Teaching Large Classes and Assessing More StudentsAuthor(s): Alan JenkinsSource: Area, Vol. 25, No. 2 (Jun., 1993), pp. 180-181Published by: The Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers)Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20003273 .

Accessed: 15/06/2014 11:21

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

The Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers) is collaborating with JSTOR todigitize, preserve and extend access to Area.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.129 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 11:21:25 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

180 Annual Conference

led a tutored tasting of unusual wines, which aptly demonstrated the influential nuances of locale, grape type and vintage. The ' sophisticated ' audience were able to identify ' a certain well advertised brand ', but red wines from England and Baja California proved more challenging. At the close of the proceedings one participant observed that this had been the most useful and informative IBG session he had ever attended; it is assumed that this was not a wine-coloured comment, but a considered judgement on a wide-ranging and stimulating afternoon.

(The papers by Kenny and Harrison, Schenk, and Unwin, together with an introductory editorial by Dickenson, have been published in the Journal of Wine Research, 1992, 3, 159-233, a special issue on the geography of viticulture)

John Dickenson University of Liverpool

Teaching large classes and assessing more students ' Sir,-Can I suggest that afurther change to teaching and assessment methods to enable more students to be taught at little extra cost which the Committee of Vice Chancellors and Principals might like to consider (The Higher November 1) is to contract out the setting of examination papers to the makers of Trivial Pursuit'. Colin Mason, Department of Geography, Southampton University The Higher, 8 November 1991.

The two stage workshop sought to provide some answers posed to geography staff faced with the problems of teaching and in particular assessing more students.

From 1986-1991 the estimated increase in student-staff ratios (SSR) in British Geography departments was from 12 1 to 1 in 1986 to 17 4 to 1 in 1991. This data comes from a survey of people in senior positions in British Geography departments. (Jenkins and Smith, in submission). Their replies clearly showed that respondents considered that large classes/more students were putting considerable strains on staff. To an extent there had been some innovations in teaching methods but as yet there had been only very limited changes in ways of assessing students. Many commented that the pressures of assessing more students were becoming intolerable and individuals and departments were investigating ways of changing their current assessment practice. This workshop was designed to spread information about geographers who had re designed aspects of their teaching and assessment to cope with more students.

In the first module, about thirty geographers from a variety of institutions presented posters demonstrating how they have re-designed aspects of their courses-including their assessment to cope with higher SSRs. Individual presenters are too numerous to mention but their strategies included, self guided fieldwork trails; techniques course taught, assessed and/or managed through information technology; delivering much or part of the course by staff produced learning packages; learning teams where students negotiate with each other for the grade they are to receive etc. My prize for the most innovating solution goes to University of Central Lancashire where third year geography students help teach first years computing while gaining academic credit for their efforts.

In the second module Alan Jenkins ran a workshop which demonstrated ways of assessing more students. The methods presented included: assessing students as groups; self and peer assessment; making one's assessment criteria very explicit and then giving only limited assistance as students worked on assigned coursework; using multiple choice tests and marking them using optical mark readers etc.

This is the second year the Higher Education Study Group has organised a session on teaching more students. As with last year, the session was very well attended. However this years attendance from the premier league universities was limited. Yet their SSRs have increased significantly (and look like continuing to rise). Perhaps they were still consumed in discussing research rankings or had they decided that under the new funding arrangements teaching quality will not matter?

Those attending decided that many of the innovations reported at the conference were of general relevance to other geographers. All of those from the Swansea conference will be published in the Journal of Geography in Higher Education. Those from this session will also be published in some form through the Centre for Geography in Higher Education. Anyone who did not attend the session (including geographers from outside the UK) who have developed a

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.129 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 11:21:25 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Annual Conference 181

strategy for teaching or assessing more students are asked to contact Alan Jenkins with a brief account of their strategy.

Alan Jenkins Oxford Brookes University

Teaching economic geography This very successful session, which attracted over 60 participants, was a product of the collabor ation of the Higher Education, Economic Geography and Rural Geography Study Groups. The context for the session was, first, that the subject of economic geography has undergone drastic changes in the last decade, but little is known about how these are reflected in the syllabuses of the courses taught. Secondly, teaching styles and methods are also changing as student numbers increase and greater emphasis is placed on the quality of teaching and learning, but the impact of these changes on how economic geography is taught is not clear.

The session, chaired by Doug Watts (Sheffield) and Gordon Clark (Lancaster), was organ ised in three parts involving a paper session, a display of posters and a workshop. Six short papers were delivered. Mick Healey (Coventry) described the findings from a survey of teaching economic geography in 50 UK institutions of higher education, which showed that economic geography teachers accounted for one in five of their teaching staff. Over the last 10 years courses had increased the amount of theory and the emphasis on links with policy, but these had contrary implications for teaching because these were the aspects which students, respectively, have most difficulty understanding and most enjoy. Indeed, an issue identified by several respondents was the image of the subject as difficult, 'dry' and theoretical. One possible explanation was given by Keith Grant (Thames Valley), who showed that course titles had a marked influence on the perception of their attractiveness to students. ' Economic geography' and ' Industrial geography' were unpopular titles with non-geography students about to start an economic geography course, while titles, such as ' Capitalism, space and society ' and ' People and work ' scored highly. Different approaches to teaching economic geography were outlined by Neil Woodroffe (South Bank) and Philip Crang (Lampeter).

Whereas the former advocated the teaching of geographical economics, the latter argued for the recognition of economic activities as culturally meaningful practices and the structuring of courses by arenas of social life. Fieldwork continues to be popular with students, though it is under threat in some institutions. Rick Ball (Staffordshire) outlined a field exercise in

Amsterdam which emphasised students observing and interpreting land-use patterns rather than the typical ' Cook's tour' common on foreign field courses. A useful balance to the

European focus was provided by Labius Mosadi (Bophuthatswana), who showed that the problems of teaching in Higher Education in the developed world are minor compared to those faced by the historically black universities of South Africa.

The posters focused on a variety of teaching strategies, including the use of no tutor groups (Doug Watts, Sheffield), monitoring the media (Rick Ball, Staffordshire), integrating fieldwork (Clive Morphet and Frank Peck, University of Northumbria at Newcastle), teaching techniques (Peter Wood, UCL), the use of secondary data to examine the locational evolution of companies (Tony Moyes, Aberystwyth), teaching the geography of consumption (Stella Lowder, Glasgow), and the use of a course text (Mick Healey and Brian Ilbery, Coventry). In addition one poster described the findings of a survey of economic geography courses in Anglophone Canada (Iain

Wallace, Carleton) which identified several similarities to those emanating from the UK survey, although greater emphasis in Canadian universities was placed on environmental issues, neoclassical theory and modelling.

The session ended with a workshop in which delegates took part in a lively discussion of issues in teaching economic geography with a panel of six economic geographers: Brian

Chalkley (Plymouth); Louise Crewe (Nottingham); Paul Knox (Virginia); Roger Lee (QMW, London); lain Wallace (Carleton) and Peter Wood (UCL). Much of the discussion revolved around what should be included in an economic geography course. Although some partici pants were defensive, others argued strongly that the breadth of the subject provides

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.129 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 11:21:25 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions