Here Are Some Ways to Market Your Class
by
Joel Newman and Eddie Easley

Small classes are nice, but there is such a thing as too small. Can you really conduct a lecture to a class of one?

When classes become too small, administrators raise questions about the efficient use of faculty resources. Prudent teachers, looking over their shoulders at the brooding presence of the dean, will strive to keep enrollments up, lest their deans tell them to offer a more popular course.

The problem often arises in "boutique" courses, which have limited potential audiences in the best of circumstances. Teachers frequently wonder how they can market these courses to increase enrollment.

Some factors affecting course popularity are beyond the instructor's control. For example, some subjects are simply not engaging to some students. Other factors might be within the instructor's control, but ethically should not be used as marketing devices. Raising grades or reducing student workload comes to mind.

There are, however, some factors that an instructor can manipulate for marketing reasons with little or no ethical problem. These factors include course credit hours, the choice of a final exam or a paper, the pass-fail option, and course scheduling.

Inspired by these concerns, we surveyed the rising third-year students of all five North Carolina law schools in 1994. A total of 530 responses were collected from the five schools distributed as follows: North Carolina, 163; Wake Forest, 147; Duke, 125; Campbell, 68; and Central, 27. The students were asked the following questions:

• Would you prefer a two-hour [semester] course or a three-hour course?
• In two-hour courses, would you prefer to meet twice a week for an hour or once a week for two hours?
• Would you prefer a three-hour course or a four-hour course?
• Would you prefer a paper course or an exam course?
• Would you ever take a course pass-fail that you would not take for a grade?

The survey also asked the students to rate various times of day and days of the week. They were asked if the fact that classes were scheduled at such times would be a positive factor in course selection, a negative factor, or a matter of indifference. The students were to answer all of the questions assuming that all other factors were equal.

In responding to all of the questions relating to the number of hours, papers versus exams, and the pass-fail option, students commented that their answers often depended on the course. Some courses really need four hours; some do not. Some courses are just made for papers; some work better with exams. Moreover, a number of students, although willing to state general preferences, said that they actually preferred to have a variety of course offerings, of different lengths, and of different types. Then again, one student probably spoke for many with a blanket response to all of these questions: "Whatever will prepare me for the bar exam."

The detailed results were, by and large, not surprising. However, not all of the responses would have been intuitively obvious.

Two-hour courses versus three-hour courses

Students had a clear preference for three hours over two. Overall, 60% of respondents preferred three hours, as opposed to only 17% who preferred two and 23% with no preference.

By far, the major reason given for the preference for three-hour courses was the belief that there is little difference in the work required for two-hour courses and three-hour courses. One student commented, "[N]ot that much more work; 50% more credit." Others noted the books cost the same whether the course carries two hours of credit or three.

But there were some comments in defense of two-hour courses. Some students believed courses had been stretched to fill out the third hour: "[I]t seems as if we are dragging things out." "Three times a week gets to be tiresome, boring." Others pointed out that two-hour courses allow students to take a greater variety of courses. "There are so many interesting classes -- two-hour courses allow one to get a taste of more topics."

Should two-hour courses meet once a week for two hours or twice a week for one hour?

Here, the results were quite mixed. Overall, there was a 54% to 39% preference for meeting once a week, with 6% undecided.

Comments in favor of once a week included the following: "[A] single block of time would mean less time wasted." "Get it over with." "I commute from 1.25 hours away. So this probably affects my answer." "You can actually cover some ground in a two-hour class."

However, there were quite a few comments against meeting once a week. Two-hour classes are "too long" and "tough -- hard to keep focused." One student commented, "My attention span is tragically truncated." Another noted a "huge drain on attention span in the second hour." Finally, there was this unsettling thought: "The fewer times a week a course meets, the less time students spend thinking about the material." Another comment in favor of twice a week noted that it was "easier to absorb information in small chunks."

Three-hour courses versus four-hour courses

Overall, 78% of the students preferred three hours to four hours, with 11% preferring four and 11% stating no preference.

Students called four-hour courses "ridiculous," "boring," and "too much of a good thing." Focusing on the weight of a grade in a four-hour course, one student wrote, "Too much rides on a four-hour class." Another commented, "Not enough time to 'digest' if a course meets four to five times a week; neglect background reading."

But there were some positive statements about four-hour classes: "I'd rather invest more time getting to know a few fields well than a little time knowing many." "So I can take fewer courses per semester." "The more frequently you're forced to think about a subject, even a broad area, the more adept you become in it."

Would you prefer a paper course or an exam?

Overall, 42% preferred paper courses, 38% preferred exams, and 20% had no preference.

This ambivalence came through in the comments. By far the most frequent comment was that a mixture of paper courses and exam courses was best, and that some subjects lend themselves better to exams and some to papers. Many students wished that grades did not depend entirely upon just one effort at the end of the semester.

One who preferred exams said tersely: "Closed book, closed notes, 3 hours to separate the men from the boys." Another commented: "I'd just rather not write papers. I'd prefer three hours of hell." Other pro-exam commenters pointed out that exams, at least potentially, covered the entire course. "Exams form a synthesis of everything taught."

Anti-exam comments also occasionally had a terse, macho quality: "Exams suck." Other commenters characterized the law school exam as a "fundamentally wrong approach to legal education," a "memorization exercise, and "painfully and embarrassingly inadequate as a tool for evaluation." Students felt that exam grades were more random, more a function of luck than paper grades. Also, some felt that exams did not relate to the real-world practice of law: "How often does [a] client come to an attorney saying, 'I've got to know the answer in three hours -- and don't use any books!'"

Students favoring papers felt that stress levels were reduced in a paper course. Papers afforded the opportunity "to explore a single subject" and were more likely to give students a feeling of accomplishment. Paper grades were more likely to relate to the amount of work put in by the student. Moreover, paper courses allowed students to get instructor guidance and feedback before submission of the final, graded products.

But there were many complaints about papers. They are "a big hassle," "an enormous time consumer," "subjective," and "nagging." Also, paper courses, in which little turns upon daily class preparation, risk making the classes less meaningful: "You don't learn a thing in a paper course. You just screw around all semester and then write your paper. With a paper course there is a tendency not to prepare for class discussion which ultimately leads to a student not receiving as much benefit from the class as potentially exists."

Would you ever take a course pass-fail that you wouldn't take for a grade?

The overall numbers were 82% yes and 18% no.

Many students suggested that an instructor's reputation for giving low grades would be a reason to take a course pass-fail. Others suggested they would favor pass-fail grades in particular subject areas, such as tax and commercial law. One student commented, "Sometimes you merely want to stimulate your mind for interest's sake -- with no stress!"

But there was one positive comment that was disturbing, from the instructor's point of view: "Allows exposure to subject matter without time restraints of studying hard."

Some respondents did not respect their colleagues who elected pass-fail options: "Why bother?" "If that interested, take the grade!" "A person afraid of grades is a person who is not doing his or her best at all times. Don't put that person in my firm."

Time of day, day of week

Like most people, law students would prefer for their day to begin at 10 a.m. and end at 2 p.m. This time frame is the overwhelming choice for the total sample. Evening classes are preferred the least, followed by early morning classes.

In terms of Monday and Friday classes, 68% of the students expressed adverse feelings toward Friday classes, while slightly over half, 54%, were ambivalent toward Monday. Overall, for most students, Monday is much preferred over Friday as a class day. A let's-get-it-over attitude is evident. With some exceptions, the market preference can be identified as Monday through Thursday from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m.