Who's at fault - student or lecturer?

studentphil

bestpud wrote: »

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.

That is true and I am not saying all learning should be directed, however, as a customer you do have rights to a certain quality of learning. You are a customer of the university because you pay for it.

melancholly

3plus1 wrote: »

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?

to cover the costs of the lecture theatres, computer facilities, libraries, course handbooks, marking, teaching, admin support, tutorial time, student services, student union reduced prices etc etc.

very little of the money in fees will go the department that teaches you! which annoys everyone, trust me! the open university is an option for everyone!

and no-one's saying that you figure it all out for yourself - however it isn't anything like school where the teacher effectively holds your hand through everything. there should be far more independent study and reading beyond the lecture materials.

it is impossible to get a teaching style that will suit all 100-500 people in a lecture theatre. however a lecturer presents material, some people won't respond to it. i found that i actually did a lot better in the subjects where i thought the lecturer was 'bad', as i had to work harder, read more and therefore had a much better fundamental understanding of the subject.

lecturing is how university teaching is done....... it won't suit everyone, but university isn't about pandering to what individuals want...... the place couldn't run if everyone got to pick how they were taught. some people will lose out, but if people really want to say that independent study is impossible for them, i'd argue that they shouldn't really be at university in the first place!

melancholly

studentphil wrote: »

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.

given that most universities weren't founded before a couple of hundred years ago, that really is one of the most ridiculous arguements i've ever read - even by your standards!

incidentally, it's also untrue. universities have always been a place of learning and reaching the boundaries of knowledge.

i realise that you did not enjoy your university experience - however, until you manage to show just a tiny bit of personal responsibility for your grades, no-one can take you seriously!

3plus1

I accept that you are meant to do a lot of research and further reading yourself at university, but the basic concepts of a module should be clearly explained in a lecture, with any confusion cleared up in a tutorial.

Where this is not the case, there is no value for money, and the students are getting ripped off. Lectures should form a solid starting point for learning.

If lecturers are not meant to explain anything, then I don't see the point of university. If students aren't meant to learn anything from going to lectures and tutorials, surely they would be just as well learned if they bought a cheap computer for £300, spent £20 on a subscription to a university library and taught themselves?

I do not think that it's fair to throw blame on lecturers when you haven't worked hard, and you need a scapegoat, but where they have been truly shocking and you've tried your best to take official action but been thwarted by the powers that be, yes, I think you have a damn good case to be unhappy!

I do know of one lecturer who was removed from teaching duties by my university because he was so crap and ALL of his students repeatedly complained, but equally, I know of another who was an awful teacher, and nothing got done. His students complained, the two "ringleaders" got kicked off his module, and then everyone else was too scared to take further action.

This is one of those rare times when Studentphil has a point.

studentphil

melancholly wrote: »

given that most universities weren't founded before a couple of hundred years ago, that really is one of the most ridiculous arguements i've ever read - even by your standards!

incidentally, it's also untrue. universities have always been a place of learning and reaching the boundaries of knowledge.

i realise that you did not enjoy your university experience - however, until you manage to show just a tiny bit of personal responsibility for your grades, no-one can take you seriously!

But you forget Britain is new to the university game. Most of Europe, however, has had many universities for many 100s of years and they were places of teaching first and foremost up until about 150 years ago.

I disliked university because of things in me and because of things in the functioning systems, I accept that.

studentphil

It seems crazy to me that the university professor/ lecturer should be the only job in the world where quality is not important. If you give a lecture and no one understands it then I can not see any other way to put it than the quality is sub standard and failing in its objective.

Voyager2002

studentphil wrote: »

But still if the lecturer is poor at lecturing then they are still poor at their job and if people don't understand their classes they are still failing.

But giving lectures (at least to undergraduates) is a small and unimportant part of what a lecturer does.

studentphil

Often though students stand on the shoulders of their lecturers and surpass them in skills and abilities in time. However, universities don't seem to value that as it is not a money earner.

If you are taught by a teaching fellow rather than a lecturer, should you expect better resources and more classes as that person is employed for almost the single function of teaching?

studentphil

Voyager2002 wrote: »

But giving lectures (at least to undergraduates) is a small and unimportant part of what a lecturer does.

Maybe it should be a more important role.

ollyshaw

Just to add to this thread. Java is a tricky thing to teach and learn. Some people will get it instantly, some will never get it. The best thing to do is to work through loads of examples and ask your practical demonstrates questions.

Olly