C'mon Mech!

You need 50 to pass at university, p's get degrees, yet go and do a 50% job in life, and see where you land.

Tell me the only brightest and best in Universities get PHD's.......not on your life.

Many of the brightest free thinkers get to a level where university ends up a waiting game they are tied to until they complete thier studies. Many cant wait this institutionalisation out, quit in dissolusion, or feel university cannot offer any more, or need to earn money.

If you have more respect for those with PHD's than those who have achieved in life, i know why you are an engineer. I bet you are a good corporate soldier, and if you have finished (which by your attitude you may still be at Uni) I bet you are working in a nice cosy mediocre place. PHD's do not correlate to success, your drive does.

As a qualified person, lets look at this. The top students from my course are now in mediocre roles with large companies, research, etc etc. This is what they are conditioned to do, so how bright are they?
I was from the bush, forced to work to survive, study only when i could. I passed, but i was not tested on my IQ or my intelligence EVER.

Funny though, these people now ring me for advice. Its the ability to harness your knowledge and apply it with real world skills - what academics don't teach. Achievers understand this.

Ability is not learnt in the classroom. It is meant to be harnessed. Look at those students with the gleam in the eye, the drive, not those with the most study hours under their belt. It is your responsibility as a lecturer to ensure you know who your cream are. At least those who are achievers, with 'experience' not 'expertise' understand and can perhaps find those better, and stop them slipping through the cracks. Many of these are not doing it for the pay either, they have enough to accept the modest return for their efforts.

Realist,

"If you have more respect for those with PhD’s than those who have achieved in life, I know why you are an engineer."

This is incorrect and off the mark. All I was saying is they are the most suitable people for teaching the theory to uni students.

What do you define as a mediocre role?

"It’s the ability to harness your knowledge and apply it with real world skills - what academics don't teach. Achievers understand this."

Are you implying that researchers such as those with PhDs are not achievers?

Are you saying that they don’t harness there knowledge to solve real world problems like; developing artificial skin for burns victims or mechanical hearts for people waiting for a heart transplant?.

"I was from the bush, forced to work to survive, study only when I could. I passed, but I was not tested on my IQ or my intelligence EVER."

I to have worked in the bush on many large resource projects but what’s that got to do with this?
Nothing personal but your arguments are fragmented, erratic and lack precision.

Tara,

Impressed by your enthusiam and high standards (though wish you hadn't written "The final issue I ask of academics is even more ostracised ...").

If we have a system for measuring quality and results as you suggest do we need to worry so much about the level of qualifications of the teachers ? If someone with a master's degree is getting good results, what's the problem ?

Hmm,

I think it's interesting that our Mr Timken has been suspended from this forum for so-called defamation. It's funny that, given all the name calling and maligning that he has suffered and endured for simply posting his opinions on line here that he's the one singled out for punishment.

Anyway, if you're reading this Timken, hold the faith mate, I know you'll be back and with a vengeance and I'm looking forward to it.

Maximus, your post is completely off thread, but needs to be answered. Timkins hasn't been "singled out". He posted comments that were defamatory and they were removed. It's our policy to note the removal of any posts and the reason. We do this so that interruptions to threads caused by comments being removed have an explanation. We also do it for transparency and to deter breaches of the rules. Anyone else who does the same thing as Timkins did will be dealt with in the same way.

I do agree that at least a one-year DipEd should be required for University lecturers, as some of those I had to sit through were utterly appalling, and clearly could not be bothered teaching "firsties" (this was a few years ago, but not many!)

From my chats with quite a few of my lecturers over the years, I found a general frustration with the way their research was quantified and counted, more than a reluctance to do it. Many of the lecturers I spoke to said that "amount" rather than "quality" was what counted with Uni Admin, so editing a 'collection' on a particular subject counted just as much as actually writing the whole book. One lecturer commented that she really wanted to write a 'dictionary', showing how certain academic terms changed their meaning in different diciplines, noting that this would be really useful to students, but that there was no point in her putting in the time and effort, as it simply would not be counted towards her 'output' and she would be 'counselled' about using her time effectively.

Also, while some students do have a "meh, books" attitude, I found that most people I went to Uni with, when they found the course that suited them (not the one they were pressured into, or thought would get them a 'decent job'), really did like researching and learning (well, if you ask them outside of the exam period!).