Most Ph.D.s go on to teach in some way, even if they don’t want or land teaching positions: they find jobs that require them to communicate their work to the public, for example, or to colleagues within an organization. And of course many Ph.D.s do still want, and snag, part- or full-time professorships across a variety of institution types.
Yet graduate education has historically treated this fact a kind of inconvenient truth, overlooking or flat out ignoring students’ need for pedagogical training. That’s explicit pedagogical training, not the sink-or-swim method adopted by so many programs that throw their graduate student instructors into teaching undergraduates with no real preparation.
Scholar Cathy Davidson -- and, evidently, scores of individual programs and groups -- want to change that. Davidson, distinguished professor of English at the City University of New York’s Graduate Center, recently asked her Twitter followers to share names of doctoral programs that actually require students to learn how to teach. The effort took off, with Davidson and colleagues creating a Google document to inform future discussions about this topic. What models are out there? Who isn't doing anything.
“We were crowdsourcing an inventory of what graduate departments do to prepare the students who are often teaching their own undergraduates,” Davidson said Thursday. “It seems irresponsible not to require some form of pedagogical training, whether a course or some other intensive training, for your own graduate students who are teaching your own undergraduates.”
Davidson’s list is humanities-heavy -- probably unsurprising given her own field and the fact that the particularly poor faculty job market in the humanities has led some graduate programs to rethink how they approach graduate training altogether. It’s also far from comprehensive or official. But both it and yet-to-be-added social media comments include some programs in the natural sciences and other fields.
Doctoral students in the School of Physical Education, Performance and Sport Leadership at Springfield College, for example, take a Preparing Future Faculty series that consists of three semester-long classes: a seminar in contemporary issues related to higher education, physical education and sport; a course in instructional effectiveness, evidence-based practices, course design, curriculum development and reflective teaching; and a seminar about faculty roles. The program says that a fourth course, on scholarly writing and publication, also will be required starting next year.
Georgia Institute Technology requires all teaching assistants in the School of Ecnomics to complete the university's Tech to Teaching certificate. The program includes two courses, in teaching fundamentals and course design, and a teaching capstone of teaching or co-teaching a course. (Such certificate programs exist on other campuses for students who want to become professors but aren't necessarily required.)
The University of California at Berkeley’s Academic Senate Graduate Council Policy on Appointments and Mentoring of Graduate Student Instructors even requires that all graduate instructors -- regardless of program -- attend a day-long teaching conference at the campus GSI Teaching and Resource Center and complete an online course on ethics in teaching. Most significantly, they must all enroll in a pedagogy course for first-time graduate instructors within their departments.
Making Teaching a Priority
The Council of Graduate Schools doesn’t have specific information on which graduate programs require training in pedagogy. But it has long promoted the idea that graduate programs should provide students the tools they need to be teachers in various capacities -- including at different institution types -- through the Preparing Future Faculty initiative (of which Springfield College is part).
The Association of American Colleges and Universities originally partnered with the council on Preparing Future Faculty. Terrel Rhodes, vice president of quality, curriculum and assessment at the association, said that many of the program’s elements -- think student learning outcomes, pedagogy and assignment design -- "have been inserted into graduate programs in many, many places,” typically as one course. Yet that's insufficient for the many graduate students who secure faculty jobs, especially teaching-intensive positions, he said.
Rhodes’s organization therefore strongly encourages departments and institutions to offer students multiple opportunities to build teaching expertise within their programs. Disciplinary associations “also need to make this a priority for graduate-level institutions to make it happen,” he said. Accreditation standards could also apply pressure, as could institutions by incorporating evidence of teaching into hiring standards.
The “disincentive,” however, Rhodes said, is that research expertise brings in money for the institutions and disciplines "in ways good teaching does not.” And while many institutions known for research do pay attention to teaching, he add, faculty reward and recognition systems don’t necessarily reflect that.
Professional organizations have weighed in here. The American Historical Association, through its Career Diversity initiative, for example, has pushed graduate programs to adopt a more student-centered approach to training historians, to prepare them for work inside and outside academe. Underpinning that effort is the notion -- as articulated by Jim Grossman, executive director, in a 2015 essay for Perspectives on History -- that “to be a historian is to be a teacher.”
"We have failed to integrate the teaching of history into the profession of being a historian -- other than by example, or perhaps by sending our students across campus to teaching and learning centers generally considered marginal to the main pathway," Grossman wrote.