Elsewhere I have commented something about the teachers at Jadavpur University. Here, I shall try to bring out a few more shortcomings on part of the faculty, and also emphasize on what I have already said, viz, the total callousness of the faculty towards the academics of the students.

Let me begin by emphasizing again- the faculty at Jadavpur is perhaps the most competent in this part of India. All of them are highly qualified in their fields of study- a reason why they are so much respected. But mere qualification is no guarantee that they are good teachers as well. Let me take a concrete example- of course, I cannot take names, but people of my department would know who the person(s) are. While we were new undergraduate students, one senior professor came and highly recommended a newly recruited faculty member. She sang paens in his honour, told us how he broke all academic records at his alma mater, and convinced us how brilliant student he us- facts which no one can dispute. Unfortunately, our introduction that that teacher wasn't that lively. We could never know how good a student he was (never once doubting that he was a good student- you just cannot teach at Jadavpur unless you are one), but we knew soon enough he was not a good teacher. A good teacher is one who can pass on his knowledge, his expertise to the students, help them with his experience, and give helpful suggestions. He may or may not be a good student himself, may not have a PhD, but he can do what is his job- teach. To become a cricket commentator you need not be a cricketer- and you know how good a commentator is Harsha Bhogle.

I have had the good fortune to have spent some time at another premier city college- St. Xavier's College. When I compare the their faculty with Jadavpur's, I feel surprised. St. Xavier's does not boast of as many PhDs, as many high qualifications as Jadavpur. The teacher to student ration is much lower at Xavier's. Infrastructural facilities- be it library resources, classrooms or other amenities- are inferior. Yet I have felt that as teachers, the average St. Xavier's faculty is much better than the average Jadavpur faculty. The reason- they have mastered the art of teaching (and which is quite apart from the art of learning, or earning degrees, or writing books, or visiting foreign universities). They take interest in lecturing, in providing materials to the students, and taking private interest in individual students. They are more committed as they keep themselves busy with their vocation-teaching.

One of the main grudges against many of the teachers at the English Department of JU is that they are very often absent from classroom. Every other day we hear that a certain professor has gone to a foreign university as a visiting professor, some other professor is on a study leave, etc. This tendency is felt as very selfish- the teachers are seen as furthering their own careers at the expense of the students'. One professor has been so busy with his own studies that he found only four or five occasions to visit his students in their classrooms. If teachers would spent more time with their students- discussing not only academics, but also career opportunities, personal experiences, suggestions and talking to students about themselves- then the divide between faculty and students would come down, and the students would profit immeasurably. 

The faculty has this assumption that all students are brilliant and intensely studious, that their only business is studying, and that they know, or should know, every preliminary thing about any text. They always take as granted that the students are gifted with some obscure knowledge. Thus, their lectures are sprinkled with such assumptions like "You must be knowing this", "You must have read that...", etc- well, not even the brilliant students usually knows them. The problem was especially acute when we were newcomers, so much so that each of us got inferiority comlexes, until we came to disregard such comments. We realized that such obscure knowledge was not mandatory. What seemed outrageous on part of the faculty was that they never cared to even suggest or provide a few materials wherefrom we could glean some knowledge. For example, in my four years as a literature student I have never once come across a single reference book on Arthurian legends in four libraries, or any bookstall- and lectures on early English literature always involved characters from them. Not one teacher cared to explain the various myths, or tell who is who. To most of us the Arthurian legends are still a mystery.

This brings me to another point about which I shall have occasion to say more in Provide faculty-authored materials. In short it is that the faculty never provides us any material on relevant topics, and relies on the students to find them. True, at the beginning of every text to be taught, they give us a long list of books; but most of them cannot be found anywhere. What is the use of giving us the name of the books if they cannot tell us where to find them? And how can they take it for granted they we have read them unless they personally provide them? If they had bothered to help us with materials then the results of all students would improve substantially. At Jadavpur the students usually fend for themselves- if they have good and sufficient materials, they can fare well at exams. This can explain how great a role the faculty can play in this regard. Unfortunately...