LES Forum on Student Incivility

Panelists: Mike Ewing (Counseling Services), Mary Geller (Student Development), Ken Jones (LES), Michelle Sauer (Academic Advising) (Summary prepared by Ken Jones)

The Problem

There seems to be a general sense that disruptive and/or unacceptable behavior by our students is on the rise.  Unfortunately, the evidence is largely anecdotal; we don’t have the data to show whether the problem is increasing and if so, to what degree.  This may, in part, be due to the reluctance of faculty to report such occurrences for fear of being seen as an incompetent teacher.

An even more fundamental problem is defining what constitutes student incivility.  The only comprehensive survey we are aware of was done at Indiana University in spring 2000, when almost 1500 instructors (faculty and Associate Instructors) responded to an extensive questionnaire - http://www.indiana.edu/~csr/Civility Survey.pdf.  Indiana’s instructors overwhelmingly agreed that such things as verbal and physical threats, inappropriate e-mails, and taunting of other students constituted incivility, but at the same time noted that incidents of such behaviors were quite rare.  Of the thirty uncivil behaviors listed in the survey, the most frequent was arriving late (30.8% of respondents indicated that this happens often) followed by cutting class (28.7%) and being unprepared (27.9%).  Male and female students were seen as basically equally guilty of poor behavior, but not surprisingly, younger and female faculty were more likely to experience incidents of student incivility.

The panelists described the central problem at CSB/SJU as a sense of entitlement among some students.  They do not believe that rules apply to them, and are frequently encouraged in this by parents who share this vision and/or have set a pattern of successful interventions that spare their children the consequences of their actions.  

The Causes 

Drawing on the research literature as well as the experience of the panelists and audience, there seem to be a large number of more specific causes.  These are grouped below by category.  

• Developmental
• Students aren’t clear yet on goals and appropriate behaviors for achieving them (“Their incivility is invisible to them.”)
• They are trying to cope with independence
• Some students have an underdeveloped sense of a common good or social responsibility
• Some have weak communication skills – can’t define internal issues
• Many lack problem-solving skills
• High achieving students often can’t tolerate failure   
• Societal
• Students see college as a continuation of high school, thus making it a requirement to be endured/evaded rather than an opportunity for fulfilling self-development
• Self-esteem parenting model means it is never the child’s fault
• Parental interference delays development of problem solving skills
• Students often have not been held accountable for actions
• Consumerist mentality; “I’m paying, so I own you.”
• Unrealistic expectations (44% of first year students entering 4-year colleges in 2001 reported an “A” average in high school, often for very little work.  As they enter college, they expect excellent grades in return for their tuition.)
• Legal rules that demand institutional confidentiality while students are free to speak
• More students with developmental problems are attending college
• E-mail, and the opportunity for instant, impersonal communication
• encourages unthinking, inappropriate comments
• Alcohol abuse
• Increased acceptability of violence in society
• Faculty actions
• Vague syllabi or frequent last minute changes
• Exam questions that don’t reflect class emphasis
• Unclear or inconsistent grading standards
• Unprepared, disorganized, unengaged lectures/classes
• Refusal to answer questions
• Coming to class late, carrying on past end of period
• Failure to look/act professionally

Possible Solutions 

Again, drawing on the research literature and the experience of those attending, we came up with a number of actions that might ameliorate the situation.  The most salient point made was that faculty and staff need to work together to send a consistent, explicit message about what is acceptable behavior.

Institutional Steps

• More faculty-staff communication on problems in their areas; faculty and Residence Directors/Faculty Residents should talk and get to know each other; Residential Life staff should be introduced in Fall Workshop along with new faculty
• Faculty/staff should report problems to Academic Advising
• Faculty/staff in all areas should have explicit conversations with students about appropriate behavior
• Faculty and staff should be united in an effort to change the “don’t ask permission/ask forgiveness” culture.  Demand individual accountability; help create a climate where mandatory means mandatory.
• Protect rigorous faculty in the rank and tenure process
• Provide consistent enforcement of a clear code of student conduct and make the results more public
• Make the extracurricular policy more visible and develop departmental and/or college policies on missing scheduled exams
• Be careful about creating unreasonable expectations (for example, Admissions promises on faculty availability and emphasis on “fun” over “work” and “growth”)
• Try to push student and parental conversations/complaints back down to the appropriate lower level
• Help students by making them aware of resources (for example, the availability of counseling) 

Faculty Behaviors    

• Develop a more realistic picture of student attitudes (they are not younger versions of ourselves so they won’t pursue learning for its own sake)
• Talk about your values, not just your content
• Stress that college should be a transformative experience; the goal should be to become a more complete person, not the same person with more knowledge
• Discuss the need for broadly educated citizens
• Don’t undercut the message with comments like “getting the Core out of the way.”
• Express exact expectations early
• Make your views clear as a normal expression rather than as an angry response to abuses - Encourage the class to come up with its own guidelines
• Be human – “I need this, what can we do about it?”
• Share the Indiana data on what faculty find unacceptable
• Model the behavior you want
• Start and stop on time
• Demonstrate inclusiveness, respect, really listening to students
• Avoid approaches that suggest an authoritarian response
• Never engage in sarcasm or anything that can be remotely seen as devaluing students
• Project a consistent professional image
• Be organized
• Dress professionally
• Remember you are not their pal or parent
• Don’t confuse students by acting differently in social and classroom contexts
• Play with and against student perceptions
  

Virleen Carlson (Cornell University) suggests thinking about how students are going to see you (“mom” or big brother/sister or expert or negotiator or coach).  Then use self-disclosure to give appropriate warnings and form adult compacts from the beginning.  Virleen announces, “I may look like a sweet forgiving mom who will love you no matter what, but actually I’m a control freak and former newspaper woman who expects students to meet deadlines.”

• Use appropriate techniques
• Don’t change assignments/expectations arbitrarily and independently
• Get mid-term feedback from students and respond
• Invite peer observations of your classes
• Use cooperative learning approaches
• Debates/role playing/case studies all push people to see multiple sides
• Teach conflict management skills
• Respond appropriately
• Stay calm
• Don’t personalize ill-mannered student responses
• Try to re-frame questions/separate issues
• Talk to students privately about behaviors that you find disturbing
• Be direct but not harsh or demeaning
• Figure out whether the issue is perceptions or reality; uncover the true nature of conflict