Value for the Money

Share

This week, I took an accounting of student retention in my three sections. I find it interesting, although I cannot say exactly what it means, that I still have 74 of the 87 students with whom I started the semester. Last night in lab, one of them asked me if I try to make it fun and funny and relevant to keep people, because they found out that if a section drops below a certain enrollment the instructor's pay is cut (I have heard that happens if there are fewer than 10 students). What I actually aim to accomplish is to give them a good value for the money.

Education is not cheap, and it certainly isn't free. There is a great price to be paid by someone, particularly the student, and when the student does not pay, frequently the money spent is wasted. A few semesters ago, I asked one troublesome section to prove to whomever it was who paid the bill that it was worth the cost. There are a few students every term who think that they can do extra work when they don't do the work already available for them to do. So, their time and mine ends up being largely a waste, but I try to salvage it with life lessons when I can. Oddly enough there is only one complaint against me in the 3.5 years I have been teaching at the collegiate level.

My retention level is good for everyone. What this means is that there is continuity to their education. The administration gets the best price possible for hiring me since I earn the absolute minimum, and the taxpayers get the best value possible since I have exceedingly high retention (85% this term). Other professors earn higher wages to teach smaller courses, and so the per student price rises. That culminates in higher tuition, higher property taxes, and higher dropout rates.

Beyond that, I try very hard to tender a course that shows them how the material actually matters to them. Chemistry is a difficult course to teach, because most of them are in the class against their will. I try very hard to show them why they care about what I have to say, where I have used it in life, and where they might expect to have need of the data or skills or principles. In fact, I center the course around three or four core principles and relate the chapters to those principles, and I figure if they only remember the principles at least they come away with something.

Unbeknownst to them, I am actually on their side. For those who stay the course and finish the race, I am interested in them showing dedication and learning. If you can evince a desire to be better and eek out a few steps, then I know learning has occurred and I am more inclined to leniency. You see, you can receive a good grade without learning anything just as much as you can learn a ton without receiving a good grade. Grades are not necessarily synonymous with learning.

The biggest value a college education can give you in my opinion is to show you how to learn. Most professors seem more interested in showing you what to learn than how, but after you graduate, learning can and should continue to occur. I told an older gentleman in my class last night that my philosophy is simply this: "Improve when you can. Hold your ground when you get there." Every little bit helps, and other professors who see my students know which ones are mine. They know what they know, and they are equipped to learn more when they get there, and that makes me feel like I offer something of value.