Salaries of Professors in SG
 

Anyone has updated statistics about this, including tenured and non-tenured tracks?

Anyway, just a little info about me (since i can't edit after 5 mins): I am matriculating in NUS this year, aspiring to be a professor in Computer Science. Just wanna know about the career prospects of professorship, not really interested in working in biz, or else i would have chosen Information Systems. There are dubious statistics that i found on the net regarding prof salaries in SG, so I want to ask for more honest opinions. No trolling please.

u can forget about being a academia in NUS since u are enrolling in NUS.
In general, they would hire from Ivy Leaguers in US, Oxbridge or other good foreign Unis.

Yeah, I heard that they don't really offer tenureship to homegrown PhD holders. Anyway, just to clear up the air. I am matriculating as an undergrad, not as a post-grad student. I'm aiming for CMU, Stanford, MIT for PhD, if I get first class honors that is.

wah haven't walk, wan to think of flying liao.

anyway, just a little info, ivy league entry requirements are more than grades. u still need to take gre/gmat/toelf/ietls, get recommendations by profs, demostrate your apitude through essays and and a few publications to show. even full gpa students can be denied admission.

Yeah, well aware of that, thank you for the info anyway :). Passion for research and recommendation letter by professors are the most important, but a first class honors wouldn't hurt. Lol. I did plenty of readings for the admission requirements. If you could excuse my being pedantic, you may want to know CMU, MIT, Stanford are not Ivies (they are better than most of the latter though).

Anyway back on topic, can someone shed some light on local professors' salaries? :P

Depends on discipline. Generally for local asst prof fresh from phd, about S$8 - 9 k++ per mth. Finance will fetch higher.

The salary is looking solid, this puts me at ease knowing that I wouldn't get paid peanuts after years toiling to finish my dissertation.

Just to side-track a little, would they offer assistant professorship to a fresh PhD grad so easily? I thought you must rise through the academic ranks, let's say: from lecturer to assistant professor? So most likely I would get a lecturer position straight out of PhD? I'm not very sure about this, can someone clarify? Btw, what would the salary for lecturers be?

eh, u wait long long ok? after phd u get 4k~5k teaching fellow, researcher, senior researcher, then a.prof. if your paper never tio publish, wait long long also dun have

Local uni is adopting US style. Entry level is Asst Prof, afterwhich you will need to work towards your tenure.

Yes, if you are under a very well-known uni and prof, you can get Asst Prof job immediately fresh out of your phd. however, the natural progression is to do a Post-doc for a year or two, then seek faculty position as Asst Prof.

If salary (i.e. money) matters a lot to you, it's easier to build up a small consulting business WHILE working toward your PhD in that 4-6 years.

8-9k is not a lot, considering the amount of effort put in, the risk of NOT getting a job, and the risk of NOT getting tenure after serving as asst prof.

In CS algo, you have approximations, numerical solutions and suboptimal but fast workarounds. In IT, you have backups. Similarly, in your academic career, you need to have a backup plan.

Someone told me that most of the profs in Stanford actually have hugely successful businesses outside and they are there only because they are passionate in the research work and can network with super intelligent people / students.

>160K.

For a NUS grad to teach in NUS, you'll just have to teach elsewhere for a year first.

Thanks for the info, guys.

Btw, if an assistant prof didn't get tenure, will he be dismissed by the university? I know this happens in US/Canada. But what about Singapore?

In the first place - if you are that good... - the respective uni would wan to hold you down for their PHD program and or might even offer you scholarship so that they would tied you down for a couple of years in their uni.

No offences - if you do your studies in your school days - it might not be the case for your uni or beyond - why? - cause you are really competing with the eiltes in studies .

When you ask how well they paid - it is a relative word - you could see alot of people here boasting how well they earn and etc. but actual fact no one knows. it had to be in line with the living standard.

Example - 10 ~ 20 years back - earning 10K p/m would allow you to own a couple of houses and etc. but now?
Hope that would answer your question.
Follow your heart - Being a Prof - do not pay that bad as i can say. but the number of years spend to being a Prof while other peers of yours like in banking and etc. would not be able to compare.
teaching is a passion

anyone know how much adjunct faculty paid?
in
NUS
NTU
SMU
Polys
ITE
SIT

It's good to dream, but like others said, learn to walk first.

The outcome of a PhD should be a person who is capable of thinking for himself, independent and resourceful.

For your info, in the past, the university usually only take on the top students in each cohort the position of Asst. Prof upon completion of their PhD. This is about the only accelerated track to get a local academic position.

The normal track would means that you do your PhD overseas from a good supervisor, ensure that you produce research output of good quality that is referred to by other researchers. Statistically, if you are a Singaporean, the number of Singaporean PhD is typically 2 to 3 per cohort.

For those whom did their PhD but did not go on to become an academic, the typical starting pay is 1 grade above Bachelor's holder, i.e. 300 to 400 more starting pay. Not all PhD do well in corporation.

FYI, typical PhD holders are people whom have time and money to pursue what they like. Typically not too interested in social activities. Their first thought is never money. I have yet to hear any one whom said they pursue a PhD because they wanted to earn good salary. To them, money is just an necessity, not a motivation factor.

So, are you willing to make the sacrifice, without any guarantee of any returns?

Thank you for the cogent reply. My main priority to pursue a PhD is to become a tenured professor, I'm not too keen on working in the industry or else Master's would be my terminal degree.

As a professor, hopefully a tenured one, I can work on exciting problems in Computer Science with the bonus of having life-long job security and above average pay. I also have the passion for teaching, and would like to make use of computing technology to revolutionize our current pedagogy, be it in primary, secondary, and tertiary level. Above all, professors are one of those few that are best positioned to change the world. I know I'm only talking the talk, not walking it; I'm not even an undergrad.

There are a lot of adjuncts who teach solely for the pay, perhaps, it would be good to know that professors too, are not the equivalent of knowledgeable monks with scant regards to worldly desires. Money would not be the end and be all, like you said, it is just a necessity.

My thread here is started with the purpose for knowing the range of salaries a starting assistant professor can earn. Because, as a PhD student, you are slaving the years when you are at your strongest, in terms of physical and mental attributes. Those years will present a lot of windows of opportunity to find a spouse, gain promotion and craft a niche in your chosen industry. As a PhD student, you are cooped up in the academia, knee-deep in literature and research at the final lap of your youth. When you graduate, in all of your 30 odd years, this is the first time you will earn a respectable wage. I'm just curious about how much it entails.

If it's high enough, then good for me, I wouldn't worry about my finance. If it's too low, I would still choose the academe, with some moonlighting in consulting (like what someone advised) to pay off the housing loans, daily expenses etc.

An asst. professor job is not that glamorous as you make it out to be. When you are in Uni, take up a few research programme (UROP or whatever they are called these days). Gain an appreciation of what it entails to be a researcher.

One of the KPI of an asst prof is to publish journal papers. Teaching takes up about 20 to 30 percent of your time (excluding exam periods). I don't know what's the in-thing these days, but contribution to the industries, be it through R&D or collaborative work, is expected as well. Starting a few years back (or maybe even longer - it was like that during my time, I was told it was better in the past), research institutes no longer do research without an industry application in mind.

If your aim is to contribute to science (which was one of the more common reason to do PhD), then I urge you to consider becoming an academic is the best approach. The way I see it, there are better ways to contribute.

Having being in both academic and commercial, I did say that if you manage to join an appropriate RI, the challenges and rewards are more than what the Unis can give.

Pay-wise, it is decent. As stated, an Asst Prof should get about $100K annually.

National University of Singapore | Kay L. O'Halloran
HR: Terms & Conditions of Service: Faculty Positions

The above two links should give you a gauge of your questions.

assoc prof SMU about 12k p.m. my fren, not mi.

I think should be more. i already earn almost 100k annually. And i'm teaching at poly.

How many years did it take for you to hit 100k at poly?

Three more references:

Career Opportunities for PhDs in Singapore - Science Careers - Biotech, Pharmaceutical, Faculty, Postdoc jobs on Science Careers

Career Opportunities for PhDs in Singapore - Science Careers - Biotech, Pharmaceutical, Faculty, Postdoc jobs on Science Careers

Lee Kuan Yew Postdoctoral Fellowship::National University Health System

In particular (from the last source):

Fyi, the appointment is pegged to Asst Prof terms and gross salary ranges from S$72,000 – S$144,000 per year (figure is inclusive of a $28,800/annum stipend funded from the LKY Endowment Fund).

Take alway the stipend, see the other sources quoted, make your own judgement.

Second link should be:
http://freestudiesabroad.blogspot.co...r-science.html

Finance and business profs should make much more, eg those in SMU.

kendeems only
 

Just a couple of things to add to the mix. Am in the social sciences, just several steps ahead of you (about to start a PhD). Observations are of working in a local U.

1. Becoming an academic is a lifestyle choice. As someone mentioned earlier, you don't go into it to get rich. Some academics do become rich, but don't bank on it. What you do get is a significant amount of flexibility in managing your time, and the chance to ostensibly do something you love (though you may end up hating it as you plod through the PhD).

2. Every faculty has different hiring practices and terms. There's a general range, but there are numerous other factors which determine your pay.

3. IMO, you will be "underpaid" for the first 6 years of your career. Pay for postdoc, research fellows etc. is very low, compared to what you might be getting had you invested your intellect, time and effort in a job outside instead of spending 3-7 years pursuing your PhD.

4. To get tenure, you need to be on a tenure-track position. Many academic positions are not.

5. 6 years is how long the "tenure" clock is. You need to secure tenure within this time frame. The requirements vary from faculty to faculty. If you don't, there's a good chance you'll be let go by the university, unless you're really quite close to successfully submitting your portfolio for review.

6. During those 6 years, you'll be on a 3 year contracts (so 1 renewal).

7. Once you've got tenured, you're set for life. That's the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. If you don't, well you'll have immense job security. Problematic if you've got commitments (family, financial, aging parents etc).

Not quite. You may be tenured at the Assoc. Prof level, but many have remained stuck because they were (1) unable to navigate the politics of the department or (2) had difficulty publishing. Once condemned, you hardly see any pay increase and they stick you with a huge teaching load, while your more published colleagues have it easy. Lastly, tenure in Singapore still means at 55 you retire automatically unless they choose to keep you. So, its certainly not for life....

If you are good, you should always strive to be a prof in the top US universities.

whoa! first, you must get IN. maybe you should concentrate more on your field of research, instead of worry about pay!

Don't dream too much. If you are only good, you will never make it. You are competing against the best of the best in the academic world when it comes to the best US universities. And you don't really apply to these places in general, what usually happens is you already know the people because they've also known that you are very good, and acceptance is just a procedure.

Just wanted to add that the OP certainly did his research. I'm graduated from a USNews top 10 college in the States so I'm familiar with the nomenclature.

I feel somewhat disturbed at people who, while trying to comment regarding the different grades of schools in the States, so freely and wrongly throw the word "Ivy" around.

Just to add my comments after reading this thread while taking a break from deciding on whether I should use circular dependency for the design of my next program. (yes, I am in a computer science related field)

I have a feel that the OP does know what research at a graduate level is like. For all the others who comment on how it would be a time of drudgery, non-productive work and a less linear pursuit of knowledge, I feel they themselves are only passing what others told them post-graduate work is like.

While those who commented are probably only educated to a bachelors level, there is some truth to their words. What I see is that the OP probably already knows this, further evident from how he is already contemplating about this prior to undergrad, and is simply questioning the salary of a job as a professor while he endures the journey in unraveling the wonders of computer science.

My take: Do a PhD only if you are interested in research. While you right now do seem to have PhD as a goal, reassess this after say two years in undergraduate. The difference in undergradate and PhD is glazed by few of the viewers. I'll add some detail with which I am confident will paint a more vivid picture of what PhD students do.

Simply put, you need to conceptualize, develop and produce something original. What I mean by that is something which is not covered in the textbooks, let alone the publications were written by other professors.

Many students fall into the trap where they think they know for sure that they want to do a PhD because they can get A's and A+'s in their first and second year. Great grades could be an indicator of whether you want to do a PhD but it is more of an indicator of whether you can do a PhD. You wanting to do a PhD may be more accurately assessed by the following:

1. Do you attempt to ask more questions once you found a solution to a hard problem. I.e., consider another data structure of solving an algorithmic problem but reduces the run time.

2. Do you subconsciously think of computer science problems amidst your usual routine in life. This sounds a little lame but I'm quite sure that every CMU, MIT and Stanford bound person wouldn't mind having a discussion of Java vs C++ whenever wherever.

3. Do you view programming as fun or as a chore. Put differently, would you skip LAN sessions to go home and run Visual Studio 2010.

These are some questions that when answered truthfully will give you a better idea on your pursuit of a PhD.

Still using VS2010? :)

What you describe as prerequisites also apply to computer programmers aka "softer ware developers", but these are the grunts.

Fhe firm I work for uses computer science for the analysis and development of a greater objective, not so much on the forefront of developing the next consumer operating system or product. Thus the 2010 C++ and Java IDEs work just fine. Also, the next build of VS is 2012, just released. Unless I am creating Windows 8 products, which I'm not, there isn't a need to upgrade.

I digress.

So, indeed there is some validity in you saying the prerequisites seem to also apply to software developers. The application, though, is very limited.

The way I see it, which I feel is the view for most in software development, is that you got the people, the grunts like you said, who grind out the code and you got the people who design and have a better overall view of the design of the program. The former have bachelors and I would think the latter have PhD or the potential to get a PhD.

There are those who can code and those who love to code. Grunts or not, they get the job done. Seeing just a software developer code doesn't say much about his potential to get a PhD. Those prerequisites I mentioned, might.

Without trying to be too harsh, I think this is a very naive post.

I think the op is being perfectly justified and responsible in asking about the salary prospects of a professor befor jumping into it.

Too many times, we are brainwashed into thinking that we should go into a job because we like it or because we are good at it. Or because (the ultimate fallacy) we have passion for it.

Too often talented people put their head down and work very very hard towards a goal, finally achieve it, and then are utterly disillusioned by the lack of financial prospects in their chosen endeavour while seeing their other less accomplished friends exceed them multiple fold in income.

So it's only responsible to try to find out what a professor gets paid before jumping head first into that route. Then, whatever happens down the road, at least you are assured that you have no regrets because it is a route you picked with your eyes open.

And if you find out that a professor gets paid $5k a month, and that's not enough, at least you have time to rethink your plans and readjust your route in life. If you just focus on getting in first, as the poster above has suggested, then find out after the fact, and 10 yrs of work, that's way way way too late.

Passion is good to have. But I rather get paid $500k doing something I have less passion about rather than being paid $30k doing something I'm very passionate about.

sorry, doing a phD is more than just programming. especially in singapore one needs to be looking at practical problems. Suggest you talk to your NUS profs, esp those who are famous or have published a lot, and ask them what their current research projects are, and do some reading up.

dunno what you talking about. there are software developers, really good ones. they get the job done. i hired a lot of vietnamese programmers, pay only 2.5k pm. Then there are the more higher paid architects who design the architecture of the solution.

Don't need phD to be a system solution architect. mostly degree holders with experience.

agreed. But getting a phD is not confirmed get tenured prof with 150k p.a . So, if one have passion, somehow one will find a way. if just target money, one may suddenly fall down with no net. Because there are a lot of phD out there who are overqualified and jobless.

fyicLia appeared
 

All right, fair enough. Somewhat do agree with what you said.

I guess it goes down to the level of understanding each candidate can bring to the job. I don't deny that those Vietnamese programmers you hire can get some jobs yet.

Yet, I feel that a Stanford PhD (since that is what the OP is aiming at) can bring in new knowledge that produces a about a better solution viz-a-viz those done by the programmers you mentioned.

Right of the top of my head and I'm not trying to show off or be verbose here:

1. Parallel programming on a GPU (undergrad would at best take a single course on GPU programming. PhDs develop and understand better the theory)

2. Machine Learning for signal detection (a PhD would throughout the course of his thesis applied machine learning to numerous problems. An undergrad probably just learnt PCM* and did a two week project on it)

3. Use of appropriate algorithms (perhaps here the PhD and undergrad can be on par. Nonetheless, doing and using algorithms for two years compared to two semesters inevitably suggest more familiarity with it for the PhD than the undergrad)

My point is that a bachelors degree equips one with fundamental knowledge, a PhD with specific knowledge in a specific area. Depending on the job, sometimes both the bachelors and PhD survive, sometimes only the PhD survives. I can trust a Vietnamese programmer to write a multithreaded console program to read and display text from a server to a screen. I won't trust a Vietnamese programmer with at most one year of experience, to tear up a Linux kernel and write a customer memory manager taken from some IBM publication written in the 1980s. (I've seen some of those, they scare the freak out of me.)

*Principle Component Analysis

My main point is to go in with eyes open.

If you are ok with doing something you love, and are good at, and are ok with the fact that the job that gives you both is likely to pay $2.5k a month, then good for you.

But don't stmble into it because you are brainwashed by everyone else into thinking passion and aptitude are the only things that are important, and then be disillusioned when you land your dream job and find that it doesn't pay... just because you were too naive or lazy to ask about the payscale before you got in.

And of course, knowing how stable the job is, and how likely you are to land that dream job are relevant considerations you should research before you go in i.e. if you jump into banking and finance as a major, put all your hopes into getting into investment banking, and do not make it, well, I say you should have known the odds. Or if you get in, and get retrenched, then it should be no surprise to the person who did the necessary research.

There are so many post grads enrolling in every year and how many profs are there in a school?

To get into CMU or MIT etc, you will need more than just a 1st class. FYI, each university has a different entry requirement for other university grads. For instance, you might need a minimum of 70% if you graduated from uni A and 80% if you graduated from uni B. This is dependent on the ranking of the uni too. For some scholarships, a 2nd upper class will suffice but some may require a GPA/CAP of 4.8. The point is, it is not difficult to get into a PhD program as 2nd upper will suffice.

However, being a prof is more than just academic results. You have to churn out papers, quality ones every year. That is the main criteria in determining if a faculty staff is suitable for tenure-track. You will also require recommendations from other profs too...

As others have pointed out, you need to have the passion and determination in research. A phd is more than a paper. It reflects an individual's way of thinking. The ability to come up with something innovative and original. The assurance that he or she is committed to the field of study and expertise in it.

In my opinion, a phd certainly adds value to an individual be it on paper or to character. Yet, it also opens doors to many places. Merely looking at salary of prof shows that one have not thought through enough.