4 ms·

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).
    - oersted1234 2y ago
      IMHO, this also applies if you want a research career. At the end of the day, you eventually need a permanent position. Most professors at top UK universities got established in Academia by doing a PhD and getting a lectureship straight after their PhD or sometimes a postdoc. Lectureships demand significant research and teaching and supervision experience. A high-end fellowship like the ones you mention is also fine if you want to improve your publication track record. In some fields getting a lectureship after your PhD or postdoc might be extremely difficult as the market is too crowded.
      - YeGoblynQueenne 2y ago
        >> At the end of the day, you eventually need a permanent position Yes, unfortunately. I'm not saying it's easy, but from what I can tell it's possible: you can have your entire academic career as a long string of fellowships. >> Lectureships demand significant research and teaching and supervision experience. Yes, but we know that in practice what that means is that the professor leaves the research work to their PhDs and post-docs, and then puts their name on it at the end. Sometimes that's because the professor has run out of good ideas, sometimes it's because they don't really care, most of the time it's because their lectureship duties leave them without enough time to do it. This was not my experience during my PhD, btw, my supervisor (who is retiring next month, three years after supervising my PhD) was an active participant in my research and he had his own totally hands-on line of research that he pursued separately ... and whenever I told people about that they were full of surprise. "Don't tell me that he is still coding?". That sort of thing. People were surprised because that just doesn't happen. >> In some fields getting a lectureship after your PhD or postdoc might be extremely difficult as the market is too crowded. I've had an offer that I turned down because it was in China, and a discussion about another in the UK that I didn't even consider. Teaching is the death of a research career, that's what I've seen and I'm not going anywhere near it. What that means I don't know. It's possible that my research career is already over anyway- next week is the last of my post-doc and I don't have anything lined up after it :/
    - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      > depends on what kind of academic work you're looking for, right? It depends on where you are. British universities value teaching more than American ones, which are more focussed on research.
smogcutter 2y ago
I’d presume that as a postdoc they have a pretty good handle on the academic job market and don’t need a one sentence FYI about how it’s important to publish.
- anonymousDan 2y ago
  Clearly not if they think they can't get an academic job without substantial teaching experience.
jltsiren 2y ago
Excellent publication record is the baseline. Every serious candidate has it. But if you are not a superstar, research merits alone are not enough. There are enough excellent candidates that universities often use checklists to filter the number of applications to a more manageable level. Why bother considering excellent researchers without teaching experience, when there is no shortage of candidates with similar research merits and some experience?

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).
  - oersted1234 2y ago
    IMHO, this also applies if you want a research career. At the end of the day, you eventually need a permanent position. Most professors at top UK universities got established in Academia by doing a PhD and getting a lectureship straight after their PhD or sometimes a postdoc. Lectureships demand significant research and teaching and supervision experience. A high-end fellowship like the ones you mention is also fine if you want to improve your publication track record. In some fields getting a lectureship after your PhD or postdoc might be extremely difficult as the market is too crowded.
    - YeGoblynQueenne 2y ago
      >> At the end of the day, you eventually need a permanent position Yes, unfortunately. I'm not saying it's easy, but from what I can tell it's possible: you can have your entire academic career as a long string of fellowships. >> Lectureships demand significant research and teaching and supervision experience. Yes, but we know that in practice what that means is that the professor leaves the research work to their PhDs and post-docs, and then puts their name on it at the end. Sometimes that's because the professor has run out of good ideas, sometimes it's because they don't really care, most of the time it's because their lectureship duties leave them without enough time to do it. This was not my experience during my PhD, btw, my supervisor (who is retiring next month, three years after supervising my PhD) was an active participant in my research and he had his own totally hands-on line of research that he pursued separately ... and whenever I told people about that they were full of surprise. "Don't tell me that he is still coding?". That sort of thing. People were surprised because that just doesn't happen. >> In some fields getting a lectureship after your PhD or postdoc might be extremely difficult as the market is too crowded. I've had an offer that I turned down because it was in China, and a discussion about another in the UK that I didn't even consider. Teaching is the death of a research career, that's what I've seen and I'm not going anywhere near it. What that means I don't know. It's possible that my research career is already over anyway- next week is the last of my post-doc and I don't have anything lined up after it :/
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > depends on what kind of academic work you're looking for, right? It depends on where you are. British universities value teaching more than American ones, which are more focussed on research.

smogcutter 2y ago

I’d presume that as a postdoc they have a pretty good handle on the academic job market and don’t need a one sentence FYI about how it’s important to publish.

anonymousDan 2y ago
Clearly not if they think they can't get an academic job without substantial teaching experience.

jltsiren 2y ago

Excellent publication record is the baseline. Every serious candidate has it. But if you are not a superstar, research merits alone are not enough. There are enough excellent candidates that universities often use checklists to filter the number of applications to a more manageable level. Why bother considering excellent researchers without teaching experience, when there is no shortage of candidates with similar research merits and some experience?