Not just who can teach, but who should

Every time I watch an orchestra, I am struck by the confident authority of the conductor who brings together diverse instruments into a coherent symphony. I often wonder whether academicians play a similar role in the classroom.

Krishna Kumar, a noted Indian educationist, has observed that social identity remains a significant axis of prejudice and that attitudes towards groups different from one’s own often reflect deep-seated bias. This question acquires urgency in light of a recent incident at a university in Bengaluru, where a professor reportedly made insensitive and discriminatory remarks towards a student. More importantly, such episodes may appear isolated, but they point to a deeper concern: the question is not who can teach, but who should be allowed to shape young minds. At stake is not just academic competence but the very ethos of higher education, its commitment to inclusion, respect, and values-based learning.

The many facets of academic life can produce remarkable harmony when thoughtfully aligned. Being a “good teacher” in the evolving landscape of higher education goes beyond subject expertise. It also calls for pedagogical innovation, such as simulations and thoughtful use of digital tools and artificial intelligence. Teaching with cases, for instance, is about enabling students to grapple with real-world complexity, trade-offs, competing stakeholder interests, and imperfect information. In the same vein, role-play brings multiple viewpoints into the classroom, helping students understand the complexity of organisational and societal challenges. That said, teaching with cases alone is not sufficient; faculty should also write them to fully appreciate the key elements that need emphasis in class. 

However, teaching is only one part of the academic role. Universities continue to place significant emphasis on research output, measured through publications, journal rankings, and citation metrics. This emphasis persists because such outputs are easier to quantify, compare, and rank. Should citations matter more than journal rankings? Does solo authorship reflect deeper scholarship, or should collaboration be valued in an increasingly interdisciplinary world? At what point does collaboration dilute individual contribution? In this pursuit of measurable outputs, social impact often remains overlooked.

Beyond these traditional expectations, faculty today are increasingly expected to connect with industry, bring live projects into the classroom, and contribute through workshops, conferences, and executive education. In effect, the academic is expected to be a teacher, researcher, practitioner, and institution-builder. 

At the heart of this debate lies the growing gap between what is measurable and what is meaningful in higher education. Paradoxically, the most consequential aspects of teaching, which remain immeasurable, are the ability to inspire trust, create an inclusive classroom, and exercise judgment with fairness. Much of what students learn is part of a hidden curriculum, absorbed not through lectures but through the conduct, attitudes, and values demonstrated by faculty. 

Crucially, amid these expectations, one critical aspect is the interpersonal dimension of teaching. The faculty-student relationship is inherently asymmetrical, since faculty hold evaluative and institutional power, which makes their conduct not merely a matter of personal behaviour but of ethical responsibility. Faculty members shape not only what students learn but also what they become as individuals. Their words and actions can build or erode a student’s confidence and dignity. In increasingly diverse classrooms, principles of equity and inclusion are integral to the teaching-learning process. John Dewey, an influential American philosopher and education reformer, emphasised that teaching is inherently a democratic act that requires respect for diverse perspectives. 

Traditionally, some educators have consciously avoided probing students’ identities, believing that such knowledge might introduce bias. However, as classrooms evolve, there is a growing recognition that acknowledging identity can also enable deeper connection and build trust. Being inclusive requires the ability to engage students, foster discussion, and create an environment where diverse perspectives can be expressed without fear. Should institutions not invest more deliberately in preparing those who shape future leaders? Faculty selection must go beyond academic credentials to include ethical awareness and inclusive conduct.

The question, therefore, is not how many roles a faculty member can perform but what kind of classroom culture institutions choose to promote. For, if inclusiveness and respect are treated as optional, the orchestra may render music but miss the symphony. 

(The writer is the chairperson, Department of OB&HR, Ramaiah Institute of
Management)

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are the author's own. They do not necessarily reflect the views of DH.