As a student, I have suffered and bore the brunt of having 1) lecturers/professors who are great as friends but suck big time as educators, and 2) lecturers/professors who are stern but great as educators. Throughout my bachelor’s degree period – I’ll be honest here – with the exception of one lecturer who did more than he should, the rest just did what they were supposed to – by the book. It was not because they had communication problems – one of them was a TV emcee, another a PR practitioner and there was this one dude who was a Toastmasters member (and always championing the perks of public speaking). It was because it was just…enough.
I was never taught to address anything outside the textbook OR be aware of global issues that have an impact on mass communication, media theories and etc. I was never encouraged to read books about advertising, media effects, etc. I never heard of the words “hegemony”, “Stuart Hall”, etc until I reached my postgraduate level.
When I started on my postgraduate course, I came across two different types of professors – both were radically different. One was excellent at making friends, a great lecturer (my former professor) and goes all out to educate us, and the other perhaps more stuffy but teaches. If you hadn’t realise, there is a difference between ‘educate‘ and ‘teach’. I’ll let you tell me what it is.
I discovered that language can be barrier to how well students understand you – my Chinese professor is extremely knowledgeable but because she has to translate from Chinese to English in her brain, a lot of the non-Asian folks just didn’t get her. BUT worse, they didn’t even bother to double-check stuff with her, which is their fault and not hers.
I started formulating the various aspects of what I desired in a lecturer – together with some discussion from my classmate. We all, from different parts of the world, concluded that while both were important, an uneducated professor is the worst of the lot. And believe you me, when I say that there are people like that in the education system.
What students want
With that, I came home and started teaching – for nearly two years. I encountered many types of academicans…still do – apparently, I’m the vessel in which students relate to me their horror stories. I ran into fun and not-so-fun academicans. And I discovered that many of us academic folks out there have different styles of teaching in the classroom and those styles doesn’t necessarily mean that we are bad or good. I mean who are we to judge whether or not a professor is good or bad?
I spoke to students and of course, if they could have the best of both worlds, they would choose someone who knows their stuff inside out, gives out more than what is needed AND is super friendly plus helpful. In other words, they would want someone FUN. BUT that is hardly ever the case. So we, and they, learn to make do with what we’ve got.
The other side of the coin
A lot of academicans out there have been perceived to be ‘boring and not-so-fun’ by students and fellow peers. I’ve gotten that as well. I was told by a student that I’m too strict and that sometimes I look really unapproacheable.
HEY, getting calls around midnight asking for extensions the last minute ain’t my idea of educating young people. Getting buzzed when I’m on MC asking me whether there is going to be tutorial the next day (when I’m not on MC) isn’t fun. Getting told that I’m too strict when I’m trying to get students NOT to slack off and give me silly excuses isn’t polite.
I don’t know about you but I have had students to test my limits as a ‘friendly’ and ‘fun’ lecturer, so after my first semester, I warned the following batch and stopped giving out my MSN AND mobile number. Even better still, I have had some students come and tell me that people have been teasing them, saying that they got higher grades because they seem to get along well with me. Possible serious allegations here.
So you can say that it wasn’t very fun for me.
On the other hand, I have students who tell me this:
“She’s really strict but at least she teaches us a lot of things. Better than so and so who cracks jokes all the time and doesn’t teach us anything.”
At the end of the day
A lecturer/professor is an educator FIRST and FOREMOST. He or she is not your buddy. Neither is he or she supposed to be a communication expert. Neither are they suppose to be your party planners. Students go to a university or college to get educate not have fun 100% of the time. As an educator, your first qualification is not interpersonal skills BUT what you know, in your head and as an academican AND how well you know it. The rest is secondary – it helps but it is never the most important thing.
I had a former colleague tell me once that a masters holder in political science is capable of teaching cultural studies and that any masters graduate is able to teach media research. The entire department nearly died of a heart attack when I related this incident to them. Bear in mind, both the individuals in question were excellent communicators and friendly people who had students who enjoyed their company and classes. But what was wrong with the picture?
So when someone tells me this:
Besides to be honest, it doesn’t make a difference whether you’re a masters student or an undergrad to me. I don’t care how smart a person is but if he/she is unable to communicate well with a student, he/she shouldn’t be a TA.
…coupled with other things that are not really accurate and should, IMHO, be something that he knows, I get a little miffed and worried.
Because at the end of the day, I thought that as an educator, your job is to teach young people not just about whatever that they are studying but about life, discipline, respect, boundaries, expectations, friendship, professionalism, self-esteem, humility, and ultimately, the world around them. It wasn’t a popularity contest, neither was it suppose to be a party sort of environment. Education and teaching isn’t about the professor’s needs and desires. It isn’t about how much people adore you or respect you. It is about fulfilling a need.
I’ll leave with a quote my former colleague once told me. He, btw, has been teaching for nearly seven years (is about to become associate professor), is obtaining his PhD soon (his thesis in under review) and is ADORED by everyone – students and peers alike.
We are their lecturers. Our job is to educate them FIRST. We are not here to be their best buddies. We are not here to be on a fashion show. We are not here to have a party. We are not here to be their mums and dads. We are not here to hold their hands. Ultimately, we shouldn’t pamper them because they are adults. It’s time they start acting like it. This isn’t about who is a better professor or who is a more fun lecturer. It is about the students.
ps: Have you picked out the difference between an educator and a teacher?
Mei,
I agree with you.
A great educator is like what you’ve mentioned above and the same goes to a teacher.
I believe that once you’ve stepped into the world of tertiary education, one most not fool around because it’s not a right thing to do first and foremost. What’s more trying to fool around with lecturers is not something cool. It’s really un-cool.
I believe that we are there to learn and so just stick with our motto and learn.
:d
I have to disagree with that. Teaching is a passion, it’s something that you want to do. It’s about personal satisfaction. How do I know this? Because my own professor who I work closely with told me straight out. He told me that even though as a prof he doesn’t get as much as he would if he were to work in the real world, nevertheless he enjoys the admiration and respect he gets as a professor. He loves discussing and analyzing organizational designs and structures and he brings that enthusiasm into his class teachings…
I will admit if you’re a scientist or a researcher, then yes knowledge is the key requisite…but if you’re a professor…you NEED TO HAVE SOME INTERPERSONAL SKILLS…that is part of the job… it’s okay if you’re not the most brilliant person….as long as you know your material well enough to teach a class.
I mean seriously what’s the point if you’re so damn bloody smart but you can’t relate anything to your students? Part of being a GOOD professor I would say is the ability to make students understand the material…in their own level.
And part of being a GOOD prof is to also know how to limit your relationships with your students. I actually scorn at profs who give out their personal contact numbers to students openly.
It’s one thing to be friendly but it’s also another thing to go overboard. I try as much not to hang out with my students whenever I go out…no one is saying a prof should be a “buddy” to their students… in fact I hate profs who give away themselves so easily to students…
In fact I wrote something relating about profs being too relaxing and friendly here
Yes knowledge and qualifications are important, heck i wouldn’t want a bachelor’s degree lecturer teaching me, but at the same time I wouldn’t want a prof who has written thousands of academic journal articles but has a stinky atttiude when it comes to dealing with students and teaching in classes.
You must also understand and respect the fact that my tertiary education is in a North American based system where creativity and group discussions are emphasized.
British education system and even the malaysian education system tend to emphasize more on following the textbook. I mean heck how many courses back at home give 10-15% of a student’s final mark in class participation?
Hi mei,
I am enrolling for my PhD programme next year and ultimately hope to be an educator too. I have done many TA and tutoring work, and certainly has been a student for many years now. I guess that qualifies me to say a few words on this topic.
Many of us want easy way out,especially in education. Many want an easy A or quick answers to their problem sets. Sadly but true, in many universities, the most popular lecturer are often given the title ‘the best lecturer’ by the student bodies. Knowing their stuff inside out is not enough in many universities. You gotta be able to present it back to the students too.
While reading your post, i wasn’t sure on your position of lecturer/prof giving advices beyond their subject matters. personally i feel that there are a lot more to learn from our lecturers than just the course work they are teaching. I hate those lecturers who are reciting whatever there is in the textbook. I might as well enrol myself with the textbook.
So, at the end of the day, what’s a good lecturer? an educator? a teacher? There won’t be a final solution for that question because everyone has different needs. To be fair, no lecturer can satisfy all those needs. Lecturer should just be who they are, and impart the knowledge they have while inspire others to achieve greater goods. Lecturer at the end is like a ladder, helping others to keep on climbing.
Tom: My stand on the whole “professor/lecturer giving advice out of their subject matter” is this:
What you do, good or bad; how popular you are…all those things shouldn’t matter because at the end of the day, what counts is whether your student makes the grade or not. We should be doing our part, not tooting our own horn or telling others how to go teach according to what we think.
We are there to help fulfill a need and that’s the need for help/assistance in learning more. However way you want to do it, that’s up to you. BUT never make the mistake of thinking that you’re great at what you do and that others suck because then you deviate from what matters.
You said it best. Helping. That’s what lecturers are for.
Btw…PhD??? Bila? Since when ar? Mygosh…been so long since I last spoke to you. How you-s?
Prashanth:I NEVER EVER said that communication was a non-essential factor. I NEVER SAID that an educator should be just brainy. YES, you have a point when you say that professors should know how to relate stuff to their students.
BUT my beef with you is this: you keep on harping on the fact that a bad professor is one who cannot communicate with their students. Is one who has a stinky attitude. First it’s your beef with lecturers who are too relaxed. Next you have a bone to pick with lecturers who are too stuffy or lack communication skills.
Did you for once ever considered language, culture and age to be a gap when it comes to reaching students? Have you ever considered departmental policies? Have you ever considered individual preference and experience when you address the issue? No. You just whitewash lecturers who are stuffy and lack the necessary skills as BAD lecturers. Which, IMHO, is extremely superficial.
All this while, I have been trying to tell you that bad is bloody hell subjective and, personally (that is what I think), that knowledge is more important than communication skills. You were the one who turned around and said that sufficient knowledge is enough – you don’t need to know more. Coming from you, it’s rich considering that you’re the very same TA who asks me to define Internet sources and tells me in the same conversation that personal blogs, Wikipedia and Yahoo are valid sources of information for a general research paper (which is not related to the stuff listed above).
Never mind all those things. I had expected some degree of openminded-ness from you and had hope that you’d see both sides of the coin. Academicans, while maintaining standpoints, are expected to be openminded about things, to be able to think outside of the box and look at all different forms of arguments/factors. Tom did great. I wanted to see if he, a lecturer in the making (the last I checked), could see that at the end of the day, your job is not about who is better, more popular, etc but about helping others. Bad/good is subjective. You shouldn’t label people who do things different from you as bad. AND above all, you are a modest, humble individual who let others go around singing your praises. THAT is the bigger picture.
I was sorely disappointed when I read this.
i’m going to give a very smart-ass response… and here’s this funny thing that i’d like both prashanth and mei to consider:
to quote prashanth:
and then mei’s infamous
i can try to combine both of your views and condense them simplistically like this:
1) you don’t know whether you are really fulfilling a need or not. but apparently, you will find out when…
2) you think that you can relate things to your students. and of course…
3) when you have a passion for teaching it all falls into place…
based on that, my magic question is:
how do you know that you can relate things to your students? is there a quality measuring device?
or did you come to this conclusion because of your own perception and self-guided point of views?
FOR ALL YOU KNOW, YOU ARE BLARDY DISLIKED by your horde of students, but because you’re the TA/Lecturer/educator/ tutor and 5-20% their grades lie in your hands, they have to pretend to like you. (I know I was damn good at sucking up to lecturers but it never stopped me from bitching about them behind their backs even though i could pretend I liked them)
I know my magic question ended with stupid answer. but my observation from that ‘relate to students’ thing pulls me to this and i’m going to say
Don’t mind my brutal comeback, but that just comes across as pretty narcissistic, and show-offy…
sheesh, where’s the bigger picture? educators shouldn’t be so concerned as to discuss such a miniscule issue like, ‘i’m popular among my students because i’m like this…’, and ESPECIALLY, not to employ self-revelling opinions as to what makes the cut, RIGHT?
why not sit and mull over your students’ progress, and concentrate on them, discuss ISSUES that students might have problems facing, RATHER than write lengthy commentaries in the themes of ‘why am i popular and why my colleague isn’t. this is what I think he should do to be like me.’
if i were a student and i found out that my tutor was priding himself on his ‘so-called’ teaching skills, so-called passion and so-called ability to both fulfil my needs and therfore he thinks that he can relate to students like me, that tutor is DEFINITELY going to get the bulk of my dislike and distrust.
so much for relating to students.
to add on, i’d rather combine both points on teaching to say,
YES ITS ABOUT BOTH OF THEM: FULFILLING A NEED, AND BE PASSIONATE IN THE PROCESS.
But let’s be passionate in teaching, not be passionate about one’s achievement and popularity in teaching, shall we? I think that’s the bigger picture.
(back to my materials, and btw, i write materials for teachers and I BLARDY suck at it…)
^:)^
Will you be my sifu ar?
i give up
So much replies since my last message. Oh well, i don’t see why there is an argument between mei and prashanth. One saying pisang goreng while another arguing goreng pisang. You would need both the substance and the mode of communicating the substance to be a good lecturer.
Just to add onto something that is lacking in Malaysian’s lecturers….they take their lecturing job too seriously, and forgets that their main job is to create knowledge..not just dissiminate… ie..where the hell is the research output? When are we going to stop relying on American’s data for consumer studies or british building code for engineering and so forth? So much can be done and studied about our own country….
Tom: Problem is that a lot of academic institutions out there are more concerned about profit making than knowledge making.
Not so good if you’re all into research and things like that. After all, you need knowledge to move further on in teaching. Can’t just teach the same old stuff over and over again – first two years, maybe but not forever.
I’m Pinoy. I’m a PhD student and a college instructor for 5 years now. Let me just comment based on my experiential framework.
First, there is no educator without the learner. The educator must do what he must to make a student learn what must be learned at the tertiary level in a specific field. In this case, a good educator must be in touch with the learning culture for him to be able to empower the learners the best possible way. There’s no formula to this… just the need for exploration and flexibility.
Second, the educator is also a learner and he must constantly learn for him to make possible improvement in the learning of students. As a learner in the classroom or any learning environment, he must be open to learning from students as well. Hence, he must be a good listener as much as he must be a good facilitator of learning. There’s communication for us!
Third, more than any specialist, the educator is most engaged in the building of knowledge and fueling the drive for it among those he asked to facilitate. Thus, his experiences both as educator/facilitator and learner/listener must translate to much reflection and knowledge building. This is what made the ancient philosophers the icons of education. We should not be educators but we should learn from all of our experiences and be able to make the life of other better with it.
Everything else are incrementals. They make us better educators… not educators.
email me for comments at brianbantugan@gmail.com