3 ms·

> If we're talking about university faculty, I would hope that they would all have a PhD! Having a PhD does not make you a good teacher (which is what this cap

> If we're talking about university faculty, I would hope that they would all have a PhD! Having a PhD does not make you a good teacher (which is what this capacity problem is about (it's about a lack of teaching capacity for undergraduates)). There are many good adjunct faculty, instructors, and gasp, yes, even assistant professors with just a masters degree teaching undergraduate college level computer science at institutions like community colleges, teaching oriented 4-year colleges, and universities with an open mind. I know because I am one of them and I know several others. It is rather rare, and sure you wouldn't hire us to be research faculty, but excluding people who lack a research credential (PhD), but who have a proven track record of successful teaching (perhaps through starting as an adjunct) from teaching is very ivory tower...

tensor 9y ago
The idea is that you want the people on the leading edge teaching, otherwise you'll end up with the same problem that colleges have where faculty may be good at teaching, but don't update their knowledge and track state of the art. I'm not at all against colleges and trade schools, they have their place, but I don't agree that we should turn our universities into into them. It's perfectly fine to have a separation. Traditionally colleges and trade schools have been focused on training a workforce, and universities have been places to go to get a broader, but not necessarily trade focused education. There are many other complaints about university education that essentially boil down to people wishing they were trade schools. E.g. why don't they teach popular industry language X? Why don't they teach unit testing, agile programming, etc? Without having research faculty doing the teaching, I think you lose what traditionally has been the strength of a university education: teachers with state of the art knowledge teaching people to push the boundaries of how they think.
- WoodenChair 9y ago
  It’s not an either/or. Great universities can have both teaching focused faculty and research focused faculty. Also the vast majority of undergraduates are taking basic fundamentals courses - not courses that involve “leading edge” research. University or college this thread is about the crunch teaching undergraduates, not research focused grad students. Also what you will find the is in research focused universities, the "leading edge" researchers you cite teach very few classes. Many of them teach no classes or one or two a year. Hence the problem that this thread began with regarding load. The fact is these classes are being taught by graduate students or adjuncts when the student population would be better served by full time teaching-focused faculty.
gowld 9y ago
A university hires research professors. A college hires teachers. There's not precedent for tenuring teachers.
- WoodenChair 9y ago
  That's not accurate — it varies from institution to institution. Most universities hire both teaching faculty and research faculty. Some universities title the teaching faculty "lecturers" or "instructors" instead of "professors." However sometimes they also receive "professor" titles. Tenure is an antiquated system, and the concern around titles is elitist. However, those are discussions for another time.

tensor 9y ago

The idea is that you want the people on the leading edge teaching, otherwise you'll end up with the same problem that colleges have where faculty may be good at teaching, but don't update their knowledge and track state of the art. I'm not at all against colleges and trade schools, they have their place, but I don't agree that we should turn our universities into into them. It's perfectly fine to have a separation. Traditionally colleges and trade schools have been focused on training a workforce, and universities have been places to go to get a broader, but not necessarily trade focused education. There are many other complaints about university education that essentially boil down to people wishing they were trade schools. E.g. why don't they teach popular industry language X? Why don't they teach unit testing, agile programming, etc? Without having research faculty doing the teaching, I think you lose what traditionally has been the strength of a university education: teachers with state of the art knowledge teaching people to push the boundaries of how they think.

WoodenChair 9y ago
It’s not an either/or. Great universities can have both teaching focused faculty and research focused faculty. Also the vast majority of undergraduates are taking basic fundamentals courses - not courses that involve “leading edge” research. University or college this thread is about the crunch teaching undergraduates, not research focused grad students. Also what you will find the is in research focused universities, the "leading edge" researchers you cite teach very few classes. Many of them teach no classes or one or two a year. Hence the problem that this thread began with regarding load. The fact is these classes are being taught by graduate students or adjuncts when the student population would be better served by full time teaching-focused faculty.

gowld 9y ago

A university hires research professors. A college hires teachers. There's not precedent for tenuring teachers.

WoodenChair 9y ago
That's not accurate — it varies from institution to institution. Most universities hire both teaching faculty and research faculty. Some universities title the teaching faculty "lecturers" or "instructors" instead of "professors." However sometimes they also receive "professor" titles. Tenure is an antiquated system, and the concern around titles is elitist. However, those are discussions for another time.