Advocate Online

Yes, holding student conferences throughout the semester serves a number of purposes.
Linda Currivan *

Assuming that "required" is a condition imposed by faculty members as opposed to their institutions, and class size is such that scheduling is practical, there are distinct advantages to relegating time to individual conferences.

Just as we do, students typically thrive on individual acknowledgment such as a handshake the first day of class or a professor's continual eye contact.

A conference early in the semester to establish personal goals, a mid-semester formative assessment, or an end of the semester summative evaluation are tonics against the "one-size-fits-all" group dynamics of a classroom.

Eyeball to eyeball with a professor, students find it harder to ignore areas that need their attention. A conference provides incontrovertible evidence of work submitted, mastery of material, and other requirements in the course outline. Reinforced with qualitative backing from a grading program, an individual update also confirms the nonsubjective nature of evaluation.

As an added bonus, there are fewer challenges to grading when expectations and achievement levels have been clearly discussed, and realistic outcomes anticipated. A final assessment is rarely unexpected if there has been a periodic comparison between a student's self-assessment and a professor's overview relative to comparative class data.

In the progression of an educational schedule and the multitude of student faces in each section we teach, it can be too easy to lose the personal touch. Unless we are inclined to get involved socially with students, student conferences provide the main venue for establishing invaluable, individual contact and direction.

* Linda Currivan is a professor of English at the University of Hawaii-Leeward and a member of the collective bargaining committee for the University of Hawaii Professional Assembly, an NEA higher education affiliate.

No, individual faculty members can best judge the need for conferences with their students.
Terry Fitzpatrick *

Frequent student-faculty interaction is an essential part of a quality learning experience. Students need progress checks and critiques of their work periodically during the course of instruction. But requiring conferences is too rigid an approach.

For one thing, students need specific suggestions on improvement when they are having difficulty, not at a scheduled conference time. For another, not all courses are taught in such a way that conferences are advantageous. Lab classes, for example, usually involve a great deal of continuous student to faculty interaction. Successful project completion relies on this interaction. An additional conference would be redundant and diminish learning time.

If we were to require all courses to fit conferences into the syllabus, would it ensure a quality learning tool? I can see some conferences becoming rigid and lackluster. In addition, we all are aware of student attitudes toward attendance. Scheduling and rescheduling student conferences could eat up precious office hours.

We all know that the one-size-fits-all approach results in an ill-fitting shoe for almost all of us.

We protest mightily when rules are imposed upon us. Why would we want to do it to ourselves? I can see some administrators using the completion of student faculty conferences as a measure of educational quality and a part of faculty evaluations.

Clearly, it is the quality and timeliness of student and faculty exchanges that make them valuable to quality education, not the number nor the visibility of them.

* Terry Fitzpatrick is a graduate of Spokane Community College, where he now teaches computer technology. He also serves as the higher education chair of the Washington Education Association.