• Tuesday, May 29, 2012

Previous

Next

A Balanced Life?

November 11, 2011, 12:07 pm

For years, academics have studied it. Plenty of faculty members want it. And many of them don’t know how to get it.

Yes, I’m talking about the ever-elusive work-life balance. It’s a perennial topic of discussion among many professors, particularly women. So it wasn’t surprising that attendees at the recent Purdue University Conference for Pre-Tenure Women had some frank conversations about how to manage their role as faculty member while trying to have a satisfying family life.

“Work-life balance permeated every discussion that we had,” said Beverly Davenport Sypher, vice provost for faculty affairs at Purdue. “We provided a space for women to feel safe to talk about the issue.”

The conference was officially billed as an event that would give the 100 or so attendees a blueprint for a successful tenure bid. And sessions that helped demystify the process did take place. But a running undercurrent was that the academic workplace equals high stress.

“There’s this expectation that you will be a specialist and produce research that’s not only important to your discipline but important to the world — and maybe even commercially viable,” Ms. Sypher said. “Then you’re also teaching and then you might have a partner and you might be a parent or taking care of parents. There’s a lot of ‘Is it worth it? What do I have to give up? Can I do it?’ ”

Encouragement during the conference came in various forms: Among them, a behind-the-scenes look at the tenure process and its pitfalls from Ms. Sypher, from senior faculty members who reviewed CV’s, and from panelists who talked about their recent transition from graduate student to faculty member.

Jess White, an assistant professor of anthropology at Western Illinois University, was one of those panelists. She’s married to an academic and her husband was hired as a tenure-track professor at Western Illinois. Ms. White landed a post as a visiting assistant professor at the same institution in 2005 and then graduated with her Ph.D. the following year. It wasn’t until 2008 that her position was converted to the one she has now. Her career path, she said, is part of a trend that concerns her.

“Unfortunately, at some institutions, you tend to get this class of women who are the spouses of tenure-track husbands” and their career paths don’t always play out in the same way. But Ms. White, who had her first child in graduate school, has learned that, as a tenure-track faculty member, “you have to be looking ahead and thinking about what your next step is going to be so that you can prepare yourself for it.”

Part of that preparation begins during the job hunt, said Brenda Berkelaar, another conference panelist, who is an assistant professor in the communication-studies department at the University of Texas at Austin. One of her best pieces of advice: Don’t let generalizations about what a particular type of college might be like get in the way of where you go to begin your career.

“It really comes down to the department,” says Ms. Berkelaar, who came to UT-Austin this fall from another tenure-track position at Northeastern University. “Some of them have a lot of face-time requirements. For someone that has a young family or is taking care of parents, that won’t work.”

As Ms. Berkelaar settles into her new position, she’s thinking about how to prioritize her time on the road to tenure. “You’ve got to get really good at saying no to things,” she says.

Such a stance could make the difference in reversing the work-life struggles that fueled so many discussions at the Purdue conference.

“There’s sort of this expectation in academia still that to be successful you have to forget things like a personal life, forget about things like a family,” Ms. White says. “That’s not what women want and that’s not what many young men want.”

But here’s the question: What factors do you think make work-life balance so hard to achieve in academe, especially for junior faculty members? And to you seasoned professors, what advice do you give junior faculty — particularly women who are parents or who plan to be — on how to “make it all work?”

This entry was posted in Faculty Hiring, Faculty@Work, Work and Life. Bookmark the permalink.

  • Print
  • Comment
  • elsie

    I’m facing the fact that to have a work-life balance means having a life to begin with. As a single woman in my late 40s, I seem to have only work and nothing else, and it’s leaving me struggling with depression.

  • http://twitter.com/BHJAS Jean Ann Schulte

    Are employees with access to resources that help balance work and family responsibilities healthier? http://t.co/mojJdW0p

  • lydiatimmins

    I think a work-life balance is hard to achieve for any professional who is devoted to his/her job. Doctors, firefighters, journalists…anyone who cares about the work they do will find it a challenge to strike a balance between “the office” and home. And because it is now so easy to bring home the office–it takes a lot of restraint not to check e-mail just one more time…answer the cell phone… grade just one more paper…
    because we care about so much, it’s hard to sit back and let anything slide.

  • stmeiers

    Wow!  Talk about “lack of balance”?  Why were profs referred to as “Ms.?  If they were men they’d be “Dr.” I’m sure.  Sigh.  We, everyone, men and women, still have a lot to overcome, obviously, evn a report on Women in Science. 

    Yes, balance is hard to achieve, esp. for us over-achievers. However, IF you don’t take care of yourself, you cannot help others and/or do well on any job, though administration (and frequently, we ourselves, doesn’t want to acknowledge that.

  • raza_khan

    This is not a gender issue.  Academia as we, faculty know it, does not allow work-life balance.  We are passionate about what we do and we unfortunately walk on the slippery slope where passion for our work is always in over-drive!

    There is no ifs and buts about this based on my more than a decade of teaching experience in the field of higher education.  We do not clock in and we do not clock out.  We can not seperate our work environment from home – we all know we have that textbook at home too!!!

    Raza
    ___________________
    Raza Khan, Ph.D.
    Dr.Raza.Khan@gmail.com

  • minnesotan

    I guess my first comment to people of any gender would be: if you want to balance work, family life, elder care, and a bowling league, then don’t accept a job at an R1. How on Earth do you expect to get tenure if you don’t bring your work home? Maybe research expectations are slipping at UT-Austin…

    But I doubt it. More likely, these are unrealistic concerns that will result in further demands for special treatment. Breeding is a choice, folks. Make it carefully.

  • boiler

    I find this kind of comment really irritating. It suggests that human concerns like family and children are personal whims, individual lifestyle choices that institutions shouldn’t pay any attention to. Sure, having children is (often) a choice. But it’s not a choice like buying a car or picking a major. For most people, it’s a foundational part of their experience, something that matters on a much deeper plane than issues of lifestyle or career. It’s also something that involves lifelong obligations of support and love, obligations that you can’t fully understand until you’re engaged in them, and that you can’t just set aside. 

    Do you really want to exclude people who have made that choice from research universities? And if you don’t, do you really want to make them choose between a successful career and responsible parenthood? Why not find ways to make it possible for them to do both?

  • minnesotan

    The research university was established to conduct research. It’s not a welfare program for breeders. You’re trying to have your cake and eat it too. I.e. “I want to have a prestigious, high-paying job devoted to the life of the mind, but I don’t want to have to bring any work home, because family’s more important.” You don’t see a conflict of interests there? If you can find a balance, good on you. But the main thrust these arguments generally take is for special exceptions and extra benefits for folks who have a litter of kids, while people who wait until after tenure don’t get any of these benefits. I mean, I’d love to be paid while I take three months off to take care of my cat, but nobody’s going to buy that argument.

    The point is this: it’s not for the university to change because you want a child. It’s your duty, if you want to make it work, to be the one making the changes. I don’t understand why you feel like everyone else in the world is obligated to make your life easier just because you can procreate. It’s not that impressive a feat!

  • girl37

    “Breeders?” Is that what you call your parents, friends and colleagues with children? You appear to be very immature.

  • boiler

    You’ve obviously got some personal issues here, so I won’t get into the tone of your commentary. But on the substance of it, you’re missing the point. Having a family isn’t some odd personal predilection that a few people are into. It’s one of the basic, essential parts of a full life for most people on the earth. That includes most people at research universities. And if we want those people to be effective scholars, we have to help them to combine that scholarship with their roles in families. If we force them to choose between fulfilling family obligations and fulfilling work obligations, then both are usually going to get shortchanged. Family accommodations aren’t a self-destructive act of charity by universities — they’re a sensible and effective way to get the most out of their employees.

    As for your scorn for “breeders” — I assume that your R1, like mine, gets much of its budget from the tuition that those breeders pay for their children. Have a little respect. And recognize, too, that the “feat” doesn’t lie in procreating, but in the many years of support and nurturance that follow it. That’s what parenthood is, and doing it well is in fact pretty impressive. 

  • minnesotan

    Honestly, I didn’t think I would find such a load of heteronormative, ‘family values’ hogwash coming from CHE readers, but the internet supports all types. Again, all I’m saying is that if you want to have kids, I don’t see why the rest of the world has to make changes. Yes, breeding is a choice, and it is one fewer and fewer humans should be making as we spin out of balance with our ecosystem. If you make the choice, you are the one who should have to sacrifice, not your coworkers who would rather have a raise, or some new facilities, instead of supporting your many, many unwarranted benefits and accommodations.

  • cmsmw

    My gay and lesbian friends, especially those with children, will be surprised to learn that family is heteronormative.

  • demisty

    I think you’re missing a point here–or the point.  The article does not _specifically_ speak to mothers, but to women who take care of aging parents (and, I think, we can go ahead and add men to that, too!), or to people who want to have any kind of life outside of academia, too.  So to direct your comment at women who have a lot of kids is off mark.  Besides, many of us (and I include myself here) only have one or two kids, if any at all, not a litter!  And if we do have one or two kids, or a partner, or a love for Parcheesi or anything else, those elements of our life are neglected because of our love for our research, for teaching, for writing, etc. 

    This is not unique in academia, of course, but here we are in _CHE_, so let’s keep it there for now.  I want to point out, too, that male scientist, of late, as well as women, are lamenting their decisions to put their nonworking lives on the back burner (please, see http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0022590 or right here in The Chronicle, http://chronicle.com/blogs/onhiring/scientists-want-more-children/29343).  Let’s not make a total bias here!

    But even with men looking longingly at the domestic life today, women are historically and traditionally delegated caregivers for the young as well as the old, so it is we who often have to find that balance.  And please, let’s not make career and everything outside of career an either/or problem. 

    And thank nature for us breeders!  Without us, we wouldn’t have you, minnesotan.

  • ElizaBro

    Actually you’re wrong. Look at any of the Chronicle’s articles. They never use “Dr” in front of an academic’s name for men or women. Neither does the New York Times. It’s a newspaper style thing to only use “Dr.” for medical doctors. …. But go right on jumping to false conclusions!

  • grward

    In his letter, Ferguson doesn’t claim that Mishra labelled his book or the author as racist. Rather, he claims that Mishra “implies” and “insinuates” that he is racist. Mishra, in his response, states that “Ferguson is no racist, in part because he lacks the steady convictions of racialist ideologues like Stoddard.” Ouch. Perhaps the statement was a backhanded compliment, but I doubt that Yeats was referring to racists in the “The Second Coming”.

    I suspect that Mishra’s review probably did nothing to change anyone’s opinions of Ferguson’s views, and probably said more about Mishra than about Ferguson. I hope the lawsuit doesn’t materialize: I think a continuation of their verbal sparring would be more appropriate and more fun: there’s always a taste in academe for a good public intellectual brawl.

  • dank48

    “Persecute” or “prosecute”? Assuming there’s a difference.

  • 22067030

    The British libel laws have reached the point that Charlie Brown could sue Lucy for calling him a blockhead.

    —–GLMcColm

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_U565MDORI6WQZIURGEWZGOWAGY Mani Sitaraman

    Pankaj Mishra is not white, so I’m not surprised that a Ferguson fanboy would not know who he is.
    He is Ferguson’s better, that’s who he is.

  • freya1

    Having a good
    balance in work and personal life is difficult, academic or not! One important
    thing I think isn’t mentioned outright, but is implied, is the need to take
    care of yourself first and foremost, because if you aren’t at least somewhat
    healthy and happy, your work won’t be the best you can produce. In order to
    advance any career, be it academic or not, taking care of yourself and/or
    personal life should come first. For different people that means different
    things. For a parent that could mean making sure homelife for your children is
    happy and comfortable, for a career person, it could mean working up the ladder
    to get the position or pay grade necessary for a content work life. More often
    than not it means being able to say “no” to certain projects at work, or things
    in your personal or social life and prioritizing what is necessary and most
    important to you personally. Everybody will have different views on what to do
    to balance, but I feel that it starts with taking care of your health and happiness
    first.

  • geno824

    We still support the myth of the student athlete ! What a bunch of crap. And NCAA still won’t pay the athletes they want to make them a national power ? It’s all about money and some NCAA prestige. Note the President’s  comment about making ASU “the the country’s premier urban research institution”. What the $%#% does athletics have to do with that ?????? I say again- what a bunch of crap !!!!!!

  • m_michael

    Isn’t the provost the chief operating officer, particularly in a research institution?

  • The Chronicle of Higher Education
  • 1255 Twenty-Third St, N.W.
  • Washington, D.C. 20037