Pedagogy vs. Research

[Dr. Old Bill]

Hey folks,

 

One thing I've noticed while looking through both old and recent Grad Cafe threads is that a lot of graduate school hopefuls (comp/rhet track excluded, of course) seem to value research opportunities over teaching opportunities. I wonder if this is truly the case. Personally, I'm far more interested in teaching down the road, with research being a by-product (an enjoyable by-product, but not my primary interest). I suspect a lot of you are more oriented toward research first, with teaching being a by-product (enjoyable or otherwise). Is this the case?

[mikers86]

A lot of this is dictated by program. If you attend a doctoral program where research is prioritized over teaching, and a program's attitude is generally known by hitting committee faculty at institution x, y, and z, where x and y are SLACs and z is prestigious R1, then it will likely require more on your part to convince x and y of your dedication to teaching. If you have Big Uni Degree, sure, that looks great for the department, but there's also the risk of you leaving said SLAC to go to R1 a few years down the road, and another hiring process repeat will ensue. (This is all hypothetical in a universe where you're even likely to land a TT) Things like certificates in college teaching can help offset that risk if opportunities to teach are limited at said degree program.

All that said, I view teaching and research as relatively equal. What you teach (you know, that one seminar or upper level course you actually want to teach that isn't a survey of British lit 1800-present every few years) should be to a degree an extension of your research, and your research should be influenced by what and how you teach (in an ideal world). I'm sure it's wonderful to land grant and fellowship after grant and fellowship that allows you to pursue your research and not have to teach. But if you're lucky to get a job, some blend of research and teaching is the norm. There are obviously exceptions.

[danieleWrites]

This is a problematic question to ask because track/emphasis matters. Comp/rhet is as interested in pedagogy as it is research. Literature has little to offer in terms of pedagogy, so research opportunities take up most of it (I've never been to a lit class that mentioned pedagogy, let alone offered the opportunity to work with it). Creative writing doesn't have much interest in either. YMMV, of course.

Anyway, pedagogy = research. If pedagogical work is not backed up by research, it's just opinion based on personal experience.

[danieleWrites]

My interest is in research, but the ultimate goal is pedagogical in nature. And it's literature with a secondary emphasis in comp/rhet.

[Dr. Old Bill]

Well, I tried to explain what I mean in the first post, though admittedly most folks will just see the poll question and vote based on that. What I'm looking for here is simply whether there is a stronger leaning toward the teaching side of scholarship or the research side -- both during grad school, and beyond. The two, of course, go hand in hand, but I'm trying to establish if current GCers prefer the prospect of teaching, or the prospect of spending lots of time doing research.

 

As mentioned above, I enjoy research a great deal, but I'm probably even more excited about the prospect of teaching in my second or third year.

[Francophile1]

Pedagogy all the way! This is why I struggle with the focus on research in my lit. program!

[mikers86]

Pedagogy is rarely mentioned in lit classes at the grad level. I've found it beneficial to actually talk with professors outside the class about their own approaches to teaching. Not surprising, the best course I've had that addressed this was my 6 credit composition and pedagogy class that assigned readings on pedagogy, allowing for larger discussions about why that program approached teaching the way it did. It would be helpful to have these meta discussions in lit courses, even a single class devoted to it.

Edited August 20, 2014 by mikers86

[cloudofunknowing]

I voted "other," because I am equally interested in both. (And while some may view this as an unproblematic binary, I don't at all.) When I was assessing programs I might applied to, I paid very close attention to the kinds of teaching opportunities available as well as what kinds of training and support were available re: pedagogy. As in: when are people able to teach (after doing the equivalent of an MA if entering without one), how much do they teach (2-2, 1-1, etc), and do PhD students get to teach a variety of courses besides Freshman Composition? Even more: do PhD students have any opportunities to *design* their own courses? Is a pedagogy practicum required and, if so, must one take it before or concurrently the first time one teaches?

Certainly, it would be detrimental to the - in my view, equally important - dissertation work required to be bogged down unduly when it's go-time, so being able to have fellowship time is also an important factor. But a program that deemphasized teaching, or seemed to "downplay" it and/or not incorporate pedagogy (sometimes very unique to the school in question) was not, in the end, a good fit for me.

Happily, I lucked out in that UT-Austin does all of these things (including designing & teaching your own courses, which seems to be somewhat uncommon). Here, someone entering with a BA begins teaching in the 3rd year. Someone entering with an MA (or an MFA) and college teaching experience can potentially teach in their first year. And the pedagogy training, which I'm currently doing now (having an MFA & teaching experience) and will be continuing in a pedagogy class this Fall, is fantastic.

[Dr. Old Bill]

Ah, I'm glad you chimed in, Cloudofunknowing. I was starting to wonder if I was speaking gibberish. Perhaps I should have avoided using the word "pedagogy" and just used the more pedestrian "teaching" instead.

 

Yes, you address exactly what I am getting at, really. There are a few institutions (I won't name names) that I have quietly taken off my list because they clearly devalue the teaching aspect of graduate school. I want to avoid programs that make it seem as though teaching is a chore, or penance, or even just the "downside" of attending a particular institution. I am exceptionally eager to do the kind of research that I want to do. I can't emphasize that enough. But honestly, when I first started down this path a few years ago, my guiding instinct was that I wanted to teach. Along the way, I've realized that my scholarly interests have evolved to the point where they are almost as considerable as my pedagogical interests...but not quite. I'm looking forward to the first day I get to stand in front of a class and get to know the various students, and eventually get to know their minds, and how they write.

 

Anyhow, I'm just interested in the various perspectives on this here.

[toasterazzi]

I tend to gravitate toward teaching more than research because I think that's who I am at the core. My undergraduate degree is in English Education, and I've known I wanted to teach since like the second grade. There is a fair amount of overlap though because I would ideally like to teach classes that are related to the things I like to research.

[Bleep_Bloop]

I figured I'd chime in since I'm in a literature program, although not in an English or comp lit department. A word of warning to those applying to the more "prestigious" departments, notably the ivies. Be careful how much you emphasize your interest in teaching in the SOP and later in interviews. In fact, for these departments I'd suggest not mentioning it, or mentioning it only in passing. There's a good chance that people will doubt the level of your research (and commitment to a research-oriented department) when they hear that you're pursuing a PhD because you "want to teach." Something that stuck with me was that a fellow student once said, "I don't want to be a professor, I want to be an academic!" I've found the distinction to be pretty important.

I'm the product of a SLAC so this was a big culture shock for me, although that's not to say that I necessarily have a problem with this kind of attitude. I'm still really happy I chose my department because of funding/prestige of the degree/research fit, but I do have to be conscious of where I am and keep any interest I might have in eventually teaching on the down low. I was advised to also do this in my applications. It worked out well for me, so I figured I'd pass this advice on and see if anyone else has had a similar experience in such an environment.

[jhefflol]

My undergrad was English Education so I absolutely wince at the slightest utterance of "pedagogy." Ugh. I want to research my little butt off, but I understand that teaching is part of the job. I don't mind the actual teaching (I actually work as a writing tutor at the local community college), but I never ever want to discuss theory of pedagogy again! 

Edited August 22, 2014 by jhefflol

[hreaðemus]

I think it's interesting that the poll results are weighted slightly towards research, while most people posting comments have expressed a strong or primary desire to teach. Do you think there's a slight stigma attached to being more interested in research? I think we have a tendency, at least in the US, to imagine teaching at a K-12 level as the "noble profession," raising the next generation up to do great things, while academia, the "ivory tower," is where professors get lost in theory, forget to clean up after themselves, and fail to contribute to society in meaningful ways. Obviously this is a stereotype, but I'm curious to know if it persists, subtly, even among those of us who want to go to grad school.

 

I want to do research. It's as simple as that. I want to write papers, dissertations, books - I want to answer questions, explore archives, and have blisteringly brilliant conversations with other scholars. I want to offer new perspectives and ideas to my little segment of the academic community. Will I teach, if I get admitted to grad school? You bet. Will I strive to do a good job, and hopefully enjoy myself? Of course. But would I teach if there were no research involved? Absolutely not.

 

So... there's my perspective.

[jhefflol]

I want to do research. It's as simple as that. I want to write papers, dissertations, books - I want to answer questions, explore archives, and have blisteringly brilliant conversations with other scholars. I want to offer new perspectives and ideas to my little segment of the academic community. Will I teach, if I get admitted to grad school? You bet. Will I strive to do a good job, and hopefully enjoy myself? Of course. But would I teach if there were no research involved? Absolutely not.

 

Yes, my sentiments exactly. I will teach so I can research, but I would not teach without being able to research. That's why my undergrad didn't work out. 

[Dr. Old Bill]

Interesting! I'd teach if I couldn't research. In fact, it was only about a year ago that I officially decided to go the distance and get my Ph.D., rather than stop at an M.A. and try to find work at a community college or something. I really love research, and getting lost in a project and having brilliant conversations with other well-read and interesting people is extremely appealing to me. However, my core impulse is to pass on knowledge, kind of like a perpetual "pay it forward" scenario. It doesn't mean that I don't want to write great papers and books and be a guest lecturer in the future, but if I had a gun to my head telling me to choose between teaching and researching, I'm pretty sure I'd choose the former (if I couldn't manage to spring Bond-like into action and wrench the gun from that lunatic's hands, of course).

[cloudofunknowing]

In my experience, & in conversations I've had with senior PhD students at a variety of universities - & in a variety of disciplines, also - the stigma is often (not always, but certainly often) the exact opposite. In academia, having/expressing a desire to teach can lead to being stereotyped as someone who isn't zealously committed to scholarship. Or, more plainly put: verbalizing a desire to teach will lead to people not taking you seriously in the amateur versus professional sense. As if teaching is a dirty word and/or drudgery. (An attitude students can sense, I think.) This isn't true universally, of course. It can be common (in my experience) in literary studies, however.

[Roquentin]

I spend more time on my dissertation than anything else, so although I love teaching - love it - I've voted for research. My dissertation is a degree requirement. Teaching is not.