“You are so far from hot”: the tiresome fall-out from my Ratemyprofessors “award”

It’s been nearly two years since I “won” the honor (however dubious) of being named “America’s Hottest Professor” by the Ratemyprofessors website.

Over the weekend, an anonymous comment ended up in my moderation queue for this blog:

You are so far from hot. You rated yourself over and over again to win that award. Your (sic) ugly and vain and a poser.

I get comments like that every few weeks now, though in the days after I won the 2008 award from RMP, they were much more frequent. My actual ratemyprofessors page was spammed with all sorts of vileness, though whoever moderates that site did take down most of the cruelest and most scurrilous postings.

I was happy when I won the “award” not because I genuinely believed myself to be the most physically attractive college professor in the States — I doubt that’s true even within my own department. But I was excited about the possibility of leveraging whatever small degree of notoriety came with the announcement to drive traffic here to this blog and to gain a larger audience for my writing and speaking engagements. Not being very wise about this sort of thing, I operated with the “all publicity is good publicity” mindset, and though I would much rather have been named “best teacher”, I figured this little bit of recognition could only help.

My friend Jane, a PR professional, reminds me that that little saying about publicity is frequently untrue. Interviewers and media outlets have not come knocking as a result of my being named hottest prof. Though I’ve been fortunate enough to start work on other projects, and to collaborate on a forthcoming book (about which more will come, promise) none of those opportunities were linked to the Ratemyprofessors distinction.

On the other hand, my ego has taken one heck of a battering. Sometimes, it’s seemed a bit like some sort of sadistic high school prank: set the dorky kid up for something for which he’s manifestly not qualified, and then rip him ruthlessly. I generally stay away from the Ratemyprofessors site itself, as I don’t trust the authenticity of what’s written there. But the emails and anonymous comments, even when they are quickly deleted, do take their toll. I remember being an awkward, unattractive teenager. Frankly, the continued reaction to the Ratemyprofessors brings back unpleasant thirty year-old memories of being teased. (It’s worth noting that there’s male privilege involved here. Were I a female professor who had won, and my “victory” was considered equally undeserved, I suspect the comments would have been even ruder and more vociferous.)

In the grand scheme of things, this is not a source of great pain in my life. I have a wife and daughter who mean the world to me, a job I love, a community of friends and students and colleagues whose support is an indispensable joy. Their gentle ribbing is affectionate and welcome. My looks mean less to me than my health; my worries around my body these days are less about my appeal to others and more about staying fit under a breakneck schedule. But I’d be lying if I said that the steady flow of nasty reminders of just how undeserved the 2008 award was didn’t take just a little bit of a toll. While winning the “hottest professor of 2008″ title wasn’t quite the same as being handed a poisoned chalice, the taste of that “victory” has proved decidedly bittersweet.

Pasadena City College: home of the hot?

In the fall of 2008, I reported this flattering and embarrassing news. But oh, how the mighty have fallen!

I learned today from a Facebook friend that Ratemyprofessors has released its 2009-2010 lists of the top profs in the country. Where I was was ranked first in 2008, I’ve tumbled to 25th. My dismay is, well, infinitesimal. Here’s the real news: the top 50 hottest professors in the USA include no fewer than seven from Pasadena City College.

The lists are compiled from student ratings across the nation for both two-year and four-year institutions. It’s worth noting that no other college or university had more than two of its faculty members selected for the top 50. The “roll of smolderingness” includes the following colleagues of mine:

#4 David McCabe, Education
#8 Russell Frank, Languages
#9 Lynora Rogacs, Philosophy — and my office-mate!
#11 Derek Milne, Anthropology (last year’s #7)
#25 your blogger, History
#38 Charlene Potter, English
#40 Tamara Arida, Sociology

Question: does this say more about the faculty — or the students — of Pasadena City College? As for me, I am proud to relinquish my title. (I have no idea what methodology made me #1 in 2008 and makes me #25 now.) But I can’t wait for Monday, when I can begin to tease my office mate (3rd hottest female professor in the country) as mercilessly as I was teased last year.

And with that, a return to serious blogging next week.

Your loyal blogger…

… has had his dubious recent distinction publicized in this piece in the Pasadena City College paper. And of course, I hate the picture they took of me.

I have been teased all day at school by colleagues and students alike. Part of me loves it, and part of me feels humiliated, and part of me wonders in what particular way I am supposed to parlay this trivial but interesting distinction into something useful. It’s the sort of thing that one probably doesn’t want in one’s obituary, so I’ll simply have to accomplish enough to ensure that there’s no room to stick this “triumph” in there. But I’m not so embarrassed that I won’t note it here, and enjoy the fleeting notoriety.

Flattered, embarrassed, bemused

I’m getting ready to leave town again, I’ve got stacks of letters of recommendation to write, and little interest in blogging.

Last week, a publicity person from MTVu contacted me. Apparently, the Music Television people now own Ratemyprofessors, the celebrated — and lamented — website students can use to rate their teachers. I’ve written about RMP before, and did an NPR interview on the subject in 2006. (The last time I wrote about the site, my ratings were immediately hacked. I suspect that will happen again.) In any case, the PR person from MTV wanted me to know that I had been “chosen” as “America’s hottest professor”, and that an annoucement to that effect was coming this week.

The announcement has come today, apparently: two people have already emailed me this link. My dear friend and Pasadena City College colleague Derek Milne joins me on the “top ten” list, apparently, which is nice to see. I note, not insincerely, that my own sense is that our positions ought to be reversed.

I debated whether to blog about this at all. It’s an odd “award” to receive — the best way I can describe it as flattering and humiliating at the same time. I also have some doubt about the integrity of the process — are a handful of devoted fans somehow jacking up the ratings? As I’ve said before about RMP and similar sites, there’s no sure way to tell that those who are doing the rating are actual students. I’m told the site checks IP addresses, but couldn’t a single student (or perhaps my mother?) with access to multiple computers submit multiple entries and hotness points? I don’t know enough to know the answer to that, but it’s another reason to feel a bit, well, flustered. Continue reading

Grade inflation works both ways: on professor evaluations

Much to my surprise, when I came onto campus this morning I found my student evaluations from last fall waiting in my mailbox. As I wrote back in November when the evaluations were distributed, in the past professors don’t get the evals until May. Things have been sped up — perhaps because unlike in the past, no one bothered to type up the written comments. I was simply given all of the evaluations in a manila envelope.
Continue reading

Prestige and student satisfaction: more on Ratemyprofessors

Emma sends a link to this article from today’s Guardian: Who’s the Hottest Teacher in the US? (Hint: it’s not me, darn it all.)

The piece is a very English reflection on Ratemyprofessors, a site about which I’ve had a bit to say in the past. (See the archive here, and my NPR interview here.) As I’ve said, my faith in RMP as a useful evaluation tool vanished after it became clear that anyone could rate themselves or their colleagues or their worst enemy or their parents. Being an enrolled student was not a requirement to rate, and that makes the whole site largely useless (which is why I haven’t followed it as eagerly as I once did.)

In any event, the Guardian piece makes a very good point, of the sort that might cheer those of us laboring in intellectual backwaters like my own Pasadena City College:

Obviously, as a conventional register of quality – whether of staff, scholarship, or courses – the MTV/RMP poll is less reliable than weather forecasting with seaweed. No statistician would see it as anything other than a joke. Sneering aside though, it does furnish food for thought. And uncomfortable thought.

What it reveals to me is that the level of student satisfaction is higher the lower you go down the prestige scale. That is, undergraduates at, say, Rhode Island College, or Stephen F. Austin University, feel they are getting a better deal than Yalies, Caltechers or Princetonians.

It could be the students in those less classy places are less demanding, or humbler. It could be the fees aren’t so vexatiously high in these less famous places, giving a better sense of value for money.

But the real reason, I suspect, is that those students are indeed getting a better classroom experience.

Bold emphasis mine.

The first of a two-part musing on teaching, self-awareness, and looks

In return for my union dues, I get many benefits. I get, for example, the semi-annual publication of the NEA: Thought and Action. The current issue has an article by Paul C. Price (only available in PDF): Are You as Good a Teacher as You Think? It begins:

A survey of professors at the University of Nebraska a number of years ago showed that 94 percent of them thought they were better than average teachers at
their own institution. Assuming a reality that puts the true value at somewhere
near 50 percent, this survey suggests a rather stunning lack of self-insight among
the professoriate.

That opening made me chuckle. This phenomenon is not limited to the Cornhusker nation; anecdotally, I’m fairly certain that close to 94% of my colleagues at Pasadena City College would consider themselves to be “better than average.” Having participated in the evaluation process many times, and having read the “self-evaluations” that my colleagues are required to produce every few years, it seems that we too have a generous and optimistic sense of our own capabilities.

Of course, “ratemyprofessors” aside, students here at PCC seem to think most of us are above average too. On the old evaluation forms that we used back when I was tenure-track, students were asked if their teachers were “Outstanding/Excellent”, “Above Average”, or “Average.” College-wide, about 65% of the faculty were ranked “above average”, indicating that grade inflation seems to flow both ways!

When it comes to evaluating my own teaching, I think about it on several different levels. I would certainly say I’m an above average lecturer. I haven’t used notes in, oh, at least a decade. I can tell stories well, and structure a compelling narrative. If part of being a good teacher is being a good raconteur, then I’m certainly a talented teacher. But I know full well that I can still learn some new techniques, and that I have miles to go in terms of developing my patience.

But thinking about this abundant, no doubt deserved high self-esteem among the American professoriate, I find myself thinking about the only vaguely related question of how we evaluate our own attractiveness. I’m not just thinking about professors, of course, but of people in general. I remember, back in my freshman year of college, staying up late in a dorm room conversation — and being floored by one brave young woman, who insisted that each of us answer the question “Do you think you’re good looking? Why or why not?”

It was a tough question. But she asked it because she wanted to have a frank conversation in which we could all take the risk to be honest. We had been raised in an adolescent culture where self-praise invited a smack down; saying that you thought you were attractive was an open invitation to criticism, while claiming that you hated how you looked was seen as a none-too-subtle attempt at “fishing for compliments.” My friend in the dorm room challenged us to move past that dynamic, and, lubricated by beer and wine coolers and hash, we did so. There were perhaps eight of us in this triple room in Norton Hall, an equal number of boys and girls of varying degrees of socially acceptable attractiveness. And we listened respectfully and without judgment as each person shared how they “rated” themselves. It was revelatory.

I write about this because my feeling is that we live in a culture where we are expected and encouraged to “toot on our own horns” professionally. Whether or not we are actually over-flowing with self-confidence, the culture of resumes and college essays and self-evaluations invites us, indeed forces us, to insist on our own uniqueness, our own exceptionalism, our own “above-averageness.” But while trumpeting (and often exaggerating) our professional and academic qualifications is de rigueur, to talk frankly and honestly about how we see our looks is something very different. It’s a fascinating question to ask people, even now:

“When it comes to your physical attractiveness, how do you think you compare to your peer group?”

Of course, I don’t run around demanding answers to this awkward query. But as someone who has written endless self-evaluations focusing on my intellectual and pedagogical accomplishments and shortcomings, I’m intrigued by the disconnect between our contemporary willingness to celebrate our professional abilities while remaining mute about our own self-appraisal of our looks.

Thinking about my own life trajectory, I can say this much with confidence: As I age, my looks are fading. But as I age, I also grow spiritually and professionally. My ability in the classroom continues to grow. It grows not merely as a function of time, mind you; not all teachers automatically become better with experience. It grows — and there is still room for much more — because I am eager to find ways to be more effective, to be more relevant, to be more compassionate. I am happy to say that I see that same commitment in most of my colleagues.

I’ll post on this topic again soon. In my second post, I’ll muse on the question of whether or not a high degree of self-confidence does correlate well with teaching competence.

A radio interview, chin update, and a confession of love for Bobby Knight

Yesterday at lunch time, I trundled over to the KPCC radio studio here on campus to do an interview with NPR.  They’re doing a story on Ratemyprofessors, and they got my name from this InsideHigherEd article.  The piece will eventually air on either Morning Edition or All Things Considered, but probably not for a week or two.  If I get more details on when it’ll be on, I’ll post them.  I really, really like radio.  I make no secret of my own desire to have a part-time gig as a talk-show host.

Our six chinchillas are well and happy.  I’ve opened up a new "Flickr" account, and now must simply edit and upload the many photos we’ve taken of Chihiro, Ninotchka, Gabriella, Joonko, Dudley, and Racheli.   They have captured the hearts of the team of workmen who are redoing our air-conditioning system at home.   Tony, the owner of the company installing the new ducts and compressor/condenser thing, said "I’m amazed that people are willing to spend so much for these little guys."  He’s considering a chinchilla for his kids; we figure that an AC repair guy is the right man to adopt one.  He’ll know how to keep these intensely heat-sensitive animals nice and cool.

And I have an odd confession to make: though it may seem strange for a liberal evangelical metrosexual college gender studies professor to say so, I am now and have been for decades a huge Bobby Knight fan.  The former Indiana and current Texas Tech coach is in the news again; once again, he is accused of "crossing the line" with one of his players.  (He apparently struck the boy gently under the chin to reprimand him.)  For some thirty years, Knight has made himself famous for many things: his remarkable coaching and motivational skills, his famous flashes of anger, his willingness to cross verbal and physical boundaries with his players — boundaries that no other modern coach would dare cross.  He is feared and hated by many, loved by others.  His epic tirades are balanced by a reputation for extraordinary, quiet kindnesses.  Few other figures in sports have had as many passionate admirers and detractors debating his behavior, his meaning, his role, and his legacy for so long.

I can’t say for sure, but I suspect that Knight wouldn’t think much of the likes of me.  Men who teach critical analyses of gender in contemporary American life probably don’t rate high on his scale.  And as someone who is committed to envisioning, embodying, and bringing about a gentler, kinder, more emotionally attuned masculine ideal, I ought to be repulsed by Bobby Knight.  He ought to represent everything I dislike and struggle against.  His overbearing swagger, his overgrown adolescent refusal to play by the rules, his penchant for abusive tirades (and the occasional slap or punch); this man is the very sort of rage-aholic we progressive feminists ought to find repulsive and horrifying.  And yet Knight is one of a handful of coaches whom I, a devoted fan of almost every non-motorized sport, truly admire.  (You haven’t heard of most of the rest of them: Vivian Stringer, Anson Dorrance, Joe Ehrmann, John McDonnell, Sue Enquist.)

What I like about Knight is not his inchoate rage.  What I like about him is something I don’t know that everyone else sees.  When I watch him on the court (and I always try and watch when his teams are playing), I see what I aspire to be: a master teacher.    For me, Knight’s greatness lies in his absolute, unswerving, nearly mad commitment to the personal, intellectual, and physical growth of his student-athletes.  When I watch him coach, I see a man for whom winning isn’t nearly as important as transformation; his great obsession is to be the catalyst for his players to grow.   His famous temper seems primarily directed less towards those who challenge him and more towards those who show some reluctance to grow, change, relentlessly push themselves to become better and better still.

I’m regularly accused on this blog of setting too high a standard, particularly for men.  Whether the issue is pornography, or relationships with younger women, or making and keeping commitments, or accepting responsibility for developing an emotional vocabulary, I push men hard.  I push them harder than I push women not because I think women are weak, but because I am a man who knows first-hand that transformation is possible.  There are plenty of folks out there pushing women to change themselves (not always in healthy ways); there are fewer voices pushing men as hard.  I don’t rage like Knight does, and of course, I would never, ever, ever put anything other than an affectionate hand on a student or youth group kid.   But Coach Knight inspires me more than do any of his peers because I sense in him a kindred spirit; I see in him a man committed to never surrendering to the notion that we cannot become all that our truest selves long to be.

Even now, in the twilight of his career, he is barking and raging against laziness, against incompetence, and above all, against the notion that we cannot radically transform ourselves.  Coach wants to build great teams of unselfish, committed young men.  In a very different and significant way, that’s what I want to do too.

Let’s go Red Raiders; fight on, Texas Tech.

Another note on RMP

Scott Jaschik, the editor of the splendid Inside Higher Ed, called me up yesterday to chat about the latest Ratemyprofessors wrinkle: photos.  His article appears this morning, and begins:

There’s a new reason to worry about students with cell phones in your classes. RateMyProfessors.com, the Web site whose popularity with students is matched by the grief it gives professors, has launched a new feature, encouraging students to shoot photographs of their faculty members and to post them along with the anonymous ratings of professors.

Think RateMyProfessors is going to ask your permission to post a photograph that you may not even know was taken (camera phones are being recommended to students)? Of course not, although RateMyProfessor asserts that it has other quality control mechanisms in place.

In the 48 hours since RateMyProfessors posted information about this new service on its site, it has received more than 1,200 photographs of professors and it is in the process of reviewing and uploading them.

Well, my students know that using their cell phone in class to take pictures, text-message, or talk to friends will result in their names being stricken from the Lamb’s Book of Life. I have connections, you know!  Still, I am sure someone could snap my pic surreptitiously.  I do note that someone has already uploaded a picture for me on RMP — they simply took the photo from this blog, which I don’t mind.  But some of my pictures need to be seen in a certain context

Jaschik kindly quotes me at length:

Hugo Schwyzer might seem like just the kind of professor who would like RateMyProfessors. A historian at Pasadena City College, he’s on the hottest list, has great ratings on RateMyProfessors, and has no hesitation about sharing life details or photographs — along with his philosophy and ruminations — online, at his blog.

Indeed Schwyzer said that he had high hopes for RateMyProfessors and thought it might provide a good source of anonymous feedback for him so he could improve his teaching. But he said that by asking students to send in photographs of professors, without a system to check first on whether the photos were taken with permission, it was clear that “the primary function is to humiliate.”

Schwyzer said he’s seen “the speciousness of the whole system” in recent weeks. He offended some men’s rights activists on his blog, and they responded by posting numerous critical comments on RateMyProfessors to bring down his scores. While some of those comments have been removed, Schwyzer said he witnessed “a remarkably detailed discussion of my appearance.”

To the extent RateMyProfessors could have served a valuable purpose, he said, it would have been about teaching and classroom performance. The non-scientific approach to those subjects and the increasing emphasis on physical appearance take away that potential, he added. By going with the photo feature, Schwyzer said, RateMyProfessors “loses whatever shreds of legitimacy it had.”