The article below explains why you find that faculty some times feel frustrated with their classes. I have modified the article by deleting parts of it (indicated by [....]) to make it easier for you to comprehend. (Smile)

"I'm expected to teach at a particular level, and I'm always having to move that level back or down."

"I'm doing things that I said I would never do, graduating or passing people that really don't know very much at all."

Regardless of all that may contribute to increasing numbers of underprepared students on many campuses, their presence challenges the kind of teaching that most faculty expected to do. Most do not feel confident about their ability to deal with underpreparedness (Stark & Lattuca, 1997). When students begin their college careers with educational deficits accumulated over the previous 12 or more years, the problems they can experience do not lend themselves to quick fixes and, despite remediation efforts for some students, can be carried over into the regular undergraduate curriculum. In fact, academic underpreparedness involves far more students than freshmen who are identified as needing remedial or developmental courses and extends well beyond the freshman year. This study, therefore, was developed to explore the dilemmas that student academic underpreparedness can pose for faculty, many of whom may see themselves as having to reconcile aspects of their work which are fundamentally irreconcilable. The two horns of this dilemma are the problem of underpreparedness and the academic integrity of the institution. In open-admission institutions, in particular, faculty must confront that dilemma and the other challenges of a teaching environment in which academic underpreparedness is widespread. This study, in describing how faculty deal with these challenges, seeks to broaden understanding of how teachers perceive the problem and how they feel about it.

This topic has not been rigorously researched, and much of what has been done focused on community colleges. Several studies conducted between the late 1960s and mid-1980s analyzed community college faculty and their perceptions of students (Cohen, 1986; London, 1982; Mason, 1978; Seidman, 1985; Weber, 1968), with Mason reporting that faculty found that students' "academic ability was far below what one would expect to find in an average college freshman class" (p. 11). Students, they said, "wanted, and at times demanded remediation within the regular course work" (p. 12). London, Cohen, and Seidman reported the difficulty faculty had in defining their roles and their frustration with lower instructional standards and grading practices necessary to accommodate the general student population.

Although there have been fewer studies of faculty responses to student academic underpreparedness in 4-year institutions, the work that has been done indicates that the problem of large numbers of underprepared students in the classroom extends beyond community colleges, encompassing open-admission and even selective-admission institutions (Bergquist, 1995). At the University of Pittsburgh, Stahl (1981) reported faculty perceptions that students' competency in basic skills had diminished and that course requirements had been reduced to accommodate undergraduates' abilities. Richardson, Fisk, and Okun (1983), after observing instruction at an open-admission [End Page 344] institution, concluded that the accommodation of underprepared students resulted in curriculum changes. Course content was reduced, while reading and writing shrank to a minimum. Clark (1987) interviewed 170 faculty from six disciplines in six types of higher education institutions and reported, "Everywhere comments about . . . poorly prepared students were prominent" (p. 221).

Boyer (1987) "repeatedly heard faculty members complain that their students are unprepared to do college-level work" (p. 73). He discussed the disparity between what teachers expected in terms of student preparedness and willingness to engage in the academic enterprise, and what they experienced in reality. A national study of colleges and universities by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (1989) found that three fourths of full-time faculty felt that students were seriously underprepared.

Concern about student underpreparedness has persisted throughout the 1990s, as an unprecedented number of underprepared students enrolled in the nation's colleges (Astin, 1989; O'Keefe, 1991; Traub, 1994). The egalitarian demand for access to higher education (Browne-Miller, 1995; Clowes, 1992) and enrollment-driven institutional funding have certainly contributed to the number of underprepared students (Bergquist, 1995; Traub, 1994), while recent federal scholarship initiatives aimed at providing two years of college for all who want to attend will surely exacerbate the problem, even at four-year institutions.

The decade began with faculty convinced that students were less well prepared than before (O'Keefe, 1991; Schuster & Bowen, 1990; Traub, 1994). A recent national study of the American professoriate's views on academic life (Sax, 1996) corroborates the results of the 1989 Carnegie Foundation study. Of the 34,000 faculty surveyed, 61% said students were a major source of stress, up from 50% in 1989. Only 24% said that their students were well-prepared academically compared to 27% in 1989. In a major study of faculty in various types of institutions across the nation, Stark and Lattuca (1997) found that most did not feel confident to deal with academic underpreparation once they recognized it, especially if students' learning skills were underdeveloped or if they were poorly motivated. The authors also reported that, while most faculty had little formal knowledge of learning theory, "they felt that they had developed considerable intuitive sense over the years concerning what worked well and what did not work for different types of students" (p. 183).

[....]

Basic knowledge and skill levels. Participants expressed concern about the general knowledge and academic skill levels of students and described those deficiencies as quite serious and pervasive. Despite their wish that students be better prepared, faculty did not seem to have a false or overly idealized conception of what students should know and be able to do. They also seemed to appreciate the student-centered ethos that goes with the special mission of open-door colleges. All respondents expressed views such as: "A [End Page 347] lot of these students . . . never really were educated . . . read very poorly . . . don't really understand what they're reading" and "They're not writing . . . at a college level." A professor of history with 27 years experience said, "At one time professors could assume that students arriving at the university would possess a core of basic knowledge . . . something to build on. Now . . . they're here almost as a blank tablet."

While all respondents expressed some concern about the academic skills of students in the lower-level classes, the majority were also quite concerned about the general level of reading and writing skills in upper-level courses as well. An assistant professor of Spanish marveled at how some graduating seniors in her classes had ever passed any course. "They're not," she said, "what I would consider somebody that should have a college degree. . . . They've been passed all along, I think."

Student attitudes and motivation. There was a general conviction that growing numbers of students simply are not properly disposed to learn. Complaints about student attitudes and motivation were frequent. Several interviewees expressed particular dismay and consternation about attitudes which they saw as having adverse effects on students' motivation and on the general academic environment. A professor of physics noted that the traditional motivational drive to get an education, get a good job, and be productive seemed absent in some instances. An English instructor lamented that students

don't have that sense of wanting to learn just for the sake of learning, and they'll snigger if you start getting involved, getting excited about what you're teaching. . . . It's usually the ones who are not prepared for college. And I find that . . . if you do try and comment on their paper or you . . . give them a low grade because they're not writing at the level that you want--that they resent that rather than work[ing] towards fixing it.

Subjects found their work complicated by the fact that many underprepared students are also undermotivated. Although subjects' perceptions of the severity of the problem varied, the general uniformity of opinion was notable. Commented an assistant professor of English:

It's bad enough if students are underprepared. That in itself presents a huge obstacle in terms of getting accomplished what you're supposed to accomplish. To have any hope of having a good class and keep the quality of learning up at a reasonable level for the majority of students, you're going to have [End Page 348] to have those underprepared students--which I think is the majority now--they're going to have to be in there doing their part and then some. They're going to have to come to class, do all the assignments, pay attention, follow instructions. Those are motivational qualities that I look for, that you would expect as a minimum. But I can't say that I see much evidence of real motivation, generally speaking.

They run into something that baffles them and just seem to wait for you to come along and get them started again . . . . Many of those little problems or stumbling blocks they could have worked through themselves with a little thought and effort. I spend way too much time on that sort of thing.

Even though on my syllabus I mention a writing center that's open here at this university to all students, they rarely take advantage of it, even if I write notes on their papers and say, "Go to the writing center," or "See me." . . . In case . . . they consider the writing center . . . humiliating or remedial, they can come to me privately. I have very few students who take advantage of that. . . . I offer suggestions on how to improve their writing, and I find [that they] very rarely do . . . the things that I ask them to do.

The most common experience that I've been faced with is one of divisiveness by the students who undermine the learning itself in a formal setting. To become abrasive, to become extremely vocal, almost unruly, in an attempt to disrupt the learning process which would allow that individual's deficiencies to be pinpointed. . . . The other is for a student to, over a period of time, to [End Page 349] simply erase himself from that environment by not coming to class and eventually that student drops out or is forced to drop out of the institution because that individual normally recognizes that he or she is not prepared and decides to complete the existing semester never to return again. . . . The third thing that happens is the attempt to bribe the instructor. That happens in two forms most often. The guys tend to want to become your close friend and ally--hang around and talk, that kind of thing. The young ladies think that they can impress you with as much of their body as they can get away with.

Participants seemed to view these kinds of behaviors and strategies as being essentially negative and short-sighted, rather than forthright and reflective of a mature concern for improving one's capacity to perform academically.

Students today, I think, are more prone than ever and more adept at finding easy ways to get by. In the past that wasn't a problem. If they weren't up to par and they didn't bear down a little to compensate, they flunked out. Of course, that still happens, but it's a little different now. There's so many underprepared students who, I think, approach their own shortcomings in a shallow way--you know, making excuses, doing sloppy work, being perfectly willing to accept the fact that they don't read and write very well, don't know what they should know--rather than trying to become a more academically oriented person, start working toward a long-term solution to the problem. And I appreciate that in the case of a lot of students it's a big problem, making up for what is lacking. That is not easy to overcome.

Several respondents noted that a significant number of students do not buy textbooks or other materials for some courses. Some faculty saw such behavior as an attempt to create an environment where that behavior is [End Page 350] tolerated and accommodated--a kind of student coping behavior that seems to involve subtle gamesmanship and posturing.

Resources. Interviewees often expressed the belief that, in view of the number of underprepared students in their classes, resources for teaching were inadequate. A sentiment heard frequently was that if an institution is going to admit academically underprepared students, faculty should be provided with resources to help make those students successful, not simply told to do the best they can. One participant put it this way:

So many of these kids require--well, what it amounts to is academic reconstructive surgery. And to do that it takes a special kind of teaching skill, it takes resources, it takes time, and lots of it. . . . Some major changes would have to take place . . . in order to make some strides in that direction. . . . Who knows if that will ever happen?

They [administrators] know that many of the students are going to come here underprepared, and they want to do everything they can to help them succeed. . . . I think that's a perfectly good mission. I think that a lot of English teachers wish that the students would get better training at the developmental level, so that when they come to us in their first college-level English class we don't have to deal with this quite so much. . . . But, when the administration puts 45 students in a class, we know they have no concept of what it is we're trying to do and what it is we're up against.

[....]

Role ambiguity. Several respondents expressed feelings of ambiguity and confusion about their role as college teachers. For example, an assistant professor of English with 12 years' experience seemed in a quandary over what to expect of students in terms of academic quality. Concerned about maintaining a collegiate standard, she was, at the same time, bothered by what she perceived to be an unusually high drop rate and seemed to have some doubt about appropriate requirements for students. She also expressed feelings of ambiguity about her teaching role and seemed to have been drawn into anxious reflection, self-assessment, and a general reappraisal of what it meant to be a college teacher. [End Page 359]

I'm confused about what I should expect from students. Is it unreasonable for me to give essay tests, ask students to read the text and answer questions, write about what they've read? Should I assign an article or two of outside reading? Some students handle that fine. But that's not the average student. And I'm not just talking about freshman and sophomores. . . . When I do give a challenging assignment, I'm setting myself up for a disappointment. . . . As a result, I seem to give fewer and fewer assignments like that--that require the student to more or less take charge and work and crank out something that is meaningful. . . . It's an indication, I think, of a severe lack of critical thinking skills. These skills just haven't been developed. They haven't had the practice. These kids have watched a hell of a lot of TV. They had very little of the mental stimulation associated with reading, writing, having to stretch themselves academically. That's why I'm kind of bewildered. I keep asking myself . . . "This is college, isn't it?" I'm not at all sure what that is anymore. But, here they are in college, and what do I as a college teacher do?

As far as my education . . . I basically pulled myself up by my bootstraps because I didn't have a family that encouraged higher education. And so, I'm expecting them to do the same, to realize that, that this education . . . is going to make them grow and be more complete. And I don't see that. They look at it as a means to an end, and I look at it as being . . . a continuing process.

I'm doing things that I said I would never do, graduating or passing people that really don't know very much at all. And I . . . see on TV about how a college degree now is equivalent to a high school degree and I say, "Yeah, I'm part of it. I passed somebody that I really shouldn't have passed." I feel like I'm drawn into this system. . . . [I feel] lousy [laugh], awful--I mean awful to the point where, you know, I lie awake at night thinking about it and wanting to get out of the situation a lot of times.

But despite the many negative comments about the quality of students, they seemed for the most part to have favorable attitudes toward and a deep sense of commitment to the teaching profession. Despite experiencing some of the negative effects of academic underpreparedness on their job attitudes, several respondents focused on aspects of their work that reinforced their attitudes and general outlook. "I have enough good students . . . to keep me just motivated enough to go on," noted a mathematics instructor. Another respondent commented that while the few students who appreciate being challenged were refreshing, there were barely enough to encourage her to keep teaching.

Emotional responses. Some faculty seemed to be notably affected on a personal level by their encounter with academic underpreparedness. Although the majority did not describe themselves as being deeply affected emotionally by the problem, a minority did. A 41-year-old assistant professor of English confessed that the situation caused him "great consternation. . . . I'm an emotional wreck, if you want to know the truth." After only five years in the college classroom, a 36-year-old instructor admitted:

I know too many teachers--and I'm one of them--that have suffered from depression as a result of it, because you just feel like "what's the use?" . . . I get really concerned for my students. . . . I guess I'm always equating their ability with my ability to teach. If they're not progressing, I assume that it's my, my fault, even though I know that a lot of the time it's their attitudes that are the problem.

[....]

[....]

The results of this study underscore, in particular, faculty concerns regarding student motivation, passivity, and caginess, for example. The words of respondents themselves best capture the nature and intensity of those aspects of the problem, suggesting a level of frustration and dissatisfaction beyond that normally associated with the fact that teachers and students tend to have different priorities and agendas. That notwithstanding, the negative perceptions and feelings expressed by participants indicate a growing rift between faculty and students at the universities where this study was conducted.

Concerns about administrative support were articulated mainly in terms of teaching resources and of the leadership needed to intervene in academic underpreparedness. It was noted frequently, for example, that large classes exacerbate the problem. While recognizing that there is no simple solution to the numbers versus quality issue, participants seemed primarily interested in seeing more open acknowledgement and discussion of how the classroom is affected. Throughout the data ran a desire for more dynamic leadership to facilitate that discussion.

As we outlined in the findings section, underpreparedness significantly affected how participants in this study taught, the way they structured their courses, and the way they evaluated students. Noteworthy concessions to underpreparedness were fairly common, and the study results corroborated the findings of several previously cited studies (e.g., Richardson et al., 1983; Stahl, 1981; Stark & Lattuca, 1997). Their general philosophical accord with the open admissions concept did not insulate participants in this study from the stress, ambiguity, and uncertainty of working in an open-admission environment. Pressures to accommodate the general level of underpreparedness and shifts from personal ideals of higher learning, for example, had fairly profound effects on some participants, as detailed in the findings section.

[....]

END OF DOCUMENT
http://www.press.jhu.edu/journals/review_of_higher_education