By Vanessa Broadbent (The Cascade) – Email
Print Edition: January 21, 2015
How long have you been teaching at UFV?
This is my 26th year.
What do you teach?
English. I’m an Americanist but my practicum, my research, is in Victorian. I also teach classical backgrounds.
Have you taught at any other schools?
I have. I began at SFU and that was in the very early days as a sessional. I’ve taught at the odd place here and there.
How has UFV changed since you’ve worked here?
It’s a lot bigger. The students seem to have changed too. A lot of incoming students are not sufficiently prepared, and so we have to drop our standards year after year, for we have to get the students through, we’re told. But I’m not sure it’s a given that all students who leave Grade 12 have an aptitude for academic pursuits. Some have an aptitude for a trade. There’s nothing better about getting a degree than [there is about] finishing an apprenticeship, but many think that a piece of paper from a university is superior. Some people are just not cut out for university (and some of us are not cut out for a trade), but we have to get them through anyway — which can be misery for everybody concerned.
How have you found that UFV compares to other institutions where you have taught?
It used to be more teaching for us; that’s one way it’s changed. We were recognized as teaching professors. Now there’s more of a shift towards, we have to do all of what we were doing [as teachers], but we also now are regarded as research professors. Often the two can’t go together because when you’re teaching, the energy that goes into the teaching is so exhausting and it’s … against the kind of quietness that you need for the reflection and research. That’s one of the changes. How does it compare to other institutions? Well, it is a good place for a student to be. We are permitted to give students time and because of the smaller class sizes, we can know students and that’s wonderful. Depending on how we teach, it is possible to include everybody in the classroom. It depends on the pedagogical position of the teacher.
Do you find that the advancement of media and technology has changed your interactions with students?
Yes to a certain degree, but it doesn’t take long for students to adjust to the absence of technology. They very rapidly will cooperate with its absence and are able to function without media, without this constant stimulation … They are able to adjust to words and to create in their minds what words should be created.
How would you describe your teaching style?
Well I’ve always taught Socratically and that is … I know what I want to elicit and I’d rather elicit it from students than give it to them. By questioning, I can get them to think about something and that for me is my most important task — to awaken those powers of intuition, of emotional intelligence as opposed to the intellectual intelligence that seems to rise at a high school level, which probably says little of anything about the true nature of intelligence.
I also use a lot of collaborative learning. I simply do small group learning and that includes everybody because each person has a task, each person has a voice. The group works as individuals, in which they would respond in writing to questions that I give them and then those individuals pair to see what they’ve written, and then I put the two pairs in a group of four and they can blend what they’ve said so they can present it to the class. That way everybody is heard and often those who are the quietest in that group have the most to say. Generally, about five to 10 per cent of any given class will participate. That means you’re excluding 90 per cent of the students.
An education is not a passive activity. I can instruct, but I can’t educate. That’s something the student must do. I can remove some of the obstacles. I can encourage, I can cheer on the side, but unless the student is active, he or she will not get an education. I can’t give it to them, and by this comes learning. I can get them involved and I can break that passivity which can become a habit.
What is your opinion on standard evaluation compared to other universities that use a curve?
I don’t encourage it. You don’t need to grade in a curve. It’s not fair to them. You could have a class of all As — you wouldn’t, but it’s theoretically possible. It’s possible in democratic right. When you’ve taught at a variety of places, you have a sense of what’s required at each level and when the student has met the requirements for that. I don’t think we need to pay attention to what other universities are doing. We’ve gone through the university system ourselves and we’ve had some experience and we have an idea of what our standards should be. Should our standards be lower to accommodate? I don’t think they need to be; I think we need to be challenged. That’s why we need to challenge students and [instead] we want to allow the students to be comfortable. We can’t go anywhere unless we let go of what we find comfortable. If the stress level is always making students feel comfortable then we’re not doing the students a service. As I tell my students, if they get comfortable in my class, I’m not doing my job and I’d better get out. They’ve had too much of that in high school, building a self-esteem that’s not based in reality. Self-esteem is fine if it’s based on reality.
What is your approach to marking and evaluation?
I mark thoroughly so a student can see why he or she got the grade he or she put in it. I don’t give out grades that students don’t get themselves. My job is to find those grades so in a sense; it’s a process of discernment.
This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
