Students never do prep any more!

[artschoolacademic]

Please tell me I'm not the only one who has tried everything to get students to do the set reading/ watching videos/ taking notes in preparation for taught sessions, only to have to change my teaching plans off the hoof when it turns out only very few have actually done it.

I'm literally only setting about 1/1.5 hours' worth to do outside of timetabled sessions, and I try and keep reading down to 3 or 4 pages at the most, and videos no more than 30-40 mins.

I teach art students. Don't they want to know about their subject??? Honestly, they just don't seem interested in the subject they chose to study.

NOTE: I am dyslexic myself, so I ensure that I give them advice on how to read these texts, and they have brilliant support from our academic skills team (should they choose to access it).

I'd love to hear if you have similar experiences.

Are these first year students? Art A level doesn't ask for this so maybe it's just an early learning curve?
My DD has just started Uni and has been quite surprised by the what she is expected to be familiar with going into seminars. She's an A* student so I'm confident she'll step up - but independent study is a skill to develop 😄

FWIW I have pointed out to her that the reading list is there for a reason!

I'm not in education.
But honestly I think lecturers should throw students out of lectures/seminars who haven't done the prep work.

I know that probably isn't allowed but still!

2nd year students. If anything, the first years are more keen. But I agree regarding A Level art. I'm in the fortunate position of having a few friends who teach the subject at A Level, so have a sense of where they are starting from. It is certainly clear that school does not prepare students for learning at this level. They really do expect to be fed everything piece by piece. The idea of taking themselves off to the library seems insane to them.

It's a problem at all levels - even masters. I'd love to be able to properly flip my masters seminars but I just can't rely on enough of them to do the prep.

At the start of my teaching career, I did just that. Only one person had done the reading, so I gave them permission to attend my other seminar, and told the others to come back when they'd done the reading. The following week, they'd all done the reading.

But that was 40 years ago. We're not allowed even to "call on" some students in class now.

But I can still tell when students haven't done the reading. I'm starting not to care. If they want to throw away their precious educational opportunities, then that's their loss.

but independent study is a skill to develop

The problem is that too many students (not all, and not the majority, but too many) nowadays are reluctant to put in the hard work to develop those skills.

They don't want to do anything too difficult or out of their comfort zone. If they don't understand something, their immediate reaction is that it's the fault of the lecturer who sets the work, and consequently "doesn't know how to teach."

The guidance we're being given for accessibility (and how we're doing g flipped learning) is to do shorter chunked recordings rather than one continuous online lecture? You may have ready done this but it means short topic recordings of 10 mins but several of them (so ultimately adding up to an hour or 1.5 hours. We find the students tend to engage with these more and if not completing the full set then at least completing enough to engage with the on campus small group sessions. We've also used expectation setting at the start of the modules and each week- sending out comms reminding them what the pre-face-to-face activities are, what this means for their oncampus sessions, and why they are important. Sorry if you've already been doing all this!!

Curious how those of you doing flipped learning are coping with the new UK visa regulations? I've always done flipped but now we are told that no more than 20% of a students contact time can be online and recorded videos are included in this. So I'd need up have 4 hours of tutorials for each student for one hour of prep videos.
Of course this only applies if you have visa students but I've found it has really disadvantaged alot of the students who were willing to do the prep work.

It’s the same at my place. There was a discussion around delivering online more in order manage staff shortages etc. Then someone pointed out the visa compliance issues would scupper that idea

For me - flipped learning requires reading but very little video content.

When I was in this position I just forged ahead with my plans for the session. Yes, it was excruciating for some, but it's not fair to abandon plans for the few who have actually done the reading.

I'm coming from an FE background though, so maybe I'm just more comfortable with students not doing their homework and making them squirm!

I know this isn't the main point. But the 'calling on' students, where that isn't allowed is typically part of LSPs in my experience it wouldn't be for all students.
Some students may be chronically ill, have fatigue, things like ADHD where it's better for them to be able to focus the way they do and interact, or students who they are having a flare up and have only just managed to attend. It's not applied to the vast majority and I know many professors, lectuers etc who use the socratic method throughout seminars etc.

Tbh id take a hard line and not adjust your plans, or dumb down for those that haven't made the effort, not fair on the students that have. I graduated 15 years ago, so not yesterday but not too far away. If we hadn't don't the reading we'd be asked to leave the tutorial and marked down on participation.

Art/Humanities Russel Group uni. What's this only setting 3 or 4 pages nonsense, can students not even cope with a full journal article or chapter anymore?

Is this a new thing or was it ever thus?

I've just retired from A level teaching (History) and I always made it plain that students needed to do the reading which was set for HW in advance of the lesson, so that they were actually aware of the background and could access what I was teaching and have some serious discussions on it.

If it was clear they hadn't done it I sent them away to do the reading, and they missed the teaching. That was their problem, but SLT were supportive of this approach.

I think I'd carry on with what I'd planned to do and give a hard Paddington stare to anyone who couldn't follow along with it. If they have chosen not to do the prep work necessary then they will struggle to access the lesson - it's not fair on the few that have done the work to be going over stuff they've already read/watched. And I'm buggered if I'd make extra work for myself having to change things due to students' lack of effort.

This.

I teach via in-person seminars with a list of required reading (probably about 10-12 hours of prep) for each seminar. I have my suspicions about how many of them do it.

Well it certainly was for the brief time I taught post graduate students. They would dodge the lectures and ask for the slides. Unlike other tutors, who regurgitated their lectures onto slides, an appalling use of slides anyway, I used slides just to illustrate a point and I made sure that they made no sense if they were all you had. Not sure it made much difference to the final grades but I enjoyed the mental exercise.

I’ve literally given up setting it with a very small number of exceptions. I set post session reading /activities instead for students who want to further /deepen their understanding of the topic.

Do you mean setting reading before tutorials? It's always been 'a thing', it was 10-12 articles or chapters per tutorial for my degree.

No, I meant students not doing the reading!

What's this only setting 3 or 4 pages nonsense, can students not even cope with a full journal article or chapter anymore?

How do you follow an author's development of his/her argument through to the conclusion if you don't read the whole article?

I'd think 3-4 pages reading for homework is what you'd ask of a Yr 7, not an undergraduate!

I find this odd, DD did A-levels at college and it was very much expected that they do study outside of lessons. Was supposed to be 5 hours a week for each subject, they even had self study sessions timetabled. Even with Art she did extra work herself.

Is this a thing lacking in schools at A-level?

She's finding her degree so far less stressful, she's only a 1st year though.

I did my PGCap more than 10 years ago and we were advised by the tutors, repeatedly, that we should not make a fuss about students not having done the reading, and in fact we should have alternative plans and activities to accommodate such students. "Mix them in groups so that those who have done the reading explain it to students who haven't", etc.
People on the course raised the issue that, if non-reading students can expect to be accommodated, this disincentivises doing the reading. "Well if this is the case you have to ask yourself what kinds of readings you are setting that students don't feel motivated enough to read them".
I was a very junior and influenceable lecturer by then (I wasn't actually even a lecturer, just a research fellow) and this completely sent the message to me that the institution (a RG university) wasn't going to support me in any way if I insisted students should do the reading.
(At the PGCap, seeing what the tutors' philosophy was, some people eventually stopped doing the readings and admitted so freely at the beginning of each class. To be fair to the tutors, they didn't make a fuss and generally tried to accommodate that - at least they were not complete hypocrites I guess).