Jump to content
Maniac Muslim Forums
cubster

What do you want out of a lecture/lecturer?

Recommended Posts

 

Thanks!

 

I teach a few courses. But the one that gives me trouble is the largest class of about 700 odd students. Its my Anthropology first year class. I teach Academic Literacy to students who are in the access stream and that is lovely because they work so hard! And I also teach a Working Life class where the students are full time workers who come for once a week classes and they are also lovely and work hard and participate in class. I think the difference is that these two groups value their education far more than the mainstream ones because its like a second chance for them.

 

I'm glad to hear that you're got great supervisors/lecturers. Honestly, I feel like that is half the work done and less of a stress. My supervisor sounds exactly like what you've described. I try to be like her but at the same time I try to be a bit sterner because she can be a bit of a pushover because she's so nice to students.

 

I've found that recently I have little respect even for the post grads because they get accepted into programmes with 50+ whereas in my year we had to achieve over 70%. There are usually at least 2 each year who have worked hard though to get into the post grad programme and I always make time for them because I feel like the actually deserve to be there and aren't simply filling a quota or increasing numbers. (That is what my uni has become about these days).

 

I think undergrads are lazy by nature as well. I still remember how lazy I was. I mean all I ever did was attend class and take notes. I did no extra work. I knew people who would sit around in the coffee shops all day. But somehow we still managed to get stuphph done. Now it seems to be about who has the best weave and the best outfit and the best shoes and who is cooler than who. If you ask a student what they are at uni for, 8/10 will look at you blankly. The culture is lazy and entitled. Few work hard and those that don't don't understand why they're being failed. Its not their fault, its the system, its the lecturer. Most have gotten in with a measly 28 points. A few years ago even 32 points would have been difficult to get a uni acceptance with.

 

 

Mashallah that's awesome man. Sounds like tough but rewarding work, you should be really proud of yourself. A class of 700, subhanallah thats got to be a challenge! I've never given a lecture to an audience that big! Even our undrgrad classes are very small, there might be at most 15 people in an undergrad class. I guess thats the advantage of having a collegiate system. I honestly don't know what to suggest, I'll think on it. But I guess a lot of it will come with experience as well.

 

Yeah it's great having a supervisor like that! It is definitely much less of a burden to have someone who can point you in the right direction, and who you can develop a good relationship with. InshaAllah I'm sure you'll be a great lecturer.

 

Wow, 50%? You wouldn't survive here with even 70%! That's really unfortunate, is that generally the culture where you are? Are degrees worth anything in your country/city?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Btw, with 700 students, can they hear you in the back row.

We don't have venues that will hold that number of students so we have two streams. Venue size is about 300, I'd say between 200 - 250 attend class. I have a loud voice, extremely loud. I barely strain myself. It definitely reaches the back. I have no ability to whisper. My whisper sounds as it would if someone spoke normally.

 

 

Mashallah that's awesome man. Sounds like tough but rewarding work, you should be really proud of yourself. A class of 700, subhanallah thats got to be a challenge! I've never given a lecture to an audience that big! Even our undrgrad classes are very small, there might be at most 15 people in an undergrad class. I guess thats the advantage of having a collegiate system. I honestly don't know what to suggest, I'll think on it. But I guess a lot of it will come with experience as well.

 

Yeah it's great having a supervisor like that! It is definitely much less of a burden to have someone who can point you in the right direction, and who you can develop a good relationship with. InshaAllah I'm sure you'll be a great lecturer.

 

Wow, 50%? You wouldn't survive here with even 70%! That's really unfortunate, is that generally the culture where you are? Are degrees worth anything in your country/city?

I'm stupid, I should clarify. I taught the 700 myself last year and this year there are two of us taking them so we have half the class each. Oddly enough its pretty easy to give a lecture to that size. I get nervous with the small classes because you can interact with them more and they actually get to know you as a person. Thanks, your thoughts would be much appreciated.

 

I was talking to a friend and she was telling me how sad it is that the people who have the most passion for academia and students are the ones being forced to leave (aka white lecturers) and the one replacing them don't have the same passion for teaching and students or their respective disciplines mostly because no one did these things for them. The few who do are considered brainwashed, but thats for a different topic :P Personally, I feel that the love for learning and the discipline you're in are part and parcel of being a supervisor. I've seen other people who are scared to sit with their supervisors or whose supervisors don't bother to read their work or don't have any time for them and I feel like I struck gold with mine cos she has this amazing love for what she does and it was what actually drew me to study anthropology in the first place and she's pretty much the reason why we get anyone majoring in the course. Supervisors are there for direction, for help, to foster your love for what you do and to ground you. That relationship is so important in a student's development!

 

Yeah. I remember an America exchange student who was appalled at getting a 75% on one of her tests and thats a great mark for us. When I asked her why she said that she would lose her scholarship if she got marks like that back home and I had to explain to her that the mark she got was an A. We don't get people getting marks higher than 85% or 86%. It is very rare for someone to score higher. Our fail mark is low in comparison to the US I think. Anything less that 50% is a fail. I've heard that some places a 60% is considered a fail. To get the 70% you have to work your ass off and anything above 75% and you're considered brilliant :P

 

Degrees are worth something in this country but I can say that degrees from my institution are becoming more and more worthless by the day. Its even hitting the post-grad area now. Third years are given three chances to write exams should they fail and by the time the third one comes around they are more often than not pushed through. Its about quantity rather than quality. We have had dozens of high standing academics leave and they've taken their students with them too. They are replaced by poor ones. There are now honours, masters and phd cohorts where you are helped to write research proposals. I find that such a slap in the face. We did those things on our own with only a supervisor to guide us. I find it utterly ridiculous that someone doing a phd would even need to attend such a thing. If you can't write a research proposal how on earth did you even get through your masters? But these things exist. Honours students get to do rewrites and supplementary exams and can even repeat if they fail. Chances we never had. They even get lecture slides because they cannot understand the material on their own! The uni wants to see the quota system seen through. Numbers must be met. Lecturers get friends to mark dissertations and then cum laudes and summa cum laudes are awarded to people who barely scraped by with 60s in previous degrees. When I applied for my phd I was told I had to wait until they decided whether my mark was good enough and yet another was allowed in without the bat of an eye with a mark 15% lower than mine. I watched students attend the Golden Key awards, students I had tutored in undergrad who were lazy and dumb as anything but they're in the top 15% of my uni? I actually felt disgusted and disappointed to be amongst them as though my degree was worth nothing and yet I know, my family knows and my supervisor knows how hard I worked on that thing. But will prospective employers know? Or will they just disregard me because I have a degree from a university that is slowly becoming the laughing stock of this country's academia? Only time will tell. Its really sad because it used to be such a prestigious institution, that you felt proud to attend but politics and especially racial politics has spoilt the whole place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We don't have venues that will hold that number of students so we have two streams. Venue size is about 300, I'd say between 200 - 250 attend class. I have a loud voice, extremely loud. I barely strain myself. It definitely reaches the back. I have no ability to whisper. My whisper sounds as it would if someone spoke normally.

depends on the acoustics of the venue. you should ask the last row to raise hand, to verify.

One reason why students just want notes is because they can't see the writing or hear the lecture.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah. I remember an America exchange student who was appalled at getting a 75% on one of her tests and thats a great mark for us. When I asked her why she said that she would lose her scholarship if she got marks like that back home and I had to explain to her that the mark she got was an A. We don't get people getting marks higher than 85% or 86%. It is very rare for someone to score higher. Our fail mark is low in comparison to the US I think. Anything less that 50% is a fail. I've heard that some places a 60% is considered a fail. To get the 70% you have to work your ass off and anything above 75% and you're considered brilliant :P

It was same when I was at school. Getting 70 was like a A a brilliant high mark. 40- 50 used to be the pass rate or a C grade. Anything below would be a fail.

I am doing a course at the moment where the pass rate for my assignments are 70. And the final exam is 60.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

depends on the acoustics of the venue. you should ask the last row to raise hand, to verify.

One reason why students just want notes is because they can't see the writing or hear the lecture.

 

I make sure to check every lecture that the ones sitting at the back can hear.

 

What bothers me is that students seem to not have the ability to listen whilst copying. Is this because of technology? Being so obsessed with visual stimuli (i.e. text messages and the like) that you cannot take in sounds at the same time? I, and many of my fellow classmates, could write notes and take notes on what was being said by the lecturer. We got lectured tons of times by people who never used slides and we would simply write what they spoke.

 

It was same when I was at school. Getting 70 was like a A a brilliant high mark. 40- 50 used to be the pass rate or a C grade. Anything below would be a fail.

I am doing a course at the moment where the pass rate for my assignments are 70. And the final exam is 60.

Wow! Good luck with it! Thats seriously scary. I wonder what the marking criteria are though? Like what do the markers take into consideration for the marks to have to be that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What bothers me is that students seem to not have the ability to listen whilst copying.

 

What does listen while copying mean?

 

1. Who explain it to the students, and then tell them to write down what follows in form of dictation.

2. Who just goes on with the lecture and expects the students to understand, process and take notes all at same time.

3. who explains, and then writes on board and tell students to copy whatever is on the board.

 

which are you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

What does listen while copying mean?

 

1. Who explain it to the students, and then tell them to write down what follows in form of dictation.

2. Who just goes on with the lecture and expects the students to understand, process and take notes all at same time.

3. who explains, and then writes on board and tell students to copy whatever is on the board.

 

which are you?

Listening whilst copying means exactly that. You are listening to the person talking while you are copying the notes.

 

There are points on the slide. I read each point and provide an explanation. Students don't have to copy exactly what you say but they should be able to listen and take down the important stuphph.

 

Nobody taught us how to do this, but my generation was able to do it and we went through an apparently ♥♥♥♥ty school system that encouraged parrot fashion learning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What does listen while copying mean?

 

1. Who explain it to the students, and then tell them to write down what follows in form of dictation.

2. Who just goes on with the lecture and expects the students to understand, process and take notes all at same time.

3. who explains, and then writes on board and tell students to copy whatever is on the board.

 

which are you?

Number 2 is the best for me. When there isn't too much info provided, it forces you to really listen and derive the important parts of the lecture. It also forces you to do independent learning to supplement what you take from the lecture. But you'll only do all of that if you really want to learn for the sake of learning and not just for the sake of passing the exam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Listening whilst copying means exactly that. You are listening to the person talking while you are copying the notes.

 

but you are not talking about listening while copying. Because listening while copying means listening, while copying some thing already written. You require your students to listen, process, understand, and decide and write what needs to be written. And usually people can't multi-task. there maybe people who are able to do that, but it can't be expected out of everyone.

When such lecturers were doing the lecture, I put my pen down, and just listen. Some others would be furiously taking down notes without understanding (they weren't really listening, more like hearing). At the end, I would borrow notes from such students (and in return I teach them the concepts).

 

In my opinion, a good lecturer should make it clear to students when to listen (with understanding) and when to take notes, and the students shouldn't be forced to do both things at ones.

 

 

There are points on the slide. I read each point and provide an explanation. Students don't have to copy exactly what you say but they should be able to listen and take down the important stuphph.

 

Nobody taught us how to do this, but my generation was able to do it and we went through an apparently ♥♥♥♥ty school system that encouraged parrot fashion learning.

In America, undergrads don't listen, they just take notes. You can sing a nursery rhyme and they will write it all down without noticing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Number 2 is the best for me. When there isn't too much info provided, it forces you to really listen and derive the important parts of the lecture. It also forces you to do independent learning to supplement what you take from the lecture. But you'll only do all of that if you really want to learn for the sake of learning and not just for the sake of passing the exam.

I notice it is usually girls who do this...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I notice it is usually girls who do this...

Because girls listen and can multitask? Or is that too much stereotype lol. Tbf I know a lot of girls that dont have that much of an attention span, some of my friends record the lecture themselves and listen to it later. I know I dont get all the information down the first time which is why I have to either listen to it again (when the lecture capture people decide they feel like uploading recordings) or by finding out the extra info from the textbook or other resources (scientific papers mostly for me).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We don't have venues that will hold that number of students so we have two streams. Venue size is about 300, I'd say between 200 - 250 attend class. I have a loud voice, extremely loud. I barely strain myself. It definitely reaches the back. I have no ability to whisper. My whisper sounds as it would if someone spoke normally.

 

I'm stupid, I should clarify. I taught the 700 myself last year and this year there are two of us taking them so we have half the class each. Oddly enough its pretty easy to give a lecture to that size. I get nervous with the small classes because you can interact with them more and they actually get to know you as a person. Thanks, your thoughts would be much appreciated.

 

I was talking to a friend and she was telling me how sad it is that the people who have the most passion for academia and students are the ones being forced to leave (aka white lecturers) and the one replacing them don't have the same passion for teaching and students or their respective disciplines mostly because no one did these things for them. The few who do are considered brainwashed, but thats for a different topic :P Personally, I feel that the love for learning and the discipline you're in are part and parcel of being a supervisor. I've seen other people who are scared to sit with their supervisors or whose supervisors don't bother to read their work or don't have any time for them and I feel like I struck gold with mine cos she has this amazing love for what she does and it was what actually drew me to study anthropology in the first place and she's pretty much the reason why we get anyone majoring in the course. Supervisors are there for direction, for help, to foster your love for what you do and to ground you. That relationship is so important in a student's development!

 

Yeah. I remember an America exchange student who was appalled at getting a 75% on one of her tests and thats a great mark for us. When I asked her why she said that she would lose her scholarship if she got marks like that back home and I had to explain to her that the mark she got was an A. We don't get people getting marks higher than 85% or 86%. It is very rare for someone to score higher. Our fail mark is low in comparison to the US I think. Anything less that 50% is a fail. I've heard that some places a 60% is considered a fail. To get the 70% you have to work your ass off and anything above 75% and you're considered brilliant :P

 

Degrees are worth something in this country but I can say that degrees from my institution are becoming more and more worthless by the day. Its even hitting the post-grad area now. Third years are given three chances to write exams should they fail and by the time the third one comes around they are more often than not pushed through. Its about quantity rather than quality. We have had dozens of high standing academics leave and they've taken their students with them too. They are replaced by poor ones. There are now honours, masters and phd cohorts where you are helped to write research proposals. I find that such a slap in the face. We did those things on our own with only a supervisor to guide us. I find it utterly ridiculous that someone doing a phd would even need to attend such a thing. If you can't write a research proposal how on earth did you even get through your masters? But these things exist. Honours students get to do rewrites and supplementary exams and can even repeat if they fail. Chances we never had. They even get lecture slides because they cannot understand the material on their own! The uni wants to see the quota system seen through. Numbers must be met. Lecturers get friends to mark dissertations and then cum laudes and summa cum laudes are awarded to people who barely scraped by with 60s in previous degrees. When I applied for my phd I was told I had to wait until they decided whether my mark was good enough and yet another was allowed in without the bat of an eye with a mark 15% lower than mine. I watched students attend the Golden Key awards, students I had tutored in undergrad who were lazy and dumb as anything but they're in the top 15% of my uni? I actually felt disgusted and disappointed to be amongst them as though my degree was worth nothing and yet I know, my family knows and my supervisor knows how hard I worked on that thing. But will prospective employers know? Or will they just disregard me because I have a degree from a university that is slowly becoming the laughing stock of this country's academia? Only time will tell. Its really sad because it used to be such a prestigious institution, that you felt proud to attend but politics and especially racial politics has spoilt the whole place.

 

 

Some of the stuff I've done in the past with smaller classes is to get them to break of into pairs, triplets or whatever sized groups and do a group task for a few minutes. I don't know if that will help you though? Group presentations can also help, plus it means less work for you lol. I prefer giving the smaller classes for exactly that reason, you can get to know the students and debate! But as I said our classes pretty small, biggest is probably about 15 people, so I don't know if any of what I've said actually helps you. With the bigger classes I guess it's going to be all to do with your speaking style; and making it engaging. Also if your having trouble with attendance, we penalise if anyone misses more that 25% of the classes.

 

See it's actually the exact opposite over here! I suppose being Oxford, it attracts a lot of academics and people the type of people who come here are hardworking. Alhumdulillah I'm lucky to be in a college at the university which is very academic and is purely postgrads. I can imagine it is really de-motivating to work in an atmosphere like that. It can get a bit infuriating here as well, because it can be too academic sometimes. What I mean by that is that there is very little real world application to what we do sometimes.

 

Wow, if I got anything less that 75% I would have a heart attack! Over here, below 40% is a fail, 40%-50% is a 2:2, 50%-60% is a low 2:1, 60%-70% is a high 2:1 and 70% and above is 1:1. To survive at Oxford you really need to keep consistently above 70%. Even though a 2:1 is technically a good mark, it's basically considered failure here!

 

Yeah degress are becoming pretty worthless here too, unless you get one from a red brick uni. Over here phd's have never really been worth a lot, unless your going to go into academia. It's considered overkill. Most employers will ask for a degree, some will ask for a masters but never phd's. In fact I have a friend who doesn't put his phd on his CV because it will actually hinder him from getting a job.

 

Wow! We get thrown straight in to the deep end, if you fail that's it, pack up and go home. Like I said earlier, even if you get a 2:1 you'll be kicked out of some courses. At phd level its a little more relaxed, depending on which college of the university your in. Once you've gotten through all that at the uni, you've basically proven your worth at phd level and the uni pretty much leaves you to it.

I seriously can't believe that you can get summa cum laudes with just 60%, that's outrageous! I'm really sorry to hear about your predicament, that really sucks, inshaAllah you'll get a really good grade. Which uni is it, if you don't mind me asking?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×