I taught Sociology at the University of Florida for a few years. I spent most of my time developing curriculum for an introductory course called Principles of Sociology, which can be found here . I also taught an upper division Social Inequality course, a Social Implications of Medical Technology course, and a fieldwork-driven course on Disadvantaged American Families. I eventually want to end up teaching experimental social science classes at a small liberal arts collge.

My Teaching Philosophy:

I came to the realization that I could become a good teacher during my senior year of high school. By that time, I had recognized that my love for knowledge and its communication was somewhat unusual. I was the only person I knew who read unassigned portions of my history textbook so I would be able to tell others about what I had learned whenever the opportunity arose. What I liked most, however, was the rare opportunity to explore controversial ideas in a well moderated peer-to-peer environment. I have always learned more from these heated discussions than I ever have from any book. The rate at which knowledge and personal biases are disclosed in these settings is unrivaled by any other method. Perhaps more importantly, the added bonus is that participating students often become sufficiently personally committed to a particular viewpoint to actually take the extra initiative to seek out information on their accord in order to bolster their arguments. I believe this format has always formed the crux of discovery based learning, whether it is based in noble attempts to ameliorate social problems or simply an inconsequential debate at a bar.

However, the social structure of education has made its implementation in either case increasingly difficult. The ranks of teachers with the institutional leeway and personal convictions necessary to create a classroom where this process of creative inquiry can be generated are quickly shrinking. They are being crushed under the weight of encroaching instrumental rationality which requires a teaching model more geared to mechanized testing and homogenized accountability standards. The vast majority of my undergraduate classes used the same tried and true least-effort procedure over and over again: textbook reading assignments, lectures overwhelmingly on the material in the textbook with slightly personalized examples, multiple choice tests to ensure that students have read the textbook and copied the PowerPoint material from class. The job of a teacher is not to serve as the sage on stage who bestows knowledge on students from on high. The great thing about the information revolution is that now the knowledge you are interested in is highly malleable and can be found packaged in a form that suits your needs - you need only be a motivated seeker.

The job of a teacher is to provide a format that will encourage students to really engage themselves in the quest for knowledge and give them some assistance in organizing and making better sense of what they have found so that they can appropriately apply it to their life. To do this, teachers do need a critical amount of pedagogical skill and some background knowledge in the field of interest. The latter however, has been vastly overemphasized in the university setting. Professors teach classes focusing on fields in which they already possess vast tracts of knowledge far outstripping what students will ever desire to learn about. Many are mildly disgusted with their students' lack of background knowledge and intrinsic motivation to learn about their passion and thus become disinterested and settle for an efficient ingestion-regurgitation model that leaves more time for their more important research career. I decided to stay and teach at UF because I have been convinced since my first Social Problems class there in Fall 2000 that I could be a superior instructor. Currently, I have the institutional leeway and the still hopeful convictions necessary to create classes where my greater than average workload can pay off in greater than average learning returns for those who want them.

Students oftentimes find the structure of my courses to be disagreeable - and I don't see why they wouldn't. They have been immersed in the dominant educational paradigm most of their lives and have never really questioned its merit or envisioned alternatives. They simply want to go through the motions and move through the system while encountering the least possible resistance. They are shocked by the level of effort my classes require and the personal responsibility I ask them to take for their own learning outcomes. I teach introductory courses using the textbook only as a supplement to my own original "lecture" materials. I ask them to read both before class and bring well conceived questions, comments, and additional information emanating from an outside source that to stimulate class discussion. I require that they construct their own lectures and research proposals (in groups and on their own) which they must present to class. This takes an incredible amount of coordinated effort on my part, but I truly believe that what students ultimately get from the experience makes it all worthwhile. Ironically, I actually learn more and enjoy the process more than the students, but I'm getting paid to do what I love. So, after reading this, if you still care to take my class (or hire me), you can take comfort in knowing where I stand on these issues and in what direction I will likely point my classes to fulfill this vision.