Rate my professors dot com

The discussions surrounding CIW have focused on the curriculum, touched on the “zesje cultuur” and concerned itself with the relatively unmotivated student attitude. But little time has been spent questioning the competency of professors as educators. Odd because, to a great extent, students in their “attitude” and general performance reflect the capacities of their educators.

During a conversation with a course coordinator I grew increasingly fed up with his complaining about students, especially since he was a mediocre/lousy teacher. I couldn’t help but ask at a certain stage: do you even enjoy teaching? It caught him off guard and it took him a while to respond. The fact that it took him so long fueled my hypothesis formulated almost six years ago that has long persisted the test of time: with a few exceptions, researchers don’t like teaching! (And this is mainly because it “cheats” them out of research time).

The other day at UU I heard an offer from one colleague to another to sit in on a lecture and give feedback, it was declined. I’m rounding off my fifth year at Utrecht University and realized then that during my four and a half years here, I have yet to experience one faculty member auditing a lecture/seminar of a colleague. During my half year at UW-Madison, I had witnessed two audits. (But then again, in that States I know that professors are demanded to excel at both research and as teacher, penalized for slacking in either. To take it even a step further, students actively participate in: www.ratemyprofessors.com )

I must confess, I don’t know what goes on “behind the curtains.” Perhaps there are meetings dedicated to reflection and assessment of the quality of our professors as educators. Perhaps they are subjected to yearly IVLOS courses to help them improve their abilities and capacities as teachers.

But I wonder: What stimulation is granted to teach (well)? What ever happens to the evaluations we give them at the end of a block? Who reviews them and to what effect? Is it a “geeh, they don’t seem to think you did a good job in making theory accessible, oh well, all in a days work” or are there actually consequences to those who repeatedly receive negative feedback? Are researchers merely bound to personal academic success or does their fulfillment of their obligation (yes, they are obliged) as teacher count for something? And I hope that those few good teachers I have had the pleasure of encountering aren’t a stroke of luck. And I sincerely hope that they receive positive reinforcement and rewards in relation to their educational contribution from the system itself.

Whilst I don’t know how it works, the experiences I have had in the BA weren’t that great (truth be told, I wasn’t that motivated myself). The MA changed that when I stumbled upon a teacher foremost, a researcher second. Someone with an immense interest in teaching, who pushed to the extremes and made time to “Gordon Ramsay” the class into doing their best. It was an eye-opener: I realized how little those before her had cared. She demonstrated an ambition for students and failed over half the class out of it, willing to go the extra mile herself. Mind you, I’ve had teachers (professors) confess passing students merely to avoid the workload of resits. What a disgrace!

But honestly, as students we are time consuming and teaching is not always rewarding. In the short run perhaps a first step could be to bridge the rift that has formed between research and education, merely by combining their powers. I remain surprised at how little “in house” research we are asked to read. This is not to say all emphasis needs to be placed on THEIR research, but let’s at least exploit their expertise as researchers. To researchers teaching can become more about their research and to us students seeing a purpose in the work may spark more interest. Any other suggestions?

Gerelateerde artikelen