Behind The Curtain Of Higher Education: Faculty Aren’t Trained

If you ask a college professor whether education is essential to learning and performance outcomes, the response would undoubtedly be a resounding “yes.” However, when it comes to teaching itself, most faculty members have never received formal, skills-based training on best practices in teaching and learning.

Historically, higher education has operated under the assumption that possessing advanced, subject-specific knowledge—demonstrated by a degree and the title of “professor”—is sufficient for teaching. Professors are then left to instruct as they see fit, often under the vague umbrella of academic freedom. Imagine if we applied the same approach to training surgeons: study biology, then perform surgeries as you wish, under the guise of “medical freedom.”

Instead of evaluating faculty based on their teaching ability, institutions often rely on scholarly output as a proxy for professional competence. Metrics such as securing grants or publishing research are typically the benchmarks of success. However, these measures, while important, fail to account for a professor’s ability to foster a meaningful learning environment or engage students effectively.

The assumption that expertise in research naturally equates to excellence in teaching is flawed. In reality, the skills required to conduct groundbreaking research are distinct from those needed to deliver effective instruction. Teaching involves not just mastery of content but also the ability to communicate it, inspire students, and adapt to their diverse learning needs. There is no evidence to suggest that productive researchers are inherently skilled instructors, and this disconnect has significant implications for student success.

To be sure, many universities have some type of center for teaching excellence established to provide resources to faculty to build on their teaching methods and pedagogy. However, all too often, these centers offer voluntary programs for faculty to learn about and improve their teaching, or receive remedial education on effective instruction because they are performing poorly in the classroom. In addition, these centers are often staffed by administrators (and sometimes faculty) who have little administrative oversight to ensure that what faculty learn is translated into effective practice in the classroom.

Why aren’t faculty trained to teach? In my experience, the reasons are varied. A significant factor lies in how faculty performance is evaluated—teaching is often not considered a key determinant of professional success by either faculty or administrators. In many cases, there are few tangible rewards for excelling in the classroom; strong teaching rarely leads to salary increases in the same way that publishing an article or securing a research grant might.

Early in my career, while teaching at a research-intensive university, a mentor advised me, “teach well enough not to embarrass yourself.” This reflects a disturbingly low bar for a profession meant to inspire and educate. But perhaps the most fundamental reason for the lack of teaching training is that we lack a standardized definition of what effective teaching looks like. And this is the case at research-intensive universities,small liberal arts colleges, and community colleges. While most of us can recognize good teaching when we experience it, articulating a universal standard is more elusive.

Think back to your own time as an undergraduate—chances are you can easily recall both your best and worst instructors. Students often express frustration, wondering why certain faculty members remain in the classroom despite consistently poor teaching performance. This speaks to the broader issue: while we can recognize bad instruction, higher education lacks a consistent mechanism for addressing it. However, it’s crucial to note that effective teaching is not synonymous with an easier, less rigorous experience. In fact, the most impactful instructors are often those who set high academic standards while still fostering an engaging, supportive learning environment. Their success lies not in lowering the bar but in helping students rise to meet it.

That said, there are indeed exceptional instructors who dedicate their careers to continually refining their teaching methods. These pedagogical innovators excel at engaging diverse learners, adapting their approaches to meet the varying needs of students in their classrooms. The critical question, however, is why learning how to teach, along with ongoing assessment and training, remains optional or ancillary for many faculty.

Professional development in teaching should be a required component of faculty training, and performance should be regularly evaluated through both formative and summative assessments. Tying salary increases to measurable improvement and teaching effectiveness is a crucial step toward ensuring accountability and fostering growth in instructional quality.

To implement this, institutions could establish dedicated centers focused on faculty development and pedagogical innovation. These centers would empower faculty by offering ongoing training, resources, and support aimed at enhancing their teaching skills. All faculty would be required to participate as part of their professional development, ensuring that teaching excellence becomes a core aspect of faculty responsibilities.

Additionally, these centers could play a key role in the evaluation process, conducting regular assessments of faculty performance. This would include both formative feedback, which helps instructors improve in real time, and summative evaluations, which provide a comprehensive view of their overall effectiveness. By linking salary increases and career advancement opportunities to demonstrated teaching improvements and student outcomes, institutions would incentivize faculty to continuously strive for excellence in the classroom.

Our institutions depend on faculty to deliver high-quality education, and it’s our responsibility to support them while holding them accountable to that standard. The best professors welcome this accountability, striving to meet the highest benchmarks in their field. Ultimately, higher education must evolve to prioritize teaching excellence, not just for the benefit of students, but for the future of academia itself. If we are to prepare the next generation of leaders and innovators, fostering a culture of continuous growth and pedagogical rigor is not just necessary—it’s essential.