What to Teach When There Isn’t Time to Teach Everything

Faculty members can’t possibly cover everything they want to cover in a semester. With courses that last only 15 or 16 weeks, the fact of the matter is some content simply is not going to be addressed. The key is to have a meaningful strategy for discriminating between material that absolutely must be covered, and modules that can be safely skipped.

As subject matter experts, professors often find themselves frustrated by the time constraints of college courses. Meanwhile, the Internet has changed the role of faculty members in the classroom.

In the current media context, information is plentiful and easily accessible. No longer are faculty members the exclusive “holders” of essential knowledge. What today’s students need most are the skills to analyze, apply, and make meaning of the information they encounter. This is both a challenge and an opportunity, as professors need to restructure coursework to focus attention on the most crucial matters.

In What to Teach When There Isn’t Time to Teach Everything, faculty developer Ruth Rodgers “shakes up” your existing course-planning paradigm and offers insights into modern ways to review and select the best course content.

Order this seminar

What you will learn in this audio online seminar:

• The three, BIG questions to ask about what to include in any course
• Recognizing the critical knowledge and skills you must cover
• The changing role of educators in the information age
• Teaching strategies that prepare students for success in their chosen professions
• Making the transition from “subject expert” to “teacher of subject”
• Determining the processes and resources students will need most
• Helping students integrate into the culture of their field of study
• Guiding students to develop the key factors for success in their chosen fields
• Shifting to analysis, application, and meaning-making in the classroom

This seminar includes a worksheet designed to guide you in re-vamping your own courses while developing a template for making future teaching decisions. You also will also receive a take-away list of self-assessment questions.

Order this seminar

This seminar is recommended for:

• Professors
• Instructional designers
• Educational/faculty developers
• New program developers
• Curriculum specialists

You don’t have to teach everything. You have to teach the most important things. Learn how to select the most essential and effective course content in this fast-paced and insightful audio online seminar.

Order this seminar

I started to work with a variety of teaching methods, which encompasses more of the visual, auditory, and even the kinesthetic learners. I found that most of my younger students had grown up with a computer in their homes and in their classrooms; however, my older students struggled with the whole idea of computer-based learning.

My dilemma was how to reach and retain both the traditional-age and adult students, while adding value to their classroom experience. I needed a method that utilized technology that was readily accessible by my students. What I discovered was that music was the key.

Because almost all of my students listen to music on their iPods® (or even on their computers) I decided to try to use MP3s as an additional teaching tool. After a bit of trial and error with my scripts from my lecture notes, I think I have something that really gets my students excited.

I discovered that by highlighting only the key points, I could condense my podcasts down to about three minutes, which seems to be what my students expect on an MP3. After all, they are accustomed to listening to songs that are about two-to-three minutes in length, and I found going over that was not conducive to the students. So instead of one long lecture, I simply broke it up into three-minute segments. Then, they could “tune in” to the part that they were having trouble with as they were reviewing their writing topics.

Most didn’t need to review the entire class, usually just one or two key concepts. For those students who wanted to review more, the main lecture notes were there, just in “bite-size” pieces. It’s become something that they are not only utilizing for review, but are talking about outside of class as well. I am excited to see how this will develop in the rest of my English classes as well. Who would have ever thought that my teaching preparation would now include a studio session as well?

Vicki E. Phillips is an instructor at Le Cordon Bleu College of Culinary Arts, Austin, TX.

The research indicating interaction outside the classroom as key to promoting student academic success and personal growth is voluminous. I’d like to share with you how I’ve moved beyond office hours to create a more productive learning experience for my students.

Last year, I started meeting informally with small groups of students for one hour each week to review class content. In the beginning a handful of students showed up for this optional meeting, but by the end of the quarter, three quarters of the class met regularly each week outside of class.

I termed the time we met as “study hall.” I would ask the students to email me sample topics for study hall they were having trouble grasping. During weeks when the emails waned, we would work on additional case studies, critical thinking activities or we would discuss broader topics, such as time management skills, test taking anxiety, etc.

Some of the “rules” for study hall include remembering that if study hall is truly optional, then delving into new course content is not fair to those who choose not to attend. Additionally, I avoid inadvertently divulging tips about the upcoming quiz or exam. I also refuse to talk about the non-participating students with their peers.

I strive to be approachable while maintaining the professional teacher/student relationship. I expected frustrated students who were performing poorly in the class to show up to study hall wanting to gripe and complain. After allowing a little venting I would redirect the learning and move on. After the first couple of weeks, the complaints died down. In a couple instances, I had to direct a student who was spoiling study hall to meet with me during office hours, but for the most part students arrive at study hall ready to learn.

I conduct a brief study hall survey at the end of each quarter and the feedback has been positive. Excerpts from some of the comments include:

• “less stress in study hall”
• “helps to touch base and see what questions and concerns are out there”
• “allows more time for questions and answers”
• “seems like extra class time”
• “another opportunity to be exposed to the material”
• “like the class input and hearing how someone else remembers it”
• “reinforces and highlights topics.”

Offering study hall one hour a week has positively influenced how students participate during class, too. They are more relaxed and comfortable with interactive activities. They know we can elaborate on their individual concerns in study hall. I can report that on the University evaluations under the “effectiveness of instructor” category, the students have identified study hall as helpful and comment that it’s something they’d like me to continue offering. I see study hall as a way to show our students we are on their side. Ultimately, study hall has resulted in an opportunity for reflection and development of interpersonal skills for the students and me.

Elizabeth Delaney, RN, MSN, FNP-BC, is an assistant professor of nursing at Ohio University Southern School of Nursing.

But there are a couple of problems. First, faculty often don’t think of themselves as funny—some are, but most academics would not make a living as stand-up comedians. In fact, any number of faculty cannot successfully tell a joke, even after carefully rehearsing the lines and easing their tension with liquid libations. So, how might a serious academic find his or her way to humor that works in the classroom?

And then there’s the problem of propriety. Not all humor is appropriate, especially given the commitment of higher education to cultural respect, diversity, and equality. If you can’t make jokes about ethnicity, politics, religion, or sex, is there anything left for one-liners?

Fortunately some recent research offers help on both fronts. For faculty who don’t think they can be funny in the classroom, there is a wide range of different kinds of humor. Options abound. Early research (referenced in the article below) identified seven different kinds of humor: funny stories, funny comments, jokes, professional humor, puns, cartoons, and riddles.

The purpose of the study referenced below was to identify what students consider appropriate and inappropriate humor. Researchers did that by asking 284 undergraduates to list several examples of “appropriate and suitable” humor and then asking them to do the same for humor that was “offensive and/or not fitting for the class.” The students had no trouble identifying examples in both categories.

This student sample generated 712 examples of appropriate teacher humor, which researchers placed in four different categories. The first, which contained almost half the listed examples, researchers called “related humor.” This humor linked with course materials; examples included a physics instructor who regularly played with a Slinky to demonstrate certain physics principles or another who used course material in jokes: “What do you call someone who likes to go out a lot?” Answer: “Fungi.”

The second category was unrelated humor. These first two categories contained more than 90 percent of the examples students provided, although researchers note that there was overlap between the two categories. Examples in this second category include some teasing of student groups or individual students, or some stereotypical student behavior such as procrastinating.

The remainder of the appropriate examples were self-disparaging humor in which the instructor made jokes or told stories that poked fun at or belittled him or herself. Then there was a very small category of unintentional or unplanned humor when something funny happened spontaneously in class.

Equally valuable in this research is the analysis of inappropriate humor, for which students offered 513 examples, which researchers again placed in four categories: disparaging humor targeting students, disparaging humor targeting others, offensive humor, and self-disparaging humor.

More than 40 percent of the examples fell into the first category where instructors disparaged students individually or collectively. Students were disparaged for their lack of intelligence, gender, or appearance, as well as for their opinions.

When the disparaging humor targeted others, it used stereotypes and such specific group characteristics as gender, race/ethnicity, or university affiliation. Some inappropriate humor examples were listed as offensive because they contained sexual material or vulgar verbal or nonverbal expressions, or they were too personal.

In conclusion, researchers encourage faculty to explore humor related to the course content. Students always considered it appropriate. Moreover, many reported that it helped them relate and recall important course information.

Reference: Wanzer, M. B., Frymier, A. B., Wojtaszczyk, A. M., and Smith, T. 2006. Appropriate and inappropriate uses of humor by teachers. Communication Education 55 (2): 178–96.

Excerpted from Humor: Getting a Handle on What’s Appropriate, The Teaching Professor, Feb. 2007.

“What I want to suggest here is that teachers…need to invent and cultivate a voice, one that serves their personal needs as well as the material at hand, one that feels authentic. It should also take into account the nature of the students who are being addressed, their background in the subject, and their disposition as a class, which is not always easy to gauge.” (p. 58)

Parini does not think the creation of teaching masks makes teaching inauthentic. He says, “Authenticity is, ultimately, a construction, something invented—much as a particular suit of clothes will feel authentic, or inauthentic, given the context.” (p. 59)

How do teachers arrive at a mask—or a set of them—that serves them, their content, and the students well? Parini says they must try on different masks. He recounts some his own attempts as a beginning teacher: “Sometimes I played the pipe-smoking, genial ‘man of letters’ who just happened to walk into the classroom, almost by accident. I would sit on the edge of the desk, my tweed jacket frayed at the collar, my elbows covered in leather patches. I offered jocular (though learned) remarks instead of organized lecture notes, and replied wittily to student questions.” (pp. 60–61)

But he was not altogether happy with this representation of himself. He felt as though his teaching persona needed a bit more “fire,” even some “occasional madness.” Donning this new mask, he paced vigorously across the classroom. Sometimes he shouted; other times he whispered. Some days he threw chalk. But this disguise was too extreme and made him feel like a fool. Ultimately he settled on a teaching persona somewhere between these two extremes—one that integrated some elements of both.

Developing Your Teaching Style
Parini believes that previous teachers and mentors play important roles in the development of individual teaching styles. Most teachers begin teaching by trying to emulate a favorite teacher, or several of them. In the beginning, this feels awkward and uncomfortable. The favorite teacher’s persona may not be at all like the new teacher’s sense of self, or the collection of favorite teachers may represent different and incompatible personae. What the new teacher must do is construct a totally unique mask, but one that should incorporate bits and pieces taken from others. Parini writes about coming to terms with these prior voices and about “the long evolution of a particular and effective teaching voice.” (p. 68)

Donning the teaching mask and heading to class takes courage, even after years of teaching. Parini elaborates, “I always feel a little frightened as I leave my office and begin the long march to the classroom, my arms loaded with notes and texts, my head crammed with ideas I have not quite properly formulated. I wonder what the hell will happen when the class begins. Will I make sense? Will the students respond in sympathetic ways? Will I look and sound like an idiot?” (pp. 68–69)

Reference: Parini, J. (2005). The Art of Teaching. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

Excerpted from Teaching Masks, The Teaching Professor, Dec. 2007.

The teaching method was effective in that most of her students did well on their assessments, but she knew their ability to analyze real-world scenarios wasn’t what it needed to be, especially given the rapidly changing technology landscape in which they’ll be working. When Microsoft began testing students on their ability to apply their knowledge in unfamiliar situations, Saulsberry knew she needed a more effective teaching strategy. The answer came in the form of concept maps; diagrams that show the relationship between concepts.

In the Jan. 28th online seminar, Using Concept Maps to Assess Online and Traditional Classes, Saulsberry provided examples of concepts map assignments from her classes, and showed how the maps are used to improve and demonstrate students’ understanding of course material.

“Assessing students’ critical thinking skills and knowledge transfer is the strong point of concept maps,” she says. “By developing assignments which have students develop a concept map to solve a specific problem, I have been able to assess this well enough that the assignments and concept maps the students created in response are included in the college’s institutional assessment of critical thinking.”

Typically arranged in a hierarchical manner, with concept boxes connected by lines and “linking phrases” that explain the relationship (e.g. “results in” or “contributes to”) concept maps are particularly effective with visual learners. Saulsberry also found that, after a few practice maps, her students prefer concept maps to other forms of assessment, and that the maps are equally effective with both her online and classroom-based students.

Basic concept mapping can be done with a pen and paper, a whiteboard and sticky notes, or PowerPoint, but as you incorporate concept mapping into your daily instruction, it’s best to take advantage of the concept mapping software that’s available. Saulsberry recommends Cmap, which is free and has versions for Windows, Mac and Linux, and in last week’s seminar she provided detailed instructions on how to install and use the software. To download the Cmap software, visit http://cmap.ihmc.us/download/