[eternaltriangle]

I am currently teaching a university-level course on US foreign policy. I like teaching, but it is hard to understand what teaching methods are most likely to reach students. My most significant form of feedback (apart from student assignments, which are implicitly feedback on my teaching abilities), the only thing I have to go on are teaching evaluations. But there are a lot of other factors that go into this. In fact, when one study hired an actor to lead a seminar that involved saying contradictory things, but in a compelling way they found the seminar got rather high marks.

To those of you who have been through university lectures (or even just high school), what makes for a good lecture? What teaching techniques best illustrated a point for you?

[TylerRDA]

It truly varies from person to person. An teacher that is perfect for an NT would be an SP's nightmare, and vice versa. I suppose identify which type primarily comprises your class and gear it toward them. Other than that, the things that seem to apply universally are
-Passion for the subject
-Well organized class material
-Clear, logical speech

You'll know you're teaching the subject right when you get some students that love it, and a few that absolutely hate it.

[Axion004]

For me the specific individual either can teach or they cannot. If they can teach then it sort of comes natural and they proof they can teach by relating coursework by specific examples which are applicable in daily life.

[theiceman]

I need somebody who is able to keep me interested in the material that is being presented. It's nice if you have information that I do not already know, I can just find that all out by reading the textbook or using my eidetic memory take care of that while you ramble on about stuff I don't care about.

Try making a real world connection as well, if somehow I can relate the material to something that is presently happening then it becomes valid information and something that I could potentially use on somebody else.

The last thing to do is try making a connection with some students, I go to a smaller college so this is easier but it can be annoying. I hear all the time from my professors how much potential I have or how they are surprised to see I aced the exam and know the material so well. I think to myself "You don't need to babble about me being the smartest kid in the class, I already know this for a fact and that the average IQ in here might slightly be over 100 which is not good at all." Students eyes will be on you to see if you are really into the subject/passionate about it and that you have good lecture material. The students will be able to connect the dots with a good connotation and will see you as a good professor.

[Imperator]

Ask one of your more senior colleagues to sit in on a lecture and give you feedback.

[Daoist]

	Originally Posted by TylerRDA To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	It truly varies from person to person. An teacher that is perfect for an NT would be an SP's nightmare, and vice versa.

I'd also say it varies according to YOU. I wouldn't try too hard to fit into how they tell you you need to teach the course. They're in college. Adapt them to your thinking style - that's the only way your passion will come across.

But also be aware of the shortcomings of your perspective, and the alternatives.

[Mogura]

Personal opinion here, but a good professor is a facilitator of in-class discussions, not a lecturer standing behind a podium. Educate means "to draw out", not to indoctrinate or force feed (or spoon feed) ideas...

[Paji eh Wong]

I taught for 6 years. Notice the use of the past tense.

It is unfortunate that classroom education is the worst but most economical way to educate students. We are stuck with it, though.

	Originally Posted by Mogura To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Personal opinion here, but a good professor is a facilitator of in-class discussions, not a lecturer standing behind a podium. Educate means "to draw out", not to indoctrinate or force feed (or spoon feed) ideas...

Along these lines, the best teachers make their students think.

In large classes, there is little to no room for discussion. You need to be creating a dialogue between your material and what your students are thinking. The technique I found that worked the best for this was to be constantly asking questions of my students. Questions force them to think and puzzle out ideas for themselves.

I suggest introducing an idea, topic, or category they are familiar with, and then ask them a question about an extension of that idea. Pause, and let them think about it.

[gestalt]

Well I think you should study and critique the best of the best. For example, the Great Courses from the Teaching Company. Those are all superstar professors who can mass educate. Order or interlibrary loan a couple of those courses and critique-note their style, organization, tone, mannerisms, vocabulary, pedagogical features, technology, etc. Do a proper analysis. Then experiment and adopt what works for you.

I too enjoy when a teacher leaves me with a puzzle during or at the end of the lecture. Then I can figure it out myself. I think that's pretty important. Sort of like how when you know the basic fundamentals of geometry you can derive all the rest of the rules. Now of course intuitions and logic break down at the higher levels of knowledge but you probably aren't teaching there right now.

[WyohKnott]

Connect each topic to the ones that came before it, and discuss briefly why it is important to later topics (preferably at the beginning of lecture). Especially in lower level courses, it's often difficult for students to see the connections between topics, so it can feel like memorizing random bits of information.

Other basics: Speak clearly, and more slowly than you think you need to. If you use powerpoint, use the absolute minimum of slides necessary. (The worst professor I ever had made slideshows with 60-70 slides for a 50 minute lecture, and each slide had a tremendous amount of information on it that was difficult to interpret on one's own. I learned almost nothing in that class.)

If you like teaching enough that you want students to come to you with questions, then make sure you say that explicitly. So many professors don't, that it can be intimidating to go talk to one, if you don't know that he won't find it annoying.

If you have TA's, make sure you know what they're up to. If they lead a discussion or lab section, try to sit in on one class so you can give them suggestions if you need to.

If there's a textbook for the class, try to give the specific page or chapter numbers that correspond to the topic you're covering. It's not always as clear to students as you think it is.

[Imagineering]

Have you seen the Feynman lectures or read any of Feynman(the The Surely you are Joking Mr. Feynman) series. Have you seen that documentary about him? He was a good professor. He tried to hit most every point he could and cater to all learning styles. He is probably a good source for what makes a good professor.

[mllebrie]

Making your students buy only minimal numbers of books. Your students will love you forever. I appreciated my foreign policy professor doing so!

I think the biggest thing is having control of the course, being organized. I always got an uncomfortable feeling if we were waaaay behind where we should have been, according to the syllabus. I had a professor once who was a really nice guy, right out of grad school, but couldn't stick to the syllabus and we had a paper due on the last day of class, in addition to the final paper due at the end of the semester. Wasn't supposed to be that way, but he got sidetracked. We hated him for it.

How big is this class? At my school foreign policy was about 100 people, which was considered large. I also took classes of 7 people, and obviously what works for one doesn't work for another.

Oh, another thing. Sit, if possible. It makes you seem less intimidating.

[bpetty]

My favorite professors were always well organized, and broke the material up with examples/application problems. Most people have a sustained attention span of 20 minutes or less, so you should try to break up the material somehow.

[Zolo]

Give interesting examples/applications of things. That always makes a class much more exciting in addition to solidifying points/theories/etc.

Also don't require students to buy an expensive, crappy textbook! That'll definitely increase your reputation. I had some professors that went as far as having all the readings in PDF form for free download.

[Paji eh Wong]

I think the best advice given on this thread is the modeling advice. Find a teacher you admire and think is effective, and then model yourself after him.

You don't want to only get student feedback, because students don't know how to teach, they only know what they like. College students are strange. They are the only consumers in the world that want less for their money. Get feedback from good teachers, and don't be afraid to do things that will be unpopular with your students. It isn't a popularity contest.

[Latro]

Originally Posted by TylerRDA To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

It truly varies from person to person. An teacher that is perfect for an NT would be an SP's nightmare, and vice versa. I suppose identify which type primarily comprises your class and gear it toward them. Other than that, the things that seem to apply universally are -Passion for the subject -Well organized class material -Clear, logical speech You'll know you're teaching the subject right when you get some students that love it, and a few that absolutely hate it.

These, with the addition of not following the book rigidly being a particular part of the second one. There is a surprising usefulness to actually *needing* to come to lecture because the book won't get you through the course. There's an extreme to this, where the textbook is useless; that's bad too, obviously. But when the textbook helps you follow but doesn't render the lecture trivial, you have a sweet spot.

In my experience the textbook usually makes the lecture trivial, though.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[RAZR]

1) Teach as little as possible - Frame your lectures so that they ask students questions - For example if you're talking about US imperialism don't list conflicts. Say "we're going to talk about imperialism - name imperialist conflicts that the US got in" and start calling on people. That way students get engaged and the information that they are learning is coming from them which makes it more memorable.

2) Go fast - Teachers who talk slowly or don't make it far in class cause me to zone out since I'm not engaged and I can take notes without paying attention. Going faster makes it a stimulating race to keep up. To do this you do need to establish that if anyone is getting left behind to tell you so that you can go back and re-explain. Also, doing #1 helps you pull this off better. If your class seems more like a rapid fire questioning you can cover more in a more efficient manner.

[Winklepicker]

I still remember the best professor I ever had... wow, what a difference it makes.

I imagine the answer depends on the individual, but I liked this guy becase:

1) He had VERY clear, easy-to-read powerpoints with visuals that we were given copies of so we didn't have to waste time/energy writing, and instead we could just listen and really learn while he was speaking instead of getting distracted by the rush to write.

2) He gave ONLY the material that was very important/relavent. But he gave ALL of the material that was very important/relavent. No superfluous information that would drown everything else out in a bottomless sea of information.

3) We spent time in class practicing together the critical things we had to know--WITHOUT consequences for wrong answers--he really wanted to help us learn it.

4) He was able to laugh. <--Enough said...

5) He communicated very clearly expectations for exams/papers, and only held us responsible for the things he made clear we had to know (<--THANK YOU ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !)

6) He gave opportunity for redeeming some points via optional extra credit.

7) No superfluous "busy-work"; simplified syllabus (not necessarily easier, just less billions of random details and more chunky projects/tests)

I'm really thankful for people like you who ask this question--it makes such a wonderful difference to have a great teacher. Thank you!!

[Uriel]

Someone who can teach the subject without using a book.

[mllebrie]

Originally Posted by RAZR To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

1) Teach as little as possible - Frame your lectures so that they ask students questions - For example if you're talking about US imperialism don't list conflicts. Say "we're going to talk about imperialism - name imperialist conflicts that the US got in" and start calling on people. That way students get engaged and the information that they are learning is coming from them which makes it more memorable. 2) Go fast - Teachers who talk slowly or don't make it far in class cause me to zone out since I'm not engaged and I can take notes without paying attention. Going faster makes it a stimulating race to keep up. To do this you do need to establish that if anyone is getting left behind to tell you so that you can go back and re-explain. Also, doing #1 helps you pull this off better. If your class seems more like a rapid fire questioning you can cover more in a more efficient manner.

That can backfire, too. I've been in plenty of situations where the professor asks a question and we just sit there, in stony, awkward silence. Until the professor pulls some sort of entrail of an idea out of one of us. Hated it!

[Daoist]

Oh, one thing I forgot. This might not apply to a foreign policy course as much as a theoretical IR course, since I guess that includes domestic policy. When I took an IR course, the teacher was throwing around these big fancy ideas, with no connection to policy debates that were going on (with the Iraq war, at the time.) It seemed like the teacher was sort of dancing around the idea of "left" and "right." Perhaps he knew too many exceptions to make generalizations, but I would have appreciated knowing the generalizations to start out with.

[RAZR]

	Originally Posted by mllebrie To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	That can backfire, too. I've been in plenty of situations where the professor asks a question and we just sit there, in stony, awkward silence. Until the professor pulls some sort of entrail of an idea out of one of us. Hated it!

That true - Usually when that happened in a class that I've been it was either because the question was irrelevant or the teacher just wasn't the type of person who made their students want to participate

[zetafunction]

A really good professor has to be able to make a radio out of coconuts.

[Sethis]

A good professor must have the following qualities:

1)Friendliness.
2)Being able to listen to his students and receive criticism gracefully.
3)Deep knowledge of his subject.
4)Understanding that one should continue learning throughout his life. A degree means nothing.
5)Knowing how to turn an extremely boring subject into a very interesting one.
6)Caring for his students.

[eternaltriangle]

Originally Posted by Daoist To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Oh, one thing I forgot. This might not apply to a foreign policy course as much as a theoretical IR course, since I guess that includes domestic policy. When I took an IR course, the teacher was throwing around these big fancy ideas, with no connection to policy debates that were going on (with the Iraq war, at the time.) It seemed like the teacher was sort of dancing around the idea of "left" and "right." Perhaps he knew too many exceptions to make generalizations, but I would have appreciated knowing the generalizations to start out with.

This is a tricky issue, because what people think of as "left" and "right" in the foreign policy context has changed dramatically over time. If you went back to the 1940s, the Democrats were the hawks, while the Republicans were isolationalists. Through the Cold War (excepting Reagan), you generally had convergence on foreign policy issues between the two (though the Republicans were more sensitive to costs, and the Democrats were more sensitive to human rights violations). Finally, since the 70's there has been the rise of "neoconservatism" on the right, which tends to embrace an aggressive hardliner policy (though there is still contestation in the GOP - the two Bushes are actually on the opposite sides of that divide). And if you look at the GOP primaries today, there may be the beginnings of a new transition. The frontrunner, Rick Perry, for instance, has sworn off adventurism, while Ron Paul, an avowed isolationist, is running third.

And then there is the normative-empirical distinction. In class I usually talk about empirical ideas - ie. how the world works, not the way it should work. But people can hold empirical beliefs that are in tension with their normative beliefs. For instance, one can be a realist (ie. you believe that power is what matters in the world) in empirical terms, but for moral reasons insist on an idealist foreign policy.

---------- Post added 09-15-2011 at 11:04 PM ----------

Originally Posted by Winklepicker To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I still remember the best professor I ever had... wow, what a difference it makes. I imagine the answer depends on the individual, but I liked this guy becase: 1) He had VERY clear, easy-to-read powerpoints with visuals that we were given copies of so we didn't have to waste time/energy writing, and instead we could just listen and really learn while he was speaking instead of getting distracted by the rush to write. 2) He gave ONLY the material that was very important/relavent. But he gave ALL of the material that was very important/relavent. No superfluous information that would drown everything else out in a bottomless sea of information. 3) We spent time in class practicing together the critical things we had to know--WITHOUT consequences for wrong answers--he really wanted to help us learn it. 4) He was able to laugh. <--Enough said... 5) He communicated very clearly expectations for exams/papers, and only held us responsible for the things he made clear we had to know (<--THANK YOU ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !) 6) He gave opportunity for redeeming some points via optional extra credit. 7) No superfluous "busy-work"; simplified syllabus (not necessarily easier, just less billions of random details and more chunky projects/tests) I'm really thankful for people like you who ask this question--it makes such a wonderful difference to have a great teacher. Thank you!!

Thanks for all of these - the main place I differ on is #1. Some people (I'm one of them) follow things better when they write down what is being said. Also, when I had more detailed powerpoints, some students didn't pay attention, because they figured they could just download the notes later. I try to treat powerpoint as a template for students to write their notes in, as opposed to an extremely detailed document.

---------- Post added 09-15-2011 at 11:10 PM ----------

	Originally Posted by mllebrie To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	That can backfire, too. I've been in plenty of situations where the professor asks a question and we just sit there, in stony, awkward silence. Until the professor pulls some sort of entrail of an idea out of one of us. Hated it!

In the first class I taught, I was given a gigantic auditorium in which to teach a class for 55 students. The problem is that a lot would sit near the back, making it very hard to facilitate in-class discussions and debates. So I've definitely experienced the sound of crickets before.

I try to make sure that when I ask questions, they are very broad ones. That way I can sort of reinterpret what people said so it ends up sounding like what I was looking for. I try to avoid calling people by name - for a lot of people, it can work fairly well. However, some people are extremely shy, and dislike being put on the spot.

---------- Post added 09-15-2011 at 11:19 PM ----------

Originally Posted by Paji eh Wong To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

I think the best advice given on this thread is the modeling advice. Find a teacher you admire and think is effective, and then model yourself after him. You don't want to only get student feedback, because students don't know how to teach, they only know what they like. College students are strange. They are the only consumers in the world that want less for their money. Get feedback from good teachers, and don't be afraid to do things that will be unpopular with your students. It isn't a popularity contest.

The trouble here is that student feedback impacts me professionally. Poor teacher evaluations can be damaging, even if students learn a great deal. They have done some interesting studies on whether being taught by a teacher that received high evaluations positively predicts performance in the next level up (ie. econ 101 -> 201). In fact it has the reverse effect, although this is partly because poorer students are more likely to take econ 201 if they had a highly evaluated econ 101 professor.

I'm certainly not above stealing the teaching techniques of others, though.