Teaching english in Europe with no degree but TEFL certificate?

On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 14:06:38 +0100, Earl Evleth
wrote:

Top American Universities often ask their star profs to teach
one course a semester, about 3 lecture hours per week. A full
Prof gets over $100,000 a year!

That depends a lot on the department. Scientific departments are much
better paid than humanities and social sciences.

Also the lecture hours per week is not a measure of the time spent
working. There are office hours, time spent preparing lectures,
supervising graduate students, committee meetings, et cetera.

At the other end of scale, lower level US colleges hire a lot
of "adjunct professors" at poverty wages.

And higher level universities use their graduate students as
indentured labour instead. There are some very prestigious
universities that have the reputation of making sure their students
take 5 years or more to finish their theses, so they can take
advantage of their poorly remunerated teaching services.

--
Barbara Vaughan
My email address is my first initial followed by my surname at libero dot it
I answer travel questions only in the newsgroup

Martin writes:

Rubbish. We have 4 TVs in the house it certainly didn't take 40 years
to save fir them. AFAIR all four cost less than two week's net salary.

I wasn't counting 10-inch black-and-white sets.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

David Horne, _the_ chancellor of the duchy of besses o' th' barn and
prestwich tesco 24h offy writes:

How was it prepared?

I don't know. Roasted or something. However it is that duck gets
cooked. It was pretty good, but not good enough to justify the price.

With _duck_!

I don't drink alcohol.

In any case, that's the only €200+ lunch I recall, but I think there
were others. In those days I didn't pay that much attention to the
bill.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Martin writes:

There are no well paid French CEO's in Paris. Remember?

By my standards, that's certainly true.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Martin writes:

AFAIR he claimed that CEOs lived in similar squalor to himself.

No, I observed that some CEOs live in conditions that would be
comparable to those of a simple office worker in the U.S., although
they are naturally considered luxurious here in Europe.

It does make you wonder if all the other customers spending EUR200 on a
meal in France are US tourists.

I wasn't a tourist when I did such things.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

B Vaughan writes:

That depends a lot on the department. Scientific departments are much
better paid than humanities and social sciences.

Science departments serve a practical purpose.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

On 11/01/06 16:48, in article ,
"Mxsmanic" wrote:

Earl Evleth writes:

Top American Universities often ask their star profs to teach
one course a semester, about 3 lecture hours per week. A full
Prof gets over $100,000 a year!

How many "star profs" are there in the United States?

No accurate idea. But for instance, in 2000-2001 the top 10 Universities
paid an average of slightly over $100,000/year for male full professors.
(there is a gap between male/female full professor salaries in the US
of several thousand dollars. At that time UC Berkeley paid $115,600
per year. In the year 2000-2001.

UC salary scales are known to everybody since they are published, except
those off-scale. A Nobel Prize winner or some other star type will
get considerably more, but this is voted by the Board of Regents and
that salary is secret. (http://www.aaup.org/surveys/01z/z01t7.htm)

Note that off-scale salaries might not cost the University anything.
If a top research has lots of research grants, the University will
collect enough in "overhead" on the grant to pay for the extra-pay.
I don't know what overhead rates are now in the US but 20% is not
excessive. 20% on a million dollars of grants per year would
be $200,000. So upping the pay by $50,000 is a way to keep the star
at a particular University. The net profit is still $150,000.


At the other end of scale, lower level US colleges hire a lot
of "adjunct professors" at poverty wages.

What percentage of instruction in the U.S. is dispensed by star profs,
and what percentage is dispensed by everyone else?

No accurate idea. I would guess 5% by the stars 95% by the others. It
should be stressed that star professor-searchers are largely interested in
their research and training doctoral students, plus their post-docs. So most
of the top doctoral students are trained with the stars. In Chemistry
there are about 200 Ph.D. granting departments in the US but perhaps
20-50, a quarter of them train most of the doctoral students (about
2000 a year are produced in Chemistry) and they get most of the research
grant money. So if one is talking about training the elite, the
stars do most of that.

One has to separate the system into undergraduate and graduate instruction.
Although the some stars don't mind giving large lecture course, such as in
first year Chemistry (for instance) this is mostly done by the newcomers,
the new Assistant Professors and Teaching Assistants. The adjunct
professors do not contribute to the teaching at the best universities but
are hired in at the 2 and 4 year colleges. They are contractual, sign on for
a year, no tenure (obviously) and not that well paid. Not all full profs
are stars but they get high salaries and probably do less teaching (or teach
the choice courses) than the new comers. It is a very structured system.

On 11 Jan 2006 14:26:33 +0000, Des Small
wrote:

Juliana L Holm writes:

DDT Filled Mormons wrote:

I know a few people teaching here in Italy, and they do just
fine. You also need to be mother-tongue English too if you want to
have a chance. Actually, none of the guys I know even have their
TEFL certificate I don't think! The most important thing seems to
be being presentable, and having the right bits of paper to work.

I thought TEFL by definition meant not mother tongue English? But I
may be wrong, so please educate me.

TEFL means _teaching_ English as a foreign langwidge. It is the
_students_ who are expected not to be native speakers; it is a plus if
the _teacher_ is. (Unless it's Mixi, of course.)

My wife is teaching English, but only to beginners. Fortunately in
these parts that's about the only form they come in, and no-one is
likely to know she isn't mother tongue. She has no TEFL cert.
--
---
DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com
---
--

On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 13:53:22 +0100, Mxsmanic
wrote:

Tim C. writes:

How do they find the time?

The source of income is usually a working partner.

Utter bull****. The in between times can be used to do other jobs,
such as translation. This can be a good combination and result in a
reasonable income if you do it right. If you just rely on teaching,
you are just plain useless.

Speaking English is a veritable cash cow if you know what you're
doing.
--
---
DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com
---
--

On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 18:30:55 +0100, Mxsmanic
wrote:

In any case, that's the only €200+ lunch I recall, but I think there
were others. In those days I didn't pay that much attention to the
bill.

Perhaps you should have had a burger instead and done something wise
with the rest.
--
---
DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com
---
--