2 ms·

In the old days (a millenia ago) Universities (teacher's guilds, literally) didn't test students - the Church tested the students and credentialed them, not the

In the old days (a millenia ago) Universities (teacher's guilds, literally) didn't test students - the Church tested the students and credentialed them, not the teachers. The great advantage of this was that there was no grade inflation or other funny business, 'cause there was no conflict of interest. Now, the academy grades its own work, in effect. Back then, if you could get the study in on your own and pass, great. If not, you found a professor and settled on a fee. Now, the academy is an old boys' club, and can get very inbred, and be a decade behind the market, too. In computer science, if someone's a prof at most Universities, it's often a sign they aren't competent enough to survive in the wild.

tjl 10y ago
I know many profs who decided to switch from industry to academia because they had enough money and wanted a less hectic lifestyle. A very large number of professors actually do contract work for companies. Even a former Master's supervisor of mine (who is officially retired) still does consulting with companies (typically game developers as he specializes in splines in computer graphics). I'm actually in Engineering and at least in Canada, there's actually an accreditation body that reviews the engineering programs to ensure they live up to a standard. If the program meets that standard, the graduates only have to take a law and ethics exam (in addition to the experience requirement). If you're outside that system, you have to take a series of exams on the material. I know that it's different in the US, though. I believe that you do have to take a set of exams on the core material for your type of engineering as there's too many programs to properly vet all of them.
- Nomentatus 10y ago
  Certainly (many) tests being taken out of the hands of individual profs and individual Universities is a good thing, so that's heartening - but in fast-moving fields I admit it could mean the test lag knowledge and best practice a bit more. As for excellent peeps choosing to be profs for the lifestyle: for a long while I've been saying that engineers/coders not be exempted from overtime; your response suggests that the unintended effect of that might be to harm teaching quite a bit, if those profs go back to a friendlier industry.

tjl 10y ago

I know many profs who decided to switch from industry to academia because they had enough money and wanted a less hectic lifestyle. A very large number of professors actually do contract work for companies. Even a former Master's supervisor of mine (who is officially retired) still does consulting with companies (typically game developers as he specializes in splines in computer graphics). I'm actually in Engineering and at least in Canada, there's actually an accreditation body that reviews the engineering programs to ensure they live up to a standard. If the program meets that standard, the graduates only have to take a law and ethics exam (in addition to the experience requirement). If you're outside that system, you have to take a series of exams on the material. I know that it's different in the US, though. I believe that you do have to take a set of exams on the core material for your type of engineering as there's too many programs to properly vet all of them.

Nomentatus 10y ago
Certainly (many) tests being taken out of the hands of individual profs and individual Universities is a good thing, so that's heartening - but in fast-moving fields I admit it could mean the test lag knowledge and best practice a bit more. As for excellent peeps choosing to be profs for the lifestyle: for a long while I've been saying that engineers/coders not be exempted from overtime; your response suggests that the unintended effect of that might be to harm teaching quite a bit, if those profs go back to a friendlier industry.