Depth v. breadth in teaching experience

[futureapppsy2]

I have the opportunity to teach a masters-level counseling class as instructor of record in the Fall; I've taught it the prior Fall and got some really nice evals. My other option is to TA one of two masters-level classes, neither of which I've taught or TA'ed before (my program won't let you teach a class as a grad student until you've TA'ed it). Would it be better to be the instructor of record of the same course twice or to have more variety in classes worked with?

For context, I also have a semester teaching a course as an instructor of record in an unrelated field (or at least nothing I would teach at any of the jobs I'm applying for) and a few prior semesters of TAing that, three semesters of TA'ing an intensive masters counseling skills class, instructor of record for a couple of undergrad seminars (one for one semester, one for four), and one semester of TAing an undergrad course. Oh, and a couple of semesters of TAing 101 in undergrad, though I'm not sure if that counts for anything. I'm also helping to supervise masters-level prac students this summer and possibly in fall. All of my TAships include at least one guest lecture per semester, up to four.

My goal is TT faculty at an R1 or R2, possibly with a post-doc beforehand. I'll be on the job market this coming fall, save anything drastic.

Thanks!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

My gut response is that instructor of record is almost always going to be better; even if it's the same class, you can still save those evals, and also speak to ways in which you actively implemented feedback from your first go round into your second attempt.

Caveat: I'm in a fully clinical position and have never looked into academic/TT appointments.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

My gut response is that instructor of record is almost always going to be better; even if it's the same class, you can still save those evals, and also speak to ways in which you actively implemented feedback from your first go round into your second attempt.

This.

TA'ing (and even guest lecturing) are good experiences, but being the instructor of record includes figuring out the syllabus (even if some classes already have a suggested one), as well as how you work with your TAs, etc.

You'll also want to have a teaching portfolio, which I believe was talked about on here a few years back. I can't remember if I started a thread about it or just posted about it, but the link is a great place to start.

 

[futureapppsy2]

This.

TA'ing (and even guest lecturing) are good experiences, but being the instructor of record includes figuring out the syllabus (even if some classes already have a suggested one), as well as how you work with your TAs, etc.

You'll also want to have a teaching portfolio, which I believe was talked about on here a few years back. I can't remember if I started a thread about it or just posted about it, but the link is a great place to start.

So, teaching the same class twice would still look good?

(Thanks for the link--I actually remember the thread you mention!)

 

[smalltownpsych]

So, teaching the same class twice would still look good?

(Thanks for the link--I actually remember the thread you mention!)

It shows that you did well enough that they wanted you to do it again.

 

[EmotRegulation]

Instructor of record is going to look better most of the time. My only question is if the other course you could TA for would be substantively different from things you've done? If you are aiming for R1, teaching experience won't matter as much as your CV, but it absolutely might matter when choosing between candidates who have great CVs (it has for us, I know). Teaching experience with "harder" courses can also help with candidate desirability (e.g., methods, statistics). So, like, if the TA experience is for graduate level statistics, that actually might be more useful than a masters counseling class, which anyone with a PhD in clinical should be able to teach. It's a matter of how you are trying to bill yourself when you go on the market.

 

[Ollie123]

Not to be the voice of dissent (actually...yes, to be exactly that) but I think it is worth considering the TA position. In my view, it would largely hinge on what the course is and what the likelihood is of you being able to serve as instructor of record in the spring. If its a course that is in-demand on the academic market (basically anything that either its hard to find someone qualified to teach or hard to find someone willing to teach - i.e. methods, stats) and TAing in the fall virtually guarantees you get to serve as instructor in the spring...I'd go for that. Gives you something to talk about on the interview trail even if it doesn't help much with apps going in during summer/fall. If you don't land something right away its a significant boost for next years apps.

If either one of those two criteria are absent, I'd probably go for the instructor position. You already have solid teaching experience and diversity so its not a huge deal either way though. We're told for the R1 market, even two undergrad preps is plenty. I've heard from several folks on search committees at extremely research-intensive places who insisted its 50/50 whether they care enough to even open a teaching portfolio. Those places are certainly the exception rather than the rule though.

 

[futureapppsy2]

Instructor of record is going to look better most of the time. My only question is if the other course you could TA for would be substantively different from things you've done? If you are aiming for R1, teaching experience won't matter as much as your CV, but it absolutely might matter when choosing between candidates who have great CVs (it has for us, I know). Teaching experience with "harder" courses can also help with candidate desirability (e.g., methods, statistics). So, like, if the TA experience is for graduate level statistics, that actually might be more useful than a masters counseling class, which anyone with a PhD in clinical should be able to teach. It's a matter of how you are trying to bill yourself when you go on the market.

One of the TA options is masters-level methods. The instructor of record class is masters-level ethics. I see your and @Ollie123 's point about being able to teach methods, as it's something that I'm legitimately very interested in teaching (as is ethics). I'm not sure if we offer it in the Spring as well--I'll have to check.

 

[Pragma]

I doubt it matters at an R1 and at an R2 I'd wager the IOR is usually going to be more meaningful. Once you secure a position you probably won't even list TA experiences anymore.

ETA: on search committees I've been on, we don't count TA experiences as teaching experience when evaluating a large number of CVs.