The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
How Do I Reach These Kids?
_J_
PedantRegistered User, __BANNED USERS regular
PedantRegistered User, __BANNED USERS regular
Questions to which I would appreciate answers:
General Backstory / Explanation
I have been teaching for about five years. General philosophy / classics Humanities courses. Read some ancient texts, and talk about them. These courses are often taken by students who do not give a shit; they are there to fulfill a requirement, and then move on to more business classes. Usually, I am able to get a few students in each section to change their minds, to appreciate the texts in a way they did not when they started the class. The ways I have done this in the past are:
This semester, I have a group of students who do not give a shit. They unapologetically, obstinately, openly fail to give any shits about the material. I have done all the dances I know, and none of them work on this group. When I talk to my peers, I receive two kinds of advice:
I dislike the punishment route. These students do not need another authority figure forcing them to jump through hoops for no apparent reason. They need to come to a self-motivated appreciation of the texts by recognizing their utility and value. They need to find a desire to learn in themselves. They need to engage the human condition. But I just can't get this group of steadfast dullards to think.
I figure some of you have experience sitting through classes you hated, and you might have some unique perspectives. So, what do you think, H/A?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXNj2BobjJ4
- Have you ever taken a required general education class in high school / college that you initially found completely boring and useless, but later enjoyed?
- Did a professor / TA change your mind about the topic, and get you to care?
- How did they do that?
General Backstory / Explanation
I have been teaching for about five years. General philosophy / classics Humanities courses. Read some ancient texts, and talk about them. These courses are often taken by students who do not give a shit; they are there to fulfill a requirement, and then move on to more business classes. Usually, I am able to get a few students in each section to change their minds, to appreciate the texts in a way they did not when they started the class. The ways I have done this in the past are:
- Show how the stories / observations are relevant to student's lives.
- Pose the moral lessons as arguments against their beliefs, so they students feel compelled to engage and challenge what we're reading.
- Show contemporary reinterpretations of what we're reading. (Troy, 300, Matrix, etc.) and compare how the stories are presented.
- Ask the students why they do not care, and lead them into the text by asking questions about their not caring. (the fun one)
This semester, I have a group of students who do not give a shit. They unapologetically, obstinately, openly fail to give any shits about the material. I have done all the dances I know, and none of them work on this group. When I talk to my peers, I receive two kinds of advice:
- Authoritarian individuals: Punish them.
- Education-is-life individuals: Those things didn't work? Fuck. I don't know, then.
I dislike the punishment route. These students do not need another authority figure forcing them to jump through hoops for no apparent reason. They need to come to a self-motivated appreciation of the texts by recognizing their utility and value. They need to find a desire to learn in themselves. They need to engage the human condition. But I just can't get this group of steadfast dullards to think.
I figure some of you have experience sitting through classes you hated, and you might have some unique perspectives. So, what do you think, H/A?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXNj2BobjJ4 0
Posts
You're going to roll the dice and eventually come up with a class that just doesn't give a fuck, like you're noticing. If it were me, I'd avoid busywork (homework/reports) and stick to group discussions maybe. Focus discussion on current going ons where students might be focused. Things like school, tests, sports, politics that affect them, etc.
It might be hard to apply that to them.
I also hate reports and homework, so I might be a bit biased but if there was one thing that made me hate those required courses it was getting nailed to read a fucking book every week about shit I didn't care about and then write about it.
This.
As a hater of school, the more busy work in a class the more I'm going to actively hate everything about that class and the less I'm going to care about what's going on in the classroom itself.
They just don't do it.
I don't know I'm not a very good teacher. If that doesn't get any appeal, maybe make an ultimatum that if they don't come prepare do having a class discussion on the topics, that they will get slammed with reports for the readings instead?
The Great Gatsby and Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance are pretty much the reasons I don't read anymore, one was English in high school, one was philosophy 101. Please tell me you don't give them that 2nd book.
And Gatsby? Even if you didn't like it, it's like half a centimeter thick.
Personally I want my kid to have to read, process, discuss, and defend their opinions, otherwise why the hell are they in school?
I imagine everybody who went through U.S. undergrad remembers at some point taking a class for a core req that they just didn't care about. The bar for getting that gentlemens' C doesn't need to be high, but it needs to exist and if students are totally refusing to engage with the class material there's no reason they should get course credit for being there. I am to understand that there are also no exams in this course?
Assuming there are a manageable number of students in the class, just going through alphabetically and asking them their opinion of the recent material might work. This is confrontational, but if all the students know that they're going to actually have to be accountable at some point they may do the reading, if only to avoid embarrassment.
ed: I mean, a big part of the meta-knowledge you're supposed to acquire in undergrad is how to learn relatively independently; i.e. pick up a book, read it, grasp core concepts and meanings, demonstrate understanding of the same. That's what these humanities core reqs are supposed to be teaching people to do. Academia does a poor job of contextualizing this to students, which is how you come to the position you're in. But at the most basic level they have to understand that the game is the game and if they want course credit they are required to at least attempt to play it.
that's why we call it the struggle, you're supposed to sweat
worth a shot?
Additionally, I would pick out some passages from the texts for each day. If you can't get a discussion going because no one has read anything, make people from the class read the passages out loud in turns, broken up by paragraph so more people read, then try to discuss the topic. If people get tired of being told to read passages out loud in the middle of class they'll start reading the night before, so they can discuss in class. If not, you can at least talk about those passages.
This did not work for every student but I enjoyed it and by the end of the semester I would say the majority in the class ended up appreciating this tactic.
I'm still not entirely certain if that was the plan from the beginning by the professor.
Most of the people I went to college with looked at that participation chunk of the grade and thought that not talking was a dumb reason to not get an A. It got people to start talking. Then, as the instructor, guide the conversation to keep everyone interested.
At my school we had long academics (90min) and even longer studios (5 hours) So teachers had the luxury of engaging students off topic before getting into actual subject matter. My suggestions may not work if you only have 45 minute classes, but here's what some of my professors did to get around art kids in academics, that worked on me:
-Section off time to read short things in class rather than assign a lot homework. I literally had a teacher ask us "How many of you read? Oh, well I'm going to drink this coffee, you have 15 minutes to try and skim this packet and then tell me what you understood, I'll tell you how wrong you are and we'll talk about it" It was a basic lesson in "You guys are going to have to read this shit". To someone who prides themselves on slipping by with minimal work (me) It was a interesting speed reading challenge
-Ask them about their course load. If you have anything other than freshman, see what their teachers are loading them up with, it may tell you if their assigned readings are too long and heavy. Better to get them on board a little bit at a time than to never get them at all.
-If you are working with freshman its worth noting that your references may be too old (Troy, 300, Matrix, etc.) assuming you have 19 year olds, these movies came out when they were what, 5-11?
Anyway this is based on my experience and it was an artschool, so, who knows if these apply outside of that environment.
@Liiya @Eat it You Nasty Pig.
There are exams in the course, so there are consequences. The problem is there are only two exams, midterm and final. I did the midterm review today, and there were looks of horror in their faces because "holy shit I have no idea what is happening". Maybe that will prompt them to study and learn.
@bowen
When they do not read, I try to explain the lessons they would have learned from the text using contemporary examples. That strategy only gets half the point across. They think about the larger issues, but fail to reflect upon the historical context from which those issues arise. For example, I can talk at them about our attitudes towards women, and the culture of victim blaming. But if they actually read Herodotus they would see this on the first page:
On the first page of the first history book ever written, in 440 BCE, we already have victim blaming up and running. Presumably, reading that in their dorm, without any expectation, has a greater impact than me just saying it.
@Eat it You Nasty Pig.
To your edit: I tell them that. Repeatedly. If they don't care about the material, they should at least use this as practice for grasping general ideas from something about which they do not care. They will have to do that in other classes, in their careers, probably in their relationships. That usually gets some kids. But it did nothing for this group.
That's one of the reasons my shtick usually works: I am honest with the students. If I think a requirement is bullshit, I tell them that, and then explain why they are required to do it, and the lesson it is supposed to teach. That honesty usually breaks their walls. But with this group? Nothing.
@bsjezz
At this point, anything is worth a shot. I can try to ask more specific questions, and be somewhat condescending at their ignorance, in a non-harsh way. Challenging them is something I have not yet tried. Good idea! Thanks!
@Demian
I tried the strategy of having them read aloud. Know what happened? Only one student brought their book that day. In hindsight, I should have given my book to students, and had them read aloud from it. But at the time I was just too damn frustrated. 20 kids, one book. That's shameful.
@davidsdurions
Presentations is a good idea. Maybe if they know they are responsible for a small portion of the text, they will be more compelled to read it. And it's not a useless bullshit motivator like a quiz. Thanks!
@Iruka
As I said, when I tried to make them read, only one student had their book. What I might do in the future is print off copies of the reading, so I can hand one to each student to read in class. Maybe staple the reading to a job application for McDonalds.
Thanks for the suggestions, all! If you have more thoughts I would appreciate them.
Finally,
How the fuck do you not enjoy Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance? It's so good!
Fuck em.
In High School, it's my job to make sure these students exit with the skills necessary to function in the world. It's my job to bend over backwards to make them learn.
College is a privilege. Not only is it a privilege, it is one in which one of the following is happening: A: Someone else is graciously paying for their education or B: They are paying themselves. In either of these cases, it is upon them to make the most of their education. No one is forcing them to be there. I remember distinctly 2 classes during my undergrad that I loathed with a passion. I didn't engage, I did the assignments, got my A/B/C, and promptly left. If they are being loud, dismissive, or destructive to the classroom environment, you have the right as a lecturer to ask them to leave. This is based on the fact that they are disrupting the learning experience of those who *do* want to be there.
That being said, there are ways of engaging with students. I have no idea of your methods or style, so I can only provide general advice - you may already employ many of these methods.
- Is it relevant? No matter how cool you think a topic is, students won't care if they can't use it in some salient fashion. In Philosophy/Humanities, this means goings the extra mile to tie the topic in with historical context, and how these concepts effect us even today.
- What is your hook? Very few teachers can begin a topic without a hook. Hooks are educational equivalent of 'clickbait' - something 'cool' that gets their attention and drives involvement.
- Set High Standards - When students aren't engaged, most teachers draw back on their assessment methods, thinking that students will become more interested if less is asked of them. This is a trap. That's exactly what students want you to do. Double down. Push them. You have the advantage at the collegiate level of no administrator bitching at you if you fail 10% of your class (As long as you can show that your Unit/Lesson Plans & Assessments are based on measurable standards-based statistics). Force your students to think in ways you know they don't want to. Your job is not to be concerned about their other classes. If they signed up for a 3 credit class, give them 3 credits of work.
- Despite the above, love your students. Smiling to a student you hate is the hardest thing to do. Believe me, I know. But the moment the students feel like you've lost control, know they've gotten a rise out of you, you've given them power over you. It sucks to hear, but this battle can be lost on day one, and can never be re-fought. The key is to get students on your wavelength without them even realizing it. I know that sounds like a Cat poster, but I don't know how else to describe it, and it's a super hard thing to do.
- Contradict their perception of the world - The best way to get a student to engage is to get them to the point where they are ready to start an argument with you. Humanities/Philosophy has a stupid easy time with this compared to me in Engineering. Spout stupid things to goad them into challenging you. Very, very few people can ignore things they patently disagree with. The best part about Philosophy/Humanities is that you can say controversial things without being wrong. I can say that the Earth is the center of the Universe, but I'd be wrong. Whereas saying experiential knowledge is useless and only textbook learning is appropriate is a wonderful way to get your students to debate among Plato/Socrates/Aristotle.
- Faraday Cage Your Room. Fuck I hate the internet. At least in High School I have a bit of control over cell phone / laptop use, but in College you can't do anything unless it is visibly distracting neighboring students. I usually make the rule that if you want to use a laptop in class, you have to sit on the edges of the rows or in the back of the room to not distract others - but this only works if computer users in your room are a minority.
- Email their advisors. - For the truly problematic or failing students. This class may not be part of their major, but most academic departments do not smile upon students shirking their responsibilities in their core classes - this makes their department look bad to the rest of the University if for example, Engineers get reputations in Lib Arts classrooms, or Vet Med students get reputations in Chem classrooms, etc etc. Also, Advisors are usually thrilled to have professors take an active interest in their students. It means you care. And the advisors care. It gives the advisors a chance to work with their students and make sure they are helping the students who are genuinely struggling (and may not have voiced their problems), and gives them a chance to weed out the shitheads.
That was a lot longer than I expected. Unfortunately, there's no magic 8-ball for teaching. In Engineering I can look at a solution and discern right from wrong, but in teaching I spend my entire life on subjectives, maybes, and what-ifs, rolling with the punches minute by minute. Many people dismiss teaching due to its historically low pay, saying that they don't pay well because anyone can do it. I always dare those people to teach a high school class for a week, with metric assessments before and after to measure progress.
Speaking as someone who got avoided philosophy and humanities classes like the plague on my way to my more physical science based degrees, that was hella hard to read.
You might have better luck with spending the class time reading key exerts and then discussing what they mean, and then have homework be something more along the lines of writing a paragraph or two (enough to show understanding and that they were paying attention without crossing into busy work territory) regarding their opinion/feelings of what was discussed/your collective translation of the material.
I say to focus the reading more in class because, as someone mentioned earlier, there is always one class that you will have to put minimum effort into to make time to do all of your other work, and for me that would probably be the class that I have to re-read each part of the reading three times to gleen any kind of understanding from it.
You can't save those who refuse to be saved. You can't force them to do the reading, you can't force them to study. When they come to you, near December, and start blubbering about needing a certain average to pass, just tell them it's what happens when they don't read the material and do the basic work for the course- and if they really want to pass the course, the best thing to do? Study hard for the final, and work your ass off to bring up your average, and if not? You'll see them when they retake the class again to get their average back up- and maybe having to explain a less-than-stellar class on their grade report to those who might be forking out a lot of cash to have them go there.
I can has cheezburger, yes?
The key to understanding the Iliad (IMHO) is to understand the mentality of the phalanx. It's Herodotus, a phalangite, talking about ancient greek heroes, more phalangites, in a story that's meant to be instructional and rousing (or at least interesting) to other phalangites. What matters to the phalangite, why does it matter, how does it explain the remarkably odd actions of various characters.
Take a few short poignant part of the Iliad that can be read in a few minutes or so and fits on a single page. If necessary bring printed out copies of the text in particular.
Ask about their initial impressions of the characters. Are they relatable or not?
Then discuss the moral values that matters to greek nobles, expected to participate in a phalanx and lay down their lives for the city and their brothers in arms. Some questions that tend to matter are "Why do they not challenge Achilles and his sulking?" "Why do they let Agamemnon continue to be a massive ass?" "What kind of cultural minefield is Odysseus navigating in his attempts to mediate in the greek camp?"
How can all these questions be traced back to the demands of the phalanx?
The same approach can be used to tackle many other classics.
Reading the classics isn't just about reading dusty tomes that someone else decided was "good literature". It's not just about exploring the roots of our own cultural legacy. It's also about understanding people living under vastly different conditions and with a different cultural heritage, something that's useful for anyone in business.
-Antje Jackelén, Archbishop of the Church of Sweden
With regards to philosophy classes, I will say that there is a general tend in those courses to simply present the original material as-is and expect students to have to wade through dense, archaic language just to glean a few simple insights.
As a philosophy major, let me tell you, the vast majority of it is a huge waste of time. It is entirely possible to understand the intent and argument of a given philosophical theory without having to force your students to essentially learn how they spoke in the 1920's just because that's when the person was alive, or worse, a fourth-hand translation of an Ancient Greek philosopher that isn't even in its original language. Yeah dude, that guy from the 1890's who translated into English from Aramaic translations of Greek translations of the original Latin is really going to speak in a language that is remotely coherent to a modern-day English speaker.
If your focus is on getting them to understand the material, the farther away you go from having them read the "original" (assuming that one actually exists in a legible form in English), the better. The ideas are both difficult and profound enough to warrant existing on their own terms.
However, that being said, as you mentioned being able to sit still and comprehend incredibly detailed or complex information is a great life skill. This runs the gamut from properly reading a mathematical graph to analyzing convoluted political arguments. If you want the challenge, then using philosophy as a way for them to pick up this skill is not a bad way to go, either. Being able to read a paragraph of Kant and then actually translate that into a coherent, logical argument is no small task, and something that they will definitely find useful later in life.
Realistically, though, it sounds like the vast majority of them just aren't interested enough to care, and are only there for the grade. If that's the case, then as other people mentioned, pretty much the only tool at your disposal is making it clear they need to do XYZ to get the grade.
Just a heads up, the midterm/final system is terrible for getting people to actually learn material. If you actually care about them remembering the lessons long-term then having regular quizzes and pop quizzes is actually a better way to go, and it gives them a better real-time assessment of how well they are actually understanding the material in relation to your expectations.
If you are having trouble getting them to just read the material first, then quiz them at the beginning of class and see how they do. As long as the quiz has a meaningful weight in their final grade, the ones that actually care about their grades will quickly step up their games. The rest who aren't interested enough on their own and don't care about their grades enough to still do the reading? Sometimes people won't learn until they make their own mistakes. And sometimes, they still don't learn after that. You gotta pick and choose your battles, unfortunately. (This is a really nice way of saying, "Fuck 'em".)
Yea, speaking as someone who, well, used to be a huge reader, my eyes started glazing over about two sentences into that writing style. I got the point when it was four sentences long and the important one is bolded, but in a long essay or story like that I think the only thing that would've caught my attention would've been the Lacey Demon girls. I haven't exactly read a lot of ancient Greek stuff, but considering it's translated from an ancient language anyways, the translator could've probably written that so much better.
Like, from a quick skimming of the link, there's
There's a couple dudes talking about being peeping toms, and all I can think about is why the fuck the author decided to translate this into Ye Olde English instead of an actual language. This translation needs a translation.
You have to set high standards. My rule was that discussion time was for questions on homework and classroom material. If the students didn't fill the time set aside for that, I had free reign to fill it with something else. The first time it happens, I offer a pop quiz. I would tell them that this is because everyone must understand the material if there are no questions. But if we still have questions, we can hold off on the quiz.
If you want discussion, you have to make it the expectation of the class and give some version of a carrot or stick.
And I think that might be the case. You need to decide whether you want to cater your energies to the students with enthusiasm, or lower the bar and spend time trying to engage students who may never care.
I'd say fuck 'em, myself. Throw some basic pop quizzes that are easy if you touched the reading to flunk a few total non-engagers, and try to find those kids you can spend extra time really diving in with.
Get up, ask them about things they do, like. Movies they have seen, stuff in the news, etc.
Then have them read something that has some bearing with it. Have a discussion the next day, involve everyone in the class, ask questions based on it.
If they don't have anything to participate with or share, then they are not reading and it will be obvious.
If they are bright, they may even be able to glean knowledge about stuff just from the discussion and be able to learn and contribute even if they skipped the reading.
You won't reach all of them, and hell, maybe this is just a class where you won't reach any of them. But hey, I know I'd at least enjoy a class like that (and have in the past).
The problem is kids aren't doing the reading. Because they're not doing the reading, they're not participating in class.
Now, you could try to get the students engaged by being more personable, attempting to relate to them, using lots of humor and trying to emphasize the "fun" parts of the lesson.
But that will work for a minority of the students. And you'll put in far more effort than you're likely to get back.
So here's my suggestion: Make class participation count towards the student's grades. And don't think of it as a punishment, it's an opportunity for some of those students who were thrown by the midterm to bring up their grades. But they can't participate if they don't do the reading.
Here's what I do with Freshman Composition Classes.
I give six quizzes throughout the class, which are 5 points each. Only five of the quizzes count (a total of 25 points, which translates to 25% of the final grade). (You can miss one quiz and still have a perfect quiz score.)
Each quiz is six easy short answer questions that simply test whether or not you read whatever it is I assigned. "What language was David Sedaris trying to learn? etc..." Stupid bullshit that anyone who read it should get. Six questions and only five of them count, because it's perfectly reasonable that you'll forget something from a reading that you read.
Yeah I'm going to have to say this is probably the issue 100%.
It's like reading Romeo and Juliet in Shakespeare's English. No one wants to do it, and I'll be damned if it makes sense without needing another course called "How to read Þe Olde English" as the precursor.
I also had to read that excerpt about 5 times. I can imagine if I'm presented readings like this, I'm pretty much going to go "jesus fuck, let me do the least amount of effort I can to pass this class, and look up modern translations in google and hope my teacher doesn't care."
This will help get some people who don't care to not care a little less, but it won't make them care.
And honestly, that second passage was an incredibly easy read. it's rather plain language what is being said without anything hiding behind double meanings. "Oh, you don't believe me that my girl is hot? Well, come take a look." "You bad boy, that'll tempt me so much! We were taught right and wrong and this is wrong. Please don't tempt me so." You just can't skim the passage or skip lines like people are taught for speed reading, which for college reading assignments turns it into a fucking pain if you don't enjoy the reading. For someone like me who sub-vocalizes everything I read and can't read faster than talking, that passage took a single pass and didn't take me any longer than it took to read any other post in this thread.
So my question is, are the students in question quietly not giving a shit about the class? They show up (or don't) and sit in the back and quietly accept their C or D? Or are they actively distracting other students that are trying to get something out of the class?
If its the former then you can lead a horse to water and all... if its the later then eject them post haste.
You need to decide if you would rather go with a carrot or a stick.
If you're looking for a carrot, instead of requiring reading hundreds of dry pages, perhaps try a 'cliff notes' and have them watch a related movie - Troy for Iliad or similar. Engage by saying something controversial and make them argue against you, then relate their arguments back to Aristotle / Socrates / etc. If people still aren't engaging, call on them at random or assign each student a portion of the reading to 'present' with the rest of the class.
If you need to go the stick method, pop quizzes at the end of class that cover specific details presented that day are a good way to get people to pay attention. Questions that can't be answered in ten or fifteen seconds through a Wikipedia or Google search, but you've made sure you give the exact answers earlier. People will learn to pay attention or fail. Trick questions that are trivial if someone actually reads the passage, impossible if they haven't. Quizzes where people can use the text, but nothing electronic and you don't provide references to the chapters. Someone who has read the material will know approximately where to look, someone who hasn't will be boned.
Assign out presentations where each student will present an analysis of a given passage or reading. Rotate it, maybe have two or three students per class present, and you force them to at least read one section in depth. Ask a few pointed questions to make sure they actually read and understand the material. Participation grades. Etc. Quizzes at the end of class so people can't skip out early.
If nobody cares or tries, fuck 'em. They are in college, so they are learning about the real world where you spend 8 hours a day having to do shit you would rather not do. Make sure people who engage and try pass - extra credit or a good percentage of the grade is participation based or make-up points for things they get wrong, etc. Realize and accept that some of the people who really don't give a shit and don't pay attention are going to pass too...but you can't get worked up about that.
Maybe even have a 'no laptop / smartphone' policy if you can for at least the discussion portion of class. People need to be able to take notes during lecture, but make the discussion portion specifically about discussing the material.
But most of all, don't be afraid to fail someone. And if someone is detracting from students who actually WANT to engage and pass, boot them right out and give them a 0 for the day. If participation is a third of their grade, say, which doesn't seem unreasonable for a discussion oriented humanities class, a 0 for participation and a 0 on that day's quiz can drop their final grade like 2-3% right there. Point that out.
At this point in the semester it may be too late to try something like this in order for it to affect anything, but it may be food for though in subsequent semesters. Personally I have found this group based method to be much more effective than what would traditionally be the case - me talking at first-years/upperclassmen just trying to pass a requirement for 50 minutes and responding to the questions/comments of the select handful who actually want to participate. Instead every student in both of my sections has said something about the material, either in their group or when reviewing as a whole with me. Less about being a lecturer, more about being a "master of ceremonies" with the material.
Also as others have said if a fair number of them are being disruptive, actively doing nothing, they rightly deserve to bomb the midterm and/or be kicked out of the class if they're hampering conversation.
Of course, I teach elementary school.
However if you think it is important enough, the previously made suggestions about altering the way the course grade is composed to include other types of assignments may work.
Alternately, hell, take your class outside or something. Lecture while walking around campus.
The accountability stick may be the one that best coheres with my teaching style. It's more work, but I like the idea of a 2-part quiz. Week-1 I give them a take-home quiz that directs them in their reading. What did Player-A do? Who did Player-B kill? What motivated Player-A to sleep with Player-C? That sort of thing. A guide to what is important.
Then, on week-2, give them an in-class quiz over those readings that ask for further details of each previously asked question.
The take-home quiz is "Did you do the reading?" while the second quiz is "Did you pay attention to the reading?"
It's a stick, by setting a requirement, but it's a benevolent stick that guides them, rather than punishes them.
That's the happy medium I have taken from your posts, and I truly appreciate the time each of you took to craft a response.
I'll be sure to let you know how my students disappoint me over the next few weeks.
I just figured they wanted an easy "C."
He pragmatically figured that if that's what they wanted out of it, they'd get what they deserved.
It's their money.
I'm not sure that full-bore cynicism and callousness was what you were looking for though.
If they're business students in particular telling them - you suck at business and always will and here's why and then proving it with monopoly money - will at least engage them temporarily (though, perhaps by making them angry). My philosophy advisor basically did that to business students and company boards (he was occasionally asked to speak to them due to people doing MBAs and so forth enjoying it so much.
EDIT: I Might not be a great case given I started off in Computer science and added philosophy as a double degree because I loved the elective course I did and the lecturer so much
EDIT2: In fact, I think any of a number of classic controversies are probably likely to stimulate interest - the monty hall problem (not a paradox of course, but still interesting), Newcombe's Paradox, the Chinese Room, The Gettier Paradox, Twin Earth etc... People will almost always come to a strong position quite quickly. The problem is that unless the students know what they actual point of the controversial argument/thought experiment is then it's pretty much just getting them to engage for its own sake. In my first year class we all took very strong positions on Newcombe's paradox, but I would have been surprised if more than a handful understood that the point of the paradox wasn't in choosing a correct answer but in how it affected classic cost/benefit analyses.
EDIT3: Contrasting Paley's Watchmaker with Hume's spider/kidney/idiot committee also generated a LOT of interest and really challenged assumptions.