1) Some thoughts about faculty governance in higher ed. and being in the position to change things for the better. ...
2) Actually governing and running a college is complicated and a ton of work, much of it the kind of work that too many faculty look down on. I say this based on ...
3) my first year as a dept. chair, hiring, writing staffing requests, managing the curriculum, &c &c and having now served on committees for reevaluating the college core curriculum, for developing free expression policies, for developing first-year orientation and ...
4) dormitory / residential plans, for launching, staffing a new AI institute, for deciding on & planning our COVID strategy, for evaluating classroom spaces and even campus landscaping and design, &c. I live on campus, I eat in the dining halls. There's hardly ...
5) an area of this institution for which I haven't had to work through plans, logistics, values, &c in collaboration with other people, and amid much (usually reasonable) disagreement. Let me give a specific example of what I'm getting at with all this:
6) I've been on twitter periodically railing against what I think are unreasonable requests for academic job applicants--letters of rec up-front, a million boutique documents that eat up a ton of the applicant's time, &c--and yet I've had to chair or participate in searches...
7) where I was required by policy to go against my firm convictions in this regard. We're changing this unreasonable policy, and it's only bc of faculty (def. not just me) who are doing tons of service work speaking up on various committees and getting things changed. ...
8) It's a relatively small example that doesn't take much in the way of resources or readjustment to change--we simply decided we don't have to do a thing if we don't want. Obviously there are bigger obstacles for bigger changes. But the point is ...
9) if you're not in the room (or banging down the door--figuratively--to get into the room) then your 'shared governance' is gonna look a lot like admin decision-making with faculty 'consultation' when and where they want you, ie discussion into the void. ...
10) The way to not be in the position where a group of people who've never set foot in a classroom with students make an 'unbelievable' decision to destroy a department or push further toward a contingent labor staffing model is to be in all the rooms. Easier said than done ...
11) but my sense is that it's more comfortable for faculty to leave this (crucial) part out of the multi-pronged battled for the soul of the university. And, not for nothing, to overlook some unlikely allies in so doing. ...
12) But in addition to being directly involved in decision-making at various levels of governance--even if 'service' is unpalatable to you--such involvement is also important for substantive understanding how institutions work. /end
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The poll questions are very poorly designed. This is one way to get Frankfurtian bullshit with data, i.e. polling designed without truth as its objective. Touting this poll is straightforwardly irresponsible.
'Inherently' introduces an unnecessary confound: One could agree there's structural white privilege (much closer to the claim of mainstream CRT) and disagree that such privilege is 'inherent.' Those are substantial conceptual differences not registered in the data. Total failure.
Similarly, dealing in absolutes (as below) introduces a catastrophic error into the question: One could view race as a very important component of identity to study in school *without* believing it's 'the most important thing about [a person].' Fail.
@conor64 I think what would have the greatest impact is reversing the adjunctification trend. Particularly if we take seriously the conjectures about faculty self-censorship. About 75% of the professoriate works off the tenure track, not protected by academic freedom.
@conor64 Another, further afield idea would be to incentivize more collaboration between departments and divisions, such that the viewpoint diversity already present isn't concentrated in disciplinary enclaves. At present I think this has some negative externalities, including ...
@conor64 ...a distorted media image of what academia is like, which focuses on a few lefty depts. while giving e.g. biz schools a (relative) pass and a tendency to form disciplinary 'teams' with distorted impressions of people in other disciplines. No point in viewpoint diversity if...
1) Dreaded thread on why I think the response to postcritique is so vitriolic. Short version: Because literary studies is a discipline in search of an application.
2) Before I go on, I'll say from the outset that many in lit studies explicitly reject the idea that the field *should* have an application. My opinion is that's fine if you want to do book clubs, but if you want an institution you can't ignore that difficult issue. But anyway...
3) The evidence by this point is overwhelming that when lit scholars talk about 'method' we're actually just talking about ourselves: 'ways of reading,' 'how we argue,' 'phenomenology of reading,' etc. etc.
1) I defend post-critique (not with any particular investment in it). But here’s a thread of some of my national media publications also defending left and PoC students and faculty against bullshit ‘free speech’ concern trolling. ...
2) Here’s where I take on ‘The Coddling of the American Mind,’ the ur-text of of this recent iteration of using appeals to free speech to criticize marginalized students who are just urging us to do better: newrepublic.com/article/122543…
1) Let us pause to appreciate the sheer comedic majesty of the fact that French politicians are worried about the threat of US academic theories of race, gender, and post-colonialism.
2) On the one hand, in the US, you have a capacious grifting industry that pins the downfall of 'American values' and 'Western Civilization' on a handful of passé French philosophers ...
3) And on the other hand, you have the French president and education minister parroting nearly verbatim the same US-based grift, but reversing causality and blaming it on US intellectuals.
1) NFL thread from a guy who didn't watch the Super Bowl. Up until about 5 years ago I wouldn't miss an NFL game. Even when I lived in the UK--before the NFL conquered the UK--I'd find creative ways to watch NFL football. What happened? I have to admit: part of it is Tom Brady.
2) There are more substantive reasons why I turned off the NFL, of course. On the principled end of things--by no means my only reasons, I have to admit--I'm uneasy about CTE and the unconscionable League response to its players. ...
3) And on the less principled end of things, the in-your-face marketing that makes the NFL what it is just became so tedious. It's just hard to watch a game with so many stoppages in play, so many of them primarily commercial. It just got really, really boring. ...