If you think it matters that your kid's classes be taught by a professor: Why?

[Anonymous]

I know that sounds argumentative, and I don't mean it that way. I went to a SLAC, and having small classes with professors committed to teaching was great. But as a former TA, I know that completing a PhD doesn't make someone better at teaching or better informed about the subjects they're actually teaching, at least for 100- and 200-level classes.

When my kids applied to college, I wanted them to avoid places that used a lot of adjunct labor because I think adjuncts are usually exploited. I don't think that's most parents' concern, though.

[Anonymous]

A lot of grad student TA's are also exploited. Although as a former grad student, I understand that being a TA is part of the learning process to become a professor.

[Anonymous]

My TAs in college (t10) were awful.
Incoherent
Unorganized
Some barely spoke English

[Anonymous]

Profs develop the courses, read widely, are active researchers, have deep expertise from both PhD and time spent working in the field. If they are active researchers, they need to keep up with current practice. They have a network and will likely be working at the school and in the field for a long time and thus can be tapped for future references/advice/network support.

[Anonymous]

I actually came here to post about labor exploitation. So we do care Many adjuncts are excellent classroom teachers.

As far as TA teaching quality, I think it depends. I was a lab TA in undergrad, after taking the lab the year before. I was adequate to the purpose (small group supervision, mostly) but probably not what you think you're paying for!
Some grad students are good teachers, some aren't. Many lack the maturity and classroom experience to teach well, even if they know the material.

[Anonymous]

The real question is whether the instructor is in the first year or two of teaching or not.

I'm a prof. I definitely got better by my eighth or tenth class. The first three of those were as a PhD student and the next ones were as an assistant professor.

It also depends on the school. Some universities have good, strong TA onboarding and training. They use materials created by professors. They teach some individual class sessions before they have their own class. And have small enrollments their first couple of times teaching. In other universities, though, TAs can have less training and more discretion so their performance can be quite mixed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Profs develop the courses, read widely, are active researchers, have deep expertise from both PhD and time spent working in the field. If they are active researchers, they need to keep up with current practice. They have a network and will likely be working at the school and in the field for a long time and thus can be tapped for future references/advice/network support.

+1 to me this is one of the most important reasons to value the opportunity to build relationships with full professors

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Profs develop the courses, read widely, are active researchers, have deep expertise from both PhD and time spent working in the field. If they are active researchers, they need to keep up with current practice. They have a network and will likely be working at the school and in the field for a long time and thus can be tapped for future references/advice/network support.

Yeah but many really suck. Being an active researcher doesn't mean you want to devote any time to your classes; in fact often professors who are into research would rather just be doing that instead of teaching and put the bare minimum into it.

OP I say that my preference would be professors, just because with professors you can look on ratemyprofessor.com and see how good they are. I have had TAs and grad students who were better teachers than real professors but I think your best bet is knowing what you're getting into before taking a class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Profs develop the courses, read widely, are active researchers, have deep expertise from both PhD and time spent working in the field. If they are active researchers, they need to keep up with current practice. They have a network and will likely be working at the school and in the field for a long time and thus can be tapped for future references/advice/network support.

TA's are usually teaching the lower level courses that are cookie-cutter and standard across the department. Most of the content has been determined by the professors ahead of time. So a class isn't lacking just because it's taught by a TA. Some TA's are younger and relate more to the undergrads. However, professors have more experience in teaching and managing a class, so in that way they may be better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Profs develop the courses, read widely, are active researchers, have deep expertise from both PhD and time spent working in the field. If they are active researchers, they need to keep up with current practice. They have a network and will likely be working at the school and in the field for a long time and thus can be tapped for future references/advice/network support.

+1 to me this is one of the most important reasons to value the opportunity to build relationships with full professors

This is only relevant though if you're going into academia in that field. If you want connections in your actual professional field, adjuncts would be more likely to have those.

[Anonymous]

It absolutely depends on the the type of school- if it is one that values teaching, then, yeah, a prof is preferable. The worst classes I ever had were taught by high-flying research faculty who just didn't care about teaching and weren't incentivized to do so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Profs develop the courses, read widely, are active researchers, have deep expertise from both PhD and time spent working in the field. If they are active researchers, they need to keep up with current practice. They have a network and will likely be working at the school and in the field for a long time and thus can be tapped for future references/advice/network support.

Yeah but many really suck. Being an active researcher doesn't mean you want to devote any time to your classes; in fact often professors who are into research would rather just be doing that instead of teaching and put the bare minimum into it.

OP I say that my preference would be professors, just because with professors you can look on ratemyprofessor.com and see how good they are[b]. I have had TAs and grad students who were better teachers than real professors but I think your best bet is knowing what you're getting into before taking a class.

This is not an accurate rating of professors. Students will give terrible reviews just because they got a bad grade. The strictest professors get bad reviews and lenient professors get good reviews.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Profs develop the courses, read widely, are active researchers, have deep expertise from both PhD and time spent working in the field. If they are active researchers, they need to keep up with current practice. They have a network and will likely be working at the school and in the field for a long time and thus can be tapped for future references/advice/network support.

TA's are usually teaching the lower level courses that are cookie-cutter and standard across the department. Most of the content has been determined by the professors ahead of time. So a class isn't lacking just because it's taught by a TA. Some TA's are younger and relate more to the undergrads. However, professors have more experience in teaching and managing a class, so in that way they may be better.

TAs also aren't equal. If you get a 1st year graduate student as your TA, they may very well be unqualified and flunk out shortly after. But you could also get a 5th year graduate student who is a wonderful teacher, especially in a lab class. They may have a ton more recent experience than a professor.

There are lots of tenured professors who are terrible teachers because they don't care. All they want to do is research, not teach. There are also some real gems. There are also good and bad adjuncts. Good and bad TAs. What really matters is if the department administration is committed to teaching and don't just care about research. Good administrators will move out the bad eggs and find qualified instructors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Profs develop the courses, read widely, are active researchers, have deep expertise from both PhD and time spent working in the field. If they are active researchers, they need to keep up with current practice. They have a network and will likely be working at the school and in the field for a long time and thus can be tapped for future references/advice/network support.

Yeah but many really suck. Being an active researcher doesn't mean you want to devote any time to your classes; in fact often professors who are into research would rather just be doing that instead of teaching and put the bare minimum into it.

OP I say that my preference would be professors, just because with professors you can look on ratemyprofessor.com and see how good they are[b]. I have had TAs and grad students who were better teachers than real professors but I think your best bet is knowing what you're getting into before taking a class.

This is not an accurate rating of professors. Students will give terrible reviews just because they got a bad grade. The strictest professors get bad reviews and lenient professors get good reviews.

When I was an undergraduate, it was an accurate rating of professors as it pertained to me. Some classes didn't matter so I just wanted a good grade in them, so I took those classes. If I really wanted to learn the material, like in my major classes, I chose classes based on how much I would learn. "Firm but fair" or "tough grader but good instructor" were green flags.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It absolutely depends on the the type of school- if it is one that values teaching, then, yeah, a prof is preferable. The worst classes I ever had were taught by high-flying research faculty who just didn't care about teaching and weren't incentivized to do so.

+1 - either there's a commitment to quality instruction, or there's a 'sink or swim' attitude towards students, and who's doing the teaching doesn't really matter. I think it probably varies a lot by department - I was a double major in one STEM and one non-STEM area, and in the STEM department, there was only one faculty member in a full-time instructional role. She taught the intro/intermediate courses and labs, and was let go a few years after I graduated. Everything else was taught by disinterested research-oriented faculty, or graduate assistants (most of whom spoke limited English and were heavily assisted by undergraduate teaching assistants, of which I was one as a junior & senior). In the humanities department, all the lecture classes and seminars were taught by professors, and probably half of them led their own discussion sections, too - the culture was much more oriented towards student engagement and growth.