Re:Georgia Tech professors revolt over reopening, say curren...
by joshuamorton on Sunday July 05, 2020 @06:26PM
(#23742646)
> But you are not getting any of these either! You seem to focus too much on lectures. The learning experience obviously includes all that above.
I know, that's why I said "And you can't provide the everything else anyway." That has nothing to do with the professor. The professor's value doesn't affect the value one gets from extracurriculars. The professor shouldn't be paid less because the university can't provide extracurriculars, because, under your scheme the professor is still providing the same value.
> Saying that a professor produces even more value online is absurd
A single professor can, on campus, teach a course of at most ~200 students. Some universities can support more for a few courses due to larger lecture halls, but at Georgia Tech 2-250 is the limit. On the other hand, in an online course the same professor can teach thousands of students. Georgia Tech is the prime example here: the OMSCS program has professors teaching tons of students per professor.
> Most of the professors there haven't got a clue on how to design an online course.
Indeed, and you'll see that many of the professors are complaining because they weren't given clear timelines. You overestimate the time component required for many subjects, I saw approximately 3 months to convert an existing on campus CS course to online, given the resources (which Tech has), which again, remember this is a university with the resources and experience to provide multiple masters degree programs entirely online, has at least one lab devoted to online education and MOOC research, etc.
> My opinion firmly stands, none of these universities can even hope to pay their professors the same if they teach online.
Sure, but not because the professor is providing in less value, but because the university is providing less value.
I know, that's why I said "And you can't provide the everything else anyway." That has nothing to do with the professor. The professor's value doesn't affect the value one gets from extracurriculars. The professor shouldn't be paid less because the university can't provide extracurriculars, because, under your scheme the professor is still providing the same value.
> Saying that a professor produces even more value online is absurd
A single professor can, on campus, teach a course of at most ~200 students. Some universities can support more for a few courses due to larger lecture halls, but at Georgia Tech 2-250 is the limit. On the other hand, in an online course the same professor can teach thousands of students. Georgia Tech is the prime example here: the OMSCS program has professors teaching tons of students per professor.
> Most of the professors there haven't got a clue on how to design an online course.
Indeed, and you'll see that many of the professors are complaining because they weren't given clear timelines. You overestimate the time component required for many subjects, I saw approximately 3 months to convert an existing on campus CS course to online, given the resources (which Tech has), which again, remember this is a university with the resources and experience to provide multiple masters degree programs entirely online, has at least one lab devoted to online education and MOOC research, etc.
> My opinion firmly stands, none of these universities can even hope to pay their professors the same if they teach online.
Sure, but not because the professor is providing in less value, but because the university is providing less value.