Come in if you or your SO is an academic

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DH was a tenure track prof at AU 7 years ago - pay was less than a public school teacher and the benefits were way worse. We had to pay hundreds of dollars a month each for our kids health insurance - basically the full cost it was insane. They added ' partner benefits' but what benefits? Basically you have to have another job to survive in this area - write a textbook for freshman classes (high yield to make a lot of money, but not scholarly work), deliver newspapers- something. Marry rich?

Professors delivering newspapers on the side? That is sad I hate how little we value education in this country.

We value education, just like we also value water. But the value of a product/service is dependent on supply and demand. There is no shortage of well educated people who wants to stay in school and teach/research rather than move on to a career in the world. The reality of this is great: it will drive more such people to seek jobs elsewhere. It also allows the schools to be highly selective in who they accept to teach, improving both productivity and standard of teaching.

I don't know how true this is. It seems that universities have figured out they can save money by hiring more adjuncts and paying them a pittance (3-5k a course, no benefits) then tenure track professors who are paid at least a MC salary 70k + and benefits.

At the same time, tuition has been sky rocketing due to great salaries paid to administrators (who do...what exactly? push paper around). That is not valuing education.

Well, if an adjunct professor delivers education quality that meets the standards of the university, then what additional value do tenure-track professors bring? A separate question, is the skyrocketing tuition and admin salaries - yes we all should be outraged that colleges and universities are no longer mainly focused on education. Go visit any big state school - it's run like a luxury resort, with new buildings, new equipment, lavish facilities and landscaping. This is the direct result of easy student loans. I was in college back in the 90s - twenty years later, I don't even recognize the school from campus pictures anymore. I never dreamed of going to a out-of-state school unless I got merit scholarship - I was a pretty horrid student so in-state was pretty much my only choice. Most of my fellow classmates either worked their way through, got help from parents, or a combination thereof. The financial aid office was a small part of the admin building back then.

Tenure track professors bring grant money. They don't teach very many classes per semester. Unless it's at a teaching college (less desirable for many but not all), a tenure track professor isn't really hired for their teaching.

The adjunct-vs-tenured discussion was surrounding the topic of teaching. Again, if the economic benefit of tenured professor justifies their higher compensation, then the universities would favor them. The key here is to realize that phrases like "I hate how little we value education" show a misplaced sense of injustice.

[Anonymous]

I am a tenured prof in the humanities in the DC area, and I make close to $100K. The benefits are autonomy (in terms of research and how I spend my time outside of the classroom), excellent work environment, and of course, life-time employment. I also benefit from a college tuition exchange program and free tuition for my children at my university. Social benefits include being the only non-lawyer at many parties in DC . I pay for our family's health insurance, which isn't cheap, but still cheaper than my spouse's. Fortunately, DH is in a much more lucrative field, but less stable, so it works out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a tenured prof in the humanities in the DC area, and I make close to $100K. The benefits are autonomy (in terms of research and how I spend my time outside of the classroom), excellent work environment, and of course, life-time employment. I also benefit from a college tuition exchange program and free tuition for my children at my university. Social benefits include being the only non-lawyer at many parties in DC . I pay for our family's health insurance, which isn't cheap, but still cheaper than my spouse's. Fortunately, DH is in a much more lucrative field, but less stable, so it works out.

I have a tenured professor friend on the east coast. He confided in me that his pay wasn't very grand, something like $150k a year, but his wife is in finance and brings home major bank. He as a lot of opportunities to travel for conferences, board meetings, and etc. His social media page is filled with travel pictures all over the Americas and Europe. Every other week, he is having a 10 course meal with a nice bottle of wine somewhere exotic. He has more culture than all of my other friends combined. He is the smartest man I know from a raw intelligence point of view. He is also the smartest man I know from a life-enjoyment point of view.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DH was a tenure track prof at AU 7 years ago - pay was less than a public school teacher and the benefits were way worse. We had to pay hundreds of dollars a month each for our kids health insurance - basically the full cost it was insane. They added ' partner benefits' but what benefits? Basically you have to have another job to survive in this area - write a textbook for freshman classes (high yield to make a lot of money, but not scholarly work), deliver newspapers- something. Marry rich?

Professors delivering newspapers on the side? That is sad I hate how little we value education in this country.

We value education, just like we also value water. But the value of a product/service is dependent on supply and demand. There is no shortage of well educated people who wants to stay in school and teach/research rather than move on to a career in the world. The reality of this is great: it will drive more such people to seek jobs elsewhere. It also allows the schools to be highly selective in who they accept to teach, improving both productivity and standard of teaching.

I don't know how true this is. It seems that universities have figured out they can save money by hiring more adjuncts and paying them a pittance (3-5k a course, no benefits) then tenure track professors who are paid at least a MC salary 70k + and benefits.

At the same time, tuition has been sky rocketing due to great salaries paid to administrators (who do...what exactly? push paper around). That is not valuing education.

Well, if an adjunct professor delivers education quality that meets the standards of the university, then what additional value do tenure-track professors bring? A separate question, is the skyrocketing tuition and admin salaries - yes we all should be outraged that colleges and universities are no longer mainly focused on education. Go visit any big state school - it's run like a luxury resort, with new buildings, new equipment, lavish facilities and landscaping. This is the direct result of easy student loans. I was in college back in the 90s - twenty years later, I don't even recognize the school from campus pictures anymore. I never dreamed of going to a out-of-state school unless I got merit scholarship - I was a pretty horrid student so in-state was pretty much my only choice. Most of my fellow classmates either worked their way through, got help from parents, or a combination thereof. The financial aid office was a small part of the admin building back then.

Tenure track professors bring grant money. They don't teach very many classes per semester. Unless it's at a teaching college (less desirable for many but not all), a tenure track professor isn't really hired for their teaching.

The adjunct-vs-tenured discussion was surrounding the topic of teaching. Again, if the economic benefit of tenured professor justifies their higher compensation, then the universities would favor them. The key here is to realize that phrases like "I hate how little we value education" show a misplaced sense of injustice.

How is it misplaced when, as a future consumer, I plan to spend upwards of $75k a year to send each of my kids to college and I see their professors being paid as little as $3-5k per course? That discrepancy doesn't seem completely NUTS to you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It strongly depends what academic field. The sciences/engineering/business/law, particularly at research universities, are all going to be higher paying than the humanities.

DH makes 350 a year. Most likely that's as much as he will make.

+1 Also, the type of academic institution - low-level state school versus elite research-oriented university.

[Anonymous]

There are so many colleges, law schools, etc. in small college towns with excellent cost of living. My DH is a law professor and we live in one of these. We can afford to live how we want to live -- private school, international trips, sabbaticals abroad, etc. I can afford a housecleaner if I wanted but I prefer to clean my own house and mow my own grass. Then I can use that money to travel. We specifically chose this place over Georgetown because I felt I'd be stuck working in biglaw forever to give our kids the same opporutnities in DC. No regrets! The prof friends who stayed in big cities are the only ones who complain about compensation (adjuncting is a different story....people do that because they want to have the resume line, not to make money. They'd make more as a barista).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a tenured prof in the humanities in the DC area, and I make close to $100K. The benefits are autonomy (in terms of research and how I spend my time outside of the classroom), excellent work environment, and of course, life-time employment. I also benefit from a college tuition exchange program and free tuition for my children at my university. Social benefits include being the only non-lawyer at many parties in DC . I pay for our family's health insurance, which isn't cheap, but still cheaper than my spouse's. Fortunately, DH is in a much more lucrative field, but less stable, so it works out.

I have a tenured professor friend on the east coast. He confided in me that his pay wasn't very grand, something like $150k a year, but his wife is in finance and brings home major bank. He as a lot of opportunities to travel for conferences, board meetings, and etc. His social media page is filled with travel pictures all over the Americas and Europe. Every other week, he is having a 10 course meal with a nice bottle of wine somewhere exotic. He has more culture than all of my other friends combined. He is the smartest man I know from a raw intelligence point of view. He is also the smartest man I know from a life-enjoyment point of view.

He is smart because he married rich.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are so many colleges, law schools, etc. in small college towns with excellent cost of living. My DH is a law professor and we live in one of these. We can afford to live how we want to live -- private school, international trips, sabbaticals abroad, etc. I can afford a housecleaner if I wanted but I prefer to clean my own house and mow my own grass. Then I can use that money to travel. We specifically chose this place over Georgetown because I felt I'd be stuck working in biglaw forever to give our kids the same opporutnities in DC. No regrets! The prof friends who stayed in big cities are the only ones who complain about compensation (adjuncting is a different story....people do that because they want to have the resume line, not to make money. They'd make more as a barista[u]).

There are MANY MANY adjuncts who are stuck there because they want to work in their field and can't get a more stable position. It's a shame to put so many people on an academic track and then deny them the opportunity to make a living at it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It strongly depends what academic field. The sciences/engineering/business/law, particularly at research universities, are all going to be higher paying than the humanities.

DH makes 350 a year. Most likely that's as much as he will make.

Doing what? Even the university presidents don't make 350k/year.

University presidents make 7 figures a year. Several senior and accomplished life sciences professors at my graduate school made $400,000 a year in salary in addition to their own companies, consulting, etc. But these were people at the top of the heap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It strongly depends what academic field. The sciences/engineering/business/law, particularly at research universities, are all going to be higher paying than the humanities.

DH makes 350 a year. Most likely that's as much as he will make.

Doing what? Even the university presidents don't make 350k/year.

He's a tenured professor with an administrative appointment. Not sure what university presidents you're referring to..many presidents/deans/provosts make more than 350.

Yes - administrator. That's key. That's not really being a professor.

Yeah, you don't know what you're talking about. I said administrative appointment. His job is full professor. Without the extra, salary would be more like 300.

You understand that this is not normal...unless he works at a professional school or in medical research, maybe. Just look at the SmartClass stats. This is only typical for full professors in the top 10 schools. I'm not an academic, but I have a PhD from an HYPS school and many friends who remained in academia. My PhD adviser was candid about what he earned, and it might be around $300k annualized now...but that's a huge academic salary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It strongly depends what academic field. The sciences/engineering/business/law, particularly at research universities, are all going to be higher paying than the humanities.

DH makes 350 a year. Most likely that's as much as he will make.

Doing what? Even the university presidents don't make 350k/year.

He's a tenured professor with an administrative appointment. Not sure what university presidents you're referring to..many presidents/deans/provosts make more than 350.

Yes - administrator. That's key. That's not really being a professor.

Yeah, you don't know what you're talking about. I said administrative appointment. His job is full professor. Without the extra, salary would be more like 300.

You understand that this is not normal...unless he works at a professional school or in medical research, maybe. Just look at the SmartClass stats. This is only typical for full professors in the top 10 schools. I'm not an academic, but I have a PhD from an HYPS school and many friends who remained in academia. My PhD adviser was candid about what he earned, and it might be around $300k annualized now...but that's a huge academic salary.

what field are you in?

[Anonymous]

For 3 years (2014-16) I was a social sciences Asst. Prof. with administrative duties, 12 month contract at a VA state U: $75k.

Most of the tenure-track 9-mo. Asst. Profs were more like $45-60k.

I actually took a $20k paycut to move from a non-profit, but got a lot of autonomy, a ton of time off, decent benefits, and good experience.

When my salary didn't raise a penny during that time, and in fact essentially decreased because of increased costs for parking, insurance, etc., it was pretty discouraging. I was used to 5-12% raises and occasional bonuses in my non-profit work.

It was also just about impossible to get anything done in state government. Archaic HR laws, a constantly changing senior leadership, and constant budget cuts pretty much encouraged anyone innovative to move on quickly, leaving a bunch of disheartened or passive-aggressive people behind.

It's a shame, too, because it was my dream job on paper.

I've taken (yet another) paycut to move back into non-profit work, in a slightly different role than before, and am so glad (despite the decreased pay).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DH was a tenure track prof at AU 7 years ago - pay was less than a public school teacher and the benefits were way worse. We had to pay hundreds of dollars a month each for our kids health insurance - basically the full cost it was insane. They added ' partner benefits' but what benefits? Basically you have to have another job to survive in this area - write a textbook for freshman classes (high yield to make a lot of money, but not scholarly work), deliver newspapers- something. Marry rich?

Professors delivering newspapers on the side? That is sad I hate how little we value education in this country.

We value education, just like we also value water. But the value of a product/service is dependent on supply and demand. There is no shortage of well educated people who wants to stay in school and teach/research rather than move on to a career in the world. The reality of this is great: it will drive more such people to seek jobs elsewhere. It also allows the schools to be highly selective in who they accept to teach, improving both productivity and standard of teaching.

I don't know how true this is. It seems that universities have figured out they can save money by hiring more adjuncts and paying them a pittance (3-5k a course, no benefits) then tenure track professors who are paid at least a MC salary 70k + and benefits.

At the same time, tuition has been sky rocketing due to great salaries paid to administrators (who do...what exactly? push paper around). That is not valuing education.

Well, if an adjunct professor delivers education quality that meets the standards of the university, then what additional value do tenure-track professors bring? A separate question, is the skyrocketing tuition and admin salaries - yes we all should be outraged that colleges and universities are no longer mainly focused on education. Go visit any big state school - it's run like a luxury resort, with new buildings, new equipment, lavish facilities and landscaping. This is the direct result of easy student loans. I was in college back in the 90s - twenty years later, I don't even recognize the school from campus pictures anymore. I never dreamed of going to a out-of-state school unless I got merit scholarship - I was a pretty horrid student so in-state was pretty much my only choice. Most of my fellow classmates either worked their way through, got help from parents, or a combination thereof. The financial aid office was a small part of the admin building back then.

Tenure track professors bring grant money. They don't teach very many classes per semester. Unless it's at a teaching college (less desirable for many but not all), a tenure track professor isn't really hired for their teaching.

The adjunct-vs-tenured discussion was surrounding the topic of teaching. Again, if the economic benefit of tenured professor justifies their higher compensation, then the universities would favor them. The key here is to realize that phrases like "I hate how little we value education" show a misplaced sense of injustice.

How is it misplaced when, as a future consumer, I plan to spend upwards of $75k a year to send each of my kids to college and I see their professors being paid as little as $3-5k per course? That discrepancy doesn't seem completely NUTS to you?

The market sets how much you pay for that education, and how much the professor gets paid for providing that education. If you don't think the university is worth $75k a year, you won't send your kids there, right? If the professor's labor is worth more than $3-5k per course, the university would pay more than that, right? How much is a gallon of water worth to you right now? I agree that our education system is wasteful and has incorrect priorities, I STRONGLY agree with this observation. However, this did not arise out of lack value placed on education. Similarly, the fact that bottle water sells for more than gasoline yet costs so little at the source isn't because of how little we value water.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are so many colleges, law schools, etc. in small college towns with excellent cost of living. My DH is a law professor and we live in one of these. We can afford to live how we want to live -- private school, international trips, sabbaticals abroad, etc. I can afford a housecleaner if I wanted but I prefer to clean my own house and mow my own grass. Then I can use that money to travel. We specifically chose this place over Georgetown because I felt I'd be stuck working in biglaw forever to give our kids the same opporutnities in DC. No regrets! The prof friends who stayed in big cities are the only ones who complain about compensation (adjuncting is a different story....people do that because they want to have the resume line, not to make money. They'd make more as a barista[u]).

There are MANY MANY adjuncts who are stuck there because they want to work in their field and can't get a more stable position. It's a shame to put so many people on an academic track and then deny them the opportunity to make a living at it.

Listen to yourself, no one is denying anyone anything. It was THEIR choice to go into academic track, no one forced them into it. As with everyone else picking out a trade to practice, they picked out what they wanted to do, and must accept what the market determines as the value of their contribution. No one owes them anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For 3 years (2014-16) I was a social sciences Asst. Prof. with administrative duties, 12 month contract at a VA state U: $75k.

Most of the tenure-track 9-mo. Asst. Profs were more like $45-60k.

I actually took a $20k paycut to move from a non-profit, but got a lot of autonomy, a ton of time off, decent benefits, and good experience.

When my salary didn't raise a penny during that time, and in fact essentially decreased because of increased costs for parking, insurance, etc., it was pretty discouraging. I was used to 5-12% raises and occasional bonuses in my non-profit work.

It was also just about impossible to get anything done in state government. Archaic HR laws, a constantly changing senior leadership, and constant budget cuts pretty much encouraged anyone innovative to move on quickly, leaving a bunch of disheartened or passive-aggressive people behind.

It's a shame, too, because it was my dream job on paper.

I've taken (yet another) paycut to move back into non-profit work, in a slightly different role than before, and am so glad (despite the decreased pay).

Sounds to me like they have options. I don't know what VA university you worked at, but Virginia Tech spent $21Mil just so that the football team can practice indoors during inclement weather:

http://facilities.vt.edu/planning-construction/campus-construction-projects/recently-completed-projects/indoor-athletic-training-facility.html

$21M is small compared to the other products they recently completed, but it shows you just how much money they have to play with, to the point that they would build a structure of this magnitude just so the football players can get out of the rain/snow.

This is ridiculous.