We are totally in agreement. And today with internet communication, a
student who doesn't write with facility gets left behind (or at least
she should). How long have you been dealing with students and essay
exams? BTW, are you a professor in the US or UK because if you're in
the US you're an exception; most of the profs I know here like their
multiple choice exams!

Good luck to you,
Gerry

Mark Campbell wrote:
>
> Thank you Gerry. I prefer essay exams because they give me a better picture of
> the student's understanding. It means more work for me and some times causes
> time problems with my adminstration. My goal is helping students learn so the
> extra time and effort is worth it.
>
> Gerry Reinhart-Waller <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Encouraging students to think is a very noble task and it sounds as
> though you have succeeded admirably. I'm pleased that you do NOT
> consider yourself politically correct; so much information becomes
> compromised when PC enters the picture. And you're correct when you
> state that there is much in the American educational system that
> discourages thought -- many profs encourage regurgitation, especially if
> they are administering multiple-choice exams.
>
> Gerry
>
> Mark Campbell wrote:
> >
> > Gerry, I've never been "politically correct" nor do I ask my students to be.
> I
> > find that when I encourage or require students to think they do. Some
> require
> > more effort than others but given an opporunity and encouragement to do so
> > most will try. I readily admit that there is a lot in the American
> educational
> > system (the one I'm most familiar with) that discourages thought. My best
> > instructors encouraged thought rather than conformity.
> >
> > Gerry Reinhart-Waller <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > Mark, the best programs available cannot make a person "think".
> > Thinking is something that comes with lots of experience and lots of
> > excellent schooling; it really doesn't come with being "politically
> > correct". Simply by making a person write a particular field report
> > won't make him smarter. I'm afraid you'll have to look to pre-school!
> > Gerry
> >
> > Mark Campbell wrote:
> > >
> > > I am addressing this from the perspective of a full time CRM praticioner
> > and
> > > part time community college instructor.
> > >
> > > Some of the problem IMO is because in CRM sped is our primary concern.
> One
> > of
> > > the ways I see people try to increase efficiency is by making reports
> more
> > > condensed and requiring less background research and documentation. The
> > > concern, as I've heard it expressed, is we strive for the minimum that
> the
> > > customer will accept. The way we move field crew from project to project
> > and
> > > divorce digging from writing fosters the idea that writing is less
> > important.
> > > I was recently criticize by one inexperienced crew member because I
> didn't
> > > spent enough time digging. AS PI I spend most of my field time taking
> notes
> > > and reviewing what is recovered.
> > >
> > > Another cause is that academia directs us toward specialization.
> Synthesis
> > is
> > > somebody else's job. As has already been stated University programs in
> the
> > > United States at least require a great deal of writing. Perhaps it is not
> > the
> > > right kind of writing.
> > >
> > > >From my experience in teaching entry level college students I do not
> > believe
> > > the quality of student as an issue or factor. When I compare what
> > > I have in my classes to what I see when I interview university graduates
> > for
> > > CRM crew members I place the blame on the universities. My intro students
> > have
> > > an enthusiasm and a desire to learn. They eagerly ask "What does this
> > mean?"
> > > Many (too many) of the university graduates and experienced folks I have
> > work
> > > with question what is necessary, shoot for the lowest acceptable effort
> and
> > > results, and see research or learning from the excavations as "some body
> > > else's job."
> > >
> > > One suggestion I have for training university students is require them to
> > > produce a management plan for an area which synthesizes the data. Have
> them
> > > use the records and reports of varying quality that exist in the real
> > world.
> > > This may help them understand why the recording, note taking, and report
> > > writing are important. Unless it is important to us it will not be
> > important
> > > to those we train.
> > >
> > > For the record I view excavation as the beginning of the process. The
> > report
> > > and what we've learned from the excavations are the end product.
> > >
> > > Gerry Reinhart-Waller <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > > >>Gerry: Perhaps archaeologists should be "reschooled" and taught writing
> > > skills as well as "how to be good discoverers"<<
> > >
> > > Is this not what the majority of university archaeology courses actually
> > > do? Some would say they do too much of this sort of thing. Students
> > > spend a lot of time collecting material from the sources and creating
> > > written texts (essays, dissertations). Excavation is just a means to
> > > collecting material to write archaeology from. Usually though, we all
> > > know that if a firm deadline is not set, student essays do not get
> > > written, the collected notes and xeroxes do not get read and
> > > synthesised. It is often the same with other types of archaeological
> > > writing.
> > >
> > > Of course the key to the problem is as you say that archaeologists in
> > > general have always seen digging as something which is often more
> > > enjoyable than sitting down and doing the tedious synthetic work
> > > afterwards. Most of us who work in the field understand this viewpoint
> > > without condoning it. The term *post-excavation* also implies that many
> > > archaeologists subconciously see excavation as a separate process from
> > > what happens to the data, when of course they are all parts of the same
> > > process.
> > >
> > > Gerry here: Paul, are you speaking of archaeology courses in the US or
> > > elsewhere? I'm afraid that many of the major US universities are so
> > > captivated with admitting "politically correct" students, and these
> > > politically correct students turn administrator (registrar) and then in
> > > turn admit like students -- the process is self fullfilling -- see
> > > today's NYTimes front page article.
> > >
> > > Thus, when the many of the students admitted to US universities are low
> > > scorers, why would they wish to publish when the process of placing the
> > > written word (especially that word in English) on paper is an arduous
> > > chore. IMO, the main reason archaeological reports aren't published is
> > > because the archaeologist is unfamiliar with the written work. He/She's
> > > a great excavator or discoverer but a poor synthesizer and writer.
> > > Gerry
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Gerald Reinhart
> > > Independent Scholar
> > > (650) 321-7378
> > > [log in to unmask]
> > > http://www.alekseevmanuscript.com
> > >


%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%