Undergraduate Teaching

[idad]

<p>Chicago has always thought of itself as educational inventor and leader in higher education. It has only recently, however, made a major commitment to being a leader in undergraduate as well as graduate education. In the early days the graduate/research component was the emphasis. Hutchins even tried to move the College to Northwestern in his plan to merge both universities. Not being successful, it was decided that the College should reflect the same level of quality as the graduate divisions. It was decided that a focus on curriculum and teaching was essential and that undergraduates be held to rigorous academic standards. To do this, the faculty had to be intimately involved in the process. This process of self-reflection, experimentation, and leadership in teaching has simply become a part of its DNA. As a result, the College has its own identity within the University, and its students are highly respected by the University community. Graduate students (having been one myself) often stand in awe of the undergraduates. Chicago has maintained this processes primarily because of the University’s commitment to open and rigorous inquiry and argument. Undergraduate education, therefore, is continually examined in this light. Great teachers are recognized, and faculty seminars on teaching occur with regularity. Further, undergrads are selected on the basis of how well they may themselves respond to this tradition and provide a stimulating classroom environment for the faculty. To read a history of the University and its importance to higher education in the past and how it is shaping the debate for the future, I recommend Donald Levine’s book, “Powers of the Mind: The Reinvention of Liberal Learning in America.”</p>

<p>One can begin here, however: <a href=“http://iotu.uchicago.edu/levine.html[/url]”>http://iotu.uchicago.edu/levine.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>A quote from the article I find captures the essence of the University:

We think of ourselves as utterly democratic, saying Mr. & Ms. instead of Dr. and Professor, making graduate and even undergrad students co-authors of papers and, as Elaine Fuchs happily put it, we “stand not for talking at students, but rather for traveling with students down the unknown paths to which questions point.” And yet, we are intolerant to the point of arrogance in our dismissal of mediocrity, with an aristocratic hauteur that is, I suspect, also bred into our bones.

</p>