A weekly collection of interesting stuff I find around the web. Found something you want to share? Put it in the comments!
What? What’s that you say? Today is TUESDAY? Yes, well, Sunday night found me stuck in Dallas and then rerouted to an airport 5o miles away from both my car and my luggage. Yesterday therefore did not go as planned. But we persevere!
All postdocs are different, but Zoe Smith and Ariana Sutton-Grier offer advice for maximizing yours.
Adjuncting is a tough position, but this article offers ways to make the experience better.
Despite its supposed time flexibility, the tenure track is not so hospitable to mothers, a new study shows, which explains why tenured faculty are still so often male.
Handling email as a faculty member is challenging, because you have to balance student desire for access with the need for faculty sanity — and sleep. How do you prevent it from creating a third shift?
An interesting review of an organization book that matches strategies to your personality type.
Despite the economic disasters putting diverse pressures on higher ed, some colleges are still rated by their employees as great places to work.
The interesting things I found around the web last week. Got something to add? Put it in the comments!
What does “adequate support” from your department and university look like in terms of developing a research agenda and eventually getting tenure? IHE blogger GMP gives you the low-down.
An associate professor’s story of applying for a new position.
The gap between men and women’s satisfaction in academia is greatest in the social sciences.
A weekly collection of links I find around the web. Enjoy!
A work-life scholar gives up tenure for love. He admits that it would be different if he were a woman.
Jessica Quillin suggests you write a one-pager for your career to get the big-picture sense of where you are and where you’re going.
One graduate students comes to the end of her submissive rope and learns the power of assertiveness.
Having self-doubt? Think like a creator, not a sponge.
Some suggestions on creating an effective adviser relationship.
Also? Have a very happy day-off-for-the-holiday-we-already-celebrated, if you indeed get this day.
Hello lovelies!
Just a reminder that today is Open Office Hours. That means I’m hanging out on the phone, excited to talk to you about whatever you’ve got on your mind, whether it’s a question about how to punctuate resumes, brainstorming what your next career might look like, or problem-solving the one you have.
I’ll be available from 1-2:30 ET today. Just call (301) 927-0083 and I’ll answer — if it’s busy, just try again in a few minutes.
Want to know more about Open Office Hours? Just click here to read all about it.
Looking forward to talking with you!
We have this idea that smart people belong in school. It’s as though we think that somehow school is the very best use of their talents, their ideas, their innovation. We think smartness is rarified, special, different, and so it must be kept in a place that is rarified, special, different.
If the last twenty years have taught us anything, however, it’s the power of smart people outside of school.
Steve Jobs? While I wouldn’t want to sit next to him at a cocktail party, I’m not sure anyone can deny that he’s really fucking smart. Atul Gawande? Really fucking smart. Joan Didion? Really fucking smart. Thich Naht Hahn? Really fucking smart.
All of these people — and countless others — have changed the world by bringing their smartness to bear on questions, contemplations, and innovations outside the classroom, outside the lecture hall, outside the lab, outside the venerated halls of thinkers. And we are better for it.
So why are we holding on to the idea that the place for smart people is school? And why are we telling ourselves that if we’re smart, we must necessarily go for the highest degree possible?
So often, that degree is supposed to reassure us that we’re smart. It’s supposed to be the unassailable proof that we’re smart, so that if we screw something up, if we make a mistake, if we try something and fall flat on our face, we can still point to the degree to prove that we’re really smart, underneath whatever just happened. And we’re mostly convincing ourselves.
What if we were able to sit in ourselves and have confidence in our own smartness, enough to follow our hearts to what we really want to do instead of what we’re expected to do? What if we were able to trust that screwing up while we experiment is, in fact, part of our smartness? What if we would could bring our smartness to bear on whatever it is that makes us passionately, excitedly happy?
For some people, yes, that will be academia. But not everyone. And if you’re in academia or contemplating academia because you’re smart and people think that, therefore, you belong in academia, please, consider what you want and where you fit into the world.
Because we need your smartness. It just may be even smarter to put it to use elsewhere.
Thanks to Jo VanEvery and Sam Ladner for the Twitter conversation that sparked this!
A weekly collection of great stuff I find as I read around the web. If you’ve read something fabulous, leave it in the comments!
Leaving a Job Gracefully, by Heather M. Whitney. Step by step instructions for leaving one academic job for another gracefully and with as few missteps as possible. Via the Prof Hacker blog of the Chronicle of Higher Education.
Stephen C. Stearn’s “Some Modest Advice for Graduate Students.” Be warned, it’s a little … blunt, and it’s geared mostly to science students. Still, he dishes out some good big-picture advice.
CHE reports on the struggle adjuncts face to get unemployment benefits when they aren’t rehired.
Eliza Woolf’s tale of botching a non-academic interview for an editorial assistant position, from Insider Higher Ed. They only seem less challenging than academic ones.
Three national groups of historians have agreed to guidelines that would open the tenure process beyond the monograph for public historians.
One scholars studies faculty burnout and suggests there are multiple factors, one of which is high expectations scholars set for themselves.
Another article on the same research reveals that non-tenured tenure-track faculty are more burned out than their tenured or non-tenure-track peers.
Carolyn Foster Segal was invited to write an inspirational book about being at the top of the academic heap, but she refused. This article explains why — she wasn’t comfortable encouraging people to follow a calling when the likelihood of it turning into a tenure-track job was so slim.
The title says it all: “The Fantasy of the Faculty Vacation.”
The reality of being a female science professor: less respect, less money, more surreal conversations with peers who think you couldn’t possibly be the researcher in question.
Rob Jenkins offers some sage advice about succeeding in the community college job search.
Michael Bérubé, second Vice President of the MLA, responds to a letter asking whether the writer should go to graduate school. While he doesn’t say yes or no, his articulate response leans towards no.
I told you a while back that my wife is starting graduate school in the fall. Theological school to be exact, and last week we went to the first orientation meeting.
In some ways it was entirely standard: These are the classes you need to take in your first thirty hours, here’s how you register, here’s how the money part of it works, please don’t mess up your student aid, really we’re all here to help you so please ask for help before you drown.
What wasn’t standard (for me in my experience of academia, not for them) was the praying, the references to the Holy Spirit, and the singing. (I’m pretty grateful my entering class did not sing at orientation. I heard them sing later, under different influences. It was all for the best.)
Two things stood out for me, though, in this orientation, two things that I think academia as a whole could do better to emulate.
Thing the first
First, the entering students were told to think about what they would have to give up in their lives for graduate school. This wasn’t particularly original, but the tone of it was. When I’ve heard this advice before, it was in the spirit of lovers throwing themselves at the feet of the beloved — you should want nothing more than this, and anything less than total dedication is a sign that you don’t love it enough.
Here, though, the advice had a different cadence. This is likely the only time, they said, when you have the opportunity to do nothing other than study. Most people who get the PhD in this field do so while working as ministers, so they’re part-time students while juggling full congregations. This three-year period really may be the only time to immerse themselves so wholly in the intellectual and spiritual engagement with the subject.
In some ways, this is also true of non-theological-graduate school — despite all of our myths to the contrary, professoring is anything but sitting around and thinking Great Thoughts. Publishing, teaching, and service are all necessary and even rewarding, but they aren’t the same as immersing oneself in the field and swimming around gladly. The early years of graduate school may be the only time that’s possible, with all of the stress and pleasure that come with it.
What this amounted to, in her orientation, was a focus on the experience and goals of the students themselves. Discipline, I’ve heard said, is remembering what you really want, and they talked about focusing on what you really want and prioritizing that during this period.
That raises the question, though, of what you really want. It’s a question too few graduate students ask themselves as they get caught up in the flow of graduate school and the expectations and ambitions of advisers and professors and administrators.
I’d argue, though, that it’s a crucial question — no matter where you are in the process. What do YOU want from this experience, this process, this degree? Why is that important to you? And how can you arrange things to meet your own goals and expectations.
Thing the second
In contrast to programs that ask you to declare your subspeciality as you walk in (more and more common these days), this program admitted from the outset that as students experienced the program, their goals, their ambitions, and their career paths would change. Because they would be learning and growing.
This is another one of those things that varies (um, like everything, really), but the impetus in most graduate programs is the Creation of Professional Academics. Everything is geared towards that end, despite the long history of degree overproduction and despite the obvious evidence that not everyone wants that outcome for themselves.
There is no way to go to graduate school and remain unchanged. It’s too long, it’s too immersive, it’s too mind-bending. But it was refreshing to see a program acknowledge and plan for the fact that people will change in ways they didn’t expect. They will become people they didn’t foresee.
All of which is to say, if you’re starting out, expect your own unexpected growth. And if you’re already in or through, it’s okay that you changed in ways that didn’t fit the linear model.
Everything in its season
Both of these themes suggest something else as well: That there will be a point at which you add things back in, because your goals are met, your changes experienced, your life in a new place.
I’ve seen too many academics come up for air and realize that they’re unhappy, not because they hate their jobs, but because they have lost contact with all of those other parts of themselves — their creativity, their joy, their playfulness, their sense of fun, their ability to relax.
It’s easy to defer them. You’ll relax once the dissertation is defended. You’ll return to your hobbies once you have a job.You’ll embark on that new thing that looks fascinating when you have tenure. There’s always something else pressing, something else important.
But if you’re unhappy, it’s worth looking at what you’ve given up, and what it might be time to add back into your daily experience of life. Because no matter where you are in the process, this IS your real life. This is the only one you have. And if you’re unhappy, it’s time to make change.
It’s the middle of June. Do you know where your energy is?
Seriously, though, if you’re still in academia, it’s probably been about a month since you finished teaching, turned in your grades, walked out of your last committee meeting, and hung up your robes from working commencement. Even if you’re teaching this summer, it’s been about a month since the packed schedules, the endless students needing your attention, the rushing around, the inbox full of items that need to be attended to now now now.
How do you feel?
This is a good time to check in with yourself, because being outside of the time pressures of the typical semester can give you a much better sense of how you feel about things.
Take your research, for instance. Are you excited by it? Bored by it? Avoiding it? Are you getting things done, noodling around without making much progress, or putting it off because hey, the World Cup only happens once every four years?
When you think about academia right now, how do you feel? Affection? Anger? Indifference? Excitement? Energy?
If you take the time to check in with yourself now, when you’ve had some time to decompress, you’ll get some really important clues — clues about what actually motivates and energizes you, clues about what drains you, clues about what you enjoy and what you merely tolerate. Figuring those things out will get you one step closer to figuring out how to adjust your life to maximize your own happiness.
So tell me: How are you feeling about it all right now? Is it different than it was during the semester? How?
It’s one thing to decide that your job is a problem and you need another one. Difficult, sure, but you know the process: search job ads, write job applications, twiddle thumbs, lather, rinse, repeat until you get an offer you like. It’s tedious, it always takes too long, and it’s stressful as all get out, but you know what you have to do.
But what if you decide that it’s the career that’s a problem, and you want another one? Where the hell do you start?
With yourself
Your skills change. Your interests shift. Your passions morph. What doesn’t change is your basic temperament. Starting with understanding how you tend to engage the world can help you better narrow down the field of possibilities from “gee, I don’t know, what could I do?” to “hey, this set of things would really suit me — what’s appealing to me?”
Enter Paul Tieger and Barbara Barron, authors of Do What You Are: Discover the Perfect Career for You Through the Secrets of Personality Type.
They argue that knowing your basic temperament can help you focus your attention on careers and jobs that are likely to match you well — making it much more likely that you’ll be satisfied in your work. They walk you through a pretty comprehensive process for finding your Myers-Briggs Type, and then they use those type categories to illustrate career possibilities you might not have considered.
What’s great about this book
There are a number of things I love about this book.
First, I’m an unrepentant personality test dork. I love them all. And this is the best practical walk-through of the Myers-Briggs I’ve come across. It’s detailed without being overwhelming and deep without being wonkish. After reading this book, I think I might actually know my damn type, which has been eluding me for years. (INTJ, if you’re interested.)
Second, they make the point over and over that any type can love and be successful in any career — it’s how that particular job is set up that makes the difference. We think about sales as an extravert-friendly, high-pressure sort of thing, for example, but they profile a seller of fine wines who is introverted and quiet.
Third, they outline a solid ten-step process for finding a next career. For those of us who like direction, it’s incredibly helpful.
It’s not perfect
For each type, they list possible career matches, but the list is both somewhat conventional and limited largely to the for-profit sector. Sure, the lists include education, health care, and counseling, but I kept wanting a broader range of career listings to help spark more brainstorming. Where are the civil service jobs? Where are the non-profit jobs?
But really, that’s a pretty small complaint all told.
Let me sum up
I’m really excited about this book because it gives people a place to start that is more personal and personalized than “list your skills.” People coming out of academia are largely going to have similar skills (public speaking, researching, writing, etc.), but we aren’t all suited to the same types of careers.
In fact, I’m so excited about this book that I’m developing a several-week, small-group telecourse based on it for later this summer to help leaving academics begin imagining what direction they might go next. Stay tuned for that!
Have you read this book? What did you think? Do you have another favorite find-your-new-career book? Share, please!
Just a reminder that our first set of Open Office Hours is tonight, 7:30-9pm ET.
If you’ve got a question, a problem, a story you want to tell, or you just want to check in with someone who understands, give me a call. I really want to hear what you’ve got to say.
More information and the number to call is here.
Looking forward to talking with you!
|
|
Introducing Open Office Hours! Sometime we all still need to sit ourselves in someone else's office chair and dump everything out -- our questions, our worries, our confusions, our hopes.
This is your opportunity to do just that. Once a month, I'm offering an hour and a half of first-come, first-served telephonic Open Office Hours.
Find out more by clicking here!
Sign up for the newsletter!
|
Recent Comments