Now Ye're Talking - To A University Lecturer

GLaDOS

I'm A University Lecturer, AMA wrote: »

You are employed based on the quality and quantity and breadth of your research expertise, and only secondarily on the quality of your teaching.

Do you think this is the correct way of doing things? I'm a PhD student myself (In Science) and I reckon you can have fantastic researchers, but that doesn't mean they make great educators.

On that note, is there targets, in terms of grades or otherwise, that your classes are expected meet?

Finding this really interesting, hence all the questions :pac:

challengemaster

I'm A University Lecturer, AMA wrote: »

I've never seen the infographic, and I'm not sure I fully understand what it's measuring.

Apologies - It's relating to the careers of PhD graduates from Science. Basically just a visual representation that a tiny proportion of PhD graduates within Science ever stay in academia, and only 0.45% ever go on to achieve professorship.

A lot of both. Loads and loads and loads of both. I never got the IRC as a grad student, but I got an IRC postdoctoral fellowship. I forget the numbers, but it was a tiny percentage of applicants got the fellowship, less than 50 nationwide across ALL disciplines, including STEM. Which is pathetic for a "smart economy" but whatever.

Did you find other funding or end up doing a different PhD which was already funded?

Relating to the latter - Do you think prospective PhD students are often required to forgo the "ideal" PhD due to inadequate funding opportunities?

Do you agree with the tendency of scholarships/fellowships to be awarded to the most "book smart" candidates (i.e. primarily 1.1 graduates)?

What do you think the likes of IRC / funding bodies should do to improve the situation in Ireland?

thelad95 wrote: »

what do you think of the practise of lecturers putting their class slideshows up?

In contrast - what do you think about lecturers who outright refuse to get with the times and use blackboard/moodle, and supply lecture materials?

ScienceNerd wrote: »

Do you think this is the correct way of doing things? I'm a PhD student myself (In Science) and I reckon you can have fantastic researchers, but that doesn't mean they make great educators.

Agreed - I've come across some of these people during my undergrad, clearly employed for research capabilities as they couldn't teach to save their lives.

How much time do you get to allocate to your research? And do you like or dislike the fact that your academic life is never something that can be left at the door once 5pm comes around?

scudzilla

What's your favourite type of cheese?

evolving_doors

Do you ever listen to music and read at the same time?

Gandalph

What is the general consensus among lecturers about students keeping in contact after their 3rd level education, in relation to bugging you about specific topics or matters along your area of expertise...bothersome or harmless? Whether it be guidance, career wise, or just inquisition into related topics that you (lecturers) taught to us (students) and that we share a passion for.

fred funk }{

Did you have pancakes Yesterday and if you did what did you have on them?

I'm A University Lecturer, AMA

Do you think that grade inflation is a serious issue in your subject area at undergraduate level?

To some extent, yes, but probably not to the extent that I used to believe when I started. Younger people, especially new tutors, always seem to mark much harder. Maybe we soften with age. Although actually I got into trouble in the past for not having enough A grades. To what extent that is because the students weren't good enough or I was too tough is debatable, but I do feel that there is a problem with the grading system. One part of university rankings is the number of 1st class honours given out. But the university grades its own people, so obviously there is a simple solution: grade easier. So the universities are asking departments the wrong question. They ask "can you get more A grades?" instead of "what can we do to get more students to A grade level?" (But I should say, they are asking that question too. Academics really are interested in improving their students, we do care and do always want to find ways of being better)

Have you ever been under pressure to pass or award a higher grade to a student who you felt didn't deserve it?

In a sense, yes. English is a subject in which grading is a source of constant concern, and on core modules the whole teaching team will meet up when exams come in, and grade a few anonymous papers together, debating what we would have given. We then begin correcting and submit about five samples to the coordinator and he/she will give you feedback. The whole thing is about ensuring a common grading standard as far as possible. So you might be told a student you graded a C might be worth a B-. Or vice versa. There is scope to argue your case. But the main pressure to pass someone who got a fail comes from students themselves who turn on the tears in your office.

At coordinator level it's not so much about individual students, it's about trends. After grading is finished all the coordinators are brought into a powerpoint presentation where you are shown graphs of all the grades in each core module, and queried about why your fail rate is what it is, or if the distribution of grades is too far off standard, or if you have a crazy number of A grades (usually for having too few).

How do you think that the current crop of undergrads compare academically to those back in your day?

Pretty much the same IMO. I used to think they were getting worse, but I think everyone feels that way ("the kids these days..."), and that it's getting easier. But I recently found some of my old undergrad essays which in my memory were fantastic. I would say they were very generously marked in retrospect, especially in first year.

I'm A University Lecturer, AMA

NotCominBack wrote: »

Is English really a subject and should it really be taught in university, given that we all speak English anyways?

Yes, and yes.

I'm A University Lecturer, AMA

Grand_Rajnah wrote: »

Thanks for this, it's really interesting.

In your opinion, would students be better off in a university setting with 400 odd students in a lecture, or somewhere like DIT which would only have ~50 in a lecture.

Would the huge numbers be compensated for by the fact that they have a more qualified/experienced (I'm not sure they'd be the right words, but I'm sure you get what I mean) lecturer, or would it something else?

I think that the size of the large lectures probably doesn't make a huge difference because a lecture is a lecture regardless, it isn't normally a two-way discussion (although now you mention it if I am giving a smaller lecture I will often open it up to discussion, which I only seldom do in a large theatre). The real problem is when the tutorials get too big. I've had tutorials with well over 20 students and it's impossible to involve everyone in the discussion at that stage. Students who are shy and want to be asked rather than volunteering a response will be overlooked, and ones who want to hide and ride out the class without doing anything, will be able to do so.

I know what you mean about the quality of the faculty. I think the quality of the lecturers in my own discipline is relatively uniform across the departments in Ireland. Some colleges have a better atmosphere as regards research and collaboration, and overall morale right now than others, and I guess the teaching situation has to reflect that to some extent. But aside from some snobbery about some of the bigger departments, I don't really think the quality of teaching is necessarily all that much better. Also the really big names, which would traditionally have gravitated towards UCD and Trinity, are nowadays pretty well spread out, for all sorts of reasons. In Irish studies, for example, the big issue now is probably losing those big names to American universities, rather than to the big Irish ones (pay is uniform across the colleges for one thing so they can only lure someone away from elsewhere by offering a promotion that the other college is currently unable to do). My inclination, if I was really serious about one subject, would be to pick a place where there are smaller classes and more attention paid to individual students and you're more likely to get to know the lecturers. I've worked in small, medium and large departments in Ireland, and that would be my opinion.

I'm A University Lecturer, AMA

I'm not sure how much use, if any you make of moodle but what is your opinion of it? While it can be an excellent method for communication between the class and lecturers without e-mail inboxes being spammed with stupid questions, what do you think of the practise of lecturers putting their class slideshows up? Does this not somewhat take away from the point of attending lectures?

I like Moodle (it's actually better than Blackboard, which is a paid-for system that some colleges use). When I was an undergrad this stuff didn't exist and it was much more cumbersome to acquire readings lists, get updates on changes or deadlines and what have you, and especially to get readings. That was also related to the lack of online resources a decade ago, like JSTOR, but nowadays we can give out PDFs of important articles at zero expense, and also students don't have to try and find articles in journals on shelves in the library too often, which was ridiculous in my day (there being only one copy of the journal and hundreds of students).

I still get spammed with oceans of questions to my email, but I'm starting to follow the rule that I won't reply to any question that can be answered with reference to the course schedule or other things on Moodle. The big problem was that when Moodle first came along, some departments thought they could get away with using it to replace tutorials and face to face interactions. That proved disastrous and luckily they are retreating from those kinds of approaches.

The lecture slides issue is related to that. On the one hand it can be useful because it means students shouldn't in theory be just scribbling down the slides instead of listening. In practice many students think that it gives them carte blanche to switch off in lectures, and they get surprisingly narky about any delay in the slides going up. Personally I write the slides fairly last minute and use them mainly as prompts for myself for the lecture, so I think their usefulness is overrated for anyone studying a course I'm teaching, but try explaining that to the students...to sound like an old codger again, "back in my day..." we looked at transparencies in class, not powerpoint, and if you missed something on the (often hand-written!) slides you wouldn't ever see it again. It wasn't the end of the world.

I presume the system for checking plagiarism that you've mentioned is Turnitin or something similar. While this is an excellent software for checking for plagiarism, would you agree that to an extent, there is a presumption of guilt on the students part? For every student thats trying to pull a fast one, there will be ten students who are trying to get an honest grade so is it fair that every students work is scrutinized? Most of my lecturers want everyone's work submitted through Turnitin.

Turnitin, or SafeAssign. I don't think there's a presumption of guilt. If you did it the other way round it would be worse, because if you then suspected someone, and contacted them to submit electronically, it would sound like an accusation. One which might prove wrong. There's also the fact that often it detects plagiarism that is clearly deliberate but that we probably would never have picked up on without the software. We have to scrutinise everyone so that the honest students will get a fair crack of the whip, IMO. If a cheater gets a B grade because we didn't check everyone, that screws over an honest student who got a C, because it devalues everyone's grades. I know what you mean about the feeling that you aren't trusted, but the amount of plagiarism students were getting away before electronic submission was compulsory (including plagiarising other students, which the software picks up on), must have been astronomical.

For us, submitting electronically is compulsory, departmental policy, so the lecturer has no discretion. There are other reasons for electronic submission, such as ensuring that if the hard copy goes missing (as will happen in a huge department sometimes), we know that the student did submit the essay on time, and we have a copy of it.

I'm A University Lecturer, AMA

ScienceNerd wrote: »

Do you think this is the correct way of doing things? I'm a PhD student myself (In Science) and I reckon you can have fantastic researchers, but that doesn't mean they make great educators.

On that note, is there targets, in terms of grades or otherwise, that your classes are expected meet?

Finding this really interesting, hence all the questions :pac:

To some extent the move for researchers rather than teachers is driven by sector-wide policies of wanting to become research institutions. Buzz words like "research-led teaching" pressurise the institutions, and there is more glamour (eh...probably not the right word...) attached to great researchers, whereas great teachers can often not really have much reputation beyond their classrooms. In terms of attracting grad students, especially international ones (grad school is where the money comes from), and drawing down research funding, big names and big projects are what it's all about. There are relatively few opportunities for teaching to draw down funding and awards.

Which is a long way of saying that I don't think it's really perfect, because you can get some awful teachers as a result, or people who regard teaching as a massive inconvenience rather than part of what they do and are. I've noticed that some big universities like Berkeley and so on are now making much bigger efforts to promote great teaching, like creating new high profile chairs that are awarded based on someone's teaching profile rather than their research.

The emphasis on research is sometimes overstated though. For an interview, you will have to write a teaching philosophy statement, and usually provide a few course designs that you could implement. Most interviews will have a research segment and a teaching one as well and if they think you can't teach you won't get the job. Junior faculty positions especially can have this emphasis, since often those jobs are relatively dogsbody positions where you'll be teaching way outside your research area, filling in for positions of need or where someone is on research leave. I haven't taught in my area of research in a couple of years (but will be this semester).

On your latter question, as I was saying there is constant concern about grades not being high enough. Funnily enough it is often external examiners, who come to Ireland from abroad, who are saying that we are far too harsh and should be giving more 1st class honours. Pushed to an extreme that can be a problem. American visiting students are often crushed when they get a B, because for them, nearly everyone gets an A or a B all the time, and a B is a severe warning. A C, you could be looking at losing scholarship funding. It's hard to explain to them that a B is a very good grade here. But in terms of targets, there's nothing systematic, at least not that I've been subjected to.

I'm A University Lecturer, AMA

Did you find other funding or end up doing a different PhD which was already funded?

I was on a local authority grant, I wouldn't have been able to complete the PhD without that. Supplemented it with whatever teaching I could get, was lucky to get some nice paid research jobs and working in museum-ey kind of jobs at cash registers some summers, and was willing to live hand-to-mouth a lot of the time, Koka noodle dinners and that kind of thing. I actually loved it all, except the anxiety about money, which made it hard to concentrate on research.

Relating to the latter - Do you think prospective PhD students are often required to forgo the "ideal" PhD due to inadequate funding opportunities?

This is really a bit of a STEM question, because in English your PhD topic will be largely something you came up with yourself (moulded in consultation with your supervisor, but certainly when I applied, living abroad and with nobody around to help, I actually just dreamt up a whole proposal. It sounded really good, but most of the ideas were abandoned and replaced with a new project in my second year, so it wasn't a good way of doing things). I think this way of deciding on a course of research can lead to some shambolic PhD theses, because by definition when a student comes up with it, they are not advanced in their field. I know a few people who carried out projects that were already fairly laid out, especially people who got Leverhulme fellowships in England, and they never regretted it. But I think for a new doctoral candidate, the excitement of designing your own research agenda would be dampened if you found yourself being told "this is what you're doing". But you're far more likely to be carrying out research that people really want done in that scenario.

Do you agree with the tendency of scholarships/fellowships to be awarded to the most "book smart" candidates (i.e. primarily 1.1 graduates)?

As someone who was refused twice for an IRC graduate scholarship, I disagree with a lot of their tendencies! But my own petty bitterness aside, I think there's an art to writing those applications, and if you have that art mastered, you'll do well. Plenty of fantastic students I know have not gotten funding, and plenty of people who probably didn't use it very well were funded. So...clearly there is a problem with evaluation processes.

What do you think the likes of IRC / funding bodies should do to improve the situation in Ireland?

Well, to continue with my last point, the evaluation process is clearly far from perfect. That's true of any industry of course. The students who are funded very often end up struggling badly when the funding dries up and they haven't finished their doctorate. That is a mentality issue, in my opinion.

One problem the IRC has is that it is badly underfunded. They don't have that many scholarships to give out, but they also clearly don't have enough staff to deal with the massive number of applications. Decisions are clearly put in the hands of external readers who have a host of prejudices thataren't properly checked. To give my own example, I was rejected for a postdoc by the IRC because someone felt that my subject was completely overcrowded with publications already. This was quite simply nonsense, the person who said it (I don't know who they are) was obviously not from my subject area at all, but was making a pronouncement on it that he or she wasn't qualified to make. I know of people who have submitted the same application twice and been accepted the second time without changing anything. I'm sure everyone has stories like that. But they all boil down to resources.

(I don't think I've answered your question very well, I don't think I understand the IRC at all well enough tbh).

In contrast - what do you think about lecturers who outright refuse to get with the times and use blackboard/moodle, and supply lecture materials?

I know one lecturer, extremely high profile, who had a typewriter in his room and no email address, until he was poached away by a US university who weren't willing to let him not have email. There are very few industries where that kind of caprice would be entertained for so long. I think every teacher should do whatever makes them the best teacher they are, and to some extent new technologies can be a hindrance to that. But if your students are used to relying on these technologies, and feel lost if you don't use them, then you have to ask if you are being the best teacher possible, or if you are just too lazy and selfish to adapt to the changing needs of students now. For a young lecturer I'm actually quite technophobic, I can see all of the exciting things people are doing now with their classroom and digital humanities. But I can also see how fiddling around with new technologies all the time is going to be counterproductive for a 65 year old Shakespeare scholar who is perfectly brilliant without all that stuff. So it's hard to generalise, but a total luddite is, at this stage, probably a harmful presence in the running of a department now.

How much time do you get to allocate to your research? And do you like or dislike the fact that your academic life is never something that can be left at the door once 5pm comes around?

I am trying desperately to keep one day a week (on which I have no teaching) solely for research, and avoiding doing administrative stuff like answering student emails etc that day. Whether I stick to it is another matter. During reading weeks, and the holidays, I get loads done. It's the great George Hook-sponsored myth about academics that they work a few hours a week and have vast holidays. That's true in one sense, but I work many more hours a week during a holiday than during the term. The "holidays" are essentially just time where you are researching instead of teaching. It's much easier to visit archives and so on in that situation.

The latter question, I both like and dislike it. When I'm home I'll usually just watch telly and cook dinner and what have you, but sooner or later I'll pick up a book and read it, and I virtually never read anything that isn't for teaching or research. But, obviously, I love reading novels, so it's great to be able to relax at home and do that, while still feeling like I'm getting something done. The problem, though, is the feeling that you're always behind where you should be, that no matter how much you've done, you haven't done enough. I guess that is what you mean by not being able to leave it behind at five. There's often a nagging sense of guilt when you aren't working.

But recently I've been getting better on that front. My partner is an academic as well so it would be easy to get sucked into a never-ending work cycle but we're trying to make a point of having a life outside of that. I remind myself often that, at the end of the day, I'm a literature scholar, not an oncologist. In the grand scheme of things what I do is not life or death, or particularly vital in any emergency sense of the word (it is important, I think, and I could argue that point all day, but you get my drift). If literature, to me, is something that should be knitted into the fabric of our lives, then it only makes sense to me if I have a life into which I can knit it. Currently I have no children, no house of my own, no dog... So we're relatively footloose. But I play sport at a fairly competitive level, and on a day where I'm training or playing a match, I'm happy to leave the English stuff at the door and get into a different mentality. It's about telling yourself that, even though you have dedicated yourself to doing this subject, to make it your life, and even though it engulfs everything in your life and really isn't just a job, it is not your life. I'm getting better about that, and I'm probably less obsessed than I used to be. I've also always had lots of good friends who couldn't care less about literature, and will remind me every chance they get that I'm not a real doctor. So that keeps it all in context.

I'm A University Lecturer, AMA

scudzilla wrote: »

What's your favourite type of cheese?

Emmenthal. That kind of sweet nutty taste and the smooth texture. The business.

I'm A University Lecturer, AMA

Armelodie wrote: »

Do you ever listen to music and read at the same time?

I find myself getting distracted by the music if it's something I already know and like. Anything with lyrics (I'm a big fan of American and Irish folk music) and I can't read as I'm listening too closely. I'd listen to Aphex Twin (the SAW stuff or Richard D James Album, rather than Come to Daddy) because it isn't too interruptive. But usually I prefer silence. Or, for some reason, 24 hour news.

reap-a-rat

I'm A University Lecturer, AMA wrote: »

I find myself getting distracted by the music if it's something I already know and like. Anything with lyrics (I'm a big fan of American and Irish folk music) and I can't read as I'm listening too closely. I'd listen to Aphex Twin (the SAW stuff or Richard D James Album, rather than Come to Daddy) because it isn't too interruptive. But usually I prefer silence. Or, for some reason, 24 hour news.

Who are your favourite artists on the Irish folk scene at the moment? Do you have time for attending gigs?

Decline

Really interesting AMA!

Is it difficult to make English and literary studies 'relevant' today? Many students are encouraged to study subjects and degrees that offer them greater or perhaps more obvious employment opportunities, has this resulted in a decline in those studying English? And, if so, are English departments changing in some way in order to attract more students?

artanevilla

Is it easy to mark papers and assignments objectively, ie, if you get on well with a student are you more inclined to be generous with marks?

Fluorescence

Great AMA so far! I'm really enjoying your answers.

What do you feel is the main benefit of studying English at undergraduate level? As someone who became disillusioned with the course after two years, I am quite curious to hear your thoughts on this.

keith16

Great idea for AMA.

During my time in college I have had some very poor lecturers and some outstanding lecturers who make things very engaging. I think that's quite a tough skill, would you say it's a key requirement in becoming a lecturer?

Secondly, I have often thought that I would someday like to lecture. I have never done a masters / PhD. Does this automatically preclude me? Or could I lecture on the basis of having built up industry specific expertise over a long career?

I'm A University Lecturer, AMA

Gandalph wrote: »

What is the general consensus among lecturers about students keeping in contact after their 3rd level education, in relation to bugging you about specific topics or matters along your area of expertise...bothersome or harmless? Whether it be guidance, career wise, or just inquisition into related topics that you (lecturers) taught to us (students) and that we share a passion for.

I wouldn't still be in contact with that many former students. Early on (when I was still young enough that there wasn't a major age gap) I had one class that I ended up hanging out with three or four of the students after the course ended.

More recently it would be students thinking about doing a postgrad, and especially ones who went on to study at the college I was still teaching. By and large I really like staying in touch and giving guidance about career and stuff like that, especially because people can be naive and badly informed about it for reasons I've already outlined.People I've taught have gone on to do PhDs themselves and been brilliant, including people who I have since done conference panels with and so on, to the point it would be insulting to call them "former students" or anything. I have a couple of ex-students who I regard as friends of mine.

The other side of it would be giving references to students when they apply for jobs etc. For some reason, outside of academic references (I'm quite junior so I normally recommend they go to someone more senior and impressive for that), the people who ask me for references tend to be people I don't remember very well, and have to pull out their record cards. But it's both a duty and a pleasure, far as I'm concerned to do all that stuff.

I'm A University Lecturer, AMA

fred funk }{ wrote: »

Did you have pancakes Yesterday and if you did what did you have on them?

No! I had to go to a funeral down home and we were all on the lash afterwards when we all realised it was Pancake Tuesday and none of us had had one.

Ordinarily, real maple syrup. Pancake Tuesday, lemon and sugar like God intended.

I'm A University Lecturer, AMA

reap-a-rat wrote: »

Who are your favourite artists on the Irish folk scene at the moment? Do you have time for attending gigs?

Uh, I feel like a bit of a phony, since when I say "big into" I mean "I listen to old Dubliners tracks and Liam Clancy". It's not so much that I don't have time to attend gigs, I'd go to the occasional one, or a session in a pub. But more generally when I get to meet up with friends I just want to have the craic with them, so just go to the pub. I also attend a lot of matches in a sport that, if I said it, would give away who I am. So I don't set aside much time for gigs. More generally, I used to be massively into electronic music but I feel very behind on what's going on in that scene these days. I just read all the time (I don't even like the theatre tbh).

I'm A University Lecturer, AMA

Decline wrote: »

Really interesting AMA!

Is it difficult to make English and literary studies 'relevant' today? Many students are encouraged to study subjects and degrees that offer them greater or perhaps more obvious employment opportunities, has this resulted in a decline in those studying English? And, if so, are English departments changing in some way in order to attract more students?

Good question. English, for various reasons (not least that it's a compulsory subject in school) is probably one of the most popular subjects in any university, the numbers can be massive. I know there was a decline in my last university in the last year or so, but that doesn't imply a trend. I don't know, honestly, what the situation is like. In my experience class sizes are getting bigger, but that has more to do with declining resources than increasing numbers I would say.

But as to changing, most definitely. The pressure on students to study more obviously "employable" subjects (though our post-degree employment rates are very very good) isn't really a new one. But the subject has changed drastically in a few ways. For one thing, there has been a gradual change in attitude towards things like popular literature. UCD had a children's literature course a few years ago with Harry Potter on it, for example, and Trinity have a huge contingent of grad students working on popular literature in various ways. The perception that research, too, should encompass a broader range of things like science fiction, gothic etc is now well established as well.

The subject has also moved into association with media studies. For a couple of decades now, most English students would also take courses in film and film theory, and films and (especially since the rise of HBO and Netflix dramas) TV also form parts of many courses these days. There is a recognition of the value of these things, and of the fact that a division between high and low art forms isn't really helpful or correct. Also the fact is things like HBO dramas are deeply "literary" in interesting ways, and are a far more important cultural touchstone than books right now. But when I mentioned The Wire and Bleak House earlier, I think the connections between those two things, their cultural relevance in their eras, is deeply comparable, and our discipline needs to be responsive to those changes rather than seeing us as museum curators protecting dusty old books from modernity. The likes of Shakespeare have withstood centuries and they aren't under threat, much as some lecturers like to believe they are.

That move towards popular forms is part of a general expansion of what is regarded as legitimate material to cover, a widening of the canon. So, for example, people will be exposed to a lot more literature from non-Anglo-American traditions these days. There's huge scope for studying literature from the Far East, the Caribbean, Latin America, Africa etc and recognising how these relate to the literature we're more familiar with.

In the classroom, lecturers need to become more fluent in using new technologies. Some of them wouldn't know how to play a Youtube video, and couldn't understand why it might help them.

I'm A University Lecturer, AMA

artanevilla wrote: »

Is it easy to mark papers and assignments objectively, ie, if you get on well with a student are you more inclined to be generous with marks?

This is going to sound contradictory. To some extent, all marking in English is subjective. We have loads of meetings and sample marking to minimise it but it's inescapable to some extent. I always tell my students to worry less about each individual grade they get, and focus more on the comments they receive. The comments will probably have a lot of the same kind of advice regardless who corrected it, even if the grades vary somewhat. If you focus on working on what you are advised about, your grades will show an upward curve overall.

But specifically with regard to students you get on well with, I'd love to be able to say we are above that kind of thing, but the reality is it probably does happen unconsciously. Some colleges keep examinations anonymous, which I think is a great idea, because it removes that element entirely. Others are a little behind on that, and all essays are corrected with the name on the front. I wish it was all anonymous. But all you can do is remind yourself often that it could be an issue.

To be honest, the differences we're talking about are like getting a C+ instead of a C. I've yet to see the essay that one lecturer will give an A to and someone else will give a C. Once you've corrected a few hundred, you know a C essay and you know and A. You'll more or less know that after two pages, and by the end you'll know whether it's a + or - kind of essay.

I'm A University Lecturer, AMA

Fluorescence wrote: »

Great AMA so far! I'm really enjoying your answers.

What do you feel is the main benefit of studying English at undergraduate level? As someone who became disillusioned with the course after two years, I am quite curious to hear your thoughts on this.

I'm actually more interested, to begin with, in following up on what you said. Why did you feel you became disillusioned? Were there things the department could have done better? Or was it that it wasn't what you expected? What let you down about the teaching?

As to the benefits, I'll kind of just address fiction because that's the bit I like. Reading great fiction can give you an understanding of how other people encounter the world that is simply impossible in any other way. Read Ulysses and you will know Leopold Bloom better than you will know anybody you have ever met in real life, including your family, your spouse, your children. We are a society that is often very short on empathy for one another (the attitude on the other AMA this week was a great illustration of what happens when people refuse to understand the difficulty or peculiarity of other people's lives and circumstances), and I think reading lets you overcome that.

I could give lots of examples of things literary study improves about us as people, but in terms of practical stuff...well, we will make you a better writer, both at the level of sentence structure, paragraphs etc etc, but also in terms of the construction of a logical and coherent argument. And the ability to provide a cogent analysis of a text in terms of a given problematic is a massively transferable skill.

thelad95

Are you happy living out your career as a lecturer or would you eventually like a head of department or president role even if it meant moving college?

What is your view on the role of Student Unions in colleges? Do they really have a voice?

eternal

Hello. I'm planning on studying an English Masters after receiving a 1H in the undergrad. What chance do I have to teach after this without doing a PhD? How plausible is it to regain a first class honours at postgrad level do you think? What are the possibilities to PT lecture considering I spent three unrelated years studying Fine Art? I feel a bit unclear as to my future prospects. I should add I'm widely published.

I'm A University Lecturer, AMA

During my time in college I have had some very poor lecturers and some outstanding lecturers who make things very engaging. I think that's quite a tough skill, would you say it's a key requirement in becoming a lecturer?

Well, as you say, some are very bad at it. Personally I love giving a lecture, it's enjoyable to me. It's a skill that we are never really trained for (except by repetition in conferences, but a conference paper is very different to a college lecture for all sorts of reasons), but I would say that these days it's getting harder and harder to get any kind of a job unless you have all the skills, and that includes making and delivering an engaging lecture. I think grad students need more opportunities to practice doing it though. Giving guest lectures at courses where your research is relevant would be a good thing, they do it a lot in America. It's very different to tutorial work.

Secondly, I have often thought that I would someday like to lecture. I have never done a masters / PhD. Does this automatically preclude me? Or could I lecture on the basis of having built up industry specific expertise over a long career?

What do you want to lecture in? This is hard to make a generalisation about. In my area, you will not become a lecturer without a PhD (unless you're a famous author and get a residency or whatever). Other disciplines, especially ones that are responsive to the needs of a particular industry, might have more opportunities for people with expertise from that area. I know nothing about it really, my suspicion would be that people in business could do it, or maybe in some tech disciplines. There are probably other people on this thread who could advise you better than me though.

GLaDOS

Have you published any non-academic material? Short stories, poems etc?

Fluorescence

I'm A University Lecturer, AMA wrote: »

I'm actually more interested, to begin with, in following up on what you said. Why did you feel you became disillusioned? Were there things the department could have done better? Or was it that it wasn't what you expected? What let you down about the teaching?

A mix of reasons were involved in my decision to leave. I was invisible to the university. Lectures had over 200 people, and weren’t always taught by the same person week-to-week. Tutorials, though small, were not engaging and the (very young!) tutors seemed bored. I was also just lazy and found studying critical theory and Chaucer very dry :pac:

The main factor in my decision to leave was that I failed most of my second year exams. I wasn’t showing up to classes or engaging with the material. I was having personal issues outside college which sucked away any enthusiasm I might have mustered for the course, and the prospect of “wasting” my time on a “useless” degree was entirely unappealing. I felt that completing the degree wouldn’t give me any more career opportunities than I had already.

That said, I have always flirted with the idea of going back and completing my studies. I think I would not go back to UCD though for reasons I mentioned in my first paragraph. I left in 2011 so things may be done differently now. I know the music course has changed twice since I left!

I'm A University Lecturer, AMA wrote: »

As to the benefits, I'll kind of just address fiction because that's the bit I like. Reading great fiction can give you an understanding of how other people encounter the world that is simply impossible in any other way. Read Ulysses and you will know Leopold Bloom better than you will know anybody you have ever met in real life, including your family, your spouse, your children. We are a society that is often very short on empathy for one another (the attitude on the other AMA this week was a great illustration of what happens when people refuse to understand the difficulty or peculiarity of other people's lives and circumstances), and I think reading lets you overcome that.

I could give lots of examples of things literary study improves about us as people, but in terms of practical stuff...well, we will make you a better writer, both at the level of sentence structure, paragraphs etc etc, but also in terms of the construction of a logical and coherent argument. And the ability to provide a cogent analysis of a text in terms of a given problematic is a massively transferable skill.

I have read Ulysses and I know what you mean :pac: Thank you for taking the time to answer this, I appreciate it