Fun? Who said you were paying for fun?

I recently received a paper from a student about the reasons why his cell phone is important, including keeping in touch with people and having the ability to call for help should he end up in a snowbank out on Rural Route 9. The final reason, and the reason for this post, was this: he liked to be able to play games on it or text message, especially if he was someplace where he had some spare time, like in a waiting room or a boring class.

If you've ever been in school, you recognize that boring classes, boring teachers, boring subjects, boring books, and boring classmates exist, and sometimes simultaneously. Before the advance in technology that allowed for portable phones, perhaps you did things while bored like (hand) write notes to friends (on paper, with a writing implement like a pen or (perhaps mechanical!!) pencil), zone out, or sleep, especially in an auditorium class. I recall being bored in some classes. I also recall, especially in college, taking notes. The paradox was this: the less interesting the class was, the more thorough notes I took. I had to in order to stay on point.

Does this make me sound like a Major Nerd? My transcripts could probably offer more evidence on that issue, but that's not the point.

Now, not too many years after I myself was a student, the roles have reversed and I'm up in front of the class. What this student's paper said to me was that students need to have fun in order to learn.

I realize that this is not earth-shattering. I'm sure many studies on educational practices have confirmed Having Fun=More Learning. We are a society that likes to have fun. We dislike being bored. But if a student isn't having fun, it seems to automatically mean that they aren't going to try harder to learn; instead, they just give up.

We are a restless society, one that perpetually strives for More and Better. For teachers, this ups the ante on our delivery of the same messages that have been delivered to students since the advent of the modern school system. I teach comma usage in class, but instead of lecturing on it and requiring demonstration of knowledge via quiz, we play a game for a prize (points), and they need to use commas correctly in their papers thereafter.

I don't think that either way is "right" or "better." I think my students like my way better, because it's probably as fun someone can have learning that a comma has to come before a coordinating conjunction when it separates out two complete sentences. My question, and the point, is, WHY?

Perhaps I am lamenting the loss of learning for learning's sake, students going to class, dutifully taking notes, and studying outside of class because that's just what students do. Why do I feel the pull to be entertaining in my delivery? Is it because I know that students will shut down if bored, and I care about them learning the material? Is it because I personally enjoy teaching in a "fun" manner? Or is it because students put on teachers the expectation to make it fun or they will deliver the ultimate in irritating punishment, not paying attention?

And, most importantly, why are students bored, anyway?

These are large questions, and I realize that I've dissolved into a lament that is unproductive. The issue remains, though, about what currently constitutes "good" teaching. It's no longer enough to be able to deliver information; as teachers, especially college teachers, we should know that students pay for the classroom experience and the direction the instructor provides. Another large, frequently unspoken undercurrent that is present, however, is the expectation of entertainment, which cannot be underestimated if we are to provide a complete experience for our students.

Like it or not.