Survey Monkey

Since I won’t be in class tonight (Dr. Mahoney please let me know if you got my email and Conference Proposal attachment), I thought I’d offer some content for the survey.

1. Ways to improve the website.
                        -For example, when I was looking at grad schools to attend, I found that the Graduate Dept. website was very confusing. Maybe just list the Version III program, and offer links to the others.

2. Class selection.
                        -Knowing further in advance what classes will be offered when and if at all.

3. Choosing a professor to be a representative for the capstone project and more information about the project in general. Can/Should examples be given?

4. How to choose a faculty member as a mentor for the thesis option

5. Areas of the discipline where classes seem to be lacking or not offered at all

That’s all I have for now! I hope that everyone can muster on without me tonight.

Straight Man

So I spent alot of time on the Conference Proposal this week, in addition to finishing up projects for 3 other classes – yay having a blend of masters and undergrad work, where each sabotages the other.  i did get a good chunk of Straight Man read, and as the others have said, it was very enjoyable reading, and a nice departure from the academic literature we’ve been studying.  I have to say though… I feel like I probably wouldn’t like this protagonist in real life.  I just think we wouldn’t get along.  I’m too sensitive, and I’d probably be in the category of people that take him too seriously and become outraged, as opposed to the category of people that know him too well and refuse to take him seriously at all.

Im considering actually turning in the proposal, but I’ve only got two days to decide.  As with the book review, I started out pretty bored with it, but managed to get swept up.  My personality tends to be like that.  The writing was reminiscent to me of my journalist studies, and it was really fun to write a persuasive, witty, SHORT piece   Hopefully we will share them in class tonight – if not, I’d like to post it and let people have at it with the criticism

There must be something wrong with me.

Office Hours was vaguely interesting for me, but I didn’t feel the outrage that seemed to be required, maybe because of my lack of direction. So I have to conclude that there’s something wrong with me, since Straight Man gave me horrified chills. This isn’t the correct reaction, yes?

I don’t think I’ve felt this way since I read Running with Scissors. Both times I felt a terrible fascination, like it was a train wreck and I just couldn’t look away. Don’t get me wrong, there were definitely parts of this book that had me laughing out loud, one such moment being when Hank has Finny (the goose, not the man) by the neck and he’s swinging him around yelling about how he’ll kill a duck a day if he doesn’t get his budget. The image this conjured in my head was so ridiculous that it took me the better part of three hours to take it back down to a hiccupping giggle. But overall I just felt this strange mixture of pity and indigestion. Maybe I’m just not cut out for realistic fiction. Maybe it reminds me too much of my own life. Not that Hank and I had too much in common, but maybe we just had too much in common.

Viewing this book in relation to Office Hours, I can definitely see the connection. Office Hours gave a very dry recitation of the situation in academia today, where Straight Man gave us an absurdist view. Neither was better or worse in their representation of the material, but, despite needing an Alka-Seltzer to read it, I would choose Straight Man hands down every time if someone were to ask me which book presents a better view of the situation. Sometimes, you just need a little absurdity to make the medicine go down.

Office Hours

Sorry I didn’t post prior to class. Apparently, the site wasn’t updating properly for me so I didn’t see anyone’s post until I got home.

Anyway, I’m just going to keep this short, since I already said most of what I wanted to say in class. I do want to ask this question (and please don’t skewer me alive for it!): Why is it so bad to be a public school teacher with a PhD? I understand that it’s always been a sort of unspoken rule that you once you achieved your Master’s you set out to teach college. It’s also been a sort of unspoken understanding that people who could teach college don’t teach primary and secondary schooling. I’ve never had a teacher with his/her PhD and the only one I’ve ever encountered is a man who has been a long-term sub in our building this year. We all seem to either avoid him or look at him as though he were an anomaly, a cipher, a….weirdo.

Isn’t this whole thing exactly the kind of classicism that we’ve been talking about with this book and with some of the previous books? Automatically assuming that anyone who was smart enough and dedicated enough to get a PhD should “demean” themselves by teaching in a primary or secondary school is just continuing this idea that professor are demi-gods to be feared (though truly I still fear! Don’t strike me down, oh Mahoney, god of the insanely big words like obfuscation!) This is probably where part of the problem comes in for me. I see no reason in the world not to chase a PhD in English. But I have no desire to teach anything but 7th grade. If I earned my PhD, I fully believe I would begin to feel pressure from all sides, urging me to leave. I can’t imagine the other faculty looking at me and saying “Hey! So glad you’re staying here with your PhD” because I’m sure secretly they’d be saying “Hey! Why are you staying here with your PhD? You’re earning more than us!” And I’m equally sure the administration would be saying the same thing except “We’re paying you too much!” This, I guess, is the OVER-qualified paradox.

I guess I am too much of an idealist. I think you should be able to do what you want, how you want. If you’re getting better pay as a secondary teacher with a PhD than as a professor, why not stay and teach secondary? Why does it have to be wrong? Why does it have to be deemed as “not living up to your potential?”

lion tail?

theend

depressing but inspiring

The flu finally got me and got me bad.  Sorry to miss class tonight but I’m still not feeling well and didn’t want to spread it around.

Office Hours made transparent many of the double-standards, unethical behaviors, and hypocrisies that have reigned supreme in the ivory towers of academia since I first entered them decades ago.  What a pleasure to see insiders stand on principle and risk alienation by their colleagues and loss of rewards accrued by those willing to remain silent or play along as though nothing were wrong.  Activists like Nelson and Watt, along with other faculty members, graduate students, and part-timers who organize and fight for equitable employment practices and policies that protect academic freedom and the rights of minorities, surely they represent the best, if not only, hope for the future of the university as we once knew it or imagined it: a place for the free dissemination of ideas, for the opportunity to explore all avenues of knowledge — not merely those deemed useful or worthy by corporate business interests — that we might gain a greater understanding of our current conditions through studying the thoughts, theories, events, and imaginings of those who came before us.  As the gradual corporatization of academia creeps into the humanities and university publishing houses choking out research that doesn’t meet corporate interests and killing off literature classes that don’t promote profits, we will all need Cary Nelson’s rhetorical skills and commitment to fight for what we hold dear.

Although Nelson and Watt clearly represent a very small minority of tenured faculty who care about establishing equitable employment practices and academic polices that serve non-tenured faculty, graduate students and part-timers, their devotion to an activist agenda is both inspiring and informative.  In the chapter Organizational Affiliation and Change Nelson shows how involvement with organizations such as the MLA and the AAUP enabled him to network with multiply affiliates to eventually conduct a nationwide survey of part-time faculty salaries, benefits, and working conditions in 5,200 English and foreign language departments.  After two years of research, networking and resisting those who didn’t want departments identified by name or wanted only a small, anonymous sampling instead of the full number, Nelson’s group won and the survey went through.  With this news out in the open, universities began to be exposed for their unfair labor practices and small changes started to be made.  What struck me most about this significant piece of activism was how many people it took to make it happen.   A companion proposal, another survey on individual graduate programs in which the schools were named, helped to push it through.

Office Hours…am I reading the same thing aaaaaaaaaaaagain??

I truly feel as though I am reading the same thing over and over. Kevin aka Dr. Mahoney aka Teach- this is not a slam on you, but I have had it with these English Studies texts. I guess I am just very ready for Christmas Break. OK, so since I do need to make a comment on this text, here we go. “Office Hours” was alright I suppose. I didn’t love it and certainly will not re-gift it to anyone I hope to see again in the near future, haha just kidding. I really enjoyed page 34. On page 34, “In the end ‘now is not the time’ means nothing more than ‘not on my watch, not while my privileges are at stake.’ ‘This is not a real political struggle’ presumably reflects the mixture of denial and other wordliness and guilt that permits faculty to claim the campus is not the real world.” I think this is so true. The section continues to note the struggles for graduate students as staff members and part-time staff members. Nelson and Watt continue on page 35, “Liek it or not, we have to conclude that a progressive politics invested primarily in one’s ego and validated exclusively by career accomplishments can to lead to a social blindness that contradicts most progressive traditions and commitments. Much in the professional reward system enhances this tendency.” I agree with this. This seems so backwards. AGAIN…we need a change. Why is it that certain staff members at institutions are weighted as seemingly more important than others. If they are all teaching the future leaders, the students of today will be the active citizens of tomorrow… why in the world are they treated so differently. And can someone please explain to me how exactly we are suppose to encourage more students to go for their masters and PHDs when there are too many people searching for these jobs and not enough positions to accomodate their intentions? I understand democracy and I understand polictics. I also can understand that perhaps part-time employees are not afforded health benefits, not only in the educational system, but pretty much in any workplace. What I can not wrap my mind around is that the egos of the tenured faculty (for the most part, not everyone of course) get in the way of these key figures calling for a reform to the current system that has existed for decades. When in the world are we going to see a change. Are the egos of the accomplished really going to hold back their brothers and sisters of English studies…. of this discipline. Why can’t each instructor of whatever level be valued for their individual contributions to the study of this area and leave it at that. so here is a HUGE question…Does the government need to be involved in all levels of education? Should the government take some responsibility away. I don’t know if I like this idea at all…but what are the alternatives? It seems that numerous scholars have picked up on the flaws and are writing in order to demand a change, but what are they really DOING to make changes occur?? Will we see these changes? Why is everyone so afraid? Change can be GOOD. Urggh…so here we are again…discussing the issues of what needs to change. We can write about it forever, but when will someone ACT?

Nothing says “Happy Holidays” like this book

Well, reading Office Hours was certainly depressing. It seems that the recurring theme everywhere I look these days is that life as we know it is going to cease to exist. Everything is in turmoil, the economy, democracy, education, the ozone, healthcare, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the world is going to end…blah, blah, blah, blah, blah…Of course, why shouldn’t the university system and English be added to that list of things we know are in trouble but are refusing to fix? It becomes wearisome just listening to everything that is wrong with our world, and, when you throw the fall of English into the equation, it just becomes too much.

Still, since everyone already covered the fact that this book is a downer, I will just highlight some things that I found interesting/shocking.  First, I found it amusing and disgusting that the “elite academics” (a.k.a. the MLA board members or whatever title they gave themselves) seemed to fail to recognize the problem going on with post-doc students and temporary faculty. To claim ignorance is ridiculous.  Anyone that attends a university (well, most universities anyway) can see the large amounts of temporary faculty that appear and disappear each year. If these “elitists” who love English so much really cared about the subject and its relevance and survival in the future, they would be much more concerned with this growing problem and make a serious effort to remediate it. Clearly, it is a case of people that are not affected by this problem YET not caring enough to say anything. Unfortunately, until these very people admit that there is a problem and pledge their support to fix it, nothing will change.

I also found the section on student debt shocking. Of course, as a student myself, I realize the tremendous costs of an education. However, I cannot imagine being in debt $100,000 or more and being able to pay that off and live, especially on a professor’s salary. What is more, I never realized how poorly temporary faculty were paid, so it is unrealistic to think that they could ever have a life that was debt-free. It is no wonder that so many people quit the profession–you have to make a living somehow.

The section on textbook reform was also eye-opening. Who knew the costs of printing a single poem!  People always complain that the same old things are taught.  No wonder!  What a hassle it is to actually get permission to publish a poem.  You would think that most poets would be honored to be included in an anthology and would relent on the high prices in order to have the recognition that would come with being included among other great poets. Still, I was waiting for him to say something about textbooks–he didn’t really. Although you could infer the ramifications that high prices have on textbooks and what they include, I felt the chapter was more about promoting and defending his own anthology (well, hey, I guess since this is his book, he can do that). However, it was a tad self-indulgent, and a better title for the chapter could have been chosen.  I also felt that the following chapter about the internet followed the same lines–his website, MAPS, was featured. He talked about how great it was as a resource. I did go on to check it out, and I will admit that it is pretty interesting that it provides criticisms on the poems and that normal people could perhaps publish something on there themselves.

Ona final note, the amount of post-doc students without a job was eye-opening. I had not realized the situation was that bad. It is difficult to come up with a viable solution. I did appreciate Nelson’s efforts at his own university to create a program that would employ their own post-docs, even if the program created some negative effects. At least they were trying to help them out. What this definitely made me realize was how glad I am that I DO NOT want to get my doctorate and DO NOT want to teach at a university. If I did have those aspirations, this book would have crushed my hopes. I feel bad for those people that do have these aspirations, though, because getting your doctorate is such a special, impressive accomplishment, and the fact that the degree is becoming devalued is a shame. It is another sign that our society’s value of education is declining all the way around, on every level. When professors are not even respected, is there any hope for the rest of us?

Shooting the Sh**

Cary Nelson and Stephen Watt enjoy shooting the shit. Urban Dictionary defines “shooting the shit” as 1.) Talking with others just to pass the time, the topic of conversation may vary, but in general there is no point to be made.  Of course, Nelson and Watt’s are making a point to take collective action to save academia from the corporate University–a serious topic.  Often, however, serious topics are part of shooting the shit. Here’s an example: I don’t want to go to war in Afghanistan, and can shoot the shit about it all day long with customers, but that didn’t stop the President (a lefty disappointment) from promising 30,000 troops to Afghanistan. So, in the end, what is the point, Dr. Nelson and Dr. Watt?  Even our best hopes in leadership seem to get sucked into the power-chain in a hyper-complex mess. Can we really move past shooting the shit–I mean beyond a few absurdly risky successes and change higher ed’s path away from the business model? I mean, come ‘on, even volunteer groups are organized like a bureaucracy.

Maybe it’s me. I’m feeling a bit overwhelmed by the status quo, which Nelson and Watt seem to make worse in the beginning of this creative non-fiction/memoir(?)  I’m actually relieved when they move into Chapter 8, “Is It a University or a Country Club?” At least the tree-hugger-neo hippy imagery (stereotype) made me smile. After each narrative, the authors initials appear giving each account authority. However, the writing style appears more myth-making with Watt and Nelson as the tragic heroes rather than a multi-perspective academic read. I do like these guys since they are fighting for adjuncts’ and grad assistants’ rights to living wages and health insurance. They write, “Our main aims are to reform the MLA and other disciplinary and interdisciplinary affiliations” by focusing on labor issues–improving working conditions for the contingent staff while also increasing the tenure/full-time positions. In other words, the affiliations act like a lobbying group such as the AARP, where collectively their influence can (and does in AARP’s case) make a difference in the decisions made by administrators, politicians, that may become trickle-down from a nearly dried-up fund.  At the moment, many of these higher ed affiliations are “elite clubs” that are very much like Plato’s republic order where the elite make the decisions for the masses of underpaid. Nelson and Watts argument to see the English studies workforce as it is rather than as a status symbol might make the MLA a viable organization again (besides arguing over italics for titles instead of underlines).

Where they lose credibility is in the editorial sarcasm. I know it is so hard to control it! lol. However, they could be a little more subtle about who they don’t like (or don’t agree with them). For instance, they write, “Yale postcolonialism theorist Sara Suleri turned in her student teaching assistant, then crisscrossed the country in a mink coat purchased with profits from the goodyear company’s Asian rubber plantation” (110). Although Nelson makes clear that he is using his personal experiences, these “gossipy” details detract from his arguments. I think its very fair to say that the MLA president was against graduate assistants joining MLA because leadership does set the tone, and indeed, this account might be crossed-referenced with historical documents. But mink coats and Asian rubber is shaky. This is hearsay–and yes–it is a provocative, memorable detail that will be repeated. And in a grass roots effort, winning hearts (key in moving people to act) is about creating the right myths. Perhaps that is their point to include it? I wouldn’t want to think it was just a hard-ball to the conservatives. They are asking for the near impossible and therefore if they are the heroes, we need to have some demons, right? Did they wear capes and use fans to blow their hair while sitting in their offices writing this stuff?

Now, my experience with Cary Nelson is pedagogical. I use his MAPS website as a regular reference for class lessons. LOVE IT!! Also, Nelson did manage to conduct his wage survey which lead to improving salaries. Perhaps my issue is whether shooting the shit belongs in a published argument. Nelson and Watt put their names behind these stories, but are we looking at unreliable narrators without the other side? If they are talking ethics at the center of their changes, should they be demonizing?

Going Down with the Ship

Here’s a quick test of your knowledge of English studies. 

Choose the quote that doesn’t apply to what we have learned this semester:

A.  Many speak of the discipline of English studies as being in crisis-a kind of identity crisis wherein we as a field are desperately attempting to pin down exactly what constitutes the discipline.

B.  English studies is in a crisis.  Indeed virtually no feature of the discipline can be considered beyond dispute.

C.  Higher education as we have known it for nearly half a century is in the process of unraveling.

D.  I know this isn’t scientific, but this ship’s warning me she’s gonna die and take a lot of people with her.

E.  None of the above.

The correct answer is…E, although partial credit will be given to those who guessed D.  Did you recognize these?   Answer A is the opening line in Transforming English Studies; B is found in Berlin’s intro to Rhetorics, Poetics, and Culture; and C is how the uplifting tome Office Hours begins.  An argument could be made that Answer D also applies to all we have learned about English studies; however, this quote is not found in any of the readings.  It’s actually what Thomas Andrews the Managing Director of Harland and Wolff Shipyards said about the Titantic when it was built there. Seems rather fitting, don’t you think?  

While I was feeling a little nervous about my cruise on the S.S. English Studies before,  after reading Office Hours, I have now donned my life jacket and am starting to calculate the swim to shore if I decide to jump overboard.  According to Nelson and Watt, if I were to take the plunge, I wouldn’t be alone in the water.  Since there’s a 50% attrition rate from grad programs (23), there will be a number of other English majors out there drowning with me.  And those who are persistent enough to stay on the ship,a length of about 8 years plus under tough conditions (205), will find themselves drowning in debt once they disembark.  When they reach their final destinations with PhD in hand, they will discover that the natives (the tenured professors in those bastions of liberalism) will maintain a “don’t worry, be happy” attitude as they are enslaved in low paying adjunct positions.  Instead of  throwing out a life perserver to help these poor souls, those in control on Paradise Island are building bigger and better football stadiums and food courts. While a few of the brave and the bold in academia are attempting to act as a rescue team,  their main advice to the drowning is to try and stick together.  At this point, it seems that those floundering without tenure track positions are simply treading water until someone with money rents a fleet of lifeboats and starts saving them.  The chances of this happening are mighty slim since the powerful are busy negotiating the rights to their next book.   I don’t mean to sound naive, but to paraphrase Goldie Hawn in the movie Private Benjamin:   “I think they sent me to the wrong place.  I did join a graduate program in English, but I think I joined a different graduate program.  I joined the one with the jobs and the bright future.”

Office Hours, despite it’s great sarcasm and humor, is no book for the beach.  Instead it’s yet another SOS which proves that while the band is playing on deck , the English studies ship is sinking.

Thanksgiving and Giving thanks.

Last week just flew past me. Wednesday to Sunday seemed like a single day to me. What with the Turkeys and all that goes with them thereafter? After Thanksgiving day, to me, came the day of giving thanks. After four and a half years, my cousin in Kenya, who is surprisingly a head of department at a University already, was receiving his Ph.D on Friday! And celebrations began in earnest at 10.40am Kenyan time. At last there now seems to be a light at the end of the tunnel, and not a fight any more. But since this is neither here nor there, safe for the fact that it is a Ph.D issue and Dr. Mahoney’s class this week is on the same, I rest the case – still in a celebratory mood.

What did strike me in Office Hours is the issue of educators cleverly circumnavigating the curriculum to suit the subjects of the day depending on the circumstances:

Teachers are entitled to freedom in the classroom in discussing

their subject, but they should be careful not to introduce into

their teaching controversial matter which has no relation to their

subject…The intent of this statement is not to discourage what is

‘controversial.’ Controversy is at the heart of free academic inquiry

 which the entire statement is designed to foster. The passage serves

to underscore the need for teachers to avoid persistently intruding

material which has no relation to their subject.(p5/6)

Hidden subject provides the opportunity to, in a careful and yet professional manner, for a clever teacher to bring into class discussion issues that would otherwise have never crossed the threshold into ‘normal’ classroom. It ain’t a faus pax for teachers to, once in a while, allow their students to engage in discussing issues outside the curriculum because their role is not simply of “…covering declared subject matter but also…one of modeling responsible and politically engaged citizenship.”(p7). And since citizens are not only found in our high schools but also in our universities as well, in fact in all our institutions, we need to change them all for better.

            It was an eye opener for me to also learn that on top of discriminating graduate students in terms of remuneration, some institutions also disregard them simply because of their age as exemplified by the luminaries of the prestigious English Institute when they concluded that “…no good work was being done by anyone under fifty.” This quickly sent me thinking about my own country where some senior professors have “frustrated” countless graduate students for years on end because they don’t want their “exclusive club” to be overcrowded. My weekend merry-making cannot be more justified, ergo.

            To change the system, as nelson and watt argue, it will need the voluntary effort of graduate students to slowly but surely move along the corridors of institutions of higher learning, the courage to knock on their colleagues’ doors, the patience to discuss, argue and convince, and galvanize all like-minded individuals so as to have one unified voice in addressing the problems affecting the entire field. A collective bargaining power so to say. However, this is not a fire-fighting activity, and therefore no one should expect it to bear fruits overnight. It will take time. And as Nugent put it in his book, change is always taking place. What we need are catalysts to speed up the process. I’m ready and willing!

12/2

So i have a problem this week. Due to lack of funds, i have been buying the books one at a time, instead of in a lump sum at the beginning of the semester.  The bookstore, apparently, stops carrying all the books for all the classes towards the end of the semester.  It makes perfect sense… if we assume that all the world has the financial capability to put out 500 dollars in one day for books sometime in september. I do not fall into that category, and my last trip to the book store on Monday was unsuccessful – they no longer had Office Hours.  I DID manage to get Straight Man, so I should be good for next week, but I’m gonna be the odd man out during conversation this week it seems. 

Hopefully well get off on some conversation about animals being people and the sun that shines inside, and then Ill be able to add my two cents to those discussions

I am excited for the conference proposals, however, and will look forward to that portion of class!

Nice little Thanksgiving read

There’s a couple things I’ve learned during my time at Kutztown. I’ve learned that Jenna Jameson is a feminist, that men change G strings too, and never to do a paper topic even remotely related to Megan’s (paper topic). I’ve learned not to suggest to the chair of the department that you could do a thesis while taking two classes (even if that’s not what I meant) and I’ve definitely learned that when Dr. Mahoney says a book is going to be a downer, man, he ain’t lying.

Nelson and Watt had me looking off of a fourth story ledge ready to take the plunge. The book, while it is incredibly well written and actually quite funny, made me so depressed if by doing nothing else than by confirming my own cynical beliefs and bringing to light new problems that plague higher education (that terrorism bit was a nice touch) that half way through I was ready to abandon the whole thing (school) completely and move to a cabin in Montana (Why Montana? Because I was watching a special on the Unabomber. Does that mean I’m going to mail people bombs? No. People go to Montana for other stuff too you know. Although what that other stuff is I can only imagine) and that was just the Introduction.

In all sincerity I think Nelson and Watt are very much in tune with the vast array of issues that face higher education in a post-9/11 world (I hate that term by the way because it’s so overused) and what’s more is, they seem to have a vested interest in seeing to it that higher education make the necessary adjustments to weather the storm and emerge relatively unscathed with scholars still eager and able to contribute to the academic canon.

I moved directly from the Intro. to Chapter 9 because I needed a pick me up (and the booze wasn’t helping) and I will say that it did sort of help. I think the prospect of activism within higher education is very real and necessary if we are the cure the ills that hinder our growth. I was reminded of the recent occupation by students at the University of California at Santa Cruz to protest tuition hikes and also the protest at my former home, the New School for Social Research (who is a whore by the way) to protest the lack of student involvement. These examples, if nothing else, should demonstrate for us that while things may be bleak (and they are) things can improve through collective action and with the help of a couple people who are willing to get knocked around in the name of change. I hate to go out on such a cheery, optimistic note (it makes me feel dirty all over) but that’s about all I got. Maybe I’ll go read the Introduction again

The On-the-Ground Approach to Changing the Academy

I really enjoyed reading this book. It is clear that the authors are dyed-in-the-wool activists, and while they are agitating here on the dire state of college English studies, one gets the impression they are spoiling to join an argument on just about anything else.

The topics covered in the essays create an excellent overall picture of higher education, along with some related areas that we’ve not heard about in our earlier readings, such as the need for reform in textbook publishing. The author’s knowledgeable but wry explanation of his involvement in an anthology-creation process was both interesting and informative. On every subject, Nelson and Watt make their point of urgent need for wholesale change compellingly: the concrete examples they discuss are real eye-openers, whether it is the NCAA salary-deal question of Mr. Brand’s at IU, or the astonishing obduracy of Indiana Club LLC in their ultimately unsuccessful drive to build their world-class golf course. These are but two of many in the book: my favorite was Mr. Watt’s lead-in to his rant against the scholastically stifling excesses of Institutional Review Boards (incredibly, his having to undergo repeated intestinal biopsies as a “regular duty” of his summer job). The unfairness of the tenure-track system, the increasing allegiance of established professors to themselves instead of to faculty or institution, and the problem of equitable pay treatment for postdoctoral candidates are all well-documented problems that Nelson and Watt highlight very effectively, and are undeniably within the scope of any efforts at improving higher education. However, some of the issues raised, such as the alarming rise in debt accumulation by college students (both grad and undergrad) and the ominous global influence of the World Bank/IMF/ITO cabal that the authors detail, might be considered instead aspects of broader economic problems in current society; nevertheless, I loved the biting tone of “Counter Manifesto.”
What struck me most about the book was its emphasis on individual responsibility, the authors’ conviction that the faculty have both the power and the obligation to effect changes to the system. And apart from the swipe the authors take at Harold Bloom (noting the critic’s claim that recent Native American and Harlem Renaissance poets’ work has no literary merit), their explanation of the versatility and classroom use of MAPS as a Web-based tool capable of “reforming and informing” the profession seems sound. And just for a reality check, I intend to check out some of the books they cite as noteworthy commentary, like Dubson’s Ghosts in the Classroom.

Reactions to Office Hours

Even though I didn’t directly read through Office Hours, (I skipped around) I have to say that I did enjoy it. The tone, I felt, was on my level, as if Nelson and Watt were coworkers having a conversation with me after work. I enjoyed how they put things into perspective for English majors, especially English teachers. As I was reading chapter one and Nelson mentions, “A teacher of composition may easily grade 120 papers a week” (21), I was ready to throw in the towel. But then I started thinking, “well, it’s not like all the grading is a surprise. I knew signing up for this brought with it a ton of grading.” Although this thinking doesn’t make the papers go away, it at least helped to remind me that reading student work and helping them improve is something that I’m good at and enjoy. Otherwise, I wouldn’t be where I am today.

Anyway, I was really interested in the chapter “The Economics of Textbook Reform.” I wasn’t really sure what the point was of this chapter, but it did open my eyes as to how expensive books are and why professors are sometimes limited with what they can teach. I also liked “Transforming Teaching and Reaching the Public on the Internet.” I often think about my undergraduate classes and how little technology was used for instruction. However, secondary schools are urged to use technology as much as possible. I just feel like this was a huge disconnect for the students. This chapter, though, shows the progress of technology at the post-secondary level. I thought the assignment of the analysis of poems sounded interesting and gives students a purpose and ownership for analyzing poems and literature. It would be nice to see more professors get on board with these ideas.

Overall, Office Hours was one of our more enjoyable readings. I just never really understood how “English” could be in so much trouble. Sometimes I wish I could go back to my world before I had all this knowledge, but maybe it’s because of people that think like me that makes the discipline stay the way it is.

“Come with me if you want to live.”

I’m really into Office Hours. In fact, I’m so into it that I have really put off finishing my conference paper draft for Wednesday. Let that be fair warning Dr. Mahoney.

Allow me enlighten you all with a story.

When I was a young girl, I used to watch Terminator 1 & 2 constantly (as in many times a week) despite the fact that each time I watched either of the movies I would have horrific dreams of machines that won’t die, nuclear wars, and of course the ever terrifying T-1000. (For the record, I can’t watch any movies starring Robert Patrick even today.)

So why am I telling you this?

Well, let’s think about it. I was completely obsessed with something that ultimately scared the shit out of me. In fact, it still does. As embarrassing as it is to admit, I still snap awake at the first metallic body that morphs into my dreams – but you better believe that I’m tuned into Encore Action on the weekends anticipating the obligatory title screen with sweet 80s robot graphics.

I feel the same way about pursuing my doctoral degree - even more so after reading much of Office Hours.  I really really really want to get my degree because it is the ONLY thing on my bucket list to do and I have so much passion for all things English that it would be the biggest indignation not to do it. unfortunately, as I wrote in my personal study plan, I live in the real world. A world that survives through the dollar. A world that doesn’t care if I love Robert Frost or T.S. Eliot. A world where I’m a high school English teacher and my fiancee is a court reporter, and the University of Penn will either laugh at my application or rape me of my hard-earned money.

But just as I still love watching Terminator 1 & 2, I’ll continue to pursue this career path even if it only ever leads me to being a high school English teacher with a few extra letters at the end of my name. Is it terrifying? Sure.

We may all struggle and become “whores” to the profession the rest of our lives. We may have to sacrifice. We may have our dreams crushed. We will either become the distant and unaware Sander Gilmans of the world, or perhaps the more intuitive yet soul smashing Michael Dubsons. However, the dark underbelly of the post-doc world isn’t a secret. I think after reading all that we’ve read in this class we understand what challenges we’ll face. I just think Cary Nelson and Stephen Watt say it better.

 

Okay, now I’m really starting to freak out

“Yet seven years in a comp paper writing sweat shop is not the most benign gift higher education has ever offered” (42).

First it was Scholes telling me there are far more PhDs than there are jobs;  now, Cary Nelson is painting a thoroughly tragic picture of the post-doc world.

Nelson writes, “As many graduates learn instead, the PhD can mean the end of their careers rather than the beginning of a better phase” (43).  Um, what?  Nelson describes a constant struggle for new post-doc graduates, one that doesn’t seem to have any indication of improving any time soon (nor does it look like departments want this to change: they get quality teachers for practically nothing).  I think most people (myself included until I stepped into this class) have an image of college professors with office walls lined with leather-bound books, suede patches on the elbows of blazers, and–that almighty holy grail–tenure.  All of that has come crashing down.  Nelson recognizes that a change needs to be made, but it is really a fruitless endeavor.  Even his attempt to create a kind of safety net for his post-docs at Champaign-Urbana has swiftly lead to resentment and the hiring of post-docs from other institutions, completely defeating the purpose of the program, which is to help their graduate students prepare themselves for a full-time teaching position.

And then there is the money…

As Nelson points out, there is a drastic cut in pay once PhDs head out into the “real world” of professorship, which seems completely contradictory.  Example: “Rutgers University pays many of its graduate student teaching assistants a sound $6,000 per course; upon completing their degrees they are eligible for part-time teaching at $2,400 per course” (43).  Taking out my handy calculator, that would be $12,000 for five classes.  Hello poverty line!  Personally, I really don’t want to be a 30-year-old “doctor” living at home, and I’m pretty sure my PhD and I would get laughed out of the welfare office.

As I continue to search through PhD programs, I like to look at where the program’s PhD candidates have ended up.  While the majority are teaching, I do see some who have gone into corporate or government jobs.  This seems like a far more promising path than staying in academia.  After all, why would I want to stay in a field which seems so intent on treating me like crap?  I may love English, but it doesn’t seem like English is ready to love me back.

We’re ALL Teachers of English

**Was locked out of word press and was not able to post this yesterday prior to class**

Article 4: We’re ALL Teachers of English- by Caren J. Town

Wow- what a new concept: high school teachers and college educators working together in order to bridge the academic gap between these two institutions. Wait, I think Scholes might have written a little something about this same topic in much greater depth. Ahh… Yes a little piece called “The Rise and Fall of English Studies”. High schools and colleges have existed for hundreds of years. Now, why has it taken US-people in this field-to realize that a disconnect does in fact exist and that it needs to be addressed- not only for students, but for their educators as well. The government is heavily involved in high school curriculum standards and decisions and of course has its hands in Education curriculums and colleges and universities. They have made arbitrary standardized tests that are designed to gauge a student’s knowledge in one way—as mentioned on pages 55 and 56 by Caren J. Town in her article “We are ALL Teachers of English” –yet these same students, less than a year later or so are expected to evaluate and value texts  in a very different way. The texts are to be appreciated for their artistic and rhetorical value on the college level and the basic mechanics of composition are the primary focus the twelve years preceeding college admission. So here is the first disconnect, the bigger issue becomes that in the past we have assumed a certain responsibility of familes to produce their children to be educated citizens and now that responsibility is falling with greater weight on the education system in America. Later in Part III of Transforming English Studies, the article in Chapter 8 follows up on this point by basically saying that society now depends on the schools to produce educated citizens. Less responsibility at home, means greater responsibility for schools and educators, but nothing has changed about the educational system that has existed since the beginning of time. These articles in Transforming English Studies are all helpful, but they seem to lack the answers. They are all pointing out fairly relevant issues, but what are we supposed to do with this knowledge. Not to mention that these are not huge contributions to the subject, we have heard very similar, if not the same identical arguments from more established scholars in greater detail with, at times, further research to back up their clams. These issues seem potentially hazardous to the current system if these same students who are missing out on the elementary level are passing through their college years, appreciating English in a very different way and then become educators of the field and must now teach in a way they have not experienced their discipline in over four years, in many cases, longer. The ideas in Caren J. Town’s article make sense, but they focus mainly on Southern Georgia and hardly serve to advance the discussion of the breakdown of English as a discipline.

Academic Study Plan

            So, here I am once again, attempting to figure out what my plan for my life is. Things have been so hectic in my day to day life recently, that I have not really had the opportunity to stop and think much about what exactly it is that I intend to do over the next few years or so.  I need to figure out how my academic life with mesh with the rest of my goals and aspirations and decide what it is that I truly want from Kutztown University.

            The next two years, roughly estimating, may look much like this semester turned out. I had been struggling to juggle my intensive in-patient treatment, which has just as of late become intensive out-patient treatment for my eating disorder with my desire to continue my education in the path of obtaining my masters degree. Part of me truly wants to simply earn a Master of Arts in English, but I am fairly certain that my intention is to teach, so it will need to be a Master of Arts in Secondary Education in English in order to do just that.

            I love school and I enjoy children a great deal, however, I am terrified by the thought of investing the time, energy, and funds into completion of  my masters and this ending in a result of not liking my chosen career. There is no sure way for me to know if I will be content as a secondary education instructor or if part of me will yearn to pursue other endeavors.

            I do not even know who my advisor is or supposed to be. I have spoken with my peers to attempt to assemble some idea of classes for next semester, but I certainly have no idea what I am doing. I definitely need some assistance and motivation to explore who my advisor is and contact them as soon as possible to get the ball rolling for next semester. I am a Professional Credit student and as I understand it, I need to apply for acceptance into the Secondary Education Masters Program, but I do not even know what that entails. As far as I know, I will need to get three letters of recommendation, take the Praxis I, and complete the written application. If I decide on a Master of Arts in English, I will need a letter of intent and complete the Graduate Records Exam for admission.

            For now, I simply need to find out who my advisor is or should be and sit down one-on-one with them and develop a plan for my academic future. I had had several email correspondence with Dr. Chernakoff, but I believe I need to meet with someone in the Secondary Education department at Kutztown University. I may not know the answer for sometime as to whether or not I will make a suitable teacher. In the meantime however, I need to determine who my advisor is, explore my educational options and work toward completion of that plan, one step at a time.

Berlin: Complete Review

Dr. Mahoney–

Uploaded the final on Berlin’s review to the Media center. Will bring hard copies of review and personal study tonight so less printing for you. Either way, electronic copies are the same as hard copy.

Thanks,