Many ENSEIRB students used the word “pédagogue.” The translation says that it means a strict professor. If this translation is accurate, we can see that there is nothing like that on MIT’s description of a good professor. I think in general, MIT students like flexible professors rather than strict. Do you think strict professors are preferred because they are more efficient and fair, or is there another reason?

I noticed that MIT students talk extensively about having professors who are caring and accommodating to all students, helping to provide a very positive experience. The ENSEIRB students also talk about passionate teaching and effective communication, but it seems that flexibility and kindness are less expected. Are many professors in France invested in helping their students through flexibility and compromise, or is this just an American expectation?

Comme l’a dit jasmin, le mot “pédagogue” a été plusieurs fois utilisé du côté des étudiants de l’ENSEIRB. Celui-ci ne veut pas forcément dire “strict”, en général ce mot est employé pour qualifier une personne qui a le sens de l’enseignement, c’est-à-dire quelqu’un qui a les bonnes compétences pour transmettre son savoir, mais qui a aussi la volonté et le goût d’enseigner . Ce n’est donc pas forcément quelqu’un de strict mais juste une personne qui aime transmettre ses connaissances et qui fait au mieux pour y arriver et rendre l’expérience agréable pour ses élèves (par exemple en adaptant ses méthodes d’enseignement aux élèves, en faisant des cours moins ennuyeux, en prenant en compte les remarques de ses élèves….). Je pense donc que la flexibilité et la conciliation sont également des caractéristiques d’un bon professeur, mais peut-être sont-elles moins officielles pour les élèves de l’ENSEIRB que pour les étudiants du MIT. Comme on peut le voir parmi les réponses du côté de l’ENSEIRB, le concept de transimission du savoir est prédominant avec les mots “explique”, “sait transmettre ses connaissances”, “fait passer l’information”, “pédagogue”.

I think Julien did a great job of articulating the definition of pedagogue. His explanation is the impression I had when originally reading the ENSEIRB responses. This semester, I am a TA for a class where the Professor takes the notion of pedagogy very seriously. It is in conversations with him that I first heard this word mentioned. He takes pride in developing his TA’s as pedagogues. His passion for mentorship and care of not only students taking his class, but of those helping teach it embodies a good professor in my eyes. Have any ENSEIRB student had a similar experience where a professor was not just teaching you material, but was teaching you how to better teach the material to others?

Julien’s explanation of the word “pédagogue” really helped me to understand the full meaning of the responses of the ENSEIRB students. This expectation of pedagogy definitely requires professors to be in touch with the meaning of teaching, which involves aiding students and ensuring that everyone has ample opportunity to understand a course’s material. I think this effectively answers my previous question of whether French professors are flexible and willing to compromise, as that seems like a natural result of professors being pedagogues. I also noticed that the ENSEIRB students frequently mention wanting respected professors. At MIT, this would often mean that the professor has an extensive and successful research background, but not necessarily that they are a good teacher. Is “respected” used the same way when describing professors at ENSEIRB?

I do think these differences are very interesting. I would agree with Collin in that it seems like the ENSEIRB students talk less about teachers being lenient. I think this is a thing that is important to many at MIT who may have very busy schedules. I also think this discussion about the word “pédagogue” is intriguing. I did not know what this word meant but reading these comments has cleared this up well. I find it interesting how this shows how important the connotation of words are and how they can be quite misconstrued in translators.

I think an interesting comment on the ENSEIRB side is “qui fait interagir ses étudiants.” I interpret this as making students interact with each other. Collaboration is a major component of education at MIT, so we inevitably do a lot of work with our peers. Perhaps since this is such an intrinsic part of classes at MIT, we don’t attribute student interactions to the quality of the professor. I do think, though, that a good professor is one who encourages students to engage with the material together. At ENSEIRB, do all professors encourage you to work on individual assignments with other people, or are you supposed to work on them strictly by yourself?

I’m interested in the difference between how classes are run, which may be contributing to the slight difference in what is thought as a “good teacher.” Of course being able to teach the material effectively and having passion in teaching are mentioned on both sides, but as brought up in the discussion, the MIT side seems to demand more of a connection with the students from the professor. Is this from the difference in the values that we put in grades in college courses? For example, the importance that people associate with grades in college is quite different between the US and Japan.

Julia, quand la personne a écrit “qui fait interagir ses élèves “, elle disait cela dans le sens qu’un bon professeur amène les élèves à bien suivre le cours, en leur posant des questions, en les intéressant à son propos. Pour cette personne, un bon professeur ne peut pas être quelqu’un qui vient en classe, fait son cours et ne parle aux élèves que si l’un d’entre eux lui pose une question. Par contre, un bon professeur est quelqu’un qui prête attention à comment ses élèves comprennent le cours, qui essaie d’adapter sa manière d’enseigner en fonction des retours qu’il reçoit.
A l’ENSEIRB, nous avons beaucoup de travaux qui doivent être fait en groupe et quelques uns que nous faisons seul.

Responding to Yoshihiro, I do think the difference in culture influences the way a professor interacts with their students a lot. What I’ve noticed during my time here and from friends who grew up in the United States mainland is that relationships between teachers and students can become friendly, but are always kept professional, there is a line one cannot cross. However back home in Puerto Rico, we can have much more relaxed relationships with our teachers. Like as a group with other students, we go out to eat with our teachers outside of school and some teachers really feel like part of one’s family, at least that was my experience. My teachers very much became my friends and people I can comfortably talk to, as well as people I look up to. How does the situation in France compare to this or the situation in the US?

Acfiallo, en France, cela dépend des professeurs et de la taille de la classe qu’ils ont en face d’eux. Quand ils se retrouvent devant une classe avec 20 élèves, il leur est beaucoup plus facile d’être amical que dans un amphithéatre de 100 personnes.. Quand nous sommes au lycée en général les professeurs sont amicaux. A l’inverse quand nous sommes à l’université, ils sont souvent beaucoup plus distants.