Teaching and Learning > DISCOURSE
Young Dogs, New Tricks
Author: Nick Jones
Journal Title: Discourse
ISSN: 2040-3674
ISSN-L: 1741-4164
Volume: 9
Number: 1
Start page: 151
End page: 154
Return to vol. 9 no. 1 index page
We all know that some students leave school with good A-levels, but ill-equipped to work well at university. In some disciplines—including my own, philosophy—they often have very little prior experience of the subject. True, this means that they have not had the chance to develop any bad habits, but the downside is that they can find the subject very different from their expectations.
There may also be very limited understanding of what sort of academic work is expected of them. Our students have done well at school, and it can be a shock to find that techniques that worked at Alevel are not what are required at university. Staff see a succession of worried or resentful students wondering just what has gone wrong, and have to repeat very similar advice on referencing, on essay content or writing style, even sometimes on basic grammar or word use.
What seems to be needed, alongside academic teaching, is training in basic academic skills—an induction into a way of doing things. In philosophy, at least, those specialised skills might include:
- Writing argumentative, rather than descriptive essays
- Developing and defending your own response to material, rather than relying on authorities (easing students away from what the Guardian called a 'sat-nav' mentality)
- Using specialised technical vocabulary correctly
- Learning effectively in lectures, seminars, problem classes
- Referencing and avoiding plagiarism
- Managing time; studying effectively on one's own, and making the most of contact time.
Developing these abilities is a daunting task, and can seem far removed from the business of subject teaching. The temptation must be to hope that undergraduates somehow absorb them along the way. Furthermore this is a disparate bunch of skills, and there may be no single best way to develop them all. What should we do?
Distributing handouts or posting online material only works if students are already self-starters, and diligent in following up the advice. Most departments probably have sections of their websites called something like 'information and advice for undergraduates', but the repeated experience of having students ask questions that are addressed on these sites suggests that they are not well used. We could offer special introductory skills classes, but these eat into teaching timetables and require considerable staff input if every student is to be supported. And not every skill is suited to classroom teaching; polishing up your writing, for instance, is best tackled on your own, and time management can only be learned by doing it.
At York we are trying a different approach; last year we introduced a compulsory online module for our incoming single honours students, called Academic Skills for Philosophers and available through the University's Virtual learning Environment, on the Blackboard platform.
Running throughout the first year, the module consists of four 'chapters', covering pretty well all the skills we want these students to grasp:
- Writing Skills explains what is required in writing philosophy and properly referencing sources, introduces technical vocabulary, and explains the marking system.
- Studying and Learning encourages students to recognise their individual learning style, to work well in lectures, seminars and private study, to manage their time, and to approach exams effectively.
- Understanding develops their grasp of philosophical analysis and technical vocabulary, and provides a refresher course in basic logic.
- Critical Thinking seeks to develop a philosophically robust approach to understanding and challenging arguments
Our own material is linked to the University-wide Academic Integrity unit, to ensure that students understand how to avoid plagiarism, collusion and so on, and to set that important topic in the context of our wider advice on academic practice.
How does this differ from just posting advice on the web? Well, completing the module is compulsory for single honours students; it forms an integral part of the first year of their degree. Completing the module counts for 10 credits in the first-year programme, and is a requirement for progression to the second year.
We try to present the material in a chatty, engaging way, and to structure it so that students are encouraged to move through the module, from relatively straightforward advice to more demanding material. Participants are offered exercises and 'think boxes' linked to their current academic work.
First year tutors are encouraged to point students to module material in essay feedback, and regular e-mails prompt students to progress through the chapters. Exercises and tests encourage engagement rather than just clicking through the pages, and the Blackboard platform gives easy access to the module, allowing students to study at their own pace, pausing to complete exercises or re-read material as they wish.
We need to keep an eye on how they are doing, however, and we are already aware that for some students, ensuring steady progress will be a challenge. There is a delicate balance to strike between emphasising the value of these skills for learning, and enforcing sanctions for non-completion. In the last session several students had to retake the module in order to progress to the second year, and this year we have changed the structure of the module a little to encourage regular work.
We have also introduced an induction element, enabling students to make a start on the material even before they arrive at university. At the time of writing, a week before term starts, over half the new intake has done so.
Writing and uploading this much online material (around 80- 90,000 words) is also very time consuming, but we expect it to provide a resource for several years to come. Certainly, revising the material for the coming year took very much less time than the initial set up.
Student feedback, as one might expect, is mixed; many appreciate the clear advice and relevant support, although some of the more able or more conscientious can't always see what the fuss is about.
So, is this the right approach? We think it is the right solution for us, but for both staff and students, only time—and exam results—will tell.
Return to vol. 9 no. 1 index page
This page was originally on the website of The Subject Centre for Philosophical and Religious Studies. It was transfered here following the closure of the Subject Centre at the end of 2011.
