Today is the last day of the spring semester and I’m starting to both look ahead to my summer research leave and look back at my classes over the past year. For readers of this blog, I’m not going to say anything new, but I feel like my experiences this semester continued a trajectory started about a decade ago toward a more learning centered approach to teaching.
Thing the First
I have one more semester of regularly teaching our department’s methods class. I’ve been teaching the course every semester for over a decade now. I’m disappointed that I’ll have to give it up, but I’ve come to terms with the idea that my colleagues are probably better at discerning when it’s my time to move on than I would be.
This semester, I changed the class up a good bit, but still came back around to the idea that learning to be a historian is partly method (and process) and partly craft. The former speaks to the influence of the social sciences and even the long shadow of scientific epistemologies on the discipline. By foregrounding methods we locate history within the bosom of the contemporary university with its predilection toward industrial modes of production. For a long time, students struggled to understand how they could be both the consumer and the product, but as they have become more accustomed to the workings of the digital economy, this paradox (if that’s the right word for it) has come to make more sense. After all, when we visit Amazon on a product web page we’re both expecting a satisfactory customer experience, but also know that our views are often being repackaged and commodified.
The other part of learning history is craft. For students who have become accustomed to learning by following a clear and stable method, this course is a bit frustrating. After all, it is impossible to tell a student how to research any possible topic in history. Instead, one has to encourage a student to embrace the craft of history. This means supporting the idea that history (and the humanities more broadly, I’d contend) has to be learned by doing.
Thing the Second
The problem with supporting craft is that this requires students to be self-motivated. There’s no way to learn how to do things unless you’re willing to put in the time. A more method driven learning experience, however, is well suited for students who might lack a bit of the personal discipline that craft learning requires.
This regularly drew me to consider how much our students’ “studenting” skills prepare them for success in my classroom. By “studenting” I’m referring to the ability of students to see the connection between the little things (e.g. showing up regularly for class, doing work on time and to spec, taking time to do the reading well, and so on) and the bigger things (e.g. reading for understanding, going beyond the letter of the assignment, engaging consistently in the classroom, finding links between classes, and so on). The better students understand that this is where a good bit of learning takes place especially in college and simply doing the assignments and getting the grades is the minimum of what is necessary to succeed.
This always leaves me in quandary. The more structured a class become the more it levels the playing field toward students who are still developing “studenting” skills. It also shifts that class away from the idea that doing history is not only a series of procedures followed in a particular order, but also a series of often frustrating encounters with texts, other people’s ideas, and the capacity to bring order to the shadowy hints of reality that one encounters in the past.
I continue to struggle to balance these priorities. For example, I prefer to have very fluid due dates that allow students to engage material at their own pace (and as much as possible turn in what they want to turn in when they want to turn it in). This certainly contributes to the idea that despite the industrial model of the university, craft methods are possible, but this also doesn’t always suit students who struggle with time management, priorities, and motivate—in short the key elements of “studenting.”
Thing the Third
I was chatting to a colleague the other day and used a boxing reference. (I find in my middle-aged, dotage, sports and particularly boxing metaphors have become central in understanding my daily life.) At this point in the semester, I find myself doing the little dance that boxing refs often perform when they look into one competitor’s eyes and say, almost implore: “You’ve gotta show me something!” It’s particularly touching (and a very intimate part of the sport) when the ref uses the boxer’s name. The ref knows that his job is to stop the fight if the boxer can’t compete or respond. It’s that time of the semester now. If a student can’t continue, it is my responsibility to help them end the fight with dignity.
At this point of the semester, I find myself looking my students in the eye more and asking them to show me something.
Archaeology of the Mediterranean World 