Broken Educational Metrics: Office Hours
Our modern-day system of higher education was built to mass-produce education during the industrial age. The system is loosely based on a factory-model where students are, in general, processed through the system in batches through a series of distinct steps. As long as the goal of education was to impart information in a uniform manner, this served our needs relatively well, ramping up education from one-room school houses and private tutors to a large-scale operation with a goal of educating the entire population. But we now live in a different era – one where information is abundant and readily available at our fingertips, creativity means greater employability, and the ability to understand interdisciplinary projects and work on a team is vital.
If we’re going to change education to adapt to the new era, there’s no doubt that we have to change the metrics that measure student learning. However, we also have to change the metrics that measure instructor duties and performance.
Let me illustrate with an example of a broken educational metric from the instructor’s point of view: office hours. Most full-time instructors in higher education are required to hold office hours. What purpose were office hours supposed to serve?
Student Engagement
Presumption: Students will use office hours to communicate with their instructors one-on-one when they need help or guidance
Today, the act of being physically present in an office does not create a lot of student engagement. Our students lead busy lives, many raising families and working way too many hours while they simultaneously attend college full-time. Especially on non-residential campuses, the living space these students occupy in their free time is mostly off-campus or online. Rarely does a student “stop by my office” when they can IM, email, VOIP, or call. Of course, I’ve made myself available via those methods (perhaps if I cut them off digitally, they would still appear in person).
Yet, the only educational metric that is tied to student-instructor interaction is a requirement that the instructor is “physically present in the office” for a scheduled amount of time every week. Just as being physically present in the classroom does not equal learning, being physically present in the office does not equal engagement with students.

Collaboration with Colleagues
Presumption: Office hours provide a time for colleagues and administrators to track you down to work together on research, plan, discuss department issues, or just be generally sociable.
Increasingly, the colleagues I collaborate with either have completely incompatible schedules with mine or they teach at other colleges. I’ve collaborated closely with many colleagues that I’ve never even met in person and this is becoming more and more common. At the last conference I attended I had a good giggle out of how much fun we all had with connecting the web handle (e.g. busynessgirl) with the actual person (e.g. maria). I collaborate with my colleagues with web conferencing, skype, email, IM, facebook, and twitter. I also collaborate with my close-by colleagues when I’m in my office, but these are rarely planned events – usually happenstance meetings (and almost every happenstance conversation happens with a colleague that I also “bump into” online in chance IM’s and spontaneous skypes).
Productivity
Presumption: Physical presence = work accomplished
There are various stakeholders in education besides students and instructors (e.g. administrators, boards, parents, and the greater community that surrounds the institution). The majority of these stakeholders work jobs that require hourly accountability (a.k.a. the 40-hour work week). It is likely that some of the pressure for physical office hours comes from the worry that the “invisible” work of instructors (prepping classes, grading papers, and now … teaching online) doesn’t add up the requisite 40 hours in the standard American work week.

Fixing the Metric
I don’t like to present problems unless I can also propose at least one possible solution. Collaboration with colleagues can certainly be measured in other ways: publications, reports, committee participation, conference presentations, etc. The real question is what would be a better educational metric for student engagement? Ultimately I suppose the ideal metric is in learning outcomes, but these are kind of squishy measurables (variation by teaching method, course format, level of student, etc.).
What we need is a communication system that can track IM, email, voice communication, twitter, video chat, etc. that would also allow instructors to quickly click on “in-person” and a students’ name to track that aspect as well. Students get a special label in the system and the system could track the quantity of student interaction with each faculty member. I’m not suggesting a contest amongst faculty for “most communication” here, merely a gateway level of communication that is considered “acceptable” with warnings built in to tell you if you’re really not getting much engagement with your students.
What benefits could such a system have? Suppose you could make short notes (tweets) on each student regarding the conversations you have been having (e.g. “struggling with concept of slope” or “starting meetings with tutor next week”). The next time you communicate with the student, you could see your own notes of the conversation history with that student. I have such a hard time remembering my communications with 100+ students each semester. What a godsend this would be.
So, who could build it? Google would be a contender. It’s possible that these are already features that might be available in Google Wave, but I’m not in the loop on that one. Google Apps already have text chat, audio chat, video chat, email, and they’ve even got a version of twitter (the Gmail status updates inspired twitter). Many colleges already use Google Apps to manage email on campus. Add automatic tagging of student conversations with instructors, an easy way to indicate face-to-face meetings, and the ability to take notes on conversation history (there is a “Notes” field in contacts, but it’s not easy to get to).
Damn. Now I’m craving another application that doesn’t exist yet. You?
Possibly Related Posts:
- Email Manifesto
- Starting a New Blog: Need Your Input
- Not dead
- Future-Proof Your Education
- I am here.






Very thorough post, Maria.
I don’t know very much about sales (except for being on the receiving end of sales calls), but I have to wonder if there is something out there that tracks sales communications between a rep and potential clients which could also be used (or tweaked) to track instructor/student relations. It
The way I track conversations (outside of email) with my colleagues is by having all of them in one IM system and keeping message histories, but that isn’t always convenient for them, and I would rather feel free to just talk with them wherever. I use Xobni for helping me track and search conversations in email, and it would be great if that were extended to all ways of communicating.
Have you ever looked at evernote? It might have potential because you can grab screenshots, grab websites, grab selected text, grab photos, etc and then tag each of those snippets. It even scans and allows you to search text in photos or screenshots. Plus, it works on and offline.
p.s. Love the view you have out your window!
A question – how do you “do math” via electronic communication? I teach precal and stat at a high school level – and it seems like most of the one on one time I spend with students is at the board working problems – seeing what they’ve done and coaxing them to find the next step. On the other hand, I would like to make much more use of electronic means – so I’m looking for ideas and tools.
wow. nice find for me. thank you for such great ideas and insight.
we have been talking about seat time for kids as well. (highschool) – the more you teach as media and through media – the less productive mere seat time seems to be. so – do we change that up? how lovely would that be?
How about asking the students how accessible you are? Accessibility of instructors is an issues that comes up time and time again when I do focus groups with students. Some instructors have office hours at bad times (like 10 am when other classes are in session) and get dinged for that. Others are praised for being available in their office most of the day willing to talk to students who drop by.
I would guess that if students feel satisfied that their instructor is available and willing to help them–whether that’s in person during office hours or via any of the electronic methods you use regularly–then that’s a decent metric.
I’ll also point out that office hours aren’t just about helping students. Office hours are also a great opportunity to get a sense of how one’s students are doing in the course: What do they understand? What do they now understand? What misconceptions do they have? Are you going to fast? Too slow? This kind of feedback on student learning is very important for meeting students’ learning needs, and office hours (or some online equivalent) is a useful place to gather it.
The problem with metrics, at least for me as a manager and teacher, is that the smart ones figure out how to play the game and get high numbers. So just as in developing compensation plans for sales people, you better be sure that if the metrics are reached, you will reach your goals. It is a great question. Thanks.