3 ms·
> why take a job that pays substantially less than what you get in industry? This is really only the case in the last 15 years or so. The vast majority of pr
by linuxftw 4y ago
> why take a job that pays substantially less than what you get in industry?
This is really only the case in the last 15 years or so. The vast majority of programmers weren't making into the 6 figures. The pay might have been marginally worse at a univ, but the benefits, QOL were probably better.
- bsder 4y agoFor lecturers? BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Sniff. Sniff. Oh, I haven't laughed that much in a while. Sorry. I couldn't help myself. But, seriously, now ... Please do be careful to separate "tenured professors" who earn a salary and do research from "lecturers" who get paid by the course and do not do research. "Tenured professors" get paid ... oookay ... sorta. "Lecturers" get paid absolute garbage. I know that Stanford, for example, paid $4000 per course in the CS department not that long ago. Yes, "nominally" that class was only 6 hours per week lecturing so it looks like that's $55/hr. In reality, if you want to do a good job teaching that class, it's a 40 hour per week commitment for 12 weeks--which means you earn below both minimum wage and McDonald's. Alternatively, you can give that same course to professionals and get paid $4K per person for a one week course. Being a good lecturer is more akin to social work than a job.
- beej71 4y agoI'm a full-time CS "Instructor" at a state university and get paid decently with full benefits. 9-month contacts. Not tenure-track. It doesn't pay nearly as well as industry, but I love teaching and I'm tired of industry at this point in my career. As an adjunct, though, pay was below McDonald's, yes.