Compilation of Upperclass Focus Group Reports—Spring 2001

 

IHUM Focus Group #11

Facilitator: X

Notetaker: Y

Attendance: 7 – 6 males; 1 female

 

1.      What did you like about your IHUM courses?

·         Exposure to literature. Most students agreed that the exposure to good books (literature they would have not likely read otherwise) was a positive component of IHUM.

·         Discussion of literature. A few students had very positive experiences with both their section and lectures from which challenging and stimulating discussions of the literature emerged. Students enjoyed talking about compelling issues and connecting the books in a larger context connected to their own lives.

o       Most students enjoyed when professors would link texts to questions they faced in their own lives rather than limiting discussion to specific disciplines.

o       A few students liked lectures which were broad enough so that everyone could connect to the material and get something out of the lecture. Additionally, when the text were discussed within a broader historical context instead of burdening the discussion with specific details.

·         Section. A few students liked the section style and structure, but all noted that the quality and teaching expertise of the TF was the key factor in their overall opinion of section, and often of IHUM in general.

o       Two students liked sections when the classroom atmosphere was lively and provocative, yet informal and ‘laid back’. The sections were viewed positively when the discussion was argumentative, not just a retelling of the reading. These students also recognized that their IHUM course topic was key in fostering these discussions. (The topic was not an obscure subject but an approachable subject for students of diverse backgrounds.) All of the students in this section were able to bring their own personal knowledge to the discussion and the TF was able to facilitate an engaging conversation with these contributions. (One student compared this to the lack of background knowledge students would have in an anthropology course.)

o       One student enjoyed the section because of the structure developed by the TF. The TF would select discussion leaders for each day, provide outlines of the reading, develop a few questions for people to discuss, and suggest activities like role playing. The student commented that the TF’s subject knowledge was apparent as was the TF’s unique ability to facilitate the discussion by managing the flow of the conversation.

 

2.      How do you think IHUM courses could be made better? [Elicit specific, workable suggestions]

·         Lectures/Professor

o        Two students expressed concerns regarding the ‘public speaking skills’ of the professors. The quality of the lecture delivery was a key factor in the students’ decision to attend lecture infrequently and of their overall opinion of IHUM. These students also commented that it did not matter how interesting the reading material was because the lecture delivery was so disengaging.

o        A few students suggested that the professors should ‘realize their audiences – freshman without lecture experience or literary analysis skills’. These students suggested that the professors should not ‘front load’ their own research on the students.

o        Other students suggested that some of the professors’ interest in teaching IHUM lectures was apparently questionable. One student, with a more positive professor opinion offered the details of her experience. Her professor would visit sections once or twice in the quarter and would both observe the TF and contribute to the section discussion. This student felt that this was a great way to show the professor’s interest in the students, in the course, and also provided a good link between lectures and sections. The professor’s presence also bridged the gap between aloof professors and students.

o        The size of lectures make it too impersonal and a few students felt no point going to lecture, primarily because they could still participate in the section discussion. This student suggested reducing the lecture size to 50 to 100 students.

·         Selection of Literature

o        Several students (4) agreed that the material needs to be interesting to everyone, as facilitated by both lecture and section discussion. The literature should, in some ways, be linked to general interest and apply to today’s world to ensure student participation in discussion.

o        One student suggested a need for a balance in the selection of required readings. The book lists should include both some canon and some non-canon works as well. Another student disagreed and suggested that the theme of the class was more important than the literature selection, while yet another student disagreed and suggested that the theme of the course was not important.

o        Most students agreed that the book lists should be shorter.

·         Section Format

o        All students agreed that 2 hour sections are too long. Additionally, students agreed that sections should not be held in the evening or on Friday afternoons. It was suggested that the section should be much shorter than the standard two hour format. A couple of students suggested that the length of the section has little to do with the overall quality of the discussion, but rather, has everything to do with the TF’s teaching quality.

o        All students agreed that the section enrollment should not be larger than 16 students. (Even that may be too large.) Ideally, section enrollment should be limited to 10-12 students.

·         Section/Teaching Fellow

o        Several students suggested that there is too much focus on getting PhDs to teach section and not enough focus on maintaining a high level of quality TFs in terms of speaking skills and discussion facilitation skills. Two students suggested they would rather have someone right out of college and knows what they are doing; someone with teaching experience would be good. Several students felt that PhDs are probably bitter about having to teach freshman in IHUM. These students also felt that this resentment might also be reflected in their grading practices.

o        Several students agreed that grading policies should be reviewed, and in some cases grading expectations should be lowered slightly.

 

3.      In retrospect and with the wisdom of hindsight, has your evaluation of your IHUM experience changed since your freshman year? [If so, in what ways?]

Overall, four of the students’ evaluation of IHUM has improved, while the evaluation of three of the students remained the same. (These 3 students’ overall opinion of IHUM was mixed: 2 disliked the experience; 1 enjoyed IHUM.) Also noteworthy, only 3 of the 7 students were enrolled in their ‘first choice’ IHUM course.

 

The explanations for this change in evaluation were varied. Below are the students’ direct quotes:

·         Writing and critical thinking skills have been important in all the classes I take. I learned more about dissecting book and putting thoughts on paper which has been very necessary for every class at Stanford.

·         Taught me how to bullshit – which comes in handy – same as academic bullshit curve – just how you write these things and learned to bullshit in section – discussion – not really bullshitting – learning how to get thoughts down on page.

·         It persuaded me to take other history classes – wanted to go more in depth than we could have in IHUM (2 students agreed).

·         Gave me chance to do stuff I have never done because I am pretty techy – exposure to field that I wouldn’t have got otherwise. (2 students agreed).

·         All other sections are only 50 minutes once a week – made me appreciate the hour and a half section to really delve into things.

·         During winter and spring quarters I didn’t learn anything – I may have even lost knowledge.

·         Made me never want to take humanities class again

 

4.      Did you learn skills in your IHUM courses (both fall and winter/spring) that you used in other courses at Stanford?

A few students commented that IHUM courses fostered the growth of their critical thinking and writing/literary analysis skills. However, the strong majority of the students identified what we’ve labeled as “college life skills” – those habits that most students acquire throughout their college career. For example, how not to go to lecture and still survive; how not to do all the required reading; and how to tolerate going to courses you’re just not interested in. Below are direct quotes:

 

·         Critical thinking skills

o       Critical thinking skills – I never thought football was something worth writing a paper on

o       Bringing multiple perspectives to same text – with so many different view points you can sift out what is really important

·         Writing skills

o       Just learning how to get thoughts down on paper

·         “College Life” skills

o       Learned that you didn’t have to go to lecture (3 students agreed)

o       Most people joke about how IHUM teaches you bad skills – don’t really have to do any reading – teaches kids who were really diligent in high school that there are some classes that there is no need to read; to be fair – any college class will teach you what you need to read and what you don’t (general agreement)

o       Some people are presented with classes where there is no way that they want to be there – bad classes – content needs to be taught well so you are not in a terrible course that you are trapped in for 10 units – but as for wanting to be there – there is gradient some people want to be there but it is just terrible;

 

5.      Should Stanford have an Area One requirement in the first year? [why or why not? If not like IHUM, what should it be like?]

The majority of students (6.5 students: one student wasn’t quite certain) agreed that Stanford should have an Area One Requirement for freshman, but 5 students didn’t believe that this requirement should necessarily be IHUM. Nearly all of the students agreed (6 students) that there should not be a winter/spring combination requirement. This combination should be an option as it was seen to as an advantage to IHUM, but not a requirement to prevent students from being locked into a section with a ‘horrible TF or lecture’. Primarily students suggested that more options be available, either within IHUM (if still it remains a requirement) or within the Humanities Department (if the Area One requirement was throughout the Humanities Dept.). The majority of students agreed with one suggestion, “make IHUM capitalist”. Simply, if substandard IHUM classes are identified by low student interest then they should be cancelled. And lastly, the majority of students agreed that “there is a benefit to having all freshman go through the same experience and be on equal footing” in terms of learning literary analysis and writing skills. However, these same students all agreed that this is only true if you can ensure that all students had similar IHUM learning experiences.

 

6. Additional Comments

A few students offered final comments:

·         There is a lot of money and it could be used better! They have plenty of money.

·         Use more multi-media but use it correctly and in moderation.

·         Movie critique IHUM would be very popular.

·         Don’t get too lost in literary stuff.

 

 

IHUM Focus Group #12

Facilitator: S

Notetaker: T

Attendance: 5 – 2 males; 3 females

 

1.      What did you like about your IHUM courses?

·          Literature selection. Two students like the selected literature, one additional student enjoyed how the class was not textbook-based.

·          Exposure to different cultures. One student suggested the exposure to different cultures shaped his interests and his selection of coursework outside his major.

·          Teaching Fellows and section. A few students enjoyed learning from their high quality TFs. Additionally these students also commented that innovative assignments and discussion methods help improve the quality of their IHUM experience.

o         I had a good fall quarter TF. She made it more a philosophical discussion and did not confine discussion to lecture and texts.

o         Liked having the same (good) TF all three quarters and chose to continue with him.

o         I enjoyed the innovative assignments. (eg, writing a dialogue between two authors)

o         My TF was really into the class, he had extensive content experience and a sincere care for the class.

·          Universal Freshman experience. One student enjoyed having IHUM as ‘something to complain about and bond over’.

 

2.      How do you think IHUM courses could be made better? [Elicit specific, workable suggestions]

·          Lecture. Several students commented on the intellectual level and style of the lectures. Some felt that the professors were not prepared to lecture to freshman. Several (three) students commented that they would either just not attend lecture or spend the whole lecture just trying to figure out what was being discussed. Most students agreed that morning lectures were even more challenging to attend and should be rescheduled.

Specific comments included:

o         A little more emphasis in lecture or section to connect things.

o         I found that if I came into a lecture five minutes late… I was lost. I didn’t go to lecture because I was lost.

o         Lecturers were experts in their own field (referring to team teaching)... they weren’t synthesized. It was confusing. Most people walked out of lecture not understanding the point of what lecture was trying to do.

o         I am not sure if the lectures are planned specifically for freshman... that would be helpful.

o         Lecture should point out the main things they are trying to get to and refer back to that thesis throughout the lecture.

o         Sometimes they refer to obscure things (details)... freshman haven’t developed that filter so we were lost.

·          Section. Most students agreed that section should be shorter and not held over the dinner hour. A few students (2) felt that the reading lists were too long which didn’t allow for any serious and deep discussion of each book.

Specific comments/suggestions included:

o         Sections could have a theme for the same week (within IHUM course).

o         Sections should meet one hour twice a week.

o         Use the Socratic model for section discussions.

·          Teaching Fellow. All students agreed that the main factor in their rating of the IHUM experience was dependent upon the perceived quality of their TF. Having a ‘horrible TF would mean you’d have a horrible IHUM experience’. The majority of students (4 out of 5) commented that the courses were graded too hard and three of the students noted grading discrepancies among TFs was a major concern. Other comments suggested that steps should be taken to ensure that the TFs are seriously interested in teaching freshman IHUM sections.

Specific comments/suggestions included:

o         I agree that grading discrepancies were widespread... people tried to get into sections with certain TFs because of this.

o         My TF did not want to be teaching the course... he made it clear to the students.

o         My TF threatened to fail people who did not participate... forced shy people to talk. They should be able to stimulate a more relaxed discussion.

o         TFs should not underestimate the level of freshman... I had a TF that treated us like freshman in high school... checked every step of the writing process formally, like checking our outlines, our first paragraphs and then our first draft….

3.      In retrospect and with the wisdom of hindsight, has your evaluation of your IHUM experience changed since your freshman year? [If so, in what ways?]

Three students felt they would enjoy IHUM more now, while two students had initially favorable opinions to IHUM and therefore their opinion had not changed. One student who did have a favorable evaluation of her IHUM experience noted that taking other non-humanities courses would have been more academically beneficial. Other students used this opportunity to reiterate some of the aspects of IHUM they enjoyed the most including the selected literature and the shared experience with other freshman. A few students also reiterated a few of the aspects that were least appealing including the intensive 3 quarters and the disconnectedness between the quarters. (Please see more detailed explanation in question 5.)

 

Additional specific comments included:

·          I think that I would enjoy it more now. For example, after taking philosophy classes, I would want to go back and re-read some of the writings.

·          We now know how to take other humanities courses. (Three students took more related courses because of IHUM, one took more for unrelated reasons.)

·          I really liked the experience... it boosted my confidence.

·          I think I would have liked it more if it weren’t three quarters.

·          We have writing down by two quarters... the third is like hitting us over the head.

 

4.      Did you learn skills in your IHUM courses (both fall and winter/spring) that you used in other courses at Stanford?

The general discussion focused around writing skills and discussion tools. The group was divided on their skill acquisition and refinement. Some students felt that their TFs provided valuable feedback and sufficient time to revise their work and integrate their comments into subsequent writing assignments. Others felt that their TFs did not provide adequate feedback nor did they provide time for revision before pushing students onto the next assignment. Additionally, a few students felt that IHUM did not help with their writing skills but PWR did improve their skills. Two students commented that they learned how to not attend lectures and still keep up in sections.

 

Additional specific comments included:

·          IHUM helped with writing only because it gave me practice.

·          My TFs were too rigid on writing style... but that changed with each quarter.

·          It didn’t seem that many TFs considered working with us on our writing skills as part of their job.

·          I had two TFs that were very good with helping with writing style, revisions, feedback, and provided individual meetings.

·          I learned how to get everything you need to get out of section and not go to lecture.

·          I learned quickly what the TFs wanted to hear in discussions.

·          I learned the skill of modifying your style to fit your teacher’s expectations.

 

5.      Should Stanford have an Area One requirement in the first year? [why or why not? If not like IHUM, what should it be like?]

Three students felt the Area One requirement should continue, but should be limited to one quarter only. One student believed that the requirement should remain as is and one student suggested that the requirement be abolished completely but the program should continue. Most students felt that more options should be available for students within either IHUM or within the Humanities Department.

 

Additional specific comments included:

·          Instead of a third quarter, choose an introductory seminar or a class in the humanities.

·          I think that the kind of school this is a lot of people would never take a humanities course and that is a big shame. (IHUM requirement is necessary.)

·          It is good to have a class with all freshmen.

·          One quarter of writing and one quarter of IHUM is enough.

·          I like the requirement, but give us more options of classes you are able to take with it.

·          All of the other area requirements are by course... it should be more like that (one person agreed). Students should be able to take one literature course or one humanities class.

 

 

IHUM Focus Group #13

Facilitator: A

Notetaker: B

Attendance: 6

 

1.      What did you like about your IHUM courses (both fall and winter/spring)? [what specific characteristics of the courses worked for you?]

·         Of the aspects that were important to keep for IHUM, a couple people in this group felt that the book list was good and introduced them to some literature that they “should” read but wouldn’t have gotten around to otherwise. The book list also seemed varied.

·         The second theme was a combination of IHUM being interdisciplinary & using different media (texts, poems, opera, film). Most everybody in the group liked this aspect.

·         There was similar agreement that it was helpful to have a class with all freshman in it – some students still have friends from IHUM. This was a much less intimidating atmosphere for many frosh.

·         Sections were particularly well liked when there was more group interaction and students were put in charge of leading the section discussions. Students were often better able to prepare the class for what was coming (through the class website) by giving guiding questions etc.

·         Almost the whole group liked having post-docs because they were so excited about teaching; post-docs seemed to have more room to deviate from subject matter during section because they knew the subject areas so well. Some TFs seemed by the end of the year – perhaps the reality of still not being a prof. had set in? Perhaps the students didn’t realize/appreciate the distinctions between TAs & TFs. Perhaps the qualifications of TFs should be made clear at the beginning of the year – it might increase participation, respect, and attendance.

·         Excitement from TFs & Profs was a big theme that made the courses better.

 

2.      How do you think IHUM courses could be made better? [Elicit specific, workable suggestions]

·         Most of the students felt there was a need to clarify what they IHUMs were going to be about. One possibility was to allow for shopping of IHUMs (including getting to see what books were going to be covered) – poster presentations during Frosh orientation would have been helpful. Some students had attended such events and found them helpful.

·         One suggestion that received little support was that three or four books would be common to every IHUM.

·         Clarifying course expectations was a major idea that emerged. Students felt they did not understand what was expected in terms of papers, participation, and evaluation. Particularly the evaluation of participation in section felt frustrating because students were evaluated on how much they spoke not on the caliber of what was said. TFs who sent out agendas or reading guides were likely to get better and more varied participation. Several students noted a competitive environment in trying to participate in discussions. This made it particularly hard for the students who couldn’t think quickly on their feet. About two students felt that this competitive feel wasn’t a big problem and that there shouldn’t be too much coddling of freshman.

·         The suggestion of making IHUM pass/no credit got a mixed reaction. Some felt it would have taken pressure off and others felt that they wouldn’t have done the work.

·         Clearer criteria for writing evaluation would have made it easier to get a feel for what the TFs wanted. Having writing tutors that work with each section would have helped a lot. Faster turn around time of getting papers back to students and more mandatory re-writes would be helpful. Perhaps there could be deadlines for TFs to return papers to students (specifically before the students begin writing on the next paper).

·         There was some consensus that the writing course could have been folded into IHUM in some fashion.

·         One “techy” would have liked to have gotten to choose great works about science and God or build up of technology; the other “techy” thought that would defeat the purpose of forcing you to take other types of subjects.

·         Having all IHUMs at 10am or 11am really limits humanities majors because that’s when other classes (e.g. in political science are offered). It would help to have some lectures in the afternoon – however, one student pointed out that this would not be amenable to the athletes who had practices in the afternoons.

·         Students would like to see more multimedia and co-teaching across all the IHUM sections. A couple students felt that it could also be made important and relevant to students today in all the sections not just some.

 

3.      Did you learn skills in your IHUM courses (both fall and winter/spring) that you used in other courses at Stanford? [If so, please describe some of these skills.]

·         If you are techy, there will fewer connections between IHUM and your other classes.

·         The skill of making connections between works appeared to generalize out to other courses for several students.

·         Some felt it would have been helpful to have to write more faster – learn to whip out five-page paper. Others felt that the fall sequence could include shorter papers with scaffolding and then winter & spring quarters could focus on developing longer essays. Others felt that there shouldn’t be any easing into college level work – the writing courses could teach people how to write.

 

4.      Should Stanford have an Area One requirement in the first year? [why or why not? If not like IHUM, what should it be like?]

·   Most liked the idea of combining POWER & IHUM if it could remain at a 5-6 unit course.

·   Who your TFs and profs are has made difference. Some noted a connection between having a TF who taught less in the fall being much better.

 

***An unsolicited opinion from the facilitator***

I think that encouraging sections to focus on groupwork, student-student interaction, presenting the readings etc. would be a good way to slant the training for the TFs. If that type of section were encouraged it could become a strong support network for students who are often away from home for the first time (in any significant way). In other words, all the research demonstrates that well constructed groupwork exercises promote better learning anyway, but now there are also very compelling stage-environment fit type reasons to take this approach.

 

 

IHUM Focus Group #14

Facilitator: B

Notetaker: A

Attendance: 2 students attended (one male, one female)

Though the number of students attending was very low, they had some interesting insights—one from the perspective of a Humanities major, the other an engineer.

 

(1)   What did you like about your IHUM experience?

·         Lecture—Both students had great experiences with lectures. Defining memories included high levels of expertise of the professors, team-teaching (when well connected), and the use of contemporary examples to give the readings relevance to modern times and students’ lives.

·         Section—The students enjoyed sections that were well organized, especially when the structure and themes for the week were sent to the students in advance. Specifically, the students liked being presented with guiding questions for the week to focus their studies of the readings. The most positive and memorable experiences in section came from teaching fellows relinquishing control to either students or lecturers for presentations at some point during the quarter.

·         Curriculum—Both students agreed that fieldtrips and alternative forms of media were really engaging throughout the year.

 

(2)   What could be made better?

·         Readings—The students felt that the courses required too much reading. As a consequence, each student would focus on a key quote or passage “to make it through section.” In section, comments would be disconnected, rather than a continuous, themed discussion. They recommended either shortening the reading requirements or mandating TFs to write questions to guide in class discussion. Both students suggested that the professors should favor depth over breadth in the selection of texts.

·         Teaching Fellows—One student felt that TF feedback was shallow and minimally useful. Papers would be handed back at the time when the next paper assignment was due, leaving no time to respond to comments. Both students agreed that access to TFs should be improved, and that TFs should take a more active role in helping students improve their writing skills. More generally, the students asked for more consistency across TFs, especially relating to the structure of section.

·         Grading—The two students had heard many complaints about grading inconsistencies across the IHUM program, but were not themselves frustrated by their grades. Both , however, agreed that the rubric outlined to them for IHUM papers was too general to be helpful. Further, they felt, although a consistent grading standard was being applied, it was never clear what that standard was.

 

(3)   Has your view changed?

·         The Humanities major appreciated IHUM in her freshman year as much as she does now. She looked on IHUM fondly because it allowed her to enter immediately into her field of interest.

·         The engineering major appreciated it more now. He felt more inclined to take additional humanities courses now as he finishes his major.

 

(4)   Did IHUM skills transfer to other courses?

·         Most of the skills transferred relate to writing: learning to adapt to different expectations, revising, style, etc. One student also commented that writing longer papers than he was used to helped him learn to stay focused for extended periods of time (eventually helping in the completion of problem sets).

 

(5)   Should there be an Area One requirement?

·         Both students liked the current structure of the IHUM program. First, they liked having a “freshman only” course that enabled professors to have more appropriate standards for their work. They also commented that a structured course was a nice contrast to the ultimate flexibility of the other Area requirements. Both students would prefer even more structure to help standardize workloads, content across sections, and expectations for writing and participation.

 

 

IHUM Focus Group #15

Facilitator: F

Notetaker: G

There were 7 students present, 5 females and 2 males. There were two Asian-American students and one African-American student.

 

What did you like about your IHUM courses (both fall and winter/spring)? [what specific characteristics of the courses worked for you?]

Students enjoyed creative assignments in their IHUM courses, they appreciated lectures when the professors were engaging and made the content fun and relevant, and they liked the wide range of topics covered by the different courses. Some students mentioned that they now have classes that make references to books they read in IHUM (even engineering classes), that they use their IHUM books as references in other papers, and that they know they will appreciate having read certain books when they get older. One student said that he learned lifeskills, for example, learning how to express himself. Students who are currently engineers said they liked having to write papers because it was a nice change from problem sets. Students liked their courses when they enjoyed the topics and content they studied and when their TFs were good. Most of the students felt that IHUM was a “unifying experience” freshman year, even if they specifically had a bad experience in IHUM.

                           One student liked the section format and looked forward to sections because students were able to discuss issues that were brought up in lecture. Two students liked having the same TF and classmates for the winter/spring sequence because they believed they formed a bond and relationships with their classmates and TFs. Another student had a good TF winter and spring quarters because this TF let students direct the section and just interjected comments with guided questions. One student did not like when her TF graded students on the number of comments they made in section. Another student did not like when the TF directed the conversation in section too much.

                           One student said that he feels his writing improved a lot by spring quarter because his TF would comment a lot on the first draft and give students chances to redo work. Five students generally felt that they received effective comments on their papers fall quarter, and four students said that they received effective comments in the winter/spring quarters.

 

How do you think IHUM courses could be made better?

A few students felt that there was not enough diversity of authors and that most of the authors were European. One student said that the lack of Black authors bothers the Black community and that they choose IHUMs based on how many Black authors are on the syllabus, but they rarely find many courses.

Another student said that it seemed like one professor did not know what he was doing until the day of lecture.

                Three students felt that the course descriptions were mostly accurate with the content of the course.

                Students did not like when the TFs graded their comments in section. They said that it becomes a “combat” section and students feel bad when what they say is not as “smart” as someone else. Students liked when the TF acts like one of the students but some TFs need to learn how to balance discussions and be good moderators.

Three students said that they did not go to lectures because they were not that useful or relevant, and that they would just read the books and go to section. Two students said that you didn’t have to read the books. All students agreed that section was the most important factor in getting a good grade, particularly the section leaders have a lot of influence. All students liked the breakup of fall and winter/spring quarters. One student, however, pointed out that it would be a good idea to let students “follow” their TF from fall quarter if they chose, because that TF is used to the student’s writing style. She suggested that IHUM make public what courses and sections each TF will be leading next quarter so that students have this information in advance.

                Students generally felt that there was a big discrepancy in how difficult the different IHUMs were. They felt that the program needed to standardize grading, number of papers, and workload more. Students learned which courses were easy and took them because they knew they could do less work or get a better grade. Some students said that they did almost no work beyond skimming “Spark” notes, and other students said they did all the work and were stressed out. Two students also felt that grading was inconsistent with the amount of work they did. One gave the example of a TF who gave her a bad grade early in the quarter, and then her grades kept improving even though her writing style didn’t improve. One student said that her TF wanted tenure and gave everyone in the class a “C” on purpose to impress the professor, but the professor had to scale the grades in that section to the rest of the class. Students also felt that there was a big discrepancy among TFs and that even within the same course different sections would be harder or easier.

                One student mentioned that it was really difficult for her to switch her IHUM course when she needed to in the spring.

 

In retrospect and with the wisdom of hindsight, has your evaluation of your IHUM experience changed since your freshman year?

                Two students said that when they were in IHUM it seemed really hard and a lot of work, but now compared to their other courses it was easy.

                Five students felt that IHUM was a good transition to college and a nice “buffer” to keep freshman from “overloading.” Everyone agreed that IHUM was stressful if you read everything that was assigned. Three students who were taking engineering classes liked how the writing and discussion of papers was different from their more technical classes.

                One student said that he doesn’t care now about talking in class and getting graded. Other students said that getting to facilitate and lead section was different than in high school.

                All students agreed that IHUM is a bonding experience and that they made friends in their IHUM courses through group projects and section.

                Two students felt that sections were long but they didn’t seem long at the time, two other students thought that they were just too long. Other students said that IHUM sections were the only sections where they could talk and go off on tangents.

 

Did you learn skills in your IHUM courses (both fall and winter/spring) that you used in other courses at Stanford?

                Students learned that they didn’t have to read all of the books, they learned how to speed read and pick out important information, highlight information, and be active readers. One student said it improved her critical thinking. Two students felt their writing got better, but improvement ranged from slight (2 students) to vast (3 students). One student said her writing did not get better because there were few comments on her paper, or that the TF would cross out paragraphs and just re-write them. Her spring TF, however, made time to go over papers.

                Another student felt that his verbal argument skills improved a lot because he learned in section to respect others’ views, but as he got to know some people he became less cordial because he knew what they were going to say.

                One student said that IHUM helped people who were shy because it forces you to be verbal and state your opinions.

                One student said that IHUM directly influenced her to take more humanities—she said that it changed what she wanted to do, and that she used to want to be an English major but through IHUM she became interested in political philosophy. The other six students said that it did not directly influence them to take more humanities—for example, two students knew they wanted to be “techies.” One student said that it taught her what departments not to take classes in. One student added that IHUM is a good way to get used to college and reiterated that it is unifying for their class.

 

Should Stanford have an Area One requirement in the first year?

                All students agreed that they want something similar to IHUM to be taught to the entire freshman class. Two students said that it was a good transition and that you could really stress yourself out without it. One student said that she will appreciate having a writing class because of her new written and verbal skills, especially if she pursues a “techie” degree. Another said that it forced her to write freshman year, because otherwise she would have taken all engineering classes.

                One student suggested that they combine the writing class with the IHUM, because the two together were stressful and too much writing.

                Another student thought IHUM would be a good Area 1 requirement if it was standardized more, and that students only had bad experiences if their TFs were bad.

                Other students said that lectures were not that useful, that they were irrelevant to the books, and that sections and lectures should be more integrated with the reading. Students would like smaller lectures. Four students said that they would like to have small sections and just eliminate lectures. Two disagreed and said that lectures taught them how to listen and were sometimes useful. Three students did admit that lectures were valuable when they were relevant and engaging, and that it might not be a good idea to eliminate them completely.

Students liked when famous professors had “open-door” policies when students could just go and talk to them. How engaging professors were, however, was not dependent on whether they were famous. One student appreciated it when her professor asked the class for feedback on the lecture and teaching styles, and this professor actually tailored the lesson to incorporate student feedback.