Tag Archives: college teaching

Getting Students to Grow by Taking Risks

An art gallery would have to turn most paintings to the wall if we insist on applying standards of good character to their artists.

Over the years we have seen many films that at least momentarily explore the dynamics of teachers and students in class sessions.  But I have never seen one that struck so many chords of recognition as happens early in Todd Field’s film, Tár (2022).  Field’s elaborate study of a complicated modern conductor pulls its audiences in many directions. Cate Blanchett’s maestra is a classical music conductor and a polymath superstar. Only later does her dishonesty toward friends and other musicians come into focus. But we first see her as a master-teacher.

We can set aside the complications of the story to the simpler example of ten minutes of a master class in conducting with a group of Juilliard students. Her pedagogical style in mostly one of interrogation. She wants her students to defend their all-too settled choices so early in their careers.

This rigidity shows up in the character of one conducting student, Max, who she sees as using a casually applied insularity to shut off what she believes he must be exploring. And scene feels about right. Getting students to really care about the subject they are ostensibly committed to was, I found, a constant and frustrating challenge as a teacher. I applaud this woman’s full-throated repudiation of her student’s indifference.

“The narcissism of small differences leads to the most boring conformity.”

The set up is simple. Max has chosen an atonal fragment of modern music by Anna Thorvaldsdottir to conduct.  It is a real piece of new music that is outside the usual western traditions. And Tár is not a fan. She stops his conducting of it and gently interrogates Max about why he likes the dissonant piece. Among other things, it doesn’t really need a conductor. In her words, it may be a car without a motor. How about something a bit more conventional, she suggests, something like a movement from a Bach cantata. But Max frowns.  He is barely able to whisper his response that he has no interest in a “cisgender white male misogynist,” which she takes as an all-too-easy excuse for avoiding perhaps the single most important figure in western music.  It is hard to conceive of a conservatory student so easily dismissing Bach, who–to this day–has united most virtuoso musicians in total admiration for his prodigious output. That would include many rockers like The Beatles and Sting, song-writers, jazz musicians and music theorists. Put simply, Bach significantly advanced the possibilities of musical invention for most working in the western tradition.

Does his domestic arrangements have any role in whether to learn from him?  The equivalent in communication theory is getting students to try an author who upends simple the simple notion of passing information from A to B. To take the risk of discovering a more nuanced view requires reading, thinking out loud, and, yes, challenging a teacher to defend his or her enthusiasm.

Sitting next to Max at a piano, she demonstrates how the opening of a simple Bach piece turns into a series of consecutive and evocative progressions inviting resolution. She and most of the musical world think of them as essential inventions. But Max clearly isn’t interested. And, in exasperation, she turns on him as someone who may be trading on the prestige of Juilliard rather than using it as a resource for discovery.  This is bracing stuff, well outside the musical cliches in most films. But at this point she is no longer teaching effectively, but performing a dramatic character that will let us witness Max’s humiliation. That’s not a good outcome. I love the lesson as a commentary on opening minds. But it can’t end with a student feeling like they are on the outside of the process. See the riveting scene below.

Luckily, Max is not a stand-in for every student. But Field seems to have presented the piece as a warning that being a slave to identity politics is going to leave any student with a very incomplete education. In an art gallery we would have to turn most paintings to the wall if we insist on a character test for its producers.

As I watched this clip I wondered about my own dislike of most of Richard Wagner’s music.  Like Max, I have revulsion for a composer who gave such evident pleasure Nazi leaders. Shouldn’t I also follow Tár and focus on the art?  My only defense is that the two align too closely for me. Wagner lived years before the rise of the Third Reich, but he displayed some of its worst tendencies, particularly its antisemitism; and both the Nazi’s and Wagner shared a love for a homegrown white super-mythology. Even so, I recognize the possibility that, like Max, my judgment is too narrow.

 

American Higher Education Will Not be Defeated

Active Listening in the Classroom Heather Syrett.

As for academics as “condescending elites:” Give me a break.

The Trump Administration’s efforts to revisit the tired but durable American pattern of attacking Harvard and other American universities is brutal, and frankly embarrassing for the rest of the world to witness. Our massive private and state systems are the envy of the world.  The cuts in research dollars and many universities will do harm. But the effort to ruin higher education will not succeed. Fortunately, American instructors have some immunity to this kind of political hate.

Why a man with a slippery grasp on reality has decided that Harvard University in particular represents the antichrist is both nonsensical and incredibly mean-spirited. After all, it is one of the world’s great universities. Moreover, the standard analytical point too many others carelessly make is that Harvard and other institutions represent a liberal “elite.”  Tell Skip Gates he is an elitist and get ready to be set straight.

As the conventional logic goes, the rest of America is resentful of what the conservatives William F. Buckley and George Will have called the “condescension” of academics.  In this familiar fantasy, academia misuses its privileged position to bend the young minds toward secular and collectivist ways of thinking.  Who knew that the effectively fragmented academic world was so unified in its efforts? Give me a break.

     Banned Books    ALA/PBS/American Experience

In one form of another this uniquely American complaint is older than the republic, carried in the Puritanism and the anti-intellectualism of  early settlers. In addition to the endemic racism fostered by the first Americans, this additional and deeply embedded incapacity remains as a blind spot that makes reading, advanced learning and education suspicious experiences.

It has always been with us. Key thinkers like historian Richard Hofstadter have pointed out a kind of bedrock stance against intellectuals mostly on the political right and, by extension, millions of Americans. Even so, the nation’s educators have tried to shed light on the dark celebration of ignorance on subjects ranging from the age of the planet to intricacies of human sociology. Red states are trying to impose curriculum guidelines at various levels mandating courses in civics. Astonishingly, Florida’s political leaders even question the legitimacy of the social sciences.

Speaking broadly, knowledge workers labor under a cloud of suspicion fed by a culture that celebrates making and promoting more than knowing. But in truth, we could use more students of the human condition and perhaps fewer devoted to the finer points of selling stuff.

Though the damage of cancelled grants to institutions and students has been devastating, the hapless functionaries of this administration will loose this battle, as the Puritans, Know-Nothings, nativists, William F. Buckley, McCarthyites, Moral Majority members and Christian nationalists did in earlier American spasms of retribution against American educators.

As for academics as condescending elites: I’ve studied with some of the most brilliant people in my own field, none of whom could begin to match the arrogance of the expense account workers who feed the nation’s bloated consumer culture. An assistant professor at most institutions is probably going to make less than a licensed worker in the building trades. If we really want to experience elites at work and play, stay a night or two in New York or Chicago and have meals in their bloated expense-account restaurants. Attending an academic conference in one of these cities was like visiting a posh land of a privileged class of managers and executives. Like hundreds of other academics momentarily dispatched  to a convention along the unfamiliar Dubai of Chicago’s lakefront, I was lucky to have my public college cover half of my expenses for one three-day conference.

Source Williams College

Though Donald Trump would like  to change it, education in the U.S. is decentralized, with states and local districts holding most of the power of control. To be sure, attainment levels in K-12 American public education often compare unfavorably with other peer nations:  a legacy of distractions from market-totems like smartphones, as well as ingrained suspicions about books, curriculum and the narratives of modern history. But the nation’s crown jewels remain in the 5000-plus colleges and universities, who generally retain a degree of autonomy to develop programs and degrees mostly as they see fit, within broad accreditation guidelines. This process is duplicated in the academic freedoms of individual faculty members to teach and develop research using their expertise and years of graduate school. To the nation’s eternal credit, the authoritarianism of this administration cannot easily reach into most university classrooms. For the most part, academics will continue to profess their subjects in accordance with their professional expertise and using the standards of their disciplines: a strength I was reminded of after teaching for a year within an uncomfortably tight pecking order within a British University.

The American protection of an instructor’s classroom is as it should be, since the nation is momentarily misguided by an administration headed by a figure who generally does not read, makes up fantasies in lieu of evidence he cannot understand, and at times disappears behind a word clouds of near-total incoherence.