Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

How do you become a lecturer?

  • 20-06-2009 10:51pm
    #1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12


    I've been thinking lately that I would love to be a college lecturer.
    What are the qualifications you need?
    Im starting a degree in marine science in september, I think its to specific to progress to being a lecturer but its the only option available to me.
    Whats it like being a lecturer, I assume its hard work but do ye really get 3 months holidays every year:p
    Is it satisfying or just fustrating?
    Thanks very much


Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 115 ✭✭dublintuition


    this is something that I have also thought about over the years. I can't see myself settling into secondary teaching forever, I like to keep challenged.

    One thing I do know from college was that our lecturers (obviously) corrected our exams at the end of the year. So I would say alot of those 3 months off are still pretty busy


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12 kafukled


    The holidays wouldnt really be the main thing for me tbh.
    Just it seems like a job that would suit me. I'm good at simplifying complicated things and that.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 115 ✭✭dublintuition


    kafukled wrote: »
    The holidays wouldnt really be the main thing for me tbh.
    Just it seems like a job that would suit me. I'm good at simplifying complicated things and that.

    Whereas I on the otherhand love to in-depthly analyse stuff. I would love it. My subject would be english. The qualifications however, I'm really not that sure about, as although it's something I plan to do, it's not something I plan to do for another few years. I'm imagining a phD though.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,420 ✭✭✭Dionysus


    The main qualifications you need are patience and the ability to network for, usually, many years before securing your tenured permanent position as a lecturer.

    It helps hugely if you are not in a serious relationship/ have no pressure to secure a permanent job quickly in order to receive a mortgage.

    A PhD is nowadays the normal basic academic qualification and it would be extraordinarily unusual to be considered for any lecturing position unless you have those three letters on your cv. More commonly the PhD is followed by two or three post-doctorate positions of varying lengths but usually of 1-2 years duration each. In between these post-docs you will, if you're lucky, receive a year-long lecturing contract which is essentially much the same work as you do during your post-doc. (Being a "lecturer" is not that hard; it most involves moving from contract to contract. Being a permanent lecture is a different matter entirely.)

    Then, having networked ferociously throughout all those years and successfully navigated the politics and egos, you may be extraordinarily lucky to receive a permanent lecturing position about ten years after you have been conferred with your doctorate. Three years after being made permanent you will usually be given tenure, meaning you cannot be sacked for issues relating to your intellectual freedom. You've arrived then.

    Over 80% of people with PhDs leave academia pretty quickly. Some keep digging after their doctorate and do one or two post-docs before giving up the ghost and leaving academia disillusioned, older and poor.


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 42,347 Mod ✭✭✭✭Lord TSC


    I remember talking to a lecturer in NUIM, and he told me that the classes were actually only a minor part of their job. I got the feeling that the college employ them more to do their own research and such rather than just teach. The lectures are more a way of the college getting some of their money back off the researchers. In this way, they don't get 3 months "off", as while their classes may be over, they are still in their offices working on their own projects and such.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,428 ✭✭✭Powerhouse


    Yes, it is far from a situation where someone is going around lecturing all day long. You'd have only a few lectures a week and the rest would be research, writing papers etc.

    And it takes a long period of what a friend of mine called "slave labour" in the uni beforehand. The funny thing is that it is often not necessarily the best people who get the job but those who have the stomach for the long haul and the banality of it all and are prepared to 'go native'.

    Do you really get 3 months holidays each year? No. Not sure where that idea came from. Perhaps it is an assumption that lecturers have nothing else to do except lecture students and if they are not around then there's nothing to do. 6 weeks holidays would be about right.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 132 ✭✭Paddo81


    While I would believe that in places like Trinity and other universities, lecturers are over-worked with research, college events and all manner of extra-curricular activities on top of their class time, I think thats far from the case across the system. I completed a degree in an Institute of Technology and I came across alot of lecturers who were fresh from completing a masters and were very green in their field. One in particular was routinely late for classes, never attending a final year project class on Fridays (despite the fact he was our mentor), never had any handouts or paperwork outside of the textbook prepared and generally had a slapdash approach to his job. He just gave off the aura that he was happy to collect the fat paycheck and chillout from May to September.

    Now there was obviously many lecturers who were exceptionally diligent, just that guy sticks in my mind. He was far from the bumbling old Prof who spent his time consumed in his reseach or writing papers. He was more of a chancer than anything!


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,405 ✭✭✭RHunce


    how many years does it take to reacht the top of the salary scale for sec school. totally off topic but just curious


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 27,088 CMod ✭✭✭✭spurious


    RHunce wrote: »
    how many years does it take to reacht the top of the salary scale for sec school. totally off topic but just curious

    25 years or thereabouts.


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,212 ✭✭✭✭Tom Dunne


    kafukled wrote: »
    What are the qualifications you need?

    A keen interest in reading. Such as reading the sticky at the top of the forum titled "How to become a lecturer". :) Lots of info there.
    kafukled wrote: »
    Whats it like being a lecturer, I assume its hard work but do ye really get 3 months holidays every year:p

    No, it more like 4.5 months (Christmas, Easter and the odd mid-term break). There is a massive difference between the Institutes of Technology and Universities. The figure I give is of course for IT's.
    kafukled wrote: »
    Is it satisfying or just fustrating?

    It is the most satisfying, enjoyable and worthwhile career ever. Unfortunately, I am no longer doing in since the recession (and the minor fact that I have a mortgage). And that is a very important point - getting a permanent position 4-5 years ago was nigh on impossible.

    There is pretty much no hope of getting one now.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 675 ✭✭✭beya2009


    Hi everyone,

    I just wanted to add on what Dionysus was saying as that was spot on. Obviously on the money side, third level teaching is very attractive. I know my course leader was on the region of €120,000 a year...ok he's been there for like 20 years but still!

    Theses days STANDARD procedure is to have a phd in your cv however it is my understanding that if you have a masters and have invaluable experience in your industry say i.e. business..then you usually have a good chance. Like one of our lectures only had a masters but because he had so much experience working for the HSE, he was givenn lecturing hours for health promotion.

    But yea..let no one kid themselves..this economic recession changes a lot of things that might have been taken for granted in the past.


  • Registered Users Posts: 675 ✭✭✭beya2009


    Also just to breakdown. I finished doing my mbs in marketing which i started in last sept in wit and MOST of my class m8s said they want to get into third level teaching. Moreover, another close m8 of mine is doing her research masters over a two year period. For arguements sake, we will just say the average age was like 25 for my class.

    There is no doubt that it is going to take them a very long time to try and break into third level teaching. Being so young means you have no experience. Gettiing into a phd aint easy either and is a timely process too. I think its like 6 years part time and 3 years full time. Even after that..you will need some experience.


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,212 ✭✭✭✭Tom Dunne


    beya2009 wrote: »
    Hi everyone,

    I just wanted to add on what Dionysus was saying as that was spot on. Obviously on the money side, third level teaching is very attractive. I know my course leader was on the region of €120,000 a year...ok he's been there for like 20 years but still!

    The key point to your statement is the last bit - it took 20 years to get there. Starting salaries are in the region of €42,000 for an assistant lecturer in an IT.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,860 ✭✭✭Rosita


    beya2009 wrote: »

    Gettiing into a phd aint easy either and is a timely process too. I think its like 6 years part time and 3 years full time. Even after that..you will need some experience.



    Sorry, this is diverting the topic slightly but I am curious about this.

    Can anyone explain to me the practical difference between a part-time Phd and a full-time one. Given that it is by definition a research degree where presumably (or maybe not) you are essentially doing your own research and reporting back every so often I'm just wondering if there is a practical difference between full-time and part-time other than allowing yourself more time. Does a full-time one require you to be at the beck and call of the college to do tutorials or things like that? Or - apart from spreading the workload more thinly and making it more manageable which might be a good idea if you were working at the same time - why would someone do a part-time one rather than a full-time one?


  • Registered Users Posts: 675 ✭✭✭beya2009


    Hi Rosita,

    Not sure if this answers your question..actually I dont think it does but might help. I know that a part time phd is far more flexible. My course leader for my mbs in marketing only has a masters under his belt and is doing his phd on sports marketing and told us that he had been doing his research for the past 3 years and that he should have started testing already but was still very much at his preliminary stage. He told me he was not in any rush and wanted to take things slowly.

    No doubt by that he meant he cant rush it as he lectures and is the course leader. Then again one of our brand management lecturers did her phd in manchester uni in 2 years full time! So i suppose you work to your own pace.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,860 ✭✭✭Rosita


    Hi Beya,

    Thanks for that. I can understand the need for flexibility for some people, but I am wondering what sort of commitment one is giving if registering for a PhD full-time as opposed to part-time. Why is there a distinction between full-time and part-time at all?

    I can understand that some people might have more time/greater capacity to deliver the good more quickly than others but I don't know what the practical upshot of committing to a full-time one is.

    I suppose in a nutshell what I am wondering is if somebody who is not in a college setting and effectively a full-time student able to register for a a full-time PhD.

    And if not, if someone registered for a part-time PhD does this mean that even if you have the work done in 2/3 years (hypothetically of course!) you cannot graduate until the full part-time period (assuming there is a minimum time during which the part-time one can be delivered) is finished? Or is there a set period in which you have to deliver the finished project?

    For example, if I registered for a full-time PhD would taaht mean I'd be expected to complete it in 3 years, and if I didn't what happens? I just know of people who have them going on for years and am curious.

    I had to interview a Trinity academic last year in the course of journalism work and asked him all these questions but despite copious conversation about it I was none the wiser at the end of it.

    It is one area that is impossible to get satisfactory information about on coillege web-sites too.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 115 ✭✭dublintuition


    I remember talking to a lecturer in NUIM, and he told me that the classes were actually only a minor part of their job. I got the feeling that the college employ them more to do their own research and such rather than just teach. The lectures are more a way of the college getting some of their money back off the researchers. In this way, they don't get 3 months "off", as while their classes may be over, they are still in their offices working on their own projects and such.


    Yes I would have thought there was an awful lot more to do with it than that. There is a hell of a lot of researching in it, I know that for a fact, as alot of my lecturers spent more time knee deep in books in the library then I did.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 115 ✭✭dublintuition


    Paddo81 wrote: »
    While I would believe that in places like Trinity and other universities, lecturers are over-worked with research, college events and all manner of extra-curricular activities on top of their class time, I think thats far from the case across the system. I completed a degree in an Institute of Technology and I came across alot of lecturers who were fresh from completing a masters and were very green in their field. One in particular was routinely late for classes, never attending a final year project class on Fridays (despite the fact he was our mentor), never had any handouts or paperwork outside of the textbook prepared and generally had a slapdash approach to his job. He just gave off the aura that he was happy to collect the fat paycheck and chillout from May to September.

    Now there was obviously many lecturers who were exceptionally diligent, just that guy sticks in my mind. He was far from the bumbling old Prof who spent his time consumed in his reseach or writing papers. He was more of a chancer than anything!


    It would appear to me that lecturing is an impossible job to do if you don't want to do it. Are you sure this guy wasn't more like a tutor? Although, you would know after all you were in the course.


  • Registered Users Posts: 405 ✭✭An Bradán Feasa


    I'm not a lecturer, and I don't intend to be in the future, but the only advice I would give is to get some sort of teaching qualification alongside your Ph.D. if you want to teach 3rd Level students. There was nothing that annoyed me more than some of my lecturers who didn't have a clue about methodologies for teaching. Although these lecturers were very intelligent in their respective fields, a Ph.D. is not a teaching qualification. It just means you know a lot about something others don't know much about.

    There is nothing worse than a lecturer reading from a textbook and passing that off as teaching. It's boring and it's lazy.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,420 ✭✭✭Dionysus


    It would be nice for students if being a good lecturer was the critical factor in being made a lecturer. It would probably even be a great feeling if at the end of each term a lecturer could read those student reviews glowing in their praise of him/her.

    Being a good lecturer matters, and it makes the lecturer's life a lot more enjoyable. It is a great feeling to know that your student's enjoy your classes. We had one lecturer who was so awful that the Students' Union held a public meeting to have him removed. By the end of that meeting I think many, if not most, students felt sorry for the lecturer and what the whippersnappers in the Students' Union were doing to ruin him. He was a dreadful lecturer nevertheless.

    Being a well published academic matters much, much more, however. Despite being an abysmal lecturer, the above lecturer was kept on because he is a leading authority in his area. He chose an up-and-coming research area for his doctorate and was the expert by the time it became popular/by the time serious funding was given to it. Universities wanted him then as he brought money to the university. "Publish or perish" is not a meaningless mantra; if you have an A1 publishing record in your field a university wants you. An academic who is published raises the university's profile, reputation and, as a consequence, its funding. Narrowing this down somewhat more, the journals that you publish in also matter as more points are given to universities in the ranking system when their academics contribute to particularly prestigious scholarly journals. Outside of academia if you can raise your profile by contributing to mere newspapers - e.g. book review sections - or current affairs programmes on TV and radio then you also have an edge as you are raising the university's profile. If you are really good at fund-raising politics, a university will also want to get you/hold on to you/promote you. Believe it or not, very very many professors are not there on their academic excellence. The above public relations factors now, more than ever, are catapulting mediocre academics into positions as Head of School and on to the academic councils of universities. (just think of high profile academics in the media and you get the gist)


    Alright! Lecture over! ;)


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,438 ✭✭✭livinginkorea


    This thread has been very insightful especially for me as I hope to return to Ireland someday and lecture in a college/university. I guess I will have to start my PhD in the near future (probably next year), try to get some papers published and present at some conferences to boost my resume.

    One thing is for sure, there's a long way to go!


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,212 ✭✭✭✭Tom Dunne


    One thing I should point out is that there are lecturing hours available on a part-time basis (again, I am only talking about the Institutes of Technology).

    For any prospective lecturers, keep an eye on the papers and college websites over July and August, because that's when colleges start planning for the Winter semester.

    And remember, you need at least an honours degree, plus three years post-grad experience. Not a PhD. ;)


  • Registered Users Posts: 49 Fergus08


    Tom, thanks for the advice. When you say "three years post-grad experience" do you mean three years teaching experience or just three years work experience?


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,212 ✭✭✭✭Tom Dunne


    Fergus08 wrote: »
    Tom, thanks for the advice. When you say "three years post-grad experience" do you mean three years teaching experience or just three years work experience?

    Three years experience using your degree. :)

    So no, not teaching/lecturing experience, but actual industry experience.

    Obviously, it would be of great benefit if you had teaching/lecturing experience. I started off in a company I worked for doing technical training, from that I got a part-time position lecturing.


  • Registered Users Posts: 49 Fergus08


    Tom, thanks for that; it's very useful clarification. I'd like to move into this area through teaching night courses, but it looks to me that there is a bit of a Catch-22 involved in that you won't get hours if you've no teaching experience, but you can't get teaching experience, because you can't get hours without teaching experience.........

    Still, won't give up.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,438 ✭✭✭livinginkorea


    Fergus08 wrote: »


    Still, won't give up.

    I agree totally. We will get there eventually! And if not there is always the world market available.


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,212 ✭✭✭✭Tom Dunne


    Fergus08 wrote: »
    Tom, thanks for that; it's very useful clarification. I'd like to move into this area through teaching night courses, but it looks to me that there is a bit of a Catch-22 involved in that you won't get hours if you've no teaching experience, but you can't get teaching experience, because you can't get hours without teaching experience.........

    Still, won't give up.

    True, but you could be lucky - you never know what factors might sway it for you. No harm in trying, I say.
    I agree totally. We will get there eventually! And if not there is always the world market available.

    Never a truer word spoken. ;)


Advertisement