It is not uncommon for graduate students in philosophy to be thrown into teaching without any formal training or preparation. This practice seems to rest on the misguided notion that if one knows the philosophy, then one will be able to teach it (or more pessimistically, teaching is not valued enough to prioritize it within graduate programs with limited resources). And while this may be the case in a straightforward sense of being able to talk about a subject in front of a room full of students, knowing the content is certainly no guarantee of teaching well or having students actually learn anything. Moreover, teaching well is not solely a matter of caring, motivation, and charisma. To be sure it is a task that may benefit from these traits, but it is also a skill that can be cultivated and improved upon with relevant knowledge, effective techniques, and practice. If these are skills that can be acquired, and graduate students are expected to teach while we move through our program or shortly thereafter, why aren’t these skills taught? Why are graduate students almost destined to learn how to teach through observation and failure rather than through instruction? Some programs, including my own, have attempted to mediate this problem with the inclusion of formal training.
In the Philosophy Department at the University of South Florida, I was fortunate enough to take a seminar on teaching methods with Professor Colin Heydt. This course, while not required in my program, is highly encouraged by the professors and previous students alike. Moreover, the seminar provides a unique opportunity for aspiring and budding professors in philosophy, because, while much of what I gained is applicable to teaching more universally, it was in many ways catered to the particular challenges of teaching philosophy. In general, this course is designed to provide pragmatic and effective tools to improve teaching and as such, is guided by cognitive science and research related broadly to learning and memory. Specifically, we considered the impacts of cognitive load theory, knowledge organization, spaced retrieval practice, course design, and more. While the teaching methods are helpful and worth noting, the purpose of this article is to illustrate a few ways the course itself can make an impact on up-and-coming professors within the discipline of philosophy (find the course syllabus here).
Our seminar meetings acted as a venue for discussing, testing, and observing some of these methods in real-time, without having to struggle in front of an actual class. We were also able to experience some of these techniques as students. For example, the guiding course idea had four components, which every person in the seminar had learned by the end of the semester, as spaced retrieval practice had worked its wonders. This experience not only served as an example of how instruction methods, such as spaced retrieval practice, can be successful when implemented properly, but it further pointed to how becoming better teachers can simultaneously enhance our ability to learn. If we can recognize how learning and memory work for our students, then we can introduce these tactics into our own projects and academic endeavors as well.
However, what was most notable for my own experience in the seminar was the inclusion of backward course design and lesson planning. Throughout the semester, I was prompted not only to ask about how to teach well but also what I wanted to teach and why. Envisioning the ideal courses I would instruct prompted reflection on why I entered into the world of academia to begin with, and what my liberal arts experience had done for me. My introduction to philosophy was very much a world-expanding and life-upending encounter that one cannot ignore. The conjunction of reading works, such as Agnes Callard’s, “Liberal Education and the Possibility of Valuation Progress”, and actively designing my own course syllabus, the final project for this seminar, provided the horizon for me to take notice of something I already knew to be true. There are numerous and diverse paths to teaching philosophy and part of what we can accomplish, especially with introductory classes filled with students who will have only a single encounter with our discipline, is to demonstrate new possibilities and ways of being in the world.
The syllabus I designed as my final project is for an introductory course focused on the role that death plays in our lives and is inspired by one that I took during my first year as an undergraduate student. It was this course, taught by Professor Megan Altman, that solidified my embracement of philosophy and introduced the themes I continue to examine in my studies today. I am under no illusion that students will share my experience to the extent that they change the course of their life in order to pursue philosophy. However, what the instruction methods seminar brought to light was the expanse of possibilities for what our students can leave a philosophy course with, such as a more nuanced perspective on their death even if they struggle to articulate the complexities of being-towards-death. Implementing backward course design can reinforce attempts to distinguish the salient aspects of philosophical inquiry that we might prioritize in introductory courses, with the expectation that most of the students will not be professional philosophers. How can philosophy serve as more than a core requirement for these students? This question guided my course design and promoted a sense of purpose for the course and consequently, my place as a professor. I created a syllabus that I am eager to teach, a sentiment that would not be possible without the adjoining actionable teaching methods provided by the seminar.
I know that my ability to teach well will progress as I gain experience, as there is no foolproof replacement for this. Nonetheless, I also know that this course has significantly flattened the learning curve for me, which will make my early teaching efforts better for both myself and my students. In addition, designing courses with the “why” in mind can keep a sense of purpose at the forefront and make the joint teaching and learning endeavor more meaningful for everyone involved. As a result, if we can alleviate some of the burdens of learning to teach and concurrently, improve philosophy courses and outcomes for students, then we should strive to do so when possible. Furthermore, this need not be a lofty ambition, as teaching seminars, such as this one can successfully aid in these pursuits.
Heather Brant
Heather Brant is a Presidential Doctoral Fellow in the philosophy PhD program at the University of South Florida. Her research interests include 20th century continental thinkers, death, phenomenology, aging, and Kierkegaard. She is president of the USF Minorities and Philosophy Chapter (MAP) and founder of the USF MAP Mentoring Program.
