By Dr. Hanif Kanjer
Founder, Director, and Dean – Rustomjee Cambridge International School & Junior College
A few years ago, I was invited to chair a research conference at one of India’s top business schools. It was meant to be a showcase of academic rigor and innovation. Instead, it turned into a revealing case study in the power—and failure—of mentorship in higher education.
During one of the sessions, a professor stepped up to present a paper. From the first slide, something felt off. The content was weak, the analysis shallow, and the delivery uninspired. I had no choice but to mark it zero across all evaluation parameters.
After the session, I asked him, “Why was the quality of research so poor?”
He responded, “It’s actually my student’s paper. She’s unwell, so I’m presenting on her behalf.”
I looked at the author list and said, “But you’re listed as a co-author.”
“Yes,” he admitted.
“Did you guide her through the research? Did you even review the final work?” I pressed.
He mumbled something vague—no real explanation, no accountability.
Just minutes later, another professor took the stage with his student. Their paper was thorough, insightful, and impressively presented. The scores reflected that. It was everything academic mentorship should be.
Two presentations. Two professors. Two vastly different outcomes.
One student missed a crucial learning opportunity because her mentor didn’t do his job. Another student shined because her professor did.
That moment has stayed with me. Not just because of what happened—but because of what it represents.
We talk a lot about student performance. But how often do we question faculty performance?
Why do institutions tolerate mediocrity among those responsible for shaping young minds? How does a professor with poor delivery and weak research skills remain employed at a prestigious institution for 15 years?
The truth is, many institutions lack genuine systems for faculty accountability. Feedback mechanisms exist on paper, but rarely translate into consequences or improvement plans.
We must ask:
Who evaluates the evaluators?
Who mentors the mentors?
And who protects students from academic negligence?
Because this is negligence. It may not involve malpractice or scandal, but when a student’s potential is stifled by a disinterested professor, the damage is real—and lasting.
The professor who scored top marks didn’t just teach. He guided. He challenged. He made sure his student was prepared, confident, and capable.
That’s what mentorship should be.
Education is not just about transferring information. It’s about unlocking minds. It's about responsibility. And it's about showing up—for your students, for the discipline, and for the future you're helping to build.
We need to call out poor performers in academia—not out of cruelty, but out of care for our students and the integrity of education.
We need to reward professors who mentor well, who go the extra mile, who take ownership of their students' success.
And most importantly, we need to ask ourselves:
What kind of educators do we want shaping the next generation of leaders, researchers, and changemakers?
Because in the end, students don’t just learn subjects.
They learn through people.