A recent thread on the AMS discussion list examines what seems to be an abnormally high number of students who are repeating their music history/appreciation classes because they've failed them the first (or second!) time around. I have a number of second-timers in my theory classes, but I don't know that I've witnessed an increase in recent years.
Pursuant to that, the AMS is also hosting a pedagogy session at their 2010 meeting in Indianapolis that addresses teaching in the Digital Age. The CFP referenced a recent Chronicle of Higher Education Article on teaching naked (no, it's not what you think). Jose Bowen, the dean of the Meadows School of the Arts, has removed much of the technology from the classrooms there, suggesting that PowerPoint and similar systems diminish student involvement in the classroom. Students, apparently, are upset because they can no longer sit back and just passively receive information (from the article): "The lecture model is pretty comfortable for both students and professors, after all, and so fundamental change may be even harder than it initially seems, whether or not laptops, iPods, or other cool gadgets are thrown into the mix."
I agree with this, and it's certainly easy for me to do what's comfortable. I'm a big proponent of active learning (which I think is much easier to pull off in the harmony and aural skills classes than it is in the history classes--especially the large appreciation classes).
It's interesting to speculate if the two phenomena are related. The initial post to the AMS list wondered about altering content so that it was fresh to students. A number of respondents mentioned creating PowerPoint slides and the like. Many of the solutions proposed suggested giving the students a more active role in the classroom, one of which included using PowerPoint to deliver short oral quizzes at various parts in the lecture. Could it be that, because students are less engaged in the class--they have to do very little in the Age of PowerPoint--that they're less successful?
Thoughts?
Pursuant to that, the AMS is also hosting a pedagogy session at their 2010 meeting in Indianapolis that addresses teaching in the Digital Age. The CFP referenced a recent Chronicle of Higher Education Article on teaching naked (no, it's not what you think). Jose Bowen, the dean of the Meadows School of the Arts, has removed much of the technology from the classrooms there, suggesting that PowerPoint and similar systems diminish student involvement in the classroom. Students, apparently, are upset because they can no longer sit back and just passively receive information (from the article): "The lecture model is pretty comfortable for both students and professors, after all, and so fundamental change may be even harder than it initially seems, whether or not laptops, iPods, or other cool gadgets are thrown into the mix."
I agree with this, and it's certainly easy for me to do what's comfortable. I'm a big proponent of active learning (which I think is much easier to pull off in the harmony and aural skills classes than it is in the history classes--especially the large appreciation classes).
It's interesting to speculate if the two phenomena are related. The initial post to the AMS list wondered about altering content so that it was fresh to students. A number of respondents mentioned creating PowerPoint slides and the like. Many of the solutions proposed suggested giving the students a more active role in the classroom, one of which included using PowerPoint to deliver short oral quizzes at various parts in the lecture. Could it be that, because students are less engaged in the class--they have to do very little in the Age of PowerPoint--that they're less successful?
Thoughts?