Abstract
Approximately thirty years ago, when I was just starting graduate school in geography, one of the first impressions I gained was the low priority accorded teaching. The emphasis, instead, was on research. The attitude was that anyone could teach but not everyone could do hotshot research. In fact, I got the impression that professors who were so wrapped up in research that their lectures were disorganized and confused were admired more than professors who did little or no research but whose lectures were superb. (There were, of course, inexplicably, those rare professors who did both remarkably well.) In general, poorly prepared lectures were the hallmark of those professors who were dealing with the more lofty and profound research issues of the day. Even professors who had no lofty ideas sought to fool the students by delivering poorly prepared lectures. It was the absentminded, distracted, befuddled, and therefore brilliant professor who was most admired. When I was leaving graduate school for an academic position, I was advised to devote as little time to teaching as possible. " Only research counts at a university," I was warned. "Just wing your way through the class." " No one will remember what you said in class, but they can see what you have published." And so on.
Recommended Citation
Wheeler, James O.
(1992)
"Projections and Perceptions-Editorial Comments. The Changing Importance of College and University Teaching: The 1960s Versus the 1990s, James O. Wheeler (University of Georgia),"
The Geographical Bulletin: Vol. 34:
Iss.
2, Article 1.
Available at:
https://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/thegeographicalbulletin/vol34/iss2/1