Forcing Teachers to Teach

Teachers are supposed to teach. That statement seems redundant and obvious to most of us - and it ought to. Teachers have one job: Teaching students. Apparently, however, some professors at State Universities refuse, in one form or another, to do it. Teachers like this are dangerous, because they have no problem putting the job of educating students aside to address their personal agendas. Some professors simply brush off their duty to teach the subject at hand. These professors are the most dangerous. Their teaching style includes:

"Promotion far beyond academic achievement; teaching subjects outside one's professional qualifications and expertise for the purpose of political propaganda; Making racist and ethnically disparaging remarks in public without eliciting reaction by university administrations, as long as those remarks are directed at unprotected groups;
Professors who even make a slight attempt at communicating, helping and truly teaching their students are becoming more and more rare. The time has come when tutoring centers in universities across the nation have become an endangered species, while teaching the recommended curriculum has all but gone the way of the do-do bird. What are students to do in situations like these? Are the students themselves responsible for learning what the professor is not teaching? Are tutoring centers really such surprising additions to universities, when professors are acting like such miscreants? However ridiculous it might seem, tutoring centers truly do seem to be surprising and embarrassing additions to universities across our nation. Tutoring centers are treated like embarrassing, red pimples cropping up on the face of an admired academic leader the day of a lecture. Either they are passed over with concealer - not advertised and only mentioned in the privacy of a casual one-on-one office meeting - or they are discussed around the office water cooler, but only in terms of how to be rid of them. This childish and anti-academic approach to the up cropping of tutoring centers on campuses across the United States is wrong and it stems either from the ignorance that professors have about what happens in these centers, or from the embarrassment that professors feel about the idea that somebody has noticed that they are not doing their job. Throughout the length of this paper, the following discussions will arise: what happens when professors refuse to communicate with students and tutors; what happens when professors are left to research rather than teach; a few solutions that America has tried in the past that have not yet worked; and finally, the solution that will work - namely, passing a law that requires full-time professors of state-funded colleges to spend 500 hours a year in the service of their college's tutoring centers, 100 hours of which shall, each year, be spent learning how to communicate with students in a class taught by whomever heads their college's tutoring center.

The first discussion that results from the aforementioned ideas, is that one regarding what happens when lack of communication between professors, students and tutors emanates as a common problem on college campuses. "I had assumed that the rigorous, intellectual methods of the academy would be focused on problems of student learning. But the truth was that, by and large, the research university focuses its collective intelligence on other problems - tutorial centers and preparatory programs - are conceived of as marginal to the intellectual community. These conditions had direct effects on the young men and women who we came to know at the center" (Rose 195).

When professors refuse to come to tutorial centers, and spend no time at all attempting to communicate with their audience, students are left feeling abandoned and soon to drown in the swift current that sweeps so many promising students away from college and the hopes that follow it. While it is hard to swallow that those who choose of their own free will to become professors in respected Universities are now refusing to do their job, it is true. According to a study done by UCLA, "Only half of educators who participated in the study said that they are satisfied with the quality of their undergraduate students" (Eliot), and yet, educators will not participate in tutoring center activities and refuse to help students in private situations. They "[do not] particularly care to help and shunt students off to teaching assistants" (Rose 196). So which is it? Are professors across the country unhappy with the way their students are performing, or do they not care one way or the other? If they want their students to succeed - if they are truly vested in seeing their students thrive - why are they not taking part in their students' education? Is there some sort of cryptic understanding among university professors that says that students must be prepared to pay full admission to a university and then, for all intents and purposes, teach themselves the material? If that really is the case, as it seems to be implied in their actions and words, why should students go to college in the first place, when libraries have the same books on loan for free? For most students, though, college is worth the money spent in tuition and books and professors can do what they wish with the lecture time that is afforded them, as long as a tutoring center is available for their needs. However, even these precious tutoring centers are coming under attack with funding being shifted elsewhere and professors becoming more and more detached from even mentioning the "marginal" facilities.

When professors are dislocated from their primary jobs - teaching students the material - their focus, too, is dislocated and they seem to lose any sense of what life is like beyond the door that separates the rest of the college campus from their office. The media readily strokes the egos of these professors, exclaiming that, "critics hold education schools responsible for many of the problems of under prepared students who fail at the transition between school and college. But the expectations for education schools are misplaced." (Levine 53). The statement that "schools are being asked to carry out activities that they were never intended to perform" (Levine 53) is an outright lie. Schools are being asked to educate students. Professors are being asked to refrain from their own political agendas and educate students. If these are activities that they were never intended to perform, then what activities were they intended to perform? The truth is that professors would rather perform research than teach their students and universities would rather they perform research too. Research makes for interesting books, and interesting theories. Theories make for celebrity professors. Celebrity professors make for more students who want to attend a class by said celebrity professor, which in turn makes for a higher student population and thus, more money. And money, as we well know, is always the bottom line. There are some professors who do understand their job descriptions perfectly well - though many of them have abandoned university life for community colleges - and they show it in their ability to communicate with students. "'Know thyself,' Socrates famously advised, while Sun Tzu counseled prospective warriors, 'Know thine enemy.' To those legendary admonitions, I would add this one, aimed at anyone beginning or considering a career in two-year college teaching: 'Know thy students'" (Jenkins 1). Professors who make an attempt to communicate effectively with their students have raised the bar for university professors and have made it clear, through their brilliant ability to perform their job that something needs to be done about the professors who cannot or will not perform.

While it is not clear exactly what must be done, at least it is clear that something must be done and that there is much that can be done. The issue has not gone unnoticed, as universities and even some professors might have liked it to. Parents and students alike have discovered tutors and created tutors and become tutors in order to bridge the gap between poor professor performance and poor student understanding. Even elementary school districts are now offering tutoring under the No Child Left Behind Act. "District officials are encouraging families to take advantage of the tutoring" (Fernandez B1). District officials are not the only people who have noticed the rising tutoring centers. Students notice too, but not without concerns.

It's hard to see how extra academic help could hurt. But some observers wonder how much progress [we] will see, given tutoring companies that range from big-name corporations like Sylvan to storefront operations that geared up just a few months ago. Because there are no standards for tutors, There's a huge range in the quality ... It's up to the state to monitor them. And for now, it doesn't have a system to do it (Matus A1).

So what is one to do if they find themselves as stuck and as authentically concerned as these people proclaim to be? A virtual tutor is a good start. "Researchers are developing virtual tutors designed not just to instruct, but to motivate as well" (Young 31). Virtual tutors cannot be shady. They cannot mislead students, however young or old, into believing things that are unsubstantiated. They will not persuade students into doing things that have nothing to do with school. They will not go off on political rants that have nothing to do with the subject at hand. They will, on the other hand, encourage students to learn and they will stay on track. However, these "creations are in no way meant to replace the work of professors" (Young 31). Teachers and professors are still the most important influence on a student's main learning environment, atmosphere, and experience. Tutoring is a start, but the fact that so many students at any age require tutoring outside of the formal classroom atmosphere and that students continue to fail, regardless of after school tutoring, is a testament to the thought that while tutoring may be a step in the right direction, it is only one step and more need to be taken.

In a society where professors cannot communicate with their students and refuse to communicate with their tutoring centers regardless of the value that the center brings to their campus, what exactly are we to do? We want students to succeed, we want professors to communicate the subject clearly and we want tutoring centers to thrive on every campus with the support of administrators and professors alike. There is only one solution. A law must be implemented that requires all full-time professors in state-funded colleges to spend 500 hours a year in their college's tutoring center, communicating with and helping students who are under-prepared and overwhelmed. 100 hours of that time, each year, must be spent learning how to communicate with students in a class taught by whoever heads their colleges tutoring center. A professor who is kept busy with political agendas and a mountain of research will not like this law, make no bones about it. But those same professors are what make this law completely necessary. On college campuses all over America, professors who want nothing to do with students thrive, tutoring centers are stripped of their funds and students are failing. Apologists for these schools say that we are expecting too much out of them; they say that we are asking schools to do things that they were never intended to do (i.e. - educate students). People who say this are off track and provide no research to say that at one time, universities and colleges did something other than teach students. Professors who know their students and are able to communicate with them are becoming a rare breed and should, instead, be encouraged with awards and bonuses. It is clear that money is the bottom line with most colleges, but the grade point average and student review of said institutions when this law is implemented will adequately quiet their demand for more money through more competitive student enrollment. Tutors and tutoring centers are the right way to go, but without professor involvement and continuing professor education in communication, students will go nowhere. Personal professor involvement for several hundred hours a year will motivate students and (imagine this if you will), they will motivate and help one another. Education is not an easy job. It is not meant for the weak of mind or the weak of spirit. Only the best students will make it through graduate school. And equally, only the best educators are able to help students achieve such a feat. That is the point - is it not - to educate students - to create the best of the best? Students are not born perfect learners, and educators like the ones that permeate universities today will keep them undeveloped. This law will help to take several steps away from an otherwise sorry conclusion to a student's experience on a major college campus. It must be implemented - and soon.

Works Cited

Andrews, John. "Dangerous Professors." Denver Post 05 Mar. 2006, final ed.: E05.

Eliot, Shannon. UCLA survey shows dissatisfaction among nation's professors." University Wire [La Jolla] 29 Sep. 2005.

Fernandez, Jennifer. "Scores could tighten supply of tutors." News & Record [Greensboro] 05 July 2006, greensboro ed.: B1.

Jenkins, Rob. "Know Thy Students." The Chronicle of Higher Education 30 Sep. 2005: Chronicle Careers: 1.

Levine, Arthur. "Expectations for Our Teachers Are Misplaced." The Chronicle of Higher Education 52: No. 27 (2006): 53.

Matus, Ron. Will free tutors help students? It's time to learn." St. Petersburg Times 18 Sep. 2005, natl. ed.: A1.

Rose, Mike. Lives on the Boundary. 10. New York: Penguin Books, 2005.

Young, Jeffrey R.. "Virtual Tutors Guide Students but Are Not Quite Ready to Replace Professors." The Chronicle of Higher Education 52 No. 15(2005): 31.