Hi, El-Sadig,

I teach in the U.S., so cannot speak to your specific context. Here we enjoy a degree of academic freedom to teach as we please. Content is, after all, a function of expertise, and I am selected to teach content in which I have some degree of expertise. Others may not be qualified to direct my efforts.

In a more general frame of reference, I believe that faculty should always put the education of their students first. If we are not here for them, then why are we teaching?

Hi dear, I have been teaching for 15 years and I don't find any difficulty in finishing the required text with the addition of my special finger prints , like new videos about certain topics, data shows, recorders to listen to the direct pronunciation of the BBC,etc. 

Yes, We assume that the lecturer has enough time to lecture to the average student all the topics in the course plan before the final exam. This will be the case generally in an established course (one that has had time to settle down and has no rough edges). The design of the curriculum packs in material to meet the capability only of the average student. Usually no textbook matches the course plan perfectly, and it is the job of the lecturer to omit material that is irrelevant, interpret material that is ambiguous, augment the textbook with Web and other resources, and explain difficult parts. Still the curriculum is packed.

However there are some brighter students who are bored by the seemingly slow pace of the lecturer. They hopefully read more deeply, to fill their recommended study hours for the subject.

Conversely, there are the struggling students who cannot e.g., take notes fast enough and therefore cannot even begin to listen for the underlying important themes the lecturer is trying to get across. They will need to undertake much study by themselves in study groups and libraries to hope to get a pass mark. With the load of other subjects, they will fail to find enough time in the day and will fail the subject.

The solution is not to lecture less or to lecture slower or repeat more to pander to the bottom of the class. The solution is to provide support structures (for all): Courses on how to take notes. How to learn. Time management. How to read outside the class. How to study the textbook. How to use the library. How to form a study group. How to use the Web. Writing Centres.

This is a multi-faceted problem. First we have to assume that every student comes to the class equally prepared. This is not exactly true. Each student is the sum of their intellect combined with their previous course work and their experiences. Therefore, each student is an individual. An individual who has to be taught in a group setting. The second part of the problem is the material in the course. The academic department has decided (for whatever reason) a certain amount of material will be included in this course. While, I agree with Peter, that in the United States we have a great deal of latitude on how we teach, especially in electives, this is not totally true in core courses that are required. A student completing a core or required course is expected by the university, other professors, and prospective employers to have the basic knowledge advertised in that course upon completion. If one professor completes all 16 chapters of the text, a second professor completes 12, and a third professor completes 4(but very, very, well) then the student going into the next level of the course with a different professor might find themselves at a distinct disadvantage. The new professor assumes that the incoming students, having completed prerequisites, have a base line of knowledge or skills and teaches to the advanced material. If they do not, then this either puts the student at a severe disadvantage in the advanced course or requires the professor to spend a great deal of class time on review This eats into class time and compounds the problem for the next class. Would you want to be treated by a medical doctor who had only completed 2/3 of the material in each of his or her classes?

Hello Peter A Kindle

University of South Dakota

It is certain that practitioners are of the view that their students' education is a top priority. However, in the Saudi context, institutions do not seem to be much concerned about learning outcomes (LOs) although LOs themselves are a quality assurance requirement. At the end of each term, faculty will be required to submit course reports to detail the extent to which they have taught all the textbook prescribed as a main source for the course at hand. Usually faculty tend to please their superiors by reporting completion of all course items. Because there is much to teach in the syllabus, classes do not provide enough practice for acquisition to take place. Students also add to the instructional dilemma.  Because most of them care only for obtaining high grades, they usually discourage teachers’ attempt to proceed with course items. Usually whole sections decide to sacrifice about 20% of the classes each term to slow down delivery of the course.

Many modern push-button, consumer-oriented, fresh from high school students seem to think that it is the job of the lecturer to pass them. In fact at university, it is the job of the students to pass themselves. The way they should do so is by learning outside of the lecture theatre, otherwise, how will they ever become lifelong learners?

Do your students understand and practice the university requirement of two or three hours of self- and group- study for each hour of lecture time, depending on the ease with which they understand the subject matter?

Ian is right on the need for several hours of study for each hour of class. One of the things we have done in criminal justice is to use some of our student groups such as Lambda Alpha Epsilon to form weekly study groups for the undergraduates. Participation is voluntary, however those that do participate have much higher GPA's. 

Dear Arwa

Congrats on a job you have been doing well. However, maybe your students are very motivated to learn,  and for them, college is more than a place to collect paper qualification. Also, the students’ level of performance counts.

Motivate your students to thirst for knowledge. Get their curiosity about the world working. Get them self-motivated. 

My career-long struggle to assure quality instruction for students in contexts where those in charge do not speak another language, have never tried to learn one and don't really care about students.  Of course, in any work setting, we must compromise and make sure we follow the rules.  But "curriculum coverage" is a concept invented by admin to force students and faculty into a pre-conceived schedule of language acquisition, something that all the research demonstrates is a bad idea.  My best bosses have been those who trusted me to work with students in ways that would get them to a level of language proficiency that was required by a curriculum and institutional context where the learners' needs were a first priority.  Thank you for reading my long answer!  I hope it helps! 

Liz England

Thank you for reading and contributing. Sure, your answer is relevant and helpful.

Mr. Ezza,  Great - it's my first time to post on Research Gate.  Liz

Ian Kennedy

Gregg W. Etter

Thank you for your insightful comments. I'm still reading them to give more informed feedback. I'm grateful for both of you for caring.

Dear El-Sadig Ezza

When curriculum of a subject is developed ,content load is assigned keeping in mind the time required for transacting the content in class,learning ability of an average student at that standard, suitable learning material such as textbooks,ICT facilities , mode and duration of testing learning outcome of students. If performance is poor in exams fault lies in sincerity of learner , efforts of teachers and level of expertise of curriculum developers. We cannot expect 100% success all the time  when one or two interventions are  not effective. Certainly analysis of performance can give good feedback for  appropriateness of curriculum, learning materials allotment of time , mode and duration of exams and efforts of particular teacher.

R S SINDHU ,profrssindhufansclub.wordpress.com

Dear Ian Kennedy

Thanks for sharing your invaluable classroom experience. You have meticulously diagnosed the situation and unequivocally provided a most relevant solution. Practically, we used to delete some course materials but we were afraid that such an instructional choice might affect the students’ understanding of the subject under discussion. Also, some faculty would find it embarrassing to include the deletion in their course report at the end of the term, because they might not be able to justify it a way that the college administration would accept;  if they choose not to report it, some (angry) students would convey to the college administration that faculty has not properly taught the course.

I agree with Sindhu's comments but as he rightly stated, a combination of resources are needed to engage students to effectively acquire the skills that the curriculum expects.  Again, who designs the content is a critical question giving the ability of the level of the learners. In my school, depending on the number of lecturers teaching a particular course, all of them are involved in designing the course content.  It is only one lecturer, then he or she does this with the Head of Department.This way the quality of the developed curriculum is assured. The course content is designed week by week for the during of the semester. So if the content is too much one should be able to identify this early enough to adjust the content.  In fact flexibility is key to course content design.  I hope this helps

I agree with the views espoused by R S SINDHU. Such a demand on faculty would not bring the best out teacher and learners, and affect feed back.

Dear Professor Gregg W. Etter

Your pertinent remarks perfectly characterize our curricular dilemma. Indeed, those who wrote the syllabus erroneously assumed it best addresses the educational needs of the students. For example, first year students are scheduled to study a very demanding course in English pronunciation while most of them could not spell their names correctly. What they need at this stage is intensive courses in the four skills. Unfortunately, our “pronunciation” course turned out to be problematic in another way. It preceded an introductory course in linguistics and functioned as a pre-requisite to it. In my opinion, the exact reverse better serves the students’ needs. That is, an early course in linguistics introduces the students to all they need to know about human language including its sound system. In so doing, it equips the students with the suitable discourse to understand the jargon used by phonologists.  Even worse, the pronunciation course is modeled on the BBC dialect while the listening and speaking courses it is planned to serve are in American speech; thus, complicating the students’ task. As you see, our syllabus does not support our attempts to provide optimal chances for leering to take place.

Let me play devil's advocate, and try to justify the system you have been brought into.

Following the development of a baby, verbal development (including ultimately correct pronunciation) comes first, grammar much later.

Historically Chaucer came before America, so it makes sense to first learn BBC English to understand its roots before progressing to American acents which are derived. Students have to realize that every language has dialects. Tough. Live with it.

Bear in mind too that the education system starts with what is known and progresses to what is not known.

A university will also take a different tack to a college, and start with the abstract, and work towards the particular, at the end giving examples.

Nevertheless, bring these matters to the table at your curriculum development day.

First poll your students for their views.

Department of Education provide schools the content and performance standard to be implemented at school level. These includes the basic competencies to be finished at a given time with complete resources such as learners and teachers guide. The teachers role is to deliver the standards at a given time.. In short the standsrds provided includes the budget of work, meaning the time frame has to be followed.

What matters to me is not what the teacher should teach, but what the students should know. You can always make your course syllabus flexible. If time constraint, choose the most relevant topics that they need to master. 

Following the textbook topics or selecting few topics to match the level of students are both not appropriate from the Quality Assurance view point. What mater is the course Learning Outcomes. Instructors' experience help in mapping the LOs to the textbook topics. As long as the LOs addressed appropriately, it doesn't mater if you touch a text book chapter mildly or in details. This way you can satisfy both objectives, covering the text book (with focus on some topics and summary of others) and satisfy the course requirements represented by the course LOs within the planned time.

Thanks Dr. Samer for your contribution. I do agree with your reasoning.

Textbooks are references only of what to teach according to the course description. What to teach and what to test should be in accordance with the course description, course standard, and learning objectives and not base on the textbook topics. I apply this principle in classroom instruction, "Teach what you test and test what you teach"

If a stone can be used to kill many birds, it is possible to step down some topics from course plan. While it is very pertinent to note that course plan is primarily designed to go in parallel with the indicative contents, an adjustment particularly in an unlikely event that time is not on anyone's side is not out of place but particular topics to cover matter a lot especially those that will bridge the knowledge gap created as to complement the intended learning outcomes.

Dear R. S. Sindhu

Your comment that “analysis of performance can give good feedback for appropriateness of curriculum, …” appealed to me. It is unfortunate that our academic administration does not seem to take our recommendations seriously. We repeatedly complained about the students’ collective tendency to regularly miss the first and last weeks of the term (they call dead weeks) which directly affects instructional progress. Also, in many courses instructors complained that it would be virtually impossible to complete, say, 7 seven writing topics in 13 weeks unless they do so in a reading-comprehension manner; truly, many students reported that they had not done any writing assignments during the term.

Dear Esther Attiogbe

Thanks for reading and contributing to the thread. Where I teach, the Dept. board is responsible for designing the syllabus following general guidelines prescribed the University. However, once the syllabus has been approved by the highest academic authorities, depts. could not amend it no matter what drawbacks classroom experience would reveal. Sure enough, the same restriction applies to the course resourcing.

Dear Liz England

Thank you once again for your very helpful remarks. However, I feel that "folloing the rules" contradicts your conclusion that "curriculum coverage is a bad idea". Also, admin trust in what we do might not necessarily be supported by the rules.

Despite the importance of the course plan but I think it is possible to step down some of the less important topics of the curriculum if necessary

Best Regards El-Sadig Ezza

I agree with Rita Diloy.

I agree with the viewpoint of Samer Al-Imamy is that CLOs are the most important to cover during the course. These CLOs you will measure later and evaluate your course. So, choose from the textbook that covers the CLOs with a summary of other topics inside the chapter.