tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8301063921236344432.post7541840497094874038..comments2021-07-18T14:04:22.209-04:00Comments on Teacher/Scholar: My Own Private Teaching MethodTeacher Scholarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16666789634867487999noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8301063921236344432.post-960370969461326632009-03-16T16:31:00.000-04:002009-03-16T16:31:00.000-04:00My long-winded initial post and comments seem to h...My long-winded initial post and comments seem to have scared everyone away. Apologies everyone, but brevity is not one of my strengths.The Daft Lairdhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09747454332900973211noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8301063921236344432.post-72194018007621846912009-03-13T08:25:00.000-04:002009-03-13T08:25:00.000-04:00I think you've identified part of the reason I hes...I think you've identified part of the reason I hesitate to give up lecturing entirely, at least in survey course--I'd really hate to leave content knowledge entirely to a textbook. A large part of what I enjoy about being in the classroom is providing students my informed interpretation of history. One of the real joys (and most difficult challenges) is taking complex historical arguments and presenting them in a way that students, who haven't been trained as I have, can understand and appreciate. Is this, at the end of the day, about authority? Maybe. But I suppose any method involves some control of the story; it's just that some are modes of control are more subtle than others.<BR/><BR/>I guess I just wouldn't enjoy my job as much if it was primarily about teaching students how to interpret primary sources. <BR/><BR/>I do realize that this whole comment has been focused entirely on me and what I like and want rather than my students. I do think that we teach students skills even when we're lecturing, even when we're delivering content knowledge. Part of what I try to do in lectures is challenge students to think about the world in different ways. I will always argue that this is a valuable skill.The Daft Lairdhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09747454332900973211noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8301063921236344432.post-73860819655256844482009-03-11T15:11:00.000-04:002009-03-11T15:11:00.000-04:00I think it would be hard to teach my course (the w...I think it would be hard to teach my course (the way I have it currently designed) without the textbook. <BR/><BR/>I find it useful to divide (one set of) goals for the class into two categories: content knowledge and skill sets. The textbook is primarily used to provide students with a narrative of American history. The knowledge they gain is measured on multiple choice exams. They also use sections of the textbook as a part of their in-class primary source projects. <BR/><BR/>But I have to admit that I increasingly see the textbook readings as futile and not effective because students almost immediately forget the information after the MC exam. So I am considering going one of two directions. One is to eliminate the textbook and constuct a survey built on major problems (not a reference to the readers) in greater depth. Students might not explore the Articles of Confederation in this rubric (or they might if I chose that to be a 'problem'), but they would have a better historical understanding of, let's say, the legacies of race and slavery, or what ever other problems I chose to include. <BR/><BR/>The other path is to have students read two textbooks at the same time, Zinn's "A People's History . . ." and perhaps Brinkley's "Unfinished Nation" or a more conservative approach. In this model I would abandon a bunch of the primary source project in favor of critical reading projects.Teacher Scholarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16666789634867487999noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8301063921236344432.post-25915982907446694722009-03-11T14:26:00.000-04:002009-03-11T14:26:00.000-04:00Though you don't make it T/S, there seems to be an...Though you don't make it T/S, there seems to be an argument in your comment for using a textbook in survey courses. It's trendy these days (at least 'round these parts) to turn up one's nose at a textbook--because it promotes the idea that the whole objective truth of history can be found in the book and because it's much harder to see a textbook's "argument," especially for survey students. <BR/><BR/>I don't know if I, at least, could teach in the style that you use if I didn't have a textbook (which I don't). We just don't have the time with them in the classroom to build a narrative from the sources up. At best, it seems to me, we can give students access to one particular bit of a larger narrative. Am I wrong about this? Could you do what you do without the students also reading a textbook?The Daft Lairdhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09747454332900973211noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8301063921236344432.post-79780824064665232252009-03-11T13:40:00.000-04:002009-03-11T13:40:00.000-04:00I imagine that if DL looks like Keanu Reeves or Ri...I imagine that if DL looks like Keanu Reeves or River Phoenix and has their performance chops, he has no problem capturing the attention of his classes.<BR/><BR/>You seem to raise two broad issues here, both of which deserve further discussion in posts. First you point to the legitimate gripe most PhDs have about not receiving instruction in pedagogy. Any gamblers willing to bet how long it will take for R1 institutions to transform their programs to include teaching methodology? Despite the supposed 'liberal' bent of academia, in some respects it remains very conservative.<BR/><BR/>Second you present classroom strategies. Here, I think DL needs to be congradulated for moving beyond strict lecture to include more interactive elements to his teaching style. While lecturing has its benefits, it cannot be the only approached used in a classroom. Students broadly tend to reject it and it does not serve to get students interacting with history, which is where they develop key skill sets.<BR/><BR/>In my mind I tend to differentiate between lower and higher division (undergraduate) courses. For lower division (100/200 level), I lecture occasionally to tie together big theme issues, abstract ideas like "the market revolution," or "the Great Awakening," and go far beyond the textbook in terms of linking it to other issues covered in that cumbersome reading. I have students spend far more time engaging primary sources, working on writing assignments where they practice skills such as thesis construction, defense of that thesis and use of sources. <BR/><BR/>Although I could expand on these methods I will not do so here. Instead I will end by noting that these in-class projects have resulted in far greater student participation (they are not surfing the web, IM'ing or nodding off) and somewhat improved retention rates, not to mention improved essay midterms and finals.Teacher Scholarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16666789634867487999noreply@blogger.com