Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 14, No. 246.
Centre for Computing in the Humanities, King's College London
<http://www.princeton.edu/~mccarty/humanist/>
<http://www.kcl.ac.uk/humanities/cch/humanist/>
[1] From: Adrian Miles <adrian.miles@bowerbird.rmit.edu.au> (72)
Subject: Re: 14.0226 meaning of "course buyout"
[2] From: "Pat Moran" <pjm0362@mailer.fsu.edu> (7)
Subject: Re: 14.0223 what is a "course buyout"?
[3] From: Adrian Miles <adrian.miles@bowerbird.rmit.edu.au> (18)
Subject: Re: 14.0232 course buyout
[4] From: "Erik Ringmar" <e.ringmar@lse.ac.uk> (11)
Subject: Re: 14.0232 course buyout
--[1]------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 07:18:44 +0100
From: Adrian Miles <adrian.miles@bowerbird.rmit.edu.au>
Subject: Re: 14.0226 meaning of "course buyout"
At 09:42 +0100 12/9/2000, Humanist Discussion Group wrote:
>My understanding of "course buyouts" is that the practice involves faculty
>paying for the privilege of not teaching one of their reguarly assigned
>courses, either by voluntarily remitting a portion of their salary or by
>allocating grant funding for that purpose. The questions we've been asked to
>review here include how often faculty should be permitted to exercise such an
>option, what constitutes an appropriate dollar amount, whether the amount
>should vary depending on the nature of the course, and so forth.
>
>As noted in my original posting, I'm asking not out of personal interest
>but as
>a fact finding exercise for a departmental committee.
I have done this as a matter of course where I have received project
funding. I have done this because:
a) all my teaching is intensive (small groups, I teach and mark all my
students work)
b) my full time load is 12 contact hours per week per semester (i'm in
Australia)
c) this translates to close to 30 hours of work per week (our 'paid' week
is 38 hours) which leaves little time for much else.
my opinions:
a) your courses generally still need to be managed by you when you've got
someone else doing them
b) your courses need to be reasonably 'modular' and contained for this to
be effective (if you teach in a way where there is informal overlap with
other subjects then you will have problems). An example: i used to teach
most of the 3rd year cinema theory subjects, and the hypertext theory
subjects. Most of the students were the same cohort, and I'd rely on
poststructural theories my students learnt in cinema in teaching hypertext
(or vice versa). But once someone else teaches one of these, this
continuity is lost. Simply means I had to reassess my own teaching
practices (which was a good thing).
c) your courses need to be very well documented so it's clear to whoever
comes in to teach what is to be done, how, what the outcomes are to be, and
what the teaching and learning experience is to be. This is crucial.
d) quality control or whatever you call it needs to be watched very
closely. another example: i'm very familiar with my computer labs and know
how to fix/troubleshoot pretty much every tech. problem that occurs (and I
usually know more about this than the tech.staff for my labs,
unfortunately). someone comes in to teach for me, assures me they can use
all the technology. result: absolute disaster with nothing working, no
ability to explain the problems adequately to tech. staff, students, etc.
This is part of a larger problem about support in teaching, but mentoring
is often needed if the person teaching is what in australia we'd call
"sessional" (ie, part time and exploited academic). The issue is lessened
if your teaching is performed by a fellow member of faculty.
in terms of how often. throughout our media studies program we have
actively sought to ensure that subjects are able to be taught by different
staff so that:
a) staff can move through different subjects (and not only teach one
course, we are a small program)
b) subjects can run well if their original 'creator' is unavailable.
This allows staff to do research without teaching, with the additional
outcome that staff tend not to 'own' their courses so much. it is a problem
when very good teachers leave for research, but on the other hand (this
will sound like management speak) how good is a teacher if their subject
can't survive without them?
not sure if I answered your questions Matt, but simple rule: good staff get
good funding. If this funding can be used to
a) generate quality research
b) mentor junior or new staff into teaching as a profession
then i don't see an issue about how often. on the other side it is
relatively easy to measure teaching (hours per week, student hours, pass
rate, whatever) which makes 'what' you do for the university reasonably
transparent. this is rarely the case in research.
adrian miles
--
lecturer in cinema studies and new media rmit university.
61 03 9925 3157
bowerbird.rmit.edu.au/adrian/
hypertext theory engine http://bowerbird.rmit.edu.au:8080/
adrian.miles@rmit.edu.au
--[2]------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 07:19:16 +0100
From: "Pat Moran" <pjm0362@mailer.fsu.edu>
Subject: Re: 14.0223 what is a "course buyout"?
As I understand it, a course buyout concerns an instructor who is scheduled
to teach a class--and should do so--according to her/his contract.
However, some instructors are more valuable as grant-writers or need the
time to finish articles for publishing. In either case, the instructor
buys out of the obligation--giving the department the money needed
to hire another instructor to perform the duties.
Pat Moran, Adjunct Faculty, Florida State University
pjmoran@gdsys.net
--[3]------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 07:19:46 +0100
From: Adrian Miles <adrian.miles@bowerbird.rmit.edu.au>
Subject: Re: 14.0232 course buyout
At 08:39 +0100 13/9/2000, Norman D. Hinton wrote:
>Thanks for clarifying "course buyouts" -- it seems a remarkably odd
>practice. I must confess that in 35 years in the profession, in the Ivy
>League, the Big 10, a leading private university and a state one, I've
>never heard of it.
hi all
as I've contributed to this thread can this be clarified for me please?
are you saying that if I taught at an Ivy League Uni. and got $100,000 of
research funding from somewhere, I could not use some of that funding to
*not* teach? in other words that my teaching duties would remain unchanged?
just want to make sure I understand that I'm talking about the same thing.
regards
adrian miles
--
lecturer in cinema studies and new media rmit university.
61 03 9925 3157
bowerbird.rmit.edu.au/adrian/
hypertext theory engine http://bowerbird.rmit.edu.au:8080/
adrian.miles@rmit.edu.au
--[4]------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 07:20:56 +0100
From: "Erik Ringmar" <e.ringmar@lse.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: 14.0232 course buyout
Dear all,
At the LSE in London buyouts are allowed provided that colleagues aren't
too inconvenienced. You simply hand back your salary for the time
concerned, and survive on whatever your external grant/fellowship/salary
provides you. (In fact, the School is quite happy to engage in these kinds
of swaps since they often can get a big professor's salary and employ a
cheap TA to replace him/her).
yours,
Erik
Erik Ringmar
Dept of Government
LSE
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 09/20/00 EDT