Meet Your Professor, Dr. Chuckles

So . . . here's my last installment of my back-to-school week blogs. Today's posting has to do with the notion of professor as entertainer (hence "chuckles"; I could have used Dr. Giggles, but that would have conjured notions of a bad horror movie starring the mentally-challenged guy from L.A. Law as a psycho doctor). Steve Martin claimed in his book Born Standing Up that if he hadn't made it as a stand-up comic, he would have been a college professor, because then he would still be performing before a room every day. I don't necessarily think this sentiment is rare.

According to a recent survey of over 10,000 Ontario university students, what students want is an motivating, enthusiastic, entertaining professor. The OUSA survey reports that these qualities are desired by 74.6% of students, which only eclipsed by "delivers interesting, well-prepared and organized lectures" at 83.7%. The next-most important factor, the ability to communicate in multiple ways, is quite a bit less important (52.4% of respondents say it is necessary). From there, the more nuts-and-bolts elements of the course and listed, and none is chosen by more than 25% of students (things like outlining expectations, availability of the professor to meet, etc.).

So what common thread holds the three most important factors together? Communication. Style. Delivery. Not content. Which is a major disconnect with what professors consider important. Many profs believe that content is king, and that a) the students are there to learn the content, and so the onus is on them to pay attention and b) they have a responsibility to deliver the content, and there is no time for anything but.

The first point, that students should just pay attention, is fine in theory but wholly unrealistic. Could you sit and listen to a content-heavy lecture for 90 minutes, even on a topic have an interest in? What many profs forget is that the topic is not nearly as interesting to the students as it is to them. Most students will begin by paying attention, and at least try, but after 10-15 minutes of droning its hard to focus. Being enthusiastic and engaging helps combat this.

As far as content delivery goes, we profs do have a responsibility. But too often, "delivery" is considered to be the transmission of information, without consideration for receipt. Delivery is only complete when the information is received, not when it is sent. If FedEx regarded delivery in this way, they would be out of business.

Which raises the question of how to be engaging. Oh, how many of my profs from undergrad could have benefited from a basic teaching or communications course. First and foremost, consider the perspective of the students and what will interest them (in terms of style - I'm not advocating only teaching the most interesting content). Use humour, or examples, or a problem-solution approach. Make the information relevant. Give over some class time to practical problem-solving.

Humour works well, but I know that not everyone is as naturally funny as I. It is also potentially dangerous, because you don't want to be seen as a clown (as in this clip - fast forward to 3:19). The key factor is to be enthusiastic, i.e. behave as though you actually want to be there. Instead of counting on the information being interesting (because it is to you), consider what will make it interesting for the students. The book Made To Stick is a great read and has excellent points to make on this topic.

Anyway, now we're back to school, and next week I'll get back to my usual topics. And only 11 weeks till the end of semester!