I was really bothered by the NY Times article (which I just read, thanks for calling it to our attention). Not about student e-mails, but about how faculty responded. A lot (not all) of the faculty responses in the article seemed to focus on deference and power, and many don't seem to understand the nature of e-mail as a communications medium. Consider the following (quoted from near the end of the article):
"But student e-mail can go too far, said Robert B. Ahdieh, an associate professor at Emory Law School in Atlanta. He paraphrased some of the comments he had received: "I think you're covering the material too fast, or I don't think we're using the reading as much as we could in class, or I think it would be helpful if you would summarize what we've covered at the end of class in case we missed anything." What is going "too far" about those messages? Wouldn't a conscientious instructor want to know that s/he was not communicating effectively? Or the final quote in the article that states that the less powerful person always should respond with a thank-you. Heck, this shouldn't be about power; anyone who has received a courtesy should say thank-you (e.g., that's a reason for acknowledging use of another's work in a bibliography). These faculty have an exclusively power-based model of the faculty-student relationship that only encourages the behavior they are objecting to, and also encourages the critics of alleged faculty excesses (whom most of us I assume dislike) who seem to grab a lot of press. In 30 years of teaching at a small liberal arts college (I retired last August), I rarely if ever encountered any of the excesses complained about in the article or by a few of the responses here at TeachSoc. And I was among the first faculty to communicate extensively with students by e-mail, starting back when we only had text-based e-mail clients, and had several courses which required use of e-mail (e.g., one in which weekly quiz answers and any subsequent student questions were handled only by e-mail, saving me class time in going over them unless absolutely necessary). Aside from the different dynamic at small colleges, I attribute this to the following policies: * Always treat students with respect. These are adolescents, not full adults. Cut 'em some slack. I don't suppose YOU ever said anything stupid when you were a teenage college student! (I won't reveal my retrospective embarassments) E-mail has the disadvantage of memorializing things that should have been considered more carefully before being put into print. Most college students I've encountered are at a sensitive transitional time, uncertain of themselves, easily subject to ego bruising. Faculty are in a power position to uplift them or do great damage and cause defensive reactions, often by behavior on our part so subtle that it's hard for us to see what we've done. So I was very tolerant about what people asked me. * Social graces (as we used to call them) don't seem to be taught as widely these days; that's of course a sociological question for another discussion. So you may indeed need to do some remedial Etiquette 101 in connection with student requests. For example, I made up and distributed to majors a handout titled "How to Ask A Professor for a Recommendation." I always gave it to anyone who asked ME for a recommendation. And note that one reason you are becoming conscious of these lapses in etiquette is that e-mail allows more communication between students and faculty; i.e., we are seeing behavior which we otherwise would have simply missed pre-e-mail. Isn't that a good thing in our line of work? * Make your e-mail rules clear. For instance, I told students flatly at the start of each semester that I do not accept papers by e-mail. Period. Why? (always give reasons) Because (a) it is an imposition on my time, and (b) proper formatting and presentation of the paper is part of its submission (as is the case in the "outside" world), and a submission by e-mail transfers part of that responsibility to me, the recipient (i.e., when I have to download an attachment, sometimes reformat it or convert it so it will print properly on my OS, and use my ink and my paper . . . uh, uh, that's YOUR job). Almost all students respond favorably when rules are clearly explained, fairly applied to all, and given a rationale related to educational goals. * E-mail is a different medium. If you are going to provide your e-mail address, be prepared to respond promptly (e.g., I never gave students my IM name, because I did not want that intensity of communication and could not take the time to handle what an IM presence requires). E-mail does indeed make you available 24-7. Quite honestly, I enjoyed that aspect. I think it enhanced student-faculty communication. I always stayed up quite late, and took some glee in having a student e-mail me something at 12:40 am, and get an answer back to them at 12:50! (this impresses the heck out of them, BTW) Of course, size of college makes a difference - I can do that with 30 students in introductory and 8 in the senior sem; I'd have to have used different and more restrictive rules with class sizes typical at state universities. * If you give students your e-mail address, answer every inquiry. To me, an unanswered e-mail is the equivalent of addressing a person and having them turn away from you without answering: it's rude. Some of the faculty in the NY Times article were hesitant to answer even the most innocuous inquiries (e.g., what kind of notebook do I buy). If you consider a query inappropriate, tell the student nicely, and always be constructive - who CAN answer their question, for example. If I didn't have time to deal with a student query, I had an e-mail response for that too (software exists that allows you to speed things up with canned responses, though I never used it). The only exception - I would not respond to an e-mail that makes a threat. I only recall one of those in the 30 years, and it came from a non-student. Those need to be immediately turned over to an outside authority, and documented. But that's not really what we're talking about here. * E-mail IS time-consuming. Over the last few years I taught, I spent up to 90 minutes/day just dealing with e-mail (not all from students). My advice - if you don't have that time to spend (I taught at an institution that emphasized and rewarded teaching), set your ground rules - otherwise students will assume you're always there (to quote the nutty doctor in the British sit-com "My Hero"). * Finally, the article focuses on only students. I don't suppose, now, that anyone on this list ever received an annoying, unfair, or ill-considered e-mail from an administrator? In the final tally, I am sure I had more of those over the years than objectionable ones from students. And it works the other way too: I got more positive, thank-you's from students over the years and at retirement than I ever did from colleagues and administrators. Sorry for the lengthy rant, I'm not done with the many things wrong with faculty complaints in the NY Times article, but I've used enough of your time. Since I haven't posted in a long time now, hopefully I've got some "credit" built up. Cheers! --- Eric Richard Butsch wrote at 09:20 AM on 21 February 2006: >It seems to me the main issue is that a signficant number but a few >students express an undue sense of entitlement in these email - and in >person. Things such as I have a right to take the test when it is >convenient to me, I am the consumer and the consumer is always right, >etc. My expereince is that this new attitude began sometime in the 1980s >Reagan era, way before email. It may be more prevalent now, and email - >prone as it is to impulsive statements - may worsen it because students >are less likely to edit themselves before writing/speaking. > >Richard Butsch >Professor of Sociology > > > > > -- * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * NOTE: If e-mail to me is rejected or not answered promptly, please re-send to my other e-mail addresses: [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Eric P. Godfrey, Professor Emeritus of Sociology Ripon College, P. O. Box 248 (mail), 300 Seward St. (courier) Ripon, Wisconsin 54971-0248 920.748.6789 (home) Home US Mail: P. O. Box 75, Ripon, WI 54971-0075 "Save the earth, we don't have a backup copy" (made up by my son Forest at age 16) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Teaching Sociology" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/teachsoc -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
