Guaranteed employment if working for a term paper mill?

In one of the first ever upper-division classes that I taught--many years ago--one term paper came across like it maybe wasn't the student's. It was on a topic that I did not even remotely discuss in class, and the contents were clearly borrowed from somewhere.

I did not go after the student, however. Instead, I examined my course syllabus and how I had set up the assignments. I found that the instructions for the term paper were not rigorous after all--it was open ended, and students could write on a topic of their choice. I met the problem, and it was me after all!

So, the following term, I changed the structure. I required a 2,500-word paper at the end of the term--but, this time it had to be a response to a specific question that I gave them. And, they still had to search for new materials, cite them, .... all the things we typically require in a term paper. Well, there was no "funny" business that term.

Since then, I don't think I have ever set up a syllabus where students can write papers on topics of their own choosing. More so since the deluge of resources on the web--not only can students be tempted to doing a whole lot of copy/paste, they can do worse things: turn to a term paper mill for help! Now, the only problem I get every once in a while is when a student doesn't think carefully and brings in paragraphs from a source, and pretends that those sentences were his. Even this, I think the last I had such a problem was two (three?) years ago.

One might argue that this severely cramps the free thinking of students. That is exactly why I phrase the question such that there is still enough latitude for them to follow-up on an issue that really revs up their curiosity.

When we faculty give generic term paper tasks like "write a paper on the Chinese economy", we should not be surprised if some students resort to unfair practices. Because, there are plenty of "term paper artists" like this one who has written an interesting, and funny, piece on it. (I don't think he outsourced this one!) He writes:

Term paper work is also extremely easy, once you get the hang of it. It's like an old dance routine buried in one's muscle memory. You hear the tune — say, "Unlike the ancient Greek tragic playwrights, Shakespeare likes to insert humor in his tragedies" — and your body does the rest automatically. I'd just scan Google or databases like Questia.com for a few quotes from primary and secondary sources, create an argument based on whatever popped up from my search, write the introduction and underline the thesis statement, then fill in the empty spaces between quotes with whatever came to mind.

This "inside scoop", so to say, further confirms my view that open-ended term paper guidelines are increasingly disasters waiting to happen. Anyway, the author adds that it takes special skills to be a term paper artist--to never get into writing a "real paper" because that is way too much work!:

The secret to the gig is to amuse yourself. I have to, really, as most paper topics are deadly boring. Once, I was asked to summarize in three pages the causes of the First World War (page one), the major battles and technological innovations of the war (page two), and to explain the aftermath of the war, including how it led to the Second World War (page three). Then there was this assignment for a composition class: six pages on why "apples [the fruit] are the best." You have to make your own fun. In business papers, I'd often cite Marxist sources. When given an open topic assignment on ethics, I'd write on the ethics of buying term papers, and even include the broker's Web site as a source. My own novels and short stories were the topic of many papers — several DUMB CLIENTS rate me as their favorite author and they've never even read me, or anyone else. Whenever papers needed to refer to a client's own life experiences, I'd give the student various sexual hang-ups

Note: because it is about how term papers can be easily sold to multiple students, well, I have cross posted this on all my three current blogs :-) No, seriously, the cross-post is because of the relevance.

Humans have always been a digital generation!

Given that "digits" are nothing but our fingers, I suppose I can always wisecrack that humans have been nothing but digital for years and years and years .... I mean, was there an analog version that I didn't read about? Ha ha. Just hysterical :-)

So, it is a sheer coincidence that our counting system was based on ten--ten fingers we had. Imagine how different it would have been if we had had a thumb plus seven on each hand--we would have been operating on base-16 instead of base-10. So, digitial, schmigital ....

What is my point? Let us not get carried away with this digital stuff. Ultimately, it is all a question of what is up in our brains. A 19-year old walking around with an iPhone is not necessarily smarter than a ten year old kid riding on a water buffalo in some poor country. It all comes down to how much knowledge we have, and how we put that knowledge to use.

Am I making sense so far? Cool. That is a first time ever!

In such a framework, how about I present to you more arguments on this from another Indian-American (yes, we are lots of us around) who, unlike me, is influential. Writing in the Chronicle, Siva Vaidhyanathan (yes, also with Tamil roots!) is quite forceful when he notes that "College students in America are not as "digital" as we might wish to pretend." Way to go, Siva--for all I know we may be related too!!!

He further writes:

Talk of a "digital generation" or people who are "born digital" willfully ignores the vast range of skills, knowledge, and experience of many segments of society. It ignores the needs and perspectives of those young people who are not socially or financially privileged. It presumes a level playing field and equal access to time, knowledge, skills, and technologies. The ethnic, national, gender, and class biases of any sort of generation talk are troubling. And they could not be more obvious than when discussing assumptions about digital media.

I bring this up in this blog because we tend to assume that our students might be ready and equipped to easily deal with information--that they are somehow born information literate. Online teaching and learning is increasingly leaning on that assumption. But, I find that it is not the case--many of them are remarkably illiterate, when it comes to dealing with information.

"MB" and I a few years ago worked on a project with two other colleagues on campus to highlight the urgency--on why information literacy is extremely important for students and why, therefore, this ought be implemented via something like writing-intensive courses. Well, without any backing, we worked on this, drafted a one-page report, presented it to the Senate where it died a glorious death :-) May it rest in peace!

Filter registration for online?

A few minutes ago, a student who is in my online class this term swung by to say hi and chat. During the conversation, he remarked that online is not for him. Because he way prefers the schedule of meeting twice a week, having conversations, and asking questions in class. On the other hand, in the online class, he feels that he is keeping things for the last minute, ....

To which I replied, "remember my emails that online classes won't work for everybody?" I told him that this is exactly why I had also included in the class webpages resources on how to be a successful online student. "of course" he said. I know what he means because a couple of terms ago he was a student in one of my "real world" classes--he was always prepared, had questions and wisecracks .....

Maybe one of the things we should do is to develop a gate system--something that makes students read a whole bunch of warnings, then click on a box that indicates that they have read through them, before they can register for the class. You know, something like how when we purchase an airline ticket online, we have to acknowledge that we are ok with the terms and conditions .... (Well, for that matter, even regular classes ought to have such a gate system--we can then avoid students taking naps in the classroom!)

Maybe such models have already been implemented somewhere. We can steal them, eh!

Lecture Capture: No Longer Optional?

So, "RM" sends an interesting piece that "an overwhelming 82 percent of students said they would prefer courses that offer online lectures over traditional classes that do not include an online lecture component."

It is neat that my gut instinct is validated by the results of this survey. "When asked why they prefer courses that offer streaming lectures online, most students cited making up for missed classes, convenience, improving retention of materials covered, improving test scores, and help with material review prior to class."

I suppose my only warning bell here comes from the fact that "The research, it should be noted, was sponsored by Sonic Foundry, a developer of streaming media technologies." Perhaps it is because of what my graduate school professor, Martin Krieger, drilled into my head--to always watch out for who funded the research, or which think-tank sponsored the distribution of the study, .....

In any case, even if turns out the data exaggerated the trends, I am willing to believe that there is a significant percentage of learners who would like to have access to the lecture, online and when the lecturer is usually asleep. I.e., in the regular classroom the lecturer is awake and the students are asleep, which means that it is only a matter of shifting the time curve a tad with lecture capture. No? :-)

BTW, the lead researcher in this was a Professor Raj Veeramani. Guess what? Either he is from Tamil Nadu--the state in India where I am from--or his parents or grandparents came from there. It is a distinctly Tamil name. I tell you, we Indian-Americans are now beginning to show up everywhere. Need proof? Read this.

"Learning"--not the professor--is the focus in online

In the contemporary world where our lives are far more complex than lives fifty years ago, and where there are multiple demands on the few hours we have to spare, online classes make it possible for students to follow-up on the course materials at non-traditional hours--very rarely does their work come in between 8:00 am and 5:00 pm, and it is more often the case that they post them way into the night.

To quite a large extent, online classes once again, after a long time, places the emphasis on "learning" as opposed to "teaching". The teacher is no longer the "star" in the classroom, and is not the center of attention. Which is how it ought to be. The focus shifts to the content we read, study, discuss, and write about. The teacher is more like a guide on the trip, as opposed to being the proverbial "sage on the stage". I am sure that there is a small piece in me that likes being the center of attention in a classroom, which then makes me feel like Norma Desmond in an online setting :-)

Of course, this also means that there is a much greater responsibility on students in the online environment than in the real-world classroom. If they need clarification, then it is up to them to ask those questions or make comments. If they snooze, well, they lose--unlike the real world classroom, a fellow classmate won't be nudging them when they snore instead of paying attention!!!

For students, online learning is not inconsistent with many other activities we pursue: we shop online at what would be non-business hours in the "real world". Same for online banking. We rent from Netflix, and we even watch Netflix online--bypassing the DVD altogether. Things are changing so fast that most of us don't even pause to think about it. When we do--or when professors force people to do so, we realize how much the landscape has changed.

In such a context, you will find this hilarious satire from The Onion quite appropriate and educational--as always, the video is on target, and shows how the nighborhood Blockbuster video store will soon become something of a historical curiosity for the young--as much as a vinyl record player is now history. (nothing lost if you do not to watch this video)

Oddly enough, over the almost ten years that I have been teaching online, I find that my workload for online classes is greater than the workload if I were to teach this same course in the real world. I mean, for starters, I could have easily talked about all these with way less effort than typing them all here!!!

Technology and passion in the service of learning

In earlier posts, I referred to MIT's opencourseware project, and to the president of Blackboard remarking that online learning is not simply about putting a course online. So, it was neat to read in today's Chronicle a commentary that brings these two ideas together. I tell you, it feels great to know that I am not an idiot after all when I wrote those things :-)

Anyway, enough about me, eh! The author writes:

That culture of sharing and participation usually starts with the students themselves, as we see vividly in the complex, multiplayer game worlds and in the power of study groups, whether conducted face-to-face or virtually. Such a culture must also involve content. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology was a pioneer when it developed its OpenCourseWare project. Other universities quickly followed MIT's lead, and both the content and the means of accessing class materials and remixing and repurposing them for different audiences grew.
But it's time that we in higher education move beyond considering only content. We must begin to determine how that content can encompass multiple kinds of instructional or learning activities. It is, after all, the combination of things we do with content that creates learning platforms.

As I was reading it, my thought was that today's professors are like the DJs of today's music. DJs are totally unlike the old time disk-jockeys. The current ones mix music, sample them, every once in a while create their own music, and the best of them pretty much set the trends.
The fantastic aspect of Web2.0 is that I am able to sample content and ideas that I could never before, and am able to remix them to create my own music in the classroom. (Well, maybe my students think it is all cacophony!)

Anyway, the author (who is at USC, my PhD school!) then says:

We must think about how technology, content, and knowledge of learning and teaching can be creatively combined to enhance education and ignite students' passion, imagination, and desire to constantly learn about — and make sense of — the world around them. And we need to collect and share good models in which various professors' and students' experiences are commented on and tried out in new contexts. ....
.... Today the Web offers students incredible opportunities to find and join niche communities that ignite their passions. That sets the stage, through productive inquiry and peer-based learning, for such students to acquire both the practice of and knowledge about a field.
In the end, the millions of niche amateur communities — from the Latin word amator, meaning lover of — could provide a powerful learningscape for lifelong learning that is grounded in the learning practices that students acquire on campuses. That would be a major step toward creating a culture of learning for the 21st century.

Hey, maybe online teaching and learning will even revive the learning of Greek and Sanskrit? We currently can't offer them at most universities because if is simply not cost-effective to offer this for a couple of students. This is what happened at USC, when it shut down German. Online? Endless possibilities :-)

Should small colleges offer online instruction?

We typically offer arguments in favor of small colleges, small class sizes, personal interactions, etc. While I personally favor all these, I am not sure whether we truly achieve significantly better outcomes just because, for instance, a class is small size. My colleagues teach intro classes that have between 70 and 100 students each. I always cap my intro classes at 40. Not that we have done any systematic studies that measure how much students learn in these competing formats, but I am tempted to conclude that there is not much difference in the outcomes. If every one of us learns differently, then does it also not mean that some students might prefer the anonymity of a larger classroom for their learning, while some might like smaller classrooms so that they don't feel lost? I mean, that is only one example, right?

We can take it one more step; most students prefer not to come to class at all. Not anything new. I suppose as long as we have had classes, we have also had students who were not thrilled to be in the classroom. So, there could be a demographic group that actually will prefer online education? So, ought we not serve them? Well, that is the question handled in this Q/A with the president of

Brenau University, a small college in Georgia, has a strong focus on distance education. The institution offers 11 online degree programs, most of them career driven, an uncommon focus for a liberal-arts college. Brenau's president, Mr. Schrader, says that about 40 percent of faculty members teach the online courses.
Q. Why did a liberal-arts college like yours decide to start an online program?
A. We did it to meet the communication needs of the current generation of students. If the majority of the world is going to learn online, the liberal-arts schools will have to make a decision. They can't give up on their responsibility saying they don't like online courses; either they participate in them and do it well, or they throw in the towel.
The complete interview is here in the Chronicle of Higher Education