next »

[cranefly]

How many of you are working on your own novel?
Do you think a novel should count for tenure if you're in a creative field?

[voxprincipalis]

Did you mean your post title to say "fiction" instead of "nonfiction"?

And there are "creative" fields that aren't writing-based, astonishingly enough. :)  I am in a creative field (music), but obviously no novel I write would count for tenure. So you might want to redefine your terms.

As for whether it "should" count for tenure (I hate the word "should"; it's a bad, bad word)... consult your institution's tenure guidelines. Whether it "should" or not doesn't really matter; what matters is whether it *does.*

VP

[octoprof]

Your subject line is so confusing, you will probably not get the discussion you were hoping for...

All of my writing is nonfiction.

[polly_mer]

Why would a novel count toward tenure in anything but the field of creative writing?

I have known people who published on other fun topics and the department was quite proud of them (a bird watching book from an engineering professor comes to mind).  But I agree with Vox that "should" is a worrisome proposition.

I'm just hoping that my novel will be a huge bestseller so that I can quit my day job with dignity.

[cranefly]

Sorry, I meant fiction! Doh.. late night.
I did mean creative fields in general. I work in a creative field but not creative writing. We get credit for creating, but not for writing, although I don't like to separate the arts in my mind-- I think sometimes I'm creative musically, sometimes in terms of visual art, sometimes I write. Being stuck in one discipline is a bit stifling, and so I wondered if anybody had had any success in making that argument?

[bacardiandlime]

hmm. If someone is an academic in creative writing, and they happen to make a sculpture, or cut a jazz album - should that count? (wasn't recording a rap album - rather than 'academic work' - something that caused Cornel West some trouble?)

[mended_drum]

At my institution, publications or artistic work outside of your field, whether it's a photographic history of a neighborhood, a novel, or helping to compose a musical version of Beowulf for a local grade school to perform all counts toward tenure in the category of "Public service"

But then again, I'm at one of those vanishing SLACs where you can get tenure with no publications at all, provided your teaching and college service is strong.

[voxprincipalis]

Sorry, I meant fiction! Doh.. late night.
I did mean creative fields in general. I work in a creative field but not creative writing. We get credit for creating, but not for writing, although I don't like to separate the arts in my mind-- I think sometimes I'm creative musically, sometimes in terms of visual art, sometimes I write. Being stuck in one discipline is a bit stifling, and so I wondered if anybody had had any success in making that argument?

Sorry to have misread you!

In that case, answer: no. :)

Here's why, as I see it: people who create in, say, music have degrees and other professional credentials in that field. Someone without those credentials may compose music or give public performances, but unless the quality of those things can match up to the quality of the same items produced by those who are trained to create them, then to me they don't count. I will evaluate any such performance I happen to hear according to those criteria, and I expect that if I were to write a novel (and expect to use it towards tenure), people who are professional and academic authors would scrutinize my work with the same demanding eye (as they should, I think). Even if the work is good, one has to consider what the purpose of research/creative activity is at one's own institution, and see if the creation of the work fits into those categories. If my job is to teach piano, and I write a novel, does the writing of the novel inform my teaching of piano? While there are some cases in which you could at least piece together an argument for "yes", much of the time I think that argument would fall down with the slightest puff of air.

This is why being interdisciplinary is so hard -- you have to show true mastery of several fields, not just dilettantism.

VP

[cranefly]

Hmm... that's what I thought, but let me throw this out there without outing myself:
I did my BA in creative discipline A, my PhD in creative discipline B, my post-doc in creative discipline C, and now I have a TT job in creative discipline D, none of which are writing!
Should I get credit for producing in A, in B, in C, or only in D?
What about those who study those creative disciplines that span others (sound performance art?)
I know other professors who've written non-fiction (I mean non-fiction this time!) outside their discipline and not been given credit for it, and I can see why, but isn't it our job as professors to explore other avenues in order to grow? If I only ever wrote in my field, I'd not only get very bored, but I'd be limited in my approach, my topics, etc. I think I'm a far better professor for being able to dabble.
Why is that universities push "interdisciplinarity" like it's going out of style (maybe it is?) but don't support interdisciplinary work?

[polly_mer]

I know other professors who've written non-fiction (I mean non-fiction this time!) outside their discipline and not been given credit for it, and I can see why, but isn't it our job as professors to explore other avenues in order to grow? If I only ever wrote in my field, I'd not only get very bored, but I'd be limited in my approach, my topics, etc. I think I'm a far better professor for being able to dabble.
Why is that universities push "interdisciplinarity" like it's going out of style (maybe it is?) but don't support interdisciplinary work?

I think Vox's main point still applies:

... unless the quality of those things can match up to the quality of the same items produced by those who are trained to create them, then to me they don't count. I will evaluate any such performance I happen to hear according to those criteria, and I expect that if I were to write a novel (and expect to use it towards tenure), people who are professional and academic authors would scrutinize my work with the same demanding eye...

Dabbling is not enough for tenure purposes.  Expanding into new territory is good, but I completely agree with Vox's last point:

This is why being interdisciplinary is so hard -- you have to show true mastery of several fields, not just dilettantism.

I can read up on sociology and apply it to my work, but other sociologists are unlikely to accept me as anything other than a rank amateur.  However, I do live happily at the intersection of chemistry, physics, engineering, and computer science and people are generally receptive to my ideas.

I think the question is "How far afield are you going?"  Are you trying to combine painting with piano playing (probably won't fly) or are you creating a painted mobile that has accompanying music (a cool interdisciplinary thing)?

[octoprof]

I once won third prize in a juried art show. I was on the TT at the time (in accounting!). Do you really think the university should have taken my creative work into account in the tenure decision?

[helpful]

I know a colleague whose Phd dissertation won a prize for the novel hu published out of the dissertation. This wasn't in Creative Writing, either. It was fiction. Hu now has a tenured position and is a superstar speaker all over the world about hu's field.

[cranefly]

I once won third prize in a juried art show. I was on the TT at the time (in accounting!). Do you really think the university should have taken my creative work into account in the tenure decision?

In that case, no, but I'm talking about those in a creative field! (And sure, accounting can be creative, but I mean the arts).

[octoprof]

I once won third prize in a juried art show. I was on the TT at the time (in accounting!). Do you really think the university should have taken my creative work into account in the tenure decision?

In that case, no, but I'm talking about those in a creative field! (And sure, accounting can be creative, but I mean the arts).

Isn't that a pretty narrowminded view of art?  Hmm?

What if I was in music? Electonic media?  IT?  Anthropology?  Where is the line, exactly?

[voxprincipalis]

I once won third prize in a juried art show. I was on the TT at the time (in accounting!). Do you really think the university should have taken my creative work into account in the tenure decision?

In that case, no, but I'm talking about those in a creative field! (And sure, accounting can be creative, but I mean the arts).

Isn't that a pretty narrowminded view of art?  Hmm?

What if I was in music? Electonic media?  IT?  Anthropology?  Where is the line, exactly?

No, OP's question is framed appropriately. There is wiggle room, though much less than you suggest.

"Creative" vs. ... ? "other"? fields is not a value judgment, merely a classification. Music, for example, is not referred to as a "science" field, even though there are lots of things that can be studied about it from a scientific perspective. That's just not its main emphasis. Similarly, the main emphasis of accounting is not on the creative process. In fact, I think that when accounting gets too "creative," people have a tendency to go to jail. ;)

Tenure standards for other fields do not include the same kind of "created from whole cloth" works that "creative" fields do. It may therefore be tempting to wonder how far those boundaries might be stretched. OP does not seem to be wondering whether he/she could get tenure credit for doing physics experiments, which is clearly a different kind of animal entirely -- cats vs. dogs. Instead, OP is wondering whether, if one's tenure requirements are to produce a bunch of leopards, one might also get credit for pumas, tigers, and housecats.

VP