Notes on Teaching Literature and Music

[Jonathan]

Does any part of this project sound interesting to anyone reading this?

Earlier you had mentioned that during an interview, you were asked how you would handle certain kinds of situations in the classroom, and how you would solve a range of problems. I'd be interested in hearing details about what kinds of problems and situations you were asked about, and what solutions you proposed.

J

Edited May 23, 2010 by Jonathan

[Philip Coates]

> Earlier you had mentioned that during an interview, you were asked how you would handle certain kinds of situations in the classroom, and how you would solve a range of problems. I'd be interested in hearing details about what kinds of problems and situations you were asked about, and what solutions you proposed.

Thanks, Jonathan. I wish I remembered all of that batch of employment interviews, as they were probably the best I've had--far better than the ones I got from big companies for computer and business jobs. They knew how to interview. It was a very thorough grilling, putting me on the hot seat which I like. A lot of those situations were about discipline, disruptive behavior, and unmotivated students. How do you inspire the latter, etc.

Yours is an excellent set of questions: I will try to think of more to say on it when I get back into the details of my chronological experience. Probably what I will try to do is include some of the situations I actually dealt with as opposed to trying to remember all the hypotheticals I was asked about.

(Again, time permitting.)

Edited May 23, 2010 by Philip Coates

[Jonathan]

A lot of those situations were about discipline, disruptive behavior, and unmotivated students.

My answer would have been that I was applying for a job as a teacher, not as a security officer, cheerleader or parent, and, therefore, that my solution would be to remove disruptive students from the classroom, and to give failing grades to unmotivated ones. Was that your solution as well?

J

Edited May 24, 2010 by Jonathan

[Philip Coates]

P: [Questions about] discipline, disruptive behavior, and unmotivated students

J: My answer would have been that I was applying for a job as a teacher, not as a security officer, cheerleader or parent, and, therefore, that my solution would be to remove disruptive students from the classroom, and to give failing grades to unmotivated ones.

I taught normally in private schools where the discipline problems were a lot less extreme. There's a whole spectrum of situations involving discipline or disruptive behavior and not all of the responses involve removing the student from the classroom which is pretty much a final step. Sometimes the punishment or discipline or consequences are conducted in the classroom. And it varies with whether or not the student understands what has been done wrong, has been warned, whether it's minor or major, etc. Sometimes you need to kick butts; sometimes you need to calmly and quietly just explain something - giving the student the respect he hadn't gotten that you are confident in his ability to process something basic and rational.

Depending on who you're teaching [what level, what intelligence, what preparation] and whether this is kindergarten, sixth grade, or college, part of your job sometimes very definitely is to be a 'cheerleader', someone who inspires, encourages, and motivates. Often the majority of a classroom can walk in the door at the start of the year "unmotivated" to one degree or another. About the subject. About their ability to do something harder than they have done before ("math phobia". etc.) About why they are learning X. About how it will help them in the future. About its relevance to life.

You can't fail them all, those who are lacking in one of those areas. If you were only teaching John Galts, perhaps they would be self-taught and they wouldn't need teachers. What you need to do is raise them up, make them better than they were across the course of the time you have them.

When I've taught below the college level: at the start of the year they are all shocked in my first class because I lay down the law. "No excuses." No extensions. No exceptions. And so on. "How much of this chapter should we know, Mr. Coates?" "Know everything." They've never had this tough a teacher and they tell everyone in the school how mean I am. And they pretty much universally hate me. By the end of the semester or year they are used to Coates's Boot Camp, and I gradually seem "nicer" in their view. They appreciate my sense of humor, etc. Even though the rules are still enforced. By the end of the year or semester they usually all love me and often said that I'm not only the fairest but the best teacher they can remember.

Edited May 25, 2010 by Philip Coates

[jriggenbach]

A lot of those situations were about discipline, disruptive behavior, and unmotivated students.

My answer would have been that I was applying for a job as a teacher, not as a security officer, cheerleader or parent, and, therefore, that my solution would be to remove disruptive students from the classroom, and to give failing grades to unmotivated ones. Was that your solution as well?

J

That would have been my solution. I never had any disciplinary problems in any of my classes - perhaps because I always taught at college level and no legal authority was forcing any of my students to be there? Perhaps because I'm a big guy - 6'4", well over 200 pounds - and have a deep, authoritative voice? Because I tend to intimidate people, even when I make no effort to do so?

I do think it's reasonable for students to wonder why the school is requiring them to study something they don't want to study and don't see the relevance of. I attempted to address such questions directly, in class, from Day One.

JR

[George H. Smith]

I do think it's reasonable for students to wonder why the school is requiring them to study something they don't want to study and don't see the relevance of. I attempted to address such questions directly, in class, from Day One.

JR

What did you say?

Ghs

[jriggenbach]

I do think it's reasonable for students to wonder why the school is requiring them to study something they don't want to study and don't see the relevance of. I attempted to address such questions directly, in class, from Day One.

JR

What did you say?

Ghs

This will have to wait until tomorrow. I'm on deadline tonight with an audio piece for Mises.org.

JR

[jriggenbach]

I do think it's reasonable for students to wonder why the school is requiring them to study something they don't want to study and don't see the relevance of. I attempted to address such questions directly, in class, from Day One.

JR

What did you say?

Ghs

This will have to wait until tomorrow. I'm on deadline tonight with an audio piece for Mises.org.

JR

All the students at the Academy of Art College in the '90s were majoring in one of eight artistic disciplines - Film & TV, Animation, Illustration, Industrial & Product Design, Fashion Design, Interior Architecture and Design, Photography, Graphic Design, and Fine Art (painting and sculpture). To earn their degree (a B.F.A.) they were all required to take certain courses in the Liberal Arts Department in addition to the courses they took in their major field(s). These required Liberal Arts courses included English Composition, American History, Biology, Music Appreciation, Introduction to Philosophy, one or more foreign languages, etc., etc. Elisa Stephens, the president of the college and a graduate of Vassar, was determined that her graduates were going to have at least the rudiments of a liberal education, instead of just vocational training in one or more of the arts.

In my opening lecture to my English Composition students, I took on their usually very obvious dissatisfaction with having to study English Composition at all. I took it on head on. I told them that in artistic careers, as in any other careers, one would be expected from time to time to express one's ideas in writing. One would be asked to submit a proposal for approval of a project or for funding of a project. One would be expected to write a letter explaining why a particular course of proposed action was or was not a good idea. One would be expected to be able to organize one's ideas, lay them out coherently and clearly, and write them up without glaring errors in grammar, spelling, or punctuation. I pointed out to my students that in all walks of life, people who possessed these skills tended to look upon those who didn't possess them as stupid, ignorant, or, at best, careless. And they tended to deny employment, advancement, and positions of responsibility and respect to those they regarded as the stupid, the ignorant, and the careless. I acknowledged that this prejudice was not entirely well founded - that there were intelligent and creative people whose skill with language was defective, but, I said, "Let's be realistic; this is a prejudice you are going to run into." I argued that my students would be able to promote their own careers by learning what they could from me about effective writing and by developing a certain facility at it, even if they had no interest in writing as such or any intention of ever becoming any sort of professional writer.

I further guaranteed to them that if they would come to class, do the assignments, and avail themselves of the opportunities I would make available for extra credit, they would pass the course, and would, in fact, probably pass it with a "B" or "C" at the worst. And I made good on that guarantee.

JR

[Alfonso Jones]

I do think it's reasonable for students to wonder why the school is requiring them to study something they don't want to study and don't see the relevance of. I attempted to address such questions directly, in class, from Day One.

JR

Certainly so, Jeff. I am astounded at the number of colleagues in the Professoriate who don't want to discuss such questions, beyond saying "You must take it because it is a requirement for the degree." (Which is saying nothing - - - the question is why the requirement, not a request for confirmation of the fact of the requirement.) I always do this on day 1 (as well as in the syllabus).

Bill P

[Philip Coates]

> I am astounded at the number of colleagues in the Professoriate who don't want to discuss such questions, beyond saying "You must take it because it is a requirement for the degree." [bill P]

Jeff, by contrast, has given them (above) an extremely thorough, logical, detailed answer and has even -anticipated- questions they might have asked. Instead of just saying in effect, do it because you're told to and shut up.

(The only thing I would add to Jeff's motivational speech is that writing is thinking. And learning how to write will make you smarter. Then that has to be explained...)

Bill, you have been teaching in China for a while, I gather. What do you teach and do you find the standard stereotype that students in Asia tend to be diligent but unquestioning, comfortable with 'rote' to have been your experience?

Edited May 25, 2010 by Philip Coates

[Philip Coates]

> All the students at the Academy of Art College in the '90s were majoring in one of eight artistic disciplines...required Liberal Arts courses included English Composition, American History, Biology, Music Appreciation, Introduction to Philosophy, one or more foreign languages, etc. [Jeff R]

I also taught for a while at a vocational college which requires Liberal Arts courses - plus some science and math - to graduate (Western Career College, which has several campuses in California.) Students were training for professions which included nursing, nursing assistant, medical assistant, law enforcement, dentistry, veterinary areas, and other health care areas.

Unfortunately, the person who directed the non-vocational, 'academic' side of things hadn't set up the curriculum properly, and those of us hired to teach it often had to fight uphill to succeed despite it. The administration also in some respects hamstrung the teachers and promised the students a better education than they intended to deliver. This was probably the only teaching experience I've had that was not really enjoyable.

Edited May 25, 2010 by Philip Coates

[Alfonso Jones]

> I am astounded at the number of colleagues in the Professoriate who don't want to discuss such questions, beyond saying "You must take it because it is a requirement for the degree." [bill P]

Jeff by contrast has given them (above) an extremely thorough, logical, detailed answer and has even -anticipated- questions they might have asked. Instead of just saying in effect, do it because you're told to and shut up.

(The only thing I would add to Jeff's motivational speech is that writing is thinking. And learning how to write will make you smarter. Then that has to be explained...)

Bill, you have been teaching in China for a while, I gather. What do you teach and do you find the standard stereotype that students in Asia tend to be diligent but unquestioning, comfortable with 'rote' to have been your experience?

Philip -

I'm not saying or suggesting that Jeff has done otherwise! I have commented on my astonishment that many colleagues DO NOT DO THIS (the thing he just stated that he does).

That having been said again (and hopefully understood), I comment on your question: I teach such subjects as Decision Sciences, Lean, Six Sigma, Outsourcing, etc... All moderately to extremely analytic content. I find the Chinese students to be just as questioning as those back in the USA about required courses. "Why do we need this course? I am going to be an X when I graduate. Do people in that industry use this subject?" The only difference worth noting is that they are often more polite about it - either phrasing their questions less aggressively than their Western counterparts or asking in one-on-one meetings, to preserve face.

Now, a typical class for me consists of 60% Chinese and 40% from the rest of the world, including at least 20% Westerners. But even when the classes are 100% Chinese students, the behavior of questioning is there. (I mention this to make it clear that it does not appear to be the case that the CHinese are just letting the Westerners do the questioning...)

Bill P

[Philip Coates]

> I'm not saying or suggesting that Jeff has done otherwise [bill P]

I understood. My sentence meant 'by contrast' to so many in the professoriate.

> I teach such subjects as Decision Sciences, Lean, Six Sigma, Outsourcing

It sounds like to a large extent the application of math and statistics to business and management.

> I find the Chinese students to be just as questioning as those back in the USA about required courses.

Good, I'm glad to hear that. Maybe you are getting the cream of the crop as it's pretty widely stated (even by Chinese writers and commentators) that China needs to move beyond rote and that is one reason they send so many of their brightest students to the U.S. for college.

[Philip Coates]

Why should a thread on how to teach and on teaching experiences be of much interest to those of us who are not teachers?

Because we're all teachers. We want to convince others of our ideas, spread a philosophy, make changes. And key skills a teacher has to learn to survive - holding attention, being engaging and relevant, clarity in presentation, persuasion - are key skills you need in order to be effective. You never retire from having the need for these skills.

You can't go through life without developing these skills to (at least) a minimal degree. And observing other people the essence of whose job heavily involves them can teach you a lot. Do you want to move ahead from buck private to officer in your field, to change people's mind in the world of ideas, to persuade someone to assist you or work with you or publish your book? You better have some of these skills to -more than- a minimal degree. Or you are going . . . exactly nowhere.

And a lot is transferable between subjects and topics. A lot of what I needed and anyone else would need to convert the frown of puzzlement or vacant stares or exasperated shrugs and eye-rolling into smiles and intense leaning forward eagerness and excited hands shooting up and furious note-taking in computers, business, and math was exactly what I needed and anyone else would need to know and do in teaching history, composition, logic, and literature.

Any ideas on what are most important among those skills? Is it skills or attitudes?

What's more important, skills or content knowledge?

Edited May 28, 2010 by Philip Coates

[jriggenbach]

What's more important, skills or content knowledge?

As will come to no one's surprise, though the teachers' colleges and the schools of education have been promoting the opposite view for some decades now, I'd say that no amount of presentation skill can make up for a serious lack of knowledge of the subject matter one is supposedly teaching.

JR

[Brant Gaede]

What's more important, skills or content knowledge?

As will come to no one's surprise, though the teachers' colleges and the schools of education have been promoting the opposite view for some decades now, I'd say that no amount of presentation skill can make up for a serious lack of knowledge of the subject matter one is supposedly teaching.

JR

There was a study of college profs many years ago. The profs that knew the most taught the best even if they weren't the most popular or charismatic or were hard to understand because of a thick foreign accent. I believe these were science and math teachers so the students could be effectively evaluated. Sorry, but I can't (acceptable pronunciation) reference this.

--Brant

[Alfonso Jones]

What's more important, skills or content knowledge?

As will come to no one's surprise, though the teachers' colleges and the schools of education have been promoting the opposite view for some decades now, I'd say that no amount of presentation skill can make up for a serious lack of knowledge of the subject matter one is supposedly teaching.

JR

Well put, JR. Generic skill in pedagogy will not make up for a deficit lack of content to communicate.

There CAN be a conflict between teaching and research PERFORMANCE due to relative priorities given to the two at a given university, of course.

Bill P

[Philip Coates]

> What's more important, skills or content knowledge? [Phil]

> I'd say that no amount of presentation skill can make up for a serious lack of knowledge of the subject matter one is supposedly teaching. [Jeff]

Which is more important for the composition of water, hydrogen or oxygen? Which do you need most to build a fire, i) kindling material, ii) sufficient applied temperature / a heat or ignition source, or iii) oxygen?

You need all of them *equally* much. You can't have the desired end product if any one is missing. A teacher who is a master of the subject is useless without communication and teaching skills. And a teacher without a good understanding of what he or she is teaching has nothing worth communicating.

So the answer to my question in the first line is: both.

Edited May 28, 2010 by Philip Coates

[Brant Gaede]

> What's more important, skills or content knowledge? [Phil]

> I'd say that no amount of presentation skill can make up for a serious lack of knowledge of the subject matter one is supposedly teaching. [Jeff]

Which is more important for the composition of water, hydrogen or oxygen? Which do you need most to build a fire, i) kindling material, ii) sufficient applied temperature / a heat or ignition source, or iii) oxygen?

You need all of them *equally* much. You can't have the desired end product if any one is missing. A teacher who is a master of the subject is useless without communication and teaching skills. And a teacher without a good understanding of what he or she is teaching has nothing worth communicating.

So the answer is: both.

The question is how good those skills have to be relative to what subject is being taught, not whether they are there or not. Of course they are there. If they are truly absent, good luck getting a job, good luck getting tenure. Of course some social sciences are so bad knowledge isn't the issue, but how well the bullshit is dished out.

--Brant

[Philip Coates]

> The question is how good those skills have to be relative to what subject is being taught, not whether they are there or not.

Obviously. Generally, the more kindling, the better or more sustained the application of heat or ignition, the better the draft or purer the oxygen, the more bright or more long-lasting the fire.

Edited May 28, 2010 by Philip Coates

[ginny]

I had one college prof who stands out as a giant in my mind. I had him for three semesters in American History, an interesting enough subject. I suppose I learned some of it from Professor Tedesco. What I most remember about his classes has nothing to do with history. We had him 8:30 a.m. on Saturdays, which means a sleepy, fuzzy-headed, coffee-swilling group of students. Dr. Tedesco had a funny rule. The beginning of each class was to be spend on ANY and WHATEVER subject anyone wanted. Anyone not like the cafeteria coffee? Speak up! Had a rough time getting the trolley to class? Tell us! Don't like those new highrises being built? Now's your chance!

Something interesting happened. The students loved it because they thought they were getting out of learning. Except Professor Pedesco had this peculiar habit of bring every subject back to is roots. Don't like the trolley system? He'd talked about the growth of urban transportation system, who was responsible and who benefited. Don't like the cafeteria food? He'd talk about food production, farms, food distribution and nutrition.

No matter what, you were forced to learn and think deeply about a subject in Professor Tedesco's class. And students did, because they weren't even aware they were learning!! They thought they were goofing off. Now that's a good technique.

Yes, I assume a teacher needs to know the subject, and I suppose I learned American history (got an A). What I do know is that I learned to THINK!

[Philip Coates]

What impresses me about your experience with that professor is the depth and richness of his knowledge - that he was able to field random issues on the fly and had so much recall and had his knowledge so well-integrated that he was immediately able to see the connection with history and give a detailed spontaneous discussion!

Also, the very fact of being able to connect -everything- to history would suggest the universality and relevance of history to the students.

I've had only a handful of teachers like that.

Edited May 29, 2010 by Philip Coates

[ginny]

What impresses me about your experience with that professor is the depth and richness of his knowledge - that he was able to field random issues on the fly and had so much recall and had his knowledge so well-integrated that he was immediately able to see the connection with history and give a detailed spontaneous discussion!

Also, the very fact of being able to connect -everything- to history would suggest the universality and relevance of history to the students.

I've had only a handful of teachers like that.

That's why I consider him a giant, Phil. I'll never forget Professor Tedesco and all that I owe him. He was one of a kind.

Oh - and the man inadvertently guided me and changed my entire political thinking with one sentence. Out of the blue one day, he said, "Isn't is strange that the phrase, 'ask not what your country can do for you, but ask what you can do for your country' should be so emphatically socialistist."

Well, he knocked me for a loop with that one. For one thing, I was raised by a Bostonian father who worshipped the Kennedys. In addition, I was raised in Germany, where Germans to this day idolize Kennedy for his "Ich Bin ein Berliner" speech. I was raised to geneflect at the very mention of the Kennedy name. To me, Kennedy was merely a synonyn for "god."

So, here was Tedesco saying Kennedy was a Socialist, which was something I hated more than the devil himself.

My head exploded. Talk about having to check your premises. Paul Tedesco forced me to do so. God bless that man.

Edited May 29, 2010 by ginny

[Philip Coates]

Subject: My Teaching Experience - Crawl, Walk, Run

There were some posts early in this thread on what kind of background (knowledge, credentials, experience) is necessary or desirable for a teacher. I thought I'd outline my own steps and a bit of my development.

I would describe my own history as "crawl, then walk, then run". Had some desire early on to be a writer, but never the slightest idea I might want to also teach. So there was a healthy, very slow, unforced progression i) from writing and public speaking to labs and workshops and tutoring to classroom teaching, ii) from short to longer curricula, iii) from subjects close to home or close to my degrees to other areas, iv) from easy environments to more troubled ones, v) from simple and easy to relatively more complex or ambitious in scope.

Just like an apprentice first learns how to saw a plank, then to make a table leg, then a table, and only later to build a house.

In school and then college, across about ten years, I spent a lot of time beginning to develop oral and written communication skills. Published some short pieces, competed in essay contests and regional speech contests, had the lead in several school plays, was on the staff of the humor magazine. Manned a campus table and argued Objectivism with the lefties, was involved in campus assemblies and student offices and political activism a little bit. Sort of untypical for a "math guy".

When I left grad school, in my first job I was asked to teach for the first time during the work day. It was a computer intro and programming course after school. The Honors students would come over to the company's offices and I would teach them APL ( a high-powered scientific language) and they would work out problems I'd assign at our terminals.

This was an -ideal- first step for teaching. I was teaching something that was right in line with the work I did every day and it was to motivated students who wanted to be there. It was bite-sized. (Unlike, say, being an English teacher, you don't simultaneously have to teach multiple sub-subjects -- grammar, spelling, vocabulary, literature, composition.) And it was only once a week so I had plenty of time to reflect on what worked and what didn't in what was for me a new kind of task. And my background and strong interest in communications (written, oral, debate)gave me some basic teaching skills to apply and hone.

There was actually another activity at that first job, where I stayed for close to four years, which might have been even more important long-term for being a teacher and communicator. We were putting in our first computer system and automating every clerical and manual operation that a small four million dollar manufacturing business engages in, from payroll to inventory, from accounts payable to accounts receivable and invoicing, from general ledger to budgeting. The clerical employees, many of them, had not even graduated from high school. This was a rural area; their parents had been farmers, etc.

The hard skill to learn -- totally unlike what a former 'academic mentality' like me had ever done -- was how to talk to them, to explain the computer and what it would do, to interview them about what functions they performed, to anticipate unanswered questions and possible 'bugs', to estimate 'capacity', to ease their worries that the computer would automate them out of a job, and to train them to become data entry and computer support staff instead of punching keys on an adding machine and hand-scribbling stuff.

Shouldn't someone else who had been with the company longer, had more years with computerization, have done this? Ideally, yes. But I -was- pretty much the computer department: Figure out what functions the software would perform, what inputs, outputs, and disk files. Carve out programs. Write them. Debug them. We had another fellow who was the computer operator, once the system was delivered. We had a couple cases where I didn't have to design and program an application from scratch. (I'm trying to remember - I think we bought a payroll package....there's no way I could have done all those taxes and deductions without even more study time than I was already putting in.) I remember boning up on lots of books on not just accounting, but on the 'soft' skills like the art of interviewing. And I was sent to 'IBM school' in the city for the more technical courses.

Next step: I had read Rand in college and computer work was not enough for me, so the President of the company (an Objectivist) got me into the local high school to spend a day there doing a discussion of Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal and a defense of political and economic freedom (and a bit of Objectivism) for seven periods to seven different classes. It was a first venture into the classroom and out of talking to students about computers. I then repeated the whole process at my old high school in Massachussetts.

In a few years, I moved to 'the big city' and had a chance to teach again. At a college this time. And back again to a semi-technical subject. . . .

(To be continued, hopefully -- any questions, so far? Hint: lecturing on Rand in the public schools was quite interesting and revealing.)

Edited May 30, 2010 by Philip Coates

[Philip Coates]

Aside: I forgot, in my four year first job, I was also on the staff and a reporter for a libertarian-oriented periodical. (But it's sort of off the subject of teaching except tangentially regarding developing writing skills.)