"When I once asked a class whether they would be interested in a seminar called “Irritations,” which would present strong arguments for unpopular views by reading taboo texts, the interest was great. My general observation is that most students, often caricatured as passive, hypersensitive, or mindlessly activist, are very open to challenging content when you convincingly explain why engaging with it is worthwhile, especially if it helps them make sense of the complicated era they live in and address questions of orientation, meaning and purpose." True! In my English composition classes, I assign my students "Guts" by Chuck Palahniuk and "Tralala," by Hubert Selby Jr. I say to them, "You can stop reading if you're offended or disgusted, but then you have to mark exactly where you stopped reading and say presicely why." They love it. Many start reading the stories before they leave class. Nobody stops reading. We have fascinating discussions on why they are considered "dangerous" stories.
If I understand your comment correctly, you read my article as naive wishful thinking. Well, I'm neither a techno-determinist nor do I believe that good things just fail for lack of goodwill. What I'm trying to say is: There is a variety of experiences, and there is leeway, even though we're in the midst of significant structural change.
Setting policy! I suppose I'm still thinking too much like a dean (as a former dean) wanting to provide clarity and support. Faculty are getting deluged with ed tech; policies are changing fast; students are ahead of everyone. Do we provide incentives? Carrots and sticks? That sort of thing.
Ah, I see. I think one reason the matter is so complicated lies in the many levels on which the change takes place: rapid technological development, economic and political constraints, administrative requirements, expectations of students, idiosyncrasies of professors... From my experience, those in teaching roles are often prone to sort things out on their own, which is, of course, not enough.
Forgive my terseness earlier! You are correct. The problem lately is faculty purchasing things on their own that don't integrate or cause security problems..
I transferred from Uchicago to the University of Minnesota-Twin Cities. Their cultural studies department regularly attracted masses of students. Why? It was relevant, it was modern, it was not outdated in its methodology, and it was genuinely interesting. A lot of students from professional programs would spend good money taking cultural studies classes, and there were many. That's just 1 department! 1! This was also at a state school. The problem is the academy is promoting irrelevance. It's focusing on close readings, hermetic readings, from pretentious, out of touch, pre-post-modern professors. It teaches arrogance, not learning. It fawns on power, not potential and even actuality. The humanities has shot itself in most departments.
Thanks, Michelle, for your comment. I agree that the humanities' problems are often self-inflicted. What my article didn't sufficiently highlight are the many differences between departments. So much depends on a department having the right people aligned and capable of translating good ideas into action.
Radicalism sells. In my cultural studies classes we'd read authors like Gramsci, Freud, Marx, Adorno, Deleuze, Derrida, etc. I think if people make classes engaging and helpful to understanding, students will engage. What they do not buy into is faux-intellectual snobbery. Which is the overwhelming trend in many departments.
Students rightly reject intellectual condescension. More important than the choice of thinkers, in my view, is how they are read—using them as examples to understand challenging texts, discussing them with open-ended outcomes, and attempting to bring one’s blind spots into view during the exchange of arguments.
A lot of professors are keen on investigating the "kernel" of the text, the de facto "right answer." Truth is found is so many ways, and there is truth, or at least the feeling of meaning. I hope you get more students, you seem like someone who would be enjoyable to take a class from!
"When I once asked a class whether they would be interested in a seminar called “Irritations,” which would present strong arguments for unpopular views by reading taboo texts, the interest was great. My general observation is that most students, often caricatured as passive, hypersensitive, or mindlessly activist, are very open to challenging content when you convincingly explain why engaging with it is worthwhile, especially if it helps them make sense of the complicated era they live in and address questions of orientation, meaning and purpose." True! In my English composition classes, I assign my students "Guts" by Chuck Palahniuk and "Tralala," by Hubert Selby Jr. I say to them, "You can stop reading if you're offended or disgusted, but then you have to mark exactly where you stopped reading and say presicely why." They love it. Many start reading the stories before they leave class. Nobody stops reading. We have fascinating discussions on why they are considered "dangerous" stories.
Thanks for your piece.
Thanks for sharing. I'm glad to hear you had similar experiences. Stories like these are needed in the discussion about the „decline of education.“
I see no argument beyond "should."
If I understand your comment correctly, you read my article as naive wishful thinking. Well, I'm neither a techno-determinist nor do I believe that good things just fail for lack of goodwill. What I'm trying to say is: There is a variety of experiences, and there is leeway, even though we're in the midst of significant structural change.
Not naive just not yet pulling the levers of change! Who does what first.
What do you mean by "Who does what first"?
Setting policy! I suppose I'm still thinking too much like a dean (as a former dean) wanting to provide clarity and support. Faculty are getting deluged with ed tech; policies are changing fast; students are ahead of everyone. Do we provide incentives? Carrots and sticks? That sort of thing.
Ah, I see. I think one reason the matter is so complicated lies in the many levels on which the change takes place: rapid technological development, economic and political constraints, administrative requirements, expectations of students, idiosyncrasies of professors... From my experience, those in teaching roles are often prone to sort things out on their own, which is, of course, not enough.
Forgive my terseness earlier! You are correct. The problem lately is faculty purchasing things on their own that don't integrate or cause security problems..
I transferred from Uchicago to the University of Minnesota-Twin Cities. Their cultural studies department regularly attracted masses of students. Why? It was relevant, it was modern, it was not outdated in its methodology, and it was genuinely interesting. A lot of students from professional programs would spend good money taking cultural studies classes, and there were many. That's just 1 department! 1! This was also at a state school. The problem is the academy is promoting irrelevance. It's focusing on close readings, hermetic readings, from pretentious, out of touch, pre-post-modern professors. It teaches arrogance, not learning. It fawns on power, not potential and even actuality. The humanities has shot itself in most departments.
Thanks, Michelle, for your comment. I agree that the humanities' problems are often self-inflicted. What my article didn't sufficiently highlight are the many differences between departments. So much depends on a department having the right people aligned and capable of translating good ideas into action.
Radicalism sells. In my cultural studies classes we'd read authors like Gramsci, Freud, Marx, Adorno, Deleuze, Derrida, etc. I think if people make classes engaging and helpful to understanding, students will engage. What they do not buy into is faux-intellectual snobbery. Which is the overwhelming trend in many departments.
Students rightly reject intellectual condescension. More important than the choice of thinkers, in my view, is how they are read—using them as examples to understand challenging texts, discussing them with open-ended outcomes, and attempting to bring one’s blind spots into view during the exchange of arguments.
A lot of professors are keen on investigating the "kernel" of the text, the de facto "right answer." Truth is found is so many ways, and there is truth, or at least the feeling of meaning. I hope you get more students, you seem like someone who would be enjoyable to take a class from!
Thanks, that's very kind of you to say. I hope my students see it the same way. 😉
I’m sure you’ve changed many lives!