As a rule, students reach university without having a clear idea of what
academic research means and demands. To them, researching and doing homework are
exactly the same thing, since most their school teachers always used both expressions
indiscriminately. For example, instead of asking learners to find out about
someone’s biography, the history instructor would ask them to “research someone’s
biography”; instead of telling learners to get information on photosynthesis,
the biology instructor would tell them to “research photosynthesis”: a serious
problem which has to be tackled immediately and consistently by every professor
in every course.
When it comes to the teaching of languages in general, and the teaching
of English as a foreign language in particular, there are two ways through
which we educators are to help students understand that when research is
carried out, facts are established and conclusions are reached: an intellectual
process which will be successful only if large quantities of systematic work
and critical thinking are involved.
1. Promoting Autonomy in and out of the Classroom
Can learners read and write properly, listen to or convey ideas and
thoughts effectively without getting in the habit of using dictionaries on a
regular basis?
All of my students, whatever semester they are in, are asked to bring
both monolingual and bilingual dictionaries to class, and to take advantage of
them while working at home or the library. By force of reflecting upon semantic
accuracy as a group, learners come to the conclusion that neither professional
language teachers, nor researchers in the field are supposed to depend on
“getting meaning from context”: a valid learning technique to be employed just in very specific situations.
But how else can students be helped increase their self-discipline?
My long experience as an educator and as a teacher of languages in
places whose perspectives, policies and educational approaches do not
necessarily have the same orientation, has always taught me to favor strictness
over flexibility, hard work over idleness, even though it may cause some students
to find me a little too unpopular at the beginning. They, unlike the ones who
expect to be challenged by teachers, resist change because they are used to
doing the minimum in a society that actively discourages studiousness and
openly fosters mediocrity. But the mission of the university has to be quite
the opposite: fostering studiousness and discouraging mediocrity. And we,
professors, by means of our professional career achievements as the best
possible example future educators can count on, are responsible for turning
lazy, neglectful learners into ambitious, studious people.
Thus, when I refuse to accept the excuse of an unpunctual student who
didn’t show up on exam day or the excuse of someone who didn’t turn in his or
her task when he or she was expected to, I ask them if, after graduating from
the university, a job interviewer or an employer will condescend to put in
their place or in the place of those who, whatever the reason, failed to
fulfill their duties. Or if, after paying and signing up to take an international
exam, the person in charge of administering it will let them and other late
test takers in. Obviously, my students’ answer is always the same: “No, they
won’t”: A reality that allows me to state that once learners realize what the
world out there is like, they wisely conclude that university must explain it rather
than deface it.
2. No Oral or Written Speculation in Academe
What must be the role of students in classroom discussions and debates?
In my classes, voluntarily quiet learners are tirelessly motivated to
share their ideas, thoughts, beliefs and expectations with their peers and
teacher. Muteness cannot be an option in our educational context (it is made a
rule from the very beginning of each course) simply because of the kind of future
professionals we work with: educators and language teachers. However, speaking
is not enough.
If one day, at any moment during class, it occurs to me that given the systemic
corruption that overwhelms our institutions and the disgusting magnitude of everyday’s
new scandal, it would be a great idea to propose an informal discussion on such
an aggressive cancer, what I want to hear from my third semester students is
their personal opinions on the matter so that I can assess how well they
express them and support them. But if “Corruption in Colombia” becomes the
issue to be debated in class next week, and students are required to find out
about a particular scandal –the one each learner selects, what I aim at having
in class is a somewhat chaotic discussion that helps us figure out how versatile
and changing that problem is.
So far, we have gone from personal viewpoints to the general, and it’s
time to go from the general to the particular. Now I ask my students to prepare
for a debate about “corrupt practices of common citizens in Bogota,” during
which I am going to evaluate the pertinence of their information, that must be
based on the facts and examples found by each of them in the sources they
decided to use, as well as on the appropriateness of their preparation for the
activity and their performance in the debate.
How must learners’ writing process be conducted?
Contrary to some of my colleagues, whom I can’t help admiring for
bravely defending the indefensible theory that people can learn how to write
well by simply taking writing lessons, I make it clear to students (and insist
on it every single day we meet) that someone’s ability to write proficiently
derives from his or her ability to read proficiently. Nevertheless, I do
acknowledge that an outstandingly reflective, studious and committed language
teacher (highly qualified colleagues don’t always fit this profile) will
certainly offer extraordinary support to those who are really interested in
perfecting their ability to put ideas in writing.
Before anything else, I think it’s worth clarifying that, depending on
the type of written exercise learners are facing, my expectations as a teacher
do change.
Suppose that, in order to take fifth semester students by surprise, one
day I ask them, at any moment during class, to take out a piece of paper and
write a paragraph whose heading is “My Opinion of Abortion.” Suppose that, on
that same day, after handing in their quizzes to the teacher, learners are required
to repeat the exercise “for tomorrow’s class.” Suppose that one day, after a
collective reflection upon the cases in which abortion is considered to be
legal in Colombia, students are assigned the task of writing, “for next
Monday’s encounter”, a paragraph entitled “When abortion doesn’t mean jail to
Colombian women.” And finally suppose that, as part of their final written test
of the semester, learners’ job is to write a composition entitled “Abortion in Colombia
As you can see, the four written activities share subject and, in three
cases, length. But all of them differ in either the level of complexity (the
fourth one with respect to the others), or the level of demand required of
students (a composition done at home after copious discussion on the topic takes
much more effort and commitment than a paragraph written in almost the same
conditions; a paragraph written at home “for tomorrow’s class” takes more
accuracy than one done in class and after no preparation at all). Likewise, the
teacher’s grading and feedback to learners must live up to the very particular
circumstances of each exercise, as well as to the amounts of rigor or
mediocrity invested by them in their work.
A few personal conclusions:
I.
Realistically
speaking, the average Colombian university student is still too far from being
able to conduct research.
II.
Many professors
perpetuate and even worsen the serious learning gaps and knowledge deficits
with which the average Colombian university student comes from school by
ignoring them and thinking to themselves that it’s not their job to contribute
to the resolution of these difficulties.
III.
Since schools and
universities practically don’t do conjoint research on the needs, perspectives,
priorities and other academic aspects, education is irremediably fractured, and
the condition will persist if collective efforts are not made.
IV.
If we educators
insist on accepting learners’ nonsense as valid participation and if mediocrity
is not politely but firmly combated, it will continue to be simply idealistic
to talk about student research.
V.
Intellectual rigor
cannot exist without self-discipline: two values which must be reflected in
every single teacher and professor’s job.
