PHd - At Night

Cavehill Red

Din Taylor wrote: »

I would agree with you to an extent. In some jobs you need to discriminate for example a priest needs to be a Catholic. Not sure your examples are very good. The Miami Dolphins had a successful kicking coach who was in a wheelchair all of his life and wasn't Beethoven deaf? Certainly being dyslexic has no bearings at all on a lecturing career with sufficient report.

No bearings at all? What twaddle. Beethoven wasn't a sound engineer, by the way, and Blevins wasn't a PE teacher. He was also sacked by the Dolphins and now works as an inspirational speaker, I believe.

Din Taylor wrote: »

Glad that dscriminating against people with a disability with regards is illegal in te UK. I hope it is the same back home.

It is here too. But that still doesn't mean that a basic inability to spell is not a fundamental impediment to becoming an educator.

Din Taylor wrote: »

You clearly have no idea of the controls used in lecturing the course. Course notes are usually passed down and any changes are checked by at least one colleague. Examinations will be checked by a colleague before being passed onto an external examiner.

And notes on a blackboard, or a whiteboard? Or new courses designed by a new lecturer, requiring course notes from scratch? And exams are only cursorily examined by a second reader, and not all are passed on to an extern, especially not at undergrad level.

Din Taylor wrote: »

You're either a troll or are completely ignorant of the facts.

Or thirdly, I have a doctorate myself, and my other half works as a lecturer, and I would want my child to be educated by people who are fully proficient in the English language.

southsiderosie

Cavehill Red wrote: »

That's much more concerning. Although it might be less important if this professor is primarily engaged in research rather than teaching students.
It brings me back to my original point, which is that the ability to spell basic words correctly and consistently ought to be a fundamental requirement to educate.
In the customer-driven environment that universities have become, students who are spending time, effort and significant money deserve to get in return the best education possible.
While some laxity may be possible where exceptional non-native speakers are involved in lecturing, I think the very least that students deserve is to have lecturers who are utterly fluent and capable in the English language, and that goes for all disciplines.
This article highlights the contrast between Australia, where standards of grammar and spelling have lapsed among educators, and Singapore, where they have not. It's interesting to note that Australia is now rolling back towards a much more rigorous process of ensuring that teachers at secondary and tertiary level are fastidious in their language.
It's also worth noting that Singapore, which our government trumpets as the model for the knowledge economy we hope to emulate, is insistent on both educators and students being exact in their use of language. It's no surprise to find that Singapore students then go on to outperform native students when studying in places like Britain.

Sorry, I still think you are being ridiculous. Certainly people should be able to speak in a grammatically correct way, and their academic writing should be sound, but judging people on email (or a message board) is just petty.

My advisor regularly sends emails that are all in lower case with many spelling errors (which have only gotten worse since he got an iPhone). He also has a PhD from Harvard, has won a MacArthur Genius Grant, and has multiple tenured appointments. His academic writing style is fluid and elegant, and his work is heavily cited across multiple fields. Frankly if there is something that people need to be concerned about with writing and academics, it should be the fact that so many academics write books and articles that are grammatically correct but otherwise utterly incomprehensible.

OP, if you want to go into academia, be prepared to deal with inane nitpicking and petty bickering over irrelevant topics. (hm, maybe that's why I'm on boards so much!)

Rosita

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Anecdotal evidence is no evidence.

Lighten up will you for God's sake. It's not the central criminal court and it's not like I claimed she walked on the moon. Fortunately I won't lose sleep if I don't reach the dizzying heights of your burden of proof. :rolleyes:

Rosita

southsiderosie wrote: »

S

Frankly if there is something that people need to be concerned about with writing and academics, it should be the fact that so many academics write books and articles that are grammatically correct but otherwise utterly incomprehensible.

Well put - and they are usually massively over-written with countless redundant words.

Cavehill Red

We can all make up 'friends' who despite being paraplegic, blind and suffering brain lesions went on to double firsts at Cambridge, doctorates at Harvard and conquered Everest without oxygen.
But it adds nothing to the discussion. This really isn't a difficult point and I'm hard pushed to comprehend people's vehemence in defending sub-standard educators:
Lecturers who are error-free in the English language, all things being equal, are better educators than those whose capacity in the language is hampered by poor spelling and grammar.
This has been demonstrated in Singapore and now in Australia too. Those who think that expecting such basic capabilities in a third-level educator is somehow being 'petty' or 'nitpicking' are simply condoning shoddy educational standards and accepting the ever-slipping quality of third-level education in Ireland.

Cavehill Red

Rosita wrote: »

Well put - and they are usually massively over-written with countless redundant words.

Irony?
While it's true many academic texts are impenetrable to the lay reader, the good ones are not.
The pressure to publish at all costs, not to mention the nature of the academic publishing sector (they'll run anything so long as someone subsidises it), does lead to relatively poor research appearing in print all too often.

Red Alert

Guys can we stay on topic - take any teaching and lecturing ability discussion over to the Teaching and Lecturing forum.

Rosita

Cavehill Red wrote: »

We can all make up 'friends' who despite being paraplegic, blind and suffering brain lesions went on to double firsts at Cambridge, doctorates at Harvard and conquered Everest without oxygen.
But it adds nothing to the discussion.

And yarns about having doctorates and other halves who are allegedly lecturers adds exactly what to the discussion?

Cavehill Red

It was a factual response to an unfounded accusation of trolling and ignorance.

Rosita

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Irony?
While it's true many academic texts are impenetrable to the lay reader, the good ones are not.

Irony?

If you are under the illusion that 'countless' and 'redundant' mean the same thing then you are sadly lacking in your own knowledge of the English language.

Countless = Too numerous to count.

Redundant = Unnecessary repetition in expressing ideas.

I take it this anecdotal doctorate of yours is not in English.

Rosita

Cavehill Red wrote: »

It was a factual response to an unfounded accusation of trolling and ignorance.

It was not a factual response. It was an anecdotal reponse. You adduced no evidence whatsoever to back up the claim.

You can't have one burden of proof for others and a different one for yourself.

Cavehill Red

Rosita wrote: »

Irony?

If you are under the illusion that 'countless' and 'redundant' mean the same thing then you are sadly lacking in your own knowledge of the English language.

Countless = Too numerous to count.

Redundant = Unnecessary repetition in expressing ideas.

I take it this anecdotal doctorate of yours is not in English.

You take it wrongly, twice over.
I was suggesting that having stated that such books were 'massively overwritten', it was perhaps unnecessary to add the phrase 'countless redundant words'. One might even consider that phrase itself to consist of redundant words, which would be ironic in the context.
And my doctorate is in English Literature.
/off-topic

Rosita

Cavehill Red wrote: »

You take it wrongly, twice over.
I was suggesting that having stated that such books were 'massively overwritten', it was perhaps unnecessary to add the phrase 'countless redundant words'. One might even consider that phrase itself to consist of redundant words, which would be ironic in the context.
And my doctorate is in English Literature.
/off-topic

Perhaps unnecessary.............but then again perhaps not. Hardly a mortal offence against the philosophy of the plain English campaign. More a piece of silly point-scoring on your part I would say.

Incidentally, I don't believe a word about this claimed doctorate.

Cavehill Red

We're well off-topic, so I've responded to you by PM.

Din Taylor

Cavehill let's keep this on topic but your views on dyslexia are at best totally tasteless and at worst illegal to put into practice. They're certainly ill-informed (you back up you claims with no scientific evidence). My comments about lecturing controls come from my own experince lecturing for a couple of years in the UK. Trust me, the lecturer - student relationship is moving towards service provider - customer relationship, in the UK at least. Think I'll leave it at that.:)

PS I've noticed some typos in my earlier posts:o Hope that didn't cause you too much distress. Sorry but I really can't be bothered checking my forum posts before posting them.;)

Now to answer the OP:

jennypeny wrote: »

Hi All,

I have never thought about doing a PHd but I am interested in getting into lecturing and have been told that In order to stand a chance at getting a position I will need to hold one.

However I am not sure of a few things;

1- The difference between a thought / research PHd and which one would be better.
2- What I should actualy do the PHd in. I have a degree in Business and am ACCA qualified so would I have to do the PHd in finance or Business? Or do I choose to do it in Edication?
3- Is it possible to do a part time / Night PHd. I am working full time and would not be in a financial position to leave my job unless I had secured another one.

If anyone might point me in the direction I need or help with I would greatly appreciate it.

Thanks:)

1. A PhD is by research only. It will be awarded after an oral examination, called a viva voce, based on a written thesis about your research. As some other posters mentioned you can earn other types of doctorates that have taught elements. Futhermore if you decide to do a PhD in North America you'll need to do some written and oral exams, called Quals, after about two years before you can go to the research part of the PhD.
2. You'll need to find what you're good at yourself. You could even contact various potential supervisors to give you a brief synopsis of your research. When I was applying for my PhD my future advisor was very helpful and this helped me make my decision.
3. Yes. Specifically, a PhD is a PhD. A good "rule of thumb" is that doing it part-time would take twice as long as doing it full-time. Some universities or research councils may also offer funding to do the PhD. This will typically cover all fees, a small stipend and a small fund in order to attend various coferences.

Good luck with your endeavours.:)

Cavehill Red

Din Taylor wrote: »

Cavehill let's keep this on topic but your views on dyslexia are at best totally tasteless and at worst illegal to put into practice. They're certainly ill-informed (you back up you claims with no scientific evidence). My comments about lecturing controls come from my own experince lecturing for a couple of years in the UK. Trust me, the lecturer - student relationship is moving towards service provider - customer relationship, in the UK at least. Think I'll leave it at that.:)

I didn't offer views on dyslexia. It was a McGuffin brought into discussion by another poster. I offered views on the suitability of someone lacking basic spelling or grammar skills to be a third-level educator.
I offered the evidence from both Australia and Singapore in support of that, though it ought to be self-evident.
Re: lecturing controls, it wouldn't surprise me that standards in Ireland are lacking compared even to those in Britain, if indeed those standards you described are rigorously applied in all circumstances at undergrad level, which I doubt.
I was the first to raise the issue of student as customer. This WILL have a major effect on tertiary education going forward, and that effect will include a raising of the bar when it comes to teaching standards, spelling included.
The Singapore model is the one both Britain and Ireland have overtly stated they wish to emulate.

gaeilgebeo

Rosita wrote: »

Irony?

If you are under the illusion that 'countless' and 'redundant' mean the same thing then you are sadly lacking in your own knowledge of the English language.

Countless = Too numerous to count.

Redundant = Unnecessary repetition in expressing ideas.

I take it this anecdotal doctorate of yours is not in English.

#

Rosita has her trusted dictionary out again.:D
Oh I'd say they'll just love to see you coming into any staffroom.

jennypeny

Well thanks to everyone who offered me some useful advice although slightly overshadowed by the 3 pages of nonsense that followed.

I must take note in future that when I am typing on an informal message board I should ensure my punctuation and typing are perfect for fear of another blast at my mental capabilities.

livinginkorea

jennypeny wrote: »

Well thanks to everyone who offered me some useful advice although slightly overshadowed by the 3 pages of nonsense that followed.

.

+1

I was very interested in this thread but now very disappointed after reading it.

As a TESOL lecturer in Korea, I do warn teachers about their spelling in marked teaching practices, assignment papers and lesson plans but never on emails, message boards or classroom activities. I also mark MA module papers for an English university and was told not to penalize students for spelling mistakes unless there is a breakdown in communication, i.e. the sentence structure is incomprehensible.

On messages boards, who cares? Is anyone taking off points for errors