Whats the salary?
Exodus from Oxford
-
That Associate Prof hire is bizarre ...
I guess its the only way to recruit with a somewhat decent salary (and still they lose people). Food and "prestige" is no longer enough.It's untenured associate, which is just a trick to pay a more competitive wage, with no significant implication.
Well the significant implication is that now the university has junior people with no publications as Associates. Signals the university has a problem assigning titles, in their academic ranking, recruiting people, paying people, and even when they hire: retaining people. Clearly Oxford think they are "special" and they would try to trick people calling their junior positions - Associate Professors. They are only tricking themselves.
The reform they did was to call some academic posts associates profs to attract talent. It clearly backfired.
-
That Associate Prof hire is bizarre ...
I guess its the only way to recruit with a somewhat decent salary (and still they lose people). Food and "prestige" is no longer enough.It's untenured associate, which is just a trick to pay a more competitive wage, with no significant implication.
well, we know that, but look at previous associate hires, they all had great publications or some post docs experiences with pubs (or their own students). This one has none.
-
Something is going wrong over there. Any insider know why they can't seem to attract good people? I mean, yes, low salary, but that can't be the only thing.
Maybe by hiring someone without top pubs they're trying to change up their strategy? Don't know who they hired but the status quo clearly isn't working for them. Their previous strategy of hiring people only if they had a top 5 was very backwards-looking. Better to get people who have potential and their best work ahead of them and deny tenure if they fail.
-
That Associate Prof hire is bizarre ...
I guess its the only way to recruit with a somewhat decent salary (and still they lose people). Food and "prestige" is no longer enough.It's untenured associate, which is just a trick to pay a more competitive wage, with no significant implication.
Well the significant implication is that now the university has junior people with no publications as Associates. Signals the university has a problem assigning titles, in their academic ranking, recruiting people, paying people, and even when they hire: retaining people. Clearly Oxford think they are "special" and they would try to trick people calling their junior positions - Associate Professors. They are only tricking themselves.
The reform they did was to call some academic posts associates profs to attract talent. It clearly backfired.This is not true, there are no tenured associate profs without publications. Please stop lying here.
All tenured associate professor are super solid and very well published,there is nobody without publications as suggested here.
-
Something is going wrong over there. Any insider know why they can't seem to attract good people? I mean, yes, low salary, but that can't be the only thing.
Maybe by hiring someone without top pubs they're trying to change up their strategy? Don't know who they hired but the status quo clearly isn't working for them. Their previous strategy of hiring people only if they had a top 5 was very backwards-looking. Better to get people who have potential and their best work ahead of them and deny tenure if they fail.A lot of college teaching. Salary is paid partly by college partly by department. College expects professors to teach 4 hours of tutorials per week. Read random essays non-stop. They are trying to get other people to teach but policies vary by college.
Also some colleges are very backward, some are great. Nuffield is top notch and no undergrad teaching. That is the best place to be, and has great people.
-
That Associate Prof hire is bizarre ...
I guess its the only way to recruit with a somewhat decent salary (and still they lose people). Food and "prestige" is no longer enough.It's untenured associate, which is just a trick to pay a more competitive wage, with no significant implication.
Well the significant implication is that now the university has junior people with no publications as Associates. Signals the university has a problem assigning titles, in their academic ranking, recruiting people, paying people, and even when they hire: retaining people. Clearly Oxford think they are "special" and they would try to trick people calling their junior positions - Associate Professors. They are only tricking themselves.
The reform they did was to call some academic posts associates profs to attract talent. It clearly backfired.This is not true, there are no tenured associate profs without publications. Please stop lying here.
All tenured associate professor are super solid and very well published,there is nobody without publications as suggested here.Check the new associate prof phd(c), not only no publications but no phd. Setting new higher standards! Simply call them assistant profs, but oxford thinks they are too special to be a normal university with usual academic ranks.
Some tenured associate profs are great yeah, best ones leave. Easily poached by other universities that provide better conditions.
-
Something is going wrong over there. Any insider know why they can't seem to attract good people? I mean, yes, low salary, but that can't be the only thing.
Maybe by hiring someone without top pubs they're trying to change up their strategy? Don't know who they hired but the status quo clearly isn't working for them. Their previous strategy of hiring people only if they had a top 5 was very backwards-looking. Better to get people who have potential and their best work ahead of them and deny tenure if they fail.Answers have all been posted earlier on the thread.
-
Something is going wrong over there. Any insider know why they can't seem to attract good people? I mean, yes, low salary, but that can't be the only thing.
Maybe by hiring someone without top pubs they're trying to change up their strategy? Don't know who they hired but the status quo clearly isn't working for them. Their previous strategy of hiring people only if they had a top 5 was very backwards-looking. Better to get people who have potential and their best work ahead of them and deny tenure if they fail.Answers have all been posted earlier on the thread.
Yes, keep reading the old thread mate. Life never changes.
-
Oxford has just hired a QMUL star, who was given an endowed chair. Tough competition at the top, Warwick out of the game.
only Warwick, UEast Anglia and Queen Mary are top top. Oxford doomed.
Let's wait until college teaching, never ending bureaucracy, lack of department culture and old fellows kill this person motivation.
I give max 3 years before this person either leaves or easily poached by another unj.