Re: Why do "teachers" needs "schools", why do "professors" need "universities", anyway? (was Re: suitable employment for wannabe-ex-author)

Charlton Wilbur <cwilbur@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

MA> I do have to wonder why [adjunct professors] bother with
MA> working inside the University system at all?

Because there's a ready-made group of students there.

How many people are going to take English Composition on their own
initiative? Damn few; but add a community-college requirement that
every student take it, and suddenly the credentials game means that
there are hundreds of students who need to take it.

This is not actaully a really good argument in favor of universities
and community colleges, IMO.

Credentialism is a *scouge* and a stupidity, and is to be opposed.

Because the bureaucracy is taken care of.

A private instructor needs to find a place,

A home, a public park, a cafe, a studio.

arrange for billing and
payment,

A monthly check seems to work.

and handle self-promotion.

Websites, google, and word of mouth.

The adjunct professor has all
that taken care of by the school.

Not take care of very well.

Classrooms in community colleges are often too small, in poor repair,
with bad and noisy HVAC.

The pay to the teacher is crap, and a very small slice of what the
students or the students sponsors have paid.


MA> Private instruction in exercise, in musical performance, and
MA> in art technique are difficult jobs, but they appear to pay a
MA> living wage, at least to the people I've met who do it as
MA> their living. As does private tutoring prep for standardized
MA> exams.

In the case of musical performance and art technique, the most
efficient method of instruction is one-on-one, possibly in a very
small class of fewer than 10. You simply can't teach it the same way
you teach a lecture course in mathematics or history. As a result,
the common practice in music and art is one-on-one teaching.

The main problem with the teaching of math and history is that it's taught
in lecture mode.

I've said before, I've have a wonderful experience tutoring remedial
jr high algebra. "Lecture mode" was literally worse than not teaching
at all, because the kids both didnt know math and were afraid of it,
instead of just not knowing it.

The math I learned in university, I mostly learned as part of my
recurring study group. We would meet a couple of times a week, take
over an unused classroom, use the assignement/project/syllabus/text,
and working together, fill every whiteboard in the room working them
out.

I'm doing something similar right now. Myself and several other
people meet weekly to read Knuth and work the problems together.
We've decided that when we reach the end, we're going to self-award
ourselves a diploma.

*My* best history classes in college were not taught in lecture, but
were instead we would do the reading, be given a list of questions to
defend or attack, and then meet in a circle of about 25 and argue
them.

The only thing that lecture is good for is that it's easy for the
lecturer.


--
Mark Atwood When you do things right, people won't be sure
me@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx you've done anything at all.
http://mark.atwood.name/ http://fallenpegasus.livejournal.com/
.

Relevant Pages