The Unspoken Side of Academia: When Teaching Tactics Cross the Line
We’ve all encountered them – those professors whose reputations precede them. The ones whispered about in hushed tones during orientation week, whose course descriptions on RateMyProfessors come adorned with fiery red ratings and tales of academic dread. While most educators strive to inspire, challenge, and uplift, a peculiar subset seems to operate under a different mandate. It leads to a darkly humorous, yet deeply unsettling, proposition: should some professors actually be awarded for their sheer, intentional wickedness?
This isn’t about demanding instructors or challenging coursework. Rigor is essential. It’s about a specific breed of academic behavior characterized by a deliberate, almost gleeful, infliction of unnecessary suffering and obstruction. It’s the intentional creation of barriers seemingly designed not to foster learning, but to crush spirits and inflate egos.
The Hallmarks of the “Award-Worthy” Wickedness:
1. The Gatekeeper of the Impossible: This professor crafts exams or assignments so esoteric, so disconnected from the actual material covered, that success feels less like achievement and more like winning a lottery nobody wanted to enter. The syllabus might promise one thing, but the assessments deliver another, often featuring trick questions or topics barely touched upon. The intent? Less about measuring understanding, more about demonstrating the professor’s intellectual superiority and maintaining a low pass rate as a perverse badge of honor. It’s sabotage disguised as standards.
2. The Feedback Black Hole: Students submit work into a void. Weeks pass. When feedback finally arrives (if it ever does), it’s cryptic, dismissive, or solely focused on minor formatting errors, ignoring the substantive content. Requests for clarification are met with disdain or silence. This deliberate withholding of guidance isn’t oversight; it’s a power play, leaving students adrift and anxious, reinforcing the professor’s absolute control over their academic fate.
3. The Curiosity Crusher: A student asks a genuine question, seeking deeper understanding. The response? A sarcastic remark (“Did you even read the textbook?”), a public humiliation (“That’s a rather basic point, isn’t it?”), or simply being ignored. This active discouragement of inquiry stifles intellectual growth. It signals that engagement is unwelcome, that the professor’s monologue is the only valid discourse. The classroom becomes a place of fear, not exploration.
4. The Arbitrary Rule Enforcer: Attendance policies applied with draconian rigidity, minuscule lateness penalties that cascade into failing grades, bizarre formatting requirements enforced with zero tolerance – all seemingly designed to catch students out. While structure is necessary, the intentional use of petty rules as tripwires, applied inconsistently and without pedagogical justification, reveals a focus on punishment over learning. It’s less about maintaining order and more about exercising dominion.
5. The Demoralizer-in-Chief: Beyond tough grading, this is the professor whose comments drip with condescension, who publicly highlights the “worst” answer on an exam, who makes sweeping negative generalizations about students’ work ethic or intelligence. This intentional erosion of confidence serves no academic purpose. It’s psychological warfare, creating an environment where students feel perpetually inadequate and fearful.
Why Does This “Wickedness” Persist? (The Unspoken Rewards)
While literal awards are thankfully non-existent, these professors often operate within systems that inadvertently reward or at least tolerate their behavior:
The Myth of “Rigorous” = “Good”: Departments sometimes mistake high failure rates or notorious difficulty for academic excellence. A professor known for being “impossibly hard” might gain an undeserved reputation for maintaining “high standards,” even when those standards are capricious and unteachable.
Tenure’s Double-Edged Sword: While tenure protects academic freedom, it can also shield toxic behavior. Once secured, it becomes incredibly difficult to address professors whose primary offense isn’t illegal but is deeply corrosive to the learning environment. They become untouchable demigods within their small fiefdoms.
Student Powerlessness: Many students, especially undergraduates, feel they have little recourse. Fear of retaliation (real or perceived), complex grievance procedures, and the sheer power imbalance discourage formal complaints. They suffer in silence, or simply avoid the professor altogether, granting the problematic academic a de facto victory.
Ego and Control: At its core, this intentional wickedness often stems from deep-seated insecurities masked by arrogance, or a fundamental enjoyment of wielding power over others. The classroom becomes a stage for their dominance, not a shared space for intellectual growth. The “reward” is the gratification of control and the illusion of superiority.
Moving Beyond the Dark Irony
The call for “awards” is, of course, satirical. It highlights the absurdity and deep harm caused by this behavior. But recognizing this intentional wickedness is the first step towards addressing it:
1. Empower Student Voices: Universities need robust, accessible, and safe channels for student feedback, taken seriously by department chairs and deans. Anonymous course evaluations are a start, but mechanisms for reporting sustained, toxic behavior without fear of reprisal are crucial.
2. Redefine “Rigor”: Departments must critically examine what constitutes legitimate academic challenge versus arbitrary cruelty. Is the course design fostering genuine learning and critical thinking, or is it merely an obstacle course designed to weed students out? Peer review of syllabi and assessments can help.
3. Focus on Pedagogy: Mandatory pedagogical training for all faculty, including tenured professors, should be normalized. Teaching isn’t just expertise in a field; it’s the skill of effectively sharing that knowledge and fostering growth. Empathy and communication are not optional extras.
4. Accountability Mechanisms: Tenure shouldn’t equal impunity. Clear policies and processes are needed to address sustained, unprofessional conduct that creates a hostile learning environment, even if it falls short of legal violations. This requires courageous leadership from department heads and administrators.
5. Cultural Shift: Ultimately, academia needs to challenge the tacit acceptance of the “brilliant but brutal” professor archetype. Being knowledgeable doesn’t grant a license to be cruel. Respect for students as learners and human beings must be paramount.
The notion of awarding wickedness is a dark joke highlighting a very real problem. While most professors are dedicated professionals, the impact of those who wield their power with intentional malice is profound and damaging. It erodes trust, stifles potential, and turns what should be a journey of discovery into a trial of endurance. Recognizing these behaviors for what they are – not quirks, but serious pedagogical failures – is essential. The true award academia should strive for is an environment where challenge coexists with support, rigor is paired with guidance, and respect is the foundation of every interaction. The goal isn’t easy success; it’s meaningful, supported learning where no professor earns infamy through the intentional infliction of academic suffering.
Please indicate: Thinking In Educating » The Unspoken Side of Academia: When Teaching Tactics Cross the Line