next »

[the_myth]

People in the sciences can and often do learn to use their words effectively, but it can still be troublesome for people who spend their lives dealing with scientific concepts to then covert what is often mathematical to the verbal.

If you think scientific concepts are about math, chances are pretty good you are not a scientist.  While I often help my colleagues write good papers, I sincerely doubt it's because I'm a woman.  I think it is more likely to be a result of being a native English speaker with all of my education in the US instead of being an adult immigrant.

See, I knew someone would read what I wrote differently than how I meant.

But, on the other hand, is there a science that doesn't use math?  Oh, biology and geology and such...so, I guess it was a bit of a mistake, no?

See how easy it is to not be able to find the right words to express an idea?

Oh, and the thing I mentioned about FSP helping with writing was not stated as a thing women should or even often do.  It's just that one scientist telling people what she sees as part of her contribution to her profession.  [Are you FSP??!?!?!]

But one must wonder:  how many men who are also native English speakers do the same?  [Especially when there are so many more of them around...]

I am, however, a major b*tch.  Is that like being a Mean Girl?

If you have ever taken delight in another person's misery, especially for something low-stakes, then yes.

Watch the movie with a friend.  If they say, "That's so like you!" then it's not exactly a compliment.

In the olden days, a rough equivalent was being called a "Heather."

P.S.  Men can also be "Mean Girls."  I see it as a gender-inclusive, generic term.

I think it's common for us all to forget the often clear divides that separate our various campus entrenchments.

Or we could work on building bridges across the divide, if only to know whom to shaft when budgets get tight.

Academia as bloodsport.  The metaphor never did much for me.

[the_myth]

Math, in fact, is pretty immaterial in accounting.

Another cherished stereotype bites the dust.

Learning sucks!  You always end up feeling stupid!

hehe

[scheherazade]

If you have ever taken delight in another person's misery, especially for something low-stakes, then yes.

Yes, clearly we are all delighted.  Jumping for joy.

[polly_mer]

The_Myth, in the past I attempted to use closed captioning to denote humor, but it turned out that I'm not funny, but actually am just really, really mean.  Now I just accept my inner bully.

[the_myth]

The_Myth, in the past I attempted to use closed captioning to denote humor, but it turned out that I'm not funny, but actually am just really, really mean.  Now I just accept my inner bully.

Have you tried adding fiber to your diet?

I hear it works wonders.

[octoprof]

Math, in fact, is pretty immaterial in accounting.

Another cherished stereotype bites the dust.

99% of the math is add and subtract, or occasionally multiply or divide. It's the parts that require judgment that are the real central parts of accounting - where the numbers are not clear.  A computer can be programmed to do the mathy parts, you know.

[galactic_hedgehog]

Math, in fact, is pretty immaterial in accounting.

Another cherished stereotype bites the dust.

99% of the math is add and subtract, or occasionally multiply or divide. It's the parts that require judgment that are the real central parts of accounting - where the numbers are not clear.  A computer can be programmed to do the mathy parts, you know.

This explains a lot about my BIL.

[octoprof]

Math, in fact, is pretty immaterial in accounting.

Another cherished stereotype bites the dust.

99% of the math is add and subtract, or occasionally multiply or divide. It's the parts that require judgment that are the real central parts of accounting - where the numbers are not clear.  A computer can be programmed to do the mathy parts, you know.

This explains a lot about my BIL.

No judgment, eh? Or, no math ability?

[galactic_hedgehog]

Math, in fact, is pretty immaterial in accounting.

Another cherished stereotype bites the dust.

99% of the math is add and subtract, or occasionally multiply or divide. It's the parts that require judgment that are the real central parts of accounting - where the numbers are not clear.  A computer can be programmed to do the mathy parts, you know.

This explains a lot about my BIL.

No judgment, eh? Or, no math ability?

Yep.

[punchnpie]

In English, there is a need for bodies to teach the lower level composition classes, so the grad programs are kept fairly large to supply that demand

Something along the same lines (maybe) that has always puzzled me. When people do dissertations in English lit, do they really understand that they could possibly be teaching intro to Great Books or something similar to large classes of students who don't care?

I can't imagine having spent years studying Poe, or Waugh, etc. and being entirely wrapped up in that, and then realizing I'm teaching a bunch of snotty nosed Biffs and Ashleighs English Lit Survey 101 for the foreseeable future. Bless those forumites who do, and who do it with a smile, but is this really what you thought you'd be doing when you were struggling with your dissertation?

[pink_]

In English, there is a need for bodies to teach the lower level composition classes, so the grad programs are kept fairly large to supply that demand

Something along the same lines (maybe) that has always puzzled me. When people do dissertations in English lit, do they really understand that they could possibly be teaching intro to Great Books or something similar to large classes of students who don't care?

I can't imagine having spent years studying Poe, or Waugh, etc. and being entirely wrapped up in that, and then realizing I'm teaching a bunch of snotty nosed Biffs and Ashleighs English Lit Survey 101 for the foreseeable future. Bless those forumites who do, and who do it with a smile, but is this really what you thought you'd be doing when you were struggling with your dissertation?

Since teaching introductory level gen. ed. classes is part of our training (at least it was part of mine), I would guess that most of us see this coming and don't mind.

Of course, if I had "a bunch of snotty-nosed Biffs and Ashleighs" in my classes (ever), that might be a different story, but I like working with non-majors.

[charlieinthebox]

"But why do the students come, is the question, I think."

I, at least, and I suspect many people in the arts and perhaps in the humanities, was not misled about the tt job market, nor did I assume I would "beat the odds."  I didn't enter grad school with the expectation of a job, I started and finished because I was passionate about my field and I was in the act of creating my own life.  I am still doing that.  I try to include academia into the creation of my life both because I enjoy it and I think I am good at it.  I think the attraction of the humanities is the potential to build your life around something you care deeply about.  I wasn't sure what building that life would mean, but I fully expected it to be very difficult and I didn't assume it would mean landing a tt position, though I hoped that might be the case. 

Then again, I had one of those coveted tt positions and left to move to NYC without a job, so according to conventional wisdom, I'm just nuts.  It's worked out very well, and I have maintained my academic interests both in teaching and research and publication, while parlaying my writing skills into freelance and now part-time work that, combined with my teaching, pays me quite a bit more than than my previous tt position.  I wouldn't have been able to create this life for myself without the skills and discipline I learned, and earned by going through a rigorous PhD program. 

[dismalist]

I'm in the box with you, Charlie! Me: crazy, certifiable, and have loved it most of the time.

[finallyfullprof]

I did it because it was unthinkable to do anything else. I was a sophomore in high school when I started telling people I wanted to earn a Ph. D. and teach college English.   (I originally thought I might want to be a journalist, but after taking a class in it, I changed my mind.)  People thought I was nuts and that there was no way I'd be able to do it. I was lucky in that I got a lot of encouragement in undergrad, but very little of it was in the way of feeding me to a particular grad school. My advisors let me make my own decisions based on my circumstances. When I finished my master's, they took me back into the fold as an adjunct while I worked on the doctorate.

I do remember during grad school reading all those articles in the Chronicle about the huge wave of retirements expected in the 90s and thinking, "Gee, I've timed this perfectly!"  Ha! Even back then, it took 100 applications to get the VI/VAP position I took. Then the second year, it took 60 applications to get the tt position I hold now. Over 300 people applied for this job.

But still, after 18 years teaching and with all the junk we put up with, doing anything else is unthinkable to me. We'll see if I still feel the same way after the current administration implements all its fabulous new cost-saving measures.

[quasihumanist]

Math, in fact, is pretty immaterial in accounting.

What most people think of as math is, in fact, pretty immaterial in math.