|
U N I V E R S I T Y O F P I T T S B U R G H |
|
|
|
A newsletter devoted to the support of teaching and learning at the University of Pittsburgh |
|
U N I V E R S I T Y O F P I T T S B U R G H |
|
|
|
A newsletter devoted to the support of teaching and learning at the University of Pittsburgh |
|
Seitz’s undergraduates actively participate in ‘making knowledge’ Jim Seitz, English,
Seitz serves as director of the English department’s composition program and as chair of the College Writing Board. His pedagogy is based on challenging students’ conception of a college education. “Students often perceive a university as a ‘house of knowledge’ where they will attend class, take notes, ingest facts, and regurgitate them on tests. That’s a secure vision of teaching and knowledge, but it does a disservice to faculty and students alike. Part of our work as teachers is to confront what we think we know and to, in effect, create new knowledge. Ideally, then, we set up education along a model by which students share inquiry into areas that remain questions for their teachers. “Although I’ve been teaching English for more than 20 years, and I do convey some forms of knowledge, there are big gaps in my knowledge. Therefore, I share with students the uncertainty of what it means to explore—to work on a question and to get somewhere, but not necessarily arrive at a final answer. I teach them how to go about analyzing a problem. I present the work of a university to students in terms of what we do—actively pursue knowledge. That’s more exciting for students.”
Seitz traces his underlying teaching philosophy, to motivate students to do more than they would have thought possible, to a comment made “a long time ago” by English Department chairman David Bartholomae: “Just because you give students work they won’t do well initially doesn’t mean you shouldn’t give it to them.” Seitz elaborates, “Often, teachers avoid challenging assignments initially because they fear students won’t do well. My approach is to go ahead anyway and give those difficult assignments. This begins a cycle: engaging the problem, unsatisfactory results, teacher feedback, improved results. As students continue to return to the original challenging problem, they build their analytical abilities until, by the end of the semester, they are in a place they never could have imagined at the beginning of the semester.” In composition courses, Seitz approaches “the early part of a course as building inquiry into a subject. I try to motivate students—or dispel the fear factor—by asking them to avoid trying to build an airtight case at the beginning of the semester, but rather to open a path for inquiry. I construct an assignment in the way I want them to think of academic work, as an exploration. For example, I may give them a problem: ‘In light of what we’ve read about violence this week, what do you consider the primary sources of violent behavior? I don’t expect you to come to a firm conclusion, but to explore ideas and express reservations. When I see your initial thoughts, I’m going to push you deeper, so your thinking becomes more complex. Next, you’ll consider how to build a stronger case, and that often means anticipating opposition. How will you take that into account?’” Public conversation Seitz’s view of the problematic nature of knowledge carries over to his personal pedagogy and supervisory responsibilities for the 30-40 teaching assistants who teach the introductory composition courses: “As a teacher I’m not only teaching new teachers about renegotiating and reassessing what they do, but constantly reevaluating what I do myself. Each year we redesign the course; this year we’re even re-thinking the model. Here I am, 20-plus years into teaching composition, and I’m still scrutinizing the way I want to teach and analyzing my fundamental presuppositions. Likewise, whether working with teaching assistants or with undergraduates who want to be high school teachers, I want to convey this ability to think reflectively. I want teachers to pull the rug out from under their own feet and say, ‘Oh my, look what I’ve been doing! How can I synthesize my strengths with all of the approaches to teaching I see around me?’” | |||||||||||||||
|
A newsletter devoted to the support of teaching and learning at the University of Pittsburgh |
||||||||||||||||
| Center
for Instructional Development & Distance Education |
||||||||||||||||
believes
in the importance of teaching all students, especially undergraduates,
to “participate in the life of the University, which is about making
knowledge. Knowledge is constantly being remade, undone, and reformulated.
That is the work of a university; thus, an ideal teaching and learning
model is inquiry based.”