One Thing ALL University Lecturers Must STOP Doing

Everyday at the University of the West Indies, I pass a bulletin board at the Department of Literatures in English with the following article posted on it: “Qualified But Clueless – University Graduates Say Students Studying Only To Pass Tests And Not Learning”. Each time I see it, I think, accurate, but how so really?

I’m not going to lie, up until my 1st year at UWI, all I’ve been doing with my brain was stuffing it with enough info to be able to pass my tests. It always worked. It was one of the reasons why I was recruited to play on the School’s Challenge Quiz Team as well. The mandate was basically “Read and Recite”. So you could just imagine my shock when, one by one, all my Literature lecturers took a good 15mins to firmly point out that they expected us to employ analytical skills. That, YES, they wanted to read in our essays what we truly thought, even if those thoughts weren’t necessarily fit for public viewing. That it was a major mistake for their high school counterparts to not have taught us how to think critically about why characters said/did what they did. How analyzing the behavioural pattern of fictional characters could help us do the same in reality.

It took some time for all of us to master the craft. Some still are. But for those of us who – according to teachers’ comments thus far – seem to be well on our way, we have now encountered a problem that counteracts with our success. Now we’re being given great grades for work we know without a doubt could have been better done.

Now before you call me crazy, hear me out.

I could always empathize with lecturers who seem especially enthusiastic about their work, but just don’t get responses from their students, so I always tried answering their questions. I couldn’t bear the awkward silence that followed if I didn’t at least try. Can you imagine being pumped about something and dying to share it with others, but all you get is dead silence and blank stares? That’s got to be uncomfortable. But the problem is, once lecturers find that one person that they could rely on for discussion, they seem to be so grateful, that they start dishing out good grades, even when it’s clear you could’ve done more with your assignment. I’ve felt so many times that I could’ve read more, said more, dug deeper in my psyche and written a more eloquent piece, but still got A’s and B’s. Why?

“This was such a pleasure to read… This one essay has redeemed an entire class!!”
He's even having a conversation with the paper.. especially at points that I thought were'nt necessary O.o
He’s even having a conversation with the paper… especially at points that I thought weren’t necessary O.o

As it relates to the pictures above, I remember the writing process for that essay. It WAS NOT fun. The assignment question was intriguing, yes, and so were the theories involved, but ask any psychology major whether applying a theory to your own thesis [and successfully proving it] is easy. The comments throughout the essay were also slightly shocking. Of course I knew that what I was writing was relevant to the topic. I was addressing everything the question asked… but then I remembered the night before submitting the paper – propping myself up and trying to focus on the blurring words; my head bobbing back and forth; being surrounded by lifeless books in a cold library; the HUNGER!!! Conditions like those don’t contribute to anybody being able to write something sensible.

The feeling I get when I’m given such a grade is that I’m being rewarded for something other than this essay[namely, participation in class], and I don’t like it. You can’t be telling me that the point I’ve made in paragraph three could have been fleshed out more with additional examples; that my thesis could’ve been narrower, etc etc etc; making me expect a C+, yet giving me an A . What kinda logic is that? How am I supposed to judge my progress moving on from there? Am I supposed to then surmise that this level of performance [where I’m biting my nails because I KNOW I didn’t do my best] is acceptable? Am I supposed to settle there? If that was A-grade work, then are you telling me that there’s no more space to go up? But I still haven’t reached your level of thinking, so how am I gonna get there then?

And I’m not the only one who’s had this problem. Since like minds attract, I keep meeting people who reveal this issue to me, and I think, so what does that mean for the future? Because I’m easily a lazy person, so if you tell me that this standard is ok, and I end up having to teach a class 5yrs from now, I’m gonna be grading people worse than you’re doing right now. And I know that truly, a lot of persons think that this is absolutely no biggie, but I find that even in the corporate world, many of the persons on top aren’t critical thinkers, and even if they are, they don’t expect the younger generation to be. Most think we only know music and can’t even manage getting the simplest of tasks done. You’ll even find that they sometimes explain directives to you as if you’re still at the primary level of understanding. How does that even work?

Lecturers, all I’m saying is, keep pushing for your students to do more. This doesn’t mean you should discourage us, nor does it mean that you should make drastic changes to the way you give grades. But talk to us truly. Explain what is expected and why. Hint at the how. Even if we seem to be displaying the beginnings of critical thinking abilities, don’t automatically assume that we’re not still clueless.


6 Replies to “One Thing ALL University Lecturers Must STOP Doing”

    1. In rereading the essay though [for eg.], it still was a good one because it didn’t feel like I wrote it, but I still could pick out areas that needed better foundation, and those definitely were too sparse to deserve an A. If it was A- or B+ I woulda understand. But the real problem is in wanting too many things from a 2000 word limit. After so much practice, you gonna need at least 3000 or more.


  1. So it seems the university is confused. Another thing that bugs me is how they organize the Dean’s list. You know part time students do less courses per semester [no more than 3], so automatically their GPAs will be higher because the overall grade is divided by a lesser number. But instead of separating them from full time students when creating the list [like having one for full time and another for part time] everybody gets flung in one category, which puts full times at the lower rung because their overall grade is divided by the full 5 courses. How them expect that fi mek sense?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s