Upperclass Focus Groups—Fall 2002—Summary

 

In the fall of 2002, we again formed five focus groups of juniors and seniors, again aiming for a total of 50 students. The selection was again random, the compensation was again a Stanford Bookstore gift certificate, and again the groups were facilitated by Dr. Porteus' graduate students. This time, only 21 students signed up, despite several iterations of invitations.

______________________

 

 

The questions for this set of focus groups were different from those of the previous spring, being based partially on questions we had used for the fall 2001 web-based survey of freshmen. These were the new questions:

 

1. What purposes do you think a good I-HUM lecture should serve Are these different for fall and winter/ spring?

 

2. What purposes do you think an effective I-HUM sections should serve? Are these purposes different for fall and winter/ spring lectures?

 

3. What kinds of skills (e.g. reading, writing, critical analysis, etc.) do you think you should learn in an I-HUM course? Should you learn different things in fall and winter/ spring I-HUM courses?

 

4. How would you describe your fall quarter I-HUM experience in light of your answers to questions 1-3 above?

 

5. How would you describe your winter/ spring quarter I-HUM experience in light of these answers?

 

6. To what extent did your I-HUM experience influence your choice of your major or of any other humanities courses your have taken?

 

We will be brief in our summary of the reports of these focus groups because, despite the partially different questions, the same kinds of answers were found as in the previous year. In answer to Questions 1 and 2, students emphasized the importance of committed and enthusiastic faculty and fellows, in both the fall and the winter/spring, while being unclear about the differences between the two kinds of courses. Lecturers were expected to introduce the students to new and diverse viewpoints, to stay reasonably closely connected to the readings, and stay centered on the theme(s) of the course. Fellows were expected to be good and informed, even controversial, facilitators for good, interactive discussions between the students. IHUM classes in general were frequently seen as good introductions to college, and as bonding experiences.

 

Again without clearly distinguishing between fall and winter/spring classes, students noted in answer to Question 3 that they learned to write better, to argue and discuss in a public forum, but also how to gear papers towards the individual fellows, how to skim reading selections, and when they could skip lectures.

 

Though some students had some idea of the different functions of fall and winter/spring classes, most didn't, so the answers to Questions 4 and 5 were frequently conflated by the facilitators. In fact, several of the facilitators noted that students were often answering #4 and #5 while commenting on #1-#3. While a good number of students reported being satisfied with their IHUM classes, a smaller number were not. A number suggested that the IHUM requirement be reduced to two quarters or conflated with PWR.

 

In answer to Question 6, a fairly large proportion of the 21 students report having taken courses (more said this) or majored in (fewer said this) subjects related to their IHUM experience. As a student in one group pointed out, however, the interests which lead to an ultimate major or class selection surely plays a role in one's choice of IHUM class.

 

A few quotations from the focus-group reports will illustrate many of the points above:

 

Many students felt that this was their first “real” college course, and it was good to see a split between high school and college in the expectations professors had for students’ abilities to analyze and think critically about information and texts. (Focus Group #16, 6 students)

 

All of the students enjoyed the IHUM classes – or at least believed that they are good for freshmen to take, although many thought that it would be better if they were just two quarters. Students appreciated the choice-structure of the classes, and thought that if IHUM is going to continue being three quarters long, it should have another choice for the third quarter. (Focus Group #16, 6 students)

 

One of the students noted that most people have interests coming in and that’s how one picks their IHUM class. So it wouldn’t be that surprising if it’s related to the current major. . . One student didn’t think the experience was inspiring and was pointless to her future education. She and others were more concerned with skills and practical knowledge then and wanted more of an explanation or grounding as to the purpose of the courses. . .Another student was especially inspired by IHUM, still keeps in contact with one of the professors and continued on to be an English major. (Focus Group #17, 4 students)

 

Even if I-HUM is viewed as negative, it is a topic for bonding. (Focus Group #18, 5 students)

 

Students seemed to focus on how their lecturers and section leaders often disagreed on interpretations of readings. While some thought this was evidence of a problem with the I-HUM program, others saw it as giving them important insight into the reality of academia. (Focus Group #18, 5 students)