This is why we[professors, aspiring and current] are attracted to teaching — it is instant gratification. You don’t really get this with research because it is much slower, delayed gratification process.

On multiple occasions, I have been told some variation of the statement above and I was immediately bothered by one term. Instant gratification. What do you think of when you hear that term?

Will Cookie Monster choose instant gratification aka one cookie or delayed gratification aka a plate of cookies?

I asked my friends what they thought of when they hear the word on its own. Their first thoughts were listing related terms: impatient, materialistic, temptations, and lack of self control. One person defined it as, “a person who wants something right now, which will cause [depending on the intensity of the desire] one of two things — a lack of attention to detail and a premature rush to do something, thereby creating undesirable side effects or aftermath.” Another friend pointed out a less extreme example — smart phones. Instead of going to the library, reading a book or periodical, you can just use your phone to search for whatever you are curious about in that particular moment. Instant gratification.

When you Google instant gratification you get a very negative connotation. One prime example that pops up in my search is The Marshmallow Test. An experiment administered to children [or cookie monster in the above video], in which a child sits alone in the room and is given to options:

Eat the one marshmallow right now in front of you. Wait 15 minutes and eat two marshmallows.

From the article I linked, the major question they ask:

Will [the child] be able to resist temptation and hold out for the greater reward?

Thus, it implies the greater good is to resist instant gratification and have the self control to wait for better outcome. The better person chooses to ignore temptations. To choose delayed gratification is the more noble pursuit.This is all out of context but I hope you understand why I was irked by the original statement:

This is why we [professors, aspiring and current] are attracted to teaching — it is instant gratification. You don’t really get this with research because it is much slower, delayed gratification process.

Now, as a graduate student, the most important aspect of your life is research. Thus, as someone with a fellowship from the Dept. of Education, who has expressed interests in teaching and possibly non-profit pursuits, this can be a problem. However, as someone who will teach a course from scratch this spring, this statement disappointed me. It disappointed me more because I was not even surprised — this opinion is common among the academic community.

When I gave instant gratification more context, I got very similar responses from my friends. One stated:

I have an issue with a professor who considers teaching an instant gratification. If teaching is an instant gratification, then to the professors it just means ‘give lectures on a topic, assign some homework, done’ instead of it being ‘set up the teaching method such that it inspires students to pursue this area of study.’ The latter will certainly not give instant gratification, it has to be delayed.

Another gave a shorter response:

I would not want to take a class with a professor who expresses this opinion.

Another friend responded:

That is such a strange mentality — how can walking someone through the process of learning ever be INSTANT gratification? Learning is inherently long term, it takes prolonged effort from both the teacher and student. It’s ridiculous to imply teaching is the “easy way out” for those who don’t have the patience and foresight to wait.

The last statement was very similar to my own thoughts along with many questions fueled by confusion and disappointment. Do most professors teach students for a quarter or a semester just to feel good about themselves immediately? Do students become an afterthought after the course is over — do their opinions even matter? Is it really instant gratification if your students just remember your formulas in order to pass the final exam and forget everything you say immediately afterwards? I guess if everyone passes and you get favorable reviews, it instantly means you were a successful teacher, right? If you choose to ignore what happens after the class, then what your students remember does not matter, right? Then again, why should the students care about what you teach, if all they are is an instant gratification.