2009: Unit outline

All 17 students completed the survey, and all agreed or strongly agreed that they were satisfied with the overall quality of the unit, for an average score of 4.69 out of 5, up from 4.33 in 2008. Scores for all the other questions were also higher than in 2008, with all the students agreeing or strongly agreeing that the teaching helped them learn (score of 4.71), that group discussions added to their understanding (score of 4.88) and that the course stimulated their thinking (score of 4.82).

Some of this response reflected changes I made to the course. In 2009, I opened each class with a small group discussion, put the results of that discussion on the board, and then we used them as the starting point of the class discussion, tracking the links and additions we made on the board. The students uniformly endorsed the group discussions as a way to begin the class. In a way I had not expected, the notes I added to the ideas from the groups that I had placed on the board became a mind map of our discussion, which students started to photograph at the end of class to add to their notes.

This group of students also responded much more positively to my approach of probing them to think through their ideas than the 2008 class did; in fact, that approach was the most often praised element of the class:

• “One of the best courses I have ever taken in helping critical thinking skills – really made me consider issues in depth/critically”
• “Dr Robertson is generous, open and dynamic in his teaching. He encourages discussion and debate, and rewards students for their contributions.”
• “Stephen is an awesome teacher! Really encouraged me to push my thinking further and encouraged me to respond in class.”
• “The discussions and Stephen’s enthusiasm really brought the class together.”

The reflective journal again worked well, drawing praise as a means of assessing work throughout the semester, as preparation for class, and as a way of “working through ideas.” Students appreciated the regular feedback I offered this year on journal entries, but wanted more, specifically a mark for each entry. That was not how I planned to assess the journal, but it became clear that the lack of marks caused students some concern, so I’ll incorporate marks into the feedback the next time I teach the course. The longer focus paper worked far better than the two short papers used in 2008.

Overall, this was a great class to teach, and I look forward to teaching it again in 2011.

2008: Unit outline

13 of 16 students completed the survey. 92% (11 of 12) agreed or strongly agreed that they were satisfied with the quality of the unit, for an average score of 4.33 out of 5. All agreed or strongly agreed that the unit stimulated their thinking, and commented that the course was “interesting,” “engaging” and “well taught.”

The students were a particularly diverse group both in terms of the degrees in which they were enrolled and their background. Two students found it difficult to contribute to discussions involving the whole group, so after two weeks I added several small group discussions to each class. This helped the students who had been struggling, but several others expressed dissatisfaction with the quality of the discussion in small groups. The next time I teach the unit I’ll try to strike a balance by retaining the group work, but limiting it to one discussion in each class.

It became clear during the course that students had little familiarity with core cultural texts, so the next time I teach the unit I will assign some of these as readings, to compliment the analyses we read.

The reflective journal generated positive feedback that showed that they achieved what I had intended; in a typical comment, a student wrote “The weekly reflective journals helped me to constantly engage with the readings. I learned a lot by going back to my own thoughts [to] reassess previous assumptions.” Several students did want more feedback on their journal entries during the course of the semester, and I will do that in future. The two focus papers were less well received, with the major concern being that 1000 words were too few to allow a sustained analysis. I agree, and the next time I teach I’ll ask for a single paper of 2000 words.