next »

[1 man BS program]

Hi
I am a biology professor at a very small school that only teaches jr-sr level courses.

In the department we teach four courses per semester with three taught be me.  the others go to an adjunct or admin.  

The school is very small with a small student body (1000) and the dept. has about 50 students.

Is my teaching the entire curriculum ethical?

[one prof!]

should say "one prof" my bad.

[theater buff]

I've applied for quite a few positions like this and know a number of friends in such situations.  They never sleep much and the posts rarely hold people long enough to get tenure or get past age 40 it seems.  

So, it is done a lot.  I'm not sure if it is ethical, though.  I always wonder about the students only getting one person's point of view.  I think it means that the prof (ideally) would be aware of the potential for such limited student interaction with the field and viewpoints and would work to bring in speakers and make sure that all sides of issues are presented in classes, lest the students get a twisted view of the discipline.  

But 50 students -- that seems to be a lot of majors for just you!

[Fiona]

Ethical according to what standard? Who is the judge?

I don't mean that as a peculiar question, but as a way of saying that there's no impartial umpire adjudicating these kinds of matters.

There's no Justice Bird in the Sky.

I think it's probably not good educationally for the students to get access to only one teacher's mind (however smart and good you are), but that's not in the realm of "ethical."

[%sig%]

[1 man BA program]

Let's address ethics differently.  Clearly "Ought implies can".  If there's something that CANNOT be done, then it is meaningless to say you OUGHT to do it.  And contrapositives apply.  So you "ought not" be a 1 man BS program obviously means you have an alternative.     If you had no alternative-- or no alternative that you were willing to contemplate-- then you wouldn't ask if it is ethical.

This is where it gets interesting-- particularly to me, for I am in the same situation.  What are your options?

Mine:  

1. Try to leave the college.
2. Push to disband the program and just teach gen ed.
3. Push hard to get a 2nd hire.

Let's consider these.  If by "leave the college" I mean "leave for another job," then this is problematic.  Sure, I could maintain my good conscience, but the problem still exists and I'm just turning my back on it.  If this means "leave even if I have to leave academia to do it" then the same objection applies-- plus there is the practical objection that, ethical or not, I'm not willing to take this extreme measure.  I like this job, ethical or not, far better than any non-academic job I currently envision.  Admittedly, this last point could, in theory, be merely my selfish obstacle to an ethical life, but then there are still the earlier points.

Choice two sounds more compelling, but I see two problems.  First, if we disband the program then it is probably permanent, because how would I ever justify getting the second hire if there were no current majors?  Second, I'm in the sort of field in which it's a bit odd not to have a major.  Third, unless I think that my field is uniquely one in which it is unethical to have a 1 man BA program, then on what grounds do I disband my major while several of my colleagues offer their own 1 man/ woman programs?  If, on the other hand, we all close our programs, then how does that help the college?  

Choice three is out of the question right now.  Not only are more hires not feasible currently, but until our student numbers jump up a bit, even if we miraculously came up with the cash for new positions, then we would merely dilute a tiny pool of students so that classes wouldn't "make."  I don't have 50 majors as you do-- I have 30.  But they're spread over all four years, and they each take only about half of the offered classes (i.e., we offer more classes than are strictly required, plus some take summer school elsewhere).  So an upper level class of 7 could become two upper level classes of 3-4 each-- or one of 6 and one of 1, so that the latter doesn't make anyway.

Then the other question echoes Fiona's:  what do you mean by ethical?  Is it possible you mean moral?-- in which case one can say, with Fiona, "whose morality?"  "Morality" implies some sort of universal standard to which, in theory, we could all agree.  "Ethical" implies some actual community guidelines to which we DO all subscribe by virtue of membership, and whose breach could be grounds for dismissal from the community.  For a psychiatrist to sleep with a patient or a lawyer to betray a client's privileged information may or may not be "immoral" behavior, but each is clearly "unethical" behavior without a question.  There is no similar "ethical" norm of which I'm aware that governs the case of the 1 man program.

All this no doubt sounds tedious, and I apologize (though I'll post it anyway).  So let me end by saying what may be more helpful-- I'm "out there", too, and I can relate, and I have these same thoughts, and I wish you the best.

[What is ethical?]

I'm not sure what ethical is.

But.

If an accountant with little background in marketing is hired to teach marketing is that appropriate?

If a historian is asked to teach political science is it ethical?

If physicist teaches electrical engineering is it ethical?

If a cell biologist teaches ecology is it ethical?

All of these fields are as disparate as the others.

If you are teaching outside of your field aren't you misrepresenting yourself?  Students are taking your classes believing you know something about a topic for which you have no or little background.  At least not the background of someone with a doctoral degree.  

Where do we draw the line on what is and is not part of your expertise.  Certainly an accountant teaching intro to business management is probably ligit.  But can we believe this same accountant is qualified to teach welfare economics?  Or that an economist is qualified to teach a junior level accounting course?  

I have a problem with this.

[to theater buff and others]

cell biology is as different from ecology as theater is from music.  Would you want your piano taught by an acting professor?

[Van Cliburn]

My piano is taught by me. Thanks for asking.


to theater buff and others wrote:

> .  Would you want your piano taught by an acting
> professor?

[%sig%]

[theater buff]

 to theater buff and others wrote:

> cell biology is as different from ecology as theater is from
> music.  Would you want your piano taught by an acting
> professor?

If the person knew how to play piano well and was a good instructor, I would be fine with that.

Why can't acting professors also be musical theater instructors who could teach courses in musical accompaniment?  I happen to be capable of doing both at an introductory level that is appropriate to these one-person departments.  I can teach most everything in my field except design, and this is not uncommon at all.  We're not talking about conservatories or BFA programs here.  These are departments where there is a basic introduction to each of the areas of the discipline, and the person hired has to be able to do a little bit of everything.    

Are there not biology generalists much like there are history generalists and english lit generalists?

[Dean A&S at SLAC]

FYI, History is not political science.  
I am not addressing generalists here.

I do not believe that there are any generalists out there capable of teaching up to date college coursework in multiple curricula unless they have an unusual specialization crossing curricula.

Generalists should be able to teach many things at the freshman-soph level.  when you reach a jr-sr level in science, the curricula becomes very broad and the faculty do not have the breadth to cover all fields.  

Molecular biology and environmental biology are so distant from each other in modern times they are comparable to the distance between economics and accounting.  Any environmental biologist could likely teach an intro course in molecular (fresh-soph), and visa versa.  Any accounting prof could probably teach intro to econ and visa versa.  

But few if any accountants could teach sr level and graduate level econ and few if any economists could teach sr or grad level accounting. Likewise few if any molecular biologists could teach sr level or higher ecology and few if any ecologists could teach higher molecular biologist.

Someone who can is probably an exceptional individual capable of getting a job at an institution much higher than the one requiring such teaching skills.  Also, someone who claims they can do these things is either lying to the public, or lying to themselves, and most likely both!

Such a person would not be a generalist but rather an expert in multiple disciplines.  Experts teach higher level college courses in their expertise.  True generalists don't have the expertise to address any of these areas!