Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Not my experience...where I attended, it was rare to find student who weren't pretty seriously engaged, and class size was such that, if somebody wasn't particularly engaged, it was really obvious early on. But institutions/settings are not all the same, nor are student bodies.
I heard this philosophy professor the other day teaching the subject of the philosophy of religion. All the students were 100% engaged. If I didn't have to go, I would have stayed and evesdropped, because he was so interesting.
In my experience, my favorite and best teachers were those in the liberal arts, philosophy, history, the humanities. My least favorite teachers have been those in the STEM classes, math, chemistry... They just weren't good or engaging or organized.
I don't know why that is, but is this the same for you guys as well?
Have you considered that it's you, not the teachers? This could just be a reflection of your innate ability to comprehend and be interested in technical material. Some people are into it and good at it; others are not.
Have you considered that it's you, not the teachers? This could just be a reflection of your innate ability to comprehend and be interested in technical material. Some people are into it and good at it; others are not.
No, it's not. Some of the best teachers are in the liberal arts. They are usually way more engaged and eager to show young minds a new slice of life.
STEM teachers are a bigger mix of stellar to just downright boring and awful.
I was wondering if it was outside opportunities draw away the better STEM professors or if the subjects don't lend themselves to much creativity aka here's the proof and definitions.
And I have heard a lot of STEM teachers are grad students, which don't have as much vested interest as normal professors.
Most architecture professors i've had sucked. Only the engineers were any good (because they actually helped with technology.) I'm not sure whether architecture would be considered 'liberal arts' or a STEM subject in the us though.
Last edited by archineer; 09-22-2014 at 05:25 PM..
I heard this philosophy professor the other day teaching the subject of the philosophy of religion. All the students were 100% engaged. If I didn't have to go, I would have stayed and evesdropped, because he was so interesting.
In my experience, my favorite and best teachers were those in the liberal arts, philosophy, history, the humanities. My least favorite teachers have been those in the STEM classes, math, chemistry... They just weren't good or engaging or organized.
I don't know why that is, but is this the same for you guys as well?
I had the same experience. Liberal arts and social science professors were totally engaged and inspiring. Hard science and math? Not so much.
Their communication skills and enthusiasm for their subjects was also lack luster.
One possible explanation: with science and math, beauty is in the underlying matter and equations. With liberal arts, many subjects deal with ugliness. So in the latters, professors' contributions is to show a path towards enlightenment. It is less necessary with science and math since both are inherently beautiful.
S.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
