Electrical Engineering postgrads demand pay for teaching
Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering deny foul play and points to confusion over departmental bursary
The Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering has been forced to clarify its position regarding the payment of its postgraduate students.
Confusion stemmed from some PhD students claiming that their acceptance letters for the doctoral training scheme did not make clear whether the listed 4 hours of required “support teaching activities” per week (such as assisting undergraduate students) would be paid work.
The course, on which several students are funded by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC), stipulates a requirement by the department for students to complete additional duties alongside their academic work. However, some students have raised issues with this with respect to guidelines published by the EPSRC which state that, "if you do demonstration, teaching or other types of employment in an institution, you should be paid for this".
In one case, a student who was required by the department to invigilate during an undergraduate exam was refused payment by the payroll office.
Speaking to Felix, Head of Department Professor Peter Cheung was keen to right the “mistaken” views that he believes some hold, rigorously denying that there has been any foul play within the department.
He firstly described the “three kinds of funding for postgraduate study: EPSRC, a department bursary or personal funding.” He then went on to clarify that the confusion surrounding payment is most likely due to the nature of a department bursary, which he claims already includes payment for any work expected to be carried out by a PhD student.
Paying someone who is funded by a department bursary for work is more or less like paying them for it twice Professor Peter Cheung
“Paying someone who is funded by a department bursary for work is more or less like paying them for it twice,” he explained.
Professor Cheung also described how those funded by the other two options should fully expect to be paid for any work carried out, “I don’t like people volunteering for work, it would be like they’re doing a favour for us and I don’t want that.”
He also maintained that the current system abides by EPSRC rulings, and that students in the department are more than willing to give their time to such duties, praising the “overall philosophy” of the department and believing it important that students develop professional skills as a result, saying that “all PhD student training should involve education. We should produce brilliant teachers.”
He does however admit that it was the department’s mistake that students were confused by the lack of explanation on the acceptance letter, though he argues that while “our offer letter wasn’t clear...it wasn’t wrong.”
At odds with these views is Andrew Keenan, Representation Coordinator for Imperial College Union. In contrast to Professor Cheung’s claim that students are ready and willing to take on extra work, Mr Keenan believes that “students shouldn’t be compelled to work [for the department]” and that “students should expect an explicitly agreed rate”.
Mr Keenan links the presence of paid postgraduate students to measures by departments to save more money, stating that “departments are always looking to keep their costs down”. However, he has his own advice for departments seeking this option, explaining that “the best way to keep costs down would be to not ask postgraduates to work!”
