4 ms·

When I was a postdoc in Cambridge, the problem was that there were too many PhD students and postdocs who wanted to teach. Not because of the compensation but f

When I was a postdoc in Cambridge, the problem was that there were too many PhD students and postdocs who wanted to teach. Not because of the compensation but for the experience. A lot of people wanted to try a career in the academia, and they needed teaching experience for that. But there were not enough undergraduates for them all to teach.

AtlasBarfed 2y ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJEmE7IYoLk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJEmE7IYoLk Summary: colleges are way too selective today at the high end. Boomers got into elite schools far more easily, although there were less schools. It's a bit of a disingenuous argument however, because the huge increase of schools down the long long LONG pecking order of school "eliteness". But the boomer thing is spot on.
- alephnerd 2y ago
  > It's a bit of a disingenuous argument however, because the huge increase of schools down the long long LONG pecking order of school "eliteness" Ehn, it really doesn't. Harvard admits significantly less undergrads than Penn or Columbia, and in personal experience, the "Ivy" cachet doesn't really help that much in most industries outside of High Finance (which itself tends to targets Penn+Columbia instead of Harvard). Harvard was historically overrepresented in MBB+Management Consulting, but that industry is dying now that Accountancies and Implementation firms are bundling MC, and companies increasingly do strategy in-house. Prestige is a finicky thing. 30 years ago UChicago was not viewed as "prestigious" compared to Harvard (it was Claremont McKenna with snow back then), but ask high schoolers today and UChicago has a strong brand value. Also, ime, I just don't bump into Harvard grads anymore at high level positions (Director and above). Harvard historically overindexed on MBB and Boutique Consulting recruiting while Penn+Columbia targeted Wall Street and Stanford+Cal targeted Sand Hill and YC. Consulting slowly started withering away, so recruiting is tough. That said, Harvard does very well in China (largely thanks to John Fairbanks and Roderick MacFarquhar in the 1970s-90s), but they aren't as driven as UPenn has been in trying to diversify their international presence.
  - alephnerd 2y ago
    > high level positions Typo: Meant high level positions in the Tech industry. HBS tends to do pretty well in PE/HF but the overlap isn't significant with Harvard College.
- robocat 2y ago
  Paraphrased: it used to be easier for boomers to get into say the top 2%? I can only guess that the meaning of elite has changed. Aside: a comment with the word "boomer" in it is usually offensive in my experience. But doing worry, you'll get a different word applied to you when you reach the same age cohort. Disclosure: not a boomer. There are two types of people in the world: those that split the world into two groups, and those that don't.
  - YeGoblynQueenne 2y ago
    And the third one that can't be placed in any category, let's not forget.
  - AtlasBarfed 2y ago
    The boomer generation has done demonstrable environmental social and financial damage to the world. Why is truth offensive? I'm a leftist, and that attitude is a strong component of the last election result.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
anonymousDan 2y ago
FYI you really don't need teaching experience to get a good academic job. The number one criteria is excellent publication record.
- shermantanktop 2y ago
  That’s an extremely broad statement. Biology, physics, architecture and history are pretty different professional cultures.
  - notahacker 2y ago
    And different academic jobs can be mostly research or mostly teaching
  - oersted1234 2y ago
    Most UK universities place a lot of value on teaching experience. If you have a PhD degree from Cambridge or Oxford, a decent publication track record and significant teaching experience, you will typically get lectureship (assistant professor) offers straight after you finish your doctoral studies. Some teaching experience will be valued more than having a stellar publication record, especially if you have a good research plan. It makes sense because most lectureships involve at least 40% of teaching and supervision. Going back to the main topic of this post, using too many underpaid academics to teach creates some perverse incentives that are IMHO destroying Oxbridge. Many professors are no longer teaching. Teaching is a great filter. It makes sure they stay up-to-date, they are technically good and they take pride in their research field. Professors that are really good and passionate, i.e. Terry Tao-like personalities, are often getting displaced by ladder climbers. This is especially common in experimental fields and really disheartening.
    - YeGoblynQueenne 2y ago
      It depends on what kind of academic work you're looking for, right? If you're going for a teaching career, then yes, of course you need to have some teaching experience. If you're after a research career, e.g. a research fellowship like the ones from the Leverhulme Trust or the Royal Society of Engineering, then you really do need an astounding publication record and I don't reckon that having any teaching experience is going to help you with that. Not least because in academia, either you teach, or you do research. You can't do both. >> Teaching is a great filter. It makes sure they stay up-to-date, they are technically good and they take pride in their research field. If that's your experience, that must be something that depends on the field of research and we must be in different fields. In CS, teaching is indeed a good filter- in the sense that it separates the teachers from the researchers. I have the direct experience of my PI, who has not done a day of research after becoming a lecturer. Because there is no time. Teaching takes so much admin work that there's no time left for research. I mean any above-junior academic position takes too much admin work, but teaching really gets the cookie. My experience so far has been that senior academics who still take an active role in research find ways to avoid teaching like the plague. Although you can't really escape it. You'll at least mark some papers in your subject, whether you like it or not (and with TA-ing from PhDs or not).

AtlasBarfed 2y ago

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJEmE7IYoLk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJEmE7IYoLk Summary: colleges are way too selective today at the high end. Boomers got into elite schools far more easily, although there were less schools. It's a bit of a disingenuous argument however, because the huge increase of schools down the long long LONG pecking order of school "eliteness". But the boomer thing is spot on.

alephnerd 2y ago
> It's a bit of a disingenuous argument however, because the huge increase of schools down the long long LONG pecking order of school "eliteness" Ehn, it really doesn't. Harvard admits significantly less undergrads than Penn or Columbia, and in personal experience, the "Ivy" cachet doesn't really help that much in most industries outside of High Finance (which itself tends to targets Penn+Columbia instead of Harvard). Harvard was historically overrepresented in MBB+Management Consulting, but that industry is dying now that Accountancies and Implementation firms are bundling MC, and companies increasingly do strategy in-house. Prestige is a finicky thing. 30 years ago UChicago was not viewed as "prestigious" compared to Harvard (it was Claremont McKenna with snow back then), but ask high schoolers today and UChicago has a strong brand value. Also, ime, I just don't bump into Harvard grads anymore at high level positions (Director and above). Harvard historically overindexed on MBB and Boutique Consulting recruiting while Penn+Columbia targeted Wall Street and Stanford+Cal targeted Sand Hill and YC. Consulting slowly started withering away, so recruiting is tough. That said, Harvard does very well in China (largely thanks to John Fairbanks and Roderick MacFarquhar in the 1970s-90s), but they aren't as driven as UPenn has been in trying to diversify their international presence.
- alephnerd 2y ago
  > high level positions Typo: Meant high level positions in the Tech industry. HBS tends to do pretty well in PE/HF but the overlap isn't significant with Harvard College.
robocat 2y ago
Paraphrased: it used to be easier for boomers to get into say the top 2%? I can only guess that the meaning of elite has changed. Aside: a comment with the word "boomer" in it is usually offensive in my experience. But doing worry, you'll get a different word applied to you when you reach the same age cohort. Disclosure: not a boomer. There are two types of people in the world: those that split the world into two groups, and those that don't.
- YeGoblynQueenne 2y ago
  And the third one that can't be placed in any category, let's not forget.
- AtlasBarfed 2y ago
  The boomer generation has done demonstrable environmental social and financial damage to the world. Why is truth offensive? I'm a leftist, and that attitude is a strong component of the last election result.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

anonymousDan 2y ago

FYI you really don't need teaching experience to get a good academic job. The number one criteria is excellent publication record.

shermantanktop 2y ago
That’s an extremely broad statement. Biology, physics, architecture and history are pretty different professional cultures.
- notahacker 2y ago
  And different academic jobs can be mostly research or mostly teaching
- oersted1234 2y ago
  Most UK universities place a lot of value on teaching experience. If you have a PhD degree from Cambridge or Oxford, a decent publication track record and significant teaching experience, you will typically get lectureship (assistant professor) offers straight after you finish your doctoral studies. Some teaching experience will be valued more than having a stellar publication record, especially if you have a good research plan. It makes sense because most lectureships involve at least 40% of teaching and supervision. Going back to the main topic of this post, using too many underpaid academics to teach creates some perverse incentives that are IMHO destroying Oxbridge. Many professors are no longer teaching. Teaching is a great filter. It makes sure they stay up-to-date, they are technically good and they take pride in their research field. Professors that are really good and passionate, i.e. Terry Tao-like personalities, are often getting displaced by ladder climbers. This is especially common in experimental fields and really disheartening.
  - YeGoblynQueenne 2y ago
    It depends on what kind of academic work you're looking for, right? If you're going for a teaching career, then yes, of course you need to have some teaching experience. If you're after a research career, e.g. a research fellowship like the ones from the Leverhulme Trust or the Royal Society of Engineering, then you really do need an astounding publication record and I don't reckon that having any teaching experience is going to help you with that. Not least because in academia, either you teach, or you do research. You can't do both. >> Teaching is a great filter. It makes sure they stay up-to-date, they are technically good and they take pride in their research field. If that's your experience, that must be something that depends on the field of research and we must be in different fields. In CS, teaching is indeed a good filter- in the sense that it separates the teachers from the researchers. I have the direct experience of my PI, who has not done a day of research after becoming a lecturer. Because there is no time. Teaching takes so much admin work that there's no time left for research. I mean any above-junior academic position takes too much admin work, but teaching really gets the cookie. My experience so far has been that senior academics who still take an active role in research find ways to avoid teaching like the plague. Although you can't really escape it. You'll at least mark some papers in your subject, whether you like it or not (and with TA-ing from PhDs or not).