I think people under-estimate how difficult it is to be a good teacher. I honestly think if you selected TAs based on (teaching) merit, you'd still have a large population of bad TAs, because some may lack the expertise in the given field (ie. a great teacher, but not good at say, microeconomics or whatever). It's a balancing act...and I think there aren't enough skilled people to go around.

It's like professors...I mean you don't require teacher's college to teach university, but why is that? ... Because there aren't enough people with PhDs to pick and choose.

Originally Posted by adrian

because you're being paid(with benefits nonetheless) when some of us can't even find jobs

I get paid to do the job, yes.

I don't get paid to go above and beyond, fine tune things to death, or give part marks on assignments, or heck, hold a review session for lazy students who don't attend lectures. These are all things which constitute a 'good TA.'

What motivation do I have to be a 'good TA?' Because I get paid even if I'm terrible.

Originally Posted by DannyV

I'm not going to bring up the other, non-engineering (and non-commerce) courses which I have taken and which are incorporated into my opinion of TAs.

Fair enough, but it's my understanding that at least 4/5ths of your courses were engineering weren't they? You guys aren't given too many elective slots. The remaining ones were likely concentrated in another area, both suggesting you got a poor sampling of TAs. (Not because you got 'bad TAs' but rather because you didn't experience a diverse array of TAs...nobody really does)

I'm not asking TAs to care whether I succeed or fail. They're not being paid for that.

Actually I disagree...I think a TA is supposed to be the link between the students and the professor: the TA is supposed to be like your 'friend' or go-to person if you're having any trouble. Namely, a TA is supposed to be more personable than a professor, more down-to-earth.

Maybe I'm over-dramatic, but I was a bit sad when I had to deduct marks because someone made silly errors, or misinterpreted the questions, etc. I want all my students to get 12's...I know it won't happen, but I'll bend over backward to help them get as close as they can.

I do expect them to be prepared, to know HOW they're going to present the material. Considering the amount they get paid, I don't see that as asking for too much.

Ok, here's something I can respond to. When I run a tutorial, I have no clue what students are struggling with...more often than not, they're struggling with something I found very easy, and the stuff I expected them to have trouble with, they found easy. It seems simple in theory to survey the class and just 'know everything in advance' but it's unbelievably difficult in practice...even a really basic concept, if unexpected, is a struggle to explain. Everything's different when you're at the front of the room, right?

Unless of course you're running your tutorials in a 'lecture style' with little to no student involvement...then you should pretty much rehearse your entire tutorial beforehand...but then, that wouldn't be a good TA either.


-----------------------------


I'll tell you what, Danny, adrian, anyone else...if you guys have any suggestions, any serious criticisms of TAs, let me know and I will seriously take it to heart. At least that way, you'll know your complaints don't fall on deaf ears.



And again, I'll reiterate that I don't want a TA strike any more than you guys.

Originally Posted by McIntyre

I definitely think more resources need to be offered for our TAs in term of training though. I don't completely understand the need for benefits through CUPE at McMaster though when the MSU and the GSA both have decent plans.

One thing the GSA doesn't cover at all is dental, vision care and childcare; these are all currently through CUPE. For MSU coverage, there are improvements to dental and vision care available through access to CUPE benefits.

Childcare is an increasing issue for many students, especially with the poor economy bringing older students back to continue their studies and retrain for the new economy.

In dental, one of the big issues is getting a bit of a contribution towards family coverage, again because we're seeing more and more families. The family coverage currently costs TAs about ~$65 / month of their paycheque, compared to ~$11 / month for single coverage.

Another big benefits issue is the UHIP rebate. International students have $750 for single and ~$2200 for family deducted off their pay for UHIP coverage. Those rates have increased dramatically in the last few years so we want to increase the fund to give a bigger rebate (currently only $100).

As for the extended health benefits (MSU / GSA) plans, we're not proposing to change those at all, rather just have the University Administration pay the premium for TAs. This is one of the ways we can get money back into TAs pockets without having deductions taken off. If the University Administration, for example, had $163 to put into the contract for each graduate TA, they could:

a) increase wages, which would result in $132 more for TAs after deductions OR
b) pay the GSA health premium, which is currently $163 deducted off in September's pay. Thus September's pay for the TAs goes up by $163.

So the benefits proposals are one of the ways to more efficiently get money into TAs pockets.

And specifically for undergraduates to break down what currently is available and what has been proposed for benefits:

Vision care: (CURRENT)
MSU coverage is for 50% of one examination and only covers broken glasses or ripped contacts. The vision fund through CUPE (which undergrad TAs already have access to) is $250 / 24 months for any vision related device / examination you need. The proposal is just to get some more money into this fund to cover a current deficit.

UHIP: (CURRENT, but hopefully increased, international students only)
See above for explanation. Currently $100 rebate / year on the premium, but hopefully more in the future

Childcare: (CURRENT, but hopefully increased)
Currently $100 rebate / year, but we want to increase it.

Health Plan: (NEW proposal)
The proposal is just to pay the premium, so it'd probably be a $45 rebate cheque for undergrad TAs since the payroll is separate for undergrads.

Health Spending Account (NEW proposal)
This is a new proposal, its ~$100 towards any health care expense (vision, drug, dental etc) and a straight reimbursement. Its for grads and undergrads.

Dental: (NEW proposal)
Access to CUPE dental plan, which is 100% coverage for restorative care (fillings etc) and exams up to $1000 per year. The MSU plan is 75% coverage for restorative, so you pay ~$40/ filling. Employee cost of this would be ~$120 / year (comparable to MSU plan) and you could choose to opt out of either (or both if your parents had coverage) plan.

Professional Development: (NEW proposal)
$100 rebate for expenses like attending a conference, travel to a conference, etc.

Originally Posted by adrian

because you're being paid(with benefits nonetheless)

Hmm...don't my benefits come from being in the GSA? Completely independent of TAing.

You certainly can't say grad students don't deserve those benefits...since undergrads also get benefits for being in the MSU. Sure, the GSA benefits are greater, but they have to be.

There's a very large difference between being 20, 21 and being 23+ from an insurance perspective. Most undergrads have some other form of insurance from their parents...I don't have that luxury, since I'm too old.

Originally Posted by Mowicz

Hmm...don't my benefits come from being in the GSA? Completely independent of TAing.

Yes they are completely independent. In both cases the MSU or GSA premium is paid by the student. The proposal tabled by the union is for the appropriate premium to be paid by the employer so then they wouldn't admittedly be independent anymore.

Originally Posted by Mowicz

With all due respect, you are an engineer...upwards of half of the undergrad engineers don't even attend their tutorials, so why would you expect a graduate engineer to give half a crap about running them? That's a pretty bad sampling of the TA population.

I'd peg it as a chicken and the egg situation. I'd venture to say 90%+ of students WILL attend tutorials on the first day, perhaps the first few. Once they realize that the TA is not providing any benefit to their education, attendance then starts to dwindle. I'm one of those few who attempts to stick it out for the whole year - and can honestly say that the first tutorial is a good indication of the value of the rest of the year. And with "all due respect", a lot of tutorials outside Engineering give you marks for coming tutorial - so there's incentive to continue coming. We don't get marks OR perceived benefit - that's why we stop going. Not because we don't give "half a crap"

Honestly - I can think of 1 TA I feel had a positive impact on my education out of about 60+ courses I took. Throw in another 4 or 5 who gave out good "hints" for tests and exams, for whom I suppose I'm grateful. That's about it. The rest of them were useless, either for lack of teaching/English ability, lack of knowledge of the material or lack of passion to even be there.

Give TAs a trial period. 2 tutorials. If they do not satisfy the 3 aforementioned criteria necessary to be a good TA (teaching ability, knowledge and passion) - let the students vote them off the island. I'd be willing to pay the GOOD TAs their weight in gold.

Originally Posted by DavidR

And with "all due respect"

An oxymoron.

a lot of tutorials outside Engineering give you marks for coming tutorial - so there's incentive to continue coming. We don't get marks OR perceived benefit - that's why we stop going. Not because we don't give "half a crap"

I can think of quite a few non-Engineering fields which also don't give attendance grades, but the people still attend.

But in any case I based it on my own experience. I TA'd a first year Eng course which had 3 students regularly in attendence...except for, of course, the tutorials which fell directly before a test or exam, I'd suddenly have 20 or so students in it (out of maybe 60 students). Cross-referencing with the math courses, or the one comp sci course I've TA'd that wasn't the case, I'd always have a consistent 3-quarters of the class in attendance, and the ones who didn't show up would never show up.

Not to mention, all my engineer friends are lazy bums. lol

Originally Posted by Mowicz

Seriously, are all undergrads as ungrateful as you guys?

Are all TAs as useless as the one's we describe?

No, and I find that whole post really condescending. Have you actually NEVER had a TA that was bad/unprepared/didnt show up/didnt help/didnt speak english?

Maybe it's just in Eng, but there are (especially in upper years --> grad TAs) SO many TAs that can't even speak English, let alone teach well.... oh but they have 12s, they get it.... *rolleyes*

Originally Posted by Mowicz

Not to mention, all my engineer friends are lazy bums. lol

Well maybe you shouldn't judge all engineers based on a small sample size.

Isn't that what you're mad at us for doing with TAs??

Originally Posted by micadjems

Are all TAs as useless as the one's we describe?

No, and I find that whole post really condescending.

By this point, almost the entire thread has been about how shit ALL TAs are at Mac. That's probably why people are starting to get frustrated.

I'd better leave this thread before it does affect how I TA.

Boycott your TAs if they're so worthless, and not worth your tuition. I mean, if they're so shit and useless, then if they go on strike there's no loss, so this whole discussion is a moot point.

EDIT: And for the record, am I going to have to label my jokes with WARNING: INCOMING JOKE?

Originally Posted by Mowicz

I'd better leave this thread before it does affect how I TA.

Boycott your TAs if they're so worthless, and not worth your tuition. I mean, if they're so shit and useless, then if they go on strike there's no loss, so this whole discussion is a moot point.

EDIT: And for the record, am I going to have to label my jokes with WARNING: INCOMING JOKE?

Boycotting TAs is not the issue - we do when we can, but in labs, etc, it's NOT AN OPTION!! They also often mark our tests and assignments. When they strike, there IS loss!! TAs don't ONLY run tutorials, you know.

So... was that one a joke?

(Maybe you shouldnt make sweeping generalizations, even in jokes, in a thread where you're posting that you're mad about sweeping generalizations)

"Not to mention, all my engineer friends are lazy bums. lol"

It wasn't clear that this was a joke? I mean I had just presented a credible reason right before this (namely that I've personally TA'd an engineering course, and non-engineering courses, and can vouch for the fact that much fewer engineers attended), and then I said a completely useless fact right afterward that not only doesn't prove a thing, but isn't even true.

So again to reiterate: I don't think engineers are lazy...I think engineers don't attend their tutorials...which is something I've witnessed for myself.


And I'm not mad that you're making generalizations based on 'small sample sizes.' This isn't about my personal pride or anything like that.

-If I wanted to convince you that I can speak english, well I've done that.
-If I wanted to convince you that I know the course material, I could certainly bore you with some rigorous details.
-If I wanted to convince you that I can explain concepts reasonably effectively, I think a few first years on this very forum can vouch for that.

No, I just think the people with the "ALL TA'S ARE CRAPPY" have a grim perspective, and that you should at least acknowledge that it may or may not be an accurate representation. And it really does boil down to one thing, which I mentioned earlier:


What would you do better?

Guys, its not the fact that you specifically are crappy. Hell, from what I've seen, there are many TAs in smaller programs who are excellent.

The problem lies in the big programs, and I am double majoring in two of the biggest.

I think Economics TAs are amongst the worst. I have friends who have been TAs in Economics classes who agree with this sentiment. They have to work with teams of people who don't pull their weight, don't understand subject matter, don't attend their own office hours etc.

These people are not disciplined in the least.

It's those people who give the rest of us a reason to argue, and unfortunately, for people like me, those people represent the majority of the TAs I encounter.

But regardless, that is not the issue here. The issue is that this strike is being called simply for the reason of keeping up with the Joneses even though McMaster is not in a financially sound state thanks to stupid decisions being made near the end of a Presidential era.

Originally Posted by micadjems

(Maybe you shouldnt make sweeping generalizations, even in jokes, in a thread where you're posting that you're mad about sweeping generalizations)[/size]

Oh, the irony.

I still maintain that if you have a shitty TA, you should say something about it. There's been so much whining going on, but no one has said that they've actually done something about it. We're all adults here, and we're all fully capable of communicating complaints to departments and professors. Like I've already said, bad TAs get re-hired because no one complains.

Originally Posted by michelle

Like I've already said, bad TAs get re-hired because no one complains.

Yes, exactly. You guys have to do your part, because "Our TA evaluations will affect what type of TA jobs we get. If we take the job seriously, then we'll get the more interesting jobs." I can't be 'fired' so much, because I signed a contract that guaranteed TA work as long as I'm doing my Masters and PhD if I decide to go that far...but I can certainly be 'downgraded' to something less vital like the Math Help Centre let's say.


Conversely, you can also reward good TAs by nominating them for TA Awards and such. This both, lets the department know they're doing a great job, and also lets the TA know their hard work is appreciated.