Reassigned Time

Tenure and the Adjunctification of Higher Ed

2009-11-24T00:33:00.002-05:00

Ok, I had vowed to myself that I wasn't going to enter the fray (or not really enter the fray, even though did, sort of, already). But I can't just let it go (even though I've tried all day, sort of, to let it go, since my initial comment). So, I'm going to write this and get it out of my system.

First, let me state for the record that I'm not saying the hiring structure of higher ed isn't fucked up. It is totally fucked up. The tenure system isn't fair, nor is it about merit, nor does it serve all students or all institutions in the way that it is "supposed" to (however that is). Higher education generally exploits a vast number of people (especially in my own field, English) in order to achieve its ends (giving the largest number of students possible a college degree). This is not because higher education is a meritocracy, in which people who are "worthy" get ladder jobs. This is because higher education is not willing or able, for the number of students it enrolls today, to pay all of its workers a living wage. And it's not willing to do so because it doesn't have to and because it's not feasible within the current structure of higher education to do so.

Here is, to quote a recent post of mine, why I think tenure matters:

"You know why tenure matters? Above and beyond academic freedom in scholarship and in the classroom? It matters because when we don't have strong administrative leadership, and I suspect this happens at all institutions in a variety of contexts at one time or another, somebody needs to be able to speak up, loudly and clearly, on behalf of students, on behalf of faculty, and on behalf of the future of the institution. Tenure has made little difference to me in terms of my scholarship or my teaching. I have never felt in jeopardy in those areas, and I think my institution values my autonomy in those areas. Where tenure has meant the most to me is that I don't have to hold back at all when it comes to fighting bullshit that will hurt my university, my colleagues, or my students. Now, my loud and contentious voice may not make any difference. But at the very least I do have the power to say my piece without fear of losing my job. And since I'm being put in a position where I'm being expected to "participate in" (read: authorize) things that entirely contravene our mission and our values, then I need that power and I need to use it."

But, there are those out there who believe that "THE SYSTEM IS DYING." And their alternative is eliminating tenure in favor of multiyear contracts. And these people believe, when somebody objects to their claims, that those people are clearly "elitists" who don't actually engage with the arguments that they make. So let me try to address some things, which I think are really important in this conversation.

1) I don't think that tenure makes a person "elite" or "elitist." I think that there are lots of different versions of tenure, at lots of different kinds of institutions. At my institution, tenure means no TAs, teaching four courses a semester, teaching composition, teaching general studies lit classes, and maybe teaching one course in one's actual field of specialty per semester, if one is lucky enough for that course to make enrollment. Tenure (or even just being on the tenure track) means immense service obligations. Tenure means doing research above and beyond all of that. Tenure does mean job security, and benefits (and I don't dismiss these as solid, important benefits), but it also means making a salary of, after tenure, someplace around 60K a year, if one is lucky. I've got friends who are ladder faculty who were hired in originally (recently) in the 30s who will be lucky to see 50K at tenure, and this is in higher cost-of-living places than the one in which I'm located. And this is with the sometimes massive student loan debt that going on for a PhD can entail. Yes, named professors do better. But most tenured faculty don't have named professorships. Let's be real about what the realities of what most of the tenured professoriate's job situations look like. Oh, and for most tenured professors, at least in my field - there is no prospect of switching jobs.

2) While it is true that "it's easier to get out of a bad marriage than to get out of a bad tenure decision" I would also argue that since you have six years before you give a person tenure, during which that person is on probation, then if a bad decision is made, given that time-frame, it's probably the fault of the tenure process at the institution. (And I'd argue that more bad tenure decisions are made in the negative - in terms of not granting people tenure who deserve it - than the reverse.) The whole point of the tenure process is that it's a vetting process. In theory, the tenure process should ensure that you don't hire anybody on long-term who would be a shit employee. If you do, that's not the fault of tenure - that's a fault of the process at a particular institution. I mean, seriously - if you can't figure it out in six years, then how would you be able to figure it out to fire people on a 5-year contract cycle? Unless, of course, the idea is to fire people who are old. 'Cause you know those old people are obviously deadwood. (Though let me note that one of the most productive and active in all areas people in my department has been around since the early 1970s, but obviously, the point here isn't productivity or activity - it's the corporate bottom-line.)

3) If one thinks that somebody on a 5-year teaching contract is going to give a shit about the institution and its future, then they are either woefully naive or actively stupid. If I were on a 5-year contract, I can tell you with utmost certainty that I would not have invested what I have done in curricular development, in service to my university's campus community or community generally, in directing undergraduate research. I'd do what I needed to get the best teaching evals. possible and I would be busting my ass on research, for I'd need to be ready if my institution screwed me to go elsewhere, and research is what allows a person (at least today) to go elsewhere. The fact of the matter is, the work of ladder faculty that is most important, given the adjunctification of higher ed in the past 20 years, is not teaching, nor is it research. It's service. The only incentive for that service, as far as I can tell, is tenure. Tenure binds a person to an institution and to that institution's community. You want to pay me by the hour for the non-teaching and non-research work that I do? Rock on with that. I'd be making more than I currently make. But until and unless that part of my job is acknowledged, I'll take tenure, thanks. Tenure makes it reasonable for me to give a shit about the institution. Without tenure? I'd be stupid if I did.

4) If you want to reduce the number of adjuncts, the first step is in looking at curriculum. If you insist on a curriculum that you can't staff, you're going to have a large percentage of adjunct (or grad student) faculty. If you make a curriculum that you can support with ladder faculty, then that problem becomes smaller (if not disappears). This might mean that not every breathing American can attend college.

5) Graduate schools need to admit fewer people, if what we want is a fairly compensated professoriate. When I enrolled in my well-respected Ph.D. program in the 90s, my entering cohort had a number of 7. They'd already made the choice only to admit those they could fund, and those whom they could ostensibly ensure would get jobs. That's where we start to deal with the problem of hiring in higher ed in my opinion - not with doing away with tenure.

***

Here's the thing, if getting rid of tenure could (a) definitely ensure more people a living wage and benefits, (b) ensure faculty governance within universities, (c) ensure the birth of new ideas, original research, and a safe space for politically volatile areas of inquiry, and (d) ensure investment on the part of faculty members in the mission of their respective universities, there wouldn't be a problem. The issue is, for me, is that those I've heard argue on behalf of getting rid of tenure have not addressed a, b, c, or d. Address, those, and I could well be your champion. For now? I think you're construing the work of professors as being only the work that they do in the classroom. If that were the only work I did, fine. But it's not. Let me state this clearly and for the record: I'm in the F2F classroom a mere 9 hours a week, in the online classroom a mere 3 hours. On top of that is grading and prep - let's say that accounts for another 12 hours, which adds up to 24 hours a week,. If we count my other work though - writing rec. letters, serving on committees, doing research, keeping myself abreast of what's happening at my institution and within my field of specialization - I'm working probably 60-80 hours per week during the academic year (which, let's note, is all that I'm paid for).

I love my job. I love my university. I love my students. But the reality is, if I didn't have tenure I'd not invest anywhere near as much. Who would? For this salary? And you'd have to hire somebody to do all of the shit that I do that isn't related to teaching and research. Because, seriously? You really think I'm going to give all of that away for free? Even though I'm an English professor and the market is glutted and whatever? I'd temp first. I'm not saying that for rhetorical effect: that's exactly what I did rather than adjuncting full-time when I ran out of funding in my PhD program. It paid better.

Thinking Positive Thoughts on a Monday

2009-11-23T11:42:00.002-05:00

This week is all about detachment, for me. After a few days of decompressing, it occurs to me that it's time for me to take a step back, to stop being stressed out about things related to work, and to revel in the short week that lies ahead. Indeed, perhaps it is a time for giving thanks, what with it being nearly Thanksgiving and all. Indeed, I'm going to get all Gratitude-Journal-y and shit. So what is Crazy thankful for?

That I am not in the middle of some stupid internet brouhaha. It's that time of the semester, kids, but all of my focus on real-life brouhahas has kept me out of the fray on teh internets. Ah, it is a pleasure to be basically irrelevant. (And I'm not linking because I am really staying out of it. I'm a casual and disinterested bystander. It is glorious.)
I'm glad that I have played and continue to play a positive role in curricular development both within my department and across my institution. Yes, it's been painful, but it's also been very rewarding. And now the bulk of my work is done with that stuff (though there are some loose ends to tie up).
I'll see my parents this week! Yay Parents of Crazy!
I had a great happy hour phone date with my dad's sister last night. I'm so glad that she and I are back in close touch again.
The semester is almost over! Only a few more weeks and it will be winter break!
I heard from a former student who had been considering grad school in English, and he's decided not to go in that direction! Hooray!
I've completed nearly all of the Thanksgiving shopping, and I'm looking ahead to a day of working on recommendations and taking care of some things around the house.

All in all, lots to be thankful for. (Don't worry, I'll get back to my regularly scheduled whining as soon as something irritating happens. I'm not like a whole different person or something.)

In Which Facebooking Elevates the Content of the Blog (Only to Make the Facebook Content Lame)

2009-11-22T00:07:00.003-05:00

Alright. So in two particular ways, I do think that my participation in Fb has been good for the content of this here blog.

#1 Facebook takes care of my need to take quizzes, as well as of my meming needs. No longer do I litter up this space with quiz results or with memes.
#2 A lot of my general complaints now get sent the way of facebook status updates, as opposed to making it onto this here blog (I'm not Fb friends with immediate work colleagues, which contributes to this).

Except, apparently over the past few weeks, I've become a Facebook Vortex of Negativity. On the one hand, I don't think that this is necessarily a bad thing. It's a way for me to get the negativity out without devoting much time or space or thought to it. On the other hand, it really sucks, as it means that all many people (aunts, cousins, friends from elementary school, high school friends, etc.) hear from me is bitching. That's not really on, I'm not thinking. On the other hand, perhaps it's better than uber-positive updates about knitting projects and other erstwhile accomplishments, which annoy the fuck out of me when I read them in my own newsfeed, if they're not also tempered with things that aren't like "hey, look how great my life is! I'm so great! Can't you tell how great I am from my status updates!" which I read as disingenuous.

What's sort of interesting is that while there is some overlap between my blog audience and my Fb audience, there's also a lot of disparity. This disparity makes for some of the reason why I post some things here and some things there. Weirdly, I'm more public on the blog than I am on Fb, even though my name is not technically linked to the blog. I think that more people know who Dr. Crazy is in real life than are my friends on Fb. In fact, I know that's likely true. So the persona on the blog has in fact, since Fb, become more of a persona, whereas the real shit is obliquely and yet more accurately recorded through my Fb status updates. The result, however, is that real life people are worried that I'm super-duper stressed all the time, perhaps in part because they don't have access to the blog. Fb has become my dumping ground, whereas I think about a wider range of things on the blog, or at least a less immediate range of negative things.

So. I think I'm going to try for the next while not to be a vortex of negativity on Fb, while at the same time I don't let my negative feelings bleed over in stupid ways onto the blog. This is not to say that I won't feel the negative things, for clearly, that would be fucked up, to shut off the negative things that I genuinely feel. But rather that I won't poison other people so much with my negative things, whether on Fb or here.

Look, it's the end of the semester. I'm tired. I've applied for a ton of things for the coming semester and year (sabbatical, summer fellowship, course release, other monies) and I know about none of those yet. The only one I feel fairly secure in is sabbatical, and even that I wonder whether I'll get it, because I feel so downtrodden and abused lately. And I've been working like a dog. I'm pissed off, pretty much all the time. Not because of students or because of my job itself or even most of the time because of colleagues. It's just that I've been working so hard and I need tangible, concrete acknowledgment and reward for the work that I do. I know raises aren't happening anytime soon, and I know that times are tough. I know that nothing right now is a done deal, regardless of merit. But I've worked so hard and I've sacrificed so much and if none of my ships come in? Seriously? Who knows how I'll handle that. Because I need at least one of these to happen, I need at least some acknowledgment that somebody at this institution gets how much my work means. Especially since I recognize that I'm basically stuck here for the duration, given the economy and higher ed funding and the fact that I'm a tenured lady and given my field.

Here's the thing: I've got a lot of colleagues, senior to me, junior to me, across the university and within my department, who know that the work that I do matters. I got a lovely email from my chair today, even, complimenting me on my hard work. All of these people give me tons and tons of praise. And that means so much, in its way. But none of that is acknowledgment from the institution. Sure, I got tenure, and maybe I should be happy with that, but I'm not. Tenure here doesn't necessarily mean that upper administration gets it. Let's face it: tenure here is sort of a de facto position. It only means that you didn't suck enough to be denied. I want acknowledgment beyond my award of tenure. And maybe that makes me greedy, but that's how I feel. How I feel is like I need more than tenure. I need funding, I need time. I need the support to do the things that I can potentially do. And if that support doesn't come? I feel like I'm very close to giving up. I feel like I'm very close to checking out. I feel like I'm very close to becoming the kind of professor that I despise.

Lately, all of these feelings are very evident in my Fb updates, though I've been trying (though not always successfully) to keep this crap away from the blog. It's not good reading. I think that perhaps some positive thinking is in order. I think that perhaps giving in to the negativity will produce negative results.

MLA? I Know It's Early But....

2009-11-20T01:58:00.002-05:00

We need to organize a meet-up, people! If you're interested, email me at reassignedtime at gmail. I feel as if it will happen on the evening of the 27th, if only because that will conflict with no one's real life plans. Whatever the case, drop me a note, and then I will organize shenanigans :)

Sick? Tired

2009-11-19T18:34:00.002-05:00

So, yesterday I thought I was coming down with something, but I think I had given myself a psychosomatic illness because I'm just freaking exhausted. After 10 hours of sleep, I seem to have recovered.

In other news, I also got an acceptance to a conference today (huzzah! Fun times with BFF and FBA!). There is a large part of me that is embarrassed by the topic of this here conference paper that I shall now have to research, to write, and to present, but I really do think that it will turn out to be grand. I also love that I got the acceptance of it today, for the fact that it came on precisely today really does speak to the universe making things happen in ways that seem fated and perfect.

I also attended a meeting (painful in many ways, but not regarding what follows) and the revised major - my baby - has passed! 'Tis reality! 'Tis happening! One of the things that makes me most happy about this is that somehow we (not knowing what the future held at the time regarding the general studies curriculum) built something in that makes our new major perfectly suited to what is happening at the university-wide level. It also does a good job of limiting the amount of turf-establishing within the department both in terms of the major and in terms of general studies, and since I hate the whole turf thing, this pleases me to no end. ( I think my hatred of the turf stuff makes me a weirdo. But seriously: I believe that students will take my classes not because they have to but rather because they either are interested in the material (a) or because they want to take a class with me (b) or some combination of the two (c). I feel like if you need to require your shit to make your courses make enrollment means that you're probably a bad teacher. Let's note for the record that I teach a lot of stuff that is not exactly intriguing to the uninitiated, so this isn't a feeling that I have because I teach something students just love without reservation or initiation. Let's also note that some of the turfiest people I know teach shit that on its own is a lot more accessible than what I teach. And I'm a mean lady, so it's not like people take my classes because I'm easy. Whatever the case, yay for making the whole "turf" thing less of an issue!)

In other news, all of my rage of the past week seems to have born fruit and to have positively influenced the direction of some Very Important Things, in spite of the fact that I didn't make some Grand Proclamation at today's Meeting of Pain about how I Hate Everything. I think everybody gets the sense that I hate everything, though, which does please me. I somehow walked that fine line between "Contentious Bitch" and "Team Player" and while I never thought I would successfully walk that line, indeed, I seem to have managed it.

So, those were and are all my things for the moment. And I am so looking forward to the weekend.

Former Students

2009-11-17T21:07:00.004-05:00

So I saw BES this weekend, and she told me a funny little story. Ok, so once upon a time, BES was a new major, and she was in a class with a student who was about to graduate. He was odious to her. Just odious. To her and to the rest of the class, but to BES in particular. BES had yet to encounter me as an instructor, and thus her naturally enthusiastic spirits had yet to be dampened by the harsh criticism of Dr. Crazy. (Never fear, she retains her enthusiasm, only now she understands that enthusiasm is not all that matters in academic work.) And so she hated with a fiery passion this Odious Nemesis, who looked upon her and her enthusiasm with hipster derision.

So last year, as BES was finishing up her thesis, we were hanging out and I was giving her feedback, and the conversation turned and she told me about her hideous class with Odious Nemesis, and her description jarred something in my head, and I exclaimed, "OMG! BES, are you talking about One of My Best Students Ever?" Indeed, she was. (I may have posted about this before, but I can't easily find the link, so bear with the repetition if this is sounding familiar to you. I promise, this isn't just me being repetitive. Scroll down a paragraph or so if you don't feel like reading the recap.)

Now, I have no doubt believing that OMBSE was indeed, odious when she encountered him. He was the sort of student who, well, let's just say that he took himself a bit seriously and he was indeed very, very bright, and let's just say he wasn't one of those bright, generous students, but rather of the sort who lacked generosity. I suspect that he would describe his demeanor as something along the lines of "I don't suffer fools gladly." And yes, some of his pompous assholery had to do with gender privilege, and some of it had to do with arrogance, and some of it was just that he can really be insufferable. BUT. He was a student who did indeed rise to the occasion in my classes, going above and beyond in his efforts to please and to turn in excellent work. And he took three classes with me, and with direction, he was not a jerk in my classes. (He was also the sort of student who needed to be kept on a bit of a short leash or he'd take advantage of other students' weaknesses in class discussion. My sense is that the instructor of the course that he had with BES did not keep him in check, and that he was disrespectful not only to the other students but also to the instructor, at least from BES's report. To be fair, I never experienced any disrespect from him when he was my student.)

But so anyway, BES hated him, and when she told me her tale of woe about him, I was sort of shocked. How could two of my best ever students hate each other with a hate so pure and true? But likely they'd never see one another again, and I'd not heard from this student in a year, and so that was where it was left.

Until.

Recently, BES was out with some friends for a night of 20-something revelry. And a friend of hers shows up with his "new friend" OMBSE in tow. BES's friend introduces him to her, and her jaw dropped. She knew him. He was the Odious Nemesis. And as the night began, he exhibited many of his more odious qualities (they were out playing trivia, and well, he's the sort of guy who will argue with a whole table about their hideous lack of knowledge of all things.) But as the night went on, and when trivia was over, he apparently acted like a normal person. Indeed, he was even sort of cool and nice. And so he and BES got to talking, and the subject of Dr. Crazy came up.

Aside: I hate it when I suspect (or know) that students of mine are comparing notes about me. What are they saying? Would I be mortified if I knew?

Anyway. So at a certain point, during their discussion of me, he said something that does indeed mortify me. Apparently, the conversation was going on as normal, and he prefaced the mortifying remark with how I was one of the best professors ever, yadda yadda yadda, "but sometimes when Dr. Crazy would read passages in class, it was, like, sexy."

Ewwwwwww!!!!!! NOOOOO!!!!!! STOP THE MADNESS!!!!! Now, of course BES told me this because she's my friend and because she knew I would be totally freaked out, and it amuses her to freak me out, as it should for we are pals. And also I know it is unreasonable that I would have any sort of extreme reaction , because a) I do read some sexy things aloud in my classes because that's what we're studying, and b) because it's entirely normal, within a classroom situation, for there to be a little transference in the student-professor relationship. I intellectually get that it's not really anything to do with me, for I was once upon a time on the other side of that dyad.

And it's not like I don't have suspicions about the fact that students in real time sometimes do this - they're the ones who hang around over-long standing in my office door during office hours, often accompanied by blushing and shifting their weight from one foot to the other for they've been there so long but they won't sit down, when they've got no reason to be there, for one example, or the boys (no female student has ever done this) who want me to read their poetry when I don't actually specialize in teaching, or write (as far as they know), poetry, for another. I suppose why it weirds me out to hear this long after this student is gone is because I so do not think, when I'm in the moment of teaching, that I do, will, or can produce this response. Because issues of gender and sexuality are so central to my intellectual work, I've become somewhat desensitized to those things when I present them in a classroom or research situation. In my head, it's all part of the work that I do. It's compartmentalized. It's not a sexual thing at all. And I'm a person who maintains professional boundaries, even with students with whom I'm friendly. So when the "sexy" thing comes up, it always makes me feel like, "Oh my god! Did I go too far? Did I unconsciously overstep some boundary?" Even though I know I did no such thing in reality, if that makes sense.

(To be fair, this problem has also come up in research settings. This isn't just a student thing, where people are all, "Dr. Crazy talks about the sexy stuff," and while it's not so much an issue for me now that I'm professionally established, research-wise, it was something that caused me no small amount of discomfort when I was a grad student or an undergrad. The thing is, I'm seriously like a Victorian Miss when it comes to my actual self - I get affronted when a stranger approaches me in a bar, for Chrissakes! I want a freaking letter of introduction and references before you talk to me! - but I just so happen to specialize in things that don't necessarily communicate that.)

But so anyway, whatever. Apparently, as the night went on with BES and OMBSE, and as OMBSE got drunker, he totally started hitting on her and trying to Make a Move at the end of the night, if you get what I'm saying, and she rebuffed him. Which for her was like this totally triumphant moment, for indeed, he was the Odious Nemesis of years gone by, who now was all "I'm drunk and I think you're dreamy." I think we've all had that moment one time or another, and to reject that Odious Nemesis is sweet, sweet revenge. Yay, BES!

But so anyway, to conclude with some navel-gazing: I really think that part of the reason I've been able to get away with teaching the explicit things that I teach at this particular institution in this particular part of the country, especially before tenure though now this is not such an issue, is because I'm young for a professor, straight, and female. If I were older, if I were gay, or if I were a man, or some combination of these, I think that I'd be perceived by students (or by people across the university) as a threat. If male colleagues of mine read some of the stuff I read aloud in class, in the way that I read these things, I think that it would very easily make students uncomfortable (I think wrongly, as the point isn't who's doing the reading but rather what's in the text). I think that if I were older woman , or if I were a woman but out and gay, that students might interpret my reading of some of the stuff that I read aloud as "aggressive" or "inappropriate." In many ways, I know that I trade on the fact that I'm a youngish, straight lady. Because as a youngish, straight lady, I'm completely harmless, right? And while I still have gotten some small number of ridiculously misogynistic course evaluations over the years, I do believe that I get fewer of those, even with the content that I teach, because I inhabit the non-threatening identity that I inhabit. So it's not that I'm unaware of the identity that I perform, and the ways in which I use it in the classroom. I think the thing is, at the end of the day, that I do sometimes forget that by using that identity in order to deliver content that I think is important, I sometimes may invite a certain kind of response that I don't consciously perceive as appropriate or even an option, if that makes sense.

And finally, dude, I really do think that the way that I read may be the center of the problem. Being a good reader is a good thing, surely, and I wouldn't and won't read aloud any differently than I do, as it does really get students to understand the literature in a deeper way. Hell, the way that I read aloud helps me to understand the literature in a deeper way. But perhaps I need to be more aware of the fact that if you read things in the way that I read them that it gives off a certain impression that may be, well, sexy, even if that's not the point.

Sleepy

2009-11-16T00:34:00.002-05:00

So, the reading marathon has reached its completion, and it was truly awesome. I'm so excited that I got the opportunity to participate in it, and that so many of my students (from over the years) participated in it. For the conclusion, lots of people were there, including BES and her parents, some of my favorite colleagues. It was just so energizing and fun.

After, I went for a beer with BES and her most recent suitor, and that was a good time, too. She's just finishing up her grad school apps, so while there was some talk of academia, it was not the primary thing that dominated the discussion.

All in all a very good weekend, indeed. And now time for bed.

Reading Aloud

2009-11-14T19:52:00.002-05:00

I first read aloud, in a way that was recognized in a truly congratulatory way, in church. See, I was a "good reader" and this meant that I was called upon (in my Catholic grade school) to do readings in church. I remember being coached by teachers and nuns about how to do a reading well. I remember being given readings in advance in order to practice them. I remember practicing.

I did one of the readings at my first communion. I did one of the readings at my confirmation. I read at countless masses that had no such great significance. I remember being annoyed that I was never chosen to bring forth the wine and hosts for offertory, as I had to be "a reader." But I've been reading, publicly, performatively, since I was a child.

And I really like reading publicly, performatively. It's something I know how to do, and it's something that I've grown to really enjoy doing.

But it's weird, because how many people, and how many jobs, count "reading aloud" as a skill?

In my last super-serious relationship, we read aloud to one another. Indeed,that's how I experienced the bulk of Infinite Jest - my boyfriend would read until he was sick of reading and then I would read. Let's note that this was his idea - that we'd read aloud to one another - not mine. But it was lovely. When we stopped reading, the relationship was over.

And here and there I've read a passage or there to various suitors, though never so much as I did with my last super-serious relationship, and never because I was telling a suitor a story as I was with my super-serious person, but rather because I read something with an agenda or seeking a reaction. When a girl like me selects a passage for you, she does it with intent. That's not the same thing as reading a story.

Today I participated in a reading event. This event was organized around a Great Work of American Literature which it takes 24 hours to read aloud. I arrived, I watched, I read my 20 minute segment, and I hung around for hours, being read to. I have to say, the portion that I ended up reading was absolutely perfect for me, and I did well. And much of what I heard after was read in a lovely way - it showed me this novel in a way that made it matter to me, made it matter to me in a way it would not have if I'd read it silently on my own, and has not done when I've tried to read it on my own.

I guess this experience made me realize, though, how much I really miss it when somebody is just reading to me. And I miss being read to and having it mean something specific. I miss reading to another person and having it mean that I love them so irrevocably.

Yes, I've got a job where I get to read aloud, where I get to feel aloud through words. I get a job where I get to practice this talent. And the fact that I get this? It's irreplaceable. But I wish that I had someone to whom I felt compelled to read, and someone who would read to me. I wish that I weren't just... outside of stories with happy endings.

Leadership

2009-11-12T21:30:00.003-05:00

If faculty governance and faculty contribution to a university community is going to work properly, it won't just do so by magic. Because here's the thing: groups of people can only come together to work effectively if they have structure, guidance, and information. There needs to be a person who takes responsibility for creating structure, for guiding decision-making processes, and for disseminating information in a way that is responsible, transparent, and coherent.

In other words, we need administrators. Faculty can't do their jobs unless they have effective administrators to create an environment in which that can happen. Left to their own devices, to piece together information by happenstance and to have discussions and to make decisions without a clear structure, clear goals, and clear guidelines, faculty will most of the time fail. That's right. I said that. Faculty can't just run the university by committee.

Now, faculty members are smart folks. They can do a lot of things well. They can achieve a great deal for a university - above and beyond their individual teaching and research - with strong leadership. With charismatic and strong leadership, they may even be able to achieve this great deal and feel proud of it and like what they're achieving.

But also, faculty members are smart folks. They know when they're being given the run-around. They know when the rhetoric doesn't match the substance. They know when the hundreds of hours they've put into something to make it great have meant nothing, and when that something is being gutted. And once they know these things, they are going to stop being so interested in cheer-leading, in taking one for the team, in doing their jobs well. This is not because faculty members are selfish or scattered or lacking in commitment. It's because they are smart folks, and they know that to be smart means not investing one's time in something that has clearly become totally fucked. They know that being smart means not letting themselves get fucked.

Strong leadership means:

Knowing how to run a meeting. If you're sitting at the head of a table, and if you're putting yourself in a position of authority over a group, you also hold responsibility for keeping the group on track. You hold responsibility for focusing the discussion, and for explaining why the discussion is being focused in the way that you choose. You hold responsibility for stopping people from talking over one another, and you hold responsibility for managing the personalities and interests around the table in order to keep the conversation civil and productive. (This is not unlike managing a classroom well, incidentally.) If a meeting is going on for 2 hours and there's no end in sight and people start leaving before it's over? You don't know how to run a meeting.
Answering questions honestly, even when the honest answer may not be to everyone's liking. Spin is not strong leadership, particularly when you're expecting a group of people to do the motherfucking dirty work for you.
Taking ownership over your role in a particular process. If the travesty that is driving the process is your idea, at the very least you can admit that it was all your idea and explain why. Speaking in the passive voice "it was decided..." "people have agreed..." "it is the case that..." is disingenuous at best. Dude, if you're behind the steering wheel, admit it. Be responsible for it. Take the punches that you fucking deserve for it. You can't keep your hands clean and be a strong leader.
Understanding that you don't get to decide things in a vacuum only to force faculty to come together under false pretenses to ratify your decisions.
Asking for input before decisions are made, not after. (I suppose that's the same thing as the last bullet, only stated differently.)
Realizing that getting people to buy into a process isn't a matter of making decrees or coercing people through scare-tactics (ahem, did we learn NOTHING from the Bush presidency?), but rather about persuading them that their investment in the process actually means something and that it will have tangible, and hopefully positive, results.
Making friends with people who have big mouths and getting them to use their big mouths to support you rather than to fight you. And if you try to persuade them and they aren't buying it? Maybe you need to listen to their objections and really take them to heart. And maybe even try to address them directly, rather than just responding with fucking sound bites.
Inspiring trust in those whom one expects to do the heavy lifting.

You know why tenure matters? Above and beyond academic freedom in scholarship and in the classroom? It matters because when we don't have strong administrative leadership, and I suspect this happens at all institutions in a variety of contexts at one time or another, somebody needs to be able to speak up, loudly and clearly, on behalf of students, on behalf of faculty, and on behalf of the future of the institution. Tenure has made little difference to me in terms of my scholarship or my teaching. I have never felt in jeopardy in those areas, and I think my institution values my autonomy in those areas. Where tenure has meant the most to me is that I don't have to hold back at all when it comes to fighting bullshit that will hurt my university, my colleagues, or my students. Now, my loud and contentious voice may not make any difference. But at the very least I do have the power to say my piece without fear of losing my job. And since I'm being put in a position where I'm being expected to "participate in" (read: authorize) things that entirely contravene our mission and our values, then I need that power and I need to use it.

But you know what I want? I want a leader. I want a person who will make it unnecessary for me to feel enraged and to go into battle mode. This is not to say that I want a leader who agrees with me in all things or who serves my interests above all others. No, that wouldn't be a good, strong leader. I want a leadership that has a vision, that articulates it clearly, and that doesn't try to pass things through under the radar. I want to be able to be a team player, even if I don't entirely agree, because I trust the ones leading me. I want to feel secure in my leadership's intentions, and I want to be reassured that I don't need to raise hell if I disagree with something because even if I express an objection quietly and civilly that it will be taken into account. I want to be confident in my leadership, knowing that it is making decisions with students, the faculty, and the institution as its first and most important priority. I want leadership that does not betray me, that does not use my hard work to advance a policy or program change only, in the implementation phase of that change after it has been approved, to strip that change of any value or meaning. I don't want to feel as if my leadership is taking advantage of my initiative, abilities, charisma, and intelligence. I want to feel as if my leadership values those qualities in me, respects them, and uses them to initiate positive change.

Look, I believe in compromise. I believe that it's impossible to make all people happy all of the time, and I believe that it's not my leadership's job to make me happy. But I also believe that if you expect people to serve, if you request their service, that you should value that service when it is given. And you should honor the spirit of the final product that those people produce.

I've had two experiences with leadership this week. One of those experiences was exemplary, in terms of demonstrating exactly the qualities that a strong leader has. The other, not so much. Tragically, the lack of leadership that I experienced this week is going to affect every single student at my university, and just about every single colleague of mine within my college.

I am angry, I am demoralized, and I am in no way going to shut the fuck up about the latter of the two experiences. Maybe my angry outcry will make no difference. Probably it won't. But I want it made very clear that I do not endorse what is happening, especially since when everybody was busy trying to get the thing support in the first place, I was the motherfucking spokesmodel.

Lesson learned.

I'm a Professor, Not an Administrator

2009-11-11T14:16:00.002-05:00

As a professor, I value a lot of things. I value helping students to learn. I value ideas and research. I even value the service that one performs - participating in important conversations about curricular development, policy decisions, etc.

And as a professor, I'm a very hard worker. I put great effort into the work that I do, and I want to take pride in doing my job well.

I am not an administrator. And the more administrative duties that somehow land in my lap, the more I have to pick and choose which parts of my job I will do adequately and which parts of my job I let slide. Notice that there is no pride in doing a good job in this scenario, because it's pretty much impossible to do a really good job when you're being pulled in about a thousand different directions. Especially when some of those directions in which you're being pulled are into doing administrative bean-counting that has nothing fucking to do with being a college professor.

And here's the thing: I have no administrative ambitions. I want to be a professor. According to my contract, that is what I have been hired to be. So you know what? I really wish that people who are administrators would take care of the administrating, and let me do my job.

RBOC: It's Tuesday

2009-11-10T21:55:00.003-05:00

I was late for every single thing today. Late for a meeting (15 minutes); late for both of my classes (5 minutes for each).
I am so freaking done with this semester. Who's with me?
I found out that one of my bright and most darling students was accepted into Teach for America!!!!!! I'm so happy!!!!! I'm so proud!!!!! I'm so excited!!!!!
The above excitement is only magnified by the fact that this student had been toying (in an ambivalent way) with pursuing grad studies in the field in which we are currently hiring. Remember that song in the movie Heathers? Teenage Suiciiiiide - Don't Do It! Well, I would like to do a version of that song called Grad School'n Engliiiiiish - Don't Do It! I mean, the quality of our candidates is so. freaking. awesome. We have our pick. And we are so not that great.
Deliberations about job candidates were interesting today, mainly because of the varying perspectives of my colleagues. It is so interesting how different the perspectives of people who've been around for 20+ years are compared with the perspectives of those who've been around for 10 years or less, and then compared with the grad student on our committee (who is learning LOADS). At the end of the day, I'm very pleased with how things are going, though interviewing at MLA will be interesting, given the fact that I'm interviewing with a colleague who... well, let's just say that our perspectives about what counts in a candidate are not identical. This actually is probably a really good thing, in that it means the initial interview process will really reflect the two ends of the spectrum in my department. On the other hand, dude. I sort of wonder how a candidate is going to be able to process the two of us in the same (bed)room. (I get along with this colleague just fine - this isn't about tension between me and the colleague. It's just, wow do we see the profession and our institution differently. And I'm sure that will come across in interviews.)
I love T.S. Eliot. I mean, it's not true love or anything, but it's definitely some sort of love. And I don't get why students find him so repellent. I mean "Tradition and the Individual Talent" is pure critical gold. "But of course, only those who have personality and emotions know what it means to want to escape from those things." Genius.
I also realized that I have an unhealthy love for D.H. Lawrence. I've suspected this for some time, but seriously, Lawrence is like the boyfriend you have who is a bad decision. He has a bad attitude and he treats you like crap, but he is compelling in a way that those nice boys who have good qualities that you really should seek out just aren't. And sure, he's annoying, too, and a little creepy. But yet, he is so freaking cool. Really. This is how I feel about the Lawrence. And yes, I recognize that this is a personal problem.
Speaking of boyfriends who were bad decisions, a pseudo-ex of mine has been commenting on my Facebook status updates, always with comments about how books are obsolete. I don't get why he wants to be my Pretender to Illiteracy Friend on Facebook, but I feel that his reappearance in my world is perhaps indicative of New Things To Come. I hope that these things do not involve illiterate wankers, though he may indeed be the harbinger of such.
In other news, what's with high school boys who were never boyfriends or pseudo-exes or even bad decisions (for they were busy going out with "cool" girls while you were editor of the school newspaper and singing in choir) but who indicate that they want to read one's book (although they are not academics) and then perform a massive fail by going MIA immediately after one sends them some chapters of said book in PDF (for one was never going to send an actual copy of the book)? And then you admonish them after like a week of radio silence along the lines of "um, dude, I sent you chapters of my book and you've not written back" with "please be patient, hon! I'm on vacation even though I haven't had a job in months. I want to devote proper time and attention to your brilliant ideas." A. He called me "hon." As my high school best friend quipped, "Who does he think he is? Flo from Mel's Diner?" B. Who gets a vacation when they're not motherfucking working? I mean, dude, I don't get "vacations" and I work like a dog. Look, I understand that nobody really wants to read my book. But if you pretend you do, and you convince me enough that I scan some chapters to send to you, you're obligated. And in a timely fashion. As I noted "I'm an impatient person." The fact of the matter is, you insisted and I relented. You owe me a motherfucking email, stupid boy from high school who claimed to have a crush on me once upon a time. If your crush was pure and true, you'd at least respond when I bestow my book upon you. And you probably wouldn't call me "hon." Because that's just gross.
FB is ignoring me. I'm not entirely certain about why, though I do have some ideas.
I am so. freaking. tired. Seriously: is this semester not done?
I feel that the above is all for now. More in the coming days, I'm sure.

I Hate That This Is Still Something That I Am Dealing With

2009-11-09T20:29:00.002-05:00

Remember that university-wide curriculum thingumbob I had something to do with? Well, it's passed our university curriculum committee and our faculty senate, and you'd think I'd not have to deal with it any longer, and yet, here I am. A) I hate people, B) I hate this thing, and C) I hate the fact that I allowed the "final" proposal to go forward with something that is totally freaking stupid because I was "picking my battles." Let's just note, re: C, that the people who I appeased are no longer dealing with the thing, and so I should have just alienated those people and steamrolled them in order to make my life easier now. So much for compromise. Compromise is for losers.

Narratives of "Deserving" and Morale

2009-11-09T07:27:00.004-05:00

I had a conversation with a colleague last week, the sort of conversation that often will happen around this time of the semester when everybody's feeling overwhelmed and stressed out and like the semester can't end quickly enough. It wasn't a significant conversation in itself, but it's had me thinking about two things that I've connected periodically over the last year throughout discussions about budget crises, curriculum, faculty workload, etc: questions of "deserving" and of "morale."

I'll take the second part first. Morale. There have been a lot of discussions over the past year or two at my institution about faculty and staff "morale" - or, rather, not really discussions. Really, the "discussion" amounts to, "Oh, morale is so low. I've never seen people with such low morale." And then that's pretty much the end of it. Sure, people might go on to cast aspersions on the administration, to bemoan the quality or behavior of students, to question policy decisions, or whatever. But the foundation of those comments is always this issue of "morale" as if it's some uniformly problematic thing and as if it is evidence that All Things are Wrong in the World.

Look, I'm not going to pretend that I'm always the most positive, shiny, happy employee - you'd all know that's not true. We all get disgruntled from time to time. What gets me about the turn toward talking about disgruntlement in terms of "morale" is that it's a way of flattening out the issues and of stopping conversation - and that's whether it's a term engaged by faculty and staff or whether it's a term engaged by administration. Instead of talking about specific, practical issues that we can address, we instead talk about how everybody's in a bad mood, as if all bad moods have the same root causes, and as if just solving the "morale" problem would make the practical problems go away.

Except "morale" is a large and unwieldy concept, and what may improve my morale may not improve everybody's. So the more we reduce our conversations to the narrative of "low morale," the more time we take away from actual problem-solving, or so it seems to me.

Because, here's the thing: "morale" seems to me to be bound to people's personal ideas about what they "deserve." When people don't believe they are "getting what they deserve," then morale is low. But, see, this is the weird thing about "deserving." "Deserving" implies entitlement. And the people I know with the lowest morale seem to characterize their complaints in terms of this sense of individual entitlement, and they don't seem to think about the big picture very much. I don't say this to dismiss individual concerns - and I don't say this to indicate that I myself haven't fallen prey to characterizing my own experience in exactly the same way. But. I question the utility of approaching one's working life from that perspective.

Does this mean that I think people don't "deserve" things? Well, not exactly. It's just, you know where we also see these narratives of deserving? On reality television. Pay attention the next time you're watching some ridiculous show. "I deserve to be here." "I didn't deserve to be eliminated." "I deserve to win this challenge." "I deserve that money." I deserve, I deserve, I deserve. And I know when I see Robin on Top Chef, for example, talking about how she "deserves" to remain in the competition, I think she's a total and complete idiot. It seems to me that when we enter the narrative of "deserving" that it's just not a terribly compelling narrative.

Or let's think about a closer-to-home example. A student who has earned a C on an assignment comes in to complain that he or she "deserves" an A. How much credence does that complaint have, 9 times out of 10? Does insisting that he or she "deserves" that A really make the argument more compelling? How often does the word "deserve" get used when what we really mean is "want"? And sure, none of us likes it when we don't get what we want, and sure, we may see not getting what we want as unjust. But just because we wanted something and we didn't get it, it doesn't mean that saying, "But I deserved x,y,z!" will make the outcome any different. Neither narratives of "deserving" nor narratives of "morale" seem rooted to reality and practical solutions. Both seem most frequently to be narratives of unfulfilled desire. How exactly can we practically address unfulfilled desire, whatever the objects of desire are?

I think my answer to that question is that we can't. When I think about my colleagues who sing the "bad morale" song, these are people who, even if their every desire was fulfilled, would still be dissatisfied. This isn't to dismiss legitimate concerns about workload or policy decisions, but rather to note that the people who talk to me most frequently about the "low morale" problem and about how faculty/staff aren't "getting what they deserve" also tend to be the people who opt out of the heavy lifting required for change. In fact, I think people often address their concerns about this stuff to me because I'm a heavy lifter by nature. I think they figure that if they complain to me that I'll get my hands dirty fighting their battles, while they get to sit back and complain about how I do so. (This isn't generous of me, but this is how it feels.) And the fact of the matter is, even if I did go to bat for all of these people, and even when I have on occasion done so, these people still aren't happy. So is the institution responsible for that? Trends in higher more generally?

Look, there are a good many things that I'd like to change at my institution. And let's note for the record that I've been very active in working to change a good number of things, particularly since receiving tenure both at the department and university levels. I'm not this stupid, foolish Happy Camper who doesn't see problems. I just don't see how it helps anything for me to be miserable and to spread my misery around to other people by bemoaning "low morale" or whining about how I "deserve" better. That's what I'd characterize as a waste of my already limited time and energy.

I guess the bottom line is that I want to change the conversation from one that centers on something I can't control - like morale - to one that I can do something about. And I'd like for the people who want to list their litany of complaints to me when they could be helping to make things better to stop doing that. I mean, seriously.

Long. Motherfucking. Day.

2009-11-05T22:03:00.002-05:00

I awakened this morning around 7. I then proceeded to drink coffee, to read blogs, to write a blog post, etc. I then, at around 8:30, decided it was time to shower. Tragically, I could not shower as the water in my neighborhood was shut off because of road resurfacing. Thus, I had to brush my teeth with water from the refrigerator and perfume and deodorant it up and hope for the best. Gross.

I then proceeded to a 9:30 appointment which took an hour. I then graded for an hour and a half, and then I met with a student for about 45 mins. I realized it was unrealistic to think I'd finish grading. So I went off to teach my class. My students, well, they looked wiped. about 5 people are out with a flu-like illness, and the rest - dead tired. Given my own state, I said, "students, I am not this sort of professor, but I shall take pity on you. Go. Use this hour wisely."

I, however, did not get an hour to use wisely or otherwise. For one of my students asked me if I would talk to her about options after graduation. Apparently, her adviser is "weird." I don't know who it is, but whatever. She's a nice student and I was happy to help. I then found a request for a recommendation for Americorps in my in-box, for a former student who's great but dude. I have no time to deal with it. I then stopped in to talk to my chair, and then I went off to the curriculum committee mtg. At which time, two things happened.

Remember how we were working on revamping our major requirements? Like a gajillion years ago? Well, the first (and most important) part of those changes have passed, passed, passed! Huzzah! I then somehow ended up volunteering my services for yet another fucking committee that grew out of the 3 committees I've been on since July. Never fear: this one shall only require some emailing and one meeting. I suppose I could have not volunteered, but really, I needed to do so.

That meeting done, I went back to my office to finish grading. Then I taught my grad class (which went pretty well, all things considered), and then I gave them their proposals back with an hour left to go, and then met with each of them individually, which ended up taking an hour and a half and not an hour. In between students, I advised BES about one of her statements of purpose. And then I was free to go home.

So now I'm home, I'm drinking a glass of wine, and I am looking forward to a day tomorrow that shall involve my kittens, my pajamas, and my couch. This week was brutal. This day was the most brutal of the entire week.

Damn.

My Grad Class

2009-11-05T07:54:00.002-05:00

Enough about the search committee posts as I've now made my way through the ~150 applications we received by the deadline, I've made my long short list and checked it twice, and now I just need to wait to see how committee deliberations next week (4 hours of meetings scheduled! Fun times - not) go. From this point I will not post anything much about the search, for this is where things get more specific and I don't feel like posting further would be appropriate for the blog.

So, let's change the subject. I want to write a bit about my grad seminar that I'm teaching this term. Our MA program is basically brand spanking new, and while at first I had concerns about us starting such a program (who needs another MA program in English?) I actually see that we are fulfilling a need in the region, and so that's fine. That said, well, I got seminar paper proposals in from my students who remained in the course (lots of attrition from my initial enrollment, which I had expected would be the case, and which I'm ultimately fine with) and I am... how do I put this?

Well, let me back up. When I designed this course, I was very clear about the fact that I could not just put together a course that would have passed for graduate-level in my own experience. Most of our students are working full time, and they just don't have the time to devote to reading or the sense of graduate-level expectations for workload that I had in my own grad experience. So, in thinking about the course design, I very clearly wanted to set up a schedule that pushed the students but also that gave them a lot of milestones throughout so that they could chart their progress.

So, whereas in my grad work, where the reading expectation was something like 1 novel per week plus secondary readings and theory, in this course, students are reading about half of the amount. I'm ok with that, as I'd rather have them do all of the half amount of reading rather than none of a larger amount of reading. And whereas my seminars with rare exceptions had a grade breakdown of 80% seminar paper (with no proposal assignment or anything folded into that) and 20% a presentation/discussion-lead and participation, my course has more bites at the grading apple. Presentation; Participation; Proposal/Annotated bibliography; Reading Journal; Seminar Paper, with percentages distributed more evenly across assignments (though the seminar paper is still the largest percentage). Again, for my student population, I think this makes sense. In my grad programs, the expectation was that you'd be doing things like a reading journal, refining a topic and doing research, participating, without instruction. My students, for the most part, did not enter this program with a level of preparedness that would indicate that they would do these things without them being assigned. I don't think that it's a bad thing for me to make these requirements explicit, given my context, so that's fine, too.

What concerns me is not the structure of the course or my level of expectation. I put a lot of time into designing the course, and I think it's a good one. And, for the most part, the students are bright and enthusiastic, if perhaps a bit lacking in maturity and seriousness compared with grad students at research-heavy institutions. But.

I was totally shocked by the quality - or lack thereof - of their proposals for their seminar papers. (In general - some proposals were alright, I suppose.) Here is what surprised me:

Quality of writing. Poor word choice, lack of clarity, failure to proofread.
Failure to comply with the required topics that the proposal assignment indicated that they should address. Because that's the thing: I didn't just say "hand in a proposal" - I gave them an assignment that broke down explicitly the information such a proposal should include.
Lack of specificity. This goes along with the first two bullets, but it's also a distinct issue. Ultimately, I don't think the majority of them actually revised the proposal before turning it in.

These three things shocked me, not in the least because I spent a good hour of a class session discussing the proposal assignment and its link to the final paper in class (something that also never happened in my own grad career).

I mean, these are graduate students. Not grad students in a top program, surely, but still: why would a person pursue a graduate degree if one didn't intend to do one's best on all assignments? I just don't get it.

I mean, I get it when undergrads don't necessarily apply themselves on all assignments. It's not what I'd wish, but I understand it. This, though, I do not understand.

Also, let me be frank: most of my undergraduates who are majors in upper-level courses produce better topic proposals than what I got from my grad students. At the very least, they follow directions. But more often than not, a good number actually have really interesting ideas above and beyond meeting the basic requirements of an assignment.

So I guess what I am, beyond anything else, is disappointed. I'm going to force some of them to redo the assignment before I'll pass it (something I'd never imagined I'd have to do) and I think I'm going to take time in class tonight for them to workshop their proposals with comments and to meet with them individually while they do so. I feel like this is a freshmen comp style thing to do, and I think it's infantilizing, but I think they all will benefit from it. I'd rather infantilize them and help them to do well than to treat them like grown-ups and have them all tank the paper.

It does suck, though, that this is where we are at this point in the semester. I'd just expected so much more from them.

More on The Search with WAY Too Many Applications

2009-11-03T21:24:00.003-05:00

I thought since I'm such a crappy blogger lately that I should turn my response back to recent comments into a post. I know. Lame. But what can I do? I'm swamped with stuff right now, and all I want to do is whine. I think Facebook has become my whining place now, and so that leaves me silent on the blog more often than has historically been my norm. But seriously, people, I feel like I'm going to collapse on the spot. Between teaching and mentoring and grading and committee work and showing up at things and yadda yadda yadda, I ain't got no ideas at the end of the day worth blogging about. I'm just fried.

But so anyway, to get to some things that showed up in the comments. First, the easy one. A number of people have marvelled at the number of applications I described as "strong" in my previous post. Let me clarify: that percentage was not about perfect fit. That percentage was about "strong candidate who could easily do a tenure-track job, who's got the package of research and teaching and all that jazz and who has the degree (or will have by date of appointment) and who is in the general area in which we are searching. " Having looked at more than 125 applications now, I would still say that about 75% of those fit that bill. But. That doesn't mean that 75% of those are *ideal* for us specifically. Just that let's say it were the apocalypse and all of those who were *ideal* were washed away in a flood. We could easily come up with 10 candidates who would do from the survivors, and we could hire one of them, and it would likely be just fine. Now, in terms of applicants who hit the sweet spot of multiple of our preferences, and whose letters I liked and who sounded interesting and cool and like they'd actually be into working here, I'd say that we're looking at more like 15-20%. In order to get to a reasonable interviewable number, we'll need to get rid of about 2/3 of the people from that long short list.

On the one hand, this is an embarassment of riches. I think in part it's because we wrote a strong ad that really did communicate what we needed and really did narrow the pool. (If we had sent off the original draft of the ad without making it more specific, I truly believe that we'd have gotten like 7,000 applications.) While there are a some folks who are really trying to stretch in ways that would win them the title of ultimate Twister player, for the most part, we're getting applicants who do have business applying for this position. Also, in part, I think this has to do with the fact that we are in what many would consider a pretty decent location. On the other, the fact that we've got so many people who we could reasonably interview/hire makes the whole process, as Hylonome wrote, "exhausting and, at times, devastating." We are not just trying to find 10 qualified people to interview. We are in a position where qualifications are so totally beside the point. Instead, this process is going to be about splitting hairs. And with that being the case, it's not about qualified or unqualified - it's about whether the people seem to "get" us - whatever that means. I guess I'm so insistent about this because saying "Oh, only 10% of applications are really on target or really are qualified" I think really perpetuates the myth that if one just applies to the jobs for which one is "really" qualified, that one will get a job. I think we all know that's not necessarily true. An applicant may be qualified, and an applicant *still* may be passed over. In fact, that's actually a strong possibility. Because we're going to have to kick a lot of "really" qualified folks to the curb - even before we get to the point of interviewing.

I also want to note that this job is not in one of the most totally glutted (ahem, 20th century anything) fields. I'm in one of those fields, and seriously, serving on this search has made me more committed than ever to advising my students NOT to do my field UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES if they insist on pursuing grad school, which I hate, but which really is how I feel. Because if this is how it is in a less popular field? Jesus. I don't know how anybody gets a job in the more popular ones. I don't know how I got my job, really, looking back on it all. Or, I kind of know specifically what contributed to me getting an offer, but the reality is that I was motherfucking the luckiest girl in the world. Not because I'm an imposter or I'm not smart or I wasn't qualified. But rather because I know they looked at about the same number of applications in the search for me and the fact that I made it through the various cuts given what the applicant pool probably looked like is astonishing. I'm seriously astonished that anybody gets a job, seeing what I'm seeing from this side of the table.

Also, I feel like I should note this. The applicants that I feel sorriest for are those whose dissertations really fall smack in between two hiring fields. Those people who are neither one thing nor the other. Their research sounds fascinating, but seriously: if I need to know that you can teach and advise MA theses across a hundred years of literature in a particular national tradition, if you only hit 30 years of that in your research and teaching, you're not a contender. And so I repeat the advice that I got from my dissertation adviser when I was embarking on coming up with my dissertation topic, just in case anybody is reading for whom it would be a help: a dissertation is, first and foremost, a job-seeking document. So while you may be passionate about crossing period boundaries or national traditions or genres or what have you, save that "it doesn't really fit anyplace neatly" project for after you get a job. Write a dissertation that clearly demonstrates your immersion in a hiring and teaching field. A dissertation shouldn't be the last major research project you ever do. It should be the first.

But so now on to the more difficult question that (not) just another girl posed in a comment:

you note that people need to find the time for research, but please help me figure out how the hell to do that while teaching 5-6 courses at 2 or 3 different schools a semester, and still having to pick up some kind of temp work to make ends meet. or am I, as I suspect, completely screwed and I might as well give up now, even though I've only had my degree a year.

A full time, decently paid 4/4 load with health insurance seems like the freakin' holy grail right now.

I really feel like this deserves an answer, and I am going to try to answer it as honestly as I can. First things first: I don't think only a year out of a degree is the time to give up. I do think, however, that one needs to be realistic about how long one can reasonably do the adjunct thing and remain human. Personally, I had always planned that three job market cycles would be my maximum. Again, I was totally lucky and so never had to put that plan into action, but that was my plan. I can also see 5 as being a reasonable number at the outside, if one is more patient than I am, and particularly given the funding/hiring situations at universities right now. More than that, and I say get out. Your life is more important than this profession.

But now for the actual comment. Let me note that this is only one person's (my) perspective, and other people may have differing opinions, and I'm coming at this after having reviewed all of these applications over the past couple of weeks. YMMV.

1. I really don't believe that anybody should be adjuncting teaching 5-6 classes a semester (whether at one university or multiple universities) plus temping to make ends meet. The reality is that at a certain point, more teaching experience does absolutely nothing for you, particularly if you're not getting the opportunity to develop courses in your hiring field. If my department is hiring a person to teach Medieval literature, say, the fact that you've taught basic writing, comp, technical writing, creative writing, intro to lit, the survey, and an American novel course does not do anything to assist your application. Nothing whatsoever. My impulse would be to say that it would make a hell of a lot more sense to adjunct just one or two courses per semester (to keep your hat in the academic ring) and to temp full time (which ultimately can lead to being able to buy health insurance once you've clocked a certain number of hours). On the weekends, you can work on research, which will add to your marketability in ways that teaching until your head falls off won't. And yes, that course of action sucks mightily. How do I know that? Because I temped full time the last year of my PhD program. Was it fulfilling and good and did I feel like I was using my education? No. But I paid my rent. And my fees for still being in the program. I didn't go into (much) further debt. And sure, I hated my life, but I'd have hated my life if I were adjuncting to pay the bills, too. And the adjuncting would have taken a lot more time and energy. And temping to pay the bills didn't stop me from getting an academic job.

2. Showing that you're a consistent researcher need not mean racking up publication after publication, not for a job at a place like mine. The point is not the length of the publications portion of your cv, or even quality of venues, but rather consistency. I can say this. The baseline for me in evaluating applications has basically been that a person has to have at least one or two publications. They need not be fancy, but they should be original articles and no merely encyclopedia entries or reviews. "Under review" doesn't count. "In progress" doesn't count. "Revise and resubmit" is slightly better, but it's not a publication. "Forthcoming" is grand. I want to see that you're getting your own ideas out there. If you're adjuncting, I don't expect you to be racking up publications, necessarily, but I do expect that you'd attend at least one local (or close to local) conference a year during that time if at all possible. And I'd hope that you'd gotten at least one article to publication during grad school, and attended some conferences during grad school. Again, the publication(s) could be in an essay collection, a mediocre journal, a conference proceedings. But if you've done NOTHING other than your dissertation, with the applicant pool that we've got? Well, we don't need to take a chance on you. That's the cold, hard truth.

3. You know, a 4/4 job, t-t, with benefits, is kind of the holy grail. But it's not heaven or nirvana. The fact of the matter is that in a 4/4 job, while your teaching would decrease, and your security would increase, and both of these are substantial and not-to- be-sneezed-at gains, your teaching wouldn't decrease that much, your research expectation would go from zero to not zero (even at a place like mine, where you only need a few articles to be totally sure of getting tenure, there would be external pressure there that doesn't exist if you're not in a t-t position), and at my place, your service expectation would be through the roof. In other words, while you'd have security, and more money, and slightly less teaching, you'd also have a fuck of a lot more you'd be expected to do and a fuck of a lot more riding on it. If I take into account the service and teaching portions of things, during the academic year I'm working - even now, with many courses "in the can" and a system and being all acclimated to the institution and such - an average of 60+ hours per week. Yes, I do not have the anxiety of not having money. Yes, I have job security (now nearly total since earning tenure). Yes, I have benefits. Yes, I have the holy grail. But if I want to do research, I have to make the time for research. (Which I'll note I've not done in the way that I need to since summer.) This job, my job, is not like skipping through fields of flowers and devoting myself to a life of the mind. If I get the sense from an applicant that this is their vision of what working here will be, I am immediately turned off. Why? Not because I'm personally affronted or something but rather because I think that they are completely clueless about, and thus would never be able to handle, the demands of this particular job.

4. The thing that I think is most insidious about adjunctification is that it makes applicants conceive of themselves and identify themselves as less than because they are adjuncting. Look: I've read applications from people who are part-timers, full-timers (non-t-t), VAPs, Assistant Professors - hell even a couple of associate professors who are willing to give up tenure to get out of their current situations. I've read applications from ABD folks. The fact of the matter is that my cream of the crop includes a range of folks. What matters to me isn't where you work - it's what you do. It's how you fit what we need to hire. It's whether you seem confident in your abilities, instead of beaten down by your obstacles. The fact of the matter is that adjuncting doesn't taint a candidate. What taints a candidate is whether they appear to be sucking on the lemon of adjuncting (or any other circumstance), as opposed to making lemonade out of it. And yes, this does come through in people's letters of application. I don't want to work with somebody who's all "my life's so hard," because you know what? Your life's going to be hard when you get this job, too. Even if you think now that it won't be. I want a colleague who can see the silver lining to a dark, gray, hideous cloud. I want a colleague who's excited, and positive, and who has Big Plans, in spite of obstacles. Because there will surely be obstacles here, and you'd better have the fortitude to handle them if we hire you.

But with all of that being said, I just want to note for the record that I answered at such length because I felt like the question deserved it. Adjuncting sucks. This profession is fucked up. It is totally ridiculous that I'm disqualifying people from my interview pool, at this particular university, because they don't have publications or because they aren't just exactly my fantasy candidate. But the reality of my applicant pool is that I don't have to be kind and I don't have to make any concessions. I suspect that's the reality at most places. I mean, I'm joyfully tossing aside candidates with Ivy PhDs, candidates with motherfucking books out. Because they're just not "us." And I can totally do that because I have such a huge amount of great candidates from whom to choose. It's not fair, and it's not a meritocracy. Not because our candidates that we will pick don't have merit. But rather because, in this situation, so many have merit that I don't have to bother with the ones who don't intrigue me. Whatever their pedigree, whatever their accomplishments.

And I think that's seriously the reality of the job market.

Some Thoughts on Job Applications from One Reading Them

2009-10-30T15:52:00.002-04:00

In just a few short days, the postmark deadline for the search on which I am serving will have passed, and all of the applications will be in. I have been reading them as they come in so as not to collapse under the weight of the whole stack or to suffer from total application fatigue trying to do them all in one or two sittings. I think this has been wise on my part, as we already have close to 100. I'm guessing that we'll end somewhere in the 160-180 range.

Others before me have done tons of great posts giving advice to job seekers from the other side of the table, and people give the "other side of the table" advice all the time over in the job seeking forum at the Chronicle, so I don't aim here to do an advice-giving sort of post. Rather, I just want to make some general observations, which may or may not be useful to others.

I'm astonished by how strong a good 75 to 80 percent of the applications are. I mean, they are phenomenal. So good that there are a lot of people who we could easily interview but we won't because they don't match quite as perfectly to our wish list of preferences. Heck, there are a good number of people who probably will get cut even though they've got ALL the preferred things. That's how great of a pool we have from which to choose. For what is not a "dream job" by any stretch. (I mean, I like it here and all, but come on. We're just not that great.)
While it is true that we all must stretch a bit to fit into a job advertisement, if a department is advertising for, oh, a Shakespeare scholar, say, and your dissertation is on Kathy Acker, chances are very good that you have wasted your time in sending us your stuff, even if you did teach a Shakespeare class once.
The most compelling letters I'm reading actually speak directly to the ad that we wrote. And that is making the difference in my rankings between people with similar CVs. I'm not talking about massive amounts of research and tailoring, here. Just people making a point of highlighting their accomplishments that match what we're looking for in the ad. So, say the ad asks for a person who has teaching or research competency in baklava and you've developed and taught a course in baklava, as well as giving a conference presentation on baklava. It's worth mentioning that.
Teaching experience is an interesting and tricky thing to evaluate. I'm finding that I'm less impressed by the sheer volume of courses taught than I am by range within the areas you would teach were you hired here. For whatever that's worth.
I find I don't care whether people lead with teaching or with research in their letter. What I care about is the balance of the two sections. Two pages on research with only a brief paragraph on teaching, for this place with a 4/4 load, well, just isn't that compelling, even if your research sets the world on fire. Makes no difference whether you put the teaching up front or at the end, in that case.
While we are not a research-heavy institution, I (and my colleagues) really care about hiring somebody who will have a research agenda and who will be able to maintain it with this teaching load. One way to show that's possible is to prove that you've successfully balanced teaching and research already. The applications I find least impressive fall into two camps: the people who've had cushy fellowships and very little teaching throughout grad school and who yet have only like one lame publication, and the people who apply for our gig because they don't have time for research in their current one, and so haven't published or presented at conferences for like 10 years. To both of these groups, I'd like to say, did you not notice the blurb about teaching load and public outreach in our ad? Where exactly do you think you're applying? The fact is, you're going to have to find a way to produce some kind of publication(s) to get tenure here, and it's not going to be easy. If you haven't shown that you can do it in your current circumstances, why would I think you can do it in this job?
I'm really glad I'm serving on this search. I love that I get to help in selecting a colleague who will thrive here.
But wow I'm tired. If doing a job search is like its own job, so, too, is serving on a search committee.

Should Be Sleeping....

2009-10-29T01:14:00.002-04:00

But I accidentally napped this evening, which was a mistake.
I have so much work to do that I can't stop my mind from racing, but I also can't motivate myself to do any of it.
Just as I was about to force myself to bed, a guy I graduated from high school with im'd me through facebook. He is too fancy for words. (Has this super-cool career, from which he is "taking time off" to write a novel, is like the coolest boy EVER.)

But I really should not be chatting. I really should be sleeping.

About What Has Been (So Far) a Very Good Teaching Semester

2009-10-22T09:58:00.002-04:00

I've been pretty silent about the subject of teaching lately basically because things in my various classes are running smoothly. I thought it might be worth it to do a post about what I think is working, as so often, when we post about teaching, we tend to focus on the problems and not on the successes. I think it's good that we have a space in which to think through the things that aren't going right in courses that we teach, and to get feedback and support from others, so this isn't about saying, "Oh, we should all be totally positive when we talk about teaching!" Not at all. Rather, it's just that I think it can be good to reflect on the positive when it's there to reflect upon.

So I'm teaching four courses this semester. Two courses are ones that count for general education credit (service courses), one course is for a program outside my discipline, an advanced writing course, which I teach online (basically a service course), and one course is a graduate seminar in my discipline (my first time teaching this course, or in this program, which is new).

So first, what are some common things that are working well that have absolutely nothing to do with me?

1. There is a great vibe in each of these courses. From the first day, the students have interacted very well together, and I have felt very relaxed in managing each of the courses. Ultimately, I really feel like I'm facilitating rather than demanding, which is how I like to feel in the front of the classroom.
2. The students are, for the most part, bright, engaged, and on board with the material - even if they don't love every single assignment.

I have absolutely nothing to do with the above, other than that I haven't done anything to fuck it up. Sometimes, you get lucky and the dynamics of a class just work. Sometimes, like this semester for me, you get really lucky and that is the case across all of your classes. This is a gift from the universe, and it's probably good to pay tribute to the Teaching Gods when this happens.

But what have I done, other than to show up and let the students do their thing, to make this good teaching semester? Because dude, I should be aware of these things so that I can do them some more!

1. In each of the classes, I was able to hit the pacing sweet spot, both in terms of amount of material assigned as well as the rhythm of the assignments (reading and writing). In one class, this involved changing out some texts with which I was bored and reorganizing the ordering of the readings. In the grad seminar, a brand new prep, it involved meticulous syllabus design, which included visions and revisions until I hit on a collection of required and recommended readings that fit together - dare I say it? - perfectly, both in terms of content and form. It occurs to me that part of the success I've achieved here has everything to do with the fact that I'm finally at the point where I really know our student body, and where I really know myself as an instructor. In the past, I've had fleeting and accidental success with this, but now I feel like I can really take credit for it.

2. This has been something that's been brewing for a while, but I've finally gotten to the point where I have confidence in having my students do a lot of small group activities, and I no longer feel like doing so is about slacking on my part. Now, when I do group stuff, I spend a lot of time prepping it, so it's not like it's just a way not to teach or to prep. Rather, it really is about getting students actively engaged. This is huge since two of my four courses meet only once a week for three hours. Keeping students doing lots of different focused things makes all of the difference in the world in keeping their attention for 3 hours. And also, they're learning by doing, which I really think is always more advantageous than me just spewing material at them.

3. I think I've really hit my stride in my abilities in facilitating class discussion. Especially in the gen ed classes, I'd say about 75% of students are actively participating and contributing in full class discussion, without me forcing them to do so. In part I think this relates to #2, but I think it also has to do with me being much better at leading them to the conclusions that I want them to reach, as opposed to me intervening before they get there on their own. I'm much more comfortable with silence, or with letting them take a little bit longer to get to where I'm leading them than I might have been in previous semesters. This has a lot to do with the fact that I'm teaching three of my four classes for the umpteenth time - experience has taught me that they do ultimately get there. I don't need to force them there.

4. Getting tenure has made all of the difference in my attitude. I hadn't expected this benefit, but it's made me much more relaxed in my teaching, in a good way. Not worrying about evaluations or about jumping through certain hoops has made all of the difference in the world and has made me a more engaged and innovative teacher. I guess that's not something that I can replicate (you only get tenure once), but it is something that I think I would be well served by remembering in future semesters.

5. With the exception of my online class, I haven't found myself dreading grading or falling way behind on it. I think this is partly because I've given myself permission to cut down on the number of graded assignments in some classes in some courses, and it's because I've gotten to the point where I'm only assigning stuff that I'm interested in grading. Instead of seeing graded assignments as disconnected from my own interests, I'm viewing them as more organic to me. I still have outcomes that I need to make sure students achieve through those assignments, but I don't just fall back on tried and true assignments that traditionally measure those things. In creating assignments that I find interesting, I'm much less likely to resist grading them. This may seem obvious, but I'd never thought about it that way before - or really internalized what approaching graded assignments that way would mean for me or my students.

Now, let me be clear: I am fully aware that I am leading a charmed life in the classroom this semester. I know that I will have classes that don't work so well in the future, that it's unlikely that I can expect every future semester to go this smoothly even with all of the above in place. But it's nice to know a semester like this can happen, even if only every once in a while.

A Movement for Slow Communication?

2009-10-20T08:33:00.002-04:00

So yesterday, I hit a crucial milestone. Indeed, I finally entered the 21st century.

But before we get to that, let's talk for a moment about what I was listening to on the NPR just immediately before. Diane Rehm was interviewing John Freeman about his new book The Tyranny of Email, and Freeman was advocating a movement toward "slow communication" - a return to letter-writing, a resistance against ever faster forms of communicating (email, for one, but also Twitter, blogging, Facebook, texting). As I was listening, I found myself nodding in agreement about a lot of what he was saying. I spend a lot of my life resisting the need to be constantly available for communication. This may sound odd, given the fact that I've got a blog. But the thing that I like about blogging is that it's not really about me being constantly available: I choose when I post, I choose how frequently I check in, I control the amount of engagement that I devote to the blog. In contrast, I struggle with the amount I'm expected to be available via email, via phone, via whatever. As a professor, I've got pretty near constant demands for my attention. And one of the things about being always in touch is that one can't actually pay total attention to any one thing. I don't like that. My thought has always been that I need to manage my availability so that when I'm, say, meeting with a student, I'm really focused on that student. Not on what emails come in or the phone that's ringing. When I'm shopping, I want to be 100% shopping - not answering calls or texts on a cell phone. When I'm on the phone, I want to be 100% in the conversation I'm having - and I want other people to show me the same courtesty. (Though I'll admit that even I become distracted sometimes when on the phone, so it's not like I'm some paragon of single-tasking virtue or something.)

At any rate. The point is, one way in which I've maintained my commitment to this is that I've resisted participating in what I like to think of as "cell phone culture." I do not need to be on the phone when I'm out in the world. I do not need to be texting when I'm walking around on campus (something that fills me with constant rage when others do it, and let's not even start with the people who text and DRIVE). Now, I did finally succumb to having an "emergency" cell phone maybe 6 or 7 years ago - one of those ones you buy at target and you just load with minutes. I only ever had it on or used it when I traveled, for the most part. But recently, I'd found myself thinking that it was time for me to have a "real" cell phone - one that I might be more likely to use and one through which people could, ostensibly, get a hold of me - if only every now and again. I'll admit, the frequent mailings from my home phone company about deals may have had something to do with my interest in pursuing the mobile technology. Even Crazy is susceptible to the advertising. Also, my parents both have cell phones, and have done for years, and they've been bugging me to have a cell phone that I actually use.

But so anyway, after listening to this interview in which the interviewee waxed poetic about how we all needed to turn off our cell phones and our computers and return to writing and sending paper letters, I walked into the Cell Phone Store. It was packed with people, young and old. So it was my turn to be taken care of, and the very nice boy who waited on me I think found me hysterical. First, he couldn't believe that I'd never had a "real" cell phone. I suppose he doesn't encounter many people like me in his line of work. He looked at me with wonder when I asserted that "I refuse to become one of those cell phone people." Indeed, he was confused by this statement, and I had to explain what "Those Cell Phone People" are. And then, somehow, I walked out of that store with a brand new Blackberry Curve and a spring in my step.

Now, let's just note that I had not intended to get such a fancy phone. I was just thinking "real phone that doesn't suck like my silly cheap-ass phone." But it turns out a) that the blackberries were the cheapest phones to buy, b) that somehow even with one of the lowest-minute plans, I get unlimited texts, access to email and the internet, GPS, etc., and c) that my monthly bill for home phone/internet/cell will actually go DOWN from what it was. (No, I don't understand how that's possible, really, but apparently for the 75 bucks after rebate that I spent on the phone, the world is now my oyster in terms of "mobile device" technology, without an increase in my monthly bill.) Ah, the world of bundling. And no contract.

What's insane is that last night I had a dream that my phone was caught in a horrifying rainstorm/flood/fountain of water, and that I had to rescue it. Apparently, I am in love and fearful that my phone will somehow be compromised, even though prior to yesterday, I cared not at all about such things. Have I become "one of those cell phone people"? In less than 24 hours?

I think no. But here's the thing. I don't really think the answer with technology is to turn back the clock. I think the answer is probably figuring out how to negotiate it and not to become ruled by it. We'll see how that goes for me.

But I heart my phone. It is awesome.

(A few people have asked why I didn't get the iPhone. Well, the only reason is because I am committed to keeping a home phone and I didn't want to spend like a gajillion dollars more a month to have it plus a cell. I still prefer to talk on a land line, and as a single lady alone in the world, I believe in a home phone for 911-related purposes, and also in the event of things like power outages. I know I'm old-fashioned. But this is how it is. And since I've got my home phone, my internet, and the cell through one provider, I get to have all of my things without any extra cost. And my company doesn't carry iPhones. So there we are.)

Um, Enough with the Death, Please

2009-10-18T19:53:00.003-04:00

Uncle Eddie, my Lebanese uncle with whom I stayed when G. and I went to Lebanon in July 2008, died. He was old (in his 80s), he wasn't well, but, well, it's just really, really sad. G.'s mom, my tayta, was his sister, and now she is the only sibling left. And after all of the horrible losses that she's faced, this is just so heartbreaking on top of it. (She's already had to survive the death of her husband, the deaths of all her other siblings, and the deaths of 4 of her 8 children. It's just too much.)

Uncle Eddie, well, what can I say about him? The most appropriate thing that keeps coming into my head is that he reminded me of my Uncle Dick, the brother of my favorite little gramma (who died just around this time of year in 2003) who died when I was in grad school. Except that doesn't explain anything to you all. Other than that I loved them both from the same place in my heart.

Uncle Eddie immigrated to the U.S. in the late 1960s or early 1970s, I think. He got his citizenship, owned a business, married a Lebanese-American woman and made his life here. He sent his sons to Ohio State. He loved football with a passion, and he loved his sister and her children. When Tayta was so afraid during the civil war, when her children's lives were in danger, her brother sponsored her immigration, and with his help, she got her citizenship which was the first step in getting nearly her entire family to the United States. (Only one of her grandchildren remains in Lebanon - the rest of the family is all now in the United States. This is a pretty amazing feat, as you might imagine. Her grandchildren number in the double-digits - great-grandchildren and great-great grandchildren added to that... well, you get the picture. My Lebanese family is even bigger than my blood-related family, and that's saying something given the fact that my mom was one of 10 kids and my dad was one of 7.) And he was G.'s favorite uncle, and G. made a point of introducing my mom to him when he first started dating her. He loved my mom. He was disappointed that my mom didn't come with me and George to Lebanon when we went. It's such a regret for me now that she didn't.

After Uncle Eddie's wife died, and once his sons were married and established, when he was ready to retire, he returned to Lebanon and has been there for the past 20 or so years. He remarried. Every day he put on his pants and dress-shirt, and a cap, and went into Batroun to do any small shopping that needed to be done. When he returned home, he'd put on his shorts and his t-shirt and relax.

He taught me to play quatorze (a game sort of like rummy, though it involves gambling). Every day he asked whether I was having fun. We drank coffee together, ate octopus and sea urchin together. He opened his home to me as if I weren't just a step-child but as if I were G.'s own. As if I were his own. He was.... He was just so loving and generous and great. And I'm really, really sad that I'll never get to see him again - to hang out with him again. And it's so sad that there's absolutely nothing I can do - that he's a world away. I can't even imagine how G. and my tayta feel.

So here's a picture of Uncle Eddie and G. I'll probably take it down, but I want to remember him how I knew him. And I want to show you him (and G., for even though G. looks like he's a thousand - he's on the right - isn't he just so handsome and darling?). I want to think about Uncle Eddie alive and G. happy.

In other miserable news, my father's mother - my one remaining blood-related grandparent - is in the hospital with pneumonia. Any prayers you've got, please send them her way. Beginning with my chair's death last November, this has seriously been The Year of Death. I really don't know how to take any more.

Tired, But Seeing the Light

2009-10-15T21:50:00.002-04:00

MUWCI passed the first Major Voting Body that it needed to pass in order to for real and for true to become approved. It's not perfect. I don't even like some of the things that it has morphed into. But I don't need to be madly in love with it, nor does anybody else. It just needs to pass. And it did! And I love that the person who made the motion for the vote was a colleague who's done nearly as much for it as I have, and that I was the one to second the motion. And, shit, it was gratifying to see that it didn't just die a sad and pathetic death today. And it also felt really good that people congratulated me for all of my efforts. I wasn't the only person who busted their ass on this, but I really did bust my ass. And it's nice to be recognized for that.

So now on to the next Major Voting Body. I'm cautiously optimistic.

I also got confirmation today that pushing the "new major" through the curricular process (for which I'm primarily responsible) is not going to be the Horrifying Ordeal that it might have been if a particular spot on a form had to have Incredibly Specific and Fucked Up Information included on it. Rather, it turns out that this document I created years ago that nobody (pretty much universally) pays attention to has all of the information necessary for that spot on the form, so even work that I've done that is nearly universally ignored is ultimately useful to me and good for our department generally. Huzzah!

My classes are going amazingly well. Have I mentioned that? Like seriously: all of them. Even the on-line one. Even the class that I hate teaching at night because it attracts a fucked up population of students at night. Even the grad class (in spite of one student who clearly doesn't read), and most especially My Favoritest and Most Important Class That I Teach.

And speaking of teaching, I put in my request for my two-year scheduling preferences today, and I'm pleased with what I've asked for. I'm also really hoping that I get my heart's desire. I even put in a request for next fall, although I sincerely hope that I get my sabbatical and that there will be no teaching next fall. (I'm a superstitious gal, and I couldn't just not put in the possible schedule, for fear that the gods would strike me down if I exhibited such hubris.) I've decided that I really want to return to teaching comp - though on my terms. I want to teach one section of freshmen writing a year, in the fall with little brand spanking new Freshmen. So assuming the sabbatical comes through, I'll return to this in Fall 2011. I think this is a good thing. Let's just note that the fact that I'm not returning to 4 sections of comp a year (2 each semester) is not me failing to be a team player. Even since I got rid of comp from my schedule, I teach 3/4 of my classes as service classes, and I always (and will continue to) teach one course online (which is a huge service to the university). So limiting the teaching of comp is not about getting out of teaching the general population for me, and it never was: it's just about the fact that I'm best as a lit professor, and I'm best when I don't resent the courses I'm teaching. That said, I actually miss teaching first-semester freshmen, and I even miss teaching them writing. I was burnt out when I found my way out of the comp rotation, and the couple of years off from it have been really, really good for me. And no, I don't want to go back to my former (hellish) comp rotation. But I do want to return to the comp classroom. I'm even sort of excited about it.

For the rest of my courses, I've designed a rotation that incorporates the best of the old while leaving room for some new experiments. And one of those new experiments would be a course that I would propose that would be The Course on the Next Book, which I want to marry just thinking about it.

Hmmm. What else? I've been diligently reading job applications, helping BES with her SoP and getting my LoR for her submitted at the places with online apps, I submitted another student's rec for Teach for America, tomorrow I'll do all of the paperwork stuff for the New Major, and over the next four days (it's our fall break) I'll clean my house and finish the revisions for the essay that's been accepted with minor revisions.

When all that's done? I shall be FREE! FREE! FREE AT LAST!

Oh, and tonight I taught my grad students the first half of Foucault's History of Sexuality volume I. And I so know my shit when I'm teaching Foucault. It was awesome.

RBOC: Oof.

2009-10-14T19:05:00.004-04:00

I spent most of the day today, when I wasn't at meetings, working on recommendations for two of my most favorite students ever.
Good recommendations, I have calculated, take approximately 3x the amount of time to write that one schedules for writing them.
I really like recommending strong students. Except for the fact that I feel like if I fuck up the recommendations that I will be responsible for ruining their lives.
We're doing a search this year - well, actually two, but I'm only on one search committee. The ad for the search I'm on was only posted like a week and a half ago. We've already got 8 complete apps in, and we could ostensibly hire any one of them. I know this because I've already read the 8, for I fear that as we edge ever closer to the deadline we'll end up with like 800 applications. Damn you, recession job market. Damn you. Damn you, recession job market, who makes a job at my university seem like a plum gig. (Two of our apps so far are from people with tenure elsewhere, and one is from an advanced asst. type person. Note to junior people who think that people with more experience are more likely to get interviews: these were not the best applications I read.)
I heart Michel Foucault, who has something to say about all things that interest me, regardless of my developing intellectual interests.
Anybody got a recent (successful) statement of purpose from grad school apps for English lit programs that they want to send my way (reassignedtime at gmail dot com)? It occurs to me as I'm trying to advise BES about hers that I've never seen one other than my own (which I no longer have a copy of because I was horrified at writing it, although I suppose it probably does exist on a floppy disk somewhere, though of course, I couldn't hope to retrieve it with any contemporary computing technology, even if I knew where to look for it).
I'm a little freaked out that BES has decided to include my grad program on her list of places to apply. I think it's a program that would be a really good fit for her, but at the same time, I'm totally wigging that the fact that she's "my" student will hurt her chances. This is an asinine thing for me to wig about, but even Dr. Crazy has her lingering insecurities.
I'm excited that I'll be able to try to work some back-door connections for BES in her application process, because it makes me feel like I'm fancy and like I'm really a real member of this profession. I have connections! I have people to email! Huzzah!
Again though, with the lingering insecurities: what if my connections aren't as strong as I think that they are? What if everybody thinks I'm a loser? What if I really am a loser? (Clearly I'm in a place of deep self-doubt. I shall not let this deter me.)
I just happened upon a pseudo-ex on Facebook, and apparently he's changed his first name (which I love) to the first name (not unlike his real name) of a real-ex. I find this entirely horrifying. Can I just say that he is entirely as beautiful as I always thought he was, though? Ever so much more beautiful than the real-ex whose first name he's adopted? Tragically, he is in Alaska. Though perhaps not so tragically, as he's really tragically fucked up. I nevertheless continue to love him with a love that is pure and true. And through him, I also happened upon his Real Ex whom I loathed when he was my pseudo-boyfriend. She remains hideous, which is some small comfort to me. For I am shallow.
FB called me "sweetie" last night. This is so totally unlike him. Eew. And also, lovely. I must have really been in a state for him to resort to such language.
Man-Kitty and Mr. Stripey are elegant and ferocious feline companions. They dislike it when I'm working so hard and stressed out. Really, my job should take their needs into account. Mr. Stripey needs a great deal of love, and Man-Kitty resents having to deal with my moods. Seriously.

What? You Thought This Would Never Happen to You?

2009-10-13T08:37:00.003-04:00

So. A colleague of mine came to me recently with a problem. The colleague is a guy, he's tenured, and he is in the middle of a situation in which a student treated him with an utter lack of respect and challenged his authority.

And of course most of you, either by experience or second-hand, know how this story goes. As so frequently is the case when it comes to such interpersonal challenges with students, the student has been one for whom professor bends over backwards, and the more the professor resists shutting the student down, the more the student pushes, until ultimately, BLAMMO! KABOOM! The grenade is thrown, and the professor is left to handle the debris.

Now, the details of what the student said or of the exact situation aren't ultimately important. What is important is that once I got over my outrage on my colleague's behalf (and really, this particular situation is totally outrageous, even by my world-weary standards), and as I started trying to help him to strategize about potential ways to handle this student and the situation moving forward, something that shocked me quite a bit more than this student's behavior came to light: this was the very first time that this ever happened to my colleague.

That's right. Never before - not when he was a T.A., not when he was a new hire, not in any course-specific context - has he ever had an overt challenge to his authority in the classroom. Now, I'm sure he's a great professor and all, and unlike me (and every woman professor I know who demands a high level of performance from her students) he's got uniformly great ratings on Rate My Professor, but come on people. He's been teaching for 10+ years. And never a challenge like this? Never a situation like this? I get at least one of these a year if not in each and every semester. Still. And early on in my teaching career it wouldn't be just one student - it would be tiny little cells of students within a section who'd try to overthrow me.

I remember the first time that it happened. I was in graduate school, and it was about three weeks into the term. I was at the end of my rope. I'd done all of the things you're supposed to do to make the classroom a collaborative and positive environment, I'd tried to be nurturing to my students, I'd tried to be gentle, yet firm. And things were only getting worse. Worse and worse. Not only was I dreading teaching the class, but it was clear a good number of the students were dreading the class, too. And, fortunately, I ran into my dissertation director, and he advised me in no uncertain terms that it was my job to get things back on track, even if it meant I had to play the heavy. But that's oppressive! But that goes against all of these theories about creating a student-centered environment in the classroom! Well, he replied, how exactly are you being an effective teacher and doing your best for the students in this class if you don't stop this from happening in your classroom?

And you know what? He was right. And no, I never entirely fixed things that term, but I learned a lot about what it means to create an environment in which all students can learn and in which I can be the best teacher possible. Maybe it's not warm and fuzzy, but maybe warm and fuzzy isn't the primary thing a classroom should be. Maybe warm and fuzzy can only happen once a baseline is set for civility and respect, and maybe that starts with how I allow students to treat me.

And yet, I didn't really believe that what happened in that semester would recur regularly throughout my teaching career. No, it doesn't happen in every class that I teach, nor does it happen in the majority of classes that I teach. Maybe it happens with such regularity because I teach four sections a term, so students get more bites at the disrespect and incivility apple. But whatever the reasons, it does happen consistently, in ways subtle and not so subtle.

Subtle: The student who refuses to call my Dr. or Professor Crazy, after many, many corrections.
Not-Subtle: The student who complains to the chair that I marked him/her down for consistent proof-reading and grammatical errors on an assignment in an academic writing course, because the student should be able to be "creative" and to write however he or she sees fit.
Subtle: The students who criticize me on course evaluations because "she acts like she knows more about the material than we do." (Note to students: I do know more about the material than you do. In a professor, that's really a positive, not a negative. If I don't correct you when you get something wrong, I'm not actually teaching you. I'm not sure how to teach without demonstrating, or "acting like," I know more than you do. Sorry if that upsets you.)
Not-Subtle: The student (or in this case group of students) who constantly chatters while I'm lecturing, distracting me and other students who are trying to pay attention, after I've gently told them to cut it out.
Subtle: The student who assumes that course policies, clearly stated, don't apply to him/her, and looks aghast when I enforce them.
Not-Subtle: The student who confronts me in front of the whole class, asserting that my selection of a book for a course was "inappropriate" and that I'm not qualified to make judgments about what books belong on a syllabus.

I could go on. But the point is, authority is not something that I just have by virtue of the facts that I'm the lady with the Ph.D. and that I'm the one who grades. I've never experienced being "a professor" as insulating me from challenges to authority, nor have I experienced it as a position that uniformly and without exception accords me some special kind of respect. And so I've always been surprised when in conversations with colleagues (of the male variety) when they talk about these things as a perk of the job, that one of the things that they like about being A Professor is that it's an occupation that commands Respect.

Look, even as a professor, I've got to walk in there and earn respect. Every freaking day. Because when they see me, they don't see A Professor. And that's whether I wear my teacher costume or jeans, that's whether I look stylish or frumpy, that's whether I'm stern or whether I'm "nice." It just doesn't matter.

The up-side, though, is that after years of handling this shit, it no longer hurts my feelings, and also I have an arsenal of tools at my disposal for handling it. All one can do is to develop a thick skin and to do one's best to nip such things in the bud as much as is possible before they get totally out of hand. And you know, as much as that does suck, at least I haven't had one of these situations get totally out of hand in years (and knock wood that this continues). I've become competent in shutting down the disrespect before it gets to the level where I need to create paper trails and get my chair involved. That's got to be worth something, right?

But that was the other thing that came through in my conversation with my colleague. For him, this was like this totally outlandish and awful thing that happened. He was at a loss. He had done all the right things, really had gone above and beyond, and all he got for his trouble was shit. On the one hand, I understand his anger and his shock. And maybe he is even right to take it personally. Since this isn't a regular part of his job, maybe it is, actually, personal, and maybe he's right to feel personally hurt and affronted.

On the other hand, though, I kind of feel like the ability to take it personally and to have hurt feelings over this sort of thing is also an effect of (hetero, white) male privilege. So while I do empathize, and I've been there myself, and my colleague also recognizes - though perhaps for the first time concretely - the privilege within which he's been operating, so he's not at all an entitled jerk.... With all of those caveats in place? Cry me a river. Now you see how the other half lives.

Hmmm. Perhaps Energy Comes with Complaining?

2009-10-12T09:25:00.002-04:00

I have awakened on this Monday morning positively bright-eyed and bushy-tailed. Now, sure, I've got lots to accomplish, but somehow, all of it seems positively within the range of my doing. I suspect that my whining of yesterday helped, as did the fact that I went to bed at 10 PM last night and only awakened at 8:30. I also have the pleasure (and I'm not even being sarcastic here) of recommending one of my favoritest students for Teach for America. (If you're not familiar with the process, they only ask for recommendations after the student passes through initial cuts and an interview, so getting to the recommendation phase is a really big deal.) Of course, I'm all energized to do this and not my grading, but I think I'm going to do a thing where I answer one question after each grading task, as sort of a reward set-up for myself.

So anyway, all of the angst of yesterday has gone and now I'm back in a happy place. Hooray! (Angst, crankiness, and rage will surely follow as the week continues, but for now, hooray!)