Who's at fault - student or lecturer?

studentphil

Wider reading is important for HE but in an exam you have to know very specific things to pass and just writing around the topic won't do.

bestpud

Exams will only cover topics from the module it is for.

I'm sorry but I cannot see how you can go into an exam with no idea of how to study for it.

Besides, essay questions have to cover what the title says - you can't ramble on about anything with those either!

I've done a mixture of the two myself (with other types of assessment as well of course) and I can honestly say I haven't been oblivious to what questions may be asked in an exam.

Some of my lecturers are better than others but that's just the way it is. It affects how much I enjoy a module but not how well the assessment goes for me as I don't expect any lecturer to spoonfeed me.

Scrilla

I'm starting a PGCE this fall and this is a subject I feel quite strongly about, so I will add my thoughts. Some of these thoughts have already been expressed by others.

There is a very basic difference between lecturers and teachers. Lecturers tend to be people in University doing research work, and they fund their research and earn their income by lecturing at the University. Teachers go through formal training and only after passing several standards do they become qualified teachers. Lecturers have no such formal training. Teachers are only allowed to teach once they are qualified.

Within that fundamental difference, lies the essence of why lecturers tend to be poorer teachers than qualified teachers.

Teachers WANT to teach, they go through the training knowing what they have to do. Teachers actually care about how well their pupils do in all aspects (educationally and socially), and I'll skip over the comments that will no doubt follow about how teachers have it easy and don't care about their work. Their motivation is their pupils.

Lecturers HAVE to teach if they want to gain the funding for their work. Their work (ie their research) is their motivation. Teaching is secondary to them. There are few avenues to take if you wish to get funding for your line of research.

When I went to University, I personally was under the impression that the lecturers were there to act as guides. To point you in the right direction, highlighting the most important aspects of the topics, whilst you the student take that further to develop your understanding of the subject. At University level, the information there is at a very high level and some students do take their subject area above what their professors are able to. Lecturers can only point out to you what to look at and where, you as a student must take those resources and carry it forward. The professors expect you to surpass them!! And if that's not your aim (ie to gain the best knowledge at the top level and be able to apply that at an even greater level), then why are you at University? I didn't expect to be hand held at Uni, like I was a secondary and indeed at College.

At secondary school, I would estimate the teacher-student "effort relationship" to be about 75%-25%. At secondary, the teacher is nearly always superior in terms of subject knowledge and social adeptness.

At college, the teacher-student relationship would change to about 50%-50%. Some teachers at this stage are pushed to their limit in how much they can support the student.

At University, I would suggest (note the wording) the relationship between Professor/lecturer/tutor would tend towards 25%-75%.

When you finish university, you should be as adept as your professor in subject knowledge of the studied topics (but of course, not in experience). You should be able to apply that knowledge and expand it in whatever career path you chose. There is no doubt that a well prepared lecturer is better than one who turns up un prepared. But I believe the onus is upon the student and not the lecturer.

As a teacher, I'm expected to do a 8/9am to 3/4pm day and outside of that do marking and prepare lesson plans. New teachers will tell you they spend an hour preparing for every hour they teach (, but of course that varies with the person, the pupils within the class and subject area). Experienced teachers less as they have the experience and the preparation from previous years to help them. I don't know about you, but I don't expect lecturers to do the same, else they won't have the time to carry out their research work.

Errata

I thought that the point of a university education was that lecturers give students the tools and the students use them to build: a house, an hypothesis, an arguement, whatever.
Tutorials give the student an opportunity to question and discuss their work.

PixiePie

studentphil wrote: »

So how are you meant to know what to learn if it is just up to you to find it all out yourself? How do you know if what you learn on your own is in your exam or not?

Because you are given a syllabus/handbook at the start of the course that says what the course covers/what is going to be examined at the end of it. But you're not just given that and told, 'off you go' - the lecturer gives you basic tools, you then go and build on these with your own self study and essay etc writing.

EG - Lets take a marketing module of a business studies degree. At the start of the course, you get the course handbook. This says you will be doing unit 1010 Marketing Level 1, covering: SWOT analysis and The Marketing Mix (it's a very short course this one). In lectures the lecturer will go over what these are. But that's not the entire be and end all of the subject. You have to go read up, using the recommended texts for that unit, in more detail, and find real life working examples to gel in yuor head how they work. The assignment is then to do a SWOT and Marketing Mix for XYZ brand. So off you go and get all the relevant details of xyz brand from your own research and apply what you have been told in lecture and what you have further read and understood to the case in hand. If you have attended the lecture, gone and read further and tried to understand but do not, it is up to you to go to your tutor and ask for clarification of (for this example eg) what is the difference between the S and O of the SWOT - you think it is this, but not sure. It is not up to them to ram everything down your throat.

Hope that helps

3plus1

If lecturers aren't meant to teach us, and we're meant to figure it all out ourself.. Why the hell are we paying 1000s in pounds for "tuition" fees? Surely we should just not bother going to university at all, study in our own time, and pay to sit the exams only?

bestpud

They are delivering you the info you need to get through though and you will also be paying for all the facilities which allow them to deliver that service. Plus they have to mark your work etc.

Even the new fees do not cover the cost of putting any given student through three years of a degree!

I think that may be one of the issues - ie people assume that because they are paying, they should somehow receive more than all the students who have gone before them?

Degrees were never meant to be hand holding teaching sessions and hopefully never will be! They are there for advice etc and you can obviously book tutorials to go over stuff you don't fully understand but you are expected to do some work yourself first!

The idea is that students develop their own take on their subject and can use lecturers to discuss this, not be taught parrot fashion. How do you think subjects ever develop if no one is prepared to move away from the ideas and beliefs of their lecturers?

bestpud

tazzababe wrote: »

I have to resit an exam at the end of August and re-do a piece of coursework. I agree that they style of teaching does have an impact on the students ability to assimialte material, however I don't think that lecturers can be blamed for the failure of a student. Throughout my time at uni I have had some very serious complications that did lead me to fail some of my exams, which has led me to the conclusion that I will end up with a third.

There were some modules which I could not grasp at all, and yes, in my opinion the teaching method was not one that helped me understand. I failed this module (exam and coursework). I talked to the lecturer involved, and he tried to explain the best he could- it still didn't get through! In the end I dropped the module and chose a different one. I was lucky that I was allowed to do this, some students cannot.

Some of the classes I have attended have been unbelievable, no structure, no commitment from the lecturer and in some cases no idea about teaching! Lecturers,however, cannot pander to the indivdual learning styles of a few when teaching a class of over 50. I would love to say that my failure is down to the lecturer's that I had, and in some cases they where bad:eek:

But, my failure is down to me. If I didn't understand something I should have made it known, if I needed help I shouldn't have been so shy in asking, if I wasn't interested from the beginning I should have changed modules. The problems that I have had, and the teaching I have receive have given me something to moan about, given me a reason to say-"Its not really my fault for failing because...."

Well. here I am now saying "I am probably getting a Third, yes its my fault. I should have tried harder, but thats it. I am going to accept what I am given and get on with it.":T

Good for you - you will get much further in life than the students who sit on their bums moaning about how they were cheated out of a first by everyone and his dog!

I know if I was an employer, I would want people who have the ability to reflect and can accept where they could have done things differently. The last thing I'd want is an employee who was going to blame others for everything that doesn't go to plan.

Good luck with whatever you decide to do!

studentphil

Why are lecturers the only people that are allowed to be rubbish and no one cares? If your cleaner to your doctor were rubbish you would want them to improve, however, lecturers are okay being rubbish as they teach as a pure favour to students and students should be grateful of what they get.

Lecturers are paid very well by both tax payers and fee income universities have, therefore, these lecturers don't do it for free and so the customer has some rights to quality.

The idea of the university as a place of research is a really new idea within the past couple of hundred years and before that they were places of mainly teaching, so it seems that historically lecturers have no right to say they are not employed to be teachers.

bestpud

studentphil wrote: »

Why are lecturers the only people that are allowed to be rubbish and no one cares? If your cleaner to your doctor were rubbish you would want them to improve, however, lecturers are okay being rubbish as they teach as a pure favour to students and students should be grateful of what they get.

Lecturers are paid very well by both tax payers and fee income universities have, therefore, these lecturers don't do it for free and so the customer has some rights to quality.

The idea of the university as a place of research is a really new idea within the past couple of hundred years and before that they were places of mainly teaching, so it seems that historically lecturers have no right to say they are not employed to be teachers.

Don't doctors make patients look after themselves now before they will treat them? As in, if a patient is clearly not going to improve their lifestyle (ie take some responsibility for their own actions) a doctor can and will refuse to operate?

Plus, cleaners have boundaries. You cannot expect them to clean up anything and everything - the person they are cleaning for has some responsibility.