I’m only taking two classes per term for my master’s degree because I’m still working full time while going to school. Thus far balancing school work and paid employment has actually been pretty easy. What I want to talk about today is the difference between the two classes I’m taking, and how the professors approach the idea of workload as expressed in their syllabi.
My first class is “Knowledge and Information in Society,” and it’s a kind of general policy and issues class built around understanding the many different facets of this nebulous concept we call “information.” The assignments are very well structured and lead one to the other in a very satisfying and logical way, but the issues we cover are all over the place. Fascinating in themselves, but they don’t really lead to a coherent “story” of what information is, or how it functions in our society from a theoretical standpoint—more of a snapshot of compelling contemporary issues, each with their own competing ideas about these things, seldom in direct conversation with each other. I feel very at home in this course; I own and have read several of the books on the syllabus, I have prior graduate-level training in some of the analytical techniques, and the issues we cover are of significant interest to me. The reading list, however, is huge. It’s divided into four sections: Required Readings, Current Controversy Readings, Worth a Look Readings, and Module Readings. The Required section is self evident, and there are … [continue reading] “Workload and Learning”