What makes an instructor or class excellent?

[boulderjohn]

Just as there are "loser instructors", there are "loser students",

Yes, there are exceptions.

When I was teaching in the mode where students were given physical books and told to complete the work, including the knowledge reviews, before arriving at class, we occasionally had students arrive who admittedly had not even looked at the books. They assumed I was going to teach everything in class anyway, so why bother? That wasn't going to happen, because the design of the class was for me to review the materials, identify confusions and misunderstandings, and amplify the material as needed. I sent them home to do the work that was supposed to have been done so they could start the class anew. I have no idea how many did that, since they would have been assigned to another instructor in the next scheduled class.

They learned this practice in school. I used to show how this work in staff development sessions. The short version of this is that they know that in the teacher's review for the test, the key issues on the test will be covered because the teacher does not want mass failures, so they could get what they needed to know to pass the test from that review.

 

[jadairiii]

Yes, there are exceptions.

That is why I always find statements using the terms "never" or "always" amusing.

The world is a bell curve, there are outliers, the far ends of the curve. Instructors that fail everyone, instructors that pass everyone, awesome students and...not so awesome students. Or I can go back to my days studying calculus and "limits", you can never get to the absolute, but you can get close!

 

[boulderjohn]

The world is a bell curve, there are outliers, the far ends of the curve. Instructors that fail everyone, instructors that pass everyone, awesome students and...not so awesome students

Bell curve thinking is problematic in instruction. The bell curve in theory describes the abilities of the overall general population. Here are some problems applying that thinking to education.

1. You rarely have a class that includes all of the general population. The lowest levels are not represented, and the higher the difficulty level of the class, the more that is true.
2. The curve represents general ability, not achievement. It does not include motivation, effort, etc.
3. It assumes the teacher is 100% ineffective; achievement depends totally upon student ability.
4. As I learned in my education classes, creating a bell curve result on an assessment requires manipulation of the test to create what is actually a false result. Norm-referenced tests that use the bell curve (like the SATs) regularly adjust questions to ensure a bell curve result. That is why it is laughable when people look at SAT results and say student performance has not improved. Those results will never show any real improvement because if students improve overall, the test is changed to keep the mean at about 500, with 3 standard deviations (100 points) above and below.
5. As applied in a classroom, it creates a grade distribution that compares the students to each other rather than to a standard. I remember one very frustrated teacher whose department gave the same final exam. One teacher did not have a single student get what would be normally considered a passing grade, but he curved the scores to that his top students got A's, even though their achievement was below the failing grades of the other teachers in the department.

The ideal of a well taught general education class is a J-curve, with spike at the low end reflecting students who essentially packed it in and didn't try and then showing a sharp rise for the students who responded well to instruction and met the class standards. In classes like scuba, the lower end students are usually not taking the class, so that part of the curve is usually missing.

 

[Rilelen]

The ideal of a well taught general education class is a J-curve, with spike at the low end reflecting students who essentially packed it in and didn't try and then showing a sharp rise for the students who responded well to instruction and met the class standards. In classes like scuba, the lower end students are usually not taking the class, so that part of the curve is usually missing.

Yep, I teach a large intro-level survey course…students tend to either fail OR make an A/high B. If you don’t come to class and don’t engage with the material, you aren’t going to pass. But the course is set up so that motivated students who do the work can and should walk away with the basic core knowledge the class is intended to impart. I like your point that not only is diving the same way, but that it tends to omit the non-motivated students who don’t even bother engaging with the material.

 

[MacDuyver]

1. Instructor genuinely loves diving and teaching, and is committed to both.

2. Instructor knows his/her **** and teaches it in a way that’s easily understandable without cutting corners or assuming the student actually retained the E Learning. They should review the E Learning but not assume you memorized it.

3. Instructor harps on the important stuff, and drills to standard. Like the actual standard and not something they made up because they went to BUDS back in the 80’s. If you want to teach a side technique or make me re-do drills I wasn’t doing right, that’s fine it’s your job to do that. if the standard says I have to do a 15m subsurface maskless swim without air, I’m not doing a 30m one because you want to be extra sure. Take it up with the agency.

Optional:
Instructor is personable. If you’re cool to hang out with, great. I’ll take a highly competent instructor who’s kind of aloof over a cool instructor is like to have deco beers with but is generally lax on teaching. Ideally it should be a mix of both but if I’m taking a class I want an instructor not a DM.