Valuing teaching...and teacher effort expectations

Yesterday another faculty member took on the role and responsibilities of department chair.  This is quite exciting for a variety of reasons, but one of them that comes to mind is that I get to experience things anew.  "Training" a new department chair, even though my colleague and I report to them, provides an opportunity to explain to someone new what the operating rules of the university are, from HR and Procurement to new staff hiring.  It's also a great opportunity to really problematize current policies and ways of doing things at the university. Reading Audrey Watters' keynote from #DigPed also contributed (a lot) I think to this mental gear churning.

The thing that perturbed me these past few days has to do with teaching, and the increasing 'accountability' that instructors, teachers, and professors are expected to have in this new working environment.  The problem, however, as I see it is that no one is connecting the dots.  One of these HUGE dots in my mind is the amount of effort faculty are expected to exhert in any one given course.  The way that I could people's expected effort is by the amount of hours people are paid to do a specific task. The more difficult or complicated a task the more time you expect someone to spend on it.  It also means that individuals with higher qualifications are higher and paid better for their work.

At my university a lecturer's FTE status is determined by the amount of courses taught.  Each course counts for 25% FTE, therefore 4 courses per semester is considered to be full time employment.  That said, I don't think I really spent a lot of time problematizing what 1 course  25% FTE really means, but it was right there, in front of me, in an HR timesheet that we were explaining to our new department chair. One course, meaning 25% FTE means that you are paid for spending 10 hours per week on that one course.  This to me seemed rather low in terms instructor hours spent on a course. I was actually thinking back to this past summer, where I taught the Introduction to Instructional Design course for the first time, and I was spending something like 16 hours per week on the course between prep, keeping an eye on forums, being the devil's advocate, providing feedback for each student on both reflective writing and their semester project, and troubleshooting. And all this while running an asynchronous course (synchronous sessions would have added to the hours I spent on the course).

Now, even assuming that I am some sort of crazy online professor who likes to spend time in Blackboard and stretching the minds of his students, what if I were on-campus? What if there were no technology component?  Would 10 hours per week be enough?  I don't think so.

In a week's time 3 hours would be spent in class lecturing or conducting laboratory sessions.  That leaves 7 hours.  Hmmm...Well...If I take at least 1 hour to prepare for each hour I am in the class, that means I have another 3 hours of preparation (if I don't want to totally wing it).  So that leaves 4 hours. Out of those 4 hours I need to have  a mandatory 2 hours of office hours per week.  So that leaves me 2 hours in the end for grading and providing feedback.  If I have 20 students in my class that means that I have 6 minutes of time per student to grade and provide feedback.  Errr...are you kidding me?!

Am I the only person who finds this patently ridiculous?   Now, people would most likely spend more time than 10 hours per week, per course, like I did, but that basically means that I am lowering the per-hour pay since I put in more hours than what I am compensated for.

I knew that teaching is not an activity that is promoted often at the university (grants and research seem to be the most rewarded things - just anecdotally speaking), but breaking it down to hours per week and doing a task analysis really underscores, to me, how undervalued teaching is in certain quarters of academia.  I do have to say that my university seems to pay non-tenured faculty pretty well per course, as compared to other university which don't even pay half of this, but at the same time, when thinking about fringe benefits and what you need to do to get them, it's clear to me that something radical needs to happen in academia - beyond unionization.  I think unionization is good, because people can at least get some protections; however what we need is an attitudinal change.  It shouldn't be alright to say that faculty are paid to spend 10 hours per week on a course of 15, 20, 30 or even 40 students. Students shouldn't stand for this either.

Thoughts?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Latour: Third Source of Uncertainty - Objects have agency too!

Image
Continuing on my exploration of ANT, and asynchronous and indirect dialogue with Latour - this blog post will cover the third source of uncertainty, which according to Latour, is that Objects have agency too! As with the previous blog posts, I've pulled out quotes from the book that seemed interesting, or that I reacted to in some way, and I am responding to them here. no tie can be said to be durable and made of social stuff (p. 66) This quote seems to continue Latour's assertion that there is no such thing as "social" or "social stuff" and that "social", or the meaning of needs to be negotiated and better understood.  It also continues the thought that social can only be seen from the actions of its actors, the traces they leave behind, and that these bonds are not durable because they need continuous reinforcement. I guess Social is a perishable item. Left to its own devices, a power relationship that mobilizes nothing but social skil...
Read more

MOOC participation - open door policy and analytics

The other day I was reading ZML Didaktik on the topic of MOOC participants. In MOOCs, one of the big questions is why are people lurking and not participating? If more than 500 people join a MOOC, why are only 10% contributing with any amount of regularity?  On the same blog, in a previous blog post, I had commented (it was an open stream of thought really) that perhaps there should be an open enrollment period, and then if the system sees that certain participants are bellow a threshold of activity, the system may give them the option to self-identify as a lurker, or un-register from the class. This line of thought went along a view that compared to the traditional classroom; in a traditional classroom students register for the course, they can attend classes for a week and then decide whether or not they want to stay with the course or not. If they do stay with the course they know that there is a certain amount of "lurking" that they can get away with, but they do have ...
Read more

You've been punk'd! However, that was an educational experience

Image
It's now the end of Teaching Goes Massive: New Skills Required (aka #massiveteaching) on coursera. Well, almost, we still have a couple of days left. I guess that the lesson here is that we were (the "learners") were punk'd† by Paul-Olivier Dehaye of the Univerisity of Zurich. After that last blog post (and subsequent pickup of the post by George Siemens and others) Inside Higher Education and the Chronicle wanted to chat with me about this MOOC experience. I only had time for one of the two before things went to press, so my 15 minutes of fame went to IHE.  Both IHE and the C hronicle have written about the topic, and have received some information from Coursera on the incident.  Others have also written about it (see here , here and here ) It's surprising to me that the University, and Coursera, waited until after this thing was a big issue in order to respond in the class, and clue people into what was happening. On Wednesday (day 3 of Week 3/3 of the ...
Read more