A rumour has been floating around that there’s talk of scaling back or even canning PDEng due to the number of complaints about it. I can’t comment on the validity of this, but it made me consider what I meant when I said that “I don’t object to education of this type.”

It also raised an interesting question… what would a better PDEng look like? Beyond knee-jerk “scrap this” and “scrap that” talk, what sort of program would actually accomplish the goal of increasing student professionalism in the workplace?

Storytelling Is The Right Approach

Previously, I pointed to Eric’s Starlog as an example of one of the more ludicrous aspects of the PDEng programme. However, thinking of an improved PDEng, storytelling is really the correct way to go about discussing misbehaviour and the poor decisions that create a less professional worker.

But rather than a rushed 120-word journal from each fictitious student, how about 1200-1500 word chapters which involve all four characters? The plot threads could interleave as necessary, focussing on the different personalities as appropriate. Rather than forcing the story to fit the week’s theme, allow the story to emphasize its characters and build supplemental material based on the scenarios of each chapter. (Shakespeare wrote Hamlet before the study guides…)

Creating A Story

Is telling a good yarn hard? Yes. And writing it by committee is the worst possible approach. Advertise in the Languages faculty for a student who wants to make some sweet cash writing a pulp serial for the Engineers. Have the first hundred in the door submit a portfolio and an ‘example chapter’ of the narrative they envision. Pick the best one, and give them full artistic license.

A longer, more thoughtful piece would allow for very specific, complex dilemmas to arise, where multiple persons are at fault, and the solution is more than just ’saying sorry and promising not to do it again.’

Would students ever face the exact situations presented? Probably not. But general wisdom is gained through specific experiences — even those experienced only through literature. And unless my understanding of PDEng’s goals is gravely off-base, it’s about training us to be wiser and make better judgements, not about instilling random-specific tidbits of how-to knowledge.

Style

It doesn’t have to be a Clancy. In fact, writing that pretentious would do more harm than good. I’d honestly aim for more of a Korman-Sachar style.

Deliver it as a plaintext email or as an attached PDF. Don’t make me log in and click through four layers of navigation just to see the most current content.

Comprehension Questions

It shocks me when I surf Amazon.com to check out the user-reviews on books I loved as a kid. Especially when the books were crammed down their throats by over-zealous elementary-school teachers. Of The Golden Goblet, one person reports, “the golden goblet i s very boring. i was forced to read it in sixth grade. i think i might of even fell asleep reading it.” Of Watership Down, another says, “It was way to boring for my liking. As a junior high school student this book was assigned to me.”

Saddening. What does this mean for my hypothetical vision of PDEng? It means that comprehension questions are few and far between. If the story is exciting and interesting, they wouldn’t even be necessary at all! Just deliver each segment right to my mailbox, and I’ll read it at my leisure during the week. At the end of the term, assign some kind of creative response, such as creating a fanfic about one of the characters meeting celebrity or something… if any of them are good, seek permission and then roll them into the future story.

Support

One complaint that came up on the forum a lot at the beginning was with regard to the UI-nightmare called PeopleSoft, which powers the whole thing (and, incidentally, Jobmine, QUEST, and presumably other administration tools on campus). Correction: It’s been brought to my attention that while PeopleSoft does power QUEST and Jobmine, the UW-ACE system is powered by the ANGEL system from Angel Learning.

Under a purely story-driven curriculum, the content-evaluation model that PeopleSoft provides is no longer necessary. A simple bulletin board, wiki, or even private blog could provide a way for mentors to publish answers to specific questions that may arise from students. No need to bury the interactive part of the system four or five clicks away from login.

The Future Is Unwritten

The current implementation of PDEng was created under the guidance of an impressive steering committee. Who am I? I’m nobody. I’m just a student. But regardless of what the plans are for PDEng, perhaps some of these thoughts will enter percolation.

And I’d be thrilled to hear from you. There’s a form below for public comments, and my email is on the About page.

Mike

← Earlier Later → Posted at 4:03 am to Waterloo.