Teaching All the Students

Years ago the department of which I was then a member invited to campus a promising candidate for a faculty position. He had been highly recommended, based in part on his purported pedagogical skills, but after listening to him present a convoluted talk, I had doubts. Later, as he recounted his success in teaching introductory philosophy, I asked him to estimate the percentage of students in the class who understood his lectures. “Definitely half,” he replied proudly. When I inquired about the other half, he answered that they were not philosophically sophisticated enough to follow the arguments. No wonder that, given the department’s commitment to excellence in teaching, he was not offered a position.

We all recognize that some students are stronger than others, and the temptation often is to focus on the standouts. The aim of teaching, however, is not to bring enjoyment to instructors but to enlighten students. And although some are difficult to reach, all who are trying to learn should be offered help in doing so. Remember, every student has registered for the class and hence deserves attention. Furthermore, most have the necessary ability to succeed, assuming their instructor is capable and cares about their progress.

Concern for all students is compatible with reaching out to the strongest, perhaps by offering them in-class challenges or extra-credit assignments. In truth, however, the talented do not need more help than others. Do you suppose Plato was worried whether he could keep Aristotle’s attention?

While few professors underestimate how much their students are learning, many instructors overestimate. They are dismayed when examination papers display egregious misunderstanding, and they are apt to disparage students whose work contains simple errors. A likely explanation for the phenomenon, however, is that the instruction was inadequate. Professors dissatisfied with the performance of their students may take refuge in supposing that the material lies beyond their grasp, but as Tamar Szabó Gendler, co-editor with Susanna Siegel and me of The Elements of Philosophy and presently dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences at Yale University, once remarked, any subject can be explained successfully if you know how.

The challenge of effective teaching is not to reach only students who come to class with enthusiasm and continually raise their hands to participate. Rather, the key test is whether you can appeal to students who arrive in class with little interest and seemingly limited talents. The crucial question is: Can you excite these students about the material and enhance their knowledge and skills?

Admittedly, doing so is difficult. Yet good teachers sometimes succeed, and great teachers often do. Granted, even the finest instructors fail occasionally, but in that case they are likely to express dissatisfaction not with their students but with themselves.

At an interview, when candidates are asked about the extent of their success in the classroom, I have little confidence in anyone who replies, “I don’t think about teaching too much, but mine’s okay.” Rather I hope to hear: “I believe I reach the students, but I’m always trying to improve.” The most unsatisfying response, which I have heard too often, is: “I work well with good students.” In that case I’m always tempted to respond, ”Who doesn’t?”

Steven M. Cahn

Steven M. Cahn is Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York. The most recent books he has authored are Religion Within Reason (Columbia University Press, 2017); Teaching Philosophy: A Guide (Routledge, 2018); Inside Academia: Professors, Politics, and Policies (Rutgers University Press, 2019); The Road Traveled and Other Essays (Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2019); Philosophical Adventures (Broadview Press, 2019); A Philosopher’s Journey: Essays from Six Decades (Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2020), and Navigating Academic Life (Routledge, 2021).