More for less?

This year and probably in coming years I am making less money than in previous years. When employees make less money morale tends to drop and consequently their productivity drops too. The one question I am asking myself this year is: Am I working more or as much as last year? A positive answer should give pause. Should I really work more or harder or the same if I'm earning less money? Maybe I should make different priorities? Maybe I should spend more time with my family, work on the house (which is the one asset that still has value at least for me) focus more rigorously on research and less on, heaven forbid, dare I say it--OK, I'll say it hushed tones--teaching or advising. Certainly I can take less time on committee work. But then again maybe this is the message in this economy and in the wake of the financial meltdown. To be fair, employers are struggling to balance their budgets too. It just seems that the "little guy" or "main street" has to bear the irresponsibility of a financial system that overleveraged itself, to put in mildly, and then gets bailed out because we can't function without them. To repeat Slavoj Zizek's recent query: What kind of society permits such blackmail?

For Zizek see Harper's Magazine, October 2009, "To Each According to His Greed" in the Readings section. It's online.

Golden Age?

My Hispanic Civ/Culture class just finished studying and discussing the Spanish Middle Ages. We are now into the so-called Spanish Golden Age. Maybe it's just me, but can anyone defend this label given the increased and ultimately absolute intolerance, fanaticism, more religious war, and economic mismanagement seen between 1500 and 1700? I understand the term may be more applicable to literature and fine arts, but I hardly see the relevance to political and social life. Is this still a valid term in critical circles? Is the term now Early Modern? The Middle Ages seem more golden than what immediately succeeded this period.

Furloughs etc.

Interesting situation out West. Here the college has suspended retiremement contributions resulting in a 5% pay cut. Other colleges and corporations have taken identical measures to balance budgets. I took a quick glance at the MLA job list last night. At the moment there are about 75 postings in Spanish. If memory serves, there were at least twice that many last year at this time. More listings will trickle in, but I'll be surprised if there are more than half as many as there has been in recent years. The list usually reaches a couple hundred postings.

Furloughs

For those of you not happily employed by the State of California, the word "furlough" may bring up images of soldiers on leave. In my case, it's professors on leave. We have two furlough days this month: the Friday before and the Tuesday after Labor Day. For me that works out to one instructional day and one non-instructional day.

In addition to four fixed furlough days throughout the semester, we're expected to choose another five, for a total of nine. There is something of a furor among the professoriat about whether we should be taking furloughs on instructional days (to make some sort of political point) or non-instructional days (so as not to harm students any further than they are already being harmed).

When I said I'm taking all of my non-fixed furlough days on non-instructional days, I was told "that's just what they want you to do." They (presumably, the nefarious powers that be) apparently are counting on the good will of professors who are unwilling to completely eviscerate their classes. On the other hand, by taking furloughs on non-instructional days, I'm not really taking days off, since I use those days for prepping.

At the UC, meanwhile, professors have been told that all of their furlough days will have to be non-instructional.

For those of my colleagues in the CSU system, what's your plan?

A Piece of the American Dream

A couple of weeks ago we had the chance to visit Mike and the family at their new home in Brentwood (not the Brentwood in West L.A., but the one in Northern California). Here are some pictures of the man of the family at their new abode.

Teaching philosophy revisited

Gentlemen:

I’m updating my Working Personnel Action File (WPAF), and I find myself revisiting my Statement of Teaching Philosophy. If you’ll pardon the random musing, I thought I’d throw a few things out there. I know I’ve broached this issue before, but I am interested in feedback.

I think we all recognize a certain amount of tension surrounding various related questions: What is the proper mission of a university? What role should a liberal education play in that mission? How do the Humanities fit into this mission? And, finally, what role does language education play?

I used to bemoan the “trade school” mentality of the modern university, believing instead that the value of a university education lies not in the marketable skills learned, but in other, less quantifiable areas. I really do believe that, more than marketable skills, a university ought to help students acquire habits of mind that will enable them to be better, more reflective, citizens.

Nevertheless, there are problems with that idealized view. Regardless of the ideal, the reality is that many, if not most, students think of a university education as a commodity. They are buying a product that promises them a) career preparation, b) a piece of paper that certifies that they have acquired career preparation and c) the enhanced stature that having that piece of paper (sometimes) brings with it. Our society has fetishized college to the point that many, many people who have no need for, nor business being in, college, find themselves paying for a product (the piece of paper) that gives them a certain amount of distinction or social capital, but that in the end has little value in terms of career preparation. Meanwhile, there are so many consumers of this product, that the weight once associated with it is diminishing.

So what does this mean in terms of a Teaching Philosophy? It is very hard to sell the Humanities as career preparation, but there still is a need for areas of study that will produce well-rounded citizens. I think my philosophy needs to recognize that students seek marketable skills, but that they may not recognize the marketability of the sorts of skills that the humanities provides. Language skills have particular “real world” applicability, but literature is less quantifiable. I used to say that the study of literature is not its own reward, but it might be more useful, from a marketing standpoint, to say that it provides students with critical thinking and analytical skills that are applicable beyond the realm of literature.

I recognize that these are not new ideas, but every time our department is asked to come up with a mission statement, or do an internal review of our programs, the reaction is whining and moaning. The attitude of many people is that the benefits of our programs are self-evident, so we shouldn’t have to go through the effort of “selling” them. I wonder, though, is that attitude is about to be overtaken by reality.

Accessorize your Utilikilt

Want to buy a Utilikilt, but afraid that your legs will get too cold (or perhaps are unfashionably mannish)? Try mantyhose. Surely there's a conference session here somewhere. How about "Control top and Subversive (E)masculinities: Applying Contemporary Scrotal Theory."