For the first time ever at Harvard, all academic departments are planning how to train their teaching fellows to teach.

Under a rule approved last spring by the Faculty Council, every department must come up with an individual agenda by December.

But the Faculty Council initiative, voted in after pressure from Dean for Undergraduate Education Lawrence Buell and Undergraduate Council members, may still be too lax.

Even as departments move to implement it, undergraduates and graduate students say the Faculty Council plan fails to provide a centralized, enforceable minimum requirement.

"I think a universal guideline is something Harvard cannot shirk from," says Hassen A. Sayeed '96, who worked on the council's TF training proposal last year when he was chair of the student affairs committee.

"I do not think it an insensitive argument to propose that a common guideline be established to ensure that all students receive the best possible education," Sayeed says.

The Plans

Most of the departments have moved to craft training plans already, though they don't have to implement them until the fall of 1995. The plans must be on Buell's desk for approval in December, however.

The majority of departments will use the Derek Bok Center for Teaching and Learning to train their TFs. The Bok Center offers orientation sessions for new teaching fellows, as well as ongoing monitoring, filming and support for working teachers.

The Near Eastern languages and civilizations department plans to send its TFs to the Bok Center, though the department is not yet sure what form the training will take.

"We are in the process of formulating procedures that will make heavy use of the Bok Center, but we still have a ways to go," said department chair John Huehnergard.

Other departments are planning more individualized teaching training.

In the religion department, for instance, TFs must take Bok Center classes supplemented by sensitivity education in the department.

"We require TFs in the department to participate in the Bok Center orientation in the fall," says chair Diana L. Eck. "We had our own session in the special problems in teaching diversity in the context of the study of religion."

Like religion, the fine arts department will use both Bok Center and specialized department training.

The department has organized an "afternoon of general orientation and preparation for first-time teaching fellows in the department with some faculty present and also other teaching fellows who have had a lot of experience as TFs already," says chair Irene J. Winter.

The English department will use two "master teachers," experienced lecturers who will work with new TFs throughout the semester.

"In addition to expecting lecturers to closely monitor their TFs, we have two very senior lecturers who are to work closely with beginning teachers," says chair Leo Damrosch.

Buell, who had originally pushed for a more stringent University-wide training requirement, says he is satisfied with the progress the departments are making.

"I am optimistic that the plan will improve TF training and orientation significantly FAS-wide," he says.

Departments like Near Eastern languages and civilizations, for instance, didn't even have a TF training requirement before the new guidelines. Many required only an initial training session for first-year TFs.

"I think it's a good start," says David Porter, the treasurer of the Graduate Student Council. "I think it'll end up being effective because just by the faculty giving more attention to teaching grad students how to teach, that will improve the quality of teaching."

Not Enough

But both Buell and Director of the Bok Center for Teaching and Learning James D. Wilkinson '65 say that just relying on Bok Center orientation training is probably not enough.

"I think that there needs also to be more extensive preparations for the specific tasks that will be required of the teaching fellows in his or her field," Buell says. "There needs to be training and feedback over a longer period of time than just a one or two day orientation."

Wilkinson suggests the full-semester apprenticeship program in the math department as a good example of a successful training program.

"Teaching fellows observe classes taught by experienced teaching fellows and get an opportunity to practice teaching in this semester before they themselves teach," Wilkinson says.

Many new plans don't go as far as the math department, however, and some advocates for improved TF training say the individual departments' initiatives are not enough to guarantee good teaching.

The proposal that the Faculty Council passed "is just the beginning," says Joseph S. Evangelista '96, who drafted an Undergraduate Council proposal last year for common evaluation guidelines for all section leaders. "It is a method to start, not a solution to end all solutions."

Some graduate students may agree with the undergraduates' criticisms.

Carlos A. Lopez, the president of the Graduate Student Council, says he doesn't want to see each department setting its own policies.

"I think the grad students would like to have some centralization to the administration of policies of teaching fellow training," Lopez says.

The problem with having departments do their training individually, Lopez says, is that grad students in small departments with no undergraduate teaching courses receive no training. One such example, he says, is the department of Sanskrit and Indian Studies.

Wilkinson, and Buell, say they are adopting a wait-and-see attitude, trusting the departments to come up with adequate improvements. Wilkinson says the requirement may be strengthened, if necessary.

Evangelista, the undergraduate council member, agrees.

"It's good that now the department has the willingness to look at the way they teach students," Evangelista says, "but I hope the department programs are not intended just for show."

"If the quality is not improved then it is obvious that the department is not taking the idea of the teaching fellow evaluations seriously," he says.