It's eye-opening that the salary of an adjunct faculty member at Cal with 100% appointment with classes taught to 1.5K+ students (CS61A) is less than the tuition fees of 8 students.
It's eye-opening that the salary of an adjunct faculty member at Cal with 100% appointment with classes taught to 1.5K+ students (CS61A) is less than the tuition fees of 8 students.
It should be an INVESTMENT into the educational institution on the MERIT and VALUE of the degree taught and received.
Thus: If I am lured into an educational track which promises a market level pay/industry-pertinent-education which makes one employable in said field, but results in NOT... the institution should be liable for such and the investment/"tuition" should be negated and a "write-off" to the school.
That's the same as saying:
"Pay me $100 to teach you how to fight!" Gets ass kicked. "You still owe me $100 for TEACHING you how to fight."
I doubt you'll find many people that have side jobs during college to defray costs are partying their way through.
(Trump.edu anyone?)
Research output determines rankings. Teaching quality doesn't.
Now, at least some of this is academia having too strong of a filter, but the year I joined Berkeley - I was 1 of 4 to accept the offer.
At least that’s what I got from the article. Weird for a university professor to blame a union.
[0]: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2020/04/20/new-report-sa...