Thursday, July 2, 2009
Economists
We talked about this in class, and I'll explain it later--but what can we do to provide better incentives for professors to teach better? One thought I had was to provide financial compensation for professors who do successful research in education, as well as in their topic area (i.e. economics research and economics education research both will work toward tenure.) Any other thoughts?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I have long thought about this topic. One of the reasons that I knew I needed to go back to school is that I saw lousy teaching all over higher ed and I felt like I was a part of that. The difference is that I recognized that I could be a better teacher. Therefore I am here now at BYU. So I think the first issue is to make teachers aware that they are not as good as they think, or at least that they all have room for improvement. I am not sure how to do this.
ReplyDeleteMy second concern in this area is the matter of tenure. Tenure is currently set up to ensure that only teachers who conduct meaningful research can net the tenured professorships at major universities. This is irrespective of their ability to teach. I have taken classes from several of the world's brightest intellectual minds and found their teaching styles seriously lacking. Perhaps that was my own inability to learn showing forth, but then everyone else in those classes must have had the same problems I did because there was a general consensus among us. The conditions for tenure need to become more student oriented than institutionally oriented.
The third issue is that teaching is often considered a separate and distinct discipline from all other disciplines. I know a student who decided recently to take a course designed for teachers because he said, "even though this is outside of my curriculum, I think this class will help me since I will probably end up teaching at some time in the future". By this I learned that teaching is seen as a secondary purpose in pursuing one's education. And secondly, I became aware that the structure of academic programs is largely responsible for students' perception of teaching as being mutually exclusive of their major. I think the 3PP Gong model, with its emphasis on developing the L/T role, would do wonders to redefine education and curriculum, especially if all majors were required to take at least elementary courses in the subject. As an interesting side note, the Brigham Young Academy (the precursor to BYU) required teaching courses as part of its curriculum required for graduation. I did a huge research project on John A. Widtsoe, who happened to be heavily involved in the development of education in UT and the Church as a whole. His whole earlier career of study and learning was amply furnished with teaching appointments, both formal and informal. He is perhaps one of the greatest teachers in the History of the Church, even in secular subjects and circles.
I believe teaching to be an essential component of communication. Perhaps the two terms can be considered synonymous in some respects.
My new questions:
Though the model professes exponential growth and continuation of knowledge, how can we develop that vision and motivation within others, especially those that aren't interested in either aspect?