Question for parents, from a professor

[Anonymous]

What happens to the students who get double time in the real world? Do their careers allow them extra time for deadlines? I’m not being snarky, really wondering.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I despise profs who are sticklers for student deadlines. It’s cruel and completely unnecessary.

You know who misses all the deadlines at work and who never gets fired? Tenured profs.

BS. What deadlines do we miss? We have grant deadlines, publication deadlines, reporting deadlines, grade submission deadlines, and on and on. Trust me, we're not imposing anything on students that we don't have to deal with ourselves.

Anything related to teaching? Showing up to class on time, grading assignments, providing assignments….

DP. Such hypocrisy. Publishing a book or article is a part of the "real world." You are getting paid for it and you have deadlines.

Why no, profs don’t get paid for publishing articles (or doing peer review) and you typically initiate the publication process when you have the article already written. Deadlines only kick in if accepted and then they’re for relatively minor revisions.

I’ve never seen profs who don’t show up on time to class. The only assignments-based deadlines externally imposed involve submission of final grades to the Registrar (and profs meet those). Grading assignments takes as long as it takes (can’t always anticipate how long that will be — it’s a function of how many/what kinds of mistakes students made, how much help you have from TAs, how much time TAs have (they’re taking classes too)). When/how many assignments to provide is up to the prof (and subject to change). Main reason for change (which is relatively rare) is students need more time.

There are lots of deadlines in academia (letters of rec, grant apps, conference proposals, tenure files), but many posters here seem to have a variety of misunderstandings re how the job works. And it’s all “the real world,” which includes lots of different kinds of jobs and levels (and types) of supervision and of time pressure.

Oh come on, if you are a salaried professor and not an adjunct, you do get paid for publishing and peer review. That is part of your job. You're not just paid per credit hour, this is how salaries work.

Other than that, I'm fully with you. I just hate it when academics say stuff like "we don't get paid to publish" and "we don't get vacation time." Your salary covers research;if you think it's not enough that's a different issue. You may not get vacation days but your workplace is CLOSED between Christmas and New Year's and nobody is nickle and diming your PTO over summer break, would you really want to make that trade? I'm the spouse of a professor and it took me 5 years from leaving academia to build up to the level of time off my partner has. (On the other hand, I may never have to apply for grants again and I couldn't be more thrilled to avoid that pressure! )

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What happens to the students who get double time in the real world? Do their careers allow them extra time for deadlines? I’m not being snarky, really wondering.

My brother was one of those people. He turned out to have an aptitude for fundraising, and has focused his career on the people aspects (face to face fundraising and managing a team) rather than deadline driven reporting. You can shape your environment a lot if you break the $$$ records.

[Anonymous]

I had a few ADHD staff who were brilliant but needed to be given work with a combination of short deliverables and flexibility built into the deadlines. I would get great work out of them but as a manager needed to structure it differently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I despise profs who are sticklers for student deadlines. It’s cruel and completely unnecessary.

You know who misses all the deadlines at work and who never gets fired? Tenured profs.

BS. What deadlines do we miss? We have grant deadlines, publication deadlines, reporting deadlines, grade submission deadlines, and on and on. Trust me, we're not imposing anything on students that we don't have to deal with ourselves.

Anything related to teaching? Showing up to class on time, grading assignments, providing assignments….

DP. Such hypocrisy. Publishing a book or article is a part of the "real world." You are getting paid for it and you have deadlines.

Why no, profs don’t get paid for publishing articles (or doing peer review) and you typically initiate the publication process when you have the article already written. Deadlines only kick in if accepted and then they’re for relatively minor revisions.

I’ve never seen profs who don’t show up on time to class. The only assignments-based deadlines externally imposed involve submission of final grades to the Registrar (and profs meet those). Grading assignments takes as long as it takes (can’t always anticipate how long that will be — it’s a function of how many/what kinds of mistakes students made, how much help you have from TAs, how much time TAs have (they’re taking classes too)). When/how many assignments to provide is up to the prof (and subject to change). Main reason for change (which is relatively rare) is students need more time.

There are lots of deadlines in academia (letters of rec, grant apps, conference proposals, tenure files), but many posters here seem to have a variety of misunderstandings re how the job works. And it’s all “the real world,” which includes lots of different kinds of jobs and levels (and types) of supervision and of time pressure.

Oh come on, if you are a salaried professor and not an adjunct, you do get paid for publishing and peer review. That is part of your job. You're not just paid per credit hour, this is how salaries work.

Other than that, I'm fully with you. I just hate it when academics say stuff like "we don't get paid to publish" and "we don't get vacation time." Your salary covers research;if you think it's not enough that's a different issue. You may not get vacation days but your workplace is CLOSED between Christmas and New Year's and nobody is nickle and diming your PTO over summer break, would you really want to make that trade? I'm the spouse of a professor and it took me 5 years from leaving academia to build up to the level of time off my partner has. (On the other hand, I may never have to apply for grants again and I couldn't be more thrilled to avoid that pressure! )

No, you may get promoted (or not) based on pubs, but you don’t get paid for articles (and certainly not by their publishers, aka the ones imposing deadlines and profiting from your work). You don’t lose pay if you refuse to do peer review or write letters of rec and different people with the same pay do wildly different amounts of this kind of work. Salaries don’t cover research costs (including time) — which is why academics have to spend time applying for grants.

I agree with you that different jobs come with different time-money trade-offs and when people complain about theirs, it does sometimes seem like they conveniently forget the perks they get in exchange for downsides.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I despise profs who are sticklers for student deadlines. It’s cruel and completely unnecessary.

You know who misses all the deadlines at work and who never gets fired? Tenured profs.

BS. What deadlines do we miss? We have grant deadlines, publication deadlines, reporting deadlines, grade submission deadlines, and on and on. Trust me, we're not imposing anything on students that we don't have to deal with ourselves.

Anything related to teaching? Showing up to class on time, grading assignments, providing assignments….

DP. Such hypocrisy. Publishing a book or article is a part of the "real world." You are getting paid for it and you have deadlines.

Why no, profs don’t get paid for publishing articles (or doing peer review) and you typically initiate the publication process when you have the article already written. Deadlines only kick in if accepted and then they’re for relatively minor revisions.

I’ve never seen profs who don’t show up on time to class. The only assignments-based deadlines externally imposed involve submission of final grades to the Registrar (and profs meet those). Grading assignments takes as long as it takes (can’t always anticipate how long that will be — it’s a function of how many/what kinds of mistakes students made, how much help you have from TAs, how much time TAs have (they’re taking classes too)). When/how many assignments to provide is up to the prof (and subject to change). Main reason for change (which is relatively rare) is students need more time.

There are lots of deadlines in academia (letters of rec, grant apps, conference proposals, tenure files), but many posters here seem to have a variety of misunderstandings re how the job works. And it’s all “the real world,” which includes lots of different kinds of jobs and levels (and types) of supervision and of time pressure.

Oh come on, if you are a salaried professor and not an adjunct, you do get paid for publishing and peer review. That is part of your job. You're not just paid per credit hour, this is how salaries work.

Other than that, I'm fully with you. I just hate it when academics say stuff like "we don't get paid to publish" and "we don't get vacation time." Your salary covers research;if you think it's not enough that's a different issue. You may not get vacation days but your workplace is CLOSED between Christmas and New Year's and nobody is nickle and diming your PTO over summer break, would you really want to make that trade? I'm the spouse of a professor and it took me 5 years from leaving academia to build up to the level of time off my partner has. (On the other hand, I may never have to apply for grants again and I couldn't be more thrilled to avoid that pressure! )

No, you may get promoted (or not) based on pubs, but you don’t get paid for articles (and certainly not by their publishers, aka the ones imposing deadlines and profiting from your work). You don’t lose pay if you refuse to do peer review or write letters of rec and different people with the same pay do wildly different amounts of this kind of work. Salaries don’t cover research costs (including time) — which is why academics have to spend time applying for grants.

I agree with you that different jobs come with different time-money trade-offs and when people complain about theirs, it does sometimes seem like they conveniently forget the perks they get in exchange for downsides.

Why on earth would the publishers pay you for articles? Do you think it doesn't count as getting paid unless you get a bonus? If research productivity is something that is in your job description at all, and you get evaluated for it, it's part of the job you are paid a salary for. If you get promoted for doing it, and can lose your job for not doing it, your salary is supposed to cover it. This is one of the reasons that people justify paying adjuncts less - they are "only" supposed to teach, and TT professors are supposed to teach AND do research and service. This is making me feel crazy because I feel like I'm just explaining how salaries work! Research is only 20% of my job description, it is hard to find time for amidst the other 80% (in my case, project and people management) and i don't get paid extra for it, but i can get penalized for not doing it - how is that NOT salary covering it?

Whether salaries cover research time is incredibly variable in academia, but "salary doesn't cover it" as a sweeping statement is just not true. Not everyone is expected to replace partial salary with grants, thats very school and discipline dependent, and one of the major reasons teaching loads are so much lower at R1 schools than small regional ones is that the professors are expected to be using more of their *salaried* time for research regardless of external funding.

There ARE "teaching professor" positions out there that are salaried, but include only teaching and no research, and generally aren't TT. If that's the kind of job you're in I apologize, you're right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What happens to the students who get double time in the real world? Do their careers allow them extra time for deadlines? I’m not being snarky, really wondering.

They learn more executive function skills as they go along, or learn ways to accomodate them. And they choose jobs/careers where these issues don't matter as much. Once you are out of school and can focus your energies on the things that you are interested in/enjoy/are more successful at, life gets easier.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I despise profs who are sticklers for student deadlines. It’s cruel and completely unnecessary.

You know who misses all the deadlines at work and who never gets fired? Tenured profs.

BS. What deadlines do we miss? We have grant deadlines, publication deadlines, reporting deadlines, grade submission deadlines, and on and on. Trust me, we're not imposing anything on students that we don't have to deal with ourselves.

Anything related to teaching? Showing up to class on time, grading assignments, providing assignments….

DP. Such hypocrisy. Publishing a book or article is a part of the "real world." You are getting paid for it and you have deadlines.

Why no, profs don’t get paid for publishing articles (or doing peer review) and you typically initiate the publication process when you have the article already written. Deadlines only kick in if accepted and then they’re for relatively minor revisions.

I’ve never seen profs who don’t show up on time to class. The only assignments-based deadlines externally imposed involve submission of final grades to the Registrar (and profs meet those). Grading assignments takes as long as it takes (can’t always anticipate how long that will be — it’s a function of how many/what kinds of mistakes students made, how much help you have from TAs, how much time TAs have (they’re taking classes too)). When/how many assignments to provide is up to the prof (and subject to change). Main reason for change (which is relatively rare) is students need more time.

There are lots of deadlines in academia (letters of rec, grant apps, conference proposals, tenure files), but many posters here seem to have a variety of misunderstandings re how the job works. And it’s all “the real world,” which includes lots of different kinds of jobs and levels (and types) of supervision and of time pressure.

Oh come on, if you are a salaried professor and not an adjunct, you do get paid for publishing and peer review. That is part of your job. You're not just paid per credit hour, this is how salaries work.

Other than that, I'm fully with you. I just hate it when academics say stuff like "we don't get paid to publish" and "we don't get vacation time." Your salary covers research;if you think it's not enough that's a different issue. You may not get vacation days but your workplace is CLOSED between Christmas and New Year's and nobody is nickle and diming your PTO over summer break, would you really want to make that trade? I'm the spouse of a professor and it took me 5 years from leaving academia to build up to the level of time off my partner has. (On the other hand, I may never have to apply for grants again and I couldn't be more thrilled to avoid that pressure! )

No, you may get promoted (or not) based on pubs, but you don’t get paid for articles (and certainly not by their publishers, aka the ones imposing deadlines and profiting from your work). You don’t lose pay if you refuse to do peer review or write letters of rec and different people with the same pay do wildly different amounts of this kind of work. Salaries don’t cover research costs (including time) — which is why academics have to spend time applying for grants.

I agree with you that different jobs come with different time-money trade-offs and when people complain about theirs, it does sometimes seem like they conveniently forget the perks they get in exchange for downsides.

Why on earth would the publishers pay you for articles? Do you think it doesn't count as getting paid unless you get a bonus? If research productivity is something that is in your job description at all, and you get evaluated for it, it's part of the job you are paid a salary for. If you get promoted for doing it, and can lose your job for not doing it, your salary is supposed to cover it. This is one of the reasons that people justify paying adjuncts less - they are "only" supposed to teach, and TT professors are supposed to teach AND do research and service. This is making me feel crazy because I feel like I'm just explaining how salaries work! Research is only 20% of my job description, it is hard to find time for amidst the other 80% (in my case, project and people management) and i don't get paid extra for it, but i can get penalized for not doing it - how is that NOT salary covering it?

Whether salaries cover research time is incredibly variable in academia, but "salary doesn't cover it" as a sweeping statement is just not true. Not everyone is expected to replace partial salary with grants, thats very school and discipline dependent, and one of the major reasons teaching loads are so much lower at R1 schools than small regional ones is that the professors are expected to be using more of their *salaried* time for research regardless of external funding.

There ARE "teaching professor" positions out there that are salaried, but include only teaching and no research, and generally aren't TT. If that's the kind of job you're in I apologize, you're right.

Publishers routinely pay writers for articles. Scholarly writing is an exception to this general rule.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I despise profs who are sticklers for student deadlines. It’s cruel and completely unnecessary.

You know who misses all the deadlines at work and who never gets fired? Tenured profs.

BS. What deadlines do we miss? We have grant deadlines, publication deadlines, reporting deadlines, grade submission deadlines, and on and on. Trust me, we're not imposing anything on students that we don't have to deal with ourselves.

Anything related to teaching? Showing up to class on time, grading assignments, providing assignments….

DP. Such hypocrisy. Publishing a book or article is a part of the "real world." You are getting paid for it and you have deadlines.

Why no, profs don’t get paid for publishing articles (or doing peer review) and you typically initiate the publication process when you have the article already written. Deadlines only kick in if accepted and then they’re for relatively minor revisions.

I’ve never seen profs who don’t show up on time to class. The only assignments-based deadlines externally imposed involve submission of final grades to the Registrar (and profs meet those). Grading assignments takes as long as it takes (can’t always anticipate how long that will be — it’s a function of how many/what kinds of mistakes students made, how much help you have from TAs, how much time TAs have (they’re taking classes too)). When/how many assignments to provide is up to the prof (and subject to change). Main reason for change (which is relatively rare) is students need more time.

There are lots of deadlines in academia (letters of rec, grant apps, conference proposals, tenure files), but many posters here seem to have a variety of misunderstandings re how the job works. And it’s all “the real world,” which includes lots of different kinds of jobs and levels (and types) of supervision and of time pressure.

Oh come on, if you are a salaried professor and not an adjunct, you do get paid for publishing and peer review. That is part of your job. You're not just paid per credit hour, this is how salaries work.

Other than that, I'm fully with you. I just hate it when academics say stuff like "we don't get paid to publish" and "we don't get vacation time." Your salary covers research;if you think it's not enough that's a different issue. You may not get vacation days but your workplace is CLOSED between Christmas and New Year's and nobody is nickle and diming your PTO over summer break, would you really want to make that trade? I'm the spouse of a professor and it took me 5 years from leaving academia to build up to the level of time off my partner has. (On the other hand, I may never have to apply for grants again and I couldn't be more thrilled to avoid that pressure! )

No, you may get promoted (or not) based on pubs, but you don’t get paid for articles (and certainly not by their publishers, aka the ones imposing deadlines and profiting from your work). You don’t lose pay if you refuse to do peer review or write letters of rec and different people with the same pay do wildly different amounts of this kind of work. Salaries don’t cover research costs (including time) — which is why academics have to spend time applying for grants.

I agree with you that different jobs come with different time-money trade-offs and when people complain about theirs, it does sometimes seem like they conveniently forget the perks they get in exchange for downsides.

Why on earth would the publishers pay you for articles? Do you think it doesn't count as getting paid unless you get a bonus? If research productivity is something that is in your job description at all, and you get evaluated for it, it's part of the job you are paid a salary for. If you get promoted for doing it, and can lose your job for not doing it, your salary is supposed to cover it. This is one of the reasons that people justify paying adjuncts less - they are "only" supposed to teach, and TT professors are supposed to teach AND do research and service. This is making me feel crazy because I feel like I'm just explaining how salaries work! Research is only 20% of my job description, it is hard to find time for amidst the other 80% (in my case, project and people management) and i don't get paid extra for it, but i can get penalized for not doing it - how is that NOT salary covering it?

Whether salaries cover research time is incredibly variable in academia, but "salary doesn't cover it" as a sweeping statement is just not true. Not everyone is expected to replace partial salary with grants, thats very school and discipline dependent, and one of the major reasons teaching loads are so much lower at R1 schools than small regional ones is that the professors are expected to be using more of their *salaried* time for research regardless of external funding.

There ARE "teaching professor" positions out there that are salaried, but include only teaching and no research, and generally aren't TT. If that's the kind of job you're in I apologize, you're right.

Publishers routinely pay writers for articles. Scholarly writing is an exception to this general rule.

Scholarly writing is very clearly the context here.

[Anonymous]

I work for a Fortune 100 corporation that is often listed as a "most admired" corporation.

At work, it's common for deadlines to get extended, as the project evolves. The goal is to have high-quality work.

So I don't think it's essential for the professors in college to be super strict with deadlines, as the workplace (at least mine) does not seem to be that way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Know what always amuses me? People who think being a total hardass teaches anything other than how to be an asshole.

Sure, maybe for military boot camp when you are trying to keep enlisted men from getting killed and you have 6 weeks. But for parents, teachers, bosses, it's always a net negative.

Have rules and be reasonable about them.

As for OP: Hey Prof, what are YOUR goals and objectives for the class you teach? What do you want to result when the semester ends?

Thank you. When I was in college at a highly ranked public university, the famous professors that people fought to have were never hard asses with deadlines. Their classes were usually demanding but they were human and worked with students. They were the most inspiring profs and encouraged lots of students to major in their subjects. I had some fantastic professors and they were, to a t decent humans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What happens to the students who get double time in the real world? Do their careers allow them extra time for deadlines? I’m not being snarky, really wondering.

They learn more executive function skills as they go along, or learn ways to accomodate them. And they choose jobs/careers where these issues don't matter as much. Once you are out of school and can focus your energies on the things that you are interested in/enjoy/are more successful at, life gets easier.

I hate the argument my own kid has had to hear from their dept chair that they won't get extended time at their job. The professor doesn't need to focus on this aspect of the job for my kid. Also I'm a software engineer and have seen both private sector and government employers work with employees with disabilities. The ignorance in assuming what the working world looks like makes me angry. We work in teams and are very used to working with employees with these issues. Some academics need to get out of their bubbles. My kid is at a small college that is supposedly very supportive of students with disabilities. My kid's dept heads are not and have been refusing to give kid the accommodations the school agreed to. One of the profs likes to humiliate the kids with disabilities - made one student with dyslexia read out loud in the class when they never do that, made a kid with dysgraphia hand write stuff in front of class when they don't do that. I no longer support the school and am trying to talk my kid in to transferring. The worst professors are the ones that went to top notch schools like Stanford yet teach at this small not very well rated school. Their goal is to exclude students with differences from college.

[Anonymous]

100% deadlines are important to stick to

Only emergencies ie sick with a Drs note, death in family, car accident.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:100% deadlines are important to stick to

Only emergencies ie sick with a Drs note, death in family, car accident.

In other words, 100% except for the exceptions I mention.

So not 100%.

Pretty much the consensus. Not 100%, we may disagree about what are acceptable circumstances, and all but the most dense would understand there are degrees, variables, and compromises.

Lol. I love an answer that says "100% except..."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Any job with tenure is not ‘the real world’

I work at a university and 70% of the classes are taught by non-tenure track faculty. Most of those people are on yearly contracts.