has the quality of professors/ideclining

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prof here. In my discipline, I would say quality of instruction has improved at a lot of Top-50 schools. Tenure requirements used to almost ignore teaching, but in my experience it is now treated as a serious consideration. In addition, some tenured/tenure track faculty have been replaced by teaching professors-- academics will lament this because it reduces a school's research, but such faculty are hired/evaluated/promoted solely on teaching, so they also take it seriously. When I started my career, there was literally no training or consideration related to teaching when we taught PhD students, and now we essentially don't let them go on the academic job market until their teaching evaluations have hit a reasonable threshold. So I think teaching has become significantly stronger over time.

Thanks for sharing this. It makes sense. Given the significantly greater rate at which students communicate with one another these days, you can't hide dissatisfaction with teaching quality for long. It behooves colleges to do what they can to make sure their students are happy with their instructors, lest they get a reputation that will lose them some of the students they want most.

A lot of students are just interested in getting good grades easily. I don't think academia should be set up along a customer/service provider model. It's not like going to dinner and ordering a meal. Students do not buy a grade, they earn it.

I'm not at all clear as to how you got the idea I was implying any of what you said. It's important for colleges to have professors who students will want to learn from--that's my point.

NP here. Consider the case of Dr. Maitland Jones, Jr, the chem professor at NYU who was fired after students created a petition protesting that his class was too difficult. This class was a “weed out” course for kids who hoped to eventually enter med school, and the professor has been interviewed saying that in recent years, students expect and demand higher grades for poorer quality work and effort than in the past; this man had published and contributed as an expert in his field and used to be tenured at Princeton for many years. In the past, the course was understood to be one that separated those capable of the rigors of med school from the rest, but now students seem to feel that because they are paying a lot of tuition money and want to go to med school, it is the prof’s fault if they aren’t given the grades they want. Universities are very much customer service oriented now, and students continue demanding what their parents demanded for them through high school, I think.

That's a valid point, of course, but not relevant to what I'm trying to say, which is simply that colleges should be looking for instructors who genuinely love teaching and are good at it.

But what YOU don't seem to be connecting is that what students want and what makes a good professor are not perfectly overlapping. In an ideal world, students would want to be challenged academically, and care more about learning than grades/recommendations/career building. But they don't always. Many think that "a good teacher" is one who doesn't give too much work and grades leniently.

PP Prof here. Maybe I wasn't clear about how we evaluate teaching. It is true that we care about teaching evaluations by students, but we look at all of the questions (these include things like whether the instructor is organized, whether the class is challenging, etc. etc.) though the overall 'rate the instructor' question also matters quite a lot. We also have the faculty member who is being evaluated summarize their grade distributions. We also send a senior faculty member to observe a few class sessions; we look at syllabi; we have the instructor summarize their teaching philosophy and annual updates/revisions to their course, and similar items. It's a pretty comprehensive assessment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prof here. In my discipline, I would say quality of instruction has improved at a lot of Top-50 schools. Tenure requirements used to almost ignore teaching, but in my experience it is now treated as a serious consideration. In addition, some tenured/tenure track faculty have been replaced by teaching professors-- academics will lament this because it reduces a school's research, but such faculty are hired/evaluated/promoted solely on teaching, so they also take it seriously. When I started my career, there was literally no training or consideration related to teaching when we taught PhD students, and now we essentially don't let them go on the academic job market until their teaching evaluations have hit a reasonable threshold. So I think teaching has become significantly stronger over time.

Thanks for sharing this. It makes sense. Given the significantly greater rate at which students communicate with one another these days, you can't hide dissatisfaction with teaching quality for long. It behooves colleges to do what they can to make sure their students are happy with their instructors, lest they get a reputation that will lose them some of the students they want most.

A lot of students are just interested in getting good grades easily. I don't think academia should be set up along a customer/service provider model. It's not like going to dinner and ordering a meal. Students do not buy a grade, they earn it.

I'm not at all clear as to how you got the idea I was implying any of what you said. It's important for colleges to have professors who students will want to learn from--that's my point.

NP here. Consider the case of Dr. Maitland Jones, Jr, the chem professor at NYU who was fired after students created a petition protesting that his class was too difficult. This class was a “weed out” course for kids who hoped to eventually enter med school, and the professor has been interviewed saying that in recent years, students expect and demand higher grades for poorer quality work and effort than in the past; this man had published and contributed as an expert in his field and used to be tenured at Princeton for many years. In the past, the course was understood to be one that separated those capable of the rigors of med school from the rest, but now students seem to feel that because they are paying a lot of tuition money and want to go to med school, it is the prof’s fault if they aren’t given the grades they want. Universities are very much customer service oriented now, and students continue demanding what their parents demanded for them through high school, I think.

That's a valid point, of course, but not relevant to what I'm trying to say, which is simply that colleges should be looking for instructors who genuinely love teaching and are good at it.

But what YOU don't seem to be connecting is that what students want and what makes a good professor are not perfectly overlapping. In an ideal world, students would want to be challenged academically, and care more about learning than grades/recommendations/career building. But they don't always. Many think that "a good teacher" is one who doesn't give too much work and grades leniently.

Where in my last statement do you see anything referencing what students want?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prof here. In my discipline, I would say quality of instruction has improved at a lot of Top-50 schools. Tenure requirements used to almost ignore teaching, but in my experience it is now treated as a serious consideration. In addition, some tenured/tenure track faculty have been replaced by teaching professors-- academics will lament this because it reduces a school's research, but such faculty are hired/evaluated/promoted solely on teaching, so they also take it seriously. When I started my career, there was literally no training or consideration related to teaching when we taught PhD students, and now we essentially don't let them go on the academic job market until their teaching evaluations have hit a reasonable threshold. So I think teaching has become significantly stronger over time.

Thanks for sharing this. It makes sense. Given the significantly greater rate at which students communicate with one another these days, you can't hide dissatisfaction with teaching quality for long. It behooves colleges to do what they can to make sure their students are happy with their instructors, lest they get a reputation that will lose them some of the students they want most.

A lot of students are just interested in getting good grades easily. I don't think academia should be set up along a customer/service provider model. It's not like going to dinner and ordering a meal. Students do not buy a grade, they earn it.

I'm not at all clear as to how you got the idea I was implying any of what you said. It's important for colleges to have professors who students will want to learn from--that's my point.

NP here. Consider the case of Dr. Maitland Jones, Jr, the chem professor at NYU who was fired after students created a petition protesting that his class was too difficult. This class was a “weed out” course for kids who hoped to eventually enter med school, and the professor has been interviewed saying that in recent years, students expect and demand higher grades for poorer quality work and effort than in the past; this man had published and contributed as an expert in his field and used to be tenured at Princeton for many years. In the past, the course was understood to be one that separated those capable of the rigors of med school from the rest, but now students seem to feel that because they are paying a lot of tuition money and want to go to med school, it is the prof’s fault if they aren’t given the grades they want. Universities are very much customer service oriented now, and students continue demanding what their parents demanded for them through high school, I think.

That's a valid point, of course, but not relevant to what I'm trying to say, which is simply that colleges should be looking for instructors who genuinely love teaching and are good at it.

But what YOU don't seem to be connecting is that what students want and what makes a good professor are not perfectly overlapping. In an ideal world, students would want to be challenged academically, and care more about learning than grades/recommendations/career building. But they don't always. Many think that "a good teacher" is one who doesn't give too much work and grades leniently.

Where in my last statement do you see anything referencing what students want?

There’s that student-as-consumer attitude again (from PP). This board is filled with greedy finance bro wannabes and their tiger moms. You can hear them say “YOU work for ME! I pay $80,000 a year to be here! I want and you give!”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP Prof here. Maybe I wasn't clear about how we evaluate teaching. It is true that we care about teaching evaluations by students, but we look at all of the questions (these include things like whether the instructor is organized, whether the class is challenging, etc. etc.) though the overall 'rate the instructor' question also matters quite a lot.

Business Prof here. Business schools are dependent on tuition money, and the consequent emphasis on teaching ratings diluted and destroyed the M.B.A. degree. Teaching ratings are all correlated with the same factor of making the students feel like they learned a lot, regardless of whether they actually learned a lot.

It is fine to have some teaching professors. But you need to have serious scholars to maintain the curriculum. When some undergrad majors start over $100K, and Wall Street compensation soon exceeds $200K, what kind of professor quality will you get cheaply? It might be a great person who loves teaching, but not someone who stays on the cutting edge of the field for decades.

Teaching ratings can be useful. For example, that NYU chemistry professor refused to relax standards during Covid. GMAFB, everybody knew it was tougher to learn remotely during Covid. Plus, college enrollment dropped, so they needed to drop standards to maintain the cash flow and meet diversity targets. You must teach the students you have, not the students you would like to have. That chemistry professor was old and unwilling to adapt.

Colleges need a reservoir of curmudeonly professors who care about their field more than they care about money. I'm reminded of the Greatful Dead allowing fans to freely tape the music. By analogy, science departments have tough grading standards and low service. They make students sit in cinder-block/concrete buildings, and professors teach on blackboards without free Powerpoint notes. But they get lots of donations after their students get jobs and found companies.

The best gyms lack juice bars. Authentic ethnic restaurants are in cheap strip malls. The most exclusive nightclubs have dress codes and face control. And the best academic classes emphasize standards over convenience.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:topic cut off - has quality of professors/instruction in schools with declining acceptance rates improved over the last 20 years

It has probably declined overall. Research is mor important to most schools than undergrad teaching, and many academics view their careers as much more dependent on research and publising than teaching.

This is not the case at small, liberal arts colleges.

I would avoid schools that rely heavily on adjunct professors. They are treated very poorly and typically do not have offices, nor are they given support for spending time with students outside of class.

In theory this is true but have you been on a search committee at a SLAC? I would bet not all of your colleagues are on the same page

Agree that adjuncts are treated poorly and not given support and resources to help students outside of class. They are also not compensated for letters of recommendation and may not be at the same school year to year. That said, I also agree with the PP who said tenure status has very little to do with teaching ability, adjuncts can be great teachers, too bad they're not employed securely for that.

Is AI the next great professor?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“- has quality of professors/instruction in schools with declining acceptance rates improved over the last 20 years” - lol they are probably the same professors now as in the 90s and even the 70s. Pesky Boomers refuse to retire or die!

How has the quality of professors in schools with declining acceptance rates improved over the last 20 years? Do professors typically teach or are classes taught by adjunct or TAs?

[Anonymous]

AI can scan essays, papers and front work

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:new to the process as a parent, and can’t believe some of these acceptance rates. I went to Georgetown back in the day when I think acceptance rate was over 40%. Vanderbilt now around 5%??? Has the quality of instruction and the overall experience changed that much over the last 20 years when acceptance rate was somewhere around 60-70%??

Oh FFS. You parents got this idea that you can micromanage your precious little snowflake’s grade school and secondary school classrooms and now you want to take that attitude to the university. Nope. Not having it. Power down the chopper.

Calm down, Clem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:topic cut off - has quality of professors/instruction in schools with declining acceptance rates improved over the last 20 years

It has probably declined overall. Research is mor important to most schools than undergrad teaching, and many academics view their careers as much more dependent on research and publising than teaching.

This is not the case at small, liberal arts colleges.

I would avoid schools that rely heavily on adjunct professors. They are treated very poorly and typically do not have offices, nor are they given support for spending time with students outside of class.

In theory this is true but have you been on a search committee at a SLAC? I would bet not all of your colleagues are on the same page

Agree that adjuncts are treated poorly and not given support and resources to help students outside of class. They are also not compensated for letters of recommendation and may not be at the same school year to year. That said, I also agree with the PP who said tenure status has very little to do with teaching ability, adjuncts can be great teachers, too bad they're not employed securely for that.

Is AI the next great professor?

AI is much better than a professor for Q&A office hours to discuss difficult spots in the material.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:topic cut off - has quality of professors/instruction in schools with declining acceptance rates improved over the last 20 years

No, in fact the classes are kind of a side project for students at top colleges. You are expected to keep up with your classes with about 20% of your time so you can spend the bulk of your time doing other stuff.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prof here. In my discipline, I would say quality of instruction has improved at a lot of Top-50 schools. Tenure requirements used to almost ignore teaching, but in my experience it is now treated as a serious consideration. In addition, some tenured/tenure track faculty have been replaced by teaching professors-- academics will lament this because it reduces a school's research, but such faculty are hired/evaluated/promoted solely on teaching, so they also take it seriously. When I started my career, there was literally no training or consideration related to teaching when we taught PhD students, and now we essentially don't let them go on the academic job market until their teaching evaluations have hit a reasonable threshold. So I think teaching has become significantly stronger over time.

Thanks for sharing this. It makes sense. Given the significantly greater rate at which students communicate with one another these days, you can't hide dissatisfaction with teaching quality for long. It behooves colleges to do what they can to make sure their students are happy with their instructors, lest they get a reputation that will lose them some of the students they want most.

A lot of students are just interested in getting good grades easily. I don't think academia should be set up along a customer/service provider model. It's not like going to dinner and ordering a meal. Students do not buy a grade, they earn it.

I'm not at all clear as to how you got the idea I was implying any of what you said. It's important for colleges to have professors who students will want to learn from--that's my point.

But students don't really learn. They use accomodations to get better grade and now everyone uses AI to cheat through exams for As.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“- has quality of professors/instruction in schools with declining acceptance rates improved over the last 20 years” - lol they are probably the same professors now as in the 90s and even the 70s. Pesky Boomers refuse to retire or die!

How has the quality of professors in schools with declining acceptance rates improved over the last 20 years? Do professors typically teach or are classes taught by adjunct or TAs?

At Harvard, classes are mostly taught by non-tenure-track faculty or graduate students.

[Anonymous]

TBH I think the quality of students is declining. So much grade inflation and AI and technology and cheating to get perfect grades, so little deep critical thinking capacity. So much focus on activities versus academic depth. It's depressing and teh professors are depressed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP Prof here. Maybe I wasn't clear about how we evaluate teaching. It is true that we care about teaching evaluations by students, but we look at all of the questions (these include things like whether the instructor is organized, whether the class is challenging, etc. etc.) though the overall 'rate the instructor' question also matters quite a lot.

Business Prof here. Business schools are dependent on tuition money, and the consequent emphasis on teaching ratings diluted and destroyed the M.B.A. degree. Teaching ratings are all correlated with the same factor of making the students feel like they learned a lot, regardless of whether they actually learned a lot.

It is fine to have some teaching professors. But you need to have serious scholars to maintain the curriculum. When some undergrad majors start over $100K, and Wall Street compensation soon exceeds $200K, what kind of professor quality will you get cheaply? It might be a great person who loves teaching, but not someone who stays on the cutting edge of the field for decades.

Seems like a lot of strawmen here. No respectable business school is displacing serious scholars. Tenured profs still teach the MBAs. A major problem with business programs is that the “cutting edge of the field” is not all that cutting edge or valued by employers.

[Anonymous]

There is almost no diversity amongst college professors when it comes to political diversity.

It is an appalling problem.