"Generation me" and today's college student

bakedbean

So, I've been reading 'Generation Me' by Jean Twenge and a couple of her opinions regarding education have really hit home to me.

In synopsis, Twenge puts forward the argument that many of today's college students:
* have an innate sense of entitlement. They expect good grades for simply turning up and 'putting in the effort', not on performance
* do not take criticism well. The student sees a poor grade as a failing of the teacher or of the mode of assessment; today's college student is much more likely to query and argue with profesors over grades
* have reduced self-reliance and need constant attention. Students need direct, explicit and repeated instructions to acheive success in a task.

I teach in a North American medical college and I agree with Twenge's broad concepts. I did, however, think that it was a USA phenomenon. A recent article in the Indo (see below) got me thinking that perhaps it's the same in Ireland.

What do you guys think?

Link
Full article:

Independent.ie
Why our college kids are so lost

Many students are helpless on campus and need constant attention. Are parents to blame?

By Ailin Quinlan
Monday March 28 2011

For some, going to college 30 years ago meant living in digs or at home, having no money and embarking on an often thrilling and sometimes confusing voyage of self-discovery. But to some eyes, there is a belief today's college students are quite literally lost. They struggle after leaving school, they fail to cope with the environment and even need the help of specially employed marshals to help them find their way around a campus.

'Orientation' is the new buzzword and in recent years some universities have poured huge resources into providing the means for students to find their way around their new surroundings. Some say it doesn't exactly inspire confidence in the notion of our 'smart economy' and argue it is a phenomenon that has arisen within the last 10 years.

So what has turned many of these 18-year-olds into such helpless souls? One of the country's most senior academics, the former head of Dublin City University Professor Ferdinand Von Prondzynski, believes today's students have the wrong approach, the wrong habits, and perhaps more worryingly, the wrong expectations.

Dispensing with the second-level 'mindset' is crucial for students entering college and in particular the Leaving Cert rote method of learning. Social factors have contributed too; the Celtic Tiger years infused a sense of entitlement in many teens and fostered a failure in some to take responsibility for themselves.

Go to a college these days and the chances are you will encounter a 'marshal', probably wearing a specially coloured shirt and calling out instructions to students on how to find lecture theatres and offering guides to the difference between seminars and tutorials.

Elsewhere there are tutors on hand to provide advice on study skills and learning centres where the baffled new students can learn how to present assignments. The question is, is this extreme hand-holding or crucial orientation for bewildered first year students?

The University of Limerick last year introduced a seven-week orientation course. Sarah Moore, assistant vice president (academic), describes it as "an elongated introduction to university life", explaining that the course, which has its own Facebook page, covers everything from campus tours to advice on healthy eating and study skills to stress management and exam preparation.

"I think the supports in place now are things that students have always needed," says Moore. "When students enter a university setting they need a bridge from the highly structured second-level system to the emphasis on more flexible self-direction at third level." But is this spoon-feeding? No, she says, it's about helping former Leaving Cert students to "hit the ground running". "We want students to really understand what's expected of them. This is about setting up good routines," says Moore. "Students have a very structured experience in second-level with smaller classes, being monitored all the time and parents signing homework etc." If you throw them in at the deep end, they don't have the skills to cope, she believes.

Many first-year students flounder, agrees Rebecca Murphy, welfare officer with the Union of Students in Ireland: "When you talk to first-years at the start of the year they're very bewildered and apprehensive. "A lot of them have come from rural areas so they have a new college, new city; a lot of things converging at once which can cause feelings of isolation and loneliness."

University College Dublin, which, with more than 24,000 students, is the largest third-level institution in the country, provides a packed week of orientation activities to help freshers navigate third level. "We have a week-long orientation programme with 300 volunteer students or orientation guides helping out," says student adviser Aisling O'Grady. "They provide campus tours, explain what tutorials are and what seminars involve. Students get an opportunity to meet the academics leading their programme. "They need all of this. College is a bigger thing than it was in our day," says O'Grady. "Many students find the first semester is very difficult so the orientation is crucial."

But what about previous generations who went to college and were expected to get on with it? "Back in the 80s there was a lot of independent learning and self-directed learning with students who were very focused and had career goals," says Tim O'Connor, principal of Schull Community College in west Cork. He believes that intensive orientation may be a response to the massive influx of students to third-level in recent years.

Before that a smaller percentage completed the Leaving Cert -- students who perhaps "came from families with expectations of completing second-level and going on to third level" and were thus better prepared.

So what to do? Dispensing with the second-level 'mindset' is crucial for students entering college says Prof Von Prondzynski. He says one of the consequences is a high first-year dropout rate, which averages at around 15pc, according to a report by the Higher Education Authority. "I don't think students are complacent -- I think they're confused," he adds. "They come equipped with all the wrong skills -- rote learning, expectations of a set syllabus which does not change, etc," observes Von Prondzynski, president of Dublin City University for the decade to 2010. It's difficult to wean them off the second-level mindset, he says. "It takes us about one-and-a-half years to re-educate students from the bad habits they learned in the Leaving Cert cycle. "We can tell them all sorts of things, but they don't believe it. Nowadays about 40pc of students will fail exams in first year -- they just don't know how to approach third level."

On the issue of basic human behaviour, those who cannot shake off the second-level mindset fail to grasp the concept of personal responsibility, says Dan Collins, head of Careers and Counselling at Cork Institute of Technology. "With some students there's an expectation that they'll be told everything. There's an expectation that the lecturer will 'chase down' a student, that the lecturer will continually keep after them for assignments etc. That's not the way third level works."

At third level the emphasis is on critical thinking, self-sufficiency and independence -- and the culture shock can have a major emotional impact believes Von Prondzynski. "There's quite a lot of depression among first years," he says. "They come out of second level thinking they know how to do things and then it dawns on them that they've no idea." What must change, he believes, is the way colleges select students. "The way to solve these problems is to change the Leaving Cert. It's really an entrance exam for university. What a crazy country, that we organise an entrance exam for third level that uses methods which are completely inappropriate to third level!"

There are a huge amount of issues in terms of progression from second to third level, agrees Moira Leydon, ASTI education officer, who says the matter is being taken seriously by the National Council for Curriculum Assessment and the Higher Education Authority. "We need to move away from the current emphasis on knowledge content to a greater emphasis on understanding how to learn.

However, the Department of Education points to the recently launched Higher Education Strategy which acknowledges that some students lack the skills of critical thinking, problem solving and independent learning -- and insists the issue is being addressed.

Part of the solution could also lie in improved communication between second and third level, believes Professor Grace Neville, vice president of Teaching and Learning at UCC. "Many students come in with the idea that there's a right and a wrong answer to everything. It takes a lot of time for students to 'unlearn' that. "Thinking for themselves has not been part of their agenda throughout the second level system." Constructive "conversations" need to take place between second and third level about the needs of students transferring into third level, she believes." Then we could pick where second level leaves off rather than starting from scratch."

- Ailin Quinlan

spurious

Sample answers, 'good' notes and learning off.

Mammy tap me egg.

A great deal of blame must lie at the door of the SEC who allowed exam papers and questions to become too predictable, allowing businesses like the Institute with no interest in 'education' to flourish and make money bypassing actual teaching or learning.

Had the original Junior Cert. been properly funded and implemented by the Department and every single subject had a project, practical or oral component for exam then things would have been quite different.

An even cursory look at the LC forum here on boards is frightening, as so many candidates appear to be looking for ways round doing work, looking for 'easy' subjects, or ones you can 'do' in a year. Similar posts are even starting to appear in the JC forum.

bakedbean

Mammy tap me egg.

lol!

This week I had a student that was 20 mins late for an appointment. She emailed me to inform me that I was late but that she would wait for me. I looked outside the office to see her sitting patiently. When I asked her why she hadn't knocked on the door, she said "I didn't bother as your lights were off".
I have tinted glass

rainbowtrout

spurious wrote: »

An even cursory look at the LC forum here on boards is frightening, as so many candidates appear to be looking for ways round doing work, looking for 'easy' subjects, or ones you can 'do' in a year. Similar posts are even starting to appear in the JC forum.

Not to mind the number of posts of the form 'I need an answer to my query but I can't be bothered to search forum/read the previous posts in the thread, so I'm just going to post my query and expect an answer pronto'.

Or 'We get way too much homework, why should we do it? Teachers are unfair'.

It would seem that there are lots of LC students who will not take any responsibility for their own learning anymore.

vallo

What about teachers that say to students they shouldn't be studying their books now - they should just be going over past papers.
What is the pre-occupation with past papers all about?
I don't think we can just blame the students. We need a complete paradigm shift.

forfcksake

The reason some students complain about the grades they get is down to the fact of the standard of lecturers in this country! you may say that you just learn stuff off for exams and this is true, but the reason you learn it off is due to the fact that the lecturers just give you information (they dont try to give you an understanding at all they just go through it and try to show you how much they know and how little you know!) and its either wreck your head and decipher some of it (which some students do) and scrape the exam or learn it off and do well

Fizzical

forfcksake wrote: »

The reason some students complain about the grades they get is down to the fact of the standard of lecturers in this country! you may say that you just learn stuff off for exams and this is true, but the reason you learn it off is due to the fact that the lecturers just give you information (they dont try to give you an understanding at all they just go through it and try to show you how much they know and how little you know!) and its either wreck your head and decipher some of it (which some students do) and scrape the exam or learn it off and do well

Proposition proven, anyone?

The Agogo

You've clearly never read The Gingerman.

1950s Trinity College life...drinking and boozing. NO learning.

The problem isn't a change in students' minds but rather that we have a higher proportion of the population attending university.

If only say 2% of a country's population were to be third-level educated, you would be sure that they'd be the best in the country. Setting high-standards.

If 20% of a country's population were given third-level education, you can be sure that some of the lesser-intelligent people would be the "rotten eggs" that soil some others.

The real problem is that there are too many people in college who don't deserve or don't want to be there in the first place. In other words, maybe their parents forced them there.

I got two 2.1 degrees from UCD. And I would much rather have spent those four years learning carpentry.

forfcksake

forfcksake wrote: »

The reason some students complain about the grades they get is down to the fact of the standard of lecturers in this country! you may say that you just learn stuff off for exams and this is true, but the reason you learn it off is due to the fact that the lecturers just give you information (they dont try to give you an understanding at all they just go through it and try to show you how much they know and how little you know!) and its either wreck your head and decipher some of it (which some students do) and scrape the exam or learn it off and do well

This is the whole point of the article. College isn't about spoonfeeding. What you describe is exactly what lecturers are SUPPOSED to do.

I agree with the article. I give grinds and I just despair at how pathetic many students are. They seem to think they can absorb knowledge from attending the odd lecture and then bitch and moan when they don't get A's. I have actually had people tell me 'but I tried really hard!' as if they deserve a gold star or something. I mean, that's the sort of comment I'd expect from a six-year-old. If you try really hard and you still don't do well, perhaps you don't belong in college. I think a lot of people would do well to remember the saying 'you get out of life what you put into it' - too many people expect all the rewards but aren't prepared to put in the work required.

forfcksake

Ramona Spoiled Thumb wrote: »

This is the whole point of the article. College isn't about spoonfeeding. What you describe is exactly what lecturers are SUPPOSED to do.

I agree with the article. I give grinds and I just despair at how pathetic many students are. They seem to think they can absorb knowledge from attending the odd lecture and then bitch and moan when they don't get A's. I have actually had people tell me 'but I tried really hard!' as if they deserve a gold star or something. I mean, that's the sort of comment I'd expect from a six-year-old. If you try really hard and you still don't do well, perhaps you don't belong in college. I think a lot of people would do well to remember the saying 'you get out of life what you put into it' - too many people expect all the rewards but aren't prepared to put in the work required.

Those that attend the odd lecture etc. then fair enough but there is still students who attend class all year gaining little advantage from it, why the hell do we pay fees at the start of the year when we might as well just buy a book, learn it that way and do the exams? if the lecturers are there just to provide the material, BTW I got a distinction with a high average, and i'm still in college so I know what the lecturers are like at the moment, plus I attended an IT for some of my course and while you may say its "spoonfed" (as ITs are said to be) you actually learn the material and IT students which are "spoonfed" are way more hardworking than university students-fact

forfcksake

forfcksake wrote: »

Those that attend the odd lecture etc. then fair enough but there is still students who attend class all year gaining little advantage from it, why the hell do we pay fees at the start of the year when we might as well just buy a book, learn it that way and do the exams? if the lecturers are there just to provide the material, BTW I got a distinction with a high average, and i'm still in college so I know what the lecturers are like at the moment, plus I attended an IT for some of my course and while you may say its "spoonfed" (as ITs are said to be) you actually learn the material and IT students which are "spoonfed" are way more hardworking than university students-fact

Many students who do attend still don't learn because they don't know how to learn. Lectures are supposed to supplement self study, not replace it. I'm not saying that there aren't some really bad lecturers around, but in my experience, most of the moaning is from students who expect to have everything done for them. I've just done an MA, so I also have recent experience of college, and there were countless opportunities to ask questions and discuss things with the lecturers. And how does the fact that IT students are often spoonfed make them more hardworking than university students? Surely reading piles of books and making sense of what you read requires much more effort than just writing down what you hear and regurgitating it in an exam?

forfcksake

Ramona Spoiled Thumb wrote: »

Many students who do attend still don't learn because they don't know how to learn. Lectures are supposed to supplement self study, not replace it.

I understand that but most lecturers just give you a pile of notes that you have to go away and try to understand yourself, most are not approachable and when approached give you a title of a book to go look at, whereas a good lecturer may present examples on the board and help you to understand it, we do go to college to learn and while yes we shouldn't be spoonfed a basic understanding should be provided by the lecturer in the lectures

Ramona Spoiled Thumb wrote: »

And how does the fact that IT students are often spoonfed make them more hardworking than university students?

I don't mean they're more hardworking because they're spoonfed, yes the lecturers do more in lectures and help you along a bit more but the material they are learning is assessed all year as they definintely have more projects/assignments/presentations to do during the year, I have experienced both and universitys are not all they're cut out to be

bakedbean

They seem to think they can absorb knowledge from attending the odd lecture and then bitch and moan when they don't get A's. I have actually had people tell me 'but I tried really hard!' as if they deserve a gold star or something.

Here's a link to what Twenge has to say about this.

JuliusCaesar

Thanks for that link, bakedbean.

This also might be relevant to the discussion.

professore

It seems there are at least two sides to every story. Being out of college for 15 years or something at this stage gives me some perspective.

First a caveat: my experience was of a physical sciences degree. I can't speak for arts or law or whatever.

The whole educational system is flawed. It rewards people who can retain huge chunks of information and punishes those with creativity and actual understanding of a subject. This is even true at undergraduate level. Making an exam "harder" means giving students longer tracts to memorise rather than rewarding problem solving skills and creativity. Some of the most successful people in the real world (i.e. not academia) from my course were the ones who barely scraped a pass, because they had fantastic practical ability and understood what they learned, but couldn't regurgitate 20 pages of a proof back on an exam paper because they actually understood it, and would make one mistake somewhere and then the whole question was a disaster. Remember Einstein never passed an exam in his life.

On the other hand, some "good" 2.1 students couldn't explain what pi actually was but could regurgitate the proofs. They're mostly the ones lecturing now.

Also there is very little focus on oral presentation and discussion, which is key in the real world. I have discussed this with some European friends and many of their exams are oral where they have to derive a proof in front of a lecturer and EXPLAIN it ... this is a much better system as it shows how much the student actually UNDERSTANDS and how they can EXPLAIN it to others .... two vital skills that are not tested properly in our exam system, particularly at second level.

I have not seen any studies on this but I bet if you go through people who got into college through grinds the failure rate is much higher than if they got the points on their own steam. Lots of people in first year had no idea what the course involved but were there because their Mammy wanted them to "get a degree" so they went for Science as the points were fairly low so therefore it must be easy. LOL. Someone should have told them about the Pure Maths degree in TCD ... lowest points of any degree course at the time!

Now having a child in secondary school myself I am appalled at how standards have fallen since I was in secondary. My child is smart and does work, but doesn't kill herself by any means, but she gets straight A's. Many of her friends only attend school and do homework if they feel like it, but still pass exams comfortably. When she asks a question about a science subject or maths the teacher tells her "you don't need to know about that, it's not on the exam" ... but she's just trying to get a better understanding .... I end up explaining stuff like that to her. Luckily I can, most parents can't since they wouldn't have my science background.

Another thing is the mollycoddling of kids by their parents in general. It is crazy. They are handed everything and have to work for nothing. it is unfair to the kids as after some initial resistance (the "but all my friends ...." argument) they actually like being in control of things. My daughter has to work for her pocket money and going out privileges. We have a list and she has to complete household tasks each day to get her pocket money and going out privileges. Before the list there were constant rows about her saying she had done "loads of work" and us saying she had done nothing. She knows that she has to make things happen rather than sit back and wait for someone else to do it for her. Our jobs as parents is to equip her with all the skills to become an independent adult - not to make her dependent.

Some lecturers are really poor. Some are excellent. A lecturer should not spoonfeed students like a teacher in secondary school however they should at least display some enthusiasm for the subject they are lecturing in and try to instil the same enthusiasm in the students. That's what the excellent ones do.

professore

forfcksake wrote: »

I understand that but most lecturers just give you a pile of notes that you have to go away and try to understand yourself, most are not approachable and when approached give you a title of a book to go look at, whereas a good lecturer may present examples on the board and help you to understand it, we do go to college to learn and while yes we shouldn't be spoonfed a basic understanding should be provided by the lecturer in the lectures



I don't mean they're more hardworking because they're spoonfed, yes the lecturers do more in lectures and help you along a bit more but the material they are learning is assessed all year as they definintely have more projects/assignments/presentations to do during the year, I have experienced both and universitys are not all they're cut out to be

I agree with forfcksake on this - continuous assessment and project work is much better and the IT's are much better on this.

JuliusCaesar

professore wrote: »

First a caveat: my experience was of a physical sciences degree. I can't speak for arts or law or whatever.

Remember Einstein never passed an exam in his life.

........ I have discussed this with some European friends and many of their exams are oral where they have to derive a proof in front of a lecturer and EXPLAIN it ... this is a much better system as it shows how much the student actually UNDERSTANDS and how they can EXPLAIN it to others .... two vital skills that are not tested properly in our exam system, particularly at second level.

This refutes the Einstein claim, but supports your contention

professore wrote: »

Now having a child in secondary school myself I am appalled at how standards have fallen since I was in secondary. My child is smart and does work, but doesn't kill herself by any means, but she gets straight A's. Many of her friends only attend school and do homework if they feel like it, but still pass exams comfortably. When she asks a question about a science subject or maths the teacher tells her "you don't need to know about that, it's not on the exam" ... but she's just trying to get a better understanding .... I end up explaining stuff like that to her. Luckily I can, most parents can't since they wouldn't have my science background.

Well, I did the LC in 1975. My maths teacher was the same....just learn the formula by heart. Admittedly I was doing Lower Maths, but I got my older brother, then a medical student, to give me a few classes and by god, once I understood it, I flew along. I had to understand the formula. But very few people got As. An A was really something. It was REALLY hard to get an A. And people failed exams. And parents supported teachers. If you failed, it was because you hadn't put the work in and that was the end of the story.

But I did psychology in college which is part science, part art. So there was a lot of room for understanding possible processes and then arguing which were important or not. Nobody in my class got a first, but that wasn't unusual - firsts were only for the most impressive geniuses, not the likes of us. A 2:1 was a bloody good degree.

jellytots!

very interesting discussion indeed.
I have mixed feelings towards the point about lecturers just turning up and throwing information at you. I recently graduated and through out my degree I experienced various approaches to lecturing. I hated lecturers who just sat at the top of the room pressing next on each power point slide before you got the chance to even read it?! Or the ones who just threw the information at you and didn't care if anyone in the room understood what it meant? if this is a lecturer doing their job then why even have lecturers? why do they not just give a syllabus and suggested reading list etc. I am by no means lazy and understand that of course a lot of independent work is required. I graduated top of my class with 1st class honours. But this wasn't from "learning off" material it was because I loved the subject and was passionate about it.

On the other hand I had some very good lecturers who took the time to explain the information BUT these were the ones who always expected a tonne of extra reading. But the thing was no one minded because from being at the lecture you had a basic understanding of the topic and enjoyed reading up on it etc.

I seen many people learn off things and do quite well out of it. The whole system is flawed and promotes regurgitation and I think it is very unfair to then criticize students for doing so. At the end of the day most people want an easy life so event those students who do have a love for a subject may take the easy road which is sad really

StrawberryJazz

Unfortunately it comes down to this...

I was raised and educated with the mantra "if you try you can succeed"...
NOTE the "can" and not "will". As a generation we have been bred for success and failure, rather imperfection isn't an option.

In my experience many lecturers take the easy way out pretty much reading slides (reused god knows how many times) for 50 minutes a pop. This generation of students needs engagement and dedication.

I don't mind getting a 2.1 and not a first once my grade is justified but when a lecturer shrugs their shoulders and mumbles something generic that isn't constructive criticism. Its so frustrating when the pillars of education don't give a crap about your development due to some deep routed prejudice or elitism.

Fizzical

professore wrote: »

Now having a child in secondary school myself I am appalled at how standards have fallen since I was in secondary. My child is smart and does work, but doesn't kill herself by any means, but she gets straight A's. Many of her friends only attend school and do homework if they feel like it, but still pass exams comfortably. When she asks a question about a science subject or maths the teacher tells her "you don't need to know about that, it's not on the exam" ... but she's just trying to get a better understanding .... I end up explaining stuff like that to her. Luckily I can, most parents can't since they wouldn't have my science background.

As a teacher, I am also appalled at how standards have fallen. But fighting against it is like swimming against the tide.

Many students coming into secondary school cannot write properly - have trouble physically forming letters, words and sentences; do not use capital letters or basic punctuation; do not use paragraphs. Many cannot sit still and listen. Many cannot read out loud coherently, cannot pronounce 'long' words and cannot understand them.

As for any teacher of science or maths who tells a student "you don't need to know about that, it's not on the exam", I suggest you check out exactly what happened and then go in and talk to the teacher(s) involved.

If that is what's happening, then there are a few possibilities: either the teacher is not properly qualified in the subject and doesn't know the answer to the questions; the student is asking too many questions and the class is getting restless, or the teacher is only teaching to the exam. If the first, complain to the teacher and to the principal. If the second, find a solution with the teacher e.g. ask the question while other students are doing classwork or at the end of class, or ask the student to reduce the number of questions to one per class. (I had a very interested student who took over the class everyday.) If the third, make a strong complaint to the teacher and the principal.