It’s that time of the semester again. The bloodbath of course registration has now come to an end. Yet, the dissatisfaction and ominous presumptions of class structure still loom in many students’ minds as we wrestle with the idea of taking courses with less-than-favorable professors or having to pivot entirely to an improvised schedule of 8 a.m. and 6  p.m. courses. Stress levels peak during finals, but the feelings of uncertainty and anxiety that accompany 7  a.m. course registration are incomparable. If you are but a few mere seconds late to The Reaping, you are faced with decisions such as taking a class called “Dog Walking Etiquette” or an intensive course on “Star Wars History.” A feeling that may be worse, though, is taking a course knowing the other section’s structure and curriculum has it miles easier due to extra credit assignments, lenient grading or objectively “easier” exams. 

In preparation for course registration each semester, most students put all their trust into the Rate My Professors website. Rate My Professors is a webpage that allows students to anonymously share their opinions on professors regarding courseload, teaching style and difficulty of a particular course. This tool provides valuable insight into courses, and more specifically the professor lecturing the course, which is something that holds true weight in the decision-making process. However, Rate My Professors offers more of a disclaimer, or warning, than it does criticism of the professor. Tenure protects employees, primarily in educational fields, against job instability by ensuring permanent employment status and security unless under extraordinary circumstances. While that is an important policy that should be maintained, it may contribute to professors’ lack of motivation to digest constructive criticism. 

The unwillingness to incorporate change leads professors to disrespect the autonomy and input of students in their courses, and they could disregard it altogether if they choose. Especially in an environment where a large population of students are pursuing pre-professional careers, good grades matter. And if professors refuse to improve their course structure or teaching methods, students are essentially walking into a pre-determined B or C, based on the difficulty of the course and rigidity of the professor. A great role in determining a student’s grade should be the effort from the student themselves, however professors play a dominant role in the delivery of information and with the creation of policies that are either in favor or rooted against the student body. 

The teaching quality disparity from class to class is significant. The degree of varying quality can essentially make or break your passion for a particular subject, cause burnout and even hurt your grade. Many students flock to particular professors lecturing major-required courses because of these disparities. But, this turns into a lottery, as those who hit the “enroll” button at just the right moment are the ones who have a greater possibility of receiving a higher grade than those who do not. 

Studies have shown that a professor’s teaching style has a profound effect on the student body’s motivation in the classroom. Negative teaching characteristics may include unclear instructions or expectations for assigned tasks, talking fast and moving through material with little explanation and low expectations on student performance or behavior. Such an environment creates a restless uneasiness and uncertainty in the classroom. The lecture hall is supposed to be established as a safe space for the cultivation of learning and ability to ask questions shamelessly. That is not always the case. 

With that said, there should be stricter regulations in place that result in more rigorous evaluations of professor performance and teaching capability to implement equal teaching while simultaneously providing an incentive for professors to truly reflect and make improvements where necessary. Professors who do not reflect upon their evaluations see no reason to change. This continues the cycle of dissatisfied students and grades that are not representative of actual learning, but that of busy work and rigid cut-offs that give way to a toxic learning environment. 

This sentiment was arguably echoed by our own university president at last week’s Undergraduate Student Government meeting in which President Eric Kaler stated that professors theoretically are unable to focus on juggling teaching, research and other academic activities all to the best of their ability. When asked: “For professors who are heavily involved in research, how do you plan to make sure that professors spend the same amount of time here, teaching and advising as they do in the research?” he responded, “The short, honest answer is we don’t [expect them to spend the same amount of time]. If somebody is a superstar researcher and they’re doing that thing, there’s only so many hours in the day, and they’re probably not going to be as effective at teaching as somebody who has more time to devote to teaching … Many people aren’t triple threat players.” There will clearly be some tradeoffs made on the educational front of such a research-focused institution, and often that sacrifice is felt most in terms of general student education. Instead of investing so heavily in AI efforts, perhaps Case Western Reserve University should consider getting its educational standards up to serve its student-debt laden population. Maybe then we could make it back into the top fifty schools in the nation.