Tuesday, July 8, 2014

A quick one from Wombat

Dear Sir,

    Please worry less what accreditors think about letting someone with a master's degree teach, and more about what they think about letting someone with a PhD who is on his 3rd-former-student-wife do so.



  1. Amen. If more academic positions are going to be teaching-intensive (and that seems likely), among the numerous things we're going to need to rethink is whether the Ph.D. is really a necessary or even useful qualification (at least as long as people earn the Ph.D. working with professors who insist on using "my work" to refer solely to their research -- and, yes, on occasion, as bait for potential partners. I do realize that these things sometimes happen spontaneously, and there are ways to handle that ethically, but 3 in a row is a pattern hard to explain by anything other than extreme creepiness).

  2. When I was an engineering undergrad 40 years ago, many of my profs didn't have doctorates. Their expertise, gained through working in industry, was considered sufficient qualification to teach. Their knowledge and experience was valued more highly than whether that person had a certain graduate degree.

    A few years ago, the head of the department where I did my Ph. D. purged all those who didn't have one. Gone were all those engineers whose industrial background who used to teach courses to undergrads. As well, gone were the courses they taught because those engineers were usually the only ones qualified to teach them. Often it was those same courses that employers in industry were looking for in student transcripts when evaluating applicant qualifications.

    Smart, huh?

  3. I'd be glad to lend you my STAPLE GUN (Twitch! Twitch!), Wombat, but you'll need to clean the blood off yourself.