[Balian]

Originally Posted by R-Star

Im looking at the pay stub as we speak, it says "Alberta School Board" job title of "Alberta Teachers Association"

Nice try though. Why not keep telling everyone else how it is, you seem to have knowledge in everything, only thing is, you should make sure you're correct before hand.

job title = Alberta Teachers Association

ROFL ...man, are you saying something subconsciously about your wife? She is the WHOLE ASSOCIATION? I hope thats not a formal title. I was referring to her salary more than her official title. Unless I am mistaken, substitute teachers usually get less pay right? Most pay stubs usually don't have formal titles printed on them. Thanks for playing.

[sa1177]

Originally Posted by Balian

Yes, its an argument of semantics and thus the importance of FORMAL TITLES and not phrases like "regarded as"

That's how the University defined it, considering they are the one and only entity who defines their professorships there really is nothing to debate. They make it quite clear that Senior Lecturers are professors.

So unless you want to try to argue that the word "regarded" is not "formal" you really have no case.

[Balian]

Originally Posted by sa1177

That's how the University defined it, considering they are the one and only entity who defines their professorships there really is nothing to debate. They make it quite clear that Senior Lecturers are professors.

So unless you want to try to argue that the word "regarded" is not "formal" you really have no case.

1992-1996 Lecturer
1996-2004 Senior Lecturer

He was a Lecturer from 1992 to 1996. He was a Senior Lecturer from 1996 to 2004.

Coming straight from the university. Just the facts with no embellishments or courtesy wording such as "served as" or "regarded as." They didn't say senior lecturers ARE professors. They used "regarded as" for a reason. If "regarded as" has the same meaning as "formal", then you would see this:

He was a Professor of Constitutional Law from 1992 to 1996. He was a Professor of Constitutional Law with tenure from 1996 to 2004.

Unless you can prove otherwise, I rest my case.

[maxiep]

Originally Posted by sa1177

That's how the University defined it, considering they are the one and only entity who defines their professorships there really is nothing to debate. They make it quite clear that Senior Lecturers are professors.

So unless you want to try to argue that the word "regarded" is not "formal" you really have no case.

Okay, now I do have to chime in. The difference is how it is presented and the venue. Sen. Obama CANNOT list on his resume "Professor". He can only say "Senior Lecturer". Sen. Obama, however, CAN say he was a professor at The Law School.

I'll give you an example. At the U of C, students called me "Professor". The U of C considered me a professor. However, on my resume, it says "Lecturer". It's a fine point, but I guarantee you a very important one for the full-time faculty at the U of C. The barrier to teach a class at Chicago isn't all that high--even a knuckledragger like me could help shape young minds in Hyde Park--but to obtain a tenure-track position is unbelievably competitive.

The point is to say "Professor" on your resume passes on an entirely different level of prestige and responsibility. The primary role of a tenure track prof at the U of C is to produce scholarly research, not to teach (sorry to break the bad news). The primary role of a Lecturer or a Senior Lecturer is to teach classes. Saying "Professor" on your resume indicates that you were engaged in that kind of high-level research.

All of that being said, everything that I've heard about Sen. Obama is that he had the law chops to handle a tenure-track position, so in my mind it's not a matter of competence. It's a matter of being honest and forthright about his experience.

[sa1177]

Originally Posted by maxiep

Okay, now I do have to chime in. The difference is how it is presented and the venue. Sen. Obama CANNOT list on his resume "Professor". He can only say "Senior Lecturer". Sen. Obama, however, CAN say he was a professor at The Law School.

I'll give you an example. At the U of C, students called me "Professor". The U of C considered me a professor. However, on my resume, it says "Lecturer". It's a fine point, but I guarantee you a very important one for the full-time faculty at the U of C. The barrier to teach a class at Chicago isn't all that high--even a knuckledragger like me could help shape young minds in Hyde Park--but to obtain a tenure-track position is unbelievably competitive.

The point is to say "Professor" on your resume passes on an entirely different level of prestige and responsibility. The primary role of a tenure track prof at the U of C is to produce scholarly research, not to teach (sorry to break the bad news). The primary role of a Lecturer or a Senior Lecturer is to teach classes. Saying "Professor" on your resume indicates that you were engaged in that kind of high-level research.

All of that being said, everything that I've heard about Sen. Obama is that he had the law chops to handle a tenure-track position, so in my mind it's not a matter of competence. It's a matter of being honest and forthright about his experience.

Yes I understand the structure and politics of Universities since I currently work in one. Yet I don't find any "lie" in what Senator Obama said or how he presented himself in this case. If the University "regards" senior lecturers as professors why shouldn't Obama regard himself as one as well? I don't find any evidence that he is lying in this case.

[maxiep]

Originally Posted by sa1177

Yes I understand the structure and politics of Universities since I currently work in one. Yet I don't find any "lie" in what Senator Obama said or how he presented himself in this case. If the University "regards" senior lecturers as professors why shouldn't Obama regard himself as one as well? I don't find any evidence that he is lying in this case.

I'll ask you to read my previous post again and focus on the different responsibilities for a tenure track position and a lecturer position. I can't speak for OHSU, but I can speak for the University of Chicago. At the U of C, there is a wide gulf between the two groups.

[e_blazer1]

I don't care if he's a full professor or not, but man, that goat herder thing really tees me off.

[sa1177]

Originally Posted by maxiep

I'll ask you to read my previous post again and focus on the different responsibilities for a tenure track position and a lecturer position. I can't speak for OHSU, but I can speak for the University of Chicago. At the U of C, there is a wide gulf between the two groups.

Yes a wide gulf to be sure, and their is certainly some disdain for "lecturers" by professors in the tenured track. The tenured folk tend to be a bit uppity about their status. However here at OHSU both groups are considered professors regardless of track and tenure. OHSU may simply solve the issue by having different levels of "professors."

[Balian]

Originally Posted by sa1177

Yes I understand the structure and politics of Universities since I currently work in one. Yet I don't find any "lie" in what Senator Obama said or how he presented himself in this case. If the University "regards" senior lecturers as professors why shouldn't Obama regard himself as one as well? I don't find any evidence that he is lying in this case.

Here is his exact wording:

"I was a constitutional law professor, which means unlike the current president I actually respect the Constitution."

Compare that to the official statement and what normally would be listed on his resume, quite contradictory:
He was a Lecturer from 1992 to 1996. He was a Senior Lecturer from 1996 to 2004.

The university had to extend a courtesy to Obama, otherwise they would have a political fallout. This was after a huge media inquiry in the matter. I can understand why the university did what they did ...to not embarrass a former employee running for the highest office in the land.

[stockfire]

hahahaha.

If this is the best they've got, it'll be a cake walk in November.

Rules for Obama-Bashing, 2008:
1. Go to Snopes.com and find something without citation or actual reference.
2. Claim it is the one true word of god with an ignorant fierceness.
3. When someone tries to call you out on A, ignore it. Argue B (the more unrelated and trivial the better) with terrifying smugness.

Remember: If you can think it, it's true. If you write it on the interwebz, it's even MORE true.

[sa1177]

Originally Posted by Balian

The university had to extend a courtesy to Obama, otherwise they would have a political fallout. This was after a huge media inquiry in the matter. I can understand why the university did what they did ...to not embarrass a former employee running for the highest office in the land.

I find that as a rather weak argument considering there is no evidence of them doing so. I do see how believing so is convenient for you though.

[Balian]

Originally Posted by sa1177

I find that as a rather weak argument considering there is no evidence of them doing so. I do see how believing so is convenient for you though.

The evidence is clear. His formal title was senior lecturer and nothing more. The university made this point very clear if you ignore the courtesy/vague wording.