Exodus from Oxford « Economics Job Market Rumors

5 years - 596 posts - Latest - RSS
Thread: 396 Goods vs 132 No Goods

Economics Job Market Rumors » Economics » Economics Discussion

Exodus from Oxford

Economist
8600

Got nothing against having a teaching track as long as it's clear. Why would you want to pay the same two persons who teach the same and one produces plenty of research but the other does not even try? In the end, the value of a degree depends a lot on the institution's prestige. And prestige is just determined by research, not by NSS scores. So the research active colleague is adding more value whichever way you see it.

Of course,if you end up on teaching track because you were dum#ed with teaching as a junior and got no support, then that is really bad.

3 months ago # QUOTE 0 Jab 0 No Jab !
Economist
3b08

UK universities are ALL going in this direction
This UK MRM has already created a 2 tier system among the academics - those that are treated favorably, and given research time + money, and those that are pushed into teaching and admin

At least UK universities are transparent about it. They call them teaching fellows or adjunct lecturers, or lecturers in teaching track, so people know what they are getting into.
Oxford is delusional calling very heavy/teaching admin positions, Associate Professorship, and then being surprised when people leave. Worse instead of helping junior people, now they have a "modern system" where already established professors (who didn´t have outside options), get rewarded with no teaching while juniors are left with most of the work. Colleges are just brutal with them, making claims that hot food and a room are sufficient perks, and in exchange expecting never ending admin.
Then Oxford after losing all their talented people, in an act of madness, re-advertises again with this poorly balanced regressive system (all with heavy college teaching/admin), and hopes for a different outcome. They might get some unaware academic for a couple of years, and then the good ones will find a way out of the place. Leaving behind all those who enjoy the free wine and brand name as a form of payment (some of them pseudo-academics who think this is an acceptable form of payment).

What's the evidence that they are surprised? This has been the pattern for at least a decade now. Either than can't or won't fix it, but I would be surprised if they were surprised...

From the comments in this forum, my sense is that teaching and tutoring is generally large, except for those in Nuffield and All Souls, who de facto are described as taking most of the important decisions (who's hired, promoted, etc).

With the new positions a restricted number of chosen people will be elected to 'research leaders' compared to colleagues. It is unclear who will select the leaders (internal or external assessors?). Are those the same position advertised for new hires so that fresh PhDs can be shielded from heavy teaching and administration?

I am wondering whether this strategy could be divisive in the department. Any inside information on this?

I envisage an attitude of junior could be to captivate the senior colleagues who make the decision (or are perceived to make the decision).

It doesn't sound a strategy that will build team spirit and loyalty among colleagues. But I could be mistaken.

Any inside comment would be helpful.

3 months ago # QUOTE 0 Jab 0 No Jab !
Economist
84d3

From the comments in this forum, my sense is that teaching and tutoring is generally large, except for those in Nuffield and All Souls, who de facto are described as taking most of the important decisions (who's hired, promoted, etc).
With the new positions a restricted number of chosen people will be elected to 'research leaders' compared to colleagues. It is unclear who will select the leaders (internal or external assessors?). Are those the same position advertised for new hires so that fresh PhDs can be shielded from heavy teaching and administration?
I am wondering whether this strategy could be divisive in the department. Any inside information on this?
I envisage an attitude of junior could be to captivate the senior colleagues who make the decision (or are perceived to make the decision).
It doesn't sound a strategy that will build team spirit and loyalty among colleagues. But I could be mistaken.
Any inside comment would be helpful.

All of these questions have been already addressed in the forum:

-Associate Prof positions (except Nuffield and All Souls), are heavy admin/teaching, low pay jobs.

-Research leaders are for senior insiders who have been there a long time, and have not received external offers or consider Oxford "prestige" a valid form of payment. All the good junior people have left.

-All the positions advertised: 5 last year, and 4 this year, are all college based. They are trying to replace tutorial fellows that left. College tutorial fellows, are the worse part of an Oxford post because it requires tons of admin and teaching.

-There has been no significant attempts from fresh PhDs to be shielded, since colleges care solely about endless admin and soul crushing tutorials. New hires are already suffering this, and the recent endless admin behind undergrad admissions are eye opening for them.

- Oxford following the vein of cutting-edge and world leading institution has reversed the trend in the discipline, instead of helping junior scholars, they now have in regressive policies, and gives research leader positions only to established researchers, and loads juniors with endless tutorials.

Yes, this is not a strategy that will build team spirits, or worse, reverse the trend in attracting and retaining good junior people. If anything it will make it worse.

A message to this year market offer holders: be aware what you are getting into, these are low pay, heavy teaching/admin jobs. Colleges, except Nuffield, are regressive. Balance other offers you have vs Oxford offer, the "brand name" comes at a heavy price. If you have no other offers, be sure to be on the market and pack your bags as soon as possible. Oxford does not do any retention offers.

They think with the brand name alone they can replace and endless revolving door of junior scholars. Let's see how long this lasts.

2 months ago # QUOTE 2 Jab 0 No Jab !
Economist
487a

I am glad there are some constructive comments and suggestions for new hires.

It seems to me that the department in Ox comprises several experience and productive economists, who have probably been waiting to get some rewards after years of committed service. I would imagine those talented and hard-working individuals would be deeply upset to see new hires enjoy more money, less teaching and administration, while they run the show (for a pittance, according to comments here).

I would think that opportunities should be offered fairly among all members of the department, not only to new arrivals. So my question is: what are the rewards once you've made tenure?

Insiders, please let us know.

1 month ago # QUOTE 1 Jab 0 No Jab !
Economist
54d9

Stay away from that place unless 1) you get Nuffield or all Souls or 2) you are retiring

Meanwhile Cambridge has also plateaud. They were improving but it stopped... why?

1 month ago # QUOTE 0 Jab 1 No Jab !
Economist
797b

where is PS going? big loss for Oxford and excellent hire for wherever he goes.

1 month ago # QUOTE 1 Jab 1 No Jab !
Economist
2ffb

where is PS going? big loss for Oxford and excellent hire for wherever he goes.

Wow more people leaving. Is there any insider here that can explain with years and years of the best academics leaving why is there no effective institutional response?

This looks like a complete failure for Oxfords' upper management.

1 month ago # QUOTE 0 Jab 0 No Jab !
Economist
0895

where is PS going? big loss for Oxford and excellent hire for wherever he goes.

Wow more people leaving. Is there any insider here that can explain with years and years of the best academics leaving why is there no effective institutional response?
This looks like a complete failure for Oxfords' upper management.

Oxford governance is a mess. Departments have little autonomy and many constraints imposed by Wellington Square, UK Government, or by colleges. Rules are made for other fields with different job markets where the Ox department is #1 in the world and then applied to econ.

1 month ago # QUOTE 2 Jab 0 No Jab !
Economist
2c34

Oxford top 10?

1 month ago # QUOTE 1 Jab 0 No Jab !
Economist
2ffb

where is PS going? big loss for Oxford and excellent hire for wherever he goes.

Wow more people leaving. Is there any insider here that can explain with years and years of the best academics leaving why is there no effective institutional response?
This looks like a complete failure for Oxfords' upper management.

Oxford governance is a mess. Departments have little autonomy and many constraints imposed by Wellington Square, UK Government, or by colleges. Rules are made for other fields with different job markets where the Ox department is #1 in the world and then applied to econ.

Even so burocrats at Colleges, and Wellington Square, after 10 years of best academics leaving Oxford Econ should realize that something is wrong and policies need updating, no?

There is something clearly messed up there, and the lack of effective change of direction after years and years doesn't look good. On other hand LSE (and even UCL), pay well their academics and manage to retain top talent, how difficult is to understand that conditions need to improve?

Probably those upper level burocrats think Oxford is the best in the world and does not need any change (but this is a speculation). Most likely they are not even academics and well connected british elite (?). Any ideas from insiders?

Whatever is the underlying explanation, this looks bad!

1 month ago # QUOTE 0 Jab 0 No Jab !
Economist
d84f

The place is special:

https://www.johnkay.com/2000/11/20/the-management-of-the-university-of-oxford-facing-the-future/

> Any ideas from insiders? Whatever is the underlying explanation, this looks bad!

1 month ago # QUOTE 3 Jab 0 No Jab !
Economist
2ffb

The place is special:
https://www.johnkay.com/2000/11/20/the-management-of-the-university-of-oxford-facing-the-future/
> Any ideas from insiders? Whatever is the underlying explanation, this looks bad!

Wow this was written 20 years ago! Very insightful. It is incredible that nothing has changed for the better, if anything things look way worse now.

1 month ago # QUOTE 0 Jab 0 No Jab !
Economist
264c

But the real problem is that people don't joint forces and are self-centered. This is what I'm told by a couple of ex-faculty members I've spoken in the past year.

I've heard stories of colleagues speaking badly at the back of other colleagues, stories of exclusions without apparent reasons. If people don't start thinking collegially and they instead primarily care to gain advantages for their own, I doubt the place will prosper. But I could be wrong.

Any insider's view on this rumor?

1 month ago # QUOTE 0 Jab 0 No Jab !
Economist
5b8e

Reminder, list of leavers since 2010:

1. Quah
2. Manova
3. Adam
4. Shepard
5. Beaudry
6. Keane
7. Bhattacharya
8. Patton
9. Huffman
10. Heller
11. Mukherji
12. Vigier
13. Hansen
14. Wallace
15. Gill
16. Fenske
17. Boneva
18. Fafchamps
19. Myatt
20. Prowse
21. Ulyssea
22. Esteves
23. O'Rourke
24. Sedlacek

1 month ago # QUOTE 2 Jab 0 No Jab !
Economist
2ffb

The place is special:
https://www.johnkay.com/2000/11/20/the-management-of-the-university-of-oxford-facing-the-future/
> Any ideas from insiders? Whatever is the underlying explanation, this looks bad!

Oxford capacity to adapt to the market is amazing. 20 years ago:

"It is not possible to attract internationally distinguished business school faculty if a newly appointed lecturer is paid less than £20,000 and the standard professorial salary is around £40,000. (Would you listen to a lecture on corporate finance or option pricing from someone earning for less than the pay of the receptionist at an investment bank?)"

20 years after... Adjust the pay by inflation, and 24 faculty lost in 10 years. Quite a revolving door. Clearly a cutting-edge, world leading, top'' institution with dynamic policies to retain top talent.

1 month ago # QUOTE 0 Jab 0 No Jab !
Economist
0af5

Got nothing against having a teaching track as long as it's clear. Why would you want to pay the same two persons who teach the same and one produces plenty of research but the other does not even try? In the end, the value of a degree depends a lot on the institution's prestige. And prestige is just determined by research, not by NSS scores. So the research active colleague is adding more value whichever way you see it.
Of course,if you end up on teaching track because you were dum#ed with teaching as a junior and got no support, then that is really bad.

1 month ago # QUOTE 0 Jab 0 No Jab !

« Previous 1…2930

Recently Announced

Upcoming

Economics

Job Market

Off Topic

Job Market Wiki

Job Market Candidates

Updates

Exodus from Oxford

Reply