A few days ago Mark Bauerlein had an oped published that has a few people (well more than a few) engaged/enraged (read it here). How engaged with students is a faculty member supposed to be outside of the classroom? How much of the lack of engagement is the fault of faculty? How much is the fault of students? Bauerlein definitely falls on the side of lack of engagement as the fault of students, after all he is the guy who wrote a piece called "The Dumbest Generation: How the Digital Age Stupefies Young Americans and Jeopardizes Our Future (or, Don't Trust Anyone Under 30).
I am pretty sure that digital ghettos exist in our culture. People exist who place themselves in these digital ghettos and do not engage with much of our society physically or in meaningful ways. I am also pretty certain that more people under the age of 40 place themselves in these ghettos. What I am not certain of to any great extent is whether people over the age of 40 are just as likely to place themselves in their own forms of ghettos and be just as disengaged from society as those who place themselves in the digital ghettos. Anecdotal evidence exists in my life to make me worry about a number of students I have had in classes or as advisees placing themselves in said ghettos. These students are not all bad students in the classroom, but I do feel they are cheating themselves of some of the great opportunities for learning and growing that exist in a liberal arts college. Does my anecdata make me worry about the entire generation? No more so that I worry about the crap my own generation has perpetrated on mankind or the follies of prior generations as well. My generation did not invent atomic weapons, or for that matter weapons in general. TNT did not make war less likely, either.
Back to the original point, student engagement appears to be at an all time low. My academic mentor from grad work (shout out to SS) states in his blog his own anecdotal evidence of high student engagement in some settings and low engagement in others (interesting that I was one of his students in a setting of low engagement--mea culpa). I was, however, always engaged in class, often running my mouth before running my brain. So what does it mean that student engagement is low? Are we talking simply about students coming to my office hours, or students not being part of discussions in the classroom?
For my two cents, engagement is particularly low in the area of visiting me during office hours. Also in the area of simply stopping me in the hallway or on campus to discuss those areas in which I have some expertise. To be certain, how available am I on campus outside of office hours and classroom time--during certain times of the year, not much--I have two sons who play two sports per year each, I am a board member and officer for a local youth sports organization, etc., which means I have time commitments away from the college. On the other hand, I am also the advisor to two student organizations, department chair, and advisor to a fraternity all of which make me more available than not to students. I also recognize that my office hours might just coincide with students time in other classes and life activities. Engagement is not particularly low in the classroom. The fact is the bad students, who are not engaged in the classroom stick out in my memories precisely because they are anomalies.
The current under 35 crowd has issues to overcome. Guess what, do did the under 35 crowd when I was in the crowd. Students need to be more engaged. I needed to be more engaged as a student. Students do not need to make themselves into computer zombies (too tired and strung out from hours of digital gaming, communicating, etc.). When I was a student we needed to get a few more hours of sleep and be ready for class too. Be engaged as a student, be engaged for life. If you are in the electronic ghettos, drag yourself out and be more human. If you think you are better than those who are in the ghetto, think again, you are most likely just different.
I am pretty sure that digital ghettos exist in our culture. People exist who place themselves in these digital ghettos and do not engage with much of our society physically or in meaningful ways. I am also pretty certain that more people under the age of 40 place themselves in these ghettos. What I am not certain of to any great extent is whether people over the age of 40 are just as likely to place themselves in their own forms of ghettos and be just as disengaged from society as those who place themselves in the digital ghettos. Anecdotal evidence exists in my life to make me worry about a number of students I have had in classes or as advisees placing themselves in said ghettos. These students are not all bad students in the classroom, but I do feel they are cheating themselves of some of the great opportunities for learning and growing that exist in a liberal arts college. Does my anecdata make me worry about the entire generation? No more so that I worry about the crap my own generation has perpetrated on mankind or the follies of prior generations as well. My generation did not invent atomic weapons, or for that matter weapons in general. TNT did not make war less likely, either.
Back to the original point, student engagement appears to be at an all time low. My academic mentor from grad work (shout out to SS) states in his blog his own anecdotal evidence of high student engagement in some settings and low engagement in others (interesting that I was one of his students in a setting of low engagement--mea culpa). I was, however, always engaged in class, often running my mouth before running my brain. So what does it mean that student engagement is low? Are we talking simply about students coming to my office hours, or students not being part of discussions in the classroom?
For my two cents, engagement is particularly low in the area of visiting me during office hours. Also in the area of simply stopping me in the hallway or on campus to discuss those areas in which I have some expertise. To be certain, how available am I on campus outside of office hours and classroom time--during certain times of the year, not much--I have two sons who play two sports per year each, I am a board member and officer for a local youth sports organization, etc., which means I have time commitments away from the college. On the other hand, I am also the advisor to two student organizations, department chair, and advisor to a fraternity all of which make me more available than not to students. I also recognize that my office hours might just coincide with students time in other classes and life activities. Engagement is not particularly low in the classroom. The fact is the bad students, who are not engaged in the classroom stick out in my memories precisely because they are anomalies.
The current under 35 crowd has issues to overcome. Guess what, do did the under 35 crowd when I was in the crowd. Students need to be more engaged. I needed to be more engaged as a student. Students do not need to make themselves into computer zombies (too tired and strung out from hours of digital gaming, communicating, etc.). When I was a student we needed to get a few more hours of sleep and be ready for class too. Be engaged as a student, be engaged for life. If you are in the electronic ghettos, drag yourself out and be more human. If you think you are better than those who are in the ghetto, think again, you are most likely just different.
No comments:
Post a Comment