teaching with a Masters

[BlackSkirtTetra]

As I've been researching everything the past few days, I've come upon something curious: three instances of women who teach college with only their Masters (no PhD).

One of these women was at my undergraduate school (a private liberal arts college) and I had known about her for a while. She is an MS, LMFT and teaches family studies at the undergraduate level. Her title is "instructor." She has been in the same position for a couple decades.

The second is an MSW and teaches graduate social work at a public university I originally applied to. Her title is also "instructor." I don't know how long she's been there or if she intends to get her PhD. I sent her an email the day before yesterday but didn't get a response yet (in retrospect, it's possible she considered my question offensive).

The third is listed on yet another public university's website as "MSSW ACSW" and I sent her the same email that I sent the second. I don't want to copy and paste her response word-for-word, but she said she does not have her PhD, and she has no plans of getting it. She said she teaches both undergraduate and graduate courses in a specialized area (learning disabilities) and does not need her PhD. She started out as the director of the university-affiliated childcare center, and then later became an instructor (she basically sent me her whole resume, lol).

How common is this? I have zero interest in teaching, but in researching my own professors (who all have their PhDs), I now wonder.

Would you study under somebody with no PhD?

Thank you so much. I'm glad this board is here for people like me with ten million questions!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[krnlady]

im actually really curious about this too, because I would love to teach with a Master's. As far as i know, you can teach community college and some state schools with a master's....

 

[BlackSkirtTetra]

I don't mean any offense, but I don't think I would want to be taught by somebody who hadn't done all the research that comes with a PhD. It would vary depending on the subject (interviewing skills VS neuropsychology, for example) and the person, though.

On the other hand, the one elective I took in undergraduate taught by somebody with only a Masters was one of my favorite courses for a whole bunch of reasons.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

im actually really curious about this too, because I would love to teach with a Master's. As far as i know, you can teach community college and some state schools with a master's....

It depends on the area of study (subject and gen-ed v. upper-level class), as well as AA, BA/BS, MA/MS level classes. I have seen it more commonly at the community college level, though it happens at 4-year colleges too. I think a point of clarification is whether the person is currently enrolled in a doctoral program and is teaching, as it is quite common to have someone with an MA/MS teach as part of their training. I think it is possible, though given the payscales out there today, I don't think teaching full-time is realistic.

 

[BlackSkirtTetra]

What subject would an MSW teach at a community college? I used to volunteer as part of a group that got at-risk teenagers ready for community college (paper filing, deadlines, and so forth), and I remember specifically that out of the seven community college in our region there was no coursework offered on social work (although there was plenty on psychology and a lesser amount on sociology). That there were no social work courses at the community college level could just be endemic to my region though. I really don't know.

 

[wigflip]

Her title is "instructor."

Instructor = Adjunct. Adjuncts are part-timers who get paid substantially less than full timers for the same teaching work. No benefits either. Some are current grad students, some earned terminal MAs, some were in PhD programs and quit before finishing the doctorate. All of them are getting screwed financially, so you should be nice to them.

Teaching and researching are two distinct skills. You can be a crack researcher but terrible in front of a class or vice versa (or good at both or neither). In CA, a masters is sufficient to teach at the JC (junior college), SLAC (small liberal arts college), or research university level. A masters more than qualifies you to teach introductory classes. For those interested in teaching you may be able to look up the equivalency requirements which dictate the minimum requirements for a particular discipline (i.e. someone with a BA in psych and MA in soc can teach soc or psych, but not anth). If I'm not mistaken, in my state a person with an MSW can teach psych, but it might hinge on whether or not said person also had a psych MA.

Most of the tenured faculty I know disdain teaching undergrads--it's easier to teach grad students and dealing with undergrads reduces the amount of time they have for research. If you have an instructor with an MA who appears to actually like teaching, you're fortunate.

Oh, and in many fields, having completed a dissertation doesn't mean that the person has comprehensive knowledge of the field--quite the opposite. They are an expert in a highly specialized area--one which may have little relevance for teaching undergrad survey courses.

If you are brave enough to find out how adjuncts and others really feel about teaching, visit the "100 Reasons Not to Go to Grad School" blog and read the comments following Reason #65.

 

[wigflip]

im actually really curious about this too, because I would love to teach with a Master's. As far as i know, you can teach community college and some state schools with a master's....

Teaching jobs are few and far between these days because of the oversupply of qualified grad students. The only saving grace for MA level folks is that in some places they are more competitive for adjunct work because the school can pay someone with a masters less than someone with a doctorate. Tenure track jobs largely go to folks with not only publications, but who have secured nationally competitive grants prior to earning their doctorate. Even the few jobs at teaching institutions are very, very competitive. Everybody else ends up swimming (or sinking) in the adjunct pool.

 

[wigflip]

I don't mean any offense, but I don't think I would want to be taught by somebody who hadn't done all the research that comes with a PhD.

If this is how you feel, I wouldn't bother emailing MA level profs to vet them. They probably will find your query offensive. If you can't find information about a prof on the departmental website, it probably means s/he is an adjunct. More and more classes are being taught by adjuncts as departments scale down their full time faculty positions. One estimate is that 68% of college courses are taught by people who are not tenure-track faculty (this would include grad students and adjuncts).

You can also take the initiative and do a google scholar search, or search the relevant academic databases for publications. Neither of these methods is foolproof (some of my pubs come up in certain databases but not others), but if you're trying to vet someone it's one method.

 

[BlackSkirtTetra]

I will ask if I need to, because I (like any student or prospective student) have a right to know said instructor ("instructor" is different from "professor," right?)'s educational background.

Adjuncts are professors (of MA- or PhD-level education) who added to the department with the clear intention of never being tenured, right? I'm not sure I have a clear idea on the nature of "adjunct."

I had forgotten about Google Scholar. Thank you for mentioning it.

 

[wigflip]

I had forgotten about Google Scholar. Thank you for mentioning it.

You're welcome.

Adjuncts are professors (of MA- or PhD-level education) who added to the department with the clear intention of never being tenured, right? I'm not sure I have a clear idea on the nature of "adjunct."

I address this in post #6 above. Adjuncts are not professors. Professor is a rank one achieves down the line after achieving tenure (Assistant prof-->Associate prof-->Full Prof). Adjunct/lecturer positions are not tenure track. Adjuncts are considered disposable labor by many departments and administrators and are underpaid. But this does not mean that they are unqualified to teach you, even if you went to an elite undergraduate school.

Nobody gets a doctorate because they have a "clear intention of never being tenured," but no, adjunct positions are not tenure track. They are not part of the department, they are hired on a quarter by quarter (or semester by semester) basis and have no job security and no future unless they get a T-T job. Some adjuncts teach as many as 9 classes a term at 4 or more schools (as my friend did), driving all over the area to pay their bills.

I will ask if I need to, because I (like any student or prospective student) have a right to know said instructor ("instructor" is different from "professor," right?)'s educational background.

.

Why would you "need" to ask? I'm not invested in you taking my advice one way or the other, but I do think that your query may come across as offensive to your profs. With the advent of the Internet it isn't so hard to find out where academics went to school. I CAN tell you that however polite their replies may be (if they reply at all--they are not obligated to do so), profs/instructors are not going to be overjoyed at the prospect of being asked to justify themselves to you. Two common complaints of profs and TAs alike are that (1) students act like "consumers" and have an entitled/demanding attitude and that (2) they are overly dependent (e.g. ask questions of profs that are easily answered on their own). Knowing from the other side (as a TA) how subjective grading often is, and how whimsical and sensitive academics can be, it doesn't hurt to show a little extra respect and caution. You risk alienating a prof before the first day of class. Trust me, they've done all this before and will have most if not all of their students figured out and categorized before the first class is over (or sooner if you give them the opportunity).

 

[BlackSkirtTetra]

Psst...students are consumers. Of education.

 

[2012PhD]

im actually really curious about this too, because I would love to teach with a Master's. As far as i know, you can teach community college and some state schools with a master's....

Trust me, adjunct or instructor positions are far from glamorous. You get paid about 2,000-3,000 per class, depending on the university, and can easily put in 10 hours per week per class. It can be rewarding as something to do for your own interest or while retired, but not as primary income.

 

[wigflip]

Psst...students are consumers. Of education.

I knew I shouldn't have put the "c" word in there. Trust me--that perspective won't endear you to educators. There is a larger discourse about contemporary students' "consumer mentality" in education. It can be found elsewhere on the Internet (including at the 100 Reasons Not to Go to Grad School blog), but anyone who is teaching now is aware of this. Part of this stems from the fact that those of us who teach/TA are often treated (by students) like we are customer service representatives who are obligated to bend over backwards and be at students' beck and call (this is not actually our job). We endure endless grade-grubbing, disrespectful demands, spurious complaints, sometimes threats. Some people who do research on generational cohorts have identified the millennial generation as especially entitled, perhaps because of trends in education and parenting that prevailed when they were growing up. In any case, acting in any way that can be interpreted as entitled, demanding, or disrespectful to your profs or prospective profs won't win you points. And profs and TAs talk with each other...

 

[BlackSkirtTetra]

Students pay for the services of education. We have every right to ask questions of those who would provide those services.

You may not offer a service (in this case, education) and expect that you won't be asked questions, challenged, and that people will 'shop around.' That's the nature of the market. You can't offer something while expecting not to be asked directly about what you're offering, your qualifications to do so, and your thoughts on various issues. It just doesn't work that way.

Education is a intangible service which is consumed in the same way that other intangible services (medical, legal, dental) are. Would you insist that patients have no right to ask questions of the doctor they're paying? No.

BTW, please don't make personal assumptions about people--I am not part of the millennial generation. I was born in the 80s.

Edit: I just looked up "millennial generation," and I've seen estimates covering people born from the 1970s to the 2000s (although that isn't just one generation). So perhaps I am a millennial generation person, after all?

 

[wigflip]

Students pay for the services of education. We have every right to ask questions of those who would provide those services.

You may not offer a service (in this case, education) and expect that you won't be asked questions, challenged, and that people will 'shop around.' That's the nature of the market. You can't offer something while expecting not to be asked directly about what you're offering, your qualifications to do so, and your thoughts on various issues. It just doesn't work that way.

No need to tell me "how things work." I've been doin' this a lot longer than you, honey.

Education is a intangible service which is consumed in the same way that other intangible services (medical, legal, dental) are. Would you insist that patients have no right to ask questions of the doctor they're paying? No.

This talk about "rights" and "markets" and "services" is precisely what I'm talking about. It makes profs/TAs recoil in horror. I would suggest you conceal this kind of talk and attitude from prospective professors. If you treat them like they need to audition in order to teach you (and you imply that you may have given offense in one of your previous posts above), you're going to make the wrong kind of impression. Even though you obviously write much better than most of your peers will. Even if you got your BA at an Ivy, 7 Sisters, or other top school, as I suspect you did. But it's your impression to make.

BTW, please don't make personal assumptions about people--I am not part of the millennial generation. I was born in the early 80s.

You ARE part of the millennial generation--just about everyone entering grad school now is. That's precisely when the millennials were born--look it up. Did you think I meant that you were born in 2000? If you were, you'd either still been swooning over Justin Bieber or would be such a genius (ready for grad school at age 11) that you'd have no need for this forum at all.

 

[BlackSkirtTetra]

Please try not to write in such a demeaning manner (such as calling me "honey"). It's unbecoming, and hurts the points you're trying to make. If you remain as respectful as possible (even when it's difficult), your points will be taken more seriously (by me and by others).

I actually have a friend--a former professor of mine--who teaches Consumer and Family Sciences. She drilled into our heads that education is a service and that students are consumers. I specifically remember one of the exercises which involved the class catalog, which was still printed on paper in those days. We each had to write a list of alternative classes (alternative to the one we were in), and why we chose not to take them. This was the first day of class, and she was introducing us to the concept of choice at the consumer level and why it's important.

Granted, this was just one exercise in one class I took, but she teaches it every semester to dozens of students, and the point is to see education as a service we consume on par with other services. I can't imagine she's the only professor with this viewpoint or that we were the only students to be introduced to that idea. The concept of students as consumers is being taught in college these days.

And I was wrong as to when the millennial generation was born. I thought it applied to people born in the 1990s, who grew up in the 2000s. I was born 10 years before that, so if that makes me a millennial, then I guess I am. That point is almost irrelevant, though.

P.S. OMGz!!! Justin Bieber rox.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

She drilled into our heads that education is a service and that students are consumers.

I loathe that perspective because it further enforces the Me Generation, as the implication is that responsibility does not flow both ways. Students forget that pursuing higher education is a privilege and not a right. I feel like this perspective cheapens education the overall learning experience.

 

[BlackSkirtTetra]

I loathe that perspective because it further enforces the Me Generation, as the implication is that responsibility does not flow both ways. Students forget that pursuing higher education is a privilege and not a right. I feel like this perspective cheapens education the overall learning experience.

There is nothing wrong with pursuing one's own interests by asking questions, when we have many options from which to choose. I was accepted into a few MSW programs, and I am glad I had the tools to "shop around" and ask questions beforehand so that I could evaluate which I'd decide to attend.

Carrying what you've said over to any other service--getting your clothes cleaned at the dry cleaner's is also a privilege, not a right, yet it is so beneficial to ask questions about the person's skill-level and experience so that you don't get your clothes ruined, or pay for a sub-standard service.

I wouldn't choose a dry cleaner whose skills and training I judged to be different from those I was after, just as I wouldn't choose an instructor/professor/university/program whose skills and training were not what I was after.

I'm afraid I really don't see why this viewpoint is controversial among some. To me, it seems like common sense.

 

[wigflip]

I loathe that perspective because it further enforces the Me Generation, as the implication is that responsibility does not flow both ways. Students forget that pursuing higher education is a privilege and not a right. I feel like this perspective cheapens education the overall learning experience.

THANK YOU!
Couldn't agree more, obviously.

 

[BlackSkirtTetra]

It's OK for us to disagree.

Be well!

 

[wigflip]

Carrying what you've said over to any other service--getting your clothes cleaned at the dry cleaner's is also a privilege, not a right, yet it is so beneficial to ask questions about the person's skill-level and experience so that you don't get your clothes ruined, or pay for a sub-standard service.

I wouldn't choose a dry cleaner whose skills and training I judged to be different from those I was after, just as I wouldn't choose an instructor/professor/university/program whose skills and training were not what I was after.

Thank you for continuing to make my point for me. Your dry cleaning analogy is most apt. That is what my undergraduates treat me like--a dry cleaner who has failed to meet their expectations. And needs to fix things RIGHT NOW. But professors and other educators are not in a service profession.

I'm afraid I really don't see why this viewpoint is controversial.

You've made that abundantly clear. One of the things your social work professors (the ones you deem worthy of teaching you) will attempt to convey is that you should pay attention to the viewpoints of people who are differently situated than you are. Understand what things mean to them. You've repeatedly steamrolled over my attempts to explain another viewpoint, one I offered in an apparently misguided attempt to prevent you from appearing arrogant and making a blunder with your new profs. Good luck.

 

[BlackSkirtTetra]

Thanks for your well-wishes. I appreciate it!

 

[Exploring789]

I had an MA level psychology professor in college at an expensive 4-year liberal arts college. She was a counselor who taught experimental psy, stats and counseling. Now you have me wondering if she'd be a less impressive reference without a PhD.

 

[wigflip]

I had an MA level psychology professor in college at an expensive 4-year liberal arts college. She was a counselor who taught experimental psy, stats and counseling. Now you have me wondering if she'd be a less impressive reference without a PhD.

Unfortunately, the answer is probably yes (this doesn't necessarily mean anything about whether or not she was a qualified or good teacher). Was she a tenured professor, or an adjunct?

 

[BlackSkirtTetra]

When I was first applying, I called one of my programs and I asked if the post-nominals mattered on references. The person I spoke to told me that they do, but that what the letter says, how it is written, the department the person is writing from, and what it says say just as much.

I'd rather have a well-written, clear, supportive letter from an MS in my field than a sloppily-written, vague, statement-of-fact letter from an MD or PhD in another field.

If you're still concerned, another tip you might employ is to have more reference letters written than you need. If you need three letters of references, ask five or six (or more) people to write on your behalf. Most schools don't mind a bit to get extra supportive documentation. It's one of those things that usually can't hurt. Good luck!

 

[wigflip]

If you're still concerned, another tip you might employ is to have more reference letters written than you need. If you need three letters of references, ask five or six (or more) people to write on your behalf. Most schools don't mind a bit to get extra supportive documentation. It's one of those things that usually can't hurt. Good luck!

I'd be careful here. Check with each school before sending extra letters. Sometimes this can backfire--it can convey that the applicant flaunts rules. A department might only review the first letters received, and since the tenured heavy hitters typically take the longest to write and send 'em...

Also, if you ask >maximum to write, do not reveal this to your letter writers. Writing a good letter takes time and effort, for which the writer is not paid.

 

[BlackSkirtTetra]

Yeah, it never hurts to ask--you're a consumer of their services and you have a right to know the rules by which they'd like you to play.

 

[wigflip]

Yeah, it never hurts to ask--you're a consumer of their services

I realize that the above is most likely an attempt at humor, but since BlackTetra decided to rub salt in the wound, I'm gonna follow through here. I'd like to urge anyone reading this not to treat your professors, instructors, or TAs as if they were service providers. We're not. And if you plan to vet them, you'd better do it in a pretty slick way (hint: you're probably not as slick as you think you are) because we can see you coming. Trust me. You're not a unique snowflake--we read literally thousands of student emails and can read between the lines.

The consumer studies prof didn't do the OP or anyone else any favors (and is it really surprising that someone who studies consumption views education through that lens?). Here's an exercise in perspective taking. Try to imagine that you give up 6-10 years of potential income to become an expert in your field. You work evenings, weekends. Your non-academic friends are having families and buying homes, but you continue to read, teach, research, write, do committee work, attend conferences, write grants, write more grants because you didn't get any in the last batch, send revisions on your latest journal article, maybe do clinical internships. One day, if you're not sabotaged by your committee members, you actually graduate. And if you have a fairy godmother, despite a crushing academic job market, you ace out 199 other qualified people for an academic job. Then, having the job, your workload doubles, because now you're going for tenure.

One day, up in your inbox pops an email from a prospective student. S/he wants to know where you studied and what your qualifications are. Your opinion of this prospective student drops immediately because the information s/he requested is readily available on your department website or elsewhere on the Internet. But more importantly, someone with only a BA is rather transparently questioning your ability to competently teach him/her. Now how do you feel about this student? If s/he decides you're adequate and takes your class, then subsequently asks for a letter of rec, what will you write?

In other words, showing sensitivity to how other people view themselves and their own circumstances will be key to your success, both in the classroom, and as new therapists.

FYI--the clinical psych department at my school asks that prospective students do not contact profs at all as they are too busy. Sometimes it does hurt to ask.

 

[2012PhD]

Yeah, it never hurts to ask--you're a consumer of their services and you have a right to know the rules by which they'd like you to play.

It depends what you ask. Professors appreciate thoughtful questions and industrious students. If you are asking questions that are readily available on the website or appear entitled, they won't think very highly of you. You may think you are a consumer, but they are really the ones with the power when it comes to evaluating you and serving as a reference.

 

[BlackSkirtTetra]

I realize that the above is most likely an attempt at humor.

That's right--it's an attempt at humor. Take a deep breath, and lighten up!

 

[BlackSkirtTetra]

P.S. Please accept my apologies for offending you. As I've re-read the conversation, I've gotten the impression that this issue is a lot heavier for you than it is for me, and I don't want to seem like I'm not taking your concerns seriously. I just don't understand them or see them the same way, that's all.

But we don't have to be monolithic in how we approach education. There is room for both our perspectives as well as other perspectives. We can all go about things differently yet still be effective in what we do, in different circumstances. Diversity of thought and actions is good thing, even when we disagree.

 

[wigflip]

P.S. Please accept my apologies for offending you. As I've re-read the conversation, I've gotten the impression that this issue is a lot heavier for you than it is for me, and I don't want to seem like I'm not taking your concerns seriously. I just don't understand them or see them the same way, that's all.

But we don't have to be monolithic in how we approach education. There is room for both our perspectives as well as other perspectives. We can all go about things differently yet still be effective in what we do, in different circumstances. Diversity of thought and actions is good thing, even when we disagree.

BST, my last post was for the benefit of any other prospective students who might be reading this thread. You've made it abundantly clear that you are uninteresting in heeding this particular piece of advice.

 

[BlackSkirtTetra]

Oh, OK. I hope you're well!

 

[paramour]

I had an MA level psychology professor in college at an expensive 4-year liberal arts college. She was a counselor who taught experimental psy, stats and counseling. Now you have me wondering if she'd be a less impressive reference without a PhD.

I'm actually surprised she did not think of this one on her own for you. I have my MA, and I taught at a 4-year univ for a bit in my past! I had a few of my students ask me for references, which actually shocked me. I informed the students that I would consider providing them with a reference if they'd like, but I also explained my situation and that they might want to find someone with "more impressive" credentials. The majority of these students were applying to MSW programs, so perhaps it did not matter as much.

On the other hand, I also have some of my undergrad lab assistants approach me (during my current program) and request that I write them a reference. Although I was the project director at the time, I certainly do not overestimate my value when it comes to a letter of reference. I suggested contacting the PI (as I send feedback to her on everyone anyway, and then she writes them a letter), but the student had no interest for whatever reason. Of course, there have been times when the PI ends up telling me to write the letter after sitting on it for weeks if not months on end, and she will sign her name to it, so I'm not sure that I can blame the student too much... But at least she has more oomph behind it than li'l ole' me!

 

[wigflip]

On the other hand, I also have some of my undergrad lab assistants approach me (during my current program) and request that I write them a reference. Although I was the project director at the time, I certainly do not overestimate my value when it comes to a letter of reference. I suggested contacting the PI (as I send feedback to her on everyone anyway, and then she writes them a letter), but the student had no interest for whatever reason. Of course, there have been times when the PI ends up telling me to write the letter after sitting on it for weeks if not months on end, and she will sign her name to it, so I'm not sure that I can blame the student too much... But at least she has more oomph behind it than li'l ole' me!

Ugh, I hate that. I'm a TA (not instructor of record) but at my school there is no standardized curriculum for discussion sections so I have to write my own lesson plans each week and actually "teach." I'm still stunned when my UGs ask for letters of rec. You've treated me like I'm an idiot and a non-person all quarter--suddenly I'm "somebody" now that you want something?? And what exactly do you want me to write, that you show up late every week and then make faces and ****ty comments when I ask you to please stop texting for the fourth time in ten minutes? I always explain that my letter won't hold weight, but as with your students, mine doggedly push for LORs anyway. I wish they showed that kind of determination during the quarter! Anyway, the joke's really on them as it reflects poorly that they were too disorganized or lazy to get to know any professors during their 4-5 years of UG. Of course, as you suggest, if they do go to the prof you just end up ghostwriting the letter for them anyway.

Interestingly, a lot of mine are also going the social work route...

 

[BlackSkirtTetra]

I don't know how people who text during class and don't know what their professors expect ever get through college (much less graduate study). I always made it a particular point to know exactly what is expected, then do it. All of my letters were glowing, and they worked since they got me into the schools where I applied.

 

[wigflip]

All of my letters were glowing, and they worked since they got me into the schools where I applied.

Glad to hear it. You also went to a SLAC though, didn't you? Easier to get prof LORs when the profs teach everything and there are no TAs.

 

[Kiara15]

I don't think I would mind learning from someone with only a master's degree. In my opinion, I think that it is much more important for someone to be practicing and have actual experience in the field that I am learning than to actually have a ton of research experience. I myself want to go into teaching at the university level, but only plan on getting either a DMFT or Psy.D in counseling psychology. Both options allow me to do the minimum amount of research as possible, while still allowing me to maximize my education in my field. Research is a acquired taste that not everyone wants to focus on. As someone going into marriage and family therapy, I would rather learn from someone who works with couples in a clinical setting several times a week than someone that spends most their time doing interviews, analyzing data, and writing research papers. I don't think that having a M.S. instead of a Ph.D makes anyone a less awesome teacher automatically. Again, as long as you are reading up on current research and actually have hands on experience, I'm willing to hear what you have to say, and learn from it.

 

[wigflip]

I don't think I would mind learning from someone with only a master's degree. In my opinion, I think that it is much more important for someone to be practicing and have actual experience in the field that I am learning that to actually have a ton of research experience. I myself want to go into teaching at the university level, but only plan on getting either a DMFT or Psy.D in counseling psychology. Both options allow me to do the minimum amount of research as possible, while still allowing me to maximize my education in my field. Research is a required taste that not everyone wants to focus on. As someone going into marriage and family therapy, I would rather learn from someone who works with couples in a clinical setting several times a week than someone that spends most their time doing interviews, analyzing data, and writing research papers. I don't think that having a M.S. instead of a Ph.D makes anyone a less awesome teacher automatically. Again, as long as you are reading up on current research and actually have hands on experience, I'm willing to hear what you have to say, and learn from it.

Glad to hear it, Kiara, and good luck with your MFT program applications.

By the way, there actually has been quite a bit written about teaching on various threads here (mostly on the doctoral forum). If you are hoping to work as a part-time teacher (adjunct/lecturer) you might be able to pick up a class here or there with an MFT or PsyD, but I wouldn't count on either of those degree trajectories culminating in a full-time teaching job in today's competitive academic market. Keep in mind that adjuncting pays $2,000-$3,000 (the high end) per course, no health or dental benefits.

 

[econoquest]

I don't know why some people are so disparaging of lecturers with only a master's. They often make for the best teachers. Professors, especially at research institutes, often don't care a whit about teaching and don't have the time of day for their students. It's their job to research, first and foremost, not teach. Whereas instructors and adjuncts (which are not the same at some places) teach.

So it depends. But they don't necessarily have a worse grasp of the material, especially when the material taught in undergrad is often so basic.

 

[wigflip]

I don't know why some people are so disparaging of lecturers with only a master's. They often make for the best teachers. Professors, especially at research institutes, often don't care a whit about teaching and don't have the time of day for their students. It's their job to research, first and foremost, not teach. Whereas instructors and adjuncts (which are not the same at some places) teach.

So it depends. But they don't necessarily have a worse grasp of the material, especially when the material taught in undergrad is often so basic.

Seriously. Teaching is stigmatized bigtime. Why do you think it gets fluffed off on grad students (besides saving universities money, of course). And any (genuinely) intelligent psych BA could competently teach Psych 1. You don't need an encyclopedic knowledge of empirical research when what your students really want to know is "What will happen to our assignments if the rapture comes?" (this sounds like a joke, but isn't).

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Seriously. Teaching is stigmatized bigtime. Why do you think it gets fluffed off on grad students (besides saving universities money, of course). And any (genuinely) intelligent psych BA could competently teach Psych 1. You don't need an encyclopedic knowledge of empirical research when what your students really want to know is "What will happen to our assignments if the rapture comes?" (this sounds like a joke, but isn't).

I disagree.

Teaching Psych 101 can be a PITA. Having to cover such a broad range of information, without getting into much depth, that is actually rather hard to do. There is a large difference between lecturing/presenting some basic information and actually being an educator.

 

[wigflip]

I disagree.

Teaching Psych 101 can be a PITA. Having to cover such a broad range of information, without getting into much depth, that is actually rather hard to do. There is a large difference between lecturing/presenting some basic information and actually being an educator.

At my school teaching ANYTHING is a PITA--our UGs suck! But I understand what you're saying. I still think it's arrogant for someone with only a BA to assume they can't learn anything from someone with "only" a masters degree.

Re the stigma: I did have a heavy hitter psych prof tell me that winning a teaching award is the worst thing that could happen when you're going for tenure. I think the idea is that it makes you look less serious as a researcher--like you're pandering to UGs (which some profs do, and it's revolting).

 

[Ollie123]

Couple notes:
Instructor typically denotes non-TT, but they are not necessarily adjuncts. Different schools (and perhaps even departments within a school) have different labels for things...I've seen it used for people who are full-time employees in psychology departments with primarily teaching/administrative duties but limited/no research responsibilities and have been in the position for years. I've seen some med centers use it to denote the non-TT soft-money "Research scientist" type positions as well.

I'm somewhere in the middle of the other posters overall. On the one hand, I've taught and definitely encountered undergrads who approach education as "consumers" and find it frustrating. Though at the same time, I do think its perfectly reasonable for an undergraduate student to make sure they are getting their moneys worth and I think if one is paying tuition one has the right to expect to get at least some exposure to the TT faculty.

As for how I would feel about it...it depends in what context we are talking. Taking an undergrad class? Couldn't care less. Would I want a non-TT faculty member with an MA as my primary research mentor in a PhD program? Definitely not. In between? It depends...

 

[wigflip]

Couple notes:
Instructor typically denotes non-TT, but they are not necessarily adjuncts. Different schools (and perhaps even departments within a school) have different labels for things...I've seen it used for people who are full-time employees in psychology departments with primarily teaching/administrative duties but limited/no research responsibilities and have been in the position for years. I've seen some med centers use it to denote the non-TT soft-money "Research scientist" type positions as well.

Good point--I know that "lecturer" is a prestigious FT position in the UK. As far as I know though, adjunct always = PT slave labor (okay, if you want to put a sunny face on it, great opportunity for a grad student??).

I do think its perfectly reasonable for an undergraduate student to make sure they are getting their moneys worth and I think if one is paying tuition one has the right to expect to get at least some exposure to the TT faculty.

No problem with the latter statement, but regarding the first: there was earlier discussion about contacting profs directly and asking them to run down their qualifications for the prospective student--a rather transparent vetting process. In my opinion, this is a sure way to get on a prof's bad side, especially since such information is readily available on the Internet.

 

[BlackSkirtTetra]

...there was earlier discussion about contacting profs directly and asking them to run down their qualifications for the prospective student--a rather transparent vetting process.

I wonder if you read too much into the conversation, because I don't see where that was discussed in those terms.

In my opinion, this is a sure way to get on a prof's bad side, especially since such information is readily available on the Internet.

Often new professors aren't on the website. I encountered no fewer than six (yes, SIX) who were not listed on my department's faculty page when I was registering for classes and decided to look them up.

 

[wigflip]

I wonder if you read too much into the conversation, because I don't see where that was discussed in those terms.

It was implied, but very strongly.

Often new professors aren't on the website. I encountered no fewer than six (yes, SIX) who were not listed on my department's faculty page when I was registering for classes and decided to look them up.

This is probably true if they were adjuncts. Even if they were new full time hires (actually, especially if they were new FT profs), it's best to look them up on the Internet--it's pretty easy to find academics and trace their publication history just by googling (and google-scholar-ing). Why risk someone with a long memory and a short temper taking offense? Grading everything but objectively scored tests is pretty subjective (I guess it would be by definition). You might be surprised by what kinds of things get factored into final grade calculations at the end of the quarter. Many academics are petty, and not above "punishing" people who have annoyed them.

 

[wigflip]

Seriously. Teaching is stigmatized bigtime. Why do you think it gets fluffed off on grad students (besides saving universities money, of course). And any (genuinely) intelligent psych BA could competently teach Psych 1. You don't need an encyclopedic knowledge of empirical research when what your students really want to know is "What will happen to our assignments if the rapture comes?" (this sounds like a joke, but isn't).

YES!! Totally awesome. Some pre-med kook just PMed me after reading the above with warnings about the rapture!! You'll be glad to know s/he's "not setting a date":

"please don't take this the wrong way. I saw you made a comment about the rapture. Do you know that it is about to take place. I'm not setting a date. Have you heard of comet elenin that is supposed to be here by the end of this month?Time is up! God bless you!Please watch the following videos to learn more:"

This mess was followed by no less than 12 links to youtube videos. Somehow I resisted clicking.

 

[mrscruff]

My favorite Psychology professor at my university has her masters in Clinical Psychology. She practiced as a counselor and Psychological Examiner for 20 years before teaching, however, so that probably has alot to do with her being hired.

She and a licensed Clinical Psychologist at my school teach all of the "hardcore" courses that actually prepare a student for graduate school. The other faculty have Ph.Ds in Educational Psychology, and they teach the "fun" courses that are intellectually edifying, but nowhere near as essential as knowing behavioral statistics/research methods, psychopathologies, and counseling techniques. Overall, I am very proud to have her as my professor. By the way, most adjunct faculty in the department are masters-level educators.

Also, the Social Work department here has mostly LCSW professors. If they do have their doctorates, they are usually not DSWs.

 

[wigflip]

Overall, I am very proud to have her as my professor. By the way, most adjunct faculty in the department are masters-level educators.

So is she an adjunct? (You can be an adjunct and teach multiple classes which look like a full teaching load). If so, she may be doing all the hard work you describe above for a mere fraction of what the full-timers make for teaching the "fun" classes.