DISCLOSURE: I paid for this book stand with my hard earned and very devalued Mexican pesos. I bought it for $499 Mexican pesos (circa $23 USD) at Costco but I looked for it this weekend and I couldn’t find them anymore (I should have bought 3. Two for my home offices, one FLACSO.
A couple of features will be intuitive like this flexible adjustment contraption in the back. This book stand comes without any instructions and there is only one YouTube video and it doesn’t give much explanation.
The feature that was NOT intuitive at all and took me a while to move from locked to unlocked and back was the adjustable base that holds books and papers. That takes a while to tinker with but once you get it, locking and unlocking is easy peasy breeze.
It works well with books of every size. Arms are adjustable and can hold books of good thickness (historians will love it!)
BUT it takes a while to figure out the “stand” part of the book stand.
THREAD. On writing, note-taking, reading, and synthesizing information. This fall, I taught Research Design at the doctoral level, and a Masters' Research (Thesis) Seminar.
Because of the way I like teaching (research design, research methods and mechanics of research), ....
... I quickly realized that teaching Note-Taking Techniques, Reading Strategies, and Synthesis Methods was complicated. It's kind of a chicken and egg problem. What do students need to learn first, reading or taking notes? Teaching strategies for both is hard to do simultaneously
I tried the following sequence:
- Reading Strategies
- Note-Taking Techniques
- Synthesis Methods
- Writing Tips
Turns out that students are thrust into the "you need to read a lot to understand what I am teaching" model quite early during their programmes. This poses challenges
I have been thinking about writing a thread on how to link theory with research, which probably fits with the question that was asked by @PhDForum earlier today - how do we choose a theoretical framework.
I'm going to try to formulate this discussion as clearly as possible.
This discussion about how to link theory with research (and with the method) is one I have had with @salazar_elena and @gcaleman for a while now. How do we link all the theories we read into what we see in the empirical work?
I believe that there are three elements at play.
1) There are various types and levels of theory (grand theory, meso-level theory, micro-level theory), etc.
2) We (scholars, students, practitioners) need to read very broadly to be able to discern across theories.
3) We need to learn how to establish THEORETICAL EXPECTATIONS
What I am going to say may potentially make me unpopular, but given that I don't give a crap about my popularity (or lack thereof) here it goes:
Stop making people feel bad about not taking time off over the holidays.
I am going to make a thread out of this b/c it deserves it.
I have loved public policy ever since I realized that it was what I wanted to do for the rest of my life. Practically everything I do/study/work on is associated with public affairs and public issues.
Populations are heterogeneous.
If you have ever taken my courses, ...
... you will KNOW and remember that the first lesson in Dr. Pacheco-Vega's courses is that POPULATIONS ARE HETEROGENEOUS.
You can't use blanket approaches to developing and implementing public policies when public issues have so many different elements that comprise them.
I started this week feeling entirely unmotivated to do any work (even though I have a metric tonne of things to do). I was afraid of working on the revise-and-resubmits I have to finish because I was AFRAID OF GETTING THOSE PAPERS REJECTED BY THE JOURNAL.
I have a fairly decent publication record, and to this day I STILL FEEL WORRIED ABOUT GETTING A REJECTION.
(I no longer feel humiliated, but I still don't like rejections).
Public thanks to my writing group, and especially @AcademicBatgirl and @LuxanaRO for help motivating me
If you are starting this academic life, or are in the throes of getting a degree and/or writing a thesis, know that even the most experienced of us feel:
- lack of motivation
- fear of rejection
- stress
- unwillingness to do work (see above)
- overwhelmed feelings.
It took me a VERY long time to appreciate my own writing.
Academia instills in you a false sense of humility. You ALWAYS have to be self-deprecating.
I'm a very good writer and I love what I write, and what I write is meaningful, valuable and important.
(yes, I said this).
Also, it took me submitting 3 articles this year, getting 3 R&Rs AND publishing 3 journal articles (two of them in the top journals in my discipline) to feel like I was back to writing as well as I did when I was a doctoral student (back then I wrote with such ferocity!)
I remember a couple of years ago, re-reading my doctoral dissertation and thinking "man, I used to write with such authority and audacity!"
These past couple of years I've just written with abandon.
I love writing, I love what I write and I am happy I am healthy again.