This Is Who Is Teaching College
-
@stacksofplates said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@DustinB3403 said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@stacksofplates said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@DustinB3403 said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@Breffni-Potter said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@DustinB3403 said
No where else do you work for 1-5 years and have a life time position.
Politics?
Not even there, sure the population has a hard time changing people out (especially in the US) but in politics you have to rerun ever few years.
It's essentially reapplying for the job.
Depends. Federal Judges don't.
Federal Judges are appointed (as listed below) and only the Supreme Court Justices get life time positions. Which even there I think is insane.
Rubbed elbows with the right people, and BAM lifetime job even if the person who appointed you is no longer around.
It's kind of a good thing though, because they aren't swayed by elections. If they were elected, You could literally buy them out just like the others.
This is a fair point, but at the same time you could end up with some crackpot justice with some out there ideas of "fair"
-
@DustinB3403 said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@stacksofplates said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@DustinB3403 said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@Breffni-Potter said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@DustinB3403 said
No where else do you work for 1-5 years and have a life time position.
Politics?
Not even there, sure the population has a hard time changing people out (especially in the US) but in politics you have to rerun ever few years.
It's essentially reapplying for the job.
Depends. Federal Judges don't.
Federal Judges are appointed (as listed below) and only the Supreme Court Justices get life time positions. Which even there I think is insane.
Rubbed elbows with the right people, and BAM lifetime job even if the person who appointed you is no longer around.
I think all judges should be appointed or hired in a way that doesn't involve an election. Elections introduce to many opportunities for corruption.
-
@DustinB3403 said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@stacksofplates said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@DustinB3403 said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@stacksofplates said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@DustinB3403 said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@Breffni-Potter said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@DustinB3403 said
No where else do you work for 1-5 years and have a life time position.
Politics?
Not even there, sure the population has a hard time changing people out (especially in the US) but in politics you have to rerun ever few years.
It's essentially reapplying for the job.
Depends. Federal Judges don't.
Federal Judges are appointed (as listed below) and only the Supreme Court Justices get life time positions. Which even there I think is insane.
Rubbed elbows with the right people, and BAM lifetime job even if the person who appointed you is no longer around.
It's kind of a good thing though, because they aren't swayed by elections. If they were elected, You could literally buy them out just like the others.
This is a fair point, but at the same time you could end up with some crackpot justice with some out there ideas of "fair"
But that's why they are vetted, and there are multiple.
-
@stacksofplates said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@DustinB3403 said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@stacksofplates said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@DustinB3403 said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@stacksofplates said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@DustinB3403 said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@Breffni-Potter said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@DustinB3403 said
No where else do you work for 1-5 years and have a life time position.
Politics?
Not even there, sure the population has a hard time changing people out (especially in the US) but in politics you have to rerun ever few years.
It's essentially reapplying for the job.
Depends. Federal Judges don't.
Federal Judges are appointed (as listed below) and only the Supreme Court Justices get life time positions. Which even there I think is insane.
Rubbed elbows with the right people, and BAM lifetime job even if the person who appointed you is no longer around.
It's kind of a good thing though, because they aren't swayed by elections. If they were elected, You could literally buy them out just like the others.
This is a fair point, but at the same time you could end up with some crackpot justice with some out there ideas of "fair"
But that's why they are vetted, and there are multiple.
For the most part this... it hasn't worked perfectly in the past but it is still better then them being elected.
-
@stacksofplates said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@DustinB3403 said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@stacksofplates said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@DustinB3403 said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@stacksofplates said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@DustinB3403 said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@Breffni-Potter said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@DustinB3403 said
No where else do you work for 1-5 years and have a life time position.
Politics?
Not even there, sure the population has a hard time changing people out (especially in the US) but in politics you have to rerun ever few years.
It's essentially reapplying for the job.
Depends. Federal Judges don't.
Federal Judges are appointed (as listed below) and only the Supreme Court Justices get life time positions. Which even there I think is insane.
Rubbed elbows with the right people, and BAM lifetime job even if the person who appointed you is no longer around.
It's kind of a good thing though, because they aren't swayed by elections. If they were elected, You could literally buy them out just like the others.
This is a fair point, but at the same time you could end up with some crackpot justice with some out there ideas of "fair"
But that's why they are vetted, and there are multiple.
Because opinions don't change over time?
I understand the balances of having multiple justices, it works most of the time. But that insane justice is still there, always voting for insanity. Because they have a life time position.
Get my point?
-
@DustinB3403 said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@stacksofplates said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@DustinB3403 said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@stacksofplates said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@DustinB3403 said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@stacksofplates said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@DustinB3403 said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@Breffni-Potter said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@DustinB3403 said
No where else do you work for 1-5 years and have a life time position.
Politics?
Not even there, sure the population has a hard time changing people out (especially in the US) but in politics you have to rerun ever few years.
It's essentially reapplying for the job.
Depends. Federal Judges don't.
Federal Judges are appointed (as listed below) and only the Supreme Court Justices get life time positions. Which even there I think is insane.
Rubbed elbows with the right people, and BAM lifetime job even if the person who appointed you is no longer around.
It's kind of a good thing though, because they aren't swayed by elections. If they were elected, You could literally buy them out just like the others.
This is a fair point, but at the same time you could end up with some crackpot justice with some out there ideas of "fair"
But that's why they are vetted, and there are multiple.
Because opinions don't change over time?
I understand the balances of having multiple justices, it works most of the time. But that insane justice is still there, always voting for insanity. Because they have a life time position.
Get my point?
Of course, we saw this recently in our supreme court. Thankfully, for the most part, the saner justices were able to balance against that opinion.
-
@Breffni-Potter said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
So let me get this right.
They are sick of being taken advantage of....why don't they get other employment then?
I don't understand this concept that the world should change to suit me.
That's what I was wondering. The obvious answer is that they are unemployable. Well other than farm or manual labour. That was my point - the college is actually doing them a favour by employing them, it would seem, as their alternatives are worse, not better.
-
@DustinB3403 said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
They want to teach full time, and not have to do manual labor or whatever else when they aren't employed.
I see this has an issue on both sides.
What's the issue on the college side? Why would it pay more or give permanent jobs to people who aren't employable? What I really want to know is why any student finds it acceptable to be taught by people useless in the real world!
-
@DustinB3403 said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
To continue this from earlier, people who go into college expecting to become tenured teachers with full time positions making 50K or whatever a "real salary" for a teacher / professor is are just insane.
Teaching to me is like cooking the fries at any fast food chain. Someone needs to do it, and there is a massive amount of people willing to come and do it for cheap, who offer nothing in particular for the job. They've got a piece of paper that says they "know this course material".
The continued mindset of students who go to college to become teachers (for whatever reason) don't see it as this. They see it as "I want to teach to help educate the community". Which quickly turns to "This community doesn't give a damn about me, only them selves. . . why shouldn't I get more"
It's an extremely self centered job (a lot like politics) that starts with good intentions, and then quickly devolves.
These aren't teachers, this are college professors at the top ranked college that they graduated from.
-
@DustinB3403 said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@Breffni-Potter said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@DustinB3403 said
It's an extremely self centered job (a lot like politics) that starts with good intentions, and then quickly devolves.
All the more reason why we should celebrate the few who continue to be good over the long haul.
Oh I don't disagree, but at the same time the idea of "I need a tenured job after 1-5 years" is crap.
No where else do you work for 1-5 years and have a life time position.
Yup, entitlement is all I see. Nobody, anywhere, gets guaranteed jobs. These are people competing with burger flippers for jobs, have no market value, yet while because they feel entitled to job security that essentially no one, anywhere ever gets.
-
@stacksofplates said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@DustinB3403 said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@Breffni-Potter said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@DustinB3403 said
No where else do you work for 1-5 years and have a life time position.
Politics?
Not even there, sure the population has a hard time changing people out (especially in the US) but in politics you have to rerun ever few years.
It's essentially reapplying for the job.
Depends. Federal Judges don't.
That's not considered politics, but law. But true, there is that exception.
-
@scottalanmiller said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@DustinB3403 said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
They want to teach full time, and not have to do manual labor or whatever else when they aren't employed.
I see this has an issue on both sides.
What's the issue on the college side? Why would it pay more or give permanent jobs to people who aren't employable? What I really want to know is why any student finds it acceptable to be taught by people useless in the real world!
The college side has the issue of not being able to say "listen, you are unemployable besides for this part time work, there is manual labor, go do that instead."
Because of the political correctness that we all have to follow.
-
@stacksofplates said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@coliver said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@stacksofplates said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@DustinB3403 said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@Breffni-Potter said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@DustinB3403 said
No where else do you work for 1-5 years and have a life time position.
Politics?
Not even there, sure the population has a hard time changing people out (especially in the US) but in politics you have to rerun ever few years.
It's essentially reapplying for the job.
Depends. Federal Judges don't.
They are also appointed and not elected. Granted they have to go through a vetting process that can be, but often isn't, fairly vigorous.
Right. It's still sort of relatable since the college has to hire (similar to appoint) the professor.
Except no vetting and they go for cheap rather than qualified.
-
@stacksofplates said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@DustinB3403 said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@stacksofplates said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@DustinB3403 said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@stacksofplates said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@DustinB3403 said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@Breffni-Potter said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@DustinB3403 said
No where else do you work for 1-5 years and have a life time position.
Politics?
Not even there, sure the population has a hard time changing people out (especially in the US) but in politics you have to rerun ever few years.
It's essentially reapplying for the job.
Depends. Federal Judges don't.
Federal Judges are appointed (as listed below) and only the Supreme Court Justices get life time positions. Which even there I think is insane.
Rubbed elbows with the right people, and BAM lifetime job even if the person who appointed you is no longer around.
It's kind of a good thing though, because they aren't swayed by elections. If they were elected, You could literally buy them out just like the others.
This is a fair point, but at the same time you could end up with some crackpot justice with some out there ideas of "fair"
But that's why they are vetted, and there are multiple.
Senility is more the issue. Degradation over time.
-
@DustinB3403 said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@stacksofplates said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@DustinB3403 said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@stacksofplates said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@DustinB3403 said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@stacksofplates said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@DustinB3403 said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@Breffni-Potter said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@DustinB3403 said
No where else do you work for 1-5 years and have a life time position.
Politics?
Not even there, sure the population has a hard time changing people out (especially in the US) but in politics you have to rerun ever few years.
It's essentially reapplying for the job.
Depends. Federal Judges don't.
Federal Judges are appointed (as listed below) and only the Supreme Court Justices get life time positions. Which even there I think is insane.
Rubbed elbows with the right people, and BAM lifetime job even if the person who appointed you is no longer around.
It's kind of a good thing though, because they aren't swayed by elections. If they were elected, You could literally buy them out just like the others.
This is a fair point, but at the same time you could end up with some crackpot justice with some out there ideas of "fair"
But that's why they are vetted, and there are multiple.
Because opinions don't change over time?
I understand the balances of having multiple justices, it works most of the time. But that insane justice is still there, always voting for insanity. Because they have a life time position.
Get my point?
Judges aren't supposed to have opinions. Opinions changing over time is not the concern for judges. It is whether or not they are doing their jobs.
-
@DustinB3403 said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@scottalanmiller said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@DustinB3403 said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
They want to teach full time, and not have to do manual labor or whatever else when they aren't employed.
I see this has an issue on both sides.
What's the issue on the college side? Why would it pay more or give permanent jobs to people who aren't employable? What I really want to know is why any student finds it acceptable to be taught by people useless in the real world!
The college side has the issue of not being able to say "listen, you are unemployable besides for this part time work, there is manual labor, go do that instead."
Because of the political correctness that we all have to follow.
So you feel that colleges aren't allowed to talk to professors as adults because college professors aren't up to the level of maturity needed for teenage burger flipping jobs?
I can buy that
-
@scottalanmiller said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@DustinB3403 said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@scottalanmiller said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
@DustinB3403 said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
They want to teach full time, and not have to do manual labor or whatever else when they aren't employed.
I see this has an issue on both sides.
What's the issue on the college side? Why would it pay more or give permanent jobs to people who aren't employable? What I really want to know is why any student finds it acceptable to be taught by people useless in the real world!
The college side has the issue of not being able to say "listen, you are unemployable besides for this part time work, there is manual labor, go do that instead."
Because of the political correctness that we all have to follow.
So you feel that colleges aren't allowed to talk to professors as adults because college professors aren't up to the level of maturity needed for teenage burger flipping jobs?
I can buy that
Pretty much, because the same people that are top honors at these schools are of the same maturity level as a burger flipper. The only difference is the college graduate is in some serious debt while supposedly being highly educated.
-
I think there is a debt:entitlement ratio that has never been explored.
The more debt an individual has, the more entitled they feel to a good paying job or whatever else.
I would love to see if there was actually a study on this. . .
-
@DustinB3403 said in This Is Who Is Teaching College:
I think there is a debt:entitlement ratio that has never been explored.
The more debt an individual has, the more entitled they feel to a good paying job or whatever else.
I would love to see if there was actually a study on this. . .
That's a very interesting thought. I, too, would love to see that study done. And compare people with the same degrees, from the same schools, with no debt. Does the debt create entitlement even though non-debt represents the better candidate (better decision making and financial skills.)
-
Just considering the thought for a bit.
Positions that are highly respected positions such as doctors or professors cost a ton of time and money to earn, causing a ton of debt.
And in these same positions, we have people who are literally charging way more money for a basic service. Because they need to pay off their personal debt.
Which if it didn't cost so much money to become a doctor (not talking about reducing education efficiency or studies, just financial cost) than doctors wouldn't be forced to charge so much for the same basic services (which ultimately result in insurance payments) because the customer simply couldn't afford to pay for the service at those inflated rates.
