Cellphones in Class! ARGHH!

[TakeruK]

These are all very good and important points and I am glad you have taken the time to explain them to me! Your point that the other students do contribute to the overall learning environment is very true and it's something I didn't consider before. I agree that it is important as an instructor to ensure a positive learning environment when possible!

 

I also agree that in some circumstances, such as when you want to get a class discussing a topic together, it makes sense to ask students to put aside their laptops and contribute. I know that if I was in a group where a fraction of the class wasn't even into the topic, I probably wouldn't speak up either. 

 

I guess the tricky part is that there is no easy one-rule-fits-all answer to this. You make a good point that preventing instructors from banning technology at all can be harmful in some cases. But I also think that some of my former instructors have been too heavy handed in their own classroom policies and they tried to set some kind of environment that didn't sit well at all with the class and it was a very terrible experience for everyone. So, how to make sure that neither extreme case happens? 

 

I don't know. Maybe more training on pedagogy would be better. You said in the above post that we should know something about teaching, and I agree--we should. However, many of us have practically no training at all. TAs are generally just assigned a class and we learn from our past experience as a student while professors mostly learned to teach from their TA experience. The main issue with this is that all of us, all the graduate students, and especially the ones that end up as professors, are a very small subset of the student population. I think if we are not actively thinking about different perspectives, we might be fooling ourselves when we think what we liked/would have liked as a student would work when we are instructors. 

 

I really wish more graduate programs placed more emphasis on teaching and that we got this training from trained educators, not just other professionals in our own fields. I have only formally learned to teach for a Canadian youth group and that dynamic is very different from college students of course. The rest have been learned from trial and error but I don't think this is very effective. My graduate school orientations included a few hours on being a TA but it was more to do with general TA rules/policies than pedagogy. There has been occasional teaching workshops and they have been helpful but I wish for something for substantial and directly part of our graduate student training! 

[rising_star]

I've come around to having laptops and cell phones in class, as previously mentioned. Part of this was purely pragmatic. The digital versions of the texts we use are cheaper, sometimes 30-40% less than the paper version, which means most of my students are now using them. If I want them to bring their book to class, then that means letting them bring their Kindle, iPad, or laptop to class. My class right now is discussion-based but, sometimes we do in class activities where they look things up. Now, for all I know, one person is looking up the answer and the rest are on Facebook. But, if I ban all electronics, then I'm either preventing them from looking up answers in class or forcing them to buy the books in a more expensive form. I'm not willing to decide how students purchase their books, though I do try to make sure that the books are affordable in whichever form they access them (library reserves, digital, paperback, hardback).

[Karajan]

I've made it clear to my students that they are welcome to use their devices in class for looking up pertinent information and looking at the textbook in PDF form.  If they want to look at Facebook and not understand what's going on in class, that's their issue.  However, it becomes a problem when students are getting distracting by their peers' electronic device usage.  So, my new policy is that, unless you let me know that you're using your device for class purposes, you'll lose your participation point for the day if I see you using your laptop, etc.  I've had a student repeatedly use his laptop to watch YouTube videos during class; usually he has it on mute, but today he was even wearing his earphones in class -- Really brazen... 

[seeingeyeduck]

I've made it clear to my students that they are welcome to use their devices in class for looking up pertinent information and looking at the textbook in PDF form. If they want to look at Facebook and not understand what's going on in class, that's their issue. However, it becomes a problem when students are getting distracting by their peers' electronic device usage. So, my new policy is that, unless you let me know that you're using your device for class purposes, you'll lose your participation point for the day if I see you using your laptop, etc. I've had a student repeatedly use his laptop to watch YouTube videos during class; usually he has it on mute, but today he was even wearing his earphones in class -- Really brazen...

I guess for me the question is if students like that would participate even if they didn't have their device. I think it's fairly obvious if a student is using the tech to supplement their learning and is still paying attention to discussion, vs just completely surfing the web. At that point I don't know if it's the technology that's the problem. Banning technology is punishing everyone for the irresponsibility of a few distracted students.

The best approach to me would be to approach a student independently and ask what's up, if he's not finding the material engaging. If he really just wants to waste time in class, then it's his own grade that suffers. If others are looking over their shoulder instead of paying attention, again that's their own prerogative and their own participation grade that suffer. You should have enough self control to block that out by college. If you don't then, you take the consequences.

Edited February 27, 2014 by seeingeyeduck

[HicklePickle]

I guess for me the question is if students like that would participate even if they didn't have their device. I think it's fairly obvious if a student is using the tech to supplement their learning and is still paying attention to discussion, vs just completely surfing the web. At that point I don't know if it's the technology that's the problem. Banning technology is punishing everyone for the irresponsibility of a few distracted students.

The best approach to me would be to approach a student independently and ask what's up, if he's not finding the material engaging. If he really just wants to waste time in class, then it's his own grade that suffers. If others are looking over their shoulder instead of paying attention, again that's their own prerogative and their own participation grade that suffer. You should have enough self control to block that out by college. If you don't then, you take the consequences.

Honestly, I agree and I was the student on my phone. I didn't participate in class. If the professor banned cell phones, I would bring a book of sudoku. That's assuming that I even went to class, which was only when it was required for a grade. Now that I'm applying to grad school, I'm reevaluating my learning style, but 18-21 year old me really just wanted to read a book and learn at the desk in my bedroom. I'm not sure you can do much to make someone listen and participate if they really don't want to.

Note: this was in lecture halls of 300-400 students. It's probably different in smaller classes.

[reinhard]

One prof in my school threw a marker at a girl for answering and talking to her phone and told her to "STFU", hes known to swear a lot so this was "normal" in his class.

[overworkedta]

 

 

I am passionate about this argument because I really think schools should enforce a policy where professors are not allowed to create "no laptop" policies. I also do not think an instructor should be allowed to kick a student out of a classroom (if they are actually creating a disturbance/being violent/being unsafe, call security; if the instructor doesn't like a student's attitude, then too bad) or prevent a student who is late to class from entering (unless it is an exam and/or some other instance where academic integrity can be comprised) or prevent students from leaving class early. Profs should not threaten to damage students' cellphones if they are used in class (who takes these threats seriously anyways) or take a phone out of a student's hand and talk to whomever is on the other end. I also do not think they should have the authority to confiscate such items.

 

Basically, I think that a student's right to take a certain class using electronics (or even just plain not paying attention) takes priority over an instructor's preference that their students do not use cell phones or laptops.

 

Lots of good here but let me start with that last part.  The right of one shouldn't take away the rights of the REST of my students who are behaving, focused, etc.

 

My policy is this: laptops are allowed in my classroom in the last row and on the end seats where no one can see over your shoulder.  It's a small class with some viewing issues, so I get that students can be deeply impacted by what is going on in front of them (facebook).  I refuse to prohibit them because while I know MOST students take better notes on paper, some have learning disabilities or different learning styles. My sister has dyslexia and needs a computer/iPad for notes in ALL classes.  When her profs have a no-laptop policy that she is exempt from, it makes her feel AWFUL and she doesn't feel comfortable taking notes the way she needs and that impacts her performance.  So, I make these students sit in an area where they are free to play around and do whatever without bothering my other students.

 

Cell phones are a huge distraction to me, personally.  I have been downright distracted by someone constantly texting or sitting there with their iPod on.  Like, seriously?  My policy is one warning, then they will be excused.  I have stuck to this if it is particularly bothersome.  I don't teach well when I am constantly distracted.  Also, I have seen other students become distracted by it and I, myself, have had this issue as a student.

 

I want to promote a good learning environment but I also realize everyone is different and I need to pick my battles.

 

Threatening to destroy the property of ANYONE is just awful, in my book.  Disrespect will breed disrespect, so I don't think those policies are effective ways to teach students to "behave" in a studious manner.  I would have written off an instructor that had that policy.

[hashslinger]

My policy is this: laptops are allowed in my classroom in the last row and on the end seats where no one can see over your shoulder.  It's a small class with some viewing issues, so I get that students can be deeply impacted by what is going on in front of them (facebook).

 

That's interesting--I've actually instituted a slightly different policy, and it's worked well in my classes: I require people using laptops to sit in the front row. This seems counterintuitive, but I've discovered that the motivated, on-task, engaged students like to sit in the front row. (The non-motivated students often seem like they'd rather die of boredom in the back row before they sit right in front of me.) Therefore, I can generally trust that these students are, for the most part, using their computers for the innocuous business of taking notes. I also suspect that sitting in the front row would make you less inclined to pull up an embarrassing website or a dumb cat video--all those people behind you might see, of course. And I walk around a lot, meaning that I can easily see what the front-row people are really doing. 

 

And as you pointed out, students with learning disabilities use laptops. I wouldn't want to stick someone in the back row if they're already having trouble paying attention or taking notes.

 

I do suspect, however, that laptops don't aid as much in learning or note-taking as people think they do. Taking notes the old-fashioned way often forces people to slow down, listen more, and make choices about what to write down. Research actually confirms this. But I'm not going to stand in the way of someone really wanting to use their laptop to transcribe my lectures--or take notes, I mean.

 

I don't have any trouble asking people to put their laptops away when we move to a more discussion-oriented part of the class. If someone wants to disengage there, then that's fine. But they're going to have to resort to good old-fashioned daydreaming or doodling to do so.

 

Cell phones are a huge distraction to me, personally.  I have been downright distracted by someone constantly texting or sitting there with their iPod on.  Like, seriously?  My policy is one warning, then they will be excused.  I have stuck to this if it is particularly bothersome.  I don't teach well when I am constantly distracted.  Also, I have seen other students become distracted by it and I, myself, have had this issue as a student.

 

This, exactly. It's fucking distracting when someone looks down at their lap or desk every six seconds and laughs or smiles. I don't think it's fair to say to a distracted student, "Well, you'll just have to learn to have more self-control and block that out." I'm not the world's concentration champion, and I don't expect my students to be either.

[overworkedta]

Yeah, I like that the classroom is in a perfect semi-circle.  Everyone has a good view of everything, though in certain positions, which is why it can distract.  I have about 4-5 students that sit on the edges of the first two rows so they are closer to take notes, though.  It was a compromise suggested by a student and I took it to heart.  If I get a room like this again where the first two rows have seats that don't have seats behind them, I will allow for the same policy.  But your solution is also really interesting.  I might consider that in another room.

[ZiggyPhil]

I guess for me the question is if students like that would participate even if they didn't have their device. I think it's fairly obvious if a student is using the tech to supplement their learning and is still paying attention to discussion, vs just completely surfing the web. At that point I don't know if it's the technology that's the problem. Banning technology is punishing everyone for the irresponsibility of a few distracted students.

The best approach to me would be to approach a student independently and ask what's up, if he's not finding the material engaging. If he really just wants to waste time in class, then it's his own grade that suffers. If others are looking over their shoulder instead of paying attention, again that's their own prerogative and their own participation grade that suffer. You should have enough self control to block that out by college. If you don't then, you take the consequences.

 

I don't think this is a reasonable interpretation of what's happening.  If you sit behind someone playing youtube videos all class (especially if you sit diagonally behind them, so that their body is not blocking the screen), you will inevitably be distracted through no fault of your own.  Would you let some students talk all through class, and say to the others that they should have the self-control to ignore the other conversations going on in the room?  Of course not, and the only difference is that the instructor can hear the talking, but can't see the screen.

[seeingeyeduck]

Well, the difference is that you can direct where your eyes look but you can't just close your ears. I said that cuz I've been in lectures where I've been behind someone who's playing RPGs and well, I just look at the board or prof instead of their screen. It's a 15" screen that's at least 4 ft in front of me - it's not like it fills my visual field.

I also agree with the poster who brought up disability issues. Plus I just don't think it's fair to try to decide what tech to allow. What if only laptops are allowed, not phones but you don't have a laptop and do have a phone? In that case would you have to spend extra time on typing up your handwritten notes just because the professor made an arbitrary decision?

I understand of you actually notice one student doing problematic things and you ask him to put away a device or deal with circumstances as they arise. I don't understand starting the term out with a ban just in case, when maybe in truth there would have been no problems at all. At any rate, I have never actually run into a class where the professor banned devices so maybe the point is moot. Maybe once a phone rings in lecture and he addresses it right there but it's never been a recurring problem.

Plus I don't think it prepares students for the real world if you try to create the perfect atmosphere. In most work environments they have to deal with distractions from others and work in less than ideal places so I don't see why it's necessary to assume they can only learn and use their minds when there are zero distractions. Some kids goof off in class and still get the material. Not sure why they need to be told to conform if they're not bothering anyone and they still grasp the material in the end.

Edited March 4, 2014 by seeingeyeduck

[TakeruK]

After reading everyone's useful thoughts and opinions, I think it might be worth it to distinguish different cases because there are so many different types of classroom environments! 

 

1. "Large" lecture-style class (large=more than 30 people). In my field, it's usually a professor teaches this type of class, not a graduate student. This type of class generally has little student participation and mostly involves the instructor conveying a bunch of material to the class. Maybe there are clicker questions or a few minutes where students are encouraged to discuss a question with their neighbours. I think in this case, I agree with seeingeyeduck and what I originally wrote before about disabilities and also a student's right to do whatever they want. Usually in these classes, there are people actually having side conversations while the lecture is going on anyways. I think that in this case, an individual's right to take notes the way they prefer trumps the right of others to a completely distraction free environment. I think it's worth it for there to be distractions so that everyone can choose the way they take notes. So, I would not think the instructor should have the right to create rules like "no laptops" or require a student to sit in a certain area of the room (although perhaps they might say something like "if you want to goof off, do it _____"). I mean, what are you going to do if a student shows up with his/her laptop? I don't think the professor has the right to kick a student out of class or force someone to move. It's the professor's job to teach the class and the student's right to be in the class (because they are registered and have paid their fees). Professors should not treat attendance at their classes as a privilege. 

 

2. "Small" discussion-group classes (in my experience, usually 10-20 people--the 20-30 people range is the grey zone). In my field, these classes are usually run by a TA and while the TA might clarify or explain a few confusing concepts from lecture, the main role of the class is to discuss a few discussion topics prepared by the TA or whatever comes up during the course of the class session. In this case, I agree with hashslinger. In cases where a cooperative group dynamic is necessary, you kind of need everyone to be on board or the discussion group might end up being 4 people talking and 15 people playing on their phones or computers. I think this kind of situation is where the instructor and class should decide on the rules of discussion together in order to create a positive environment. These rules should include things like how to properly disagree with someone, how to respectfully listen, and rules about electronics. When this discussion happens though, the instructor should be open to what the students want out of their discussion group instead of just using this time to railroad the class into accepting whatever rules they had defined ahead of time. 

 

3. "Small" tutorial/recitation type classes. In my field, these are optional 1-hour sessions that primarily focuses on review of lecture material and homework help. It's basically a Q&A type session where the TA and/or prof answers questions from the class about the assignments or lecture or other examples. I think these sessions should be super informal and most of the time, the question being asked/answered is not relevant to a fraction of the class, and this fraction often will work on other things or use their phones/computers to do whatever. 

 

4. Lab classes. Here, students are either in small groups or individually working on something at a computer (if it's like a programming class) or a lab bench (if it's a "wet" lab). In this case, I enforce no phone/no laptop rules if the experiment they are doing means that the phone/laptop distraction causes a safety concern. Otherwise I know that many students have the lab manual/instructions on their phones/laptops to save on printing costs. In these labs, I also try to uphold an "on-task" working environment because goofing off usually means that they won't finish their experiment within the 3 hours and I'm not willing to open the lab after hours (and supervise, for safety reasons). If I see goofing off, I'll remind them of their time limit and if the entire group or individual decides that they want to goof off, then it's their problem and they will not finish. Oh well. I will only strongly intervene if a group is distracting another group, or if parts of a group is goofing off (e.g. one lab partner just playing on their phone while the other does all the work). Usually I will not give credit to the part of the group that is not actually doing the work (with proper warning). If necessary, reassigning groups might remove the unfairness of one person doing all the work.

 

So I agree with hashslinger from earlier on in this thread that we can't have campus-wide rules because there are a lot of different environments. I also think that we should keep these different environments in mind in this discussion because I think we should modify our feelings towards distractions and electronics based on the context and environment.

[hashslinger]

So, I would not think the instructor should have the right to create rules like "no laptops" or require a student to sit in a certain area of the room (although perhaps they might say something like "if you want to goof off, do it _____"). I mean, what are you going to do if a student shows up with his/her laptop? I don't think the professor has the right to kick a student out of class or force someone to move.

 

I sometimes teach classes that are these hybrid lecture/discussion things. There are about 50 people. Sometimes it's lecture; then it transitions to discussion. (A challenging set-up, no doubt.) So sometimes we'll start out in rows and then break off into smaller discussion groups or a large circle. It's cool if they want to use their laptops while I'm going through the material, but when we all sit down and face each other for discussion, then we go into non-technology mode (and there's really no need for it at that point since we're usually sitting there with the books open, doing close-readings and all else). The policy has worked for me so far. My students know that's the rule going in. I never have to force anyone to move; I've never kicked anyone out of class. (Seriously?) The policy has actually been reviewed favorably in anonymous course evaluations. If the students were super opposed to it, then I might rethink. But students feel it's a good compromise.

 

I'm not knocking what anyone else does--and obviously we're talking about different situations here--but I would never say to a student, "if you want to goof off, go do it ______." I teach my class with the assumption that those who are there want to learn and have come to learn. I would never approach a class with the assumption that there are people who *aren't* there to learn. If someone wants to goof off, then they shouldn't come to class. None of my professors would have ever said such a thing to us--they didn't hold us in such low esteem. So, I don't believe in giving people a green light to goof off, even if they're in a certain area. I just ... don't believe in setting expectations that low; seriously, these are adults, not high school students who goof off. I personally believe our students should meet us half way, not that we should bend over backwards to make things super easy and palatable for them--or, on the contrary, that we should hold them to impossibly high standards. It's about meeting somewhere in the middle. (For the record, no one in my class ever blatantly "goofs off," so I assume that my approaching students with the assumption that they're adults actually does the trick, though I don't run a lab where that sort of thing might happen more frequently.)

 

And what if someone shows up late and doesn't get the seat they want? It's never really happened. If it does, they can always use a notebook. I'm fairly certain that's not the end of the world. I've never had a student complain because they had to physically write things down. (If someone came to me and said that they REALLY wanted to use their laptop even though they couldn't sit in whatever spot, I'd probably make an exception.) I think that people are making too big a deal about having to physically take notes. I've seen many students in large lectures (where there are no restrictions) actually elect to take handwritten notes--I'd say an overwhelming majority, where I go to school. I'd argue that being able to take notes in a variety of different formats is actually a good skill to develop. More than that, it's a skill that most students have already developed. I don't think most are as dependent on technology for learning as we like to assume. And to be honest, I think that many understand that technology these days often goes hand-in-hand with entertainment. If a professor doesn't allow laptops for whatever reason, most understand why, and most don't think of it as an "arbitrary" rule.

 

I'm still not seeing the big deal with organizing a classroom the way one sees fit. Just because the students "have paid for it," it doesn't mean that they somehow own it, or that I am their employee or their waiter or whatever. The world might be capitalist, but education, as far as I'm concerned, is still a public good, and I'm beholden to the greater commonwealth, not to the individual student who believes he "pays my salary." (He doesn't.) As long as education remains a public good (and doesn't get subsumed into some for-profit conglomerate), I'm going to try to teach in a way that benefits the greatest number of people rather than in a way that elevates and caters to the desires of the individual. When people say things like, "Well, they paid for it, by not paying attention they're wasting their own money, but that's their decision to make," I don't disagree, but I'm not entirely comfortable with that attitude. You can't force someone to learn or pay attention, sure, and ultimately the burden is on them to decide. But ... I'm not comfortable with such an individualistic attitude toward the classroom since the classroom is still a place where people come to learn collaboratively (even in a lecture). I was at college not *that* long ago, and that kind of attitude seriously wasn't an issue. It was just expected that if you went into a classroom, you were going to conduct yourself in a certain way--not talk and laugh with your friends or be a dick. (Honestly, other students wouldn't put up with people who were a drag on the class, and a lot of times there was peer pressure to not be a shithead.) The professor had a right to expect a basic respect for the class and a few rules. No one ever thought they were tyrants or egomaniacs. It was just that we were adults who elected to come to class. Really, the whole "I paid for it; I get to be a dick if I want" perspective is fairly new.

 

However, if we are going to take a more "for-profit" capitalist model here, then we might as well acknowledge that other students are also paying really good money to sit in a classroom. Why do we assume that the individual who wants to goof off pays more of my salary than the person who wants to pay attention? Who do I ultimately "service," in this situation?

 

 

 

When this discussion happens though, the instructor should be open to what the students want out of their discussion group instead of just using this time to railroad the class into accepting whatever rules they had defined ahead of time.

 

I agree with this for the most part. Obviously, if your students absolutely hate the way you're running your class, then you need to stop and reevaluate. However, I also want to say that I think it's okay for teachers and professors to be an authority figure. Seriously, it's okay. The TA/instructor *is* in charge and should take the lead. I assume that you [a general "you"] know a thing or two about teaching and your subject. Even if you don't have a lot of training. Even the 22-year-old TA who's been teaching for two weeks knows more than their students and has a right--an obligation--to take the lead. There's nothing wrong with being an authority in your class or with defining the curriculum or guiding people through discussion points. It's why you're there, right? (I knew people who used to allow their students to pick the readings and design the syllabus. Hint: the students always pick the shortest readings.) I think that, in our efforts to be as student-centered as possible, we've started to conceptualize "authority" as a dirty word. But I'd argue that people who cede the classroom agenda to their students entirely do them a great disservice because most don't know what they're supposed to get out of the class at this point. (At 18, I didn't know what I was supposed to get out of college.)

 

I even think it's okay to have classroom policies that some students may find a little unlikable. For instance, if you want to randomly call on people or solicit participation, that's okay. It's not something that I do personally, but I don't think that people who do are automatically cruel tyrants. Different teachers have different pedagogical methods, and though it's unpopular to say this these days, I think that they have a right to use the pedagogical methods that they have found to be productive, within reason. You have to look at more than just students' desires when you're leading a class. If students are performing well, learning, engaged, etc., then it's okay to put aside their gripes and personal complaints. Like, some of my students hate group work, but I've routinely found that it's been productive for starting class discussions. So we do group work, with some modifications. Oh well. Being a teacher doesn't mean just doing what's popular among students, or being a beloved figure. IMO, the same principle applies to certain uses of technology. 

Edited March 4, 2014 by hashslinger

[seeingeyeduck]

That all sounds reasonable. Guess I've just personally never had a bad discussion experience where people had laptops open even when it was only 20 people. But actually maybe it's easier with smaller groups since it is easy for everyone to see who is doing what, so unless someone is totally shameless, they mostly stay on task...

[hashslinger]

That all sounds reasonable. Guess I've just personally never had a bad discussion experience where people had laptops open even when it was only 20 people. But actually maybe it's easier with smaller groups since it is easy for everyone to see who is doing what, so unless someone is totally shameless, they mostly stay on task...

 

And hey, whatever works for you is great. At the end of the day, I really do believe that it's all about the instructor's comfort level with certain things. I think some people like a classroom where things are loose and people are multitasking, and more power to them. I just think it's important to let students know your expectations. Most, I've found, are pretty willing to get on board. Most understand that teachers have different styles.

 

Perhaps my aversion to laptops is symptomatic of being in my 30s. When I was in college you basically just brought your notebook and book to class and sat quietly no matter how boring the professor was. You fought to stay awake sometimes, but that was that. There was a clear demarcation between how you behaved in the classroom and how you really felt inside. No one at my college even put their heads down on a desk--it would have been social suicide (and we weren't scholars by any means). I always automatically assumed that the classroom was a place where you forked over something resembling respect, no matter how much you really didn't care about the subject. 

 

But I do agree that technology has its upsides and that we can't ban it altogether. And I will say that most students who use laptops in my class are respectful. I did have a few exceptions in a recitation I TA'd last year (where the policies were not my own). I had a few students who were clearly gaming the entire time. One was in the middle of the room, banging on the keyboard and a distraction to others. A couple of times I turned to him with a factual question, asking him if he didn't mind looking something up. It usually took a couple long seconds before he realized that I was actually talking to him, and he was so distracted that he'd have no idea what I had just asked.

 

The other one sat in the back, smiling and chuckling at his laptop. This was distracting to me.

Edited March 5, 2014 by hashslinger

[TakeruK]

I actually agree with everything you said above (in post #38), hashslinger! Especially the way you would divide up complex situations like half-lecture, half-discussion. 

 

My opinions towards "too much instructor authority" were more strongly worded maybe because I have been in plenty of classes where the instructor was on a "power trip" or tried to assert more authority than necessary which just created a bad atmosphere for the class. In addition, they might employ threats such as "I will kick you out of my class if you do _____" and it's basically clear that these threats are empty so my reaction is mostly annoyance that someone is unnecessarily throwing their weight/rank/authority around. I would say that we are basically expressing more or less the same teaching/authority philosophies but maybe we are just approaching it from different ways. I mean that if I use your text above to describe my teaching philosophy, it would be a very good description.

 

I also agree with you that teacher-student relationship is not the same as employee-client. When I brought up that the student has the right to be there, I don't mean that we are employed or paid by the student. As you said, even if we take this mindset, we have to also consider the other "paying students". However, when I said the student has the right to be in the class, I don't mean it specifically in the sense that they are a "paying customer", but that we, as an instructor, cannot override University policies. To me, this means that I don't "own" the room I am teaching in, I have no right to bar entry to my students, or prevent people from leaving so it really irks me when an instructor tries to implement rules like "if you're late, don't bother coming" or "every minute of my lecture is important, you are not allowed to leave for bathroom breaks", or requiring you to ask permission to take a break (this is not high school!) etc. I know this is only a minority of people that do this, but I guess some of the posts in this thread reminded me of these "tyrannical" professors! Another pet peeve is when instructors don't think the bell/schedule applies to them and goes beyond their allotted class time. I have other classes to go to! This is the type of authority that I think professors and TAs should not try to throw around in the classroom environment. Setting an atmosphere of positive discussion is obviously fine! (For the record, I think it is perfectly fine and completely respectful for a student who needs to use the bathroom or answer a phone call or stretch their legs to just get up and leave, then come back.) 

 

When I am in charge of a class, I try to generally see myself less of an authority figure and more of a "leader". That is, I don't see my main role as "parenting" or enforcing rules. My main goal is to be their ally, working with the students "against" the course material. I take authority through leadership, and like you said, guide them through the material and maintain positive work environment etc. when necessary. I do enforce rules and class policies when necessary--e.g. late deadlines etc. but I avoid doing things in the paragraph above. 

[seeingeyeduck]

And hey, whatever works for you is great. At the end of the day, I really do believe that it's all about the instructor's comfort level with certain things. I think some people like a classroom where things are loose and people are multitasking, and more power to them. I just think it's important to let students know your expectations. Most, I've found, are pretty willing to get on board. Most understand that teachers have different styles.

Perhaps my aversion to laptops is symptomatic of being in my 30s. When I was in college you basically just brought your notebook and book to class and sat quietly no matter how boring the professor was. You fought to stay awake sometimes, but that was that. There was a clear demarcation between how you behaved in the classroom and how you really felt inside. No one at my college even put their heads down on a desk--it would have been social suicide (and we weren't scholars by any means). I always automatically assumed that the classroom was a place where you forked over something resembling respect, no matter how much you really didn't care about the subject.

But I do agree that technology has its upsides and that we can't ban it altogether. And I will say that most students who use laptops in my class are respectful. I did have a few exceptions in a recitation I TA'd last year (where the policies were not my own). I had a few students who were clearly gaming the entire time. One was in the middle of the room, banging on the keyboard and a distraction to others. A couple of times I turned to him with a factual question, asking him if he didn't mind looking something up. It usually took a couple long seconds before he realized that I was actually talking to him, and he was so distracted that he'd have no idea what I had just asked.

The other one sat in the back, smiling and chuckling at his laptop. This was distracting to me.

Yeah, I think it's good to deal with those kind of students and let them know you're zeroing out their participation grade if there is one if they keep doing it.

It's funny we got into this debate since I actually really hate taking notes on a laptop so I mostly use notebooks. I will pull out the phone if necessary but other than that I just hate lugging a computer everywhere...

[hashslinger]

When I am in charge of a class, I try to generally see myself less of an authority figure and more of a "leader". That is, I don't see my main role as "parenting" or enforcing rules.

 

Agree there! Lords, I would never recommend that a TA or instructor (or professor) conceptualize themselves as a parent. I do think of our students as adults, not high school kids who need rules. And I think that 95% of college students are very willing to see themselves as adults and to behave accordingly. I've always been a big believer that if you treat people reasonably, they will respond reasonably.

 

My general rule for myself is that I always try to explain to my students the rationale behind doing things so that rules never seem "arbitrary." Like, I explain the no-laptops-in-discussion rule by stating that we really don't need computers when we're close-reading the text and having a discussion. Today I did a midterm eval and discovered that some students don't understand the rationale behind some of the assignments, so I'll have to explain those assignments better. But I don't think "authority" is a bad thing to have, as long as you don't abuse it. TBH, I think students actually *want* the teacher to exert authority sometimes. On the few occasions that I've had to throw my weight around a bit (never a pleasant thing, and something I'm not comfortable doing), I've actually had students come up to me later and thank me.

 

We often think that our students want us to be freewheeling and fun and willing to give up authority rather than asserting it; really, I've discovered that most students hate classmates who are disruptive. I think they actually side with the professor more often than they side with the annoying texting leaving-early classmate. On the occasions when I haven't asserted authority--when I was too worried about alienating the class with a show of authority--I've regretted it when I got back the evals to find comments like, "instructor didn't seem to have control in the classroom." I actually think that students are far more forgiving of a hard-line cellphone policy than an instructor who lets annoying people have sway.  They'll never like the assignments or certain policies--or probably even you--but if you allow the classroom to go dirty Alabama south, then you can count on really bad evals for sure. Students seem to hate incompetence above all else.

 

I personally would not ever bar students from entering my classroom late. However, I do have an attendance policy (connected to a participation grade). I explain to my students that if they come late there's no guarantee that they'll be counted as present, and that excessively disruptive lateness won't do them any favors in the participation category. I'm also fine with counting someone absent if they come just to be counted present and then leave. I wouldn't physically stop them from leaving (how would you even do that?--or why would you want to? If someone really doesn't want to be there, then I don't want them there!), but I've got no problem with stating upfront that there are consequences.

 

So, while I would never block someone from coming into class, I actually don't fault instructors who do. I don't think it's an arbitrary rule. Late people can be really disruptive, depending on the classroom you're in. My astronomy professor in undergrad would not allow people to walk in while he was giving a demonstration, and after getting locked out once I made sure to get there on time for the rest of the semester. I'd go so far as to say that walking in really late is probably more disruptive than playing games on your laptop. When a student barrels in late, whatever we've been doing or talking about is off the rails for a few seconds. Again, it hurts the other students. So, I see where those profs are coming from, even though it's a battle that I've chosen not to have. For me personally, I feel that the best route is to just state upfront that lateness is not really acceptable and that there are consequences. (I don't know if my university actually has a policy on what professors can or can't allow in their classrooms.)

Edited March 5, 2014 by hashslinger

[ZiggyPhil]

I guess I'm not really seeing how visual distraction from laptops is any different from audible distraction from talking.  Neither actually blocks the information from the professor, but both create unavoidable extraneous stimuli that distract attention from the lecture.  You can't close your eyes in a lecture any more than you can close your ears without missing important information.

 

Here's a study that suggests that the distraction from others' laptops is in fact the number one distraction in modern classrooms, even more distracting than other students talking:

 

http://www.mcla.edu/Academics/uploads/textWidget/3424.00018/documents/laptop_use_in_the_classroom.pdf

 

On the other hand, I am in agreement about avoiding arbitrary rules, and I have no interest in forcing students to learn who are intent on zoning out during class.  My only concern is the effect on other students, and that's why I've settled on only allowing laptop use in the back row, where that is not an issue (of course with exceptions in the case of physical impairments that preclude that option).

[overworkedta]

I guess I'm not really seeing how visual distraction from laptops is any different from audible distraction from talking.  Neither actually blocks the information from the professor, but both create unavoidable extraneous stimuli that distract attention from the lecture.  You can't close your eyes in a lecture any more than you can close your ears without missing important information.

 

Here's a study that suggests that the distraction from others' laptops is in fact the number one distraction in modern classrooms, even more distracting than other students talking:

 

http://www.mcla.edu/Academics/uploads/textWidget/3424.00018/documents/laptop_use_in_the_classroom.pdf

 

On the other hand, I am in agreement about avoiding arbitrary rules, and I have no interest in forcing students to learn who are intent on zoning out during class.  My only concern is the effect on other students, and that's why I've settled on only allowing laptop use in the back row, where that is not an issue (of course with exceptions in the case of physical impairments that preclude that option).

 

This.  My first day of college I had a class in a lecture hall with about 550 people.  It was a math class and I got stuck next to someone with a 17'' laptop who was watching PORN on it.  It was incredibly distracting to me to try and focus and it's not like I was trying to watch porn in class.  i can only imagine how distracting that could be to someone like 2 rows back or directly behind this guy.  I reported it to a TA who excused him but it was ridiculous.

 

It's very distracting when someone is watching videos on facebook and you are sitting either directly next to them or behind them.  I say that from personal experience.  And most students WON'T say anything.  I rarely did in my 4 years of school and laptops were far less common back then than now when everyone has one that they bring or a tablet.  They just weren't that portable back then.

[TakeruK]

This.  My first day of college I had a class in a lecture hall with about 550 people.  It was a math class and I got stuck next to someone with a 17'' laptop who was watching PORN on it.  It was incredibly distracting to me to try and focus and it's not like I was trying to watch porn in class.  i can only imagine how distracting that could be to someone like 2 rows back or directly behind this guy.  I reported it to a TA who excused him but it was ridiculous.

 

I think this would also be considered a different case because it is sexual harassment, not just a distraction. I hope when you said the TA excused him, he meant that the TA asked the person to leave the class (instead of make an excuse for this person)!

[Mr. Hobbes]

I approach this in a few ways. Every once and awhile when I enter the class, with a few minutes before class starts, I make a point of saying something like "Oh! I have to turn my phone off." This helps hint to kids my expectations without me having to be mean about it. I'm not sure if this strategy would work in a large lecture hall, though. On other occasions, I'll embarrass a goofball for playing games or shopping if I catch them, but in a somewhat nonconfrontational way, saying things like "Woah! You just got the high score? Fantastic!" or "Are you kidding? Those shipping costs are way too high." I've only done that twice and gotten a laugh both times. The kids don't appear too ashamed, but they figrue it out enough to knock it off for a bit. I facilitate a gen-ed discussion section, so I can understand why some of the students drift. They're just fulfilling credits.

Edited March 7, 2014 by Mr. Hobbes

[overworkedta]

I think this would also be considered a different case because it is sexual harassment, not just a distraction. I hope when you said the TA excused him, he meant that the TA asked the person to leave the class (instead of make an excuse for this person)!

 

Actually, this is tricky.  A good friend of mine (a grad student) was told that he couldn't report a student for watching porn anymore than anything else because of "academic freedom" and the policies at our public university.  Another friend was in the library studying and went to report someone watching torture porn on one of the huge mac screens and the librarian said again that because of the 1st Amendment protections provided, they couldn't ask the person to leave.  For that, I give you various case law and the case against "obscenity" made by SCOTUS but that's a lot to explain to the administration of a school with a law school, apparently.  *head desk*  At IU, I don't know what the policy was.

 

And, yes, the TA excused the student as in, sent them packing!

[TakeruK]

Actually, this is tricky.  A good friend of mine (a grad student) was told that he couldn't report a student for watching porn anymore than anything else because of "academic freedom" and the policies at our public university.  Another friend was in the library studying and went to report someone watching torture porn on one of the huge mac screens and the librarian said again that because of the 1st Amendment protections provided, they couldn't ask the person to leave.  For that, I give you various case law and the case against "obscenity" made by SCOTUS but that's a lot to explain to the administration of a school with a law school, apparently.  *head desk*  At IU, I don't know what the policy was.

 

And, yes, the TA excused the student as in, sent them packing!

 

I'm not a law expert but I have had some training in workplace harassment and sexual harassment in general (required for all public service employees in some parts of Canada, which includes graduate TAs). Although I have had a bit of similar training in the US during orientation and other workshops, the laws of US and Canada are similar enough that it's entirely possible that I will confuse one for the other in cases with subtle differences!

 

So, my interpretation of what is happening here would be that it is sexual harassment because (at least in Canada, but I think this was covered in my US grad orientation too) for someone to show sexually explicit materials to another person without their consent. A workplace (e.g. the school/the classroom) should be free of harassment so I am confused why this is "academic freedom". Obviously, every person, student or otherwise, should be free to watch whatever they want (as long as it's not illegal) in privacy but I don't think it is reasonable to infringe on others' rights to a harassment-free workplace/classroom in order to uphold an individual's first amendment rights.

 

I don't know if there is a US equivalent, but the very first article of the Canadian Charter of Rights & Freedoms is 

The Canadian Charter of Rights & Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society. (emphasis added).

And in Canada, there are laws that prescribe that workplaces/classrooms should be harassment free. So, to me, it completely makes sense for a student to not be able to watch pornography (and thus make other people see it without their consent) in public places such as classrooms and libraries. But that was in Canada -- is there not some similar restrictions to the US Bill of Rights?

 

Like I said above, I am not a law expert! But my previous harassment training would definitely tell me to talk to someone / escalate it if I saw something like that happening at my school!

[danieleWrites]

I've never been near someone who watched porn during class, but I was near one who torrented anime. I poked him enough to get his attention and told him to get away from me or I'd start yelling and force the prof to do something. If it had been porn, I would have started yelling like a wet cat. Oh My Gawd, dude, we're in class. If you want to spank the monkey get a room. That looks like one of the Golden Girls! She's naked! Gross! What can I say, humiliation is a spectator sport.

This has been an interesting thread and I'm really glad someone started it and that so many people have had so many well-thought replies. I've learned a lot.

I've TA'd and adjuncted and then TA'd again for years. I started out with a draconian cell phone policy, mostly because my fellow students' texting habits always hosed up lecture for me. At first. And then I got all bent out of shape as the first semester wore on. I eventually figured out that cellphones and computers (all electronic devices, really) have three issues involved: attention, student learning outcomes, and disrespect.

Attention is what we all seem to focus on. They can't pay attention if they're texting. They keep others from paying attention. And so on. We all know that there's a direct correlation between the amount of attention paid in class and student learning outcomes. Disrespect is where, in my unresearched opinion, the upset comes from. After all, we don't grind our teeth and arrrrgh! when they're doodling or peeling their split ends. It's the electronic devices that do it for us. And it's not just that by texting they're disrespecting the teacher, they're also disrespecting other students, and the people who are footing the bill for their education.

In the end, I think the cell phone thing and computer thing comes down to control. By banning the use of devices and punishing students (participation points, asking them to leave, making jokes about why they're smiling at their hands moving in their laps--or is that just me?) we are trying to control how they use their attention. We might have the best of intentions in doing so, but even if we collected all electronic devices at the door, we still can't control how they use their attention. I wrote, pencil and spiral notebook, my first novel during algebra 1. The outcomes for both sucked.

Personally, I've decided this is a battle that can't be won because ultimately, it's a battle for their attention in class, not over a device. I don't have participation points, don't have attendance points, and ignore devices unless they're bothering others. Instead, my first day of class is all about the word adult and my relationship with them, as adults. I tell them I love teaching, but kids give me hives so I picked college for a venue, and we should now have a moment of pitying silence for my child who managed to be well-adjusted despite his mom. I tell them that they're adults now, legally if not emotionally, and it's not my job to parent them. It's my job to provide the education they paid for the opportunity to have. We discuss how much it costs. There's even math. I like math. Amortizing student loans on the board in a composition class? Priceless! I explain why I don't bother with attendance points, participation points, and what not. They serve no pedagogical purpose beyond directly incentivizing good student behavior. Then we talk about the relationship between grades and participation.

Though, I do like the idea of reseating device-zombies on the peripheries.

Anyway, whether these things work or not for my students? The only device-use change I've noticed between my Stalin phase and my it's all cool, brah, phase is that they put them on the desk instead of in their laps. It does work for me, personally. I'm way more zen these days, and I have noticed a major shift in the number of students who will approach me for help, clarification, and whatnot. Stalin is not a good look on me, apparently.

Edited March 9, 2014 by danieleWrites