dagblog - Comments for "Dedicated Teachers Hurting American Education"

One thing that has not been

SF — Sat, 23 Apr 2011 08:09:33 +0000

In reply to Dedicated Teachers Hurting American Education

One thing that has not been mentioned here is the escalating cost of research. Besides infrastructure and equipment, particularly for the sciences, allocation of faculty time has also shifted. Increasing the proportion to research means less teaching by tenured/tenure-track faculty. My own flagship--in a poor state-- used to have a 4/4 load in the 70s but now has 2/2 in the humanities and 1/1 in the sciences. And as for infrastructure and overhead like staff support, I just learnt that despite the complicated calculations of indirect costs, universities aren't able to recover it all from the federal or state governments. Apparently of our 50% indirect cost only 20% of that is recoverable from the feds while it is 0% from the state. Apparently that's a bigger cost problem than healthcare, which we know to be bad. Ironically, computing the indirect cost rate, which varies from institution to institution, itself costs money. But there's a research arms race and nobody can afford not to keep up with the Joneses.

Thanks for the comment,

Doctor Cleveland — Fri, 22 Apr 2011 20:46:22 +0000

In reply to About funding:The original

Thanks for the comment, anonymous. That's the story of American education today; I wish your school's situation were not typical.

I'd also point out that cutting funding to 1999 levels is a huge cut from the 1999 funding level, because it doesn't account for twelve years of inflation. It's disgraceful.

About funding:The original

Anonymous — Fri, 22 Apr 2011 19:38:00 +0000

In reply to Dedicated Teachers Hurting American Education

About funding:

The original idea of community colleges in our state was that they would funded 1/3 by tuition, 1/3 by the state, and 1/3 by the county. Our college is now funded just under 15% by the county (having dropped from 25%, 10 years ago) and state funding has been cut to 1999 levels. Tuition has risen only modestly and in fact was steady for four years. How does it keep going? Adjunct faculty now outnumber full time faculty by nearly 2 to 1 and the number of sections taught by adjuncts has risen from 25% to nearly 40%. That figure is low compared to some of our peer institutions. We now educate college students for about $1000 less per student than the average local high school.

Long ago, I began my teaching

tmccarthy0 — Fri, 22 Apr 2011 14:39:20 +0000

In reply to Dedicated Teachers Hurting American Education

Long ago, I began my teaching career as an adjunct. I do love teaching, I always have loved teaching and it seemed to be a great way to teach my subject without the rigid requirements of publish or perish. But while teaching I also held down a regular job as a DataAnalyst/Designer/Admin. When you wrote about the rigors of teaching introductory level classes, it brought back all those memories of long hours preparing for those introductory classes, and they were long hours. One of the great problems with being an adjunct is never getting paid for those off hours of preparation, we were paid for in class teaching hours. After 7 years of teaching as an adjunct, (100 - 600 level classes) I quit, I found I could no longer give my students everything they needed, by holding down a regular full time job and several teaching jobs on the side. It gave the state and out, as they never had to offer me benefits of any kind and I wondered myself if it was killing the profession of teaching college. I'd worked hard as a graduate student myself, hoping that would be enough to secure a position at a college or a university. I didn't want all that education to go to waste. I wondered if I quit would the school(s) hire full time Professors? At best when I was teaching I would make an extra 15,000.00 a year. It isn't much money and on the outside I made much more than that and wasn't required to take work home. I don't know what happened with those positions, I suppose there were other adjuncts there to step up and take my place and so things didn't change. The bottom line was I got burned out fast, maintaining a regular job and teaching. I don't think it was particularly good for any of my students. And as we continue to strip more money away from higher education, I fear more and more classes will continue to be taught by adjuncts. Will it make higher education better... no like you I think not, I think it is helping to destroy higher ed. Everything you've written I've experienced first hand.

That's a key point about

Fri, 22 Apr 2011 14:27:45 +0000

In reply to I'm going to skip the law

That's a key point about higher ed that needs to be said again and again. So I am just leaving this comment for emphasis. Shifting the cost of public education to students is a key factor in the current trend. Snazzy new buildings and facilities as ways of attracting more students are important, too, and so is the balloning admin budget. But these are hard to deal with through political means. These are now the production costs of a commodity.

State budgets, on the other hand ...

Thanks. The coffee bar is run

Donal — Fri, 22 Apr 2011 10:34:54 +0000

In reply to Maybe that is the problem

Thanks. The coffee bar is run by an outside vendor, so they need security for their stuff.

Res ipsa loquitur or ipse

Flavius — Fri, 22 Apr 2011 10:07:00 +0000

In reply to Okay, as far as me, always

Res ipsa loquitur or ipse dixit

When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'

I'm going to skip the law

Doctor Cleveland — Fri, 22 Apr 2011 03:10:29 +0000

In reply to Hard to concentrate on any

I'm going to skip the law school points, because I don't know the history of law school tuitions and financial support.

I'm also going to skip the textbook-publisher part.

But the other part, about tuition at public schools, is the other important story about American higher education, and the press ignores it entirely.

In the post-war period, states paid for state colleges and universities. Now they don't.

I don't mean that states pay a little less than they used to. I mean they're not the primary funder of their state schools anymore. The University of Michigan only gets 10% of its budget from the State of Michigan.

The result is that the cost of public education has been shifted onto the students, and the quality of that education has suffered as its budgets shrink. You used to be able to get a great education cheaply. Now you can get an underfunded education at a moderate discount.

That's the story. That's the main story. Every other factor involving cost and price is trivial in comparison to this.

Here's a recent example from the University of Georgia, a flagship school.

Maybe that is the problem

A Guy Called LULU — Fri, 22 Apr 2011 02:57:13 +0000

In reply to That's the coffee bar. They

Maybe that is the problem with education today. After hours is when coffee is really needed. I meant to add that the place does look good.

Okay, as far as me, always

Richard Day — Fri, 22 Apr 2011 02:27:28 +0000

In reply to Useful , as indeed was Dr.

Okay, as far as me, always between a 3.5 and a 3.9 by contract.

I have not signed an actual contract in a decade...but there are implied contracts.

I mean it is implied that I get between a 3.5 and a 3.9.

Res ipsa loquitur or ipse dixit

the end