Korean Job Discussion Forums

[ChrisPK]

[Shimokitazawa]

[PRagic]

All depends on the job an individual chooses to take. If someone takes a tenure track gig, then everything I've said is true. If someone takes a contract, visiting prof gig, then, no, they obviously won't get the terms and perks associated with a tenure track position.

If you want to call that a two-tiered system, fine, but that's the reality of academe the world over, and NOT just in ESL. There are loads of people ion temporary, visiting, and adjunct status in N. America, for example.

And, again, I'm not tenured yet.

[ChrisPK]

[PRagic]

...and having reread your post, a few points need clarification....

1. tenure track positions will not be available for those teaching ESL (teaching students English). The tenure track jobs will be in colleges of education, usually in a department of English language education, and for those who teach future teachers and researchers. Along with this will come the usual MA and Ph.D. guidance, publishing, and admin responsibilities.

2. No, an MA holder, even if they publish and are active in their field, will not be qualified at a 4 year university or college for a tenure track position. It's not reasonable to think that an MA holder can teach doctoral level seminars or guide diversified doctoral level research. Teach ESL? Heck ya, but see number 1 above.

3. Obtaining tenure is a process for Ph.D. holders, and there's no guarantee of tenure once the process has begun. In fact, most assistant professor new hires, here and elsewhere, are indeed on a contract, though it is normally 4 years as opposed to the one or two year contracts a ESL lecturers are given. If the person doesn't sufficiently publish and/or does not meet satisfactory teaching metrics, they are simply not promoted to associate professor and not renewed. This can happen again when going up for full professor promotion review (you're still on a contact that, once promoted, carries over until the
next review). So you have to have the Ph.D. and publications just to get the job, and you have to stay sufficiently active to keep the job. Tenure is granted (usually with a promotion to full professor here, but at the associate professor level in N. America) only after a full internal and external review of your credentials.

[ChrisPK]

[PRagic]

Been in the game a while, thanks, and I'm on the tenure track HERE so I'm very well aware how things work HERE. The shadowy process you're describing may still be the norm at smaller, lower tiered universities, but to get promotion and tenure at the bigger schools (and to get hired in the first place) you have to have publications in SCI/SSCI ranked journals and the editorial and referee vigor for these publications reflects international, peer review standards that are pretty tough to skate on. At most of the larger universities, triggered in part by the problems you mentioned, all publications are further vetted via plagiarism software.

And let's not forget that academic integrity lapses are certainly not confined to Korea. Would the good senator from Montana please raise his hand?

[ChrisPK]

[ChrisPK]

Here is just one example:
http://www.voanews.com/content/plagiarism-imperililng-south-koreas-academic-reputation/1147381.html
You can find a lot more if you google it.

[PRagic]

Which is exactly why the hiring, promotion and tenure processes have become more stringent.

[ChrisPK]

[PRagic]

Christ on a crutch, NO! Which, again, is why I said there have been changes and firewalls put up to try and eradicate these practices. To the contrary, you seem dead set on believing that nothing is changing.

Problems with plagiarism are rampant in several places around the world. Here, it's no longer a slap on the wrist; people can lose their positions. So you asked if I 'knew how to play the game' yet. Sure, EVERYONE in the game knows how to play it, and they know that if they cheat and get caught, it's a monster professional embarrassment and there are consequences.

How about people stop trying to denigrate the work of all Korean academics by suggesting that everyone on the tenure track is plagiarizing their way up the ladder?

[swashbuckler]

[PRagic]

Yup, that's exactly what it means, with a few differences. And it would be the same if I worked in N. America. The big difference is that my contracts are substantially longer, something I mentioned in a previous post. It also means that I can't get let go on a moments notice; usually there's a year trial period granted before a dismisal.

I started as an assistant professor with a 4 year contract, after which I was reviewed and promoted to associated professor. I'm now on a 6 year contract, which will run up until I go under review for full professor and full tenure two years from now (I'll be on a one year paid sabbatical for one of those years, a nice perk). I'm looking forward to knocking that out as soon as possible, but it is also possible to postpone the review process a bit (and to get a bridge contract to do so).

I know several international academics at various universities and in various diciplines in Korea who DO have full tenure, though, so it's not like it's a pie in the sky scenerio. I'm fully aware of the process and the 'points' necessary to make the promotion and get tenure, and I do a lot of work to make sure I'll have them covered in spades.

VERY strong suspicions, or any suspicions for that matter, are merely conjecture. There is no shadow system here, and there is no fudging; either you have the points and the credentials or you don't, and you won't get promoted or get tenured if you don't. Period. This is not conjecture, this is coming from someone inside the system. Different universities will have different promotion and tenure criteria, but it needs to be filled none-the-less.

Will there be exceptions? Yawn. Sure, as I'm sure there are just about everywhere else in the world. But, again, to create and perpetuate this big conspiracy theory and then to denigrate the work of ALL Korean scholars based on conjecture just seems a bit much, especially in the face of commentary coming from somenoe inside said system.

[swashbuckler]