My role as a teacher in higher education: feeling useless

[johns1]

This one may sound like a rant, so please forgive me if I am generalizing a lot.

In my student life as well as teaching career, I have noticed an alarming trend that makes me question the worthiness of my profession. The only type of students that I (as well as other teachers I have seen in action) can manage to successfully teach are the ones who show very high cognitive abilities. Even if I explain something poorly, they somehow manage to catch it. These students are the ones who usually score high on competitive tests.

To my dismay, I have realized that students who require and appreciate my special attention are often the ones who fail to score well.

I have been given different theories as explanation. One says that students who have no interest in their subject matter show this behavior. However, that does not explain why the same students appear so curious and engaged during classes. Is that an illusionary effect of being surrounded by an organized environment?

I am a certified teacher .. Math and Science. Straight up, the only thing your tests measure is the effectiveness of your teaching environment. In no way does it measure the preferred learning style of your students ... which differ considerably across your class. So stop testing ! Go to the Project Method and let your students "experience" what you are teaching. Right there is where it BEGINS ! And a lifetime later they will have met the goals that your tests are VERY VERY WRONGLY trying to force on them. When I worked for Corning Electronics Research Lab, we invented fiber optics .. there was not a single degreed scientist in that lab .. most of us were German techs .. totally hands on and self educated every single day.

 

[Bob K99]

This one may sound like a rant, so please forgive me if I am generalizing a lot.

In my student life as well as teaching career, I have noticed an alarming trend that makes me question the worthiness of my profession. The only type of students that I (as well as other teachers I have seen in action) can manage to successfully teach are the ones who show very high cognitive abilities. Even if I explain something poorly, they somehow manage to catch it. These students are the ones who usually score high on competitive tests.

To my dismay, I have realized that students who require and appreciate my special attention are often the ones who fail to score well.

I always assumed that self-tutoring is a crucial ability in higher education. The higher you rise on the academic ladder, the more self-reliant you have to become. However, I always assumed that this is a skill that students automatically pick up as their interest as well as knowledge grows. Unfortunately reality turned out to be quite different from that expectation. Is there any cognitive science study that goes deep into this phenomena? Anything I can do as a teacher? I personally do not know any miracle teacher who can give me advice. That is why I am sharing this here in the hope of getting some valuable input.

I do not want to rush to some conclusion like ADHD or poor IQ. Through persuasion (and some personal experience) I have found direct correlation between performance and the amount of time students study at home. Some students have reported that they find it much easier to enjoy solving problems when they are doing it under my supervision; but cannot seem to be able to attain the same interest in study when they practice alone at home. They have reported that they feel overwhelmed when they look at the problems and often procrastinate. I suspect that if somehow I can help them kindle the interest to study at home, the necessary self-tutoring skill will grow. I have noticed that it helps some of them if I mark questions for them to try at home, but that is a temporary solution. Study should not feel like a chore.

I have been given different theories as explanation. One says that students who have no interest in their subject matter show this behavior. However, that does not explain why the same students appear so curious and engaged during classes. Is that an illusionary effect of being surrounded by an organized environment?

I suggest you watch a YouTube video given by Ann McNeil at University of Michigan titled "Why I'm talking less" She is professor of chemistry and has been getting incredible results with a new teaching approach. I wish I had her for freshman chemistry back in the day.

 

[ebos]

This one may sound like a rant, so please forgive me if I am generalizing a lot.

In my student life as well as teaching career, I have noticed an alarming trend that makes me question the worthiness of my profession. The only type of students that I (as well as other teachers I have seen in action) can manage to successfully teach are the ones who show very high cognitive abilities. Even if I explain something poorly, they somehow manage to catch it. These students are the ones who usually score high on competitive tests.

To my dismay, I have realized that students who require and appreciate my special attention are often the ones who fail to score well.

I always assumed that self-tutoring is a crucial ability in higher education. The higher you rise on the academic ladder, the more self-reliant you have to become. However, I always assumed that this is a skill that students automatically pick up as their interest as well as knowledge grows. Unfortunately reality turned out to be quite different from that expectation. Is there any cognitive science study that goes deep into this phenomena? Anything I can do as a teacher? I personally do not know any miracle teacher who can give me advice. That is why I am sharing this here in the hope of getting some valuable input.

I do not want to rush to some conclusion like ADHD or poor IQ. Through persuasion (and some personal experience) I have found direct correlation between performance and the amount of time students study at home. Some students have reported that they find it much easier to enjoy solving problems when they are doing it under my supervision; but cannot seem to be able to attain the same interest in study when they practice alone at home. They have reported that they feel overwhelmed when they look at the problems and often procrastinate. I suspect that if somehow I can help them kindle the interest to study at home, the necessary self-tutoring skill will grow. I have noticed that it helps some of them if I mark questions for them to try at home, but that is a temporary solution. Study should not feel like a chore.

I have been given different theories as explanation. One says that students who have no interest in their subject matter show this behavior. However, that does not explain why the same students appear so curious and engaged during classes. Is that an illusionary effect of being surrounded by an organized environment?

I firmly believe that all students can learn if the method of teaching and the method of the teacher is right for them. Now this is impossible in a classroom of 30 kids because one would possibly need 30 teachers. So if the curriculum could be changed to reach most of the students, the remainder could be passed to tutors, parents (hello!) and older students and/or extra classes. Some kids can figure everything with just a textbook in front of them. Some need 24 hr. teacher attention. Wouldn't it be possible to subdivide kids at the start of a school year into their learning levels and then match them with the volunteers ready to help them? Sounds too easy...

 

[Drakkith]

Wouldn't it be possible to subdivide kids at the start of a school year into their learning levels and then match them with the volunteers ready to help them? Sounds too easy...

There's several issues with this, but the main one is that there simply aren't enough skilled volunteers. Not nearly enough.

 

[ebos]

There's several issues with this, but the main one is that there simply aren't enough skilled volunteers. Not nearly enough.

You are right that it is not possible; however, as you say, it is probable. It would take a lot of work by an institution like the PTA or whatever they're called now (as long as it included parents and teachers working together and not apart). I'd be happy if the PTA got as involved in teaching as they do in fund-raising, for example. And how about PTA Alumni...?

 

[spero14159]

When I worked for Corning Electronics Research Lab, we invented fiber optics .. there was not a single degreed scientist in that lab ..

So Maurer, Keck, and Schultz pretty much sulked in their offices while you people did the actual work? Sigh. I wonder how common this occurrence is in modern R&D industry. Congratulations for the success of your team. Thanks to your work, fiber optic became a thing long before the concept of world wide web was born. I doubt copper could handle the load of transatlantic mass communication (you would be more wise regarding these matters).

Straight up, the only thing your tests measure is the effectiveness of your teaching environment.

Those are not my exams the students are failing. They are failing competitive exams.

In no way does it measure the preferred learning style of your students ... which differ considerably across your class. So stop testing !

Wait... are you talking about this:

http://school.familyeducation.com/intelligence/teaching-methods/38519.html

I don't do that ...yet. This was a suggestion from people in this forum. I don't know how that quiz works and kinesthetic learning is still a big question mark.

.. most of us were German techs .. totally hands on and self educated every single day.

I don't understand what you mean by "techs". I don't understand the exact nature of your work either (not my field). Did you take Kao's theory for granted or did you verify it beforehand? Were there any doubts about the method? Did you use trial-and-error or did you apply theories of quantum chemistry to predict the resultant attenuation? What was the challenge: the technical aspect of doping or finding the proper element?

Go to the Project Method and let your students "experience" what you are teaching. Right there is where it BEGINS !

This is very true. There are people who can't learn the formal way. They require a more hands-on approach. However, we can't leave theory behind. We move forward by picking up where our predecessors left off. To do that, we need exhaustive knowledge of everything that has been done before. Even the greatest minds like Sir Newton and Albert Einstein did not start from zero.

It is very difficult to come up with projects that will require understanding (not just application) of a broad range of theories (due to shortage of time). I learned how to teach from my own teachers as they taught me. I have been taught technology through projects (and I am somewhat efficient at that), but I have never been taught theoretical physics/math through projects.

 

[Diaz Lilahk]

In my student life as well as teaching career, I have noticed an alarming trend that makes me question the worthiness of my profession. The only type of students that I (as well as other teachers I have seen in action) can manage to successfully teach are the ones who show very high cognitive abilities. Even if I explain something poorly, they somehow manage to catch it. These students are the ones who usually score high on competitive tests. To my dismay, I have realized that students who require and appreciate my special attention are often the ones who fail to score well. I have noticed that it helps some of them if I mark questions for them to try at home, but that is a temporary solution. Study should not feel like a chore. One says that students who have no interest in their subject matter show this behavior. However, that does not explain why the same students appear so curious and engaged during classes. Is that an illusionary effect of being surrounded by an organized environment?

As a former student who exhibited the behavior your cite and as a high school teacher who struggles with students like my former self, it is an illusory effect. Really I think what you are observing is that education for the average student is wasted on the young. It is not that the students have no interest in the subject matter, it is that the average American student does not have the academic maturity or emotional maturity to prioritize the struggle that is necessary to really learn the material over their social lives. Let's not kid ourselves, studying feels like a chore to most kids because relative to socializing studying actually is a chore. The learning curve with problem solving is absolutely brutal and our high schools have all but abandoned teaching and assessing the art of problem solving, I am among the few teachers who steadfastly hold onto it. There is nothing inherently pleasing in the process of problem solving, the fulfillment comes with completion. Over time we begin to realize that it was the process that mattered not the results, but that is not what it feels like when you are waist deep in the mud, especially if you are sacrificing partying for it.

I just do not see a way around this frustration until we radically restructure our education system. So long as children get dragged onto this k-12 conveyor belt which takes them from one school to the next, where they are not academically challenged and where socializing and athletics takes precedence over academics then you will likely continue seeing this phenomena at the college level.

 

[Diaz Lilahk]

When I originally responded I was under the impression that you taught in the US. So I don't know how much of what I wrote corresponds to students outside the US. Additionally I forgot to add one other important aspect to the cause. Namely that the type of students that gravitate toward mathematics and physics are not the ones who are actually most suited to succeed in the field. In the mind of almost all 17-20 year old students, their view of mathematics is manipulating ready made functions. They are what I call Formula Monkeys. This is generally what they are taught in high school classrooms for a myriad of reasons and math teachers that go against this tide are harshly rebuked. Anyhow, this creates many problems at the undergrad level, but perhaps the worst problem is that it filters out our most able math and physics students. The Formula Monkey approach to mathematics discourages the critical thinkers because they reject this type of rote memorization and regurgitation of facts, usually unconsciously. As a result they think of themselves as not particularly good at what they think of as mathematics and when they leave high school they leave mathematics and applied mathematics fields behind as well. What you are left with are either the students who are talented and drawn to the field despite their mathematics mis-education or students who are gifted at rote memorization and regurgitation of facts and have inflated sense of self as a result of this, I was a member of both groups but mostly the latter group.

To give you an idea of how many talented students there are that are filtered out consider that this year I have 5 students who are going on to major in physics and/or mathematics who otherwise would not have had they not taken my class, out of 80 students in their graduating class which took my class. That number is probably on par with the percentage of students who leave high school and go into these fields, meaning that the number of students that do not go into these fields but are actually well suited is easily on the same order of poorly suited students that do.

I will preface my advice by telling you that it is not a cure and some of it applies more to first year physics students rather than later physics majors. But I believe it can help.

1. Give your students a complete survey at the beginning and the end of the course, and I don't mean the survey you have to give, but rather one that you construct. I strongly recommend using Google Forms for the survey. Email me if you want to see an example of a survey that I give. The purpose of the survey is to understand the psychological profile of your students when it comes to studying, what they believe constitutes mathematical problem solving, what they believe physics should be like. This will help you when you address them about the realities of the field of study.
2. Be upfront with your students from day 1. Explain to them what is actually required to succeed in Physics and that many people go into this major/class thinking that they are hot stuff. Many of these students have dramatically inflated sense of self, they think they are geniuses when they are actually average at best. One of the ways that I do this is by incorporating the discoveries of the Greeks into my first year physics course. For instance, when I introduce Newton's theory of Universal Gravitation, I start off with the proof and discovery of the radius of the Earth by Eratosthenes and the proof and discovery of the distance from the Earth to the Moon by Hipparchus. These proof's lead to Newton's determination that Gravitation is an inverse square law. What this does is it humbles and it gives them a renewed perspective of what mathematics actually is and how the process of discovery actually happens.
3. Spend time teaching students the art of problem solving. That means you will have to reduce content or increase credit hours. The way I do this is by solving hard beautiful problems usually from the next level course that involve many concepts. Students need to learn techniques, we know the techniques, it is not clear how we learned them ourselves, but even if we taught ourselves out of necessity it does not mean that we can not teach them. This is one area where my students are most grateful.
4. Use clickers with concept questions to flesh out their gaps in knowledge.
5. Derive or prove almost everything and do it without using the fundamental theorem of calculus or derivative and integral formulas. Students are rapidly pushed into calculus with little to no appreciation of algebra, trigonometry or analytic geometry. The fundamental theorem and the formulas for derivatives and integrals are mechanisms for students to continue the behavior of regurgitating memorized facts. This is going to take time on your part, because it will force you to derive ways to solve problems that you could easily do with the fundamental theorem at your disposal, like linear drag problems for instance. But if you want students to really learn how to problem solve it helps to restrict their toolset and force them to learn the myriad of ways to really use a flat screwdriver. There is no conceivable way for students to appreciate the work of Newton if they have no idea about the contributions of Archimedes. This really gives meaning to Newton's statement "if i saw further it was by standing on the shoulders of giants".

I hope this helps.

 

[spero14159]

Well, I could neither edit nor delete that incomplete post. So I reported it.

Allow me to start anew. I will do away with lists and categorizations this time.

...Students need to learn techniques, we know the techniques, it is not clear how we learned them ourselves, but even if we taught ourselves out of necessity it does not mean that we can not teach them. This is one area where my students are most grateful...

I wish I had a teacher like you. I know how to solve specific types of problems, but I don't know how to approach an unknown problem. This is an area where I need help myself before I can help my students.

You may be wondering how I am even a teacher without this knowledge, right? Thing is (as I already mentioned in my first post), I don't have to put any effort into teaching a student if they are good, and I can't help them if the student is average or bad. Experience saves me from ever facing a totally unknown problem during the course of teaching. Teaching is a profession that Indians choose when they can't secure a job at a foreign company. There are some excellent teachers (knowledge-wise) around, but there is no general standard.

I remember one encounter with a specific math teacher who would only show me one or two examples from a chapter (high school math) and expect me to solve all the problems from the exercises. Some chapters would be easy for me, some chapters would prove so hard that he would end up having to explain nearly all the solutions. I got pretty annoyed by his behavior and dismissed him, but during his dismissal he accused me of expecting him to do all the hard work for me. I did not understand his accusation at that time because I was never interested in memorizing solutions, so I took it as an ignorant remark. But now I know that explaining all the answers is no better than instructing the student to memorize every solution.

I know that most of my students suck at facing new problem types, and I don't instruct them to memorize practiced solutions either. Needless to say, the exam goes very predictably. They can't do half of the known problems because they did not revise, and they can't crack the unknown problems because... they can't (and there is negative marking). I expect students to become naturally good at problem solving after they solve a few of same type. I suppose this is nothing less than expecting a miracle.

There is nothing inherently pleasing in the process of problem solving, the fulfillment comes with completion. Over time we begin to realize that it was the process that mattered not the results, but that is not what it feels like when you are waist deep in the mud, especially if you are sacrificing partying for it.

No wonder the average students do not have any motivation to practice. Observing their classroom performances I can tell that most of them have rarely (if ever) tasted the satisfaction of completion. They can practice what I taught, but there is little satisfaction in that. They can choose to get stuck on new problems, but where is the fun in that either?

[ it is not that they can't solve anything on their own. however, I assume that the ratio of success:failure has to be high enough in order for it to be motivating (and at least 3:2 for any chance in competitive exams). Otherwise it might discourage instead]