« Honor's Constitutional Moment: Now Downloadable | Main | "Education and Soulcraft" »
Monday, November 24, 2008
End-of-Semester Exhaustion
So it's the end of the semester again and I'm exhausted. Is it something about 14 weeks that naturally leads us to be spent at the end? I presume not; instead, I presume that it's the knowledge that the semester is coming to a close that makes one more tired. This has got to be due, in part, to a sense of disappointment. It seems like most semesters I begin with big plans for my class, from grandiose ideas about setting up in-class simulations to ordinary good practices such as not falling behind the syllabus. But the last few weeks of the summer are spent polishing that article, the enthusiasm of the first few classes soon wanes, other matters (more scholarship, committee work, home) demand our attention, we start scrimping on teaching -- not just (or even mainly) on prep time but on sitting back and thinking about what we want to accomplish in the classroom. Before too long ... well it's too change anything this semester. Maybe next time. Sigh.
Of course my teaching does get better year by year, as I suspect it does with most profs, at least unless and until they start to burn out. I talk with my students more and lecture at them less. We talk more about how the doctrine impacts what they do as lawyers. And I try to let student comments guide the discussion while ensuring that the basic points get put out on the table, even if it leads to a class that seems more disorganized.
Still, the competing demands on my time have consistently led me to shy away from doing anything really innovative. I used a new casebook this semester. (For any non-profs out there, don't think that's a small thing; it can lead to a major reorganization of how you present the material and even how you test.) But that's really nibbling around the edges of a major pedagogical change.
I worry that incentives in law schools are structured to disfavor pedagogical innovation. Scholarship gets praise, service gets admiration, but good teaching serves in silence, at least officially. You might get good student evaluations for trying something new -- but you also might get them if you're entertaining, or tell war stories, or spoon feed, or don't assign a lot of reading, or never call on anyone. There's no guarantee that innovation gets you high reviews, especially if the roll-out is bumpy. If you're lucky you'll eventually develop a reputation among your faculty colleagues as a great teacher who does lots of interesting things in the classroom. That's a great thing, but in terms of public approval it's limited.
Ultimately, the reward for taking time on teaching is internal. If you're lucky, it's internal to the class -- that is, the class, or a decent part of it, recognizes the good work or at least the effort. But my sense is that more likely the reward is internal to the teacher only; only he or she recognizes a class well taught. So I suspect a lot of us (me included), given our completely understandable motivations, don't put the time there. And when it comes to the end of the semester, the main sense is one of exhaustion rather than something more positive. It's unfortunate, and a disservice to our students. The good news is that it's within our power to change. Maybe next semester . . . .
Posted by Bill Araiza on November 24, 2008 at 10:08 PM in Teaching Law | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c6a7953ef01053620ab22970c
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference End-of-Semester Exhaustion:
Comments
Bill, I think you are right. This semester I taught the same courses as last year, but cut way back on the innovative stuff (in-class simulations, pair-square-share, etc.) I think one has to pick one's spots. A good 25% of my large unincorporated business associations class last year said in the evaluations that they hated the simulations (about as many said they liked them), but in most sets of evaluations, 25% toward the low end puts you well below the mean as these things go. I'd begin my innovating in smaller classes and ones in which the students are self-selecting - i.e., not the big "required" upper level classes like corporations or evidence.
Posted by: Jeff Lipshaw | Nov 25, 2008 4:58:23 PM
I agree with your assessment, Bill. But I don't think you put the point quite starkly enough. Couldn't you say this?: Why would a rational professor put one calorie of energy into reorganizing a course she has already structured? Isn't teaching ultimately a waste of time, distracting you from scholarship, which is (1) unlike teaching, actually important and (2) unlike teaching, measurable. Sure, students benefit from good teaching, but that's not why you're working in academia, is it? (And if it is, isn't that a sign that you don't ultimately belong?) And it's not, in the end, why students are at your school. Isn't teaching supposed to be "good enough" -- passable, servicable, but not better? Indeed, it's pretty hip these days, isn't it, to belittle teaching in conversation?
If all that is the true view of teaching in the legal academy (and I like Bill think it is), then I wonder how, exactly, "it's within our power to change." Not to despair or anything, but...
Posted by: Bleak | Nov 25, 2008 5:10:53 PM
Nice post -- I agree that "incentives in law schools are structured to disfavor pedagogical innovation," and that profs can each act locally. But the overall incentives may be changing, and law profs and lawyers can help do this more globally as well. At the Race to the Top project, we've started highlighting schools that excel at pedagogical innovation and other "best practices," and are emailing this information to U.S. News voters to use in ranking schools.
We ran an ad last week in the NY Law Journal encouraging hiring partners, who complete the survey this month, to use our info, and will have a final reminder ad tomorrow at Above the Law. For more on the project, see our website at www.racetothetoplaw.com, or email us at rtttlaw@gmail.com.
Posted by: Jason Solomon | Nov 25, 2008 10:54:39 PM
Oh, please. Give me a break. Law profs do not work that hard, certainly not as hard as people who are actually working as attorneys. If your class tapers off midway through the semester, you're just not that great a teacher. Sorry.
Posted by: legalwriting | Nov 25, 2008 11:12:54 PM
"Law profs do not work that hard, certainly not as hard as people who are actually working as attorneys."
If only that were true...
Posted by: Bruce Boyden | Nov 25, 2008 11:31:23 PM
"But my sense is that more likely the reward is internal to the teacher only; only he or she recognizes a class well taught."
Does good teaching exist in a vacuum? I would agree that sometimes there are classes that just don't click. But overall, students should be able to recognize that the teaching is good: they should be learning.
Posted by: BTB | Nov 25, 2008 11:38:12 PM
Bleak: Wow, you sure got the name right. I assume/hope you're kidding when you suggest that good teaching isn't that important and that profs who think it is don't belong. I suspect for most of us it is the biggest mark we will make in our careers. I say iit's in our power to change because we do control the classroom; all we have to do is do something with that control. I take the point that it's not necessarily great career advice to spend time on it. But individual profs can still make the choice.
Jason: Thanks for the cite; I will check it out.
BTB: I don't know about that. I think most students can recognize really exceptional teaching. But the worth of a lot of very good teaching may become clear only later on -- the following year, or five or ten years later. In a very real way students are in the worst position to recognize good teaching, because they don't fully know what's important to learn.
Posted by: Bill Araiza | Nov 26, 2008 12:10:30 AM
It is the best damn job on Earth! Wake up, get a life and start billing some teaching/scholarship/teaching hours to earn your generous academic year salary. What we do is not rocket science! But for meeting your classes, you can come and go as you please (for the most part). We have it made compared to our friends in the English, Political Science, Sociology, Music, Math, Chemistry etc. departments ... name the school or department! They are hurting. I have loved what I am doing from the start(fall 1977), I have been married to the same wonderful woman since my third year of teaching (May 1980), and my wife and I have enjoyed watching our daughter grow up to become a lawyer (and a happy one at that). Moreover, I was the Dean at three schools from ages 39 to age 52 and had the challenge of evaluating colleagues. Read this: the best teachers where I have worked/served as Dean and set salaries/was the last/primary advocate on promotions and tenure/etc. (South Carolina, Ole Miss, Kentucky and Georgia) are/were the best scholars; those who are the best scholars are usually the best teachers; and, they are also the colleagues the Dean turns to for the important committees like Hiring, Curriculum and Admissions. Multi-tasking as a law professor is easy. There are exceptions but not many. I will put it this way: often, those who who let you and colleagues know that they are highly regarded scholars and at the top of their games are really the ones the manager (the Dean) would like to trade for the untested rookie (open faculty line). Keep your ego in line and do your job! David Shipley
Posted by: David Shipley | Nov 26, 2008 8:00:03 PM
Regarding revising courses: First, it's certainly worth the time to revise a course if you believe that it will actually add value to it for the students. This being said, a massive revision does not always make a course better and it can actually make it worse. It has been my observation that too much revision leads to a constant state of uneasiness in the material and presentation. Better, in my humble opinion, are incremental changes every time you teach a course - constantly adding the good (hopefully) and deleting those things that don't pay off pedagogically.
Obviously, teaching is important, but establishing exactly what makes for good teaching can be difficult and may vary a good bit, depending on who you ask. My feeling (from both sides of the podium) is that I know it when I see it. Of course, this doesnt provide much guidance. Personally, I never felt a difference from my immediate evaluation of a course (as a student) and 5-10 years later (for what it's worth).
For a prof, I think that you can take into account certain external referents of success (e.g. student evaluations), but most profs have a feel for when it went well. I've always focused on a sense of "value added" - i.e. what knowledge or abilities do students have at the end of the class that they didnt have at the beginning.
Also, a happy Thanksgiving shout out to David for his tip of the hat to we in the arts and sciences who are suffering ;-)
Posted by: Jeff Yates | Nov 27, 2008 9:04:09 AM
I hate to say this, but Bleak is right. As long as law schools value their US News ranking above anything else (and they all do), teaching will not be important.
It is a self-perpetuating problem. Profs complain b/c their teaching doesn't matter yet profs are as guilty as anyone at measuring their peers on their number of published works vs their quality in the classroom.
Bottom line, scholarship feeds US News and as much as we like to pretend we swim upstream, when it comes down to it, which of you on hiring committees would take one look at a prof who had 1 published article and 3 years of great work in the classroom (evidenced by student evaluations and letters from other profs who have witnessed) as your next lateral candidate? So, until you change your behavior, the system will remain the same.
Posted by: Just as Bleak | Nov 27, 2008 6:46:50 PM
"In a very real way students are in the worst position to recognize good teaching, because they don't fully know what's important to learn."
Often, what appears to be bad teaching is in fact bad teaching.
Posted by: keith | Nov 28, 2008 12:22:35 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.