Taking Teaching Seriously
The work of teaching is our most common labor. We need to value that labor more fully.
By Steven M. Cahn
Most college and university administrators claim to care deeply about the quality of teaching at their institutions. But, too often, their actions belie their words. Consider, for example, the following questions. Which candidate for a faculty position is usually viewed as more attractive, the promising researcher or the promising teacher? Who typically secures the larger salary increase, the successful researcher or the successful teacher? When a faculty member receives an offer from another institution, is more effort made to retain an outstanding researcher or an outstanding teacher? And who usually receives such offers, the famed researcher or the famed teacher? Granted, the scholar-teacher is the ideal, but who is more likely to gain tenure, a top-notch researcher who is dull in the classroom or a top-notch teacher whose scholarship is thin?
If presidents, provosts, and deans cared as much about teaching as they say, their commitment would be demonstrated by policies quite different from those typically in place now. First, during a campus interview, a candidate for a faculty position would be expected to give not only a research paper but also a talk on an elementary topic organized and presented as if for introductory students. Only candidates whose teaching performance was proficient would be taken seriously for an appointment.
Second, when salary raises were distributed, excellence in teaching would be weighed just as heavily as excellence in research. To give teaching awards to a select few while rewarding research for the many is no more a sign of genuine concern than would be the unheard-of practice of giving research awards to a select few while rewarding teaching for the many.
Third, just as research is evaluated by peer review, so teaching would be. Popularity among students is a positive sign for a teacher, just as having a book on the best-seller list is a positive sign for a researcher, but neither accomplishment ensures academic quality. We care enough about research to undertake an elaborate review of a professor's scholarship; we ought to care enough about teaching to undertake an equally elaborate review of a professor's work in the classroom. Such a review should involve input from departmental colleagues who visit the professor's classes and analyze syllabi, examinations, and test papers to assess teaching performance. The more an institution is concerned about teaching, the more effort will be made to evaluate it.
Fourth, a corollary of serious evaluation of teaching is the willingness to differentiate among levels of effectiveness. We recognize the differences between research that is incompetent, barely competent, mediocre, strong, or superb; the same distinctions apply to teaching. Not every sound researcher is a serious candidate for a Nobel Prize or its equivalent; neither is every sound teacher a serious candidate for the teaching hall of fame. Describing all teachers simply as "good" or "not so good" is a sign that teaching is not taken seriously. An individual may be said to be a good teacher; the key question is how good a teacher.
Fifth, an outstanding researcher may be awarded tenure even with a weak performance in the classroom. An analogous policy should be in effect for an outstanding teacher with a weak research record. Again, the ideal candidate excels as researcher and teacher, but if an occasional exception is made so as not to lose a researcher of national stature, so an occasional exception should also be made so as not to lose a teacher of similar accomplishment.
Sixth, an institution sometimes seeks to recruit an outstanding researcher to enable a department to enhance its national reputation. But has any school ever recruited an outstanding teacher to enable a department to strengthen its offerings to students? I don't recall ever seeing an advertisement seeking such an individual, but a school committed to teaching would from time to time conduct such searches.
Seventh, if graduate schools cared about teaching, they would require courses in methods of instruction for all students who are to be recommended for faculty appointments. Such courses should involve future professors in discussing and practicing all phases of the teaching process, including motivating students, organizing materials, presenting them clearly, guiding discussions, constructing examinations, and grading papers. Emphasis should also be placed on the crucial importance and multifaceted nature of a teacher's ethical obligations.
Eighth, letters of recommendation would provide details not only about a candidate's research but also about the candidate's teaching. At present, such letters usually contain a perfunctory sentence or two, assuring the reader that although the writer has never actually seen the candidate teach, given the candidate's intelligence and winning personality, the writer is sure that the candidate will be effective in the classroom. After reading hundreds of such letters, I wonder where all the ineffective teachers come from.
Ninth, just as faculty members are given release time to pursue their research, so they would be able to obtain such time to develop new courses, syllabi, and methodologies. They would also be offered the opportunity to spend time at a center for teaching effectiveness, working to strengthen their pedagogic skills with the guidance of master teachers.
Tenth and last, at a school seriously concerned about teaching, classrooms would be open to all qualified persons, including any interested members of the faculty who wished to sit in. What would we think of a surgeon who barred all other surgeons from an operation? We should view with equal skepticism any professor who locks classroom doors against any knowledgeable observers. Physicians watch other physicians conduct medical procedures, thereby honing their own skills; similarly, teachers can learn by observation. And teachers who may be visited by peers are apt to devote greater attention to their presentations. Open classrooms thus benefit all.
At schools where these policies are in effect, teaching will not be overshadowed by research. Instead, teaching will be taken seriously. And at such institutions, those who pay the tuition bills can depend on receiving the quality of instruction to which they are entitled.
Steven Cahn is professor of philosophy and former provost and acting president at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York. He is the author of Saints and Scamps: Ethics in Academia and general editor of Rowman and Littlefield's series on issues in academic ethics.
|