More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Michael Roth

Michael Roth

Posted: December 3, 2010 05:10 PM

I noticed on the calendar today that this week there are early interviews for students planning to apply to Teach for America this year. Teach for America was a popular choice for graduates from many universities even before the jobs situation deteriorated so dramatically, and it continues to attract some of our most thoughtful and engaged students. Liberal arts colleges have contributed more than their fair share of teachers to schools at all levels. Bard College has been especially innovative in this area, most notably with Simon's Rock and Bard High School Early College (BHSEC). The Scripps College Academy offers a free year-round college-readiness program for high-achieving young women in the greater Los Angeles area who may lack the resources necessary to prepare for success in top colleges and universities. Wesleyan's Graduate Liberal Studies program has provided hundreds of teachers in central Connecticut with advanced degrees. There are dozens of programs around the country sponsored by selective colleges eager to help students and teachers acquire the tools necessary for getting the most out of higher education. We certainly need new ideas for improving our schools -- as well as a better understanding of how our education system now reproduces inequality rather than offering an escape from it. Liberal arts colleges can help in these areas by connecting their on-campus educational mission of enhancing life-long learning to the practical challenges faced by public schools in their towns or regions.

Recently, a spate of commentators have complained about university professors merely chasing specialized awards and not spending enough of their time and energy on undergraduates. Although there is certainly some truth to this at universities with large graduate programs, this picture of the professor protected from teaching neglects the thousands of college teachers who spend countless hours advising, grading, and mentoring in addition to preparing lectures and leading seminars. I'm thinking of the art history department at Williams College, famous not only for providing its students with a great classroom experience, but also for helping graduates over decades to develop rewarding careers as leaders at museums from Massachusetts to California. And I'm thinking of a Wesleyan film prof of whom screenwriter Joss Whedon said, "I've had two great teachers in my life -- one was my mother, the other was Jeanine Basinger." Not every prof gets to see things like that in print, but we all take pride in them.

I'd like to think that one of the core reasons so many students in the liberal arts go on to careers in education is that they are inspired by the energy and dedication of their teachers. Whether they are studying computational biology or ethnomusicology, postmodern Christian thought or microeconomics, our students are enlivened by the work of their professors. And as their teachers, we are enlivened by the creativity, inquisitiveness and intellectual verve of our students. Of course, most of our students don't go on to become teachers, but I do think they go on to find a way to put into practice the lessons learned on campus: to help those around them to develop their talents and to expand their horizons.

Although as a university president I spent much of my time in meetings, my colleagues tell me that I'm happiest just after I come back from the classroom. There is nothing quite like having to respond to the skeptical questions of bright undergraduates. Now as our fall term comes to an end, I'm already beginning to wonder who will be in my spring course...

Emerson wrote that colleges "serve us when they aim not to drill, but to create; when they gather from far every ray of various genius to their hospitable halls, and by the concentrated fires, set the hearts of their youth on flame." That's why we teach. To see those fires and to feel their warmth.

 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 14
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
07:55 AM on 12/05/2010
The tittle of the article is, "Why we teach.". I read it expecting to learn why teachers teach. No truth in this advertising.
12:47 AM on 12/05/2010
I'm an adjunct. It is hell. The students are outright abusive. Hateful. Frightening. Fatuous is the call and watchword. And the administration is their friend. If a student complains about you--you are, a priori, in the wrong, and you'd better start, uh, baissering les grassses derrieres toutes suites. I bet you miss them, Scarabus. You probably gave them all As, because then they love you.

Alant--you right on de money. Or not, to be precise.
senseandnonsense
Trapeze artist
08:23 AM on 12/06/2010
I'm an adjunct as well, but it is not hell, in my experience. Support from the top, I suspect, is the difference. Disruptive students are read the riot act, after we report them, and they either correct their behavior or are gone.
03:47 PM on 12/07/2010
How could adjuncting not be hell? You must not teach freshman comp and you must be one of those rare adjuncts who get real money. Because the rest of us all suffer the torture of frosh comp (no-one who has not taught it can understand what torture and humiliation it is) and the starvation wages without benefits they grace us with. In fact, you are part of the problem--adjuncts who are not ready to stage a sitdown strike and maybe even more "direct action" are scabs.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Scarabus
Retired Humanities Prof.
05:18 PM on 12/04/2010
Wow! Strange to see such bitterness about education from persons who are or were themselves educators. I loved teaching. I'm retired now, and I miss it deeply. Not the committees or the proposals or reports for bean-counters or meetings or such. I miss the young people.
12:01 PM on 12/04/2010
Yes, well, I too am very happy while teaching and certainly also right after class: I very often thereafter recall that I am an adjunct, and am paid, like the majority of those who now teach in America's colleges and universities, at a sort of discount rate—relative to the not-lavish-but-reasonable salaries received by our colleagues in the fast-dwindling ranks of traditional full-time tenured and tenure track faculty (to say nothing of Univ. Presidents who teach now and then, apparently for relaxation)—and that I receive basically nothing in terms of retirement or other benefits. Oh well, to get to the point: Seeing fires and feeling the warmth of other's, that's NOT the only reason why I teach: that's all good fun, and most elevated, but I teach, as do many of my academic sisters and brothers who are adjuncts and contingents in an increasingly exploitative university system, to make a living, or at least to cobble together a living while also driving a cab or working at a grocery store or elsewhere—and it's not that much fun, no matter what Ralph Waldo has to say. Have a look at Newfacultymajority.info for some new ways of looking at the magic of higher eduction
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
10:14 AM on 12/04/2010
My experience of students headed for elementary and secondary teaching careers was rather different from Michael Roth's. But then, I didn't teach at an elite institution such as Wesleyan where most students supposedly exhibit an eagerness to learn. At my college, students minoring in education (one had to major in a subject area) did so largely because they perceived the field as unchallenging and leading to a moderately well-paying career with lots of time off. Most of them were, in a word, lazy. I remember writing across the bottom of one such student's final exam, "I wish you took your own education as seriously as you perhaps will that of your students."

Our college turned out a lot of teachers. But the best students chose other careers, surely for the money or the challenge, or both. Perhaps that's what is wrong, in part, with our secondary education system today: the better college students, the truly serious ones, are not going into teaching, at least not in large numbers.

So, President Roth, before foisting such out-of-touch platitudes about the lofty values of teaching, perhaps you should take a leave from your presidency and gain some experience at non-elite institutions (not those you mention in your post, all of which are elite) where the vast majority of today's teachers are trained (not educated).
senseandnonsense
Trapeze artist
08:27 AM on 12/06/2010
About students taking their own educations seriously, some say that education is the one thing for which people do not seek to get their money's worth...
09:55 AM on 12/04/2010
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CnSe04-eEY

Wonderful times!
Presidents matter!
researcher
researcher
04:59 AM on 12/04/2010
now that I am retired or just plain tired as I look back what I saw was the paradigm effect in action at the university level. huge class size often taught by TA's, etc. publish or perish. let me give you an example of this paradigm effect that has become paradigm paralysis in our universities. pay for performance is taught as a leadership model.

one dept chair I worked for created his own journal so he and his friends could get published. peer review is a joke. ie like attract like. anyone that presents a paper not in alignment with the existing journal's paradigm is rejected outright. ie science has become scientism.

anyone that understands teaching knows that pay is not the biggest issue with a teacher.

in one dept I taught at one professor got 300 dollars more than the other professors. that created a hostile work environment the rest of the year. 300 dollars??????? and the dept chair walked away thinking what a great leader he was. absolute ignorance. where did he learn such ignorance?

then the dean at one major university would come over and say this is what your dept is going to do. no dialog no discussion just do it or else no funding for your dept.

the same thing wrong on wall street and at our banks and our gov is the same thing wrong at our universities.
photo
unfoxworthy
We:ScottOlsens,the misfits,out to change the world
09:03 AM on 12/04/2010
Good one.
The shift in "management mentality" at universities is not peculiar to these institutions.
We have become a society in love with artificial "feel good" (but empty) artificial goals.
One example:
The Martial Arts [paralleled] improvement programs. It's one thing to achieve the goals of the job, quite another to entertain the management by having to leverage a position by wearing pre-teen brownie badges (e.g. belts) in order to be recognized for the next annual review.
In many cases I've seen these initiatives used in place of actual upgrades or additional training (being the cheap and inefficient way of improvements to the organization).
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
realitytrumpsbull
two 'alves of coconut!
12:49 AM on 12/04/2010
I didn't read anything in this piece that would motivate me to sign my life away for a student loan to learn it. I think if you're serious about self-education, and you're a high school graduate, if you have a computer and an internet connection, you're kind of at the point where the bureaucrat has become at least somewhat superfluous. It's nice to have the 'sheepskin' for purposes of professional advancement, but it's entirely possible to just become an academician, a scholar, a student of many subjects, without spending a copper cent beyond the electricity to power your 'comp, and the price of the bits n bytes flowing down the wire. Freestyle! Might not get you a fancy degree, but you'll learn something anyway.
12:47 AM on 12/04/2010
Oh, thank goodness for anonymity. It is my experience, in 23 years of college teaching, that university presidents are some of the most clueless people I have ever had the privilege of encountering. The position of university president in the US, like that of clergy in Victorian England, is the job reserved for the, shall we say, under-gifted, non-primogenitured sons of the ruling class. Alternatively, they are chosen solely for their ability to pry endowments out of their well-connected connections. So what? I would say along with you, if not for the inevitable hubris problem. Once they get the dough, what do they way too often spend it on? Teacher's salaries? Don't make me laugh. Teachers are highly third-ary to post-secondary education. If only they could figure out a way to replace them. No, university presidents build buildings. In honor of themselves. At my school--two new sports facilities! With deficit spending! Crank opinion? If you think Harper's Magazine a crank magazine:
"VOODOO ACADEMICS: Brandeis University’s hard lesson in the real economy"
by Christopher R. Beha
http://www.endowmentethics.org/downloads/Harpers_Magazine_Brandeis_Article.pdf
11:02 PM on 12/03/2010
Go Wes