Where chaos stops and more chaos ensues. Where Filia plays the electric keyboard.
Where anything goes.
-//o_O\\7 *Home of the Awful, Mediocre and Pathetic* -//u_u\\7
|
|
Where chaos stops and more chaos ensues. Where Filia plays the electric keyboard. Where anything goes. -//o_O\\7 *Home of the Awful, Mediocre and Pathetic* -//u_u\\7 |
|
|
Wednesday, November 15, 2006 Ah, well, the sixth week of term draws to a close. And, according to my supervisor, it's about this time that supervisors and directors of studies generally compile their termly reports. As for a lowly student like me, I wouldn't say I'm suffering burnout (come on, it's only the first term ever!) but boredom, following the routine of going for lectures, reading and churning out that essay. The most excitement, I would say, would be that spine-tingling feeling of watching my supervisor mull over my essay while marking it, where the sound of the slightest scribble sets affrighted thoughts flitting about my consciousness. Oh, and playing Diplomacy, too. But in a rather vain attempt to bring some new structure and orientation to studently existence, I've spent quite some scraps of time thinking up strategies for Diplomacy ... uh no, rather I was considering lecturers and their styles. History happens to be one of the (probably) few faculties in Cambridge where lecturers are actually obliged to give out handouts every week, usually with among other things bibliographies and references, history being a discursive subject, while the lecturer isn't obliged to but usually provides a outline of the lecture and some quotes and sources. I have thus rather pretentiously come to the conclusion that there may well be an ideal lecturer out there, one which fulfils the following criteria : 1. Always coming in on time, of course, and being understanding enough not to start right off the bat but maybe engage with students a bit, giving out the handouts, while waiting for perennial latecomers like me to sprint in. But patience should only be granted to a certain extent, of course. Like for until after Charlotte has entered the room... 2. Is able to inculcate in students a full and complete understanding of the subject of the lecture without the (immediate) need for further reading. (Although, of course, some lectures are already about well-known or easily understood things...) 3. Makes good use of their time, which is to say that their lectures are structured such that they do not need to accelerate their discussion, or end the lecture more than five minutes early. They should not dwell too long on specific points or examples. They can be humorous, but should ensure their jokes are not inordinately deliberate, obscure or lame. Most importantly, I feel, they should not waste time with long pauses or prompts for "any questions". This last bit is especially troublesome for me because I seem to get a nervous tic any time the lecturer pauses for too long ... for some reason. 4. Is friendly and approachable, willing to answer questions after the lecture, and not immediately dashing off. Lecturers should, of course, not be obviously unfriendly or haughty with their students, even given the obvious gap of education and age. A degree of academic accommodation should be visible in their treatment of the subject. 5. Makes good handouts that effectively describe the lecture, and provide useful sources and references which students are unlikely to get directly from books, for example listing primary sources. Of course, there should always be enough handouts for all the students, and the lecturer should take initiative or at least pay attention that all students receive a copy. Well, I won't go on talking too much about lecturers in specificity, but I'll say my favourite lecturers here, for whom I've sat in on more than one lecture, are Dr. David Smith, Dr. Mark Goldie and Dr. William O'Reilly. Anyone who has attended the same lectures as me should know or at least understand why I think they're the best of my lecturers so far. As to the opposite spectrum, well ... to be fair, I'll declare straight off that I'm biased against social historians, because they in turn are usually very unaccommodating towards other kinds of historians, especially economic historians (then again, economic historians aren't accommodating toward any historians, only economists ... but I actually like economic historians, so ...). So the lecturers I tend to dislike are mostly social historians, although to be very honest I do quite like attending the lectures of one of the lecturers who would ordinarily disappoint most students, because I find it strangely ... absorbing. Ah, different tastes. The mid-term boredom has set in, I can't seem to find the initiative to read so much as I used to, well, I do like to read, but I hate taking notes, which really puts me off reading anything other than direct historical narrative. Where I once returned to the library to mug away the rest of the afternoon, I now spend my time napping in bed, which very unfairly still leaves me dead tired in the mornings and unable to get up satisfactorily early. The weekend seems so long when it starts, but it seems that time is wasted the most effectively when you realise just how much time you're wasting. How paradoxical ... and how stupid. Maybe I should have more coffee, more often ... but then I would need more money, more often. Damn it. posted by Charlotte | 11:57 pm
Comments:
Post a Comment
Disclaimer : The Slayers and Filia Ul Copt and all images thereof are the property of Hajime Kanzaka and Rui Araizumi. I don't own any of them, although if I had a choice I would want Filia ... ~//n_n\\7 |
|
|
|
|
||
|
 |
|||||
|
||||||
