Not the Wizard of the Westwood, But the Master Teacher

The best book I have ever read on the importance of teaching, and how to do it, is probably Swen Nater and Ronald Gallimore's You Haven't Taught Until They Have Learned: John Wooden's Teaching Principles and Practices.  John Wooden is arguably the greatest college basketball coach of all time.  He is often referred to as "The Wizard of the Westwood" because of his amazing record of 10 NCAA championships at UCLA.  But what captures the imagination in reading this book is Wooden's approach to teaching --- whether it was HS English or how to break down a set of offensive skills on the basketball court.

I have been a fairly successful teacher --- reasonably popular classroom teacher as reflected in teaching evaluations, and I have had students from every school I taught at that had me decide to become professional economists and thus pursue their PhDs in the discipline after exposure to my classes. And, my PhD students have done well and gone into teaching and research careers themselves.  But I have also had several years of frustration with teaching and my ability to reach students.  To me, Wooden explained why my approach to teaching during some periods worked and others it seemingly led to nothing but frustration.  It is a challenge to try to stick to the teaching principles that work, rather than to succumb to incentives that lead to frustration.

There are 11 common characteristics of good teachers: (1) they make learning engaging; (2) they have a passion for the subject; (3) they possess deep subject knowledge; (4) they are organized; (5) they are intense; (6) they recognize students for even minor progress; (7) they treat all with respect; (8) they are fair; (9) they believe all students are natural learners; (10) everyone knows implicitly that they like working with students; and (11) they place a priority on individual learning.

The book ends with a discussion of Wooden's notion that teaching is a moral profession.  He believed that the teacher had a moral obligation to be an example to his students.  A poem Wooden often recited goes as follows: "No written word, no spoken plea can teach our youth what they should be.  Nor all the books on all the shelves, it's what the teachers are themselves."

That is indeed a challenge for all of us who have decided to become teachers.  And lets face it, teaching is probably the most important job any of us do as economists.  As James Buchanan puts it "Economics as a Public Science"  the didactic function of economics is to teach students the principles of spontaneous order so that these students can become informed participants in the democratic process.  Too much intellectual energy, Buchanan argues, is currently being spent on "stylized puzzles" and not enough on the "repetitive and sometimes boring activity of 'teaching' the long-accepted principles of the science." (see Buchanan CW, XII, p. 49)  "Economics, and economists," Buchanan insists, "must make the categorical distinction between science fiction and potentially attainable reality.  Failure to do so can produce results both exemplified by and experienced in the human tragedy of this century's failed pursuit of the impossible socialist idyll." (p. 51)

The objective is clear, the stakes are high, and we do have a moral obligation to teach as effectively as we can.  When students don't get it, perhaps we should go back to a lesson from Coach Wooden -- "You say you have taught them and they don't seem to follow, but you haven't taught until they have learned."

Comments

[matthew mueller]

I have learned very little from the classroom. In fact, I think the current arrangement of college education is a great hindrance on private learning. I remember reading a passage by Adam Smith describing his student days at Oxford which consisted of him going into the offices of his instructors once a week to share with them what he was currently reading.

People do not go to school because they enjoy learning; they go instead to earn a degree and get out as quickly as possible. And I think teachers, however enthusiastic they may be, have come to increasingly orient themselves toward this stifling milieu. If we adopted the British education system of the 18th century (the one Smith enjoyed), I don't think I would ever graduate. It would just be too much fun going into Professor Boettke's office once a week to share with him what I have been reading.

[Pearl]

You should check ratemyprofessors.com to get a somewhat (non)-representative picture of yourself. And I can tell that there is an upward tendency for Dr. Boettke.

[Pearl]

In 2002/03/04/05 there are many negative comments like

"more interested in his own work than the class"

"Entire semester is him engaging in various forms of mental masturbation in an attempt to demonstrate his superiority over the rest of academia."

"wow, he is so hard. his lectures are very entertaining, but don't have much content. you must read and thoroughly understand the books to do well. i recommend taking this your senior year when you will be able to better digest the material."

"Class was mind-numbing. The textbook was horribly worded, almost as if he was getting paid by the word when he wrote it. Rambles, lectures aren't helpful, and is totally full of himself."

"Full of himself. Ignores you. Won't listen to anything you have to say. Never on time for class. Stories are long, rambling, and often repeated several times in a semester."

"Loves to hear himself speak. Horrible"

But 2006/07 there are only positive comments about Dr. Boettke. This page is not a very good indicator of professors, but in general it confirms the overall impression that I got from some people.

[anon]

Time to get rid of the comments i think Dr. Boettke - who is Pearl anyhow?

[Pearl]

Yah, right. I just want to stress that none of the comments have been written by me. Actual students were giving this evaluation. Next time when I'm gonna cheer how great GMU people are, quote every minor contribution and I'll maybe be a member of the RAE-Board.

[Pearl]

Why isn't there any edit function?

[Peter Boettke]

Pearl,

Why are you adopting this attitude? Is it your notion of civil discourse? Or do you just get a great sense of utility out of trying to ruin discourse? And why are you posting anonymously --- name your name and stand by your position. If you really want to engage in an honest discourse lets do so explicitly. Those of the rules of this blog.

In this, as in the past, you take every opportunity to make negative comments about GMU and the RAE which are irrelevant to the discussion at hand. We could discuss those issues that seem to bother you about GMU and the RAE, but why is that even relevant here.

BTW, it is not me who raised a question about your putting up negative comments about me, I let them stand. If people go to rate my professor (which I think is a very bad evaluation tool actually, but for reasons different from my obvious self-interest), you will see other types of comments about me as well. In the end, I actually end up with a rating of AVERAGE. The quotes you give would have me rate HORRIBLE.

I obviously have work to do to improve as a teacher --- and I obviously rub some students the wrong way. I am sorry that students walk out of my class and feel the way reflected in those comments. I shows a weakness on my part as a teacher. I don't know this, but I cannot imagine any student every writing comments like that about Professor Israel Kirzner --- who I would take as a role model as a teacher and as a scholar. I will try better to approximate Professor Kirzner's teaching style in the future.

But in the future IF you want to post comments here please respect the rules ---- make constructive critical comments and explicitly state your name. Anonymous postings cause problems on blogs, just like a lack of reflection in the "invisible man" causes problems in moral conduct.

[Rafe]

Student valuations can be very wide of the mark. The most unpopular lecturer in my first year was one of the Chemistry I teachers. Chem I was also the biggest class on campus, being required for all courses in science and engineering. If he had been subjected to student evaluation the complaints would have filled the departmental office. He had a take on the subject that appealed to me, so I worked hard on the lecture notes and the text books and ended up with one of only 3 High Distinctions in the course. Later I found from a postgrad student that he was the most helpful of all the staff in commenting on postgrad presentations and progress reports.

Chem I had a massive failure rate and when I was elected to the Student Council and assumed the Education portfolio I was asked to find out the reason. It turned out the university insisted that students should be allowed into Chem I with only a lower pass in the school leaving (matriculation) exam, so many of the students were not adequately prepared for the course and they were wasting their time.