next »

[lodore66]

I'd be interested to know if anyone has experienced the following type of problem.  I'm on a temp contract with means that I co-teach a lot of courses.  Sometimes I lecture, which is fine, but other times I run seminars for other people's courses.  In this latter regard, I've increasingly run into problems where senior staff members present theoretical positions to students as 'facts,' when it is often the case that the theories they cover are questionable, to say the least.  This is not a question of the senior staff member in question surveying different positions with a view to giving a comprehensive overview, but a matter of presenting whatever theory on whatever issue as a definitive, last word, I'd better-see-this-reflected-in-the-assignment type of truth.

I work in the humanities so I'm sure people can imagine the type of thing I'm talking about here, but I feel a little uncomfortable teaching something that, because of the political environment in humanities departments, one feels almost afraid to query.  Moreover, in faculty research seminars and the like, I sometimes feel stifled by an environment that precludes criticism of certain approaches -- not least those are motivated by people's lifestyle or background.  I hasten to add that this isn't to say that our backgrounds don't influence our intellectual choices (which is true of everyone), but that I have issues with a criticism of an intellectual approach being construed as a personal attack. 

To come to the point, I guess I'm asking how one coordinates intellectual conviction with the need to be nice to those higher up in the hierarchy, especially when the overall accent of your department is on approaches that you find problematic for whatever reason.  Any insights much appreciated   

[dr_stones]

Ah.

The former Speaker of the House same Rayburn observed "to get along, go along."  You have no power or authority in the situation, so STFU.

[larryc]

What Stones said. If you want to be the big dog go out and get the qualifications and the job. In the meantime do the job you have now.

[categorical]

larryc and dr_stones,

Why the knee-jerk support of rank here?  Isn't rank over played in academia?  Couldn't we resist it a little?

[lodore66]

I'd like to side with categorical here.  Whatever about grinning and bearing it, one of my reasons for the original post is the fact that surely you have an obligation to your students to give them the best education that, in your professional opinion, you are capable of giving them -- even if this means challenging departmental orthodoxies and the like.

Not sure either if I follow the point about getting the relevant qualifications.  Im my department, all the adjuncts are post PhD, and hence as 'qualified' as tenured staff.

[larryc]

larryc and dr_stones,

Why the knee-jerk support of rank here?  Isn't rank over played in academia?  Couldn't we resist it a little?

In a theoretical sense I could not agree with you more. But what choices does Lodoree66 actually have? It seems to me that the choices are to do as he is told or to leave the job. If you already have the PhD, Lodoree, I wish you luck on the job market. When you have your own courses you may teach them as you like.

[larryc]

See this thread for someone in a similar position who decided to take a stand against the department culture: http://chronicle.com/forums/index.php/topic,44627.0/topicseen.html

[svenc]

Lodore, fight the power by all means!  You will probably lose your job over it, though, as these senior colleagues will just see you as the temp who badmouths them, in front of students nonetheless.  It won't take long for them to convince the Chair (or whomever holds control over your contract) that you should not be retained.

[lodore66]

Thanks for all the support, even of it is a tad fatalistic ;-)  Can't really say I love my department anyway, and I guess if I'm going to leave at some point regardless, then doing a Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid may not be the *worst* way to go . . .

[dr_stones]

larryc and dr_stones,

Why the knee-jerk support of rank here?  Isn't rank over played in academia?  Couldn't we resist it a little?

Not knee-jerk at all.

It is called being a professional.

[dr_stones]

Thanks for all the support, even of it is a tad fatalistic ;-)  Can't really say I love my department anyway, and I guess if I'm going to leave at some point regardless, then doing a Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid may not be the *worst* way to go . . .

Well, Sundance, you won't have to worry about swimming because it'll be the fall that kills you. 

All those ignorant big dogs you want to clash with, they know people you will seek employment from in the future.  Future employers check up with past employers, and you'll have the "uncollegial/unprofessional" tag hung on you, even if it is not deserved.  Regardless of what you think of their shortcomings, they have friends who think otherwise.

Take the lessons and learn from same.

[categorical]

larryc and dr_stones,

Why the knee-jerk support of rank here?  Isn't rank over played in academia?  Couldn't we resist it a little?

Not knee-jerk at all.

It is called being a professional.

Okay, I can see, to a point, that this could be true, but I also think invoking "professionalism" could be wrong here.  Insisting on professional norms could be the way that those who have power and privilege keep their power and privilege in the face of rival claims. 

[larryc]

I guess if I'm going to leave at some point regardless, then doing a Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid may not be the *worst* way to go . . .

As stones said, it is the very worst way to go. Suck it up and do as you are told. And smile.

[dr_stones]

larryc and dr_stones,

Why the knee-jerk support of rank here?  Isn't rank over played in academia?  Couldn't we resist it a little?

Not knee-jerk at all.

It is called being a professional.

Okay, I can see, to a point, that this could be true, but I also think invoking "professionalism" could be wrong here.  Insisting on professional norms could be the way that those who have power and privilege keep their power and privilege in the face of rival claims. 

Spoken like someone who can't play the game and who doesn't have the juice to change the game.

[twofish]

To come to the point, I guess I'm asking how one coordinates intellectual conviction with the need to be nice to those higher up in the hierarchy, especially when the overall accent of your department is on approaches that you find problematic for whatever reason.  Any insights much appreciated   

You have enough money in the bank so that the people at the top of the hierarchy can't make you starve, and that point the balance becomes one between annoyance and convenience.  If you have options other than academia, then they have no real power over you and you can say whatever you want.