Guest guest Posted August 6, 2003 Report Share Posted August 6, 2003 , Julie Chambers <info@j...> wrote: > > Just for the record, the school in California where I teach pays much better > than $20 per hour -- the range is from $35 to $50, Actually the post was about clinic supervising. Most schools pay in the 35-50 range for classroom teaching, including OCOM and NCNM. If the students feel they pay too much, the schools can't make ends meet and the professors are not paid a living wage, we should not be surprised that things are perceived as dismal in academia. And before the objections start spewing, I will stipulate that other schools may also be able to pay living wages and I am just unaware of them because they are located in areas that experience northern winters or LA. :-) I also will acknowledge that having been privy to the finances of three schools in part or whole, I know there is no way to increase teachers wages without increasing tuition. So this is no indictment of any other school. I am sure PCOM's symposium is one of the variable factors in our living wages, so that situation is somewhat unique. BTW, I teach or supervise 30 hours per week and so do several other PCOM professors (or even more). PCOM feels that students are better off with fulltime professors and a number of us do not practice in private at all anymore (which I consider educationally advantageous because we tend not to generalize random personal experiences as I believe often happens in isolated fulltime private practices). So PCOM pays a living wage to teach so that one can devote themselves to it and it does not become a labor of love, from which the love rapidly disappears as soon as dollars start really flowing in one's practice. I do not at all like the idea that people should generate money from practice so they can teach or supervise a few hours per week at inadequate wages as a way to give something back. I have to say I think that ultimately injurs the field. It is probably one of the reasons that wages remain depressed. It really hurts those who would devote themselves to teaching if they are undercut by part-timers who have no time or energy to work on the major issues of curriculum development. And when this development is stymied, the field as a whole is hurt. As long as we are a tuition driven profession, this situation will never be remedied. I am sure many of you know that a large chunk of the power of western medicine in terms of dollars and clout comes from their prestigious schools and those schools are heavily endowed by wealthy grads. So one might ask oneself whether one should endow their alma mater or contribute to a professional organization or both. I think the issue of school endowment has been ignored by our field as a fundamental pillar of modern medicine and it must be a consideration for those who can afford to pay. And I think the professional organizations should heed this. To be at loggerheads with the college council is shortsighted. It makes much better sense to craft mutually acceptable solutions to problems. Chinese Herbs " Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocre minds " -- Albert Einstein Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 6, 2003 Report Share Posted August 6, 2003 , wrote: PCOM feels that students are better off with fulltime professors and a number of us do not practice in private at all anymore (which I consider educationally advantageous because we tend not to generalize random personal experiences as I believe often happens in > isolated fulltime private practices). So PCOM pays a living wage to teach so that one can devote themselves to it and it does not become a labor of love, from which the love rapidly disappears as soon as dollars start really flowing in one's practice. I do not at all like the idea that people should generate money from practice so they can teach or supervise a few hours per week at inadequate wages as a way to give something back. >>> : Around here, $20-25/hour seems to the limit for teaching. I agree with what you say, but would add that it is a vicious circle. If graduating students don't make a salary equivalent to others in the healthcare profession, schools won't be that much in demand, and professor's salaries will stay low. To get that sort of cash flow into this system, a doctorate could be one of the things that could help stimulate it. Jim Ramholz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 6, 2003 Report Share Posted August 6, 2003 , " James Ramholz " <jramholz> wrote: > > To get that sort of cash flow into this system, a doctorate could be > one of the things that could help stimulate it. Interesting point. of course, it will likely be doctors and not acupuncture techs who endow schools. I do thus support a doctoral tier for many reasons, just not convinced about entry level or grandfathering. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 6, 2003 Report Share Posted August 6, 2003 At 9:45 AM -0700 8/6/03, wrote: >PCOM feels that students are better off with fulltime professors and >a number of us do not practice in private at all anymore (which I >consider educationally advantageous because we tend not to >generalize random personal experiences as I believe often happens in >isolated fulltime private practices). So PCOM pays a living wage to >teach so that one can devote themselves to it and it does not become >a labor of love, from which the love rapidly disappears as soon as >dollars start really flowing in one's practice. -- This appears not to be true at PCOM's New York campus. Rory -- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 7, 2003 Report Share Posted August 7, 2003 Hi Just to interject my $0.02. I was employed as a part time teacher of Acupuncture at a local school in L.A. and taught classes at a rate of $30 per hour, which did not cover my preparation time for the course (sometimes 10 or more hours per week to prepare handouts and quizzes). I did this for half a year. I was told about the Clinical supervisor position at this school and when I inquired about the hourly rate - it was at a paltry $20 per hour. I laughed and realized what the school wanted to do was exploit an instructor (probably one from Mainland China). Needless to say, I grew disgusted with this school and left, and concentrated on private practice. The political nonsense and the low wages just didn't make teaching worthwhile anymore. This is a sad state of affairs for our profession, and it is no wonder why our profession suffers. Robert Chu, L.Ac., QMEchusauli See my webpages at: http://www.chusaulei.com - cha Wednesday, August 06, 2003 9:45 AM is teaching a job? , Julie Chambers <info@j...> wrote:> > Just for the record, the school in California where I teach pays much better> than $20 per hour -- the range is from $35 to $50,Actually the post was about clinic supervising. Most schools pay in the 35-50 range for classroom teaching, including OCOM and NCNM. If the students feel they pay too much, the schools can't make ends meet and the professors are not paid a living wage, we should not be surprised that things are perceived as dismal in academia. And before the objections start spewing, I will stipulate that other schools may also be able to pay living wages and I am just unaware of them because they are located in areas that experience northern winters or LA. :-) I also will acknowledge that having been privy to the finances of three schools in part or whole, I know there is no way to increase teachers wages without increasing tuition. So this is no indictment of any other school. I am sure PCOM's symposium is one of the variable factors in our living wages, so that situation is somewhat unique.BTW, I teach or supervise 30 hours per week and so do several other PCOM professors (or even more). PCOM feels that students are better off with fulltime professors and a number of us do not practice in private at all anymore (which I consider educationally advantageous because we tend not to generalize random personal experiences as I believe often happens in isolated fulltime private practices). So PCOM pays a living wage to teach so that one can devote themselves to it and it does not become a labor of love, from which the love rapidly disappears as soon as dollars start really flowing in one's practice. I do not at all like the idea that people should generate money from practice so they can teach or supervise a few hours per week at inadequate wages as a way to give something back. I have to say I think that ultimately injurs the field. It is probably one of the reasons that wages remain depressed. It really hurts those who would devote themselves to teaching if they are undercut by part-timers who have no time or energy to work on the major issues of curriculum development. And when this development is stymied, the field as a whole is hurt. As long as we are a tuition driven profession, this situation will never be remedied. I am sure many of you know that a large chunk of the power of western medicine in terms of dollars and clout comes from their prestigious schools and those schools are heavily endowed by wealthy grads. So one might ask oneself whether one should endow their alma mater or contribute to a professional organization or both. I think the issue of school endowment has been ignored by our field as a fundamental pillar of modern medicine and it must be a consideration for those who can afford to pay. And I think the professional organizations should heed this. To be at loggerheads with the college council is shortsighted. It makes much better sense to craft mutually acceptable solutions to problems. Chinese Herbshttp://www..orgvoice: fax: "Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocre minds" -- Albert Einstein Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 7, 2003 Report Share Posted August 7, 2003 , <@i...> > > BTW, I teach or supervise 30 hours per week and so do several other PCOM > professors (or even more). PCOM feels that students are better off with > fulltime professors and a number of us do not practice in private at all > anymore (which I consider educationally advantageous because we tend not > to generalize random personal experiences as I believe often happens in > isolated fulltime private practices). So PCOM pays a living wage to teach > so that one can devote themselves to it and it does not become a labor of > love, from which the love rapidly disappears as soon as dollars start > really flowing in one's practice. I do not at all like the idea that > people should generate money from practice so they can teach or supervise > a few hours per week at inadequate wages as a way to give something back. > I have to say I think that ultimately injurs the field. It is probably > one of the reasons that wages remain depressed. It really hurts those who > would devote themselves to teaching if they are undercut by part- timers > who have no time or energy to work on the major issues of curriculum > development. And when this development is stymied, the field as a whole > is hurt. I agree, this makes sense... I also found it quite annoying when part- time teachers ended up recruiting students as patients, oh but they usually did give a 10% discount (or something)... lame... - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 7, 2003 Report Share Posted August 7, 2003 I agree that teaching is its own profession. To be good at it is a different set of skills than being a good clinician. To be good at it also takes just as much education and experience as being a clinician. As I teach around the U.S., I would say that there are many good clinicians teaching at U.S. I would not say that there are many good teachers teaching at U.S. schools. (Please note the word " many. " I did not say " any. " ) $50 per hour X 30 hours per week seems like a decent wage to me in terms of someone with the knowledge, experience, and skill set of a " professor " or senior teacher of CM. That would leave ample time to write/publish, lecture, consult, edit, translate, etc. on one's own. Seems to me a person with the right skill set could earn $100K per annum this way. Perhaps $100K is insufficient in SoCal, but I think it's ok in many other areas of the U.S. Just as a for instance, if I earned $60-70K in teaching salary for 30 hours work per week, I would easily top $100K in cumulative royalties alone. Bob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 7, 2003 Report Share Posted August 7, 2003 , Rory Kerr <rorykerr@w...> wrote: > -- > > > > This appears not to be true at PCOM's New York campus. the payscale is higher in NY than SD, but I have no idea if it is adequate to live in the city. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 7, 2003 Report Share Posted August 7, 2003 , " Bob Flaws " < pemachophel2001> wrote: Perhaps $100K is insufficient in SoCal, its plenty if both spouses work Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 8, 2003 Report Share Posted August 8, 2003 At 4:06 PM +0000 8/7/03, wrote: --- In , Rory Kerr <rorykerr@w...> wrote: > > > > This appears not to be true at PCOM's New York campus. the payscale is higher in NY than SD, but I have no idea if it is adequate to live in the city. -- I was referring to the employment of full time teachers, which as far as I can tell isn't done at the PCOM-NY campus. The pay scale you mentioned appears to be less than other colleges in the area. Rory -- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 9, 2003 Report Share Posted August 9, 2003 Bob and Are you saying, then, that a teacher should not be a clinician? My understanding is that in Western medicine, clinicians also teach and visa versa. I don't know the scenario in China, but I would assume that teachers practice at least in the associated clinic or hospital to that college. As in other areas, practice informs theory which informs practice. Having said that, like most teachers of TCM in the West, I had to teach myself to teach over time and get myself the necessary skill set through trial, error, and training, on my own time and at my own expense, for basically the love of teaching. It also has influenced my style of practice, which I've tried to arrange to inform my teaching and visa versa. I try to keep everything simple and manage my qi so that I don't exhaust myself, or let one role distract me from the other. On Thursday, August 7, 2003, at 08:39 AM, Bob Flaws wrote: > > > I agree that teaching is its own profession. To be good at it is a > different set of skills than being a good clinician. To be good at it > also takes just as much education and experience as being a clinician. > As I teach around the U.S., I would say that there are many good > clinicians teaching at U.S. I would not say that there are many good > teachers teaching at U.S. schools. (Please note the word " many. " I > did not say " any. " ) > > $50 per hour X 30 hours per week seems like a decent wage to me in > terms of someone with the knowledge, experience, and skill set of a > " professor " or senior teacher of CM. That would leave ample time to > write/publish, lecture, consult, edit, translate, etc. on one's own. > Seems to me a person with the right skill set could earn $100K per > annum this way. Perhaps $100K is insufficient in SoCal, but I think > it's ok in many other areas of the U.S. Just as a for instance, if I > earned $60-70K in teaching salary for 30 hours work per week, I would > easily top $100K in cumulative royalties alone. > > Bob > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2003 Report Share Posted August 10, 2003 At 09:45 AM 8/6/2003 -0700, you wrote: --- In , Julie Chambers <info@j...> wrote: BTW, I teach or supervise 30 hours per week and so do several other PCOM professors (or even more). PCOM feels that students are better off with fulltime professors and a number of us do not practice in private at all anymore (which I consider educationally advantageous because we tend not to generalize random personal experiences as I believe often happens in isolated fulltime private practices). So PCOM pays a living wage to teach so that one can devote themselves to it and it does not become a labor of love, from which the love rapidly disappears as soon as dollars start really flowing in one's practice. I do not at all like the idea that people should generate money from practice so they can teach or supervise a few hours per week at inadequate wages as a way to give something back. I have to say I think that ultimately injurs the field. It is probably one of the reasons that wages remain depressed. It really hurts those who would devote themselves to teaching if they are undercut by part-timers who have no time or energy to work on the major issues of curriculum development. And when this development is stymied, the field as a whole is hurt. - While I am certainly in favor of the the full-time professor in our profession, I also feel that there is an incredible value that the parttime instructor brings to the picture. While they may not be as integrated a part of the curriculum development (although my experience has been that if they are truly invited to the party they do participate) they bring the variety that is so important to studying this medicine in this country. One of the things that some of the smaller programs have suffered from when hiring too many fulltimers is that students end up studying with a very small number of people and not really seeing the different ideas and techniques that different people pick up over their years of practice. Some people really do want to teach, but they do not want it to be a profession - they want their profession to be the practice of Chinese medicine - but they are great teachers and have a lot to offer. And, IMO they should be paid appropriate rates for their adjunct teaching. Certainly, in all areas of academia, the adjunct faculty member is a cheap way to get people to teach, but, usually the adjunct faculty are the ones who are recently graduated from Ph.D programs and are unable to land a fulltime teaching gig and so they make a living by adjuncting at several institutions. This does not have to be the case for us. We have a huge population of very well trained individuals who might like to teach one or two classes and who make a nice supplement to our fulltime faculty. They can and should be integrated into the development of the program - this integration requires a bit more work on the part of the college administration but it is usually worth it. Many of the best " adjunct " faculty I know out here will not teach for under 55 - 60 / hour - and often they ask for more. And, again IMO, they deserve it - they are able to give students valuable clinical information and information about how this medicine is practiced in this country. I am not saying that the fulltimer cannot give this, the role of each individidual is slightly different and both are important in the development of our field. Marnae As long as we are a tuition driven profession, this situation will never be remedied. I am sure many of you know that a large chunk of the power of western medicine in terms of dollars and clout comes from their prestigious schools and those schools are heavily endowed by wealthy grads. So one might ask oneself whether one should endow their alma mater or contribute to a professional organization or both. I think the issue of school endowment has been ignored by our field as a fundamental pillar of modern medicine and it must be a consideration for those who can afford to pay. And I think the professional organizations should heed this. To be at loggerheads with the college council is shortsighted. It makes much better sense to craft mutually acceptable solutions to problems. Chinese Herbs voice: fax: " Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocre minds " -- Albert Einstein </blockquote></x-html> Marnae C. Ergil, M.A, M.S., L.Ac. Huntington Herbs & Acupuncture (631) 549-6755 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2003 Report Share Posted August 10, 2003 Bob - Just a note about the 30 hours - that is actually a VERY high teaching load in traditional academic settings. If it is just clinical supervision, which I think is what Todd is referring to then that is fine, but I suspect that on top of the 30 hours of clinical supervision there is some course work involved too. In a trad university, a fulltime faculty is generally expected to teach 2, maybe 3, course per term, thus leaving time for effective course prep, writing and research. At too many of our schools, a " fulltime " teaching load actually translates into 40 " contact " hours - an amount that is far too much for anyone to maintain. At one school where I was full time, I was expected to do 30 contact hours (class and clinic) and 10 hours of administrative work. Most of our schools simply do not yet understand what a full time faculty position entails. Todd - I am curious - what is PCOM SD's definition of fulltime for faculty? At least 2 programs that I know of have started to figure this out - full time is a max of 12 credits (3 classes) per term, a certain amount of admin time and anything over and above that (i.e. clinic) is compensated over and above that. Marnae At 03:39 PM 8/7/2003 +0000, you wrote: I agree that teaching is its own profession. To be good at it is a different set of skills than being a good clinician. To be good at it also takes just as much education and experience as being a clinician. As I teach around the U.S., I would say that there are many good clinicians teaching at U.S. I would not say that there are many good teachers teaching at U.S. schools. (Please note the word " many. " I did not say " any. " ) $50 per hour X 30 hours per week seems like a decent wage to me in terms of someone with the knowledge, experience, and skill set of a " professor " or senior teacher of CM. That would leave ample time to write/publish, lecture, consult, edit, translate, etc. on one's own. Seems to me a person with the right skill set could earn $100K per annum this way. Perhaps $100K is insufficient in SoCal, but I think it's ok in many other areas of the U.S. Just as a for instance, if I earned $60-70K in teaching salary for 30 hours work per week, I would easily top $100K in cumulative royalties alone. Bob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2003 Report Share Posted August 10, 2003 Marnae, please be more careful in your editing, because the following statement looks like it it being attributed to me, whereas it was actually Todd's statement, I believe. Julie - Marnae Ergil Sunday, August 10, 2003 1:27 PM Re: is teaching a job? At 09:45 AM 8/6/2003 -0700, you wrote: , Julie Chambers <info@j...> wrote: BTW, I teach or supervise 30 hours per week and so do several other PCOM professors (or even more). PCOM feels that students are better off with fulltime professors and a number of us do not practice in private at all anymore (which I consider educationally advantageous because we tend not to generalize random Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2003 Report Share Posted August 10, 2003 Sorry Julie - indeed it was Todd's statement. Marnae At 02:09 PM 8/10/2003 -0600, you wrote: Marnae, please be more careful in your editing, because the following statement looks like it it being attributed to me, whereas it was actually Todd's statement, I believe. Julie - Marnae Ergil To: Sunday, August 10, 2003 1:27 PM Re: is teaching a job? At 09:45 AM 8/6/2003 -0700, you wrote: , Julie Chambers <info@j...> wrote: BTW, I teach or supervise 30 hours per week and so do several other PCOM professors (or even more). PCOM feels that students are better off with fulltime professors and a number of us do not practice in private at all anymore (which I consider educationally advantageous because we tend not to generalize random Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2003 Report Share Posted August 10, 2003 It would seem to me, from what I know of academia, that 3 classes at 3.5 hrs. each would be full-time. So-called full-time faculty at PCOM are doing, as you pointed out, mostly clinical supervision. I have always taught this load, so I consider myself semi-official 'full-time' faculty. On Sunday, August 10, 2003, at 12:41 PM, Marnae Ergil wrote: > Bob - > > Just a note about the 30 hours - that is actually a VERY high teaching > load in traditional academic settings. If it is just clinical > supervision, which I think is what Todd is referring to then that is > fine, but I suspect that on top of the 30 hours of clinical > supervision there is some course work involved too. In a trad > university, a fulltime faculty is generally expected to teach 2, maybe > 3, course per term, thus leaving time for effective course prep, > writing and research. At too many of our schools, a " fulltime " > teaching load actually translates into 40 " contact " hours - an amount > that is far too much for anyone to maintain. At one school where I > was full time, I was expected to do 30 contact hours (class and > clinic) and 10 hours of administrative work. Most of our schools > simply do not yet understand what a full time faculty position > entails. Todd - I am curious - what is PCOM SD's definition of > fulltime for faculty? At least 2 programs that I know of have started > to figure this out - full time is a max of 12 credits (3 classes) per > term, a certain amount of admin time and anything over and above that > (i.e. clinic) is compensated over and above that. > > Marnae > > At 03:39 PM 8/7/2003 +0000, you wrote: > > > > I agree that teaching is its own profession. To be good at it is a > different set of skills than being a good clinician. To be good at it > also takes just as much education and experience as being a clinician. > As I teach around the U.S., I would say that there are many good > clinicians teaching at U.S. I would not say that there are many good > teachers teaching at U.S. schools. (Please note the word " many. " I > did not say " any. " ) > > $50 per hour X 30 hours per week seems like a decent wage to me in > terms of someone with the knowledge, experience, and skill set of a > " professor " or senior teacher of CM. That would leave ample time to > write/publish, lecture, consult, edit, translate, etc. on one's own. > Seems to me a person with the right skill set could earn $100K per > annum this way. Perhaps $100K is insufficient in SoCal, but I think > it's ok in many other areas of the U.S. Just as a for instance, if I > earned $60-70K in teaching salary for 30 hours work per week, I would > easily top $100K in cumulative royalties alone. > > Bob > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2003 Report Share Posted August 10, 2003 At 03:41 PM 8/10/2003 -0400, you wrote: - I am curious - what is PCOM SD's definition of fulltime for faculty? At least 2 programs that I know of have started to figure this out - full time is a max of 12 credits (3 classes) per term, a certain amount of admin time and anything over and above that (i.e. clinic) is compensated over and above that. Oops again - I meant 9 credits, not 12. Marnae At 03:39 PM 8/7/2003 +0000, you wrote: I agree that teaching is its own profession. To be good at it is a different set of skills than being a good clinician. To be good at it also takes just as much education and experience as being a clinician. As I teach around the U.S., I would say that there are many good clinicians teaching at U.S. I would not say that there are many good teachers teaching at U.S. schools. (Please note the word " many. " I did not say " any. " ) $50 per hour X 30 hours per week seems like a decent wage to me in terms of someone with the knowledge, experience, and skill set of a " professor " or senior teacher of CM. That would leave ample time to write/publish, lecture, consult, edit, translate, etc. on one's own. Seems to me a person with the right skill set could earn $100K per annum this way. Perhaps $100K is insufficient in SoCal, but I think it's ok in many other areas of the U.S. Just as a for instance, if I earned $60-70K in teaching salary for 30 hours work per week, I would easily top $100K in cumulative royalties alone. Bob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2003 Report Share Posted August 10, 2003 , Marnae Ergil <marnae@p...> wrote: Todd - I am curious - what is PCOM SD's definition of fulltime > for faculty? I think its 30 contact hours and I do spend another 5-10 doing odds and ends such as lesson prep, grading, etc., some of which I get paid for. I have graders and readers and the biggest burden is when I teach a new class. I teach 2-3 classes and rest is clinic and admin, just like you said. However one of my colleagues teaches 4 classes in 7 sections and does one clinic shift. I think that's a little nuts. But whatever works for you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2003 Report Share Posted August 10, 2003 , Marnae Ergil <marnae@p...> wrote: If it is just clinical supervision, > which I think is what Todd is referring to then that is fine, but I suspect > that on top of the 30 hours of clinical supervision there is some > course work involved too. It is mostly clinical supervision but we also like the idea of classroom teachers working in clinic and vice-versa. It is very frustrating and counterproductive to teach students something in class and then have no opportunity for them to carry it out in clinic. So it would serve no purpose to teach worsely style in class and then have no such px in clinic. Likewise it would be silly to not teach TCM style in class when we rely on many supervisors from china as the bulwark of our clinic staff. There is limited to time to achieve any goal in 4 years of school and I do not believe diversity is necessarily the key. With my background in naturopathy, I am trained and experienced clinically in several , modalities, but it is my observation still that those who focus more narrowly in modality and style get better clinical results than those with big bags of tricks. For the record, I also think fulltime teachers must necessarily devote a significant amount of their " teaching " time to clinic. this is not a study where one can be an ivory tower academic and have much to say of any import, IMO. Finally, there are certainly good parttime teachers out there, but I have not found many of them willing to be part of the team no matter how well coaxed. They are often independent sorts, which is fine for many classes, but not for core material, IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 11, 2003 Report Share Posted August 11, 2003 , " " <@i...> wrote: > They are often independent sorts, which is fine for many classes, but not for > core material, IMO. > Examples I can think of might be upper level classes in certain topics such as infertility or specialty electives like meridian acupuncture (and associated clinic shifts) or orthopedic acupuncture (and associated clinic shifts). Those are examples taken from PCOM; there are more, but its incredibly hot..... On the other hand, almost every member of the herbs department taught at least two classes plus did at least one clinic shift and typically more like 3 shifts, averaging about 25-30 hours per week. The same is true of professors of our internal medicine series. So I would agree with Marnae that such a balance is useful to the extent that diversity in class can be integrated with enough clinical training to make the time spent worthwhile. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 11, 2003 Report Share Posted August 11, 2003 Is a " fulltime " position paid an annual salary or " by the hour " ? Benefits? Marnae At 05:22 AM 8/11/2003 +0000, you wrote: --- In , Marnae Ergil <marnae@p...> wrote: - I am curious - what is PCOM SD's definition of fulltime > for faculty? I think its 30 contact hours and I do spend another 5-10 doing odds and ends such as lesson prep, grading, etc., some of which I get paid for. I have graders and readers and the biggest burden is when I teach a new class. I teach 2-3 classes and rest is clinic and admin, just like you said. However one of my colleagues teaches 4 classes in 7 sections and does one clinic shift. I think that's a little nuts. But whatever works for you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 11, 2003 Report Share Posted August 11, 2003 At 05:45 AM 8/11/2003 +0000, you wrote: --- In , Marnae Ergil <marnae@p...> wrote: If it is just clinical supervision, > which I think is what Todd is referring to then that is fine, but I suspect > that on top of the 30 hours of clinical supervision there is some > course work involved too. It is mostly clinical supervision but we also like the idea of classroom teachers working in clinic and vice-versa. It is very frustrating and counterproductive to teach students something in class and then have no opportunity for them to carry it out in clinic. I certainly agree - So it would serve no purpose to teach worsely style in class and then have no such px in clinic. Likewise it would be silly to not teach TCM style in class when we rely on many supervisors from china as the bulwark of our clinic staff. There is limited to time to achieve any goal in 4 years of school and I do not believe diversity is necessarily the key. With my background in naturopathy, I am trained and experienced clinically in several , modalities, but it is my observation still that those who focus more narrowly in modality and style get better clinical results than those with big bags of tricks. Again, I agree, but, if there is a clinician who, for example, is an expert in SHL but has a fulltime practice and does not want to give it up to teach fulltime then isn't it worth it to have them teach? Or, if someone is well trained in Yoshio Manaka's ion pumping cord treatments, or Richard Tan's pain management and you want to introduce students to these techniques isn't it best to have the expert teach them? Better than ignoring the fact that they exist? And, then, perhaps, training your clinical faculty as well (what, giving free training to faculty?) so that they can support the work done in class? I agree that a more narrow focus generally gives better clinical results, but, having access to a few different techniques is also very helpful. I will use a Manaka type treatment every now and then, even though it is not my " specialty " because sometimes the patient walks in for whom that is the most appropriate treatment and I'm glad that I know the technique so that I can recognize the pattern and use the technique when appropriate. I am not suggesting that we give our students a big bag of tricks but that we help them to understand the breadth of what is out there so that they can make informed decisions about how they want to practice. For the record, I also think fulltime teachers must necessarily devote a significant amount of their " teaching " time to clinic. this is not a study where one can be an ivory tower academic and have much to say of any import, IMO. I agree that all teachers in our field should devote a considerable amount of time to clinic. Having devoted a great deal of time to clinical supervision over the last 7 years however, as well as to creating an independent practice, there is a huge difference between the clinical experience that I get when I am supervising students and when I am seeing my own patients. I learn very different things from these two endeavors and I try to move them back and forth. Don't get me wrong, I wholly support the idea of full time faculty in our field, however, if you look at other fields that are clinically oriented such as ours, a fulltime position does not preclude maintaining a private practice as well, and ideally, having time for writing and research too. A full time position in fact should be designed to support both the school and the individual - anything that the fulltime faculty does outside of the envrions on the school, supports the school, and therefore should be supported by the school. Finally, there are certainly good parttime teachers out there, but I have not found many of them willing to be part of the team no matter how well coaxed. They are often independent sorts, which is fine for many classes, but not for core material, IMO. I don't fully agree. We have several parttime faculty who teach core material and are very involved in the team. I think that if the team gets too big it makes people feel that there input is not needed. While the parttime faculty may not always be able to make it the " large " faculty meetings etc., curriculum development does not really occur there - it occurs in smaller, departmental meetings or one on one meetings (over coffee?) with a dean or department head. Working through syllabi with instructors, understanding what they want to achieve in a course and helping them to be clear about what the institution wants to achieve in a course and then bringing 3 or 4 faculty together to discuss the curriculum of one area of study (i.e. fundamentals, or 1st year theory), is often the most productive way to get input from individuals and then, to give them the opportunity to implement their ideas and to support those ideas in other areas is often the best way to make people feel a part of a team. If they are simply given a syllabus, told " teach this " and attend one faculty meeting per semester, then that is what they will do. Marnae Groups Sponsor Chinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety of professional services, including board approved online continuing education. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 12, 2003 Report Share Posted August 12, 2003 , Marnae Ergil <marnae@p...> wrote: > Is a " fulltime " position paid an annual salary or " by the hour " ? Benefits? > > Marnae it varies Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 12, 2003 Report Share Posted August 12, 2003 Marnae Marnae Your email is not wrapping the message. You might want to check your settings. there is a huge difference between the clinical > experience that I get when I am supervising students and when I am seeing > my own patients. I learn very different things from these two endeavors > and I try to move them back and forth. good point. on the other hand, I have always worked in clinics where a team approach to medicine is emphasized, so I have rarely had the true solo practitioner experience if that's what you mean. On the other hand, my clinic supervision includes personally treating patients with assistants working with me so they see how I question and diagnose and prescribe. However I admittedly let them do most of the " bodywork " , but that has never been my passion anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.