Pre-Semester Surveys:

The top reasons for joining the group were (in order of most to least): (1) being interested or intrigued in the book we were reading and (2) having been a member of this group for several years. What people hoped to gain from the sessions were (1) connecting to colleagues/intellectual discussion and (2) learning about narcissism and (3) reading. When asked if there was anything they would like to share the group did not offer comments on the pre-semester surverys. However, as the meetings progressed Susan, Michael, Jay and others brough material in for the group to consider when that material related to our reading. One such piece was offered and it was on the value of empathy, something that the authors claimed was lacking in younger generations. The piece can be found here http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/30/opinion/brooks-the-limits-of-empathy.html?_r=1

 

The Reading Questions and Surveys Used in the Meetings:

Meeting One Observations: October 5

KCTL Reading Group Questions October 5 (1)

Discussants: Mike, Janine, Peter, Stuart, Gordon Rick, Chris, Susan E., and Jay

Members reflecting on the lowering of standards in education were able to discuss ways that they had seen or experienced this in education. We discussed ways to strengthen the connection between students’s efforts to the grades they receive. Members felt that the book’s authors needed to do more work to distinguish narcissism as a psychological diagnosis from, for lack of a better tern, everyday narcissism. Another major theme was about how aware this generation of students was about the feelings and needs of others around them and whether we should be working to teach emotional intelligence. We ended this meeting with a general consensus that while the book was engaging due to its ample use of popular examples at the same time we were critical of the book for its use of popular examples.

Meeting Two Observations: October 26

KCTL Questions October 26

Discussants: Peter, Susan E., Cheryl, Maya, Janine, Chris, Stuart, Gabrielle, and Gordon

During this meeting we debated the idea of having the obediant student versus the disobediant but critically minded student. We discussed how we could expect behavioral obediance at the same time the student was critically minded – the two weren’t exclusive to each other. We discussed how the parental impulse to advocate for children sometimes goes too far in the case of a parent advocating for a college aged adult – within the group interactions with students’ parents were rare but the did happen. We also spent a great deal of time considering whether students have an academic knowledge base or a popular cultural value base. Susan brought in materials to show how she connects teaching emotional health with song lyrics.

Meeting Three Observations: November 9

KCTL Reading Questions Nov 9 Final

Discussants: Janine, Gabrielle, Maya, Cheryl, Michael, Susan F., Gordon, Jay, Susan E., and Peter

We had a lot of food for thought in this session. This part of the book revolved around social media and incivility. On the topic of social media we discussed the benefits of forging mentor-mentee relationships via social media but at the same time possibly opening ourselves up to knowing more about our students than is appropriate. Networks like linkedin and having separate professorial facebook pages were discussed as options. We also considered how social media and technology have become barriers to classroom learning and encouraged a culture of incivility amongst college students towards their peers and professors.

Meeting Four Observations: November 30

KCTL Reading Questions Nov 30

Discussants: Gabrielle, Michael, Susan F., Gordon, Jay, Susan E., Richard, and Stuart

At the end of the semester we focused less on the discussion questions and more on our overally feelings and thoughts about the book. Many members felt that the characteristics of narcissism and entitlement profiled in the book were less representative of the populations we serve here at KBCC (e.g., ESL, first generation college, careers programs). We talked about how much responsibility professors should and do have to teach social skills and emotional intelligence. We also as a group talked about narcissism within the professorial ranks and about how some of us have evolved from being professor-centric in our teaching to being student-centric. People enjoyed taking the personality inventory that measures narcissism but none of us shared our scores : -)

In sum it was a pleasure to facilitate this group and I am already looking forward to some good discussion next semester.

The End of Semester Surveys:

When asked if their expectations were met the group said unanimously yes with one caveat that there was a tendance to revist issues that had already been discussed. TRhe benefits of participating in this group were connections with other faculty, good discussions, and good question handouts for each meeting. In terms of least beneficial aspects of the group members noted the fact that they were not able to attend as often as they would like and that they would like to see equal participation in the discussion. In terms of changes to the teaching practice members reported working to be more aware of student narcissism, being more student centered, and keeping high standards in the classroom all of which were issues raised in the book. The members reported wanting to return next semester depending on book choice.