This week, I graded a paper in my communication ethics class I noticed 2 things.

First, more than any other ethics class that I've taught, this class has their head firmly wrapped around situational ethics, and they refuse to see any other possibilities. Situational ethics has always appealed to a lot of students, but never to an entire class. And make no mistake, the situation as many of them see it is "how can this situation benefit me." Part of what I like about the class is challenging them to think about what they will do when faced with ethical dilemmas where what's right conflicts with what seems self-serving. This class seems to have no trouble with that dilemma and is very honest and vocal about pursuing self-interests over what's "right" in any kind of objective sense. I will have a chance to look at each student's perspective individually at the end of the semester, and it may be that it's just the vocal few that feel this way. I'm hoping.

Second, I've noticed a trend where students have trouble reading something and picking out the main argument. Part of this could certainly be that the pace of their lives has quickened, and they are not taking the time to read at any depth. This is certainly not a very scientifically founded assertion, but I am wondering if it is possible that teachers' use of PowerPoint could be robbing students of the ability to pick out main points themselves. Why would you learn to do that when someone gives you a bulleted list? I suffered from PowerPoint abuse from a teacher that made too much use of bullet points, so I tend to not use PowerPoint when I don't really need it. I've had several students in the last couple of years complain because they didn't know what to take notes on. I'm not sure how one would study this, but I would like to see some data.