Talk:Lecturer

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

October 2006[edit]

I think there is a position in the US called Research Prof which is the same as a reader. Also, I don't think that the career progression via reader is linear. Indeed at the university I work at they are phasing out that position.

--- Urr this is not true at all. Research Professors do exist, but in most cases this refers to someone who is on soft money.

I would suggest that the table showing equivalent ranks of UK old and new, and US, academic ranks, is not correct. A US associate professor with tenure is not equivalent to a reader. Tenure as an associate professor is possible after 6 years, a reader will invariably be much more senior. A US associate professor, with or without tenure, is equivalent to a senior lecturer, and a professor is equivalent to a reader. A professor with a named chair in the US is equivalent to a UK professor.Ncox 21:16, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The scale is very approximate (as it says). But I believe that anyone with tenure is roughly equivalent to a reader, because they have gone through the process of proving they can get funding and supervise strong PhD students, and they have at least 5 letters from external experts in their field saying that their research has changed their field. It is true that there are far fewer readers than associate professors, and that some people prefer being readers to accepting chairs. But I disagree that you can say that someone with tenure is like a sr. lecturer. I think you should look for a way to add another sentence or two into the text saying how prestigious a readership is, although I've already tried to do that.--Jaibe 21:24, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd suggest that the relative numbers of readers versus associate professors are an indication of equivalent ranks. Also I've acted as a referee for tenure applications in the USA and for promotion applications to senior lecturer in the UK (I'm a full professor in New Zealand), and I'd say that they are broadly similar - though it must also be said that Australian and New Zealand senior lecturers are lower than those in the UK. Have a look at the Association of Commonwealth Universities website. They have some fascinating publications on academic salary equivalenceNcox 23:03, 29 October 2006 (UTC).[reply]

"incorrect assertion"[edit]

Ncox edited this out as an incorrect assertion:

One consequence of this is that UK academics can spend long careers as lecturers or senior lecturers without ever receiving promotion to professor.

Many UK academics retire in the position of senior lecturer after a full career as an academic. In fact, I would say not admitting this runs contrary to the above argument that readerships are more prestigious than associate professorships.

This is not a consequence of the previous statement, though something which is quite true. The two sentences are not contingent. Ncox 22:59, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have asked around, and the trend to replace 'Reader' in the UK with 'Associate Professor' seems to be gaining ground. The only explanation I can find is commesurability with the North American system. Warwick was definitely the first to do it. The LSE had a vote on this, and decided not to follow their example. If this trend contines the article will have to be reworked. SB 10 Nov 06

The Senate of Imperial College London also examined the issue and rejected the change, citing that the current UK ranks were "well-understood", even in the US, and therefore any modifications would be unnecessary. Given that both Imperial and LSE have effectively now voted down using the American system and both Cambridge and Oxford are unlikely to move in that direction any time soon, I don't see how one can claim the trend is "gaining ground".200.177.192.118 11:22, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Naive?[edit]

Did you mean to say "naive or foreign academics" or is this a typo? Deadstar 09:17, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How could it be a typo? I mean "foreign or naive" --- obviously someone from another country can't be expected to know that "senior lecturer" means two different things at apparently identical types of institutions (in theory all UK universities are on the same pay scale, though not actually any more), but I have also seen English people get fooled by this!--Jaibe 21:24, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry - I just thought that maybe it was "native" indicating that even people from the country itself are confused by it. Thanks for the clarification. Deadstar 16:01, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
ah! yeah, it could have been a typo for "native", I hadn't thought of that :-) If you think of a way to clarify it in the text, please do. --Jaibe 21:30, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Tenure in the UK[edit]

I am confused about the statement that British universities have largely given up tenure. Isn't tenure still granted to faculty members in old universities like Cambridge and Oxford ? If the answer is yes, at what level is one normally offered tenure (upon being promoted to Reader or upon taking a professorship only) ? Toeplitz 18:44, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know about Oxbridge, but Edinburgh is fairly old and they phased out tenure about 30 years ago. Basically, you couldn't get promotion if you didn't sign a new contract giving up your tenure. A few people studying controversial issues (e.g. individual differences in IQ, primate testing) refused promotion to chairs rather than give up their tenure, but most accepted, and no one new is getting it.
You do get a permanent job after 3 years in the UK (well, most people pass "probation" and get this), but tenure is different because you can't be layed off / made redundant if you have tenure, even if your entire department is closed.--Jaibe 20:29, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It was abolished in the 1980s by the Thatcher government. I think there are still a few old profs who have it as their contracts were signed before the changes, but noadays no-one is permanent, and some unis are starting to lay off underperforming teaching staff, most notably Queen Mary's in London which seems to be hiring and firing like an investment bank nowadays. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.167.9.248 (talk) 17:07, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

US/UK table[edit]

What is the basis for this table. As far as I understood the system a senior lecturer in the UK, which is a tenured post, is equivalent to a US Full Professor. Where are the sources for this? Billlion (talk) 21:47, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment factors for UK academics[edit]

How do UK universities - particularly law faculties - assess the candidates for certain posts? I.e., is there a guideline requiring a certain number of publications for the post of a "reader" or "professor"? Besides, if such a guideline exists, do publications in foreign languages count? Thanks a lot! Tim. 171.66.60.147 (talk) 22:06, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Promotions policy varies by institution, so no there is no such guidelne that could be included in the article. Typically a university will have a list of promotion criteria, but these will be interpreted differently in each department. The contribution to the RAE is generally going to be a factor as well as research income in most areas.Billlion (talk) 07:20, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Opening is misleading[edit]

The opening statements are very misleading, for in them we are told that in the United Kingdom, lecturer is a title for those at university in their first "permanent" position. In fact, a lecturer may only hold a temporary or fixed term contract and would still be a lecturer. This opening was also rather patronising; the name "lecturer" is typically given to a teacher who teaches in a place other than a school and in the post-compulsory education sector, so this would include those who lecture at colleges of further education or at sixth form colleges. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 23:47, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"often holds a permanent position" Mootros (talk) 13:58, 4 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Clarify pre-1992 universities[edit]

Can we have a clarifying sentence about pre-1992 universities to be sure it is understood what this means? At least I am not sure about it. --maye (talk) 18:30, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lecturer. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:28, 13 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lecturer. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:50, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Warwick[edit]

Reader and associate professor are not the same thing at Warwick.88.111.239.43 (talk) 15:45, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

About the picture[edit]

I do not like the picture (as of Jun 26th) and it should be replaced. Why is the lecturer surprised? --193.136.33.132 (talk) 16:57, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is not the only problem of the picture. The person is not a lecturer but a school teacher. I deleted the image. --Redrobsche (talk) 19:59, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lecturer&oldid=1203443138"