Andragogy is a brand new term for me, one I haven't heard until this class. From what I understand of it so far, based on discussion and readings, andragogy could most easily be explained as pedagogy for adult-learners. To take it a few steps further than that base definition, I would say these are the following components that stick out to me as differentiating andragogy from the overarching umbrella of pedagogy:
- Focused on post-secondary education
- Heavy emphasis on external motivators such as vocational training
- More emphasis on student advocacy
- Students' investment in learning is relative to the content's applicability
- Problem-based, instead of content-based
- Students already developing, or working toward developing, their own individual identity
I think focusing on andragogy will help us a lot in teaching FYC. I think it's very easy to forget that the eighteen and nineteen year old, traditional freshmen, are adults and not kids (sometimes students can facilitate that forgetfulness, too). When I'm in the classroom, I tend to automatically categorize myself as old, which while true (relatively, anyway), doesn't mean that my students are young as a default. Students, even 18 year old students, have their own expectations, desires, and goals when they enter a classroom.
Problem-based versus content-based is an interesting perspective, one that I'm thinking about how to implement in my own classes this semester. I've read Pratt's article (and a few secondary articles), but the recent Bizzell reading on contact zones made me think of incorporating the concept in terms of curriculum instead of social interaction in the classroom. I like the idea of problem-based learning, of giving students something active to solve or interact with. I'm going to try and figure out how to remodel in-class work in this vein.
I think the last bullet point is especially important when considering the responsibility of a teacher in the classroom. Many of FYW students are in their formative years, having just left home and just begun the process of being self-reliant. Like it can be easy to forget that these students are adults, I think it's also easy to underestimate the importance their classroom experience will have on their formation of identity, and the formation of their perspective of higher education.
I had a professor once tell me that it takes four weeks to either gain or lose student attention in an undergraduate class. While that obviously isn't a hard or fast rule, I think it's something to be mindful of when building our own curriculum. The atmosphere you set for your students right away matters, the content you give to your students right away matters, and the initial workload and assessment matters.
This is something I constantly struggle with myself as a teacher-- I'm still figuring out how to adjust my class time content to be something that is seen as relevant and important beyond what assignments are due and what grade students are going to earn. One of my primary goals of being here, and being a student instructor, is to practice and refine how I deliver content-- to make the value of it transparent to students in the class, and to make its application outside of class obvious.
Leah, I think your comment about it taking four weeks to either gain or lose attention is very interesting. Looking back at my time as an undergraduate, I think your professor was definitely on to something there. Especially in required classes, students may come in hoping that the class will turn out to be interesting, but certainly not expecting it to be so. It makes sense that they would with hold their judgement for a bit to see how the class will turn out. Of course, that makes it all the more important to make a good impression in those first weeks.
ReplyDeleteAny first time teacher is going to have their doubts, but I think that showing enthusiasm for the content is one way to reach our students, as adult learners, and to show them that what they are learning may have that all important relevance to their lives.
I like what you have here. I am definitely into everything you put here. I think you are right in the idea that this is good practice for when you are a full time professor after you get your doctorate. But, I also think this may, in some ways be harder than after you get your doctorate, like taking a grad level class as a sophomore or something along those lines. Once you are a professor you will mostly be teaching upperclassmen and graduate students that are English majors and are already interested in learning what you have to teach. These students on the other hand, are not all English majors and are only taking this class because they are required to. I think connecting and making these student become engaged in your class is much more difficult than what you will see in the years after you finish grad school.
ReplyDeleteThat being said, I may play devil's advocate to myself here, I have seen English majors lose interest in a class because they disagree with the readings they are supposed to do or the way the professor is teaching the class. The majors in a program can be very critical of anything and everything you have them do.
I like your extension or application of andragogy in various contexts. Good thinking about advocacy, agency, developing identity, etc., for instance. These should be motivating to all students, and increasingly are, but they may not focus on them as the primary motivating characteristics of learning in a course. Instead, they focus more on grades. They should see more internal motivation, though, as deep learning comes from this space, in a sustainable way, far more than grades.
ReplyDelete