raincitygirl: (Default)
raincitygirl ([personal profile] raincitygirl) wrote2012-02-07 11:04 am

(no subject)

Real Life has been absolutely INSANE. So if anybody had anything exciting happen and I didn't comment, I probably didn't know about it. Rather than try to go to skip =280 or whatever, I'm sitting on the sofa with John Henry (I love having a laptop!) watching Manchester City kick Fulham's ass in a snow storm. Yes I know that game was played on Saturday. It's a recording. And please don't spoil me for the ending.

I was re-reading bits of Gaudy Night the other day, in a rare moment of solitude, and I am perplexed. Most of the academic staff at Shrewsbury College are referred to as "Miss". Only the Warden is referred to as "Dr". For the uninitiated, Gaudy Night was written in 1935, and is a mystery novel set at a women's college of Oxford University (in those days there were no co-ed colleges). Now, it seems to me that by the 1930's surely to be a university teacher would require a doctorate, wouldn't it? Particularly at a prestigious university like Oxford. Or am I wrong?

Edited to Add: apparently I'm wrong. See, this is why I love the net. Someone, somewhere always has the answer to my questions.
sollers: me in morris kit (Default)

[personal profile] sollers 2012-02-07 07:38 pm (UTC)(link)
In the 1960s it wasn't needed, certainly in any of the universities I knew anything about. In the psychology department I think 2 out of about 10 lecturers had doctorates, and one of them was the professor (head of department). Most of the others were working for it, but it's a long drawn out process and you have to make a genuine contribution to human knowledge.

For the record, when I went back into school teaching after getting a Master's degree I kept quiet about it - it made me over-qualified. In most of the schools I worked in, it gave me a higher qualification than the head had.