Frequently now, candidates for faculty positions are being asked to provide teaching philosophy statements. Bob Eierman reports that that request appears in 40 percent of the ads for chemistry positions that he looked at in a professional publication advertising positions in that field. Another 20 percent of the time the request is for a statement of teaching plans or interests.
It’s yet another sign that folks are trying to take teaching seriously in the hiring process. Given the amount of time devoted to teaching in most faculty positions, that couldn’t be more appropriate.
I do have some questions though. Can you write a teaching philosophy statement without much or any teaching experience? If you do, is that statement anything more than an amalgam of how you’ve been taught and think you might want to teach?
And then there’s the problem created by writing a teaching philosophy when the goal is getting a job. Does that give you the freedom to really explore what you think or believe about teaching? Or are you constrained to prepare what you think might be the “right” or “politically appropriate” philosophical statement?
And finally, there’s the potential disconnect between writing and doing. Just because you say you endorse strategies that engage and involve students doesn’t mean you will use active learning strategies when you teach. And, we are certainly not to the place where what you wrote in a teaching philosophy statement used in the hiring process is going to be grounds for dismissal.
Eierman’s points out that those reviewing candidate credentials in chemistry have some pretty clear guidelines that can be used to assess research potential. The criteria for evaluating teaching potential are far more eclectic and individually determined. Eierman’s solution is summarized in the June-July issue of The Teaching Professor.
Wouldn’t it be interesting if that first teaching philosophy statement followed a new teacher across those first years of teaching? What if new faculty had the opportunity to share and discuss statements with each other as they read statements of teachers recognized for their excellence in the classroom? What if for one of their reviews on the way to tenure they reacted to that initial statement and then for the promotion and tenure dossier wrote a new philosophy statement in light of the first one?
The need to constantly hold a philosophy statement up against practice. To let what we do shed light on what we believe. To let what we believe shed light on what we do.
—Maryellen Weimer
Asking for a statement of teaching philosophy is indeed common, but it has always seemed to me like a perfunctory request. As a grad. student, I was encouraged to follow exemplary models of a teaching philosophy statement as opposed to writing a genuine, personal reflection on how I approach teaching.
As a new faculty member, I learned quickly that my teaching philosophy, as long as it contained the right key words and referenced currently accepted methods, was not subject to any scrutiny. This has been followed by several years of almost no in-depth conversations regarding teaching with colleagues.
My colleagues are great - we just don’t talk about teaching.
As I prepare my tenure dossier now, I feel more able and free to include genuine reflection on my teaching practice, but I know this section of my personal statement will matter far less in the review process than students’ evaluations of my courses. This is truly frustrating, not because I distrust student evaluations, but because I believe that evaluation of my teaching should be performed mostly by colleagues in the profession.