When class started in September this year, it was not the first time I met with a student walking through the door. That’s because I conducted online group interviews with students expressing interest in taking my courses in the week before they arrived on campus. All the students have to do is show up in the number of times I’m going to meet them.
Interviews are a tradition of Sarah Lawrence College, which I teach, and they aim to let students learn more about us as individual teachers so that they can see if they want to take one of our courses. This is a practice that other universities should try.
Interviews usually last about 30 minutes and cannot replace the description of my course or the syllabus I published. It is best to describe them as academics of film trailers.
The difference in this case is that unlike moviegoers, students are not required to sit quietly in their seats. After I briefly covered what I hoped would happen in class, they were invited to ask questions. In these course interviews, students are students with decision-making skills. When the interview is over, they can simply decide that my class is not suitable for them and then take another interview.
Some of the issues I get are the varieties of nuts and bolts. How many readings do I have to allocate in a week? How many papers do I need? But many problems are substantial. Why Book X instead of Book? What was the most interesting article I came back last year?
If there is enough time, I will ask my students to interview why my course might be of interest and how it fits in other courses they are considering. Students are welcome to stay after the group interview is officially concluded and a one-on-one conversation is held.
During the interview, I also tried to explain my thoughts on teaching. For example, I do not subscribe to the tonnage theory of allocated readings. I believe that a student takes a 500-page course per week is better than a student reading a 200-page course closely every week.
It is also important that I think students should not be strictly alone when writing essays. In the so-called real world, my editors don’t wait until I publish a book or article to provide their advice. They did this before they were released and I tried to apply this practice in the classroom. I consider myself as the editor of the student before becoming their judge and jury.
Speaking of AI and Chatgpt, I have nothing to say these days. I think this topic has been talked about. I told my students to stay as far away from AI and Chatgpt as possible. I ask, why pay good money for education and then turn to software that limits your critical thinking and research? I hope the writing assignments I gave were thoughtful enough, believing that AI and Chatgpt can only have the lowest value. When it comes to long posts, I want my students to consider the material they are analyzing with depth, which is not possible in a timed test.
Looking back at a week of interviews, I often worry that I have imposed too much on my students. But in the end, I think it’s a risk worth taking. Prophetic interviews offer students the opportunity to see programs that are more than just rote. This is a cause that depends on mutual participation and can be easily predicted.
