the dreaded research paper

I teach at a two-year school with open enrollment and find that the research paper is the students' greatest fear. And as far as teaching, it is one of mine as well. Does anyone have any ideas, links, handouts, instruction, strategy--anything! that may help in actually teaching these students the purpose of the research paper, how to write one, and what their main goal is? After graduate school, I am well aware of what a research paper is and I can write one. But when it comes to teaching it, things seem to unravel for me. I would say that it is the weakest area of my teaching. Little help? Thanks in advance.

Hello Sinclair, welcome to LitNet :) I'm not a teacher so have no applicable advice but as you peruse the fora you will soon see that there are many students here and some fellow teachers too! who deal with these very issues and maybe they will give you some feedback.

What grade are you teaching? Also, is the student's problem the research itself or the actual writing of the paper (or both). If the problem in the research element, then maybe to start, if it's their first research paper, you can do guided reseach (teach the students how to pick up key points in articles, books, etc). What you can try as well is, as a class, try guiding them to model a research paper. Find an interesting article, or different exerpts about a certain topic, as a class read through them, then ask quesions that get the students to answer questions about the topic, picking up the key ideas. You can get them, as a class, to create a model outline of a possible paper that they could write on the subject, demonstrating to them that the purpose of a research essay (as far as I know) is to extrapolate and outline key ideas about a certain topic.


I hope this helps somewhat.Best of luck.

-Charles Darnay

I'm a writing tutor at my college's Writing Center, and my college is an open-enrollment college, too :). The students here equate writing a research paper to finding a cure for cancer, so we get a lot of panicky students coming in looking for help with it.

Before I do my little speech on how I guide them through, I would recommend a book called "Writers Inc." or "Write for College." I can't remember who they're by, but they are little black books that contain chapters on how to write argumentative, narrative, research, and other types of essays. I find them very helpful.

Now, as for me, students come in absolutely appauled that they have to write a 10-page research paper for this required freshman course we have here. Most have never written more than three or four pages, and many have never written a formal essay at all. First, I make sure they have a specific enough topic, and I try to get them to think of three, four, or five main points they want to make, depending on the length of the paper. (If the student is assigned a topic they know nothing about, then I usually have them Google search or use Wikipedia to start getting ideas).

One girl came in recently and said she had been assigned to write about the importance of sugar production in Grenada. The paper had to be at least 7 pages. I asked her if she could think of four main points she would like to make. She said she would want to talk about the history, meaning how, why, and when sugar production first started and the results, and she also wanted ot talk about how today sugar production's importance has become very small, since other products and tourism are brining in more money.

So, I tell her that she's got two points so far, and that it seems like the history should be the first point she makes and the point about today's lack of importance should be the last point, to keep things simple. I told her she needed to think of at least two more points about things that happened involving sugar production between when it first started and now...like were there any droughts, slave rebellions, taxes, or other events that affected the production? She said she didn't know, so I told her to do some research (again, this is a whole other skill that may need to be taught as well) and come back.

When she comes back, she'll hopefully have at least two more points, and we can start to outline. I'll use a pen and paper to give a space for the intro, main point 1 (history), main point 2 (something she found), main point 3 (another thing she found), main point 4 (today's lack of importance), and the conclusion. More main points can be added if she found more. Now we start filling in under each point...give some details about the history and other main points under each one.

Now that she's got a rough outline, I'll tell her to try to think of her huge 7 page paper as really 4 one and a half page papers. Everyone feels like they can write a page and a half. If she writes an intro, a page and a half on each point, and a conclusion, she should come to about seven pages. This, again, needs guidance...but I'm sure by now you're catching the drift of how it gets done. Students really tend to feel better when I tell them to break the paper down into smaller chunks; and the outline often makes them feel more confident.

In all, this is something that isn't taught in a day. You might spend a day brainstorming topics to write about, send them home to research, come back and have them think up 3-5 points, send them home to write up details, use class again to formalize and tidy up outlines, send them home to draft, do peer reviews and such in class, then get a formal paper and see what you can do. The best thing one of my professors ever did was make each stage worth a grade: coming up with a topic was a grade, writing up a works cited with 3 sources was the second grade, writing the main points another grade, then the outline, then the draft, etc. Teaching them MLA format for in-text citations and works cited pages along the way can be tought, but is obviously important to enforce early on or else they may fall in to bad habits...

I'm sure you can Google some resources, but I sure hope this helps. Good luck!

Hi Sinclair--As Charles Darnay says above, it would help if we had a better idea of what age you're teaching. I've done a little college teaching (though I'm just starting out) and I suppose my freshmen are fairly close to highschool, so I'll assume that some of what works for them might also be adaptable to younger students in some way. I've noticed at the very beginning college level that it's helpful to really give them a lot rather than just tell them what to do and set them loose in the library. If possible you might want to start with a special session in the school library in which you or a librarian really walk them through what resources your library has and how to use them (even freshmen in college sometimes need a little help with even such seemingly basic things as doing a productive search in the library catalogue and finding call numbers).

I would also compile a bibliography of books available at your school and/or local library (or internet sources which you find acceptable) which you think are pertinent to the topics you're asking the students to research and appropriate for their level, and which you could either pass out as a recommended reading list or refer to for making reading recommendations in individual consultations with students about their project. If your students are true novices at using secondary material it may well be enough of a task for them to sort through your recommended list, pick a book, find it at the library and incorporate it in the paper (the last being no small part of the challenge). If part of what you want them to do is not just use the library but spend some time rooting about in the stacks you could possibly tell them that they have the option to use one source from the recommended list, but a second source must be one they find on their own (though, particularly if you're teaching highschool, I suppose that could depend upon whether your bibliography exhausts the offerings of your library ;)).

Regardless of whether you offer a bibliography or not, I would also be very specific about how many and what kinds of sources you want them to use. Is one secondary source enough? Two? Three? Do you want them to look at whole books? Articles? Do you want one biographical and one critical source? Only critical sources? Historical background? (you might want to go over what the difference between these secondary sources are). Sometimes being very specific about the kind of sources you want helps make it easier to see how to use them in a paper. For example (to take a recent assignment from my own teaching) you may want them to do something like look at historical sources on the Wars of the Roses and compare the real history with Shakespeare's account in Richard III, or you might specify that you'd like them to look at critical work analysing the poetry of one of the speeches in Richard III. Even if they're coming up with their own topics, it's good to give them examples of what kind of research you're looking for. They're going to understand why they're looking for this secondary material better if they see a direct purpose for it (to understand the historical context of a play, to get a scholar's opinion about the way Shakespeare uses poetry, or with other authors perhaps you want them to address biographical background and the way the author's life is associated with his/her work). I'd also be very clear about what your policy is on internet sources and possibly limit those, since the temptation of wikipedia is almost irresistable.

Finally, it's also helpful sometimes to break the process of research down into detailed step by step instructions the way Shannanigan has already suggested. In terms of explaining to students how to incorporate secondary material into their writing, I've also found it helpful to encourage them to think about the reading they do in their research in terms of having had conversations with the authors of the secondary material. This is especially useful if they're looking at literary criticism. Instead of viewing the crit. as a text that they have to somehow relate to the work they're writing on, I tell them to imagine that the critical work they've read is a conversation they've had with the author of the book or article about the subject. Now the paper they're writing is a conversation they're having with me, and they get to refer back to what the other person said by quoting him/her when they're trying to get their own points across to me. This seems to get them thinking about secondary material as a helpful dialogue rather than some weird thing they're supposed to work in somehow. Anyway, hope some of this is of help, or perhaps sparks a helpful idea. Best of luck. Let us know if you strike on any useful strategems yourself, since I'm sure we could all use suggestions on how to make research more painless for both teacher and student. :D

Sorry fopr the delayed reply--haven't been on in a while. Anyhoo, the students range from right out of high school to early thirties and it would be safe to assume that they have done very little--if any--of this type of writing. I appreciate all the info. I actually broke up the assignment (produce research, annotated bib, outline, final paper). However, it did not help in a lot of cases. I found several instances of plagiarism. I foud that when they sat to actually write the paper, they ignored their research and went to the internet, so they "would not have to read all the stuff they found."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sinclair1

I teach at a two-year school with open enrollment and find that the research paper is the students' greatest fear. And as far as teaching, it is one of mine as well. Does anyone have any ideas, links, handouts, instruction, strategy--anything! that may help in actually teaching these students the purpose of the research paper, how to write one, and what their main goal is? After graduate school, I am well aware of what a research paper is and I can write one. But when it comes to teaching it, things seem to unravel for me. I would say that it is the weakest area of my teaching. Little help? Thanks in advance.

---

perhaps your weakness is not so much a reflection of a lack in your ability, but an indication that the notion that the research paper has an intrinsic value to student learning is fundamentally flawed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sinclair1

Sorry fopr the delayed reply--haven't been on in a while. Anyhoo, the students range from right out of high school to early thirties and it would be safe to assume that they have done very little--if any--of this type of writing. I appreciate all the info. I actually broke up the assignment (produce research, annotated bib, outline, final paper). However, it did not help in a lot of cases. I found several instances of plagiarism. I foud that when they sat to actually write the paper, they ignored their research and went to the internet, so they "would not have to read all the stuff they found."

---

Though I wouldn't claim to be much help in this department, to me (though I may just be stating the obvious) it seems it all comes down to how do you teach someone who just doesn't want to learn? These are adults who have been wired to fear this type of paper; I don't know exactly how they're fearing something they have no experience with--no opportunity to have a past bad experience. For the present the only advice I would have is something you've already done--break it down into steps outlining, final draft etc. I would have expected that to work. The ultimate motivator for me as a student is when I get to pick my subject, something I'm passionate about, although that is not always a possible choice.

Well, I guess I am weird, because the research paper has always been my favorite paper ;) What is their research paper on? I've had one on current issues, one on vietnam, two on a disease (each one about a different one), and right now one on Dracula (honestly, the sacrilege of making us do a reasearch paper on a book). It helps if you actually like the topic, however, it sucks when you can pick whatever you want, because then you can't decide ;).

hey sinclair...
about plagiarism: i suppose your students aren't taking this course because they want to be the greatest intellectuals of all times, but because they need a degree in order to get a better job???
so the world of academia is new territory to them. they probably aren't aware that plagiarism is intellectual theft and that there a special rules and a special code of conduct withing academia?
maybe it helps if you make it clear to them that stealing somebody's ideas is the same as stealing someones car. you could have a group discussion about that

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Petrarch's Love

Regardless of whether you offer a bibliography or not, I would also be very specific about how many and what kinds of sources you want them to use. Is one secondary source enough? Two? Three? Do you want them to look at whole books? Articles? Do you want one biographical and one critical source? Only critical sources? Historical background? (you might want to go over what the difference between these secondary sources are). Sometimes being very specific about the kind of sources you want helps make it easier to see how to use them in a paper. For example (to take a recent assignment from my own teaching) you may want them to do something like look at historical sources on the Wars of the Roses and compare the real history with Shakespeare's account in Richard III, or you might specify that you'd like them to look at critical work analysing the poetry of one of the speeches in Richard III. Even if they're coming up with their own topics, it's good to give them examples of what kind of research you're looking for. They're going to understand why they're looking for this secondary material better if they see a direct purpose for it (to understand the historical context of a play, to get a scholar's opinion about the way Shakespeare uses poetry, or with other authors perhaps you want them to address biographical background and the way the author's life is associated with his/her work). I'd also be very clear about what your policy is on internet sources and possibly limit those, since the temptation of wikipedia is almost irresistable.

---

i think this is a very good idea.
i took a course about how to write a term paper for Geography once and the professor told us exactly how many books and articles to use. it worked out quite well.

edit: you could also draw their attention to how we often cite our sources in everyday conversation, e.g. when we say "I read in the paper..." or "I heard...on the radio" or "My granny said...". citing your sources in a research paper is not much different, is it?

My own experience is that much of the 'fear' in a research paper is like 'fear' anywhere - it comes from the unknown.

Students who have never written more than 1 page before are forced to think about writing 50 pages, who have never read more than 20-30 pages of assigned reading before now must read 20-30 books for their paper, etc.

It is partially something that the student himself must overcome.

Well, as a student myself, I find that the hardest part is just getting started. Taking that first step is difficult for me because I'm afraid that I'll drown in the information. I find that as long as the teacher takes the time to help get a class started on it, it's much easier, for me at least. Of course, I don't know what advice to give on students who just don't care, or plagerise. Personally, I have no patience for them, and figure they deserve to work in a McDonalds the rest of their life, if their not going to even try. That's probably why it's a good thing I'm not planning to be a teacher. My patience level is not especially high.

I have a website for my classroom with a link you may find helpful. I have taught the research paper component for several years now, and have both a packet of information (senior project based), as well as general notes for my students when writing. Go to the site below and check the link on the left "SPRP"- hope this gives you some helpful info...
http://edtech.nmusd.us:8080/p_home.asp?tid=749

or go to Corona del Mar High School in Newport Beach, CA homepage and go to teacher website for Yvonne Sturgeon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sinclair1

The students range from right out of high school to early thirties and it would be safe to assume that they have done very little--if any--of this type of writing. I appreciate all the info. I actually broke up the assignment (produce research, annotated bib, outline, final paper). However, it did not help in a lot of cases. I found several instances of plagiarism. I foud that when they sat to actually write the paper, they ignored their research and went to the internet, so they "would not have to read all the stuff they found."

---

You obviously are teaching it well with that breaking down of the assignment, so don't put any blame on yourself; yes, it is new to many of them, and they just have to dig in and get gritty, make some mistakes, and do the best they can. You could also xerox a quality paper for them all to use as a model. I have dealt with hundreds of them, and the other day I got an email from a prior student who wonders if I still have a copy so they, no doubt, can re-use it for a current class. You have to impress upon them that this is "basic" college work that they will be doing repeatedly for the next 4+ years, so it's something to start to acclimatize with because this writing structure is not going away anytime soon. It seems a mammoth thing to them and they just need to attack it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by byquist

You obviously are teaching it well with that breaking down of the assignment, so don't put any blame on yourself; yes, it is new to many of them, and they just have to dig in and get gritty, make some mistakes, and do the best they can. You could also xerox a quality paper for them all to use as a model. I have dealt with hundreds of them, and the other day I got an email from a prior student who wonders if I still have a copy so they, no doubt, can re-use it for a current class. You have to impress upon them that this is "basic" college work that they will be doing repeatedly for the next 4+ years, so it's something to start to acclimatize with because this writing structure is not going away anytime soon. It seems a mammoth thing to them and they just need to attack it.

---

shouldn't students know the ABC's of research and writing by the time they reach college? i think it's terrific sinclair is taking the time and effort to guide students along the process, but at what point does the system recognize that some students will not get it and deserve not to be in college? "acclimatizing" is just a euphemism for coddling lazy students who simply have little interest in putting in the requisite hours of study time, period.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon1jt

at what point does the system recognize that some students will not get it and deserve not to be in college? "acclimatizing" is just a euphemism for coddling lazy students who simply have little interest in putting in the requisite hours of study time, period.

---

Half true; I would not deny laziness is widely evident in Comm. Colleges. But even Ivys too -- admit it, there is skating, grade inflation, and boozing the hours away going on there too.

Yet, many are trying their hardest, plus working 20-40+ hrs. a week at some God-awful job, raising a kid or two; they know they goofed-off in high school and didn't get a foundation, and are having an even tougher time in Basic Math. I do see them pushing up against their limits -- there's some heroism in that -- and that's when things get interesting. They know 1 essential point: education is the prime route upward (unless they are good at selling or their dad owns a pizza shop).

While it might take some of them 10 yrs. what takes 4 for others, the obsessional thirst for knowledge might kick in at any moment. It's a process and they just aren't ready yet for those German philosophers you have said you like better than the Greeks.

Quote:

---

shouldn't students know the ABC's of research and writing by the time they reach college? i think it's terrific sinclair is taking the time and effort to guide students along the process, but at what point does the system recognize that some students will not get it and deserve not to be in college? "acclimatizing" is just a euphemism for coddling lazy students who simply have little interest in putting in the requisite hours of study time, period.

---

Like Byquist I only agree with this part way, in that I'll agree that there are certainly lazy students, but I don't think that's the whole problem with Sinclair's students who struggle with research papers. Byquist has already eloquently defended why some students require extra patience, but I'd like to add that I don't think it's true for most students to come to college prepared to write a research paper. That's usually a big part of the step from high school to college writing. They may have gotten a little taste of research in highschool, but freshmen in college (be it community college or a prestigious university) usually need a lot of teaching and guidance as to how and when to quote sources, cite sources or even go about finding the appropriate secondary material in the library. Even very bright and hardworking students need some help with their first college research papers. I would expect a beginning college student to have an idea about how to go about writing a basic essay (they certainly stress the 5 paragraph format in highschools), but not neccessarily how to produce a research paper.

my question for sinclair and the other college teachers here is, how much time do each of you spend "teaching" research and writing in your courses? research and writing is usually covered in the two sections of English Composition required at most colleges. if the course is american history or women and gender, etc., then teachers ought to invest their time in that and put the onus on the student to purchase the writing books and seek out the primary college resources. the students described above, who have come to realize the importance of a good education, need to do their part then and step it up.

i learned that research and writing is not something that can be taught, but something that must be done again and again. with all due respect, the idea that one can teach this subject beyond the basics is foolish as the idea that one can teach poetry.

Jon--First off, I was under the impression that Sinclair was teaching Comp. or some similar introductory course. I thought we were talking about students who hadn't encountered writing research papers at the college level before, and those students would need a lot of guidance. I objected to your statement because you said that students should know how to do this kind of research "by the time they reach college," which implies that they would have learned this in highschool, and in most cases they don't. If, as you say, we're talking about a student who's been through a year of college level Composition courses and/or basic level English courses that deal with how to write a research paper, then I'll agree that I would have higher expectations of them. No, I would not dedicate large portions of class time in an upper division Shakespeare class to instructing students on how to write a research paper, since I would assume that they had the basics covered in their Comp. class, but I probably would try to give some guidance in the form of a clearly formatted assignment, possibly a suggested reading list to get them started, and help with questions in office hours. By the way, I agree with you about practice making perfect in terms of writing. There's only so much even the most dedicated Comp. teacher can do. :p

Maybe I could give some advice from a student's point of view. Over the years I've had many teachers, who had me read books in many different languages. It's needless to say that their styles of teaching literature were very different.

When it came down to research papers, they approached it in various ways.

First, you had the "I don't really care about this, but the school council wants me to do it"-approach. This usually consisted of the teacher just pinning down a date for the paper to be turned in, after which you wouldn't hear the slightest thing about it. Needless to say, this made the temptation of just looking up a summary of a random book on the internet so astronomically big, that it was hard to resist.
After all, if you DID read the book, it wouldn't be in the slightest bit rewarding, because its eventual effect would be exactly the same as if you just looked up some random summary on the internet: you turn in the paper, and that's it (of course, reading has its personal benefits, but I'm mainly talking about its school relevance here). This method is crap. If any, it demotivates students to read anything.

Next is the slightly more effective, but equally demotivating "I'm just gonna force you to either read the book, or study the summary very carefully" method. Basically it means that the teacher tests the knowledge of the student about the book in question in a very direct way, such as a conversation, by asking the most complicated, precise, insignificant questions he or she can think of; usually minor details or whatever, to test if the student has actually read the book. This method is bound to cause an increase in the percentage of students which actually reads the book, but it will probably also cause a dense hate for literature which can last for many years.

Last, but certainly not least, is the relaxed method. It can come in many forms. You could ask the students to write a review, or you could engage in a conversation with them on the book's purpose, the likes and dislikes, etc. However, all questions must eventually be traced back to these basic questions:
- What was the book about?
- How did you like it?
You see, if you give a student the opportunity to form an opinion on the book's style, message, or the author itself, it's much more rewarding to read the book than to just use a random summary. It's very wise to avoid questions such as "what did the author mean when he said...", because, if we're honest, noone really knows that, most of the time, and it's silly to ask for that, because the message is either so clear that it could've hardly escaped even the most distracted reader, or the author's meaning was to write a good book. Exceptions are, of course, given, but with all the introductions and footnotes included in most classic books, the main point is eventually hard to miss.

I guess it comes down to motivating the students by telling them about a certain writer (preferably a writer you like, so that it won't sound like you give the presentation with a gun pointed at your head), and somehow try to transfer your enthousiasm to them. It might sound a bit vague, but the former 2 methods actually made me stop reading, while the latter method made me pick up reading again. Quite frankly, if I had another, more boring teacher in the past 2 years, I probably wouldn't be registered here. It's all about enthousiasm; make it look natural. Students will appreciate that more than when you try and shove the complete works of William Shakespeare down their throats, complete with the horrors of explanation and clarification.

Students, or so my experience is, like to voice their opinions, rather than sit through boring, dusty sessions which consist of endless elaborations. If that is how they first get in touch with the literature at hand, it will most probably kill it for them. I know how I hated English class last year when we struggling through MacBeth. I'm actually gonna try some works of Shakespeare again, thanks to the much more laid-back approach to literature of the teacher I currently have.

Well, I hope that helps, and I certainly hope that you see it as help rather than a tirade against the literary education system (mind, I'm located in The Netherlands, although that shouldn't make that much of a difference). I don't know how big your options are when it comes to choosing which literature to teach in your class, but remember that motivation and enthousiasm is the key, take a student's word for that. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Panflute

First, you had the "I don't really care about this, but the school council wants me to do it"-approach. This usually consisted of the teacher just pinning down a date for the paper to be turned in, after which you wouldn't hear the slightest thing about it. Needless to say, this made the temptation of just looking up a summary of a random book on the internet so astronomically big, that it was hard to resist.
After all, if you DID read the book, it wouldn't be in the slightest bit rewarding, because its eventual effect would be exactly the same as if you just looked up some random summary on the internet: you turn in the paper, and that's it (of course, reading has its personal benefits, but I'm mainly talking about its school relevance here). This method is crap. If any, it demotivates students to read anything.

---

students don't hear the slightest thing about the paper once it's assigned because the professor is not there to coddle you. when you arrive at college you are considered to be a big boy or girl and required to come equipped with a work ethic. the source of the demotivation you speak about is more often a function of the student's laziness compounded by poor critical thinking and writing skills.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Panflute

Next is the slightly more effective, but equally demotivating "I'm just gonna force you to either read the book, or study the summary very carefully" method. Basically it means that the teacher tests the knowledge of the student about the book in question in a very direct way, such as a conversation, by asking the most complicated, precise, insignificant questions he or she can think of; usually minor details or whatever, to test if the student has actually read the book. This method is bound to cause an increase in the percentage of students which actually reads the book, but it will probably also cause a dense hate for literature which can last for many years.

---

c'mon, spare me. professors don't force assignments on students, students ask to be there. college is not a prison term. most professors have a genuine motive for the assignments they craft with the hope that they contribute to the student's intellectual growth and development.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Panflute

You see, if you give a student the opportunity to form an opinion on the book's style, message, or the author itself, it's much more rewarding to read the book than to just use a random summary. It's very wise to avoid questions such as "what did the author mean when he said...", because, if we're honest, noone really knows that, most of the time, and it's silly to ask for that, because the message is either so clear that it could've hardly escaped even the most distracted reader, or the author's meaning was to write a good book. Exceptions are, of course, given, but with all the introductions and footnotes included in most classic books, the main point is eventually hard to miss.

---

opinions are fine and there is plenty of opportunity for students to voice them in the course of a semester. the question, "what did the author mean..." is one way to get you to consider the material more critically, to get you to think for yourself and not what the preface or the footnotes or even the professor says is the case. you miss the point completely. UGH.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Panflute

I guess it comes down to motivating the students by telling them about a certain writer (preferably a writer you like, so that it won't sound like you give the presentation with a gun pointed at your head), and somehow try to transfer your enthousiasm to them. It might sound a bit vague, but the former 2 methods actually made me stop reading, while the latter method made me pick up reading again. Quite frankly, if I had another, more boring teacher in the past 2 years, I probably wouldn't be registered here. It's all about enthousiasm; make it look natural. Students will appreciate that more than when you try and shove the complete works of William Shakespeare down their throats, complete with the horrors of explanation and clarification.

---

while it's true that teachers are required to invite students into the learning experience, they are not required to be motivated for them. your assumption is wrong, again. professors don't shove assignments down the student's throats--- the student chooses to be there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Panflute

Students, or so my experience is, like to voice their opinions, rather than sit through boring, dusty sessions which consist of endless elaborations. If that is how they first get in touch with the literature at hand, it will most probably kill it for them. I know how I hated English class last year when we struggling through MacBeth. I'm actually gonna try some works of Shakespeare again, thanks to the much more laid-back approach to literature of the teacher I currently have.

---

those endless elaborations are often the product of years of intensive, engaging research on the part of the professor. but you wouldn't know anything about that now, would you? My advice: spend less time criticizing and more time asking yourself what you can bring to the process. and stop deluding yourself; be honest, even self-critical. ask yourself why you decided to go to college in the first place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon1jt

those endless elaborations are often the product of years of intensive, engaging research on the part of the professor. but you wouldn't know anything about that now, would you? My advice: spend less time criticizing and more time asking yourself what you can bring to the process. and stop deluding yourself; be honest, even self-critical. ask yourself why you decided to go to college in the first place.

---

I know what you're saying Jon, and I totally agree that it isn't up to the lecturers to mollycoddle their students at University level.

However, my mother is a researcher of and writer about teaching methods, and according to her, it has been found that University level teachers are generally the worst at following the basic principles of good teaching (I am not implying that you are one of these teachers though).

Apparently the main problem is when lecturers take their title a wee bit too seriously and act as if that is all they are there to do, lecture.

While lecturing is one of the key principles of good teaching, it is not the only one, and, stand-alone, it will never compete with a more diverse range of teaching methods.

If all teachers are needed for is to hand out information, then I don't see why they don't simply email their lecture notes to their students. Reading the information is just as good as hearing it, surely.

I wish I could remember all the different techniques that the 'ideal teacher' should use but it's late and I'm tired. However, I do remember that modeling (or giving examples) is one, questioning is another, explaining, telling (which is different from explaining. More like "You'll find it on page 10 of your book" etc), directing ("do this" etc) and giving feedback.

Some good teachers do this naturally (hopefully you are one), however, for the rest I believe it would be useful if University lecturers had to undergo some kind of training in these techniques. In my country, University lecturers are not required to undergo any teacher training.

Weird.

Whoops, I just realized I was totally assuming you are a teacher Jon, and maybe you are not??
Anyway, I suppose that doesn't change my point, but it might have sounded a bit unclear. Sorry!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon1jt

students don't hear the slightest thing about the paper once it's assigned because the professor is not there to coddle you. when you arrive at college you are considered to be a big boy or girl and required to come equipped with a work ethic.

---

Actually, as I forgot to mention, I was giving my views as experienced in the last classes of highschool, which is bound to be a difference, because, as is obvious from your statement, the university teacher has a lot more students to teach than the high school teacher. (note: it's quite confusing to tell from the posts to tell which educational level we're talking about here, because the Dutch school system is quite different from the English/American, as well as some of the terms, naturally.)

However, I understood from the post of the topic started, he/she had trouble making the students do research papers without making it look as a boring collection of questions. I, in return, told some things that might help to get those students to look at those papers from a different perspective, and I've found the things stated in my previous post to help a lot to not look at literature class as some dusty school subject.

Quote:

---

the source of the demotivation you speak about is more often a function of the student's laziness compounded by poor critical thinking and writing skills.

---

It's certainly a part, but many people I've spoken to (mind, not only people of my own generation), who are now avid readers, all share the complaint that school can ruin the joy of reading.

Quote:

---

c'mon, spare me. professors don't force assignments on students, students ask to be there. college is not a prison term. most professors have a genuine motive for the assignments they craft with the hope that they contribute to the student's intellectual growth and development.

---

I agree, and I should've told you I was talking about highschool literature class, which is, much like almost every subject in highschool, of a dramatically low level.

Quote:

---

opinions are fine and there is plenty of opportunity for students to voice them in the course of a semester. the question, "what did the author mean..." is one way to get you to consider the material more critically, to get you to think for yourself and not what the preface or the footnotes or even the professor says is the case. you miss the point completely. UGH.

---

Quote:

---

those endless elaborations are often the product of years of intensive, engaging research on the part of the professor.

---

Well, my main point with that, is that it's often very inaccurate. I've read tons of accounts of authors who are still alive, who hear the most astonishing motivations behind their work from school teachers (ie. that it is said that the author meant something with a certain passage or contrast or whatever, while he really didn't mean anything at all). Simon Carmiggelt would be a good example of that, but not that you would know the slightest thing about him. (Oh, look how smart and educated I am!)

Maybe I'm not artistic or intellectual enough to search a meaning behind everything, or maybe it's the stereotypical sober thinking the Dutch are famed for, you decide, but I don't really care. Don't think, though, that I don't see deeper meanings in some books, be they personal, be they solely based on the writer's background, the book's effect, or whatnot. I don't have a problem with the question "what does ... mean with..." as long as it asks for my opinion, thought, whatever you'd like to call it, instead of turning it into a right/wrong question, with the teacher claiming to know everything, as if he had the phonenumber in heaven of the author himself (for these types are certainly present on every level in the wonderful world we call school).

Quote:

---

but you wouldn't know anything about that now, would you?

---

Oh! Yes! I was waiting for this. Aren't we the intellectual little fellow? I'm sure I've stepped on your educated figure-of-speech toes by not agreeing with some methods of education (even though it turned out that we're talking about quite different things), as you demonstrated by the highly irritated nature in which you typed your reply, but I'm equally sure that you can cherish yourself with the idea that you're better than me, with which I sincerely congratulate you.

I will most certainly admit that I am not very much into answering questions which consist of uncovering the writer's aim (which surprisingly often is just 'writing a nice book', but that aside), but I do know that many an author fought against upperclass nitwits like yourself (which would mean that you yourself are the meaning; the essence of self-critical thinking I'd say; a more philosophical answer is not possible), so my advice: keep up the good work, Sparky. :thumbs_up

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Panflute

Actually, as I forgot to mention, I was giving my views as experienced in the last classes of highschool, which is bound to be a difference, because, as is obvious from your statement, the university teacher has a lot more students to teach than the high school teacher. (note: it's quite confusing to tell from the posts to tell which educational level we're talking about here, because the Dutch school system is quite different from the English/American, as well as some of the terms, naturally.

I agree, and I should've told you I was talking about highschool literature class, which is, much like almost every subject in highschool, of a dramatically low level.

---

very true. speaking about education on here i'm learning is a tricky matter given those differences.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Panflute

Maybe I'm not artistic or intellectual enough to search a meaning behind everything, or maybe it's the stereotypical sober thinking the Dutch are famed for, you decide, but I don't really care. Don't think, though, that I don't see deeper meanings in some books, be they personal, be they solely based on the writer's background, the book's effect, or whatnot. I don't have a problem with the question "what does ... mean with..." as long as it asks for my opinion, thought, whatever you'd like to call it, instead of turning it into a right/wrong question, with the teacher claiming to know everything, as if he had the phonenumber in heaven of the author himself (for these types are certainly present on every level in the wonderful world we call school).

---

well then we agree. if you have teachers like those you speak of, then shame on them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Panflute

Oh! Yes! I was waiting for this. Aren't we the intellectual little fellow? I'm sure I've stepped on your educated figure-of-speech toes by not agreeing with some methods of education (even though it turned out that we're talking about quite different things), as you demonstrated by the highly irritated nature in which you typed your reply, but I'm equally sure that you can cherish yourself with the idea that you're better than me, with which I sincerely congratulate you.

---

like i said in my last post to you, be self-critical. for lack of information we embarked on a discussion about quite different things. my "demonstrated irritated nature" is no less visible than some of your misguided thinking about teaching and literature that i initially replied to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Panflute

I will most certainly admit that I am not very much into answering questions which consist of uncovering the writer's aim (which surprisingly often is just 'writing a nice book', but that aside), but I do know that many an author fought against upperclass nitwits like yourself...

---

i didn't know that my love of books and the idea that books have something to teach and we ought to remain open to that possibility makes me an upperclass nitwit. but i'll take being an upperclass nit any day over being a moron.

I know what I am but what are you? (now that we're speaking about high school level anyway)

Anyway, it seems like we've been in some kind of misunderstanding. No hard feelings?

Now that you two seem to have finished quarreling:D - may I butt in?
I'm a teacher of English and German language and literature, and I think that the question "What did the author mean?" is completely out of date. In classroom discussions I am often surprised what my students (aged 16 - 19, advanced level; German school system different again) come up with. Reading is - just like writing - a very individual matter. There are certainly things about a book most readers can agree on, but the actual question is not "What did the author mean" but "What effect does the book have on you as a reader?" or "How does it affect you?" If the teacher allows the students to talk about the way they experienced the book many of them will be much more willing to go into depth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Panflute

I know what I am but what are you? (now that we're speaking about high school level anyway)

Anyway, it seems like we've been in some kind of misunderstanding. No hard feelings?

---

me? i'm tortured by sidewalks and cruel lips. otherwise, i think i'm a pretty happy guy. :p no hard feelings at all, ol' pan. be well. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon1jt

me? i'm tortured by sidewalks and cruel lips. otherwise, i think i'm a pretty happy guy. :p no hard feelings at all, ol' pan. be well. :)

---

Heh, same to you, buddy. Those internet quarrels are getting a bit tiring anyway. :p

can you show me some strategies to transform a lesson, a literature lesson more effectively

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thuycam

can you show me some strategies to transform a lesson, a literature lesson more effectively

---

If you can get a hold of a used amazon book by Lucy Calkins or Randy Bomer, they might have either specific ideas, or the sense of spirit or tone that's valuable to have in a classroom.

Without particulars, all I could say is: (1) "ask them questions" instead of lecture and (2) have a variety of activities in any one class meeting -- say, some reading aloud, some writing quietly, some discussion of character and theme, some work in small groups of 4 or 5, some info for them to copy off the board, some passing out of xeroxes, some of you reading off of papers they have handed in, etc.

Hm... well, I'm still a student, but I hope I will be a teacher one day, and I'd like to teach literature on university (actually I already got a message from one university they'll have a free place for a reader next year), so I can give you only a student's view, so you might say it's not appropriate, but I felt provoked by those post about how students are lazy.

In my first year, and even in the second, research paper was real problem not just for me, but for most of students. Especially from English subjects. On high school, most papers we did were something that in English would be called "a report". It was maximum 4 pages long, and usually it was enough to read two or three boks to prepare it.

But on university, they suddenly required 10 - 15 pages, with at least 10 resources, with very limited use of quotations (paraphrase was usually recquired). And we were supposed to somehow know it. I'm not a lazy student, but this was a problem for first few papers. Professors never said what they wanted, only gave us the task, e.g. in the first year I got the topic "Gulliver and women, 15 pages, 4 weeks to do it". God, what stress that was! I worked so hard on it even read that boring book in Slovak, English, and Croatian so that I could be sure I undertood everything, only to find out it was completely useless, as the professor said she doesn't have time to read papers from external students!!! Now, I'm supposed to do 14 papers in a term, and if I don't do it excellently, it's because I'm a lazy student, and she doesn't have time to read 25 papers in 5 months (i.e. by the end of exam period, and it's o.k.
(if you don't know what "external student" is - external students have lessons and exams during weekend, because they work during the week but the content and extent are the same as of daily students. Still, some people never miss occassion to belittle this form of study).

So in my case, it weren't students who were lazy, but professors. From other subjects, we had to hand in papers and of course, pass the exam, and we got one grade for both. But we were almost never told how the paper influenced the final grade. I'm pretty sure most of professors never really bothered to read it at all. But, thankfully, there were few that were really helpful - they explained clearly what they want and how to do it and, for example, made "defence" of the paper part of the oral exam. It was difficult, but at least we knew what was good and what we should try to improve next time.

And I might add, those professors who gave us the feedback on our papers, are the same that really tried and managed to teach us something - rather than just reciting by heart their own book on the subject (I wish they would read How to Read a Book, I forgot the author, especially the part on "dead teachers!) Those professors who gave us feedback, were usually well-prepared for the lesson, gave us many practical tasks and advices, explaining even things that are not included in textbooks. We dearly love them and appreciate what they do for us, though they are usually very strict and demanding. Those who never gave us clear instruction, or feedback, usually never do anything on their lessons. If I did so poorly in my job, I'd be out after two weeks, yet some of them are teaching for years, or even decades! We usually call them "frozen" professors. I don't think they're all just lazy. No, they are just unable to teach.

So if you want to help students to do good papers, tell them clearly what you want. You might give them an example of some good paper (one professor did that and it really helped - not that we copied it, it was not possible, anyway - but we saw what level is expected from us. Tell them what is good or wrong - defence of the paper as a part of exam was great thing. It helped professor to find out plagiators very easily, so we were forced to really read books and to think very carefully about our statements. If there is a book about how to write academic papers, how to quote etc. recommend it to them. There are different ways how to quote or rephrase, so be sure you make it clear what way you prefer.

But most importantly - they can feel right away if you really care to teach them something, or if you think you're too above them - if you're prepared for the lesson, they'll be prepared as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aunty-lion

I know what you're saying Jon, and I totally agree that it isn't up to the lecturers to mollycoddle their students at University level.

However, my mother is a researcher of and writer about teaching methods, and according to her, it has been found that University level teachers are generally the worst at following the basic principles of good teaching (I am not implying that you are one of these teachers though).

---

i hear what you're saying aunty, but i'm not convinced that the teaching methods folks inspired by Dewey are offering anything new. what's that old saying?..."Old wine in new bottles." more departmentalization and promulgation of know-it-all standards. ugh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aunty-lion

Apparently the main problem is when lecturers take their title a wee bit too seriously and act as if that is all they are there to do, lecture.

---

one of the best colleges in the WORLD is St. John's in New Mexico and Maryland that places teachers in the role of faciliators and active participants in the class discussions steeped in the classics. there are no exams, no papers. the "grade" is based on classroom participation. if i had known about this school when i was applying to college i would have gone there in a second. check them out.

today's student has the option to go to a four-year college where the majority of courses are steeped in the lecture format or a school like St. Johns. or if they're daring, they'll save their money and obtain a free public library card.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aunty-lion

If all teachers are needed for is to hand out information, then I don't see why they don't simply email their lecture notes to their students. Reading the information is just as good as hearing it, surely.

---

schools would go out of business if all professors emailed their lecture notes. even rigorous lecture courses invite questions at some point in class. one of my professors devoted the remaining 45 minutes to questions/discussion and it worked out great.

i only imagine what it must have been like to sit in one of Plato's classes, or Aristotle's. just read Nichomachean Ethics, the latter which are students' notes of Aristotle's lectures. to watch the masters laying it all down for posterity must have been quite an experience, even if the students didn't quite realize it then. maybe i'm a romantic in this regard. i dunno.

anyway, case in point: i had a graduate course by a professor with the name Richard Falk, a human rights scholar. he sat on numerous international criminal tribunals, ad hoc war courts, wrote dozens of books/journals, made TV appearances, and met with leaders all over the world. sitting in that class and listening to his experiences over the years in that field was like listening to Homer sing songs of war. and at the end of the semester he invited his students from three courses to his house for lunch and it turned out he had some big names in the field there. standing in my prof's living room having lunch over a big chat about important world issues was enough to make me feel i got my money's worth.
**courses like this one are out there; you just have to seek them out at your school like i did and take advantage of them.

most of what i learned in college took place 'after' class---in the halls, on walks to/from the dorm, in the library, in study groups, over lunch. the classroom provided the structure. being stirred up by the material was the lifeblood of learning, at least for me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aunty-lion

I wish I could remember all the different techniques that the 'ideal teacher' should use but it's late and I'm tired. However, I do remember that modeling (or giving examples) is one, questioning is another, explaining, telling (which is different from explaining. More like "You'll find it on page 10 of your book" etc), directing ("do this" etc) and giving feedback.

---

some class discussion is good, but in my case there were always those one or two students who loved to take the floor and hear themselves talk and innundate the class with drivel. i'm just not convinced that classroom 'dialogue' is the way in the American university. in my opinion, St. John's is the exception.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aunty-lion

Some good teachers do this naturally (hopefully you are one), however, for the rest I believe it would be useful if University lecturers had to undergo some kind of training in these techniques. In my country, University lecturers are not required to undergo any teacher training.

Weird.

---

i disagree. teaching is a calling. you either got it or you don't. and no pricey teaching program is going to inculcate the skills to inspire great teaching.

"How to read a book" was written by Mortimer Adler who also started the Great Books Program. Today with computers writing research papers is a snap. I went to college when we used typewriters and had to use footnotes; today's MLA parenthetical documentation style is very easy. Of course, students need guidance on formulating a strong thesis. Once the thesis is written, the rest will fall into place. The mistake that many students made is not restricting the topic. I had a student who once wrote on "The American Indian". The paper was a disaster and so was her grade. Because so many students do not read much, they have no idea how much is written on a given topic, or how short their research paper is.