Prof. Richard Dent is an anthropology professor here at American university, and amongst his classes are two specific general education courses, Human origins and Early America: The buried past. Because he has experienced with these two completely different classes, he realizes that teachers have to approach their courses differently to reach common general education goals and it all depends on the subject being discussed.
On one hand, in his Human Origins class, Prof. Dent is able to apply the “global perspective” easily to the course. He accomplishes this by demonstrating to his students the different perspectives on human origins and where they were developed. Students will look at research on primatology, both by the Japanese and by the American institutions, and realize how these two opposite cultures differ on their approach to research. This allows the students to critically look at the problems faced by the researchers and come up with their own conclusions about human origins.
On the other hand, in his Early America class, Prof. Dent finds it difficult to apply the “global perspective”. Therefore, he will present historical events in 15th and 16th century America and reveal how largely related these events were to events going on elsewhere in the world. This will demonstrate to the students that the idea of a global community is not necessarily new.
Prof. Dent uses a lot of videos in his classes to engage the students in the course. Although he believes PowerPoint presentations can be helpful in some cases, he considers that after too many of them they can become deadening and hypnotic. By showing videos Prof. Dent is able to make the class more interactive and engaging. Prof. Dent also believes that taking notes is an important part of his students’ learning. He has observed that through this process ideas are filtered and added, making the learning more effective. Although the class is mostly based on lectures, Prof. Dent engages the students through discussion on small case studies, which he believes are more effective for that class than traditional textbooks.
With anthropology, as Prof. Dent sees it, “it is not hard to incorporate outside views”, therefore he believes the general education goals are well met.
Friday, December 7, 2007
Friday, November 30, 2007
Philosophy in the arts
Prof. Erfani teaches the course Meaning and Purpose in the Arts, a course far different from the other general education classes. It is a philosophical 200 level class inserted into cluster number 1, making it hard for Prof. Erfani because students will reach his class with no previous philosophical knowledge. Because it has no supplement, and therefore students enter with no foundations, Prof. Erfani can’t make any assumptions and has to structure the syllabus so that the students will understand the subject even if they know nothing about it. Through different teaching techniques, and a very specific syllabus, Prof. Erfani is able to reach the goals he believes come with teaching a general education class.
Prof. Erfani believes that the goal of the class is to teach students what philosophy can do within the arts, but more importantly to get students to become critical learners and take responsibilities for their beliefs. At the beginning of the semester, Prof. Erfani will start by covering different philosophers with different theories on what art is. He will then narrow the topic into specific definitions of art, all of which eventually fail. This, he believes, will demonstrate to students how complicated the matter is and will encourage them to come up with their own definitions and approaches to what art is.
Due to the difficult structure of the course, Prof. Erfani relies on Blackboard for everyday readings, instead of using a specific book. This allows the professor to choose the correct readings that apply to that day’s lecture because he believes that no single text comes close to what is needed to understand the class. Students will have to come to class prepared for discussion, by answering two questions about the reading, all of which are included in the syllabus. This gives students that have not studied philosophy a second chance each day; if they did not understand one of the readings they have another chance because next day’s topic is completely different.
He will also divide the course into different segments where he will go into the different types of art, such as music and film, and read philosophical approaches to these subjects. He will also leave 2 to 3 days open in the syllabus, where he will allow students to choose their own art forms for in depth study. This semester, the students chose theatre/musicals and graffiti. Prof. Erfani found that this helped engage the students in the course, it made many usually quiet students speak up and it allowed students to guide their own learning.
Prof. Erfani believes one of his best strategies, which he also uses in all his other gen ed classes, is an essay which is done at the beginning and end of class. The first day of class, he will ask his students to write a two page essay and tell what art is; this will be done with no research, just the student’ perspective. At the end of the semester, students will then review this essay in a three to four page assignment, where they will be able to apply the knowledge they acquired throughout the semester. Students can either change their minds, and will have to explain why they did, or stick to their original conclusions and defend their perspectives with better support. Prof. Erfani thinks this essay will demonstrate to the students how much they have learned and their particular evolution after the class has ended.
Prof. Erfani does not focus his class on getting students to be critical thinkers, but rather get them to be critical thinkers through good writing. He will reach this goal by sending several assignments throughout the semester. Students will have to write responses to readings and different assignments which will make them read the required articles more carefully and therefore come prepared to the class with discussion comments and questions.
Although a difficult class to teach, Prof. Erfani has managed to structure the course so that students are focused on the topic and engaged on the subject. He believes it is the teacher’s job to make cohesion of the topic, and he achieves this through a complex syllabus that clarifies where the course is going.
Prof. Erfani believes that the goal of the class is to teach students what philosophy can do within the arts, but more importantly to get students to become critical learners and take responsibilities for their beliefs. At the beginning of the semester, Prof. Erfani will start by covering different philosophers with different theories on what art is. He will then narrow the topic into specific definitions of art, all of which eventually fail. This, he believes, will demonstrate to students how complicated the matter is and will encourage them to come up with their own definitions and approaches to what art is.
Due to the difficult structure of the course, Prof. Erfani relies on Blackboard for everyday readings, instead of using a specific book. This allows the professor to choose the correct readings that apply to that day’s lecture because he believes that no single text comes close to what is needed to understand the class. Students will have to come to class prepared for discussion, by answering two questions about the reading, all of which are included in the syllabus. This gives students that have not studied philosophy a second chance each day; if they did not understand one of the readings they have another chance because next day’s topic is completely different.
He will also divide the course into different segments where he will go into the different types of art, such as music and film, and read philosophical approaches to these subjects. He will also leave 2 to 3 days open in the syllabus, where he will allow students to choose their own art forms for in depth study. This semester, the students chose theatre/musicals and graffiti. Prof. Erfani found that this helped engage the students in the course, it made many usually quiet students speak up and it allowed students to guide their own learning.
Prof. Erfani believes one of his best strategies, which he also uses in all his other gen ed classes, is an essay which is done at the beginning and end of class. The first day of class, he will ask his students to write a two page essay and tell what art is; this will be done with no research, just the student’ perspective. At the end of the semester, students will then review this essay in a three to four page assignment, where they will be able to apply the knowledge they acquired throughout the semester. Students can either change their minds, and will have to explain why they did, or stick to their original conclusions and defend their perspectives with better support. Prof. Erfani thinks this essay will demonstrate to the students how much they have learned and their particular evolution after the class has ended.
Prof. Erfani does not focus his class on getting students to be critical thinkers, but rather get them to be critical thinkers through good writing. He will reach this goal by sending several assignments throughout the semester. Students will have to write responses to readings and different assignments which will make them read the required articles more carefully and therefore come prepared to the class with discussion comments and questions.
Although a difficult class to teach, Prof. Erfani has managed to structure the course so that students are focused on the topic and engaged on the subject. He believes it is the teacher’s job to make cohesion of the topic, and he achieves this through a complex syllabus that clarifies where the course is going.
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Dave Chappelle's role in our general education
When I asked Prof. Rachel Watkins how she believed she was reaching the general education goals in her Roots of Racism course, she told me she had many techniques to incite critical thinking and develop student’s intuitive, creative and aesthetic faculties.
She focuses on getting students to take a second look at ordinary things, and getting them to reflect on their effect on our perspectives and our values. At the beginning of the semester, she will teach her students on racism in general. Towards the end of the semester, she will make her students apply their knowledge to the world around them, therefore making them use their critical thinking capabilities. Students will look at TV shows, such as Comedy Central, and address the issues related to racism that this show portrays. They specifically discuss Dave Chappelle, a popular comedian amongst the students. Prof. Watkins will then encourage her students to look past the jokes, and, instead of looking at it mindlessly to get a good laugh, they will investigate on the critique of race relations this show discusses. They will look at the different layers that Dave Chappelle puts into his sketch, and demonstrate how this affects the audience through its racist comments.
Prof. Watkins also devotes a whole module of her class to talking about how celebrities, being an important influence to our society, also demonstrate racist behaviors. They will look at cases such as Mel Gibson or Michael Richards to demonstrate that racism is still part of our society, and to analyze its different representations.
To teach students intuitive, creative and aesthetic faculties, Prof. Watkins separates the class into small groups and requires them to develop their own research project. They will have an in depth study of any concept or idea that they see fits with the topics discussed in class. This, as Prof. Watkins believes, “will facilitate their own, self directed second look”.
Prof. Watkins believes that one of the most important parts of her class is getting rid of the students’ tendency to believe that racist ideas have been around for a long time. Her main goal is to make students realize that these racist processes are not natural, but created by specific social relations, political situations and economic conditions. This will enable students not to take things for granted, and question everyday events. They will eventually develop a method of thinking, where instead of saying “this is just how it is”, they will question processes by asking themselves “how did this stuff come to be?” or “ where did this process come from?”.
She focuses on getting students to take a second look at ordinary things, and getting them to reflect on their effect on our perspectives and our values. At the beginning of the semester, she will teach her students on racism in general. Towards the end of the semester, she will make her students apply their knowledge to the world around them, therefore making them use their critical thinking capabilities. Students will look at TV shows, such as Comedy Central, and address the issues related to racism that this show portrays. They specifically discuss Dave Chappelle, a popular comedian amongst the students. Prof. Watkins will then encourage her students to look past the jokes, and, instead of looking at it mindlessly to get a good laugh, they will investigate on the critique of race relations this show discusses. They will look at the different layers that Dave Chappelle puts into his sketch, and demonstrate how this affects the audience through its racist comments.
Prof. Watkins also devotes a whole module of her class to talking about how celebrities, being an important influence to our society, also demonstrate racist behaviors. They will look at cases such as Mel Gibson or Michael Richards to demonstrate that racism is still part of our society, and to analyze its different representations.
To teach students intuitive, creative and aesthetic faculties, Prof. Watkins separates the class into small groups and requires them to develop their own research project. They will have an in depth study of any concept or idea that they see fits with the topics discussed in class. This, as Prof. Watkins believes, “will facilitate their own, self directed second look”.
Prof. Watkins believes that one of the most important parts of her class is getting rid of the students’ tendency to believe that racist ideas have been around for a long time. Her main goal is to make students realize that these racist processes are not natural, but created by specific social relations, political situations and economic conditions. This will enable students not to take things for granted, and question everyday events. They will eventually develop a method of thinking, where instead of saying “this is just how it is”, they will question processes by asking themselves “how did this stuff come to be?” or “ where did this process come from?”.
Friday, November 9, 2007
A student's perspective
Why are students still reluctant to take general education classes if such new interesting techniques are being implemented? I’ve been interviewing professors about the teaching methods they use and every time I hear innovative and creative methods, so why is the general education program not as successful as it should be? I decided that before investigating any further into these teacher’s techniques, I needed a student perspective that could help me get an answer to my question.
I talked to Vanessa Garber, a senior here at AU, who is also involved in the general education program. When I asked her if she believed that her general education classes were interesting she told me that the only classes she found helped her, where the ones that counted towards her major. Although she is a firm believer in general education, she thinks that because classes that counted towards her major seem to have a focused purpose, they are better developed and better structured. This does not imply that students should take general education courses that only count towards their major; it implies that the general education courses that are not towards a major are “place holder classes”. These don’t seem to be working because they do not have a defined purpose and teachers therefore do not know how to approach the class. She also told me that many times professors that teach these classes are first of all in many cases adjuncts and second of all do not have control over the assigned readings or the syllabus. This creates a big problem because professors are therefore deprived of their teaching methods causing them to conform to methods that may not play to their strengths.
She also told me that the general approach of students towards a general education course is a “simple class”. This may imply that there is something wrong in the program because it is making the students not take their general education courses seriously. When I asked Vanessa what she thought about this, she told me that she believes that it is because the administration is “trying to keep a structure that is no longer viable”. She told me that she believes professors should have more teaching creative freedom and that the administration should have more detailed structures of the courses so that they have a clearly defined purpose that lets the teacher know where he/she needs to arrive at.
Although a difficult problem to attend to, she also believes that it is important to have smaller classes to allow for dialogue between the students and the professor. Because of the nature of the general education classes, they require dialogue or else they will become one more factual class. As I mentioned on a previous blog, I believe that general education classes teach more than just facts, they create a way of thinking. If there is no dialogue students will never develop critical thinking skills that they should acquire from their general education courses.
There are remarkable professors involved in the general education program, but although they are doing their best, students don’t seem to appreciate them. So far I believed that it was a problem with students; thinking that general education is not important. Now my opinion has changed. I believe that students are not interested because they are actually not getting much out of the general education classes. This mainly occurs because the structure is failing to accomplish its purpose: teaching the students about a topic while developing their critical thinking skills. Therefore, I believe the administration should look at the syllabi to determine a specific purpose for the class and at the strengths of each professor and join these two concepts together to be able to develop successful class structures.
I talked to Vanessa Garber, a senior here at AU, who is also involved in the general education program. When I asked her if she believed that her general education classes were interesting she told me that the only classes she found helped her, where the ones that counted towards her major. Although she is a firm believer in general education, she thinks that because classes that counted towards her major seem to have a focused purpose, they are better developed and better structured. This does not imply that students should take general education courses that only count towards their major; it implies that the general education courses that are not towards a major are “place holder classes”. These don’t seem to be working because they do not have a defined purpose and teachers therefore do not know how to approach the class. She also told me that many times professors that teach these classes are first of all in many cases adjuncts and second of all do not have control over the assigned readings or the syllabus. This creates a big problem because professors are therefore deprived of their teaching methods causing them to conform to methods that may not play to their strengths.
She also told me that the general approach of students towards a general education course is a “simple class”. This may imply that there is something wrong in the program because it is making the students not take their general education courses seriously. When I asked Vanessa what she thought about this, she told me that she believes that it is because the administration is “trying to keep a structure that is no longer viable”. She told me that she believes professors should have more teaching creative freedom and that the administration should have more detailed structures of the courses so that they have a clearly defined purpose that lets the teacher know where he/she needs to arrive at.
Although a difficult problem to attend to, she also believes that it is important to have smaller classes to allow for dialogue between the students and the professor. Because of the nature of the general education classes, they require dialogue or else they will become one more factual class. As I mentioned on a previous blog, I believe that general education classes teach more than just facts, they create a way of thinking. If there is no dialogue students will never develop critical thinking skills that they should acquire from their general education courses.
There are remarkable professors involved in the general education program, but although they are doing their best, students don’t seem to appreciate them. So far I believed that it was a problem with students; thinking that general education is not important. Now my opinion has changed. I believe that students are not interested because they are actually not getting much out of the general education classes. This mainly occurs because the structure is failing to accomplish its purpose: teaching the students about a topic while developing their critical thinking skills. Therefore, I believe the administration should look at the syllabi to determine a specific purpose for the class and at the strengths of each professor and join these two concepts together to be able to develop successful class structures.
Thursday, November 1, 2007
Music is for life
When I asked Prof. Sapieyevski for an interview I never imagined it would be as interesting as it was. As soon as our conversation started he demonstrated to me how he believed that music is an international language because, as he explains, “it is the only language that while only having seven letters, it speaks to everyone.” He moved towards his piano, and played a piece for me. Throughout the piece he narrated a story of two lovers, and with changes in the dynamics the relationship evolved into a complex bond between the two lovers. As I heard the accords my imagination wondered and music became a story inside my head- they were dating, they fell in love, they had a fight, one of them tragically died, the other was only left with memories. When the piece was over I realized how music is a language that speaks to everyone; even someone from Russia would have pictured a love story with the same ups and downs as I did.
Prof. Sapieyevski believes that his class is not about facts. He uses a teaching website, Music Happens, where he helps his students get the gist of the class, leaving the class period for discussion and demonstration. He believes his most important goal is to make the students aware of the emotion of music, something you cannot read on books. Therefore through demonstrations in class, Prof. Sapieyevski teaches his students how to "feel musical emotion" and to recognize how music sets the atmosphere on everything from a movie, to life.
Prof. Sapieyevski truly believes in the power of music. He told me music is a direct mirror of our emotions, something I also believe is true. I have played flute for almost five years, and I believe music is more important in life than we give it credit for. It helps us express feelings difficult to share with others; it gives us a safe route where we can expose our true feelings. In Prof. Sapieyevski’s words, “music is cheaper than a psychiatrist”.
Besides using a website to help with his class, Prof. Sapieyevski uses the program “Painted Music” to invite his students to mix painting with music. Through incredible technology, I didn’t even know existed, he is able to teach his students to paint on sensitive canvases so that they can create the sound they want; painting therefore becomes the instrument. This way, through painting on a canvas, the students are also able to create music and unite both disciplines into one. This helps the students realize that the world is a multidisciplinary place, where we have to learn to apply everything we know to our day to day actions.
When I asked Prof. Sapieyevski why he believed his class met the requirements of a general education course he told me “because unlike many subjects, Music is for life”. He told me that almost everything else in life becomes obsolete, but music has lasted centuries, therefore it is important for students to know about this subject. It teaches them to have a good emotional life, something many subjects here at the university do not attend to. In our modern world, we lack enrichment of emotions because we have focused ourselves on getting jobs. Through this course students are taught that there is more to life than a job, it teaches them the emotional aspect of life.
Prof. Sapieyevski believes that his class is not about facts. He uses a teaching website, Music Happens, where he helps his students get the gist of the class, leaving the class period for discussion and demonstration. He believes his most important goal is to make the students aware of the emotion of music, something you cannot read on books. Therefore through demonstrations in class, Prof. Sapieyevski teaches his students how to "feel musical emotion" and to recognize how music sets the atmosphere on everything from a movie, to life.
Prof. Sapieyevski truly believes in the power of music. He told me music is a direct mirror of our emotions, something I also believe is true. I have played flute for almost five years, and I believe music is more important in life than we give it credit for. It helps us express feelings difficult to share with others; it gives us a safe route where we can expose our true feelings. In Prof. Sapieyevski’s words, “music is cheaper than a psychiatrist”.
Besides using a website to help with his class, Prof. Sapieyevski uses the program “Painted Music” to invite his students to mix painting with music. Through incredible technology, I didn’t even know existed, he is able to teach his students to paint on sensitive canvases so that they can create the sound they want; painting therefore becomes the instrument. This way, through painting on a canvas, the students are also able to create music and unite both disciplines into one. This helps the students realize that the world is a multidisciplinary place, where we have to learn to apply everything we know to our day to day actions.
When I asked Prof. Sapieyevski why he believed his class met the requirements of a general education course he told me “because unlike many subjects, Music is for life”. He told me that almost everything else in life becomes obsolete, but music has lasted centuries, therefore it is important for students to know about this subject. It teaches them to have a good emotional life, something many subjects here at the university do not attend to. In our modern world, we lack enrichment of emotions because we have focused ourselves on getting jobs. Through this course students are taught that there is more to life than a job, it teaches them the emotional aspect of life.
Thursday, October 25, 2007
An unexpected method
I have visited many teachers, all of whom have told me specific ways in which they approach their courses. I have heard images, videos, presentations, and blogs, each one a different method to keep students’ attention focused. This week, I visited Prof. Peach, who teaches the course on Theories on Democracy and Human Rights. When I entered her office, after finally being able to arrange a meeting with her (due to her tight schedule), we started talking about her techniques for motivating the students in the subject. She told me something I never expected.
This semester, Prof. Peach took her students to a play at the Katzen Arts Center, called “Death and the Maiden”, a presentation focused on human rights in Argentina. She used this as motivation for her students, and as an introduction to one of the topics to be covered in class- human rights. She later made them reflect on the play and use what they had learned about Argentina’s violent history to relate it to current international events through a series of discussions and reading assignments. They also read essays on democracies in Latin America, that helped connect the play and the human rights abuses with the other part of the course-democracy.
Besides discussing human rights in Argentina and human rights in Burma, Prof. Peach will present to her students a film about Iraqi prisoners from the 2003 War in Iraq. This will help demonstrate that abuses are not only a part of third world countries but also of the world's superpower. This way, the students get a global perspective on the topic and are not left with a biased opinion.
Prof. Peach believes that the most important part of her class is when students relate the philosophies they learned to current events. She thinks it helps them keep focused on the present and understand the world they live in.
This semester, Prof. Peach took her students to a play at the Katzen Arts Center, called “Death and the Maiden”, a presentation focused on human rights in Argentina. She used this as motivation for her students, and as an introduction to one of the topics to be covered in class- human rights. She later made them reflect on the play and use what they had learned about Argentina’s violent history to relate it to current international events through a series of discussions and reading assignments. They also read essays on democracies in Latin America, that helped connect the play and the human rights abuses with the other part of the course-democracy.
Besides discussing human rights in Argentina and human rights in Burma, Prof. Peach will present to her students a film about Iraqi prisoners from the 2003 War in Iraq. This will help demonstrate that abuses are not only a part of third world countries but also of the world's superpower. This way, the students get a global perspective on the topic and are not left with a biased opinion.
Prof. Peach believes that the most important part of her class is when students relate the philosophies they learned to current events. She thinks it helps them keep focused on the present and understand the world they live in.
Thursday, October 18, 2007
More than just credits
So how does Prof. Danna Walker plan on making her students “recall that the dissidents who produced the publications and helped change society were critical thinkers and social activists”? And even more important, make them “perhaps emulate [the courage to challenge the dominant ideology of their time] in the larger world.” I had a conversation with Prof. Walker today that made me realize she has very interesting strategies that will help the students leave the class with something more than just credits.
First of all, she approaches her classes so that students will learn why journalists act the way they do instead of how they do things. This is one of the main reasons why critical thinking is developed throughout the trajectory of this course. They will look at journalists from a theoretical context, at a macro level, a human condition level. They will connect current events, such as the revolution on communications, with specific theories they have learned in class. This will let students apply their knowledge to contemporary affairs.
One of the most important strategies Prof. Walker uses is a collective blog, where students can be engaged with the material they study. They determined a specific topic for this blog, Renewing political debate, and through this they research different ramifications of the topic: the political, the historical, the social. This makes the class dynamic for the students and helps Prof. Walker avoid the static situation some professors tend to fall into. Not only will this open doors for discussion and ideas to flow within the students, but because of links and comments from people all around the world, it will also open new doors for intercultural discussions and connection with the outside community. Prof. Walker has noticed that many of the students show a lot of interest for this blog (Especially after realizing that if they googled the topic, the first link would be to their blog).
As Prof. Walker sees it, “students can get caught up in their own race to the goal line… to the job, therefore forgetting that they should take advantage of all the opportunities that the university is providing.” She asks of her students to “just think about what they are doing”, and to have a purpose in life instead of just doing what is ordered or expected of them.
First of all, she approaches her classes so that students will learn why journalists act the way they do instead of how they do things. This is one of the main reasons why critical thinking is developed throughout the trajectory of this course. They will look at journalists from a theoretical context, at a macro level, a human condition level. They will connect current events, such as the revolution on communications, with specific theories they have learned in class. This will let students apply their knowledge to contemporary affairs.
One of the most important strategies Prof. Walker uses is a collective blog, where students can be engaged with the material they study. They determined a specific topic for this blog, Renewing political debate, and through this they research different ramifications of the topic: the political, the historical, the social. This makes the class dynamic for the students and helps Prof. Walker avoid the static situation some professors tend to fall into. Not only will this open doors for discussion and ideas to flow within the students, but because of links and comments from people all around the world, it will also open new doors for intercultural discussions and connection with the outside community. Prof. Walker has noticed that many of the students show a lot of interest for this blog (Especially after realizing that if they googled the topic, the first link would be to their blog).
As Prof. Walker sees it, “students can get caught up in their own race to the goal line… to the job, therefore forgetting that they should take advantage of all the opportunities that the university is providing.” She asks of her students to “just think about what they are doing”, and to have a purpose in life instead of just doing what is ordered or expected of them.
A faculty perspective: Danna Walker
School of Communications faculty member Danna Walker weighs in which this take on her experience teaching in the General Education program:
I told my students in the general education course that I’m teaching this semester -- Dissident Media (COMM-275) -- that it was okay that we were looking at our topic in a “broad-brush” way. It had occurred to me only a few weeks into the semester that we had already gotten through a lot of historical material, including the labor press of the early 1800s, the righteous indignation of William Lloyd Garrison’s abolitionist newspaper -- The Liberator, Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony’s The Revolution, and several other historical dissident newspapers, all the way up to the Black Panther started by Huey Newton and Bobby Seale. We were more than halfway through our text, Voices of Revolution, by AU Professor Rodger Streitmatter. I started to worry that we were going too fast, even though we were “on task” in terms of the syllabus. I guess I get concerned when things go too smoothly in teaching; it’s unfamiliar terrain for a fairly new teacher like me. But when I realized that with each chapter the students were taking the initiative to relate the historical facts in the book with the theoretical underpinnings we had studied in the beginning of the semester, I knew I didn’t need to justify the approach of the class anymore. They were discussing ideology, hegemony, Juergen Habermas and other high points of critical theory with relative ease. I felt -- with what I had to admit was almost certainty -- I had evolved into a full-fledged General Education teacher.
Yes, I had to concede that I had fully internalized the six program goals. What I interpret that to mean is that while I’m happy that my students are being exposed to the rich history of dissident newspapers, I know that the students may not always remember the FBI’s effort to shut down the counterculture newspapers of the 1960s or other details about specific presses. But I trust that they will recall that the dissidents who produced the publications and helped change society were critical thinkers and social activists who had the courage to challenge the dominant ideology of their time. That’s something students can take with them, and, even, perhaps emulate in the larger world.
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
A daily workout
We are repeatedly told that exercise is one of the most important things in life, and it is drilled into our heads how to do it correctly; you have to start while you are young, you have to do it regularly and you should work every muscle equally. As the professor for Understanding mass media, Prof. Menke-Fish, sees it, general education is exactly like exercise. She believes that general education is a daily workout that students need to take advantage of.
The people that mostly appreciate exercise are usually elders, because then is when they realize the little exercise they did while they were young helped their present health. As with exercise, general education is for the long run, and unfortunately, as Prof. Menke-Fish believes, students will only realize the importance of the program until 20 years have passed; when they have more experience and maturity. This is why students are not willing to take general education classes, they are not looking into the future; they are only concentrating on the present.
Prof. Menke-Fish also believes that with general education we can explore every aspect of the world and therefore be able to think about things from numerous perspectives. Like exercise, where every muscle needs to be kept fit, in general education we need to learn about every subject. To be solid and well rounded human beings, we need to be “tuned into the world around us and approach the problems we face from multiple points of view; a well designed liberal arts education brings that opportunity.”
To make the class memorable for the students, as she believes it constitutes an important part of their education, Prof. Menke-Fish does not make her students read the syllabus on their first class. Instead students will be tested on how they view the world and how their perceptions are affected by the media. Prof. Menke-Fish welcomes the students, and tells them that they should believe everything that the media says; she will support this with a video that states how students should view things. This will help the students question the way in which they think about society, and realize the impact the media has on their opinions and stereotypes.
Throughout the class, Prof. Menke-Fish will use to several videos, posters and especially slides which will help the students visualize the ideas and stereotypes present in the media. They will also have to take risks in weekly projects called “in the media, about the media”, where they will have to apply that week’s readings in group presentations.
Prof. Menke-Fish clearly believes that general education is one of the most important parts of the learning experience. As advice to students she concludes “this is the last opportunity to think about a topic in a way you will never encounter again, it should not be taken lightly… general education will sustain you”.
The people that mostly appreciate exercise are usually elders, because then is when they realize the little exercise they did while they were young helped their present health. As with exercise, general education is for the long run, and unfortunately, as Prof. Menke-Fish believes, students will only realize the importance of the program until 20 years have passed; when they have more experience and maturity. This is why students are not willing to take general education classes, they are not looking into the future; they are only concentrating on the present.
Prof. Menke-Fish also believes that with general education we can explore every aspect of the world and therefore be able to think about things from numerous perspectives. Like exercise, where every muscle needs to be kept fit, in general education we need to learn about every subject. To be solid and well rounded human beings, we need to be “tuned into the world around us and approach the problems we face from multiple points of view; a well designed liberal arts education brings that opportunity.”
To make the class memorable for the students, as she believes it constitutes an important part of their education, Prof. Menke-Fish does not make her students read the syllabus on their first class. Instead students will be tested on how they view the world and how their perceptions are affected by the media. Prof. Menke-Fish welcomes the students, and tells them that they should believe everything that the media says; she will support this with a video that states how students should view things. This will help the students question the way in which they think about society, and realize the impact the media has on their opinions and stereotypes.
Throughout the class, Prof. Menke-Fish will use to several videos, posters and especially slides which will help the students visualize the ideas and stereotypes present in the media. They will also have to take risks in weekly projects called “in the media, about the media”, where they will have to apply that week’s readings in group presentations.
Prof. Menke-Fish clearly believes that general education is one of the most important parts of the learning experience. As advice to students she concludes “this is the last opportunity to think about a topic in a way you will never encounter again, it should not be taken lightly… general education will sustain you”.
Wednesday, October 3, 2007
A student perspective: Zach Ulrich
Zach Ulrich, AU undergraduate student and two-time General Education Faculty Assistant, had this to say about the General Education program:
As part of my experience at American University I had the privilege of assisting in two General Education courses, Astronomy and Western Legal Traditions. In many ways, these two classes' curricula are exemplary of the wide variety of thinking that General Education brings to students' lives. Astronomy taught me to think "not only out of the box, but out of this world"; I was able to place myself within the amazing scientific discoveries that researchers have come upon over history -- and truly get in touch with what it meant for me to be a human amidst the world around me. In contrast, Western Legal Tradition taught me to take otherwise abstracted concepts and use argumentative structures to analyze, synthesize, and then present my thoughts on precise rhetorical points.
General Education is not about having a bunch of different courses, it's about being able to think a bunch of different ways. A well-rounded adult/citizen/parent/worker/contributor to society needs to be able to hold many different types of ideas, sometimes contrasting, in their minds at once and use their own experience and skills to form independent conclusions. Indeed, many philosophers have remarked that the true mark of intellectual development is the ability to understand and grapple with competing ideas at the same time. General Education, for me, was not about getting in front of a classroom as an assistant and having students memorize facts -- it was about exploring and understanding such vastly different ways of interpreting the world that I had no choice but to grow, to mature, and to see life and indeed myself in whole new ways, ways otherwise impossible.
So, the next time you stop to choose your next General Education courses, I sincerely encourage you to step outside of your comfort zone -- take the opportunity to enter realms of thought you never would experience otherwise; you never know...you just might learn something you'll never forget.
Creating a "method of thinking"
This week I had an enlightening conversation with Prof. Abraham, the professor for Greatness in Music. He told me he believes his class is not about “learning a specific theory or history or even a single topic, it’s about using music as a vehicle to learn about critical judgment and aesthetic theory.” Does this ring a bell? Well, if you read the comments from last week’s post, something should light up; “An American from Cairo” argued that for him, general education classes are “the initiators of a method of thinking that should continue throughout one’s life.”, and I agree that this too is part of what a general education encompasses.
Through the Greatness in Music course, students are able to develop independent thought. They are stripped away from preformed opinions caused by experience, tastes and influence from others, until they can form their own judgment of what is “good” and “bad”. After taking this class, students will not only know about music itself, but will think about values in a different way and will posses critical thinking capabilities.
In order to reach this goal, Prof. Abraham has his students read an article every week, whether about aesthetic theory, cognitive education theory or ethnomusicology, and generate a reader’s response that will be discussed during class. In this discussion, students learn to recognize the effect of society on their opinions, and are able to get rid of them to create their own judgment. They are also able to reach these conclusions by studying the language of criticism. By looking at reviews students identify how language is used to express a judgment value. They later apply this to their own critique reviews, which they have to create based on a performance they saw, where they can fully comprehend how a critique affects people’s opinions on what is determined as “good” or “bad”.
Because of the approach to the class, there is no assigned text for it, and most of the classes are characterized by discussion and dialogue amongst the students. This allows students to be independent thinkers while also considering other’s points of view.
Therefore, I believe general education is both to create “a method of thinking” as “An American in Cairo” said, and to make us “informed citizens of the world”, as Prof. Nadell said.
Through the Greatness in Music course, students are able to develop independent thought. They are stripped away from preformed opinions caused by experience, tastes and influence from others, until they can form their own judgment of what is “good” and “bad”. After taking this class, students will not only know about music itself, but will think about values in a different way and will posses critical thinking capabilities.
In order to reach this goal, Prof. Abraham has his students read an article every week, whether about aesthetic theory, cognitive education theory or ethnomusicology, and generate a reader’s response that will be discussed during class. In this discussion, students learn to recognize the effect of society on their opinions, and are able to get rid of them to create their own judgment. They are also able to reach these conclusions by studying the language of criticism. By looking at reviews students identify how language is used to express a judgment value. They later apply this to their own critique reviews, which they have to create based on a performance they saw, where they can fully comprehend how a critique affects people’s opinions on what is determined as “good” or “bad”.
Because of the approach to the class, there is no assigned text for it, and most of the classes are characterized by discussion and dialogue amongst the students. This allows students to be independent thinkers while also considering other’s points of view.
Therefore, I believe general education is both to create “a method of thinking” as “An American in Cairo” said, and to make us “informed citizens of the world”, as Prof. Nadell said.
Tuesday, October 2, 2007
General Education opens door for new Ideas
The article listed below is published in American Today, an on-campus newspaper.
October 2, 2007
Gen Ed town meeting opens door for new ideas
A student who meant to follow her father’s wishes and become a doctor changed her major when she found a love of political science through a general education course.
Another student took a philosophy course, became a double major, and now plans to go to graduate school in the subject.
The General Education Program is intended to ensure that all AU students are exposed to a world of academic thought that goes beyond the narrow goal of preparation for the careers they first imagine they want.
For some students, the experience is transforming. Others, like the author of a recent Eagle editorial calling for the program to be scrapped, charge it with rigidity and irrelevance.
How is the General Education Program doing at AU? What is it doing well, and what is less successful? Are there aspects that might be modified? Those are some of the questions Patrick Jackson is considering as the program’s new director. “The idea is to broaden your horizons—to become broader than what you would have come to college thinking you were going to study,” said freshman James O’Donnell, School of International Service (SIS), at an open meeting on General Education last week.
Nathan Wick ’08 expressed appreciation for the ways in which his General Education courses ended up relating to other courses in unexpected ways. The SIS senior found it exciting, for instance, to read Merchant of Venice in one course, learn about the Holocaust in another course, and be able to draw connections. Several students and an adjunct faculty member said they discovered their majors through the General Education Program.
But students also expressed frustration with aspects of AU’s “cluster” model, which some said was too rigid and others said didn’t go far enough in requiring students to experience subjects outside their majors. Jackson provided context by describing the two main models for the design of General Education programs: a “core” model, in which all students take designated courses deemed important for their education, and a “distribution requirement” model, in which students can simply take a “smorgasbord” of courses outside their major.
AU’s model is an “alloy,” Jackson said, offering “choice within limits.” The program has five broad curricular areas, such as Creative Arts and Natural Sciences, that all students must study. These areas, in turn, are divided into clusters, so that students take a series of courses in the same sequence.
For instance, to complete a sequence in Creative Arts, students decide at the outset whether they prefer to focus on the arts through practice or theory. Those who choose courses from a cluster called Understanding Creative Processes might end up taking a foundation course such as The Studio Experience and a second-level course such as The Artist’s Perspective: Painting.
Those who prefer to look at art more theoretically look at the cluster called Understanding Creative Works, where the offerings include courses in art history, Shakespeare, African literature, and other topics.
While students said it was good to broaden their horizons, Wick noted that students typically pick courses that fulfill a major requirement, whether or not they really like or want that particular course. As a result, “I was able to get rid of six classes without broadening my horizons,” said the SIS senior, which he felt in retrospect was not a good thing.
Wick also said that the goal of cross-college diversity was not being met in practice, because students from particular schools and colleges tend to flock to the same courses.
Some faculty and students contended that small class sizes were imperative for General Education courses. But Jackson pointed out that, lacking “billions of dollars in endowment,” a mandate for small class sizes in General Education courses “is not going to happen.”
He said, though, that such methods as online discussions and blogging can be used to facilitate interaction and small group discussion. O’Donnell, the SIS freshman, said that he has found online discussions and blogs helpful.
Jackson said he is evaluating the program and its courses to see what changes might be needed, and where “a bit of housecleaning would be in order.” He maintains a blog on the topic.
Thursday, September 27, 2007
Succeeding in life
Ever since I was asked to write about my insight on General Education at American University, I’ve been wondering, what is so important about the program that American University faculty so fervently admires? I went to visit Prof. Nadell, the professor for Ancient & Medieval Jewish Civilizations, who gave me interesting insight on why she believes students should be exposed to the liberal arts. In her own words, “It is impossible to be an informed citizen of the world if you don’t know liberal arts”.
As I watched “Talk to me”, a movie shown at the Ward auditorium Tuesday night, I realized just what Prof. Nadell was arguing. In order to understand the movie, you needed to know a little about the past. The movie is based on the life of Ralph Waldo “Petey” Geene Jr, an influential Radio DJ during the 60’s that created controversy amongst the community by highlighting race relations in a previously silent atmosphere. After Martin Luther King Jr’s death the troubled black community of DC was unstoppable, creating several riots and chaos, inspiring Greene to help them through their grief. If I had not known who Martin Luther King Jr. was, most of the movie would not have made sense. Not only was history involved, but because I had some knowledge about the effects of mass media on society, I was able to understand the effect his morning radio program had on the black community and how it helped calm the citizens down.
Then I started to think, if these classes are so important for our daily life, such as simply watching a movie, what does Prof. Nadell plan on doing so that her classes are memorable to her students? Her main approach is an interactive classroom, where students can have different ways of learning and therefore remember the information. Prof. Nadell arranges small discussion groups, which students have to attend at least twice, where a General Education faculty assistant is present and therefore gives the students a more comfortable atmosphere where they can have critical reflections on the readings of the week. She also invites speakers, exposing students to experts, and bringing different approaches and different ways of looking at sources to the class. Finally, by including picture slides during presentations and lectures, she is able to help visual learners grasp concepts easily and overall make students connect learned knowledge with images.
American University faculty wants us to be successful in life, not only successful in our major, which is why they stress General Education as much as they do. They therefore give us the necessary tools to function properly in life, to be knowledgeable instead of existing in ignorance, and to be able to appreciate things as simple as a movie in a much deeper way.
As I watched “Talk to me”, a movie shown at the Ward auditorium Tuesday night, I realized just what Prof. Nadell was arguing. In order to understand the movie, you needed to know a little about the past. The movie is based on the life of Ralph Waldo “Petey” Geene Jr, an influential Radio DJ during the 60’s that created controversy amongst the community by highlighting race relations in a previously silent atmosphere. After Martin Luther King Jr’s death the troubled black community of DC was unstoppable, creating several riots and chaos, inspiring Greene to help them through their grief. If I had not known who Martin Luther King Jr. was, most of the movie would not have made sense. Not only was history involved, but because I had some knowledge about the effects of mass media on society, I was able to understand the effect his morning radio program had on the black community and how it helped calm the citizens down.
Then I started to think, if these classes are so important for our daily life, such as simply watching a movie, what does Prof. Nadell plan on doing so that her classes are memorable to her students? Her main approach is an interactive classroom, where students can have different ways of learning and therefore remember the information. Prof. Nadell arranges small discussion groups, which students have to attend at least twice, where a General Education faculty assistant is present and therefore gives the students a more comfortable atmosphere where they can have critical reflections on the readings of the week. She also invites speakers, exposing students to experts, and bringing different approaches and different ways of looking at sources to the class. Finally, by including picture slides during presentations and lectures, she is able to help visual learners grasp concepts easily and overall make students connect learned knowledge with images.
American University faculty wants us to be successful in life, not only successful in our major, which is why they stress General Education as much as they do. They therefore give us the necessary tools to function properly in life, to be knowledgeable instead of existing in ignorance, and to be able to appreciate things as simple as a movie in a much deeper way.
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
A Faculty Perspective: Andrew Lewis
Andrew Lewis, recipient of last year's faculty award for excellence in General Education teaching, had this to say when I asked him about his experiences teaching in the GenEd program:
Food for thought as we consider what it means to be generally educated and how we can best achive that goal here at AU.
I've given General Education a great deal of thought over the past few years and my classes have evolved accordingly as I've become a more experienced, and hopefully, better teacher. First, I'm more inclined to let students do the learning for themselves than I used to be. By that I mean that I'm more patient with letting students tell me (and each other) about what they find interesting/troubling/perplexing in particular readings rather than making sure that I drive home what I want them to learn. I've taken this approach with lectures as well -- asking students to tell me what it is that they hear and what they think it means. Over time this has led to livelier in class conversations; more investment by the students in their own education; and a savvier crop of critical thinkers by the end of the semester. At the end of each class I'm regularly pleased to find that I've covered the material that I wanted to cover but have also included much more than I would have anticipated because of what the students find in the readings and in the lectures.
And, for me? It means that I've got to be quicker on my toes and much more responsive to questions and comments that I might not have anticipated. But then, being creative and thinking hard is why I got into this profession.
Food for thought as we consider what it means to be generally educated and how we can best achive that goal here at AU.
Thursday, September 20, 2007
The Purpose of General Education
Because of space constraints, The Eagle was unable to print the full text of my reply to Olga Khazan's editorial on the General Education program. The full text is below.
On September 27 at 3:00pm I will be hosting a public discussion in the McDowell Formal Lounge on what it means to be a generally educated person and how we at AU can ensure that we are helping students to achieve that goal. Food will be provided. Come join in the conversation!
When I was an undergraduate student, I used to have endless debates with my academic adviser about ways of getting around the general education requirements at my institution. I mean, I was an international relations major with an interest in math and philosophy, so why should I be forced to take classes in art history or laboratory science? Like most clever undergrads, I tried all kinds of avenues to get out of those requirements, but I was unsuccessful.
In hindsight, I’m very glad I was unsuccessful. Some of the most important courses of my undergraduate career were courses I took under duress, forced into them by the general education program requirements and by my advisor’s professional integrity in not supporting my efforts to evade them. Looking back, I’m especially glad I was forced to take a general education course entitled “The Impressionists and After,” since it gave me the opportunity to figure out precisely why I liked Monet and Degas, why I preferred them to Cezanne and Sisley, and precisely what was so darn revolutionary about painting myriad pictures of the same haystack and using an unusual color-palette in doing so.
In fact, I remember that course and its material better than I remember most of my major classes. In part that’s because after going to graduate school in Political Science I can no longer recall precisely which bits of my polisci knowledge came from undergrad and which came from grad school. What is true of graduate school, I think, is equally true of the working world, in that professional experiences after one’s undergraduate days will tend to deepen and replace some of the things one did while an undergraduate. Indeed, I’d say that those post-graduate experiences, whether in school or outside of it, are what one is most likely to draw on in one’s professional life—and how could it be otherwise, since the skills you learn in undergrad are likely to be out of date by the time you need to use them professionally?
I’ll go further. Contra Ms. Khazan’s column from last week, I do not believe that the purpose of undergraduate education—general education or otherwise—is to prepare students for the “real world,” if by “real world” we mean the world of professional work. Rather, undergraduate education is all about helping students become who they are, by giving them opportunities to explore a variety of areas of human knowledge and experience and start to chart their own course through it. This is fortunate, because (to give another example from my own experience) the computer programming class I took in undergrad, a class I thought would give me some real practical skills, did train me in the proper syntax for FORTRAN programs, but since no one uses FORTRAN much anymore, those skills turned out the be pretty useless. (Indeed, these days one doesn’t even need to know how to program a computer to use it, but once upon a time you did.) Times change; skills become outdated; even facts—like “the United States is in engaged in a Cold War with the Soviet Union”—aren’t immutable. If undergraduate education were about skills, it wouldn’t be worth much, since your education would have a very short half-life indeed.
Fortunately, that’s not what undergraduate education is all about. The point of taking classes in undergrad is to help you develop not skills and factual knowledge, but aptitudes and dispositions, to discover how various people and fields of study think about perennially important issues that seem to be more or less embedded in the human condition. And in discovering how various people and fields of study approach these issues, you can begin to craft yourself into a human being with a perspective on those issues. Issues of ethics, aesthetics, cultural and perspectival diversity, and the challenges of a global point of view. Not by accident, those form four of the program-wide goals of AU’s General Education program; the ability to communicate in written and oral forms, and the critical disposition that leads to a healthy skepticism about knowledge-claims until you have evaluated them for yourself, round out the list. That’s what general education is all about, and that’s why we don’t let students take just any course for GenEd credit—we want to make sure that the courses we approve are actually intending to achieve those goals.
I had yet another occasion to think back to that art history class this past week, while in Europe attending a professional conference. I took half a day to go to the Edvard Munch Museum in Oslo, spending several hours wandering around looking at a vast array of brilliant paintings. While I completely agree with Ms. Khazan that sitting in a darkened room viewing slides is no substitute for seeing such paintings in person, I can say beyond a doubt that sitting in a darkened room viewing slides was what made it possible for me to understand and appreciate what I was seeing in person in that museum. I’m no art historian, but because of that class I can look at a piece of post-impressionist art and place it in its proper context: I could see Munch’s visual nods to Van Gogh and Picasso, notice how his later work took on abstract expressionist elements, and make sense of his pictures of everyday urban life by setting them in a general movement towards the depiction of gritty everydayness instead of idyllic pastoral scenes. I got more out of my visit to that museum because of that general education course that I was forced to take while an undergraduate student. That’s what I think that undergraduate education, especially general education, is for: it’s an opportunity for you to become a more humane person—something that goes far beyond mere cocktail-party conversations.
On September 27 at 3:00pm I will be hosting a public discussion in the McDowell Formal Lounge on what it means to be a generally educated person and how we at AU can ensure that we are helping students to achieve that goal. Food will be provided. Come join in the conversation!
Thursday, July 26, 2007
The six program goals
Did you know what the six program goals of the American University general Education program were? Well, in case you didn't know, here they are:
- written and oral communication
- critical thinking / information literacy
- ethics
- aesthetics
- perspectives of race, class, culture, and gender
- a global point of view
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)