How do professors who went to top schools feel about teaching students at bottom tier colleges?

[Anonymous]

My uncle is a prof at MIT and he hates his students and teaching: he hates ALL his students, and not because they aren’t bright, but because they take up his time. His love and focus is his research. Teaching and interacting with students are something he tolerates for the purpose of being able to conduct his research. Disclaimer: my uncle is brilliant but most certainly on the spectrum, but so are most of his colleagues at MIT. I went to Harvard and had some amazing professors who truly cared about teaching and liked interacting with students, but also knew some who clearly viewed teaching as a necessary evil to be tolerated if one wanted space and the arena to write and then publish in one’s field.

I suspect that many professors like teaching well enough, but would happily limit their teaching time or give it up if they could do so without losing their place at a university. People who enjoy teaching more than research/writing/publishing in their field do not become university professors, they become…teachers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My uncle is a prof at MIT and he hates his students and teaching: he hates ALL his students, and not because they aren’t bright, but because they take up his time. His love and focus is his research. Teaching and interacting with students are something he tolerates for the purpose of being able to conduct his research. Disclaimer: my uncle is brilliant but most certainly on the spectrum, but so are most of his colleagues at MIT. I went to Harvard and had some amazing professors who truly cared about teaching and liked interacting with students, but also knew some who clearly viewed teaching as a necessary evil to be tolerated if one wanted space and the arena to write and then publish in one’s field.

I suspect that many professors like teaching well enough, but would happily limit their teaching time or give it up if they could do so without losing their place at a university. People who enjoy teaching more than research/writing/publishing in their field do not become university professors, they become…teachers.

Or they become professors at liberal arts colleges that place more emphasis on teaching.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My uncle is a prof at MIT and he hates his students and teaching: he hates ALL his students, and not because they aren’t bright, but because they take up his time. His love and focus is his research. Teaching and interacting with students are something he tolerates for the purpose of being able to conduct his research. Disclaimer: my uncle is brilliant but most certainly on the spectrum, but so are most of his colleagues at MIT. I went to Harvard and had some amazing professors who truly cared about teaching and liked interacting with students, but also knew some who clearly viewed teaching as a necessary evil to be tolerated if one wanted space and the arena to write and then publish in one’s field.

I suspect that many professors like teaching well enough, but would happily limit their teaching time or give it up if they could do so without losing their place at a university. People who enjoy teaching more than research/writing/publishing in their field do not become university professors, they become…teachers.

It's interesting that you say that, because at least within research schools, the better researchers also *tend* to be the better teachers. There are top teachers who are less productive, and there are top researchers who despise teaching, but overall they are definitely positively correlated. How do I know? I've been on performance review committees where we have to assess both research and teaching performance, and I have a big old spreadsheet of hundreds of people's ratings over years

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My uncle is a prof at MIT and he hates his students and teaching: he hates ALL his students, and not because they aren’t bright, but because they take up his time. His love and focus is his research. Teaching and interacting with students are something he tolerates for the purpose of being able to conduct his research. Disclaimer: my uncle is brilliant but most certainly on the spectrum, but so are most of his colleagues at MIT. I went to Harvard and had some amazing professors who truly cared about teaching and liked interacting with students, but also knew some who clearly viewed teaching as a necessary evil to be tolerated if one wanted space and the arena to write and then publish in one’s field.

I suspect that many professors like teaching well enough, but would happily limit their teaching time or give it up if they could do so without losing their place at a university. People who enjoy teaching more than research/writing/publishing in their field do not become university professors, they become…teachers.

No, they become professors at SLAC's, which emphasize teaching (unlike R1 universities).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My uncle is a prof at MIT and he hates his students and teaching: he hates ALL his students, and not because they aren’t bright, but because they take up his time. His love and focus is his research. Teaching and interacting with students are something he tolerates for the purpose of being able to conduct his research. Disclaimer: my uncle is brilliant but most certainly on the spectrum, but so are most of his colleagues at MIT. I went to Harvard and had some amazing professors who truly cared about teaching and liked interacting with students, but also knew some who clearly viewed teaching as a necessary evil to be tolerated if one wanted space and the arena to write and then publish in one’s field.

I suspect that many professors like teaching well enough, but would happily limit their teaching time or give it up if they could do so without losing their place at a university. People who enjoy teaching more than research/writing/publishing in their field do not become university professors, they become…teachers.

No, they become professors at SLAC's, which emphasize teaching (unlike R1 universities).

Nobody with a PhD CHOOSES to go into teaching. lol. They just fail at research

[Anonymous]

Sophisticated consumers look at HOW the faculty are paid. At R1 universities, they are forced to bring in a large portion of their salary through grants. Anyone who works in their lab is also paid through their grants. What they can't make up for in grants, they have to underwrite by taking on teaching or administrative roles.

At schools which emphasize teaching, they are usually paid a 9 month salary just for teaching (many then bring in grants which pay them in the summer). Mind you, people on such "hard money" salaries have a heavier teaching load (which can mean they can't give as much individual attention). But at a place like Bowdoin, the school is so well endowed that teachers have both a relatively light teaching load and are not under pressure to fund their own salaries. Teaching quality follows.

And the faculty who seek out such positions care about teaching quality.

[Anonymous]

I think they're glad to have a job. Do you know how difficult it is to get a teaching job at a university? You sound completely out of touch, OP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My uncle is a prof at MIT and he hates his students and teaching: he hates ALL his students, and not because they aren’t bright, but because they take up his time. His love and focus is his research. Teaching and interacting with students are something he tolerates for the purpose of being able to conduct his research. Disclaimer: my uncle is brilliant but most certainly on the spectrum, but so are most of his colleagues at MIT. I went to Harvard and had some amazing professors who truly cared about teaching and liked interacting with students, but also knew some who clearly viewed teaching as a necessary evil to be tolerated if one wanted space and the arena to write and then publish in one’s field.

I suspect that many professors like teaching well enough, but would happily limit their teaching time or give it up if they could do so without losing their place at a university. People who enjoy teaching more than research/writing/publishing in their field do not become university professors, they become…teachers.

It's interesting that you say that, because at least within research schools, the better researchers also *tend* to be the better teachers. There are top teachers who are less productive, and there are top researchers who despise teaching, but overall they are definitely positively correlated. How do I know? I've been on performance review committees where we have to assess both research and teaching performance, and I have a big old spreadsheet of hundreds of people's ratings over years

Hmm, I have no idea what his students think of him, but maybe he is a good teacher despite himself. Certainly the MIT students I knew seemed to almost WANT to be perceived as someone like my uncle. Judging by his behavior at family events, I’m sure he stays on topic and is capable of explaining his ideas; he refuses to talk about anything BUT his academic interests even when surrounded by people who don’t know or care anything about those things. I suppose if I wanted to know, I would go to him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My uncle is a prof at MIT and he hates his students and teaching: he hates ALL his students, and not because they aren’t bright, but because they take up his time. His love and focus is his research. Teaching and interacting with students are something he tolerates for the purpose of being able to conduct his research. Disclaimer: my uncle is brilliant but most certainly on the spectrum, but so are most of his colleagues at MIT. I went to Harvard and had some amazing professors who truly cared about teaching and liked interacting with students, but also knew some who clearly viewed teaching as a necessary evil to be tolerated if one wanted space and the arena to write and then publish in one’s field.

I suspect that many professors like teaching well enough, but would happily limit their teaching time or give it up if they could do so without losing their place at a university. People who enjoy teaching more than research/writing/publishing in their field do not become university professors, they become…teachers.

No, they become professors at SLAC's, which emphasize teaching (unlike R1 universities).

You clearly have no idea how academia works.

[Anonymous]

There's an article here about a professor going from R1 to LAC. He seems to make a good case: https://blogs.ams.org/inclusionexclusion/2017/09/15/why-im-leaving-a-research-i-university-for-a-liberal-arts-college/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:David Foster Wallace preferred teaching at Illinois State University to Pomona, where he went after being offered an endowed faculty Chair

What do you expect them to say? "These kids are lazy underachievers, very few actually read the assigned material, plagiarism is rampant, and lectures are like talking to a wall."

Well he made the comment after he left the "directional" university and while held an endowed professorship at a selective Liberal Arts college, so I'm not sure what his incentive would have been to celebrate his previous students over his current ones other than it was probably true

I'm not sure his issues with Pomona were entirely with the students. I know someone who was a student worker in the English department when he was there. She was the one who was tasked with reaching out to him for scheduling events. He expressed deep frustration over the number of public events he was expected to attend and speak at. The demands on his time were quite extensive.

[Anonymous]

My Stanford Phd sister had to teach at a few community colleges.
One student came to her and admitted she was having a hard time because she'd never had any homework before.
At another school, the football players held dreams about being professional athletes someday and schoolwork was just a pesky feature of their time in school.

The students at the regional college she taught at were much better, worked harder, and were realistic about life.

No matter what level of institution, they want their teachers to have publications on their resumes (i.e. research).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:David Foster Wallace preferred teaching at Illinois State University to Pomona, where he went after being offered an endowed faculty Chair

What do you expect them to say? "These kids are lazy underachievers, very few actually read the assigned material, plagiarism is rampant, and lectures are like talking to a wall."

Well he made the comment after he left the "directional" university and while held an endowed professorship at a selective Liberal Arts college, so I'm not sure what his incentive would have been to celebrate his previous students over his current ones other than it was probably true

What is the source? Because I follow DFW quite closely and have never heard of this.

[Anonymous]

My child attends a small independent school (not DMV) where about 80% of the teachers have PhD's from well recognized schools. I initially wondered if they might consider this a "last resort" option, but they have been wonderful and seem to lead very full lives outside of school that they share with the students. A couple compete nationally/internationally in sports, one is a published fiction author, and many sponsor interesting student groups related to their field that involve travel and introduce the students to practical application. The trade-off of avoiding university politics and publish or perish pressure seems to be worth it to them, and teacher recruitment is largely word of mouth so over time they have attracted colleagues.

[Anonymous]

University/college faculty have to constantly apply for grants to keep their research going. It is an exhausting process that not many want to do. And it's not like their research will change the world. Only a tiny, tiny percent of research is breakthrough. And that interestingly enough is done or funded by government.