Wednesday, January 21
First day of class. 35 students are registered, 40 are in the room. From the names on the class list I had expected such diversity of the students. A large number of Muslim students (about 9). I decided that I would not call out attendance on the first day. I hand out the syllabus and explain that we would go over some of the more general topics listed on the syllabus (primarily that this is a writing-intensive class) and that they would have until Wednesday to look at it in more detail and come back to me with questions next class session (Friday). This left us with twenty minutes to do a brief exercise to get us into the material. I hand out ten definitions (attempts at defining) religion and ask the students to write a brief essay about which of these definitions best describes Islam in their understanding and why… They discussed their essays in pairs and we brought the discussion into the plenary for the last ten minutes after which I collected their writings. I left them with a brief reading assignment to make sure that they have an incentive to quickly acquire the textbooks.
The students’ questions with regards to the syllabus for the most part were directed at the required readings (I had all of the books with me) and the nature and technicalities of the (written) assignments. It seems necessary to continue with these questions (mainly assignments) next class session as many students felt somewhat threatened by the amount of reading and writing expected of them. As for the writing exercise, I received thoughtful questions and comments about defining Islam already indicating some student’s perceptiveness of the difficulties inherent in such an endeavor. In general the students seem talkative (about which I am quite happy). I know only one of them from a previous class. I know the brother of another student from last semester’s Introduction to Western Religions, and one of the Muslim students was a class in Ayoub’s class more than a year ago. I’ve also seen some of the other Muslim students on campus when they took Arabic (although not in the classes I participated in).
Friday, January 23
New faces! The syllabus must have scared some of those initially registered. About five new students are in the class today. We go over the numerous (written) assignments that students are required to do. Somewhat tedious as I have to repeat some information that I had already gone over during the previous session. This takes up almost the entire class session. Nevertheless, I felt that as demanding as the reading and writing assignments appear on the syllabus, it is probably a good idea to clarify my expectations and the technical procedures involved in meeting these requirements. We recap briefly the “definition” exercise and discuss the difficulties surrounding any simple answer to the question of “What is Islam?” My assignment for them is to find an encyclopedia/dictionary definition of Islam and bring it to class (in addition to the readings for next week including the journal entries and discussion questions they have to come up with).
Week 2
Monday, January 26
Snow Day!!! Only twenty-five students are in class. I had seen from the Blackboard registration that more students had dropped the class and other had enrolled in their stead. I am a concerned at this point that the newcomers will not study the syllabus carefully and take this class too lightly. Isn’t there (shouldn’t there be) a procedure that requires students to get the instructor’s signature if they want to enroll after the first week of classes??? The readings for over the weekend were substantial. How will the new students catch up? With only twenty-five in the class today, the new students are not even among them. At least I saw almost only familiar faces.
I have them fill out identification card and use them for attendance today. Afterwards groups of four students discuss their findings from the dictionary/encyclopedia. Not everyone had done the assignment but everyone is discussing something – some are already engaged in a controversial discussion about Said. I sense some negative emotions from one student (John) towards the general topic of Said’s writing but in his statements in front of the class he is moderate and insightful with his comments. In the subsequent discussion students participate well; they share their results from the group work (I collect on the blackboard); we deliberate if any of the aspects (or all put together) would make a good definition of Islam. I lecture a little in question-and-answer style about the etymological meaning of “Islam” and, derived from that, what a “Muslim” is. We reflect on the difference between Arabs and Muslims and look at the geographical distribution of Muslims around the globe. Result: The Great Diversity which we call Islam. I think that point is demonstrated well. Students seem to agree that 1,400 years of history and a presence on all continents make a precise definition of what Islam is problematic.
I change gears: I want to find a way to shift our conversation to Said since I had already heard much talk about the reading during the exercise. I choose the idea of “diversity” as something that could provide a smooth transfer as Said claims that an appreciation of this diversity is lacking in the media coverage described in Covering Islam. I don’t seem to be getting my point across. At least, students seem at loss with my questions. I read a few quotations from the introduction and have them respond. Using the book’s title I ask them to reflect on what Said implies with “covering.” We end in a list of things on the blackboard that are being covered by the media representation of Islam, but its hastily drawn out, not developed, and I run out of time too early. I’m not happy with this. Are the students? I manage to give them their assignment for Wednesday: bring two newspaper articles that somewhat treat (“cover”) Islam, summarize them, and evaluate how Islam/Muslims are being depicted. I still feel that the issue of what is “covered” is a helpful one to explore Said’s conceptual frame for his media analysis. Maybe I can find a way to bring this up again in the next class session.
Wednesday, January 28
And again! I encounter students I had not seen before. I am getting better with the names, though. I used the ID cards in the beginning of class and had the new students identify themselves. Didn’t take too long. We got started with me putting the past sessions into perspective: defining Islam. That has been our topic. Today’s sub-topic was to be: How the media defines/presents Islam. Almost all students had brought news articles with them. In groups of four students they introduced these articles to each other and tried to find similarities, differences, common themes, semantic fields etc. I collected on the blackboard. Lively discussion ensued. I was able to moderate and bring us back to Said: What is Said’s perspective on media representations of Islam? Would you say your brief survey confirms his ideas? So we were able to talk about Said; about his perspective, and about some of the critical questions students had written down in their journals (e.g.: Doesn’t he exaggerate a bit? There are more alternative news channels available here in the US.). We ended in me mentioning Said’s theoretical framework which is based on a discursive understanding of the study of Islam in western academia. I promised to give a background lecture on this topic on Friday (History of Islamic Studies + Orientalism). We should have enough time to discuss Said after this (the open questions from the journal entries). I also gave them a written assignment: Answer the question of what you think Said’s objective is for writing Covering Islam. What does he want to achieve? I hope these questions will stimulate discussion on Friday. It should also prepare them to write the book review which is due next Monday. We have to talk about his in class on Friday as well.
In general I felt that the discussion format worked well. At times I wonder if the questions I prepare or bring with me to class (even if they are students’ questions) will facilitate discussion. Today they did. Of the twenty-five in class about 12-14 students spoke up in front of the whole class. All were talking in the small groups. I am still dissatisfied with introducing and ending a discussion. I could make it a point to ask for one of the students to sum up our discussion at the end or to ask people what they think they learned from the discussion, or what its most important results are. Alternatively they could write a brief paragraph in class about what they thought was important in the discussion/class session. I guess I am trying to say that it is not clear to me how much the students get out of the class discussion even if they are contributing to it.
Friday, January 30
Yet another student wants to join the class. She’s a religion major. I sign. Not many students are in class. I get twenty (20) written assignments at the end of class. I think to myself that twenty would be a great number. Maybe emphasizing the demanding workload (reading/writing) scared a large number of students who had initially signed up for the class. Will I have to lower the load for those who are still in class during the semester? I decided to lecture on the history of Islamic Studies in the West. After a brief review I go right into the topic (along with PowerPoint slides). There are only few questions during the lecture – albeit instructive. I realize that I will run out of time and not be able to finish what was on my agenda. The content of Said’s criticism remains unsaid. I will start with it next session. Five minutes before the end of class I speak about the assignment that will be due next class session – the book review. The students take notes despite the fact that all of this is also on the syllabus (in even more detail!).
Bottom line: time management was a big problem. My lecture was too long and involved. It should have been shorter which would have enabled us to have a discussion afterwards and to get to Said’s criticism of Orientalism. As a consequence, next Monday’s class session has too many activities. My solution: I shortened the worksheet for the peer review. At this point I am confident that they can do the peer review in 15-10 minutes. This should leave 15 minutes in the beginning and 15 minutes in the end to discuss Said.
Week 3
Monday, February 2
The peer review went reasonably well. That is, in class the time was well spent. More time would have been beneficial but the twenty minutes in which the students reviewed each other’s assignments seemed productive (judging by the reviews I got to read afterwards). Two observations: students are able to summarize the assignment’s main point(s); it is more problematic for them, however, to productively criticize and suggest modifications for future editing. Are they simply not aware of material and stylistic shortcomings in these papers? Matt suggested that the format could have something to do with it as well. The reviews were not anonymous. Are the students inhibited by this? Are they afraid of that their comments could be taken personally? A possible way out would be to conduct the peer reviews anonymously (only put the last digits of your student ID on the form). I ought to try that.
Wednesday, February 4
The equipment was late. This was not too bad since I wanted to return and respond to the book review assignments at the beginning of class anyhow. I thought some students looked rather shaken when reading the grade. By no means was this an unusual distribution of grades. Among the 24 assignments were 8 A/A-, 8 B+/B/B-, 6 C+/C/C-, and 2 D+/D. The C and D papers exhibited not just a lack of engagement with the material but had formal problems as well. After a few remarks about the assignment we had a brief discussion on how helpful the peer review was. Letha suggested we do the peer review one day, rewrite, and turn in the final draft two days later. This found support in class. I will have to think up a procedure to do so (which seems entirely possible). Having finished with the book reviews I elicited feedback from them about the first two weeks. Since it was given anonymously I got to see it only after class. It was overwhelmingly positive – which is not how I perceive the class (bringing me thus back to the question of whether the are afraid to voice criticism or if they cannot perceive things that are not going well). Our discussions were praised as well as the way class session were structured. The feedback also brought out the students’ desire to learn more about the history, tradition, beliefs, and practices within Islam. We started with it today. My idea for the next class session: I received their discussion questions today. I will distribute a number of productive looking questions to small groups. They can discuss them and produce their answer to the whole class. Maybe the questions can form a historical narrative (with me filling the gaps).
Friday, February 6
I was greatly relieved after today’s class. These are the days when I enjoy having to teach. I used the discussion questions to structure my lecture and to stimulate class discussion. It did not matter that we were not able to finish all that I had hoped we would. Next session we have to start with the early Islamic community in Medina and the incorporation of Mecca (particularly the question of Muhammad’s use of military raids in this process). Students were participating in the discussion (more than half of the class had said something by the end of the period), and the classroom atmosphere was much more relaxed than I had perceived it earlier in the semester.
Week 4
Monday, February 9
The DVD player did not work properly. Not that my life depended on it… I had planned to show five to ten minutes on the “incorporation of Mecca into the Islamic ’ummah” since many students had indicated irritation at the use of military means to achieve this end. So I ended up talking about it and asking questions. One question that worked particularly well asked the students to answer this question from the perspective of a Muslim: “How could/would a Muslim answer this question?” (The question being whether Islam is an aggressive religion due to the number of battles in early Islamic history). Students came up with a number of different answers to this question. When summarizing our discussion I pointed to yet another model of answering this accusation: placing the use of battles (limited military expeditions) into its historical context of pre-Islamic Arabia and indicating the limitations that were put on those engaging in these activities (a precise code of conduct for these military campaigns). I felt that the foregoing discussion had opened up the students to be receptive to this interpretation of early Islamic history. The remainder of the class we spent on the concept of God and prophethood as contained in the Qur’an. I think I talked too much, especially towards the end when addressing the issue of prophecy. Maybe I should have reserved that for the following day.
Wednesday, February 11
Well, I finished the Courage to Teach in the meantime. One insight is particular helpful to me: dutiful adherence to the requirements of my field can cause bad teaching. That is: if I think I am required to cover the whole field in my course, I will end up talking too much. Students are more likely to be confused than to come to a better understanding of the discipline. I am definitely caught up in this thought process. In one of my early classes students complained that I did not incorporate the textbook enough into classroom interaction. My strategy became to cover the most important aspects of the weekly readings. Still: this is too much material. Instead I should pick a few (maybe even only one) point(s) to explore more thoroughly with students. This would certainly allow for more interaction of the students with the material. Moreover, if I can find a topic that connects to their life experiences, the implied relevance to them will encourage not only their participation in the class but also the learning process outside of the classroom (textbook readings etc.).
With this in mind I entered today’s class. I wanted to concentrate on the issue of appropriating sacred text. The example was to be the Qur’an (since this is an Intro to Islam). I started talking about the Qur’an, asked a poorly phrased question, and felt that this did not allow me to make my point clearly. I wanted them to see that the status of the Qur’an within the Muslim community is best paralleled by the status Christians assign to Jesus. Both are the word of God made book and flesh respectively. However: Since we were talking about Muhammad I asked: “To whom/what in Christianity can we compare Muhammad?” That was not at all what I had intended to ask. Students were earnestly engaged. But that was not the right question. After a while I asked what I had initially wanted to discuss and we struggled with the idea of “the word of God.” It went reasonably well, but could have been much better without my misguiding first question. Towards the end of class I felt that some people were drifting away. I definitely talked too much, went off onto sidetracks and did not get to discuss the question of how to approach and appropriate sacred text at all. We ended with the question of why the Qur’an is only the Qur’an in the Arabic language. Next session I want to discuss with them if they perceive that as a difficulty knowing that only about 20% of Muslims worldwide speak Arabic as their native tongue.
Friday, February 13
We talked about ways of appropriating sacred text. My hope was to show that there are many ways other than a purely intellectual/rational approach to scripture. While interpretation and is important (and we worked on the question why this is so – students came up with very good answers; they had exchanged their written assignment before we brought the discussion into the plenary form), other approaches must not be dismissed. The audio-visual component in Muslim’s appropriation of the Qur’an is a reminder of this. The discussion of whether interpretation is necessary went well. Students had a lot to say about it and came up themselves with all of the points that Livingston makes. I gathered the items on the blackboard. We should have had more time for the other approaches (i.e., audio-visual) but they started thinking about the importance of interpretation – that’s an achievement I find. What is missed, however: I had no time to introduce the history of Qur’anic exegesis. That would have been interesting since the source material covered examples from this tradition. I still feel that the source texts are somewhat unconnected to our class discussion. How can I bring them in? Can I design group works for in-class assignments? So far I have designed a number of writing assignments (homework) which addressed the sources. That seems to work. It must be unsatisfying, however, not (or only rarely) to be able to talk about these texts in class.
Week 5
Monday, February 16
General concern after this class period: We talked about 500 years of Islamic history in about 30 minutes. This is not enough time, especially not if I want to elaborate some ideas and watch a few more sequences from the film. In a T/Th class a whole class period would be appropriate. For a M/W/F class, two sessions (maybe with the second functioning as a transitional phase to introduce the reasons for the origin of the religious sciences: quest for answers by new converts (Bulliet’s “View from the Edge”) and to unify disparate groups and traditions due to the massive expansion after the first centuries.
I showed parts of “Empire of Faith”: I think it makes some good points about the spread of Islam, and addresses questions about this rapid success. The narrators/scholars touch upon the question of unity/unifying ideology and also address the issue of military conquest (spread by the sword). These two points along with an introduction of the chronological structure of the first five hundred years (632-1258) is enough. Students were especially concerned with the issue of violent, military conquest. It would have been good to acknowledge this in more depth. I started out with the question of how they would respond as a Muslim to the question/charge/accusation that their religion was spread by the sword. The change of perspective was difficult for some but brought out creative answers in others. Suggestion: Next time around I could ask the general question of whether they find the use of violence appropriate to spread one’s own faith/political domain. While the early Islamic conquest through military means was not done with the aim of converting people, the student’s expected aversion to the idea of military force in the name of religion can be paralleled to the “conversion history” of early Islam (exponential surge only in the 9th c., long after the territorial conquest). Also: we could discuss if contemporary military campaigns (US invasion of Iraq) can be understood as furthering political aims, and are thus not different from early Muslim political expansion.
Wednesday, February 18
I gave a lecture on the development of Islamic theology (not philosophy). It would have been better had they read Ibn Khaldun’s source text (but they had to finish reading the textbook). I lectured for most of the time with interspersed Q&A. The material is interesting because of its parallels to early Christian doctrinal developments. I mostly stressed Mu‘tazilite ideas and ended in a brief exposition of Asharite theology. This was a good transfer to the next session: Islamic Creeds. For next session they are to read the Fiqh Akbar II and write about how it resolves the controversy with the Mu’tazilites and helps formulate “orthodox” Sunni doctrine.
Friday, February 20
Group work: After a brief look back I had the students form groups and come up with a list of topics treated in the creed. I intended to have a list of major Islamic statements of faith. Apart from Article 1, however, the creed only speaks to the major issues that arose from the controversy with Mu‘tazilite ideas. I think this is a good learning tool: Article one lists the 5-6 major elements of faith (parallel to the 5 pillars of practice); most of them, however, are not explained in the Fiqh Akbar II. Why not? Because of the historical background of the creed. Most issues (such as the day of judgment and resurrection, belief in prophets and angels) were not controversial at the time. The textbook tells us more about them, and I added whatever the students did not remember in class. Then we went into a discussion of the controversial issues in the creed and how they were resolved: my intention was to show them the mediating character of the creed. It is a compromise. It remains vague and ambivalent; much like the Christian creeds when it comes to the nature of the Trinity. These creeds aim at unifying not at polarizing. We did not have enough time to talk about all of these aspects in appropriate length. We confined ourselves to the question of predestination and free will because it was brought up by the students. I should resume next session with a brief review and summary of the most important points.
Week 6
Monday, February 23
We started our discussion of Islamic Law. After a (rather extended) review of the related religious sciences in Islam, especially theology and philosophy, we turned to the shari’ah. The question of “What is shari’ah?” and “Where do we find it?” really got students started. In my experience, this is a difficult concept for students. They, as so many others, conceive of shari’ah as Islamic Law and, moreover, as a specific code of ordinances which is written down somewhere in a coherent form (e.g., in a book). The difference between shari’ah as an abstract concept of God’s Will and fiqh as the human interpretative reflection on how to gather it was helpful for students and elicited a good conversation on the recurrent topic of “interpretation” in our class. My “lecturette” on the origins of Islamic law from the regional centers to the personal schools of law was rather brief and I interspersed some anecdotes from Indonesia in which the Shafi‘i school of law is predominant. We had another 15 minutes towards the end and I asked for their questions, saying that this would be more helpful than for me to go on lecturing. Fortunately, a number of questions were geared towards what I had in mind as well. For instance, students wanted to know about who the interpreters of religious text/law are. This gave me a chance to talk about the ‘ulama and connect it with contemporary events in Iran and Iraq in which we hear about ‘ulama, muftis, ayatollahs, and qadis. I utilized the blackboard for this. Redirecting students’ view towards the board was a good break from the powerpoint presentations. Still, I felt that little “real discussion” was generated by my presentation. Students seemed interested and asked questions. They, however, did not discuss much with each other. Rather, they asked for more details and clarifications in addition to what I had been talking about. It makes me realize, once more, that I ought to spend more time on finding issues which connect the class material with the students’ life world and experience so that a discussion becomes meaningful to them and does not remain detached from their own lives.
Wednesday, February 25
Sources of Islamic Law – Couldn’t there be anything more exciting? Well, I thought I had everything worked out nicely. The lecture unit was not long, I had a large number of copied hadith texts which I wanted to distribute and have students look at; the additional text they had to read fit in well with the topic and made a valuable contribution to furthering our understanding of the interplay between the legal sources. Yet: It was a rather dull class period. They woke up when I gave the example about drinking alcohol, eating mangos, using airplanes etc. Imitatio Muhammad and qiyas (analogical reasoning) I could explain in an animated and lively fashion. For everything else my presentation was very “historical” and seemingly lacked relevance for the students. For Friday: We got to discuss religious freedom in the US. My question for the writing assignment was to think about problems Muslims could encounter practicing the Five Pillars. Usually few people think it to be difficult to practice the first pillar. If one thinks purely of a private profession of the shahadah this might be correct; but what about the public profession and display of one’s Muslim identity? After 9/11many Muslim men shaved their beards, women wouldn’t wear the hijab etc.
Friday, February 27
I had quite a number of announcements to make in class. Thus, we got
started with a little bit of a delay. I quickly connected today’s topic with
the previous sessions (contextualization). Content of Islamic Law – mu‘amalat and ’ibadat. Today’s session was on the mu‘amalat, the prescribed acts of worship, namely the five pillars.
I used the hadith book which I had
introduced last session. The third hadith
names all five pillars of Islam. From student’s memory I gathered them on the
board and asked whether there was logic to the order used. This stimulated a
good discussion in which we already got into explaining the different pillars.
Subsequently I asked them systematically for one pillar after the other what
they found either interesting or puzzling. We talked at some length about the shahadah, salat, and the hajj. I
had a video segment on the call to prayer and a brief account of Michael
Wolfe’s hajj experience (both DVD). Students were interested, I had anecdotes
from Indonesia to tell (specifically about the five daily calls to prayer). The
question of Islam’s perception of other religions was addressed in our
discussion of the shahadah. An
inclusive interpretation of the shahadah’s
first part allows for a positive perception of both Judaism and Christianity. Moreover,
again as a story from Indonesia, even Hinduism and Buddhism can be subsumed
under it at times. What could I have done better? Time management. The students
wrote an essay on problems for Muslims to follow the five pillars in the US. We
only touched on in at the end of class. Since we had ended on the hajj, I said: Often people say that the
hajj must be difficult form American Muslims. Saudi Arabia is so far away. But
air-travel makes renders the hajj quite feasible for many Muslims worldwide.
Instead, can someone find potential difficulties with the practice of the other
four pillars in the US? I got very thoughtful answers to that question and it
would have been worthwhile to pursue them further. However, we had not enough
time left at the end.
Week 7
Monday, March 1
This week the topic is still Islamic Law. Yet, we are looking at the mu‘amalat, particularly at Islamic family law. This focus seems fitting as it gives us a chance to address the contentious issue of women in Islam. Also, we have an additional book to discuss this week (Amina Wadud’s Qur’an and Woman). I reserved this Monday for a general on the role of women in Islam and invited students at the beginning of the class session to brainstorm topics that we should address when discussing the question of woman in Islam. The subsequent list was extensive which I took as a sign that the students found the topic stimulating. I had imagined that the topic of women’s dress would be of concern. Thus I was prepared to talk, discuss, and show a brief clip about it. In the lively discussion (more than half of the twenty students present contributed) we called into question the textual foundation for many of the associated practices and were able to place the issue in a wider context of religion, culture, and interpretation. The clip (from Muhammad: Legacy of the Prophet) stressed an American Muslims voluntary decision to wear the hijab (against the will of her father). Students responded with surprise; yet they did not dismiss the scenario as unrepresentative. Also: the seriousness of our discussion made a student’s remark possible with which she (not a Muslim herself) probed the alleged freedom of American women to dress the way they want. The class responded thoughtfully to this observation – probably more so as not I or a Muslim brought up this point.
Wednesday, March 3
Today we did the peer evaluation of student’s book reviews. I had made a more elaborate questionnaire than the one we used for Said’s book. I asked those who did not bring their draft to class (5 students) to form a separate group and come up with a list of questions we should discuss about Wadud’s book on Friday. Most students were done with their peer review after twenty minutes so that we still had some time left to hear the questions the group had formulated. I also elicited some feedback on the review process itself. Students responded that they found it very helpful and enjoyed reading what others had produced. [NB: in the mid-semester feedback many remarked on how useful they found this exercise, too]. Note to myself: I think I need to revise the review sheet to include a few more possibilities for positive feedback. Maybe: The most important step in any response task is for the reader to note the part of the paper that is the strongest and describe to the writer why it worked well (Davis 211). Also for the future: Davis (212) asks students to identify the characteristics of effective writing This should be done before the first peer review so that they feel that the categories used for evaluation are also their own.
Friday, March 5
This class session was reserved for a discussion of Wadud’s book. I intended to bring together Wadud’s Qur’an interpretation with the question of women’s role in Muslim societies. Equally I wanted to stress (again) the inescapability of interpretation. I started class with a news article from the Philadelphia Inquirer on the issue of gay marriages. In this letter to the editor the writer stressed the seriousness of the institution of marriage while at the same time pointing to the divorce rate which for him indicated that marriage was “under assault” primarily by heterosexual couples who did not take their vows seriously enough. Asking the students what this article had to do with class we discussed Islamic legal stipulations for marriage and divorce. I wanted students to realize that (regardless of what they thought about the specific regulations) many Muslims claim that respect for marriage and the attempt for reconciliation is at the heart of the legal proceedings. For the discussion of Wadud’s book I projected the questions that the group had thought up during the previous session. We went through them one after the other. Students had a lot to say about the book. One issue I had to bring up myself was the question of possible critiques of Wadud’s work: What would her critics say about the book? Looking back at the whole book (and also from the mid-semester evaluations) the time spent on the book was too short. While we dealt with the books topic for a whole week, direct discussion of the book’s content was limited to one session only. For Farid’s book this means that I should reschedule the second half of the semester and make room for a more detailed engagement with this additional text.
- Spring Break -
Week 8
Monday, March 15
Not everybody brought a journal entry (i.e., only five students did). It was on Blackboard but I did not announce it in class before the spring break. We had the mid-semester review at the beginning of the class period. Looking over the feedback, particularly the peer reviews were appreciated by students. Some suggested we spend more time on the books that were for review. Maybe we can do that with Farid’s book. I will have to revise the remaining course schedule for the second half of the semester. We also started our discussion of mysticism/Sufism. I thought it helpful to entertain the question of mysticism on a more general level before we begin the discussion of Islamic mystical expressions. I asked: Where does religion come from? Why are people religious? Gathering students’ answers and having them afterwards come up with categories for the possible explanations stimulated much talk. My intention was to point to mystical explanations for religion: ultimate reality does exists! Mystical experience proves it despite the inadequateness of human language to convey these experiences fully (points to allegorical, mytho-poetic language; there will be much poetry this week). Unfortunately we did not have enough time to ponder the question of language. I was able to give an example (driving stick-shift: you know it’s real; you know what it “feels” like; but can you explain it to someone?) but it wasn’t enough time to dwell on. I should pick up here next session.
Wednesday, March 17
After a brief review of last session’s topic I lectured on the basics of Sufism. I had them come up with a list of topics that we need to address in order to have a deep enough understanding of Sufism. The aim was to be prepared for an interpretation of Sufi poetry (which is a writing assignment for Friday). The list on the blackboard was fairly extensive. I lectured (in what I think was interactive) for a few minutes at a time, showed a clip, referred to students reflection papers and answered questions. Class was over in no time. I felt that I had “covered” much and still given students opportunities to engage the material for themselves on many different levels. More time would certainly have been helpful. Still, the only thing left for Friday is a discussion of the later developments in Sufism. Afterwards I think I should have them work together and share their interpretations of Sufi poetry.
Friday, March 19
Another snowy day. A number of students were missing. Seems to me that we have a very small crowd these days. Many students came in late (about 5). It also seems to me that two students have stopped coming to class altogether. Adeel and Tyana have not been in class since the end of spring break. I should email them. The rest of the crowd is attending frequently and exhibits a – as I find – stimulating group dynamic. Discussions work better than in the beginning of the term. Some of the more reserved students seem to have lost some of their inhibitions to speak in class. When there is room for contributions I often hear statements from more than ten students during a class period; after a group exercise it is not always the same person who reports back in the plenary form. While I am generally pleased with this situation, I feel that we still do not have reached a point in which students have discussion among themselves. This may be due to my lack of imagination how to facilitate a discussion which invites them to talk with each other. It happens only rarely. I should think up some “debatable” issues related to our course content.
About today: I gave a brief introductory lecture in which I reflected on what he had done during last class session. I continued the discussion of Sufism with the spread, decline, and revival of Sufism throughout the Islamic world. It gave me a chance to talk about the current popularity of Sufi thought in America. Rumi’s poetry fills shelves in bookstores; much of which is probably fed by the New Age movement. I asked if some had encountered Sufis. Two students reported at length. One had been to a “performance” of the Whirling Dervishes. This left us with slightly more than thirty minutes. Since we had already talked about Rumi and because of their homework (interpretation of a poem by Rumi) I had them break up into groups according to the poem they had chosen. Those who had not done the assignment were free to chose a group they liked. I gave them not more than ten minutes. They were to discuss the poem and select a presenter who would recite/read the poem and say a few words about what they had discussed in the group. In their groups the class was busy talking and discussing. I went around and they most had a few questions. The presentations were good, most also recited the poems with close attention to meter and rhyme. Unfortunately we did not have enough time at the end to discuss the variant interpretations, difficulties with reading poetry, and thoughts on why poetic language is so important in Sufism/mysticism/religion. We should start with that on Monday as a quick review. Also: This weekend I ought to type up a new course schedule for the rest of the semester.
Week 9
Monday, March 22
Shi’ite Islam: Computer and projector arrived late; no network cable was to be found. I had planned a brief motivational period with a New York Times article that mentioned Shi’ite Islam in Iraq as well as the present month of Muharram, the tenth day of which is an important holy day for Shi’ite Muslims. Thus, I had to find another way into the topic. I managed to lecture on the origins and defining differences in Shi’ism – mainly the doctrine of the Imamate. We did not get to talk about the different groups within Shi’ite Islam. We should start with it next class session. It could be the opening question: “What do you remember as an important distinguishing feature of Shi’ite Islam?” I could then say a few words about the various Shi’ite groups as they differ in their respective lines of Imams. Back to today’s session: I used a brief video clip from “Empire of Faith” (on the Saffavid Empire: it mentioned the origins of the split between Sunni and Shi’ite Islam). Generally I felt this clip was helpful. It provided a change of pace. It is not very informative, though. Maybe there are better media on this point. My lecture (we had little discussion today as most questions I asked were factual ones) could have been structured better. Also, I had planned to have them read a paragraph from our textbook about the theory of the Imamate. During the class period, however, I did not find an appropriate moment to turn to this passage.
Wednesday, March 24
Only half of the class had read the source text. I had not given a writing assignment on it but only phrased a question that they should be able to answer after reading the text (I even had the question on PowerPoint and Blackboard). This shows me that writing assignments are crucial – or: I need to find a strategy which makes them realize that not reading has negative consequences. A pop-quiz or in-class writing assignment would take care of this. In fact, I had planned such for today’s class. I wanted them to write a one-word essay (suggested by Davis) in which they pick one word that to them best describes Shi’ite Islam. In a brief essay they would then explain why they found this particular concept meaningful in describing Shi’ism. I still had them write the essay but now they were allowed to draw on a wider range of sources such as the textbook and class discussion whereas formerly they should have argued with the source text. After the writing period we discussed what students had come up with. The discussion was slow. I tried to connect some of what they said with statements from the source text. For those who had not read this text this did not seem to have been helpful. At this point I don’t think I should assign Enayet’s text again unless I know that I can spend a whole class period on it so that we can discuss his main points in detail. Another point: neither the topics from Monday nor today seemed relevant to the students despite my references to Iran and present-day Iraq and the Shi’ite majorities in both countries. One thing that we could have discussed: the mixing of political and religious authority. The question of the Iranian revolution (they read this passage in the textbook) and the contemporary issues in Iraq with the interim constitution and (Shi’ite) Islam’s role therein could have stimulated meaningful interaction with the material.
Friday, March 26
Today I gave room to discuss the interviews that the students had conducted. I started with a brief video clip about Kevin James (U.S. Fire Marshal from NYC and a convert to Islam) in which he talked about what appealed to him in Islam. We discussed what we could learn from his statements about his interpretation and understanding of Islam. Since this was exactly their task I the interview they had conducted, a smooth transition into today’s topic was possible. I had them split up into groups in order to introduce to each other what they regarded as important results of their interviews. I gave them three concrete questions to guide their thoughts: What were your expectations before the interview? What confirmed them and what surprised you? What are the central points that your interviewee mentioned about her/his understanding of Islam? After fifteen/twenty minutes I elicited feedback from the groups – mostly about the last of my questions. I called on one group after the other to let the rest of the class know what stood out in their discussions. I gathered main topics on the blackboard. When every group had had its turn (with little time left) I questioned how they would interpret the diverse list on the board. After we had talked about the diversity of interpretations in American Islam I concluded by asking them what topics interested them most. I will pick up on these in our discussion of Islam in America towards the end of the semester. The most controversial topic that emerged from our discussion today was the question of religious freedom in the United States as many students had made the experience that their interview partners had indicated that it was difficult to practice Islam in the U.S. while others had found out the opposite from their interviewees. As a general comment: The interview project was a good idea. Most students were enthusiastic about it. This is reflected in their essays which I have already graded. Next time, however, I need to stress even more explicitly that I am interested in an answer to the question: What does it mean to be a Muslim for your interview partner? Some students wrote about many aspects of Muslim life in the United States from the perspective of their interviewee but did not tie this into a more general reflection on the question what this says about the interviewee’s understanding of Islam.
Week 10
Monday, March 29
Islam in the Middle Ages: I especially wanted to use this week as preparation for our discussion of Farid Esack’s book next week. Thus, the main perspective from which I wanted to look at Islam in the Middle Ages was its relationship with the Christian West. The Crusades as much as the fruitful coexistence of Muslims, Christians, and Jews (for instance) in Muslim Spain but also later in the Ottoman Empire were on my agenda. Similarly I wanted to discuss the consequences of the crusades in both their negative and positive aspects for the relationship between the religions. I decided to show two selections from “Empire of Faith.” The first depicted the military campaigns of the Crusaders while the second dealt with the flowering Muslim civilization (trade, craft, architecture, science) and the influence this had (mediated at times through the knights of the Crusades) on Europe. We discussed each segment after I had shown it. Apart from questions about the historical background of the Crusades students found thinking about the consequences for the relationship between the traditions stimulating. Most could only conceive of negative ones. How much the (subsequent) exchange in other areas of thought influenced Europe was new to most of them. I handed out a list of Arabic words that have made it into the English language to illustrate these influences. I summed up class myself (although I had initially planned a short in-class writing exercise): history is replete with both aspects of religious interaction: conflict and cooperation. In light of the present conflicts we too easily forget the rich historical precedents of fruitful co-existence and co-operation. ® I gave them Goddard’s final chapter of A History of Christian-Muslim Relations (“Dialogue or Confrontation?”) to read together with a writing assignment. Next session we will look at the present and the future of the relations between religious traditions.
Wednesday, March 31
I was afraid that the Goddard chapter would be too technical for students. He lists and describes a vast number of movements and organizations within the field of interreligious dialogue. Surprisingly (or not so) the majority of students found the text thought provoking (so they wrote in their assignments). Many had never heard of such initiatives. I had planned to spend the session on the question of interreligious dialogue as an alternative to the concept of interreligious conflict. Matthew Hunter observed my teaching. I started out with a brief motivational phase: I pulled up the cover of Samuel Huntington’s Clash of Civilizations and asked their associations: How does this connect to what we are doing this week? Joshua made a very perceptive comment about the book’s cover. The new edition has three separated photos showing distinctly Roman (Western), Islamic, and Chinese architectural structures. To follow up on their thoughts on conflicts between religions I handed out a quotation by Seelengut (Sacred Fury). I made them paraphrase it. As transfer to discussing Goddard I asked if they thought that Goddard would agree with Seelengut’s idea as expressed in the quotation. After a few contributions addressing possible scenarios for the future interaction between the world’s religious traditions I introduced the session’s main topic: interreligious dialogue. In groups I had them discuss attitudes which are likely to promote or hinder successful dialogue. Eventually they were to come up with three ground rules for successful dialogue. After ten minutes I collected their thoughts on the blackboard. Finally, I steered the discussion to the objectives/goals of dialogue. I proposed three categories of attitudes to religious truths and we thought about which one would be most in accordance with their ground rules (exclusivism, inclusivism, pluralism). Two students started arguing about the concept of pluralism. After three exchanges I asked someone else to analyze what the two were talking about: the danger of relativism. I felt this was a very good point to end the discussion and to refer to Farid Esack’s book for next week. Esack (who was also mentioned in Goddard’s chapter) identifies himself as a pluralist. At the same time he is consciously aware of the dangers of relativism. What are the elements of his tradition (Islam) that he can refer to in order to make a case for a more pluralist understanding of religious difference? These are questions we need to come back to (maybe when discussing Esack; particularly his sixth chapter).
Friday, April 2
With Esack’s book coming up, I did not give them any new reading or writing assignment but asked that they start with the book. I wanted to use the Friday for a playful segment on Islamic art and architecture. I felt that the student’s had worked hard and well – at home and in class – over the past weeks. This was supposed to be a creative break. I started out with the “Eid” stamp and discussed the controversy that had centered around its release in the wake of 9/11. The stamp was designed by Mohamed Zakarya. I showed the brief clip (2 min) from “Legacy of the Prophet.” We discussed a few things mentioned by M.Z. in the clip: why calligraphy and no pictorial representations etc. Afterwards I showed them a number of slides with different Arabic scripts and various examples of calligraphy. Students already had a number of questions about Arabic and wanted to know more about the language itself. I ended after ten minutes with the slides from an earlier class in which we had concentrated on sacred texts in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam and explored a number of ways to appropriate sacred texts (among which was calligraphy). I had prepared the students’ names in Arabic script on the computer and gave each of them their printout along with makers and paper. Twenty minutes I allocated for them to work with their name: either copying the script or exploring alternative ways of rendering their names. Students generally seemed to enjoy the exercise and time off. I had a number of engaging conversations walking through the room. Students asked about the meanings of their names in Arabic (especially Yasin who is not a Muslim himself but has an Arabic/Qur’anic name and wanted to know more about it – Surah 36). The last ten minutes I spent on asking them about their experience with the Arabic script. I placed calligraphy in the context of religious/sacred/sacramental practice: exhibiting strong iconographic qualities, it is more than mere decoration.
Week 11
Monday, April 5
Most of the students had not read carefully Farid’s book. I should have been aware of this. Also: I should have given them a writing assignment along with the reading. Anyway: I felt I should start with a one-word essay. Pick a phrase that first comes to your mind when you think about what you read in Farid’s book. In a second step, explain why this expression encapsulates something of his work. It turned out that students had only vague things to say; little actual content that had left an impression. I managed to get through the class. Luckily I had thought of the two main questions from the concluding section of the book. We read the first question and I asked students to identify the charges against Farid and to come up with a response from his perspective. Since they had not (carefully) read the text, they could not say much – although Yasin had a very appropriate insight. I rephrased the question: What would you respond if someone charged you and your understanding of the religion that you are practicing as heretical? This got a much better response. It goes to show that I have to make the questions personally meaningful for them.
Wednesday, April 7
This week drags on. The students haven’t really read the book. Well, some did. Others don’t even have the book yet. I do not have a second copy of the text so that I didn’t put it on reserve. Anyhow, a good number of students haven’t read the text yet. I knew that I could expect this to some extent. Consequently, I had prepared a few quotations from the Qur’an dealing with the question of the religious other. Reflecting on how the exercise went, I am inclined to say that I should use only one quotation in each section (one seemingly speaking against accommodating pluralism the other one seemingly speaking in favor). In general they did come up with everything I wanted them to think about; but the discussion itself was dull and tedious. My Intro to World this week hasn’t been too responsive either. Cumulative effect: That’s why I am a bit down. Well, maybe it’s just that they did not read much in Farid’s book. That can be taken care of next time around by assigning a response to his book. Also: next time around there will be student introductions to the readings: students will share the responsibility to introduce us to the text and facilitate discussion.
Friday, April 9
We worked on the peer evaluations for the third and final book review. I had revised the review sheet. I think by now it is a helpful tool for evaluating student writing. Not everybody showed up. Those who were there worked diligently. After thirty minutes I asked them to come to a close. This gave us fifteen minutes to discuss what they felt was left over from earlier sessions. I opened the discussion with general comments on Esack’s book: positive and negative critique. Students were engaged and contributed much to the discussion (although they did not really discuss with each other but mostly mentioned their own views). Much of what I heard in class reappeared (obviously) in their book reviews. They took the peer evaluations home with them and had a chance to revise their work. On Monday they turned in their final draft along with the first draft and the peer review. Here are my comments on the book reviews: many (almost half of them) were rather disappointing (not so much because of the quality of the writing but because of the topics that students chose to write about). They did not pick up on what I find to be outstanding contributions to the study of Islam: questions of pluralism and commitment to social justice and equality found little reckoning with the students. They praised or criticized Esack on other points: some found him very accessible while other mentioned that his humor discredited him as a reputable scholar. Few were able to perceive underneath this the scholarly depth of his arguments. His concept of the Qu’ran and Sunnah as much as his quite unique way of interpreting both many discussed only in passing. Maybe much of this is due to the fact that not everybody read his book carefully (cf. above). Those of whom I know that they closely read Esack’s work did a much better job discussing his contributions to the study of religion/Islam. [NB: Students were most engaged by his personal account of his hajj experience.]
Week 12
Monday, April 12
We started with feedback for the past weeks. When I looked through it afterwards I felt confirmed that we had done a good job in class with preparing the students for readings Farid Esack’s book but that our discussion of the work itself lacked depth. When we got started afterwards I connected the task for the rest of the semester with Esack’s book: trying to find a religious path in the world today. Thus, we have to ask: what characterizes the world today, and how did we get to where we find ourselves at present? This lead us into a discussion of the term “modern.” We brainstormed on the idea what “modern” means, and students came up with everything that I would have wanted to say about “the rise of modernity.” Islam is often portrayed as anti-modern and backwards, stagnant, impervious to change, thus unable to accommodate the exigencies of our time. I brought an opinion piece from the internet into class and had them discuss it in groups. It was truly scathing: “Why Islam Hate America.” In groups students were to identify the author’s claims and formulate a response. We had time for every group to share ideas about how to react to such claims. Students were very engaged; some even mentioned Said’s points from the beginning of the semester. I ended with a summary providing a transfer to next class: Islam is often portrayed as unchanging and backwards – it is NOT modern. We will have to look at this and study whether this is an accurate claim. We will thus look at how Islam has developed in “modern” times, i.e., from the 18th c. onwards?
Wednesday, April 14
I started with a quotation expressing the idea that Islam is a “backward” religion. I reminded them of Said and his criticism which we encountered at the beginning of the semester. Today’s topic was Islam and Modernity with an emphasis on the question of Religion and Change. In their journals students had formulated challenging questions. I assigned six of these questions to individual groups. The groups worked on them and presented their answers on poster-board to the rest of the class. We discussed the individual answers briefly. I got very good comments on the question of whether Muslims reject modernity (mostly the question of technology and science). I supplied some background about colonialism and had students think about how being a culture “under siege” could influence one’s willingness to accommodate changes. It was a lively session, but we did not have enough time – neither for the group work nor for the subsequent discussion. We would have to start right away and really spent all 45 minutes on this topic. For next class I invited Simon to talk about Muhammad Abduh and Rashid Rida along with the conceptual question of fundamentalism. This should connect well with what we did today and also provide a smooth transfer to next week when we will discuss more political interpretations of Islam (Islamic resurgence etc.).
Friday, April 16
Simon Wood came to my class and gave a wonderful guest lecture. He distinguished four groups within modern Islam: traditionalists (Al-Azhar), secularists (Ataturk’s Turkey), Islamic modernists (Afghani, Abduh, Rida), “fundamentalists” (al-Banna, Qutb, Khomeini). He talked for about thirty minutes about the different categories placing them all in the context of Muslim responses to modernity. Starting with the traditionalists he emphasized the passive nature of the response (taqlid). The secularists’ response he described as completely opposite to the route taken by traditionalists. Modernists he placed in between the two former. With Abduh he elaborated on Islam as a rational religion (compatibility between reason and revelation). All of this left enough time to discuss the last group, fundamentalists. He put the term in quotation marks and qualified his use of the category. Three characteristics mentioned by him: literalism, extreme dualism (we are right, you are wrong), eschatological expectation. Since the students had read and responded in writing to Sayyid Qutb’s introduction to Milestones he was able to ask for students’ opinions on Qutb. Would you classify him as a fundamentalist? This was exactly the writing assignment I had given for today. I found the class session a “perfect fit” considering that Simon and I had not talked at length about the emphasis he would give his presentation. Also: I would definitely assign Qutb’s introduction again. Maybe I should also get the Time Magazine article which depicted Qutb as the intellectual father of the people responsible for 9/11.
Week 13
Monday, April 19
Religion and Violence: I went over some of the concepts and ideas presented by Simon last Friday and asked for students’ comments. We further discussed the concept of fundamentalism and came up with a number of additional ideas that this concept conjures up. Among them were the idea of violent extremism and the fusion of religion and state (anti-secularism). I had planned to devote some time today to the question of religion and violence. I started out (with only thirty minutes left in the class) by showing a clip from “Legacy of the Prophet.” Kevin James talks about his experience of 9/11 in NYC. He ends by saying: “Islam is a religion of peace. You have to distinguish between those who live within the peaceful ideas of the tradition and those who are fanatics and use the religion to justify violence.” I opened with a general question about students’ impressions. They were talkative but the conversation did not seem to go anywhere. I decided to shift to James’ aforementioned statement. I asked: “What do you think? Is this a valid distinction?” I had prepared to reflect with them a little more on the general question of where violence comes from and whether there is a connection between religion and violence. Somehow our discussion, lively though, did not come full circle. I tried to sum up what we had talked about in the end, not sure that I really captured what had moved the students to contribute to class discussion. For the future: I should be more at ease with the idea that students take the discussion to where they want to go – for a while – before bringing them back to the issue I want us to reflect on. For next class session this means that I should revisit today’s discussion and briefly summarize what I got out of it and how it spawned a thought process in me to reflect on potential harmful aspects of religion and religious practice. This could provide a good segway into discussion about the separation between religion and state (since many people claim that mixing the two breeds nothing but violence and strive).
Wednesday, April 21
Islam and Politics: democracy, secular systems of law, human rights: I would have liked to discuss all of this with the class. Instead, I decided to tamper my impulse and not cover all that could be covered. The students had come up with pertinent questions on the readings concerning the relationship between church/religion and state in Islam and Muslim countries. After about ten minutes on the Reflexive Essay assignment and a brief summary of the last class session I announced the topic that was to provide the frame for the last remaining part of the class session: religion and politics. Islam in contemporary debate is often characterized (by Muslims and non-Muslims alike) as a complete way of life (religiopolitics); the idea being that Islam does not know of a separation between religion and state. I decided that students should engage some of the questions that their peers had raised on this topic before we would get to an evaluation of this problem. I tried something new. Knowing that we have only about twenty students attending every class session, I felt it proper to experiment with the “concentric circle” format. I had them form an inner circle of ten people facing outside and an outer circle around the inner one facing inside. Thus two students would always sit opposite one another. For every question which I had prepared on a ppt-slide I had them rotate so that students talked to a different classmate every two minutes. I had six questions. For the seventh question, and with time running short (since students utilized the time well), I posed the last (seventh) question to the plenary: why is there a lack of democratic structures in the Muslim world? With the previous discussion students were in a good position to voice their perspectives on the matter. I wish we had had more time for this question. A brief “lecturette” would have been appropriate after Wade had brought up the fact that this should be seen rather as determined by historical circumstances than by recourse to religion. Instead I had to briefly summarize the discussion and emphasize that as the main point for having had the discussion: realize that much of the present situation in the Muslim world goes back to distinct historical circumstances of colonial and post-colonial times (internally instable territories such as Iraq, Kuwait, Jordan, Lebanon, India, Pakistan in addition to weakly legitimized governments with have to resort to undemocratic means to bolster their claim to rule – often backed by European and later American politics and economic interests). With a little bit more time at the end this class period would have come full circle. I must remember this for next time: reserve fifteen minutes after the end of the concentric circles for general discussion and brief input from me.
Week 14
Monday, April 26
I asked Munjid to come to my class and talk about Islam in Southeast Asia (primarily Indonesia). I reserved the first minutes of class to discuss the writing portfolio assignment for which I distributed a handout. Secondly, I introduced Munjid and gave a brief presentation on why I wanted him to speak on Islam in SE Asia. I used data from 1999 about the nominal distribution of Muslims in the countries throughout the world and the lack of both of our textbooks to intensively address Islam in the Southeast Asian regions of the world. Munjid talked for about twenty minutes afterwards and answered a number of questions from the students. I thought that Munjid talked about some key aspects that distinguish, for instance, Indonesian Islam from other Muslim countries. In order to make this more engaging for students they should probably be prepared next time to read up on Islam in Indonesia before we discuss this often-neglected aspect.
Wednesday, April 28
Today, Phillip Hoefs talked to the class. The students had indicated a number of questions about Islam in the United States, particularly about the Nation of Islam and Malcolm X. I thought Phillip also to be an interesting conversation partner for the students as he converted to Islam about five years ago. Over the course of the semester many had asked questions about what attracts people to Islam. After a brief introduction in which Phillip gave some biographical information about himself he opened up the discussion for questions that students had. I had previously told him about the particular interest in the Nation of Islam that the class had indicated earlier. Indeed, a number of questions addressed this issue. Other questions were of a more personal nature and inquired about Phillip’s decision to convert to Islam. After half an hour we ended the discussion because we had to find time to fill out course evaluations. The conversation could have easily carried on – but then you can always find a way of showing that the end of a class period need not be the end of all thought and interest in a topic… After students had filled out the course evaluations many still had questions about the final assignment. What strikes me is that a large number of students (at least those who talked to me in the hallway) had not yet started on the Reflective Essay. For this assignment two days is obviously not enough time. This convinces me even more that this particular assignment should be changed to a different format so that students work on it throughout the semester and revise it numerous times.
Friday, April 30
Class attendance is optional next Monday. This means that today was the last official class of the semester. I had students fill out feedback forms which I find better suited to elicit information that can help me to reflect on the course and in this process to revise it where beneficial. We also spent the last thirty minutes of the class on discussing both the textbooks we used over the course of the semester and some of the students’ observations in their Reflective Essay assignments. Students reported that they felt Esposito’s book was the better text. In the future I may only assign this book (if I continue using a textbook at all). With respect to the essay assignment students had much to say. Since not only Chick’s portrayal of Islam is offensive but also his views of the Catholic Church, students felt much need to talk about his text. We could have easily spent a whole class session on this – which I must do in the future. I also felt that it was good to have this assignment at the end of our class time. I will not rework this assignment so that students write consecutive and expanding drafts of this essay over the semester. Instead, I may just give options for revisions and rewrites.
Week 15
Monday, May 3
I made this an optional day in terms of attendance. Students could turn in their course portfolio (if they were already done with them), ask questions about the assignment, or just come for small talk and coffee. Fifteen out of my twenty-one regulars showed up. I was very surprised. I returned the reflective essays and collected the course portfolios from those who had completed them. After a brief conversation about the course portfolio assignment and additional comments on the reflective essay assignment we went out for coffee. Out of the fifteen eight decided to go. I treated them to Munchkins and coffee which we consumed in the atrium of the film school. This was a good concluding meeting in which I got to meet students on a more personal level. In the future I should definitely build these things in over the course of the semester. Matthew Hunter invites his classes over for dinner; others hold their office hours one day at the cafeteria one day of the week. I will certainly consider these options in the future. For now I am going to see everybody again when they turn in/pick up their course portfolios during exam week. Coffee and tea as well as cookies in my offices should give me another opportunity to meet students in a more casual atmosphere than the classroom.
Postscript: Friday, May 7
All students had dropped off their course portfolios by 3:00 p.m. I had sodas and cookies which gave me the chance to invite them to sit down and talk for a while. I must always do that. It is a good way to get to know the students a little better. With the end of the semester in sight, most of them were quite relaxed and seemed to enjoy a less “professional” conversation. From time to time Matt would be in the office which opened up the opportunity to introduce the students to someone else from the department. Today’s interactions with the students and their positive feedback about our class were very encouraging for me and left me with a sense of “accomplishment” for the semester.