|
Post by umm on Oct 1, 2012 19:47:14 GMT -5
The news article listed above is from 2004, so it might be wrong to assume that the current course load for the Sociology Dept is a 5-4. Someone who has applied for this job should just email them and ask!
|
|
|
Post by annimo on Oct 1, 2012 20:17:42 GMT -5
It's certainly true that the 2004 article might not accurately reflect current teaching loads, but given the recent history of labor relations in Wisconsin, I'd be surprised if things have gotten significantly better.
|
|
|
Post by SomeClarityPerhaps on Oct 1, 2012 20:22:25 GMT -5
I did a little searching to try and get to the bottom of this question of teaching load. I didn't find anything on the UWW website, but I did find a few things that led me to what I believe is an important oversight in this discussion. UWW has both the typical tenure track faculty positions (assistant, associate, and full professors) and lecturers. I am persuaded that the 4-5 teaching load is for lecturers, but not professors. I did not find hard evidence of this regarding the sociology department, but I did find two job postings for lecturers from other departments that mentioned a 4-5 teaching load: Exhibit A) www.uww.edu/employment/jobs/JournalismLecturer.htmlExhibit B) www.mathjobs.org/jobs/jobs/3751I also searched for information on tenure track positions at UWW, and similarly found a posting regarding a different department that suggests it is 12 credits per semester (3-3): Exhibit C) h-net.msu.edu/cgi-bin/logbrowse.pl?trx=vx&list=H-Asia&month=1209&week=e&msg=bKVh1AKnodaOU9Rf7wKIYQ&user=&pw=Of course, someone could just email the department to find out
|
|
|
Post by ignorant on Oct 1, 2012 21:45:50 GMT -5
that suggests it is 12 credits per semester (3-3) I realize this is not exactly the topic of this thread, but it raises a point that has confused me for a while now. I've always been a schools that talk in terms of just counts of courses. How does one translate between credits and courses? I take it from the above statement that the typical translation is 4 credits = 1 course? I realize that one of the reasons to speak in terms of credits is that some schools may have more flexibility, for instance teaching shorter courses for fewer credits or more time-intensive courses for more. I've always wondered, though, how to translate schools that speak in terms of credits to compare them to course units. If 4 credits = 1 typical course, then I guess I've answered my question, but if others have additional insights I'd be happy to fill this gap in my knowledge.
|
|
|
Post by latenightmath on Oct 2, 2012 7:32:00 GMT -5
My mistake - that's what I get for doing math in my head after a long day. So it's 4-4 in standard 3-credit courses.
I hope this makes me human rather than ignorant ;P
|
|
|
Post by To the haters on Dec 28, 2012 11:29:53 GMT -5
I just stumbled upon these posts, everything on this thread is wrong.
A friend and colleague of mine recently accepted one of the positions at UWW. They had three new hires this year. He's pumped.
1. The teaching load is not 5-4, it is 4-4, and an easy 4-4 at that. The classes are capped at 25, no more than 2 preps each semester, and the ability to combine courses (e.g., 2 classes each semester, 50 students each class). As graduate student teachers in our R1 department we currently have 80 students per class, this teaching load (100 students a semester) is really NOT THAT BAD.
2. The pay is NOT in the 40s. They start in the high 50s, closer to 60.
3. Research and grants are valued. Look at the faculty. They are from schools like UCLA, Indiana, Princeton, Madison, etc. They somehow find time to publish and write. They have a fantastic grant program and over the last five years he said there have been two professors move to R1 universities. I agree, such a move is not easy, but it can and has been done. Not to mention the UWW department offers numerous course reduction programs for research and writing.
4. The UW system is one of the strongest in the nation. Regardless of labor disputes it has great pay, benefits, and funding. Wisconsin takes care of its schools regardless of the moron governor. If you want to look at a failing school system, look at the Cal-State system, they are bankrupt.
5. Finally, geographic location is important to many, as well as career advancement. Teaching at Whitewater allows one to live in Madison or Milwaukee. Not to mention it's only a two hour train ride to Chicago. There are many schools I applied to that may be great places, but I would be miserable living there. My colleague is excited about living in Madison, teaching in Whitewater 2-3 days a week, and leaving students behind.
6. It amazes me that people are so quick to put down jobs on such a competitive market. My question, did all the haters on this thread find employment? Let's have a show of hands. I certainly wouldn't put down any jobs at this point, I'm still looking.
|
|
|
Post by Follow up on Jan 2, 2013 11:22:54 GMT -5
I just stumbled upon these posts, everything on this thread is wrong. A friend and colleague of mine recently accepted one of the positions at UWW. They had three new hires this year. He's pumped. To all the haters, let's not make this a name calling game. You're making yourself look like a hater by backhanding other schools/systems, while trying to lift up UWW. It's exciting that your friend got one of the positions and he should be proud! Getting to actual follow up to your post--has UWW made all 3 of their new hires? Maybe you can post the names of the new hires on the "hires" thread off the main wiki homepage?
|
|
|
Post by True True on Jan 2, 2013 13:39:32 GMT -5
Very true. Just got a bit upset by people putting down jobs that people may really want. I have two friends who were recently hired in the cal-state system and the monetary issues in that system was simply something they had expressed as somewhat worrisome.
|
|