Student 1: [Reading quietly at a table]
Student 2: [Walks up, sharply dressed. Directing himself to student one] What are you reading?
Student 1: [Indistinguishable speech]
Student 2: Oh I didn't read that. It looks long.
Student 1: It is long. Did you read the other reading though?
Student 2: No, but I'm sure it's the same thing as the first one.
Student 1: It is the same, they're all about the same thing.
Student 2: It's always the same thing.
Student 1: Listen to this part, [reads a passage from the reading].
Student 2: You know, I have to really be in the moment to appreciate that stuff and I'm just not right now.
The conversation then shifted to the topic of methodology for directing discussion groups for undergrads. The positive is that one of the students was reading, and, from what I heard, doing their darndest to finish ALL the reading. The negative is that there are even grad students that don't do the reading. This isn't terribly new. When I was a T.A. for a theory course in my M.A. program it was obvious who had and hadn't read the day's text at all. I've noticed it in my PhD program as well. Of course many of us have had days where we didn't finish the reading. Sometimes toward the end of a quarter I've given up on finishing the reading because I need time to work on my paper. So this is a case of the pot calling the kettle black, but it also hints at a larger problem. What seems to be more prevalent now is that there are undergrads and graduate students that simply don't read much at all (a symptom of the internet age?). They get summaries, they read Wikipedia entries, they gloss over what this or that critic has said about this or that author, they make the token comment in class so that it appears that they have read, but it all comes down to appearance. It almost seems that the appearance of erudition is more important than erudition. I don't know what to make of this. Maybe it's nothing new. Thoughts? Criticisms? Jokes?
12 comments:
Most of the time I didn't read all of the material that was assigned for class. Of course, I thought that everyone did that.
I think what stood out in this conversation is that this student seemed like they didn't read at all. Also that he assumed that since texts A and B were "the same thing" as text C, that he didn't have to, or didn't want to read it.
I guess the equivalent would me saying, "I've read Los de abajo, so I don't need to read El águila y la serpiente". I guess the worst part for me is that students do this and then pretend that they have read the material. But, as you point out, most of us have done this to some degree or another. So I guess it's like the guy driving a Prius pointing and laughing at the guy in a Corolla while saying, "Ha ha, I use less gas than you."
First note: my word verification is "pringel" I must be hungry.
Second note: I do my best to get the readings done, but when push comes to shove and the crap hits the fan, there are big huecos in what I actually read as opposed to what is assigned. Sometimes that's due to pure laziness, other time its due to having too much on my plate. Oh well.
In addition, I'm pretty sure that the teachers know about this. Some of them have probably grown to accept it as part of teaching a course (and try to assign less reading, only to see it repeat, to their dismay.), while others I suppose could be oblivious to it. To me, it seems pretty obvious who has read and who has not as soon as the teacher asks any open question, though.
I had a class a few semesters ago where the professor assigned 7-8 articles per week. The following week we would only cover a max of 4 of those articles in class. Of course, after a few weeks students will stop reading everything. Oh, and said professor would also provide a document with the articles in order of importance.
As for TA'ing that theory class. I was one of those students. I hope you didn't misconstrue not reading for not understanding. I was really lost in that class most of the time.
I have rarely not read everything for a course, but I know I'm one of few who approach grad school in this way. That being said, it irks me to no end I that show up to class having read all 500 pages, while my classmates have read the first chapter or so, and it makes no difference whatsoever. I'm thinking specifically of my experience with Contrapunteo del tabaco y azúcar. I think my inferiority complex is one of the main reasons I read everything - I'm simply not confident enough in my intellect to feel like I can get by without really having read.
And as a side note, I <3 that shirt.
I try to finish everything too. I had a great track record until I came to UCI, the quarter system is sometimes more about prioritizing than it is reading everything. But it's a shame.
Steve, I think the amount a teacher assigns and then does not cover has a lot to do with it. Also, if the teacher isn't thoroughly testing the student's knowledge of the text, they mostly likely won't read (freakonomics). I don't think we should give grad students tests or quizzes, but we should probe to find out if they read or not and there should be a penalty for not doing so. At least that's how I look at it. Also, no, I don't think you were one of those that didn't read much. I know you read just about everything all the time for that class. It was really interesting to talk about that with the professor.
AL, I think your approach is what we should all strive for. As a great professor/friend once said, "Finish the damn thing." Like I said, I am also guilty of not finishing everything, especially around paper time (my weakness is writing). Once I had two 500-page novels assigned the same week in two different classes (as well as the readings for a third class) so I opted to read the one I was presenting on and only skimmed the other. Guess which one everybody else decided to read? My presentation had zero participation from the other students.
I also want to make clear that I think there is a big difference between not finishing all the reading and not reading at all. More and more it seems like it is more common for a student to read little more than a Wikipedia entry on the work. But I guess there is no way to really know, and if I am wagging my finger at them it is a hypocritical gesture since I don't always finish all the reading.
As a pre-comment caveat, I must disclose that I have time-management issues. That doesn't mean that I can't tie my own shoes in the morning, but that I will usually put other things before schoolwork. On that note...
I read nearly everything, or at least most everything, up through my Masters. That all changed when I got to the PhD. The big factor is the courses I've taken. I've had, unfortunately, a number of courses where the material read is barely, if ever, discussed, or where the teacher talks for the entire three-hour period, leaving the students to doodle or write nonsense on their paper (please see my April 30, 2010 post at A Monkey for All Seasons). This is the thing that irritates me most. In these courses, I rarely do the reading unless I have to present on it or I have to write a paper on it since there are other things that demand my attention.
I've also had and heard about courses here at UT where the teacher purposely assigns more readings than the students can do, less with the purpose of bogging down the students than providing them with tools later as they do their own research, either for that course or later on. While I think the idea is good, actually assigning so much reading is counterproductive since you don't know what to focus on for the course itself.
In other situations, they simply assign too much and expect students to drop everything and marry their (the professor's) class. I remember last Fall (2010) I had a professor for a 19th century Peninsular lit class, with a focus on serial, non-canonical novels. The teacher was great, very intelligent, etc, but she assigned on more than one occasion 800+ page novels for one week. Granted, the type was big and the stories lent themselves to quick reading, but in that course I would read the first 10 chapters or so, skim the middle, and read the end. In class, I would comment on the things I could comment on, and leave the stuff I hadn't read to others. I usually read every other week, just to keep up with the material in my other courses.
Also, as a father of two (and now three) for all of my doctorate program thus far, I can tell you that when it comes to finishing yet another article on how Western civilization and men are evil, or spending time with my kids, I'm going to spend the time with my kids. I know all of us are parents here, but I simply feel that with kids I don't have as much time to dedicate to all the reading as someone without. I'm not saying that's good, but that's how I've rolled in my PhD career.
I really take it all one day at a time, focusing only on the immediate academic priorities. If I can finish my reading beforehand, great, if not, so be it. For good and for ill, I've been able to get by on it. And I mean get by. I know I should know more and be more familiar with ideas, key texts, etc in my field, but it's been the only way I can approach my schoolwork and get decent grades. I don't claim it's the best way to approach grad school, and I admit that I would like to have gotten more of the reading done for my courses, but that's how it's been.
For my part I can relate to the students in the conversation. I sincerely think that it's just a part of grad school life.
My approach to reading is a lot like AL's, and for basically the same reasons.
I still remember being overwhelmed by reading for one of Prof. Pratt's classes (there was a lot) and saying something to Valerie. She looked at me and said "You read every word of everything he assigns?" I nodded, because her tone sort of left me speechless. She then said something about how I needed to figure out how to not do that, or I'd 1) go crazy, and 2) it was impossible anyway.
I still couldn't stop reading all of everything, or at least as close to it as I could (again, see AL's comments on the inferiority complex). :-)
And I used to get ANGRY at my colleagues that complained about not getting reading done because they were doing one social thing or another when I had finished the reading in the midst of cleaning up for puking children....
Pratt also told me that grad school was about figuring out what to read, and what not to read, and yet I still haven't mastered it. I remember making JC read out loud to me while making dinner so that I wouldn't lose out on a second of potential reading time. It's a little sad, no? And ditto M's comment about lame excuses from colleagues.
Follow-up: I close-read everything and so I take my time reading (and writing, I should mention). My only strength in reading so closely is that whatever I read really gets burned into my brain. I do confess, however, that more than once during a class discussion of a text that I had indeed read, I have felt like everyone was talking about a completely different story, essay, novel, etc. The problem is that when I am tired or the text is tired (or both) my reading ends up being like my driving home at 1:00 am in the morning: I suddenly wake up and I can't remember the last mile (paragraph) or two.
Rantipoler - I've often wondered how cool it would be to have my better half read stuff to me as I do the dishes or some other chore. I know a certain student from your generation has his spouse do much of the correcting he has to do for his teaching job, thus freeing up time for reading.
Mac - I do that late night reading thing too. When i have to read a page three or four times and I still don't get it, if I'm smart, I go to bed. I also read slow, in part because I can't not do a close-reading anymore, but also because my vocab is more limited than it should be. An unrelated note, when I haven't slept enough, my Spanish is full of errors. When I'm well rested, fed and I've exercised, it's pretty good. Of course, those occasions are rare, so when I do speak consistently well and precise during a three hour class, it comes as a surprise.
Post a Comment