they say, should consider this a warning shot from a Republican-controlled Congress fed up with the liberal academy.

”If the universities don’t move, all that’s going to happen is this will build,” said David Horowitz, a conservative author and a driving force in the free speech movement that inspired the resolution. ”They’re sitting on a tinderbox. Now we have resolutions. I guarantee you, if they thumb their noses at this, there will be statutory legislation.”

A little bit later on, the article says this:

Representative Jack Kingston, Republican of Georgia, who introduced the original resolution that inspired the language in the higher education bill, said his aim is to protect conservative students from having their views squelched by the more radical members of the academy.

”The common knowledge is academicians are usually liberal, and it’s cute because they’re harmless ivory-tower types, but as the years have gone by, I think they have almost imploded among themselves,” said Kingston, whose father and sister are college professors.

Wow, I bet family dinners at the Kingston house are kinda tense…

Hmm. Okay. Well, I guess I’m left with a few questions and thoughts:

  • Other than the fact that this resolution has been introduced by conservative legislators concerned with the “liberal” academy and it is being supported by David (who gets WAY too much attention, IMO) Horowitz, why is this resolution a “victory” for conservatives? I mean, I understand that the goal of these folks is to “rein in” the (so called) liberal academy, but I don’t see how this vague and non-binding resolution does it.
  • As any number of people have written in blogs and elsewhere, the fact of the matter is there are a lot of “not so liberal” academics out there. I’ll grant you that most of the folks in humanities departments tend to be liberal, but I’m just not sure that’s true about my colleagues in the sciences, the college of technology (at EMU, at least), medicine. law, business, and a whole bunch of other areas. Look folks– don’t forget that Condi Rice was in the provost’s office at Stanford before she came into the Bush White House. You don’t get a whole lot more a part of the so-called “liberal ivory tower” than that.
  • And while we’re at it, what exactly counts as “liberal” or “conservative” here, what counts as including multiple viewpoints? If my university hosts a speech by a Holocaust survivor, does that mean, in the interest of providing “equal time,” my university should also host a speech by a Holocaust denier? I hope not. So, as far as I can tell what folks like Horowitz and the supporters of this resolution mean by “liberal” or “biased” views in college classrooms is “ideas we don’t like.” But of course, part of a college (dare I say “liberal”?) education is to confront and consider ideas we don’t like.
  • Oddly, it doesn’t seem like this resolution (which of course has no teeth to it anyway) would prevent me from teaching radical and polemic texts. So if I teach a whole semester’s worth of Marxist criticism, as long as I don’t grade a student on their specific politics, I’m okay. Hmmm….

An article I need to look up for 516…

This is really a message just for me, just a reminder to look up this article. I say that because I know that Collin and Alex have been talking lately of the “value” of scholarly blogging lately, by which I think they mean (or at least I mean) scholarly-types participating in the broader academic discussion. That’s something I might comment on when I get a chance because that’s one of the reasons I write to this blog. But one of the other reasons is to remind myself of stuff I need to look at. So if you’re not interested in this, feel free to ignore it.

Charlie Lowe posted this cite to the tech-rhet mailing list: Barb Duffelmeyer’s “Learning to Learn: New TA Preparation in Computer Pedagogy.” Computers and Composition 20 (2003), 295-311. I’m not familiar with this article, but if it is what I think it is, I should probably include it in English 516 the next time around.