This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Being taught by PhD students: your thoughts

I often see students on TSR complaining about being 'fobbed off' with PhD students for tutors, instead of getting the fully qualified, experienced tutors they deserve. In my first year at university I used to feel this way myself - I wanted to be taught by professors, not grad students who were only a couple of years older than me.

I revised my opinions on this when I realized that many of the doctoral students were more enthusiastic about their subject, more knowledgeable about the latest developments in their fields, and more conscientious when it comes to preparing classes, than many of the older professors were, some of whom had long since lost their passion and interest in teaching. I think it's unfair of people to automatically assume that a younger teacher = an ineffective one, or that an older teacher would inherently be better equipped to teach or more in touch with his or her subject, as this isn't always the case.

But not many people agree with me on this, and it seems that on TSR many of you have had bad experiences with graduate tutors, whom you feel are neither experienced nor knowledgeable enough to be teaching you.

My question is, how do you think PhD students should get teaching experience, if not by teaching undergrads? And do you always feel 'fobbed off' if you are being taught my a young doctoral student, or do you give them the benefit of the doubt? Has anyone had positive experiences of being taught my a PhD student?

I ask because I'm now a PhD student who is about to begin undergraduate teaching. I don't want to feel like a fraud; I don't want the undergrads to automatically assume that they're being fobbed off with me or whatever. How else do young lecturers gain teaching experience?

I'd just like to hear people's thoughts on this matter, as it's a subject that comes up quite a lot, and PhD student tutors are often viewed very negatively by people on here. Over to you.

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1

strawberry_wise

I've only had one module taught by a PhD student (an option module from another course as well, so not even in my degree specialism), but she was very good and was quite a few years older as well which might have made a subconscious difference.

To be honest, as long as they know their stuff and can be engaging about it, I'm not too bothered. We had one module taught by someone who was fairly young and had only recently got their PhD and that was quite good as they could 'relate'. But this was in third year; I think the further you get into the university system the more you realise the value of things like this. Maybe if you had put a PhD student in front of me in first year I wouldn't have been quite so happy about it. I would also hazard a guess that it will only get worse as now students are paying even more for their degrees and there is a worrying increase in this instrumental attitude to university and the idea that 'I'm paying X amount of money so I deserve Y and Z'.

So, in conclusion, if you'd have come and taught me I wouldn't have had any problem with it at all as long as you came across as knowledgeable and approachable (perhaps an advantage that you would have over an older professor). But I can't speak for everyone and I do worry that the trend is to demand 'what I pay for' without quite having the understanding of how the university system works.

So that's my two cents.

As a side note, I'm also interested in the replies to this thread as I will (hopefully) be in the same position my self in a couple of years!

Reply 2

yonanz

Im not in university yet, but a little insight into my pre university college experience.

My best learning experience by far was me being taught by a young, almost fresh graduate from university (for economics A2 level). Because the age gap was virtually non existent, there was no need for the formality that is usually reserved for the senior teachers. You could be forthcoming and bold in your questions wihout being chided, and classroom lessons become more quirky and interesting because students identify so many similarities with a teacher who is at most 6-7 years older. We more jokes which indirectly also relaxed the usually tense atmosphere and encouraged students and teachers to be interactive and the shy ones to open up as well. It was really fruitful learning and we were never shy of approaching him for problems.

Besides, I also feel personally that younger teachers are more passionate and more acquainted with latest trends (wouldnt say more knowledgeable though). Thus they are able to relate far better to students.

However that said, this kind of enthusiam wanes with the passing of each academic year. Teachers who have been in the job too long do feel that the nature of their job is repetitive and run-of-the-mill, bar the rare few who actually enjoy teaching as a lifelong passion. This is what is happening to my economics teacher. It has been 2 years since I left school (serving compulsory conscription in singapore) and when I go back to visit him, he reveals to me some very honest details about academia. He tells me that the initial novelty is no longer there and he is thinking of switching jobs (probably in a bank as he got 1st class hons in economics).

Besides, we cannot discount the fact that older teachers do bring to the table certain things which the younger ones lack of, namely experience. Teachers know what kind of question to expect, what kind of questions are not worth the time, know every nook and cranny and gapholes and flaws of the examination system, and are generally very knowledgeable (from my exp).

Reply 3

fake plastic love

I think it COMPLETELY depends on the actual tutor! I've had 3 PhD students tutoring me (I'm first year so I think thats pretty common) - 2 of them were really good: enthusiastic, encouraged class debate, etc. The other one is absolutely terrible. He seems so bored and fed up about having to be there, essay feedback was about 2 lines long, and I'm not sure he's really 'taught' me anything. I think in his case he sees teaching as a nuissance on-route to getting his PhD. With proper doctors in works both ways as well, I definitely don't think you can generalise.

I think people prefer the idea of being taught by someone who appears to be an expert in their field because it is more exciting, and can make the classes feel more significant/important (if you know what I mean). I can't lie that I hope (expect) to be taught only by doctors in the second and third years, but I definitely don't mind having PhD students now. I understand completely that they need the experience, and that first year undergrads is the perfect opportunity for that.

When it comes down to it though, all I expect is for my tutor to be good - however experienced they are. I think that's the least we can ask for paying £9,000+. I can't stand that some make so little effort (luckily this does seem to be a minority!).

Reply 4

the_alba

Thanks for the responses so far. You've all been incredibly generous towards PhD-ers so far, which was unexpected! It's actually quite refreshing to see that not everybody automatically writes off grad student tutors. I think strawberry_wise's point about the growing culture of students wanting more for their money is a good one. I don't necessarily blame the students for having this attitude - after all, it is unfair that they are having to shell out for their education like that. But it puts people like me in a slightly invidious position! Anyway, I hope more people respond - this is really interesting.

Reply 5

Jahmez23

the advantage of PhD's, is that frequently they are able to devote a much greater amount of time to you. My best supervisor is a Dr., and though his teaching is excellent, we aren't to have as much contact time as I feel i sometimes need. However, another supervisor I have is a first year PhD and what she lacks in experience of the course, she makes up for in her experiences of being in the field at the current time, and the huge effort she puts into teaching us, meeting us as often as we like, and giving us loads of extra supervisions.

Reply 6

username36063

I love teaching undergrads, it is one of the best things about my PhD.

I get to pass on some of the knowledge that I have gained over my degree and help others understand the difficult concepts. I also like to imagine that I am more approachable than Prof. X who really does not want to be there. I try and get the group to interact with each other and me and not worry about mistakes. I know that when I was an undergrad it scared me to answer incorectly to some eminant prof who has just won a medal for his develops in his field.

Do not forget as well, that we read the latest papers and books were as profs are too busy with admin and "fell out" with certain researchers and depts over peer review issue 15 years ago to read newer articles.

Also PhD students here at imperial have to pass a work shop to teach UGs both tutorials and demonstaration, so we know what we are doing. We also have to be quality controlled by the dept and our supervisors also have a role in lesson planning etc.

I would have to say that UGs are not fobbed off with PhDs, that is like saying that A-level students are getting fobbed off with their teachers who just have a degree. I have a degree and have covered what I am teaching and passed exams in what I am teaching. I also have a mastersd where I suppased that knowledge requirements, and I have spent 3 years on a PhD learning about a specific field. The only way I differ from a prof is that I have not got so insular in to one subject area that I have forgotten the grand unifying themes of undergrad degrees.

e.g. I will give you an example to why i think phds are better than oldies.
A) 54yo prof who has worked on bacterial hormone pathways for the last 30years has won a field medal and is FRS and president of the bacterial pathway society. Fantastic at bacterial pathways, BUT he is teaching on a microbiology course. He knows nothing about bacterial phylogenies, interactions, nevermind fungi, oomycetes, viruses etc. Last time he looked down a microscope at a fungi hyphae he was hungover after partying to T-rex and slade. He has no idea about modern techniques and current work in virology. He is at the top of the tree and undergrads are just a burden to lunches and conferences. Has no time to learn from mere UGs who know nothing. But he is a prof and he is good at that.

B) PhD student: graduated with a degree only a few years ago, and remembers whats its like to do all forms of microbiology. Has read all the recnet literature on a wide subject area for thesis introduction. Can talk to students about their concerns and remembers what it was like to be in tutorials. Still has the memory of sitting mycology, virology and bacteriology exams which were only 3-4 years ago (tops) and the key texts involved. PhDs are at the bottom of the ladder trying to get CV boosters, need the cash and can not fall short with all the feedback assesments and regulations as this could cost them eating that month. Also looking to brown nose academics for perminant positions so wish to get good feedback. PhDs also wish to gain knowledge from UGs who may find new work and give no insights. PhD students still enjoy knowledge and have not become dogmatic or apathetic to the academic system.

what more can I say, I think PhDs should get more teaching (I would say that as I need more cash) and duffers should stick to stamping forms and looking at UCAS aplications.

Reply 7

Kitty Pimms

Hmm. I feel a little uncomfortable making generalisations one way or the other, because as you've rightly pointed out in another thread, teaching varies so much by the individual.

I will say that my most outstanding and inspiring teachers have all been Professors/Doctors, but have all been under 40 and therefore still fairly in tune with the student population. I do think I'm slightly biased in respecting them so highly, however, as they are people that I've dealt with primarily whilst working out what to do for my own PhD and so we've tended automatically to inhabit the same wavelength. Some of the Professors I've had have just clashed wildly with their tutees and have been frankly, utterly crap and disinterested.

However, in my first year I was primarily taught by PhDs, and I think at the first year level they were immeasurably better than their Doctorally-equipped counterparts. They gave far more structured seminars, rammed the things we needed to know down our throats, and generally forced the more recalcitrant (read: lazy) to turn up and do some work. One in particular stands out and everyone I know who was taught by her sings her praises as a first-year tutor, loads of us did incredibly well in that module thanks to her hard work in encouraging and helping us.

I have to say though, that I think being taught by PhDs is less advantageous in the second and third year, because there is less a reliance on being taught and more on self-directed learning, with the tutor as a sounding board. I think most would happily acknowledge that as a pre- or post- doctoral student, your knowledge can be somewhat narrow and it's therefore harder to answer all the questions that will no doubt get thrown your way, as the added years of experience and knowledge-gathering aren't there. I do think I benefitted from being taught entirely by faculty staff in my final year, although I am equally sure that had these people taken me in my first year, I would have sunk.

So in conclusion, I've really benefitted by having Doctoral students teach me, but within slightly limited parameters. I myself would prefer to teach first years if/when I get the opportunity, as it's in this group that I think I could provide the most benefit. Particularly given that PhDs seem to be a lot more generous with their time and much happier to go over the finer points of essay-writing, which a lot of staff seem to neglect.

Reply 8

thefish_uk

I haven't had any PhD student lecturers but I have had them giving supervisions - they generally put a lot of time in, take our work beforehand and properly look through it sometimes even write in bullet point answers to the questions we couldn't do. In contrast another supervisor is one of the top professors in the department and you get the feeling he's been giving the same supervision for 20-odd years.

We have had our fair share of older lecturers who look like they've been shoved in front of the lecture theatre against their will.

Reply 9

username36063

the_alba

I think strawberry_wise's point about the growing culture of students wanting more for their money is a good one. I don't necessarily blame the students for having this attitude - after all, it is unfair that they are having to shell out for their education like that. But it puts people like me in a slightly invidious position! Anyway, I hope more people respond - this is really interesting.

When you go in to a restaurant or a garage. You pay for a service, you deserve the best and most experience waiter or mechanic that they have.....However, the thing is they are busy, they have other things to do so you get the YTS lad who has been doing it a week, he still fixes your car and serves you the food, and the job gets done, you would have of cause liked the experienced chap, but at the end of the day the car works and you are full.

PhDs fill a gap in the labour force. The only way forward is to have masssive departments which allows academics time to research, teach and do admin. Not gonna happen.

Reply 10

RyanT

I would support a much bigger expansion of UG-phd student teaching on my course personally. I've only had one disappointing tutor and that was mainly because nobody could hear him since he spoke so quiet (chinese - seems to be a cultural thing). But I've also had 4 great phds and I have to say only one lecturer/professor beats them in tutorial work. I don't get why unis don't give you a 2 to 1 or 1 to 1 with a phd once a week. It will make everyone **** themselves and do a lot of work - also $$$$ for the phds to attract the best candidates.....win-win.

Reply 11

username36063

RyanT

RyanT you are my new best friend. Sell the idea to your dept see what happens. I would love a lab monkey that I could train up over three years. The only 1-1 im getting to do is final year projects, and I do not get paid for that, its the experience of supervising a project that im after.

Reply 12

generalebriety

Two of my supervisors are grad students, two are qualified members of staff. The teaching is little different; if anything, the grad students are more enthusiastic about the work they do, but it really depends very much on the student. One of my supervisors has recently become completely uncontactable and cancelled several supervisions, so I don't know what's happening there. The other, on the other hand, is quite happy for you to pay a visit whenever you want because she likes her subject so much that she'll happily teach you all about it.

The two college fellows that supervise me are similarly very different (oxymoron? :p:

). One is very happy to make the most of the supervision and will make sure everything gets done in the supervision and even quite happily overrun by fifteen minutes, but once the supervision's over that's it, you're done for the fortnight and you won't get anything else from him. The other is happy for you to email him at any time and he'll respond with an incredibly thorough email detailing exactly how to do the questions you've asked about and the thought patterns that went into doing those questions. This guy actually wrote in my report something to the tune of "his second worksheet was a disaster, but he has worked hard to ensure he caught up and produced an almost flawless set of solutions second time round" - well, of course I did, I was being taught by someone who had a genuine passion for a subject I really couldn't stand and was making it seem really interesting and intuitively obvious, and that rubs off.

I suppose it just depends entirely on who's teaching you.

Reply 13

oriel historian

Having worked already as a TA in a Canadian University I think I'd like to offer my view from both sides of the fence. In general I love teaching, it really gives you a buzz and the responses you can get from students is amazing. I taught a class in Latin American history (hardly my specialism) but the students bounced right off what I said. I think it really can benefit students to learn from younger people because there's less of tendency to appear as though you're being talked down to from one with "superior" knowledge. Obviously greater knowledge but y'know!

Now as a student who's been taught by doctoral candidates, I have a mixed bag. On the one hand those who taught me IR were amazing, really enthusiastic, willing to pick holes in my weaknesses to rebuild them. The effort put in was immense but also unsustainable when teaching large numbers of people. I certainly couldn't have done this in the context of my class of 20 in Canada. For comparative government, the paper that caused me to get a 2.1 in finals last year, it failed completely. This is partly because Oxford overestimates that course but also because the guys teaching me were so mixed in their approach. One was brilliant but entirely not suited to my learning style. The other was pants.

In general I'm all for it. But I tend to learn by enthusiasm for everything, so I read abstractly around topics and PhD students who are mastering literature are often brilliant for that because if you pick out a book or an idea that catches their interest then the interaction is super. For established dons though I've rarely had this sort of engagement -except, I will say, with Colin Howell, MA supervisor, Dr Skinner of Balliol, and Robert Service. These retained the enthusiasms of PhD students and buzzed with ideas about things. So I guess what really counts is the learning style that you pass along. Restrictions in this are perhaps probably gonna be down to the course structure... eep!

Reply 14

generalebriety

RyanT

I don't get why unis don't give you a 2 to 1 or 1 to 1 with a phd once a week.

It's incredibly expensive.

Reply 15

trm90

Just a question to the PhD students though; isn't it daunting to teach, though? I mean, being expected to know your subject like the back of your hand... especially in an environment with proportionally more interested students; it just seems like a lot of pressure :s-smilie:

Reply 16

generalebriety

trm90

Surely after three years you would know undergraduate material like the back of your hand if you've been accepted into a postgraduate research degree?

I think it'd be great. The only teaching experience I've had is in a school, and that was only a couple of lessons.

Reply 17

trm90

generalebriety

Surely after three years you would know undergraduate material like the back of your hand if you've been accepted into a postgraduate research degree?

Yeah, I guess you're right. Probably just a case of me being a little paranoid :redface:

I think it'd be great. The only teaching experience I've had is in a school, and that was only a couple of lessons.

Completely agreed. I would absolutely love to be a university lecturer someday.

Reply 18

Paeony

I didn't mind being taught by PhD students at all - as has been said, it was lovely to be taught by someone who was really enthusiastic and knew their subject. I also found it to be inspiring, in that they tended to be closer to me in age and were much more approachable than the more experienced lecturers. As someone who considered carrying on in academia, it was nice to speak to people who were at the beginning of their academic careers, they tended to be less cynical lol. I also found that the PhD students were less likely to 'dumb stuff down', which I appreciated. I know that some of my fellow students found this a problem, but I liked working at a fast pace and it suited me.

I think it totally depends on the student though - if they're obviously passionate about the subject and and are passionate about sharing their knowledge then it tends to be more enjoyable than if they're making it obvious that they're only there because they have to be ...

Reply 19

the_alba

trm90

Yes, I find it incredibly daunting. It depends on your personality - I'm not very good at speaking in front of large groups unless I'm drunk (not a good idea if you're teaching!), and I have quite a quiet voice. It probably takes practice. There's always the possibility that in a group of very clever university students, some of them will have read things you haven't and might (whether or not intentionally) expose you as some kind of fraud. I suppose you just have to be confident in your knowledge and abilities. Unfortunately for academics, self-doubt often comes with the territory :frown: