In a generous review of my recent book Professors as Teachers, Martin Benjamin supports most of its major contentions, yet he finds outdated my claim that research, not teaching, rules in academia. In response, he details how the field of philosophy has taken steps to emphasize teaching. These steps include the founding of specialized organizations and journals as well as the sponsorship of numerous conferences and workshops.
Such activities are admirable, but they are consistent with my view that in academic life scholarship is central, teaching peripheral. For instance, a top-notch researcher who is barely adequate in the classroom is far more likely to be appointed, promoted, or awarded tenure compared to a superb teacher whose scholarly record is thin.
This phenomenon is not surprising given that all members of a department share in the prestige of having a national or international authority on its roster, whereas to colleagues of a celebrated teacher, the situation can be perturbing. After all, how many of us are comfortable admitting that someone else’s class size is larger due to that individual’s superior pedagogic skills? In such a situation, the inclination is to chalk up success to personal popularity or generous grading.
Administrators, too, favor the renowned researcher over the best of instructors. The celebrated scholar focuses wide attention on the institution and in some disciplines may attract outside funding which contributes significantly to the school’s coffers. For that reason, leading researchers regardless of their teaching performance have far more leverage with the administration than those faculty who excel primarily in the classroom.
How would we know if teaching were taken more seriously? One sign would be if graduate schools required that all students seeking to be recommended for teaching positions demonstrate teaching prowess as evaluated by peer review, either in a departmental practicum or in an extended series of classroom observations. In that case, letters of recommendation from the department would include detailed accounts of a candidate’s teaching, not just a perfunctory remark such as, “I have never seen this individual teach, but I presume the classroom performance will be fine.” Unfortunately, such an optimistic prediction is without basis.
A second sign would be if schools making appointments were more concerned with evidence of teaching skills. Thus, during campus interviews, each candidate would be expected not only to give a research paper but also to deliver a talk on an elementary topic, organized and presented as if the audience were introductory students. Only those candidates whose teaching was proficient would be given serious consideration.
Third, on those occasions when we routinely undertake an elaborate review of a professor’s research, so too would we undertake such a review of a professor’s work in the classroom. Departmental colleagues would visit classes and examine written materials. After all, the more an institution is concerned with teaching, the more effort would be made to assess it.
Fourth, as faculty are given release time to pursue their research, so too they would be given release time to develop new courses, syllabi, and methodologies. They would also be offered the opportunity to attend a center for teaching effectiveness, working to strengthen their pedagogic skills with the guidance of master teachers.
Fifth and finally, suppose that in considering faculty for salary raises or other recognitions, concern for the quality of teaching was counted more heavily. Granted, some institutions give teaching prizes to a select few while rewarding research for the many, but I doubt that few, if any, schools give research prizes to a select few while rewarding teaching for the many.
In sum, imagine that from day one graduate students were reminded of their obligations as teachers, were expected to work at enhancing their teaching skills, and knew that the quality of their teaching throughout their careers would play a major role in their academic success. Then teaching would not be overshadowed by research but would be illuminated for all to appreciate.
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).
