'Professor Must Be Just and Flexible': Yury Kabanov on Working with University and High School Students
On November 19, HSE University-St Petersburg and other Russian universities celebrate the Day of Higher School Professors. To commemorate the occasion, we talked to Yury Kabanov, whom the students chose as the best professor eight times over his ten-year career at HSE University. In the interview, the professor explains how to stay a good professor, why one should deliver lectures at schools, and why it is hard to give students grades.
— You have been teaching at HSE University for ten years. How has your attitude to work changed over time?
— I have become a teacher by coincidence but I am happy that everything turned out this way. It is one of the best professions, and I like it at HSE University. But of course, now, I perceive my occupation differently.
Earlier, I used to believe that professors only retransmit their knowledge. It turned out that this profession is much more complicated. I shouldn't even hope that students will reproduce my lecture word-for-word—it won't be necessary. We should teach not facts but thinking patterns which will help to structure new knowledge in the future. It is the only option to make the studies meaningful.
— Over these years, you have become the best HSE professor eight times. What does it mean to you?
— I am very grateful to the students who voted for me. If my work receives positive feedback, it means that I don't work in vain.
Feedback has always meant a lot to me. I follow closely how students assess my courses, and look at their reactions during the classes, whether they ask questions or keep quiet and fall asleep. If students are asleep, I obviously won't wake them up—we are all people. But next year, I will try to deliver the topic in a way which won't bore anyone.
There was negative feedback as well. It's useless to get offended by it. Quite the opposite, I try to take into account all the students' wishes and change the course content. For instance, I deliver 'Categories of Political Science' to the first-years, and every year, I change it a little. It is not that I create a course and repeat it for the rest of my life. If an explanation is incomprehensible, you should change it; if a task for a seminar didn't work out, you should come up with something more involving.
— How have the requirements for professors changed?
— In general, it seems to me that students have become more demanding than before. When I was a student, I attended lots of courses because I had to. If the course is interesting, we're lucky; if it's not, there's no choice anyway. Now, students utter more clearly what they want from each course. They all have to know why they need this subject and how they will use it later. Meanwhile, goal-setting must come not only from professors but also from students themselves. This way, it will be easier to find benefits even in those courses which initially seem uninspiring.
— Do you think that the focus on the goal can make students less involved in the theoretical subjects?
— Everything depends only on the way you present your subject. The benefit of practice-oriented courses is obvious but it doesn't mean that fundamental courses are useless. Practice without theory is bad. Professors should explain how theory changes the way of thinking and the approach to decision-making. For instance, the philosophy course: historians and political scientists need it for professional development, and others—to understand how and what they think about.
Some students come to a university for skills. Such an approach is also quite acceptable but you have to understand that a university can offer much more—a community, a part of which you will be forever. For skills, sometimes, it is enough to complete the online courses but it is a short-term decision. In the upcoming 10-15 years, it might not work, especially if you would want to change the direction. Thanks to the university and its community, there are even more of these opportunities.
— What qualities must a good professor have?
— Professor must be just and flexible. Justice for me is following the 'game rules' which are known in advance. All these rules are described in detail in the course curriculum, and, of course, you should follow them. At the same time, you should be quite flexible to react to certain circumstances. For example, you can make a course a little easier or more perplexed depending on how the classes are going. But the main thing is that any of these changes mustn't influence the attitude to students. In the end, they are an important part of the university community, one should approach the work with them with warmth and respect.
For a professor, just like for everyone who works with people, empathy is very important. You should understand the students' emotions well, sense their attitude to each other, monitor the dynamics of a seminar... Besides, it seems to me that being an empathic professor means to understand that your course is not the centre of the universe. Students have other homework and their own lives—bright and eventful. When you accept it, it becomes much easier to live and work. Offences against unprepared students disappear. While planning, you just remember that students have other businesses.
— What is the most pleasant and complicated in your profession?
— The most interesting thing for me is to find some unexpected ways to explain the material. I can say that I have made a career out of explaining political science through 'Star Wars'. Truth be told, now, these examples cause less excitement, so I switched to everyday ones. Once, I even explained the versions of new institutionalism based on the example of how students enter the building at the Griboyedova Canal Embankment.
The hardest thing is to assess students. It's easier with school students in continuing education. You can give certain grades but in general, they impact only the motivation. The most important thing is how students will perform in the exams or the olympiad. At HSE University, for many students, grades are very important. I understand them but giving scores is still difficult for me. For me, a grade is just feedback, that's why I try to come up with formulas which would make it the most objective.
Several years ago, I stopped assessing students' oral responses at seminars. Sometimes, such a form of control creates a too competitive atmosphere during the classes. A goal in itself might become a 'plus' for a response and not a wholesome understanding of the subject. While others might know the material greatly but not be talkative in seminars in general.
Instead of that, in every class, students fill in summary files which I prepare in advance. They are what I give a part of the course grade for. If a person doesn't want to speak up, they can listen to the discussion and write down what's important to them. I give another part of the grade for tests: we take them in every class. Moreover, if you listen carefully during the seminar, even without doing the homework, it is possible to get a good grade.
— Before HSE University, you worked with school students, and you keep doing that but in another status. What motivates you?
— At meetings with school students, I often talk about social sciences. We must admit that it is not the most obvious choice for a child. Meanwhile, I am a researcher, so I know exactly why we need social sciences. Even with this one conversation, I show the school students the world of science and prove that it is not that hard to get into it. It happened several times that later, attendees of such lectures enrolled in our programme.
I have a professional interest in such lectures as well. A quality education is distinguished by how well each lesson is thought out—in its form and content. To hold the attention of a school student for at least an hour is, in fact, a non-trivial task, and to make them remember the material is even harder. This is exactly why it is important to avoid complicated terminology when working with school students.
— Is there a difference in teaching university and school students?
— I wouldn't say so. Perhaps, the difference is that the university gives more specialised knowledge. However, a good school education is not that different from a university one in its format. It must be interesting, interactive, motivating and based on what science knows about this subject. My lectures for first-years can easily suit graduate school students: I carefully explain terms and try to find clear examples. With every year, the material gradually gets harder.
— What do modern school students want from education in the first university year?
— In my opinion, the most important things are mental comfort and objectivity, in the second place—an applied focus. It's clear that adaptation often goes hard, not all expectations are justified. But HSE University-St Petersburg is quite a cosy campus: we do everything to make the transition from school to university smooth. Even if not everything works out, we are always grateful to students for the comments.
— And the last thing, to your mind, what future awaits professors? Will your profession change a lot?
— I think that its basic principles won't change. Of course, artificial intelligence is developing rapidly but it still cannot replace a professor. As I've already said, a professor transfers not only knowledge but also their perspective and experience. No neural network can do it, at least now. This is why people should stay in education.
Perhaps, AI will automatise some work processes but it won't replace everything related to communication. We realised it during COVID-19 and the online education boom. Any teaching is attention management. But how is it possible if you are on Zoom with turned-off cameras, you can't see each other and constantly get distracted? I don't say that we don't need technology. I record all my lectures so that students can listen to them again if desired. But I see that students come every time—it means that they have such a demand. It means that simple human communication still scores off technologies.