We plan academic workloads based on the standard 1:1, but our model allows
for flexibility, in that some kinds of teaching require less, whereas the
preparation of new material requires more, and individual line managers have
some discretion in determining the allocation for each part of an individual
colleague's teaching load, however, we would never be able to allow anything
like a ratio of 15:1.
-----------------------------------------
Catherine Fehily
Programme Area Manager - Arts, Culture and Design
Faculty of Arts Media and Design
Staffordshire University
College Road
Stoke-on-Trent
ST4 2DE
Telephone + 44 (0)1782 294528
Fax + 44 (0)1782 294873
On 28/7/06 10:08 am, "Pauline Ridley" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> It's fairly standard practice for HE academic contracts to be based on
> the assumption that the annual total of 1650 working hours is divided
> equally into: contact teaching, 'preparation and marking' and research,
> giving an annual maximum contact teaching time of 550 hours - or around
> 18 hours a week during term time. (In practice, humane departments don't
> always make their lecturers teach up to that maximum, but it's often
> close - and for people teaching HE in FE, it can be worse)
>
> That allows less than one hour paid preparation for each hour of
> teaching - or two if you accept that most of your research time will
> also be sacrificed for this. Even if you say that some of this teaching
> is not lecturing, but includes seminars and tutorials which may need a
> bit less preparation time, there is still nothing like the 15 hours that
> Steve calculates. The hourly rate for part-time visiting lecturers also
> assumes something close to a 1:1 ratio for preparation:teaching, though
> some employers do compensate by offering 3 hours pay for a 1 hour
> teaching session.
>
> Steve's figure is almost certainly much closer to the reality - so there
> must be an awful lot of denial and exploitation going on. Anecdotal
> evidence suggests that many lecturers spend many unpaid hours at
> weekends and evenings preparing their lectures, but understate this
> publicly so as not to appear incompetent or inefficient.
>
> Something for SEDA and/or UCU to research more systematically perhaps?
> -------------
> Pauline Ridley
> Centre for Learning and Teaching
> Room 113, Mayfield House, Falmer
> University of Brighton
> Brighton BN1 9PH
> 01273-643406
> Email [log in to unmask]
> Visit the CLT website at
> http://staffcentral.brighton.ac.uk/clt
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Online forum for SEDA, the Staff & Educational Development
> Association [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of SEDA automatic
> digest system
> Sent: 28 July 2006 00:02
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: SEDA Digest - 26 Jul 2006 to 27 Jul 2006 (#2006-88)
>
>
> There is 1 message totalling 202 lines in this issue.
>
> Topics of the day:
>
> 1. Preparation time
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 13:10:13 +0100
> From: John Casey <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Preparation time
>
>
> Dear Colleagues
> I hope you don't mind but I have decided to respond to the list as well
> on this one:
>
> I have worked in places where course design and preparation time has
> been as low a ratio as 3 to one. These figures are often very arbitary
> and formed by local budget structures and politics more than reality.
> Your question is very interesting and is particularly relevant to the
> world of online teaching and course design etc. l know Paul Bacsich has
> done some work on costings in that domain and if you do a google search
> on 'Bacsich costings' you should find some useful stuff.
>
> My feeling is that your figure is right, but I suspect local pressures
> push people towards lower figures. I would be interested if anyone on
> the list can point to any studies done on this? In the world of distance
> learning I know there are fairly established costing models but of
> course that is a very different regime to mainstream HE - Laurillard has
> a section on this in 'Rethinking University Teaching' you can find it
> under 'costs' in the index. It seems to suggest that academic
> development time for being involved in a video would be 10 to one (but
> with substantial assistance) - so I think you are in the right zone from
> a reality point of view.
>
> I would be very interested as well to hear from colleagues who any kind
> of 'metrics' for working out such costs.
>
> All the Best
> John
>
> John Casey
> Learning Materials Manager
> TrustDR JISC Project Manager
> UHI Millennium Institute
> Room 145, Perth College, Perth, PH1 2NX,
> Scotland
> UK
>
> e-mail: [log in to unmask]
> Tel: 01738 877213
> Mob: 07796930031
>
>
>>>> Cooper, Alison <[log in to unmask]> 07/26/06 8:48 pm >>>
> Dear colleagues
>
> Lancaster University and Colleges Union (LUCU) are trying to ascertain
> roughly how long it would take a PhD student/Teaching assistant to
> prepare a brand new 1 hour lecture. We need this information to try and
> establish an appropriate pay rate for such a lecture.
>
> We are fully aware that one response is likely to be, 'well it all
> depends' or 'how long is a piece of string,' but this will simply leave
> us with no basis for action and, and we wish to avoid an arbitrary
> number being imposed. We are thinking in terms of a 1 hour lecture to a
> large (100?) audience, in arts, humanities social science.
>
> Not to try and lead, but rather to try and encourage you to have a stab,
> my guestimate (after 16 years of teaching in HE) is that such an
> endeavour would take me around 15 hours - roughly 2 days.
>
> We could really do with (preferably) an informed response backed by
> research or, if not, a guestimate from your experience as
> educationalists. Does anyone know of any studies on this? We would also
> be interested in how other institutions have gone about calculating a
> pay rate.
>
> Thanks in anticipation - I really need responses before the end of July.
>
> Dr. Steve Fleetwood
>
> Please send replies to Steve Fleetwood, not to this list -
> mailto:[log in to unmask]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --=__Part7C59FD35.0__=
> Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> Content-Description: HTML
>
> <html>
> <head>
> <style type=3D"text/css">
> <!--
> body { margin-left: 4px; margin-top: 4px; margin-bottom: 1px; =
> font-variant: normal; margin-right: 4px; line-height: normal }
> -->
> </style>
> =20
> </head>
> <body style=3D"margin-left: 4px; margin-top: 4px; margin-bottom: 1px;
> =
> margin-right: 4px">
> <DIV> Dear Colleagues
> </DIV>
> <DIV>I hope you don't mind but I have decided to respond to the
> = list as well on this one:
> </DIV>
> <DIV> </DIV>
> <DIV>I have worked in places where course design and
> preparation = time has been as low a ratio as 3 to one. These figures
> are often very = arbitary and formed by local budget structures and
> politics more than = reality. Your question is very interesting and is
> particularly relevant to = the world of online teaching and course
> design etc. l know Paul Bacsich = has done some work on costings in that
> domain and if you do a google = search on 'Bacsich costings' you
> should find some useful stuff.
> </DIV>
> <DIV> </DIV>
> <DIV>My feeling is that your figure is right, but I suspect
> local = pressures push people towards lower figures. I would be
> interested if = anyone on the list can point to any studies done on
> this? In the world = of distance learning I know there are fairly
> established costing models = but of course that is a very different
> regime to mainstream HE - Laurillard= has a section on this in
> 'Rethinking University Teaching' you can = find it under
> 'costs' in the index. It seems to suggest that = academic
> development time for being involved in a video would be 10 to one =
> (but with substantial assistance) - so I think you are in the =
> right zone from a reality point of view.
> </DIV>
> <DIV> </DIV>
> <DIV>I would be very interested as well to hear from colleagues who
> = any kind of 'metrics' for working out such costs.
> </DIV>
> <DIV> </DIV>
> <DIV>All the Best
> </DIV>
> <DIV>John
> </DIV>
> <DIV> </DIV>
> <DIV>John Casey
> </DIV>
> <DIV>Learning Materials Manager
> </DIV>
> <DIV>TrustDR JISC Project Manager
> </DIV>
> <DIV>UHI Millennium Institute
> </DIV>
> <DIV>Room 145, Perth College, Perth, PH1 2NX,=20
> </DIV>
> <DIV>Scotland
> </DIV>
> <DIV>UK
> </DIV>
> <DIV> </DIV>
> <DIV>e-mail: [log in to unmask]
> </DIV>
> <DIV>Tel: 01738 877213
> </DIV>
> <DIV>Mob: 07796930031
> </DIV>
> <DIV><br><br>>>> "Cooper, Alison"
> <a.m.cooper= @LANCASTER.AC.UK> 07/26/06 8:48 pm
> >>><br>Dear colleagues<br><b=
> r>Lancaster University and Colleges Union (LUCU) are trying to =
> ascertain roughly how long it would take a PhD student/Teaching
> assistant = to prepare a brand new 1 hour lecture. We need this
> information to try and = establish an appropriate pay rate for such a
> lecture.<br><br>We are fully = aware that one response is likely to
> be, 'well it all depends' = or  'how long is a
> piece of string,' but this will = simply leave us with no basis
> for action and, and we wish to avoid an = arbitrary number being
> imposed. We are thinking in terms of a 1 hour = lecture to a large
> (100?) audience, in arts, humanities= social
> science.<br><br>Not to try and lead, but rather to try and =
> encourage you to have a stab, my guestimate (after 16 years of =
> teaching in HE) is that such an endeavour would take me around 15 =
> hours - roughly 2 days.<br><br>We could really do with
> (preferably)= an informed response backed by research or,
> if not, a guestimate = from your experience as educationalists. Does
> anyone know of any studies = on this? We would also be interested in
> how other institutions have = gone about calculating a pay
> rate.<br><br>Thanks in anticipation - I = really need responses before
> the end of July.<br><br>Dr. Steve Fleetwood<br=
>> <br>Please send replies to Steve Fleetwood, not to this list =
> -  mailto:[log in to unmask]<br><br><br> </DIV>
>
> </body>
> </html>
>
>
>
>
>
> --=__Part7C59FD35.0__=--
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of SEDA Digest - 26 Jul 2006 to 27 Jul 2006 (#2006-88)
> **********************************************************
The information in this email is confidential and is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised.
If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, except for the purpose of delivery to the addressee, is prohibited and may be unlawful. Kindly notify the sender and delete the message and any attachment from your computer.
|
