As another relative lurker to this list, I would like to echo John's
comments about diagnostic on entry testing. Here in Portsmouth we
have exactly the same system and when I worked in the Geography
department I got complete listings of all my tutorial group and their
self-ratings. As I was closley associated with the department's study
skills support programme, I also asked for and received a summary
of the whole of our entry cohort's profile. This was very useful but as
John says, it is simply the time constraint that prevents either a unit
leader or a tutor from getting down and working with the information
and the individual student. Extreme modularity also works against
seeing the student as a whole person and makes it hard for one unit
alone to try to offer study skill development. Give academics a choice
between proposition knowledge specific to their subject matter and
procedural knowledge about how to study or how to do things, then
academics will plump for the propositional knowledge every time.
Like John, it must be age and I do find it depressing.
Might I be making a little difference now with changed responsibilities
for the ILT recognised programme for our new staff? I'd like to think
so, but the emphasis on 'know that' rather than 'know why' and 'know
how' does go so very deep. Students probably quickly pick up on this
and push both new and experienced staff in the 'know that' direction
(especially when a key 'know that' question they pose is "will it be in
the exam?")
John
John Bradbeer
Principal Lecturer in Higher Education
School of Education and Continuing Studies
141 High Street
Old Portsmouth
Portsmouth
PO1 2HY
023 9284 5203
|