next »

[hollygoheavily]

Hello everyone,

I am in an MLA field and am currently revising my statement of teaching philosophy for an application for a TT assistant professor job at a small private liberal arts college. My question is about semantics and the perception of a distinction between language courses and content courses at non-R1 universities and colleges. I am currently finishing my dissertation at an R1 university where a huge distinction is made between languages courses, i.e. taught by graduate students and based on acquisition of a facility in a language and introduction to a culture, and content courses, i.e. taught by professors and based on surveys and seminars in literature, literary theories, cultural phenomena, etc. This distinction is often disparaged in my field because it creates an artificial gap between language and literature. Furthermore, the professors at the small private college I am applying to appear to teach both type of courses since there are no graduate students or apparent adjuncts to teach the language classes. So, as an ABD at an R1 who is concurrently a lecturer at a different university in order to obtain experience teaching content courses to augment my experience teaching language classes, I am unsure about the semantic juxtaposition of content and language courses in a teaching philosophy for a small liberal arts college.  I don't want to offend the search committee and I really do believe in the integration of these courses.

Do professors at small liberal arts colleges discuss and recognize this distinction or should I avoid it in my statement of teaching philosophy and cover letter?

Thank you in advance for your thoughts and advice on this matter.     

[periodically]

There is no way to know what a search committee will think.

It is also difficult to say that SLAC professors do any one thing.  Some will "discuss and recognize this distinction", some won't. 

If you address it in your application materials, tell them what you really think, not what you think they want to hear.

[normative_]

It depends on the institution, particularly how strongly they're attuned to the classical methods. I've taught at a SLAC, and they didn't appreciate the connection. Some of my colleagues teach at SLACs where they do.

IMO, a good SLAC does, but there is no guarantee. The only way to resolve this for you is to do some old-fashioned investigation of what applies at the institution to which you're applying.

[losemygrip]

Believe me, the situation at your R-1 is rare.  Your statement should show that you're confident and eager to do both and to integrate one with the other.  That's how most language departments work these days.

[hollygoheavily]

Thank you for replies. I'm afraid I don't know how to investigate a department's stance on this issue without reading some syllabi or at least having access to a class schedule to see who teaches what. I did notice that the courses listed on their website have general titles which are vague enough to go either way. Being direly delusional, I'm sure I have overlooked something, so I will search the university and department website again.

My question was not posed to attempt to figure out what the search committee might want to hear, but rather to see if my terminology might imply an opposition that does not exist outside of R1 universities and therefore would address a different audience than the recipients of my application. Based normative's and losemygrip's responses, I'm leaning toward dropping the reference of this dichotomy in my application. It seems like it would open a can of worms that doesn't have to be opened in my written materials. 

Thanks again for your replies!

[watermarkup]

Class schedules are usually (but not always) online somewhere. Check the registrar's website.

In my experience teaching a foreign language, although not at a SLAC, every course I teach involves language teaching to some degree. You never really get away from it at any level. Talking about "both language and content courses," or "how I teach language is X, while how I teach literature is Y" isn't going to worry too many people, I think, but hammering too hard on the distinction might make people nervous, especially if it sounds like you value language teaching less or would prefer not to teach language courses.

[concordancia]

Do not distinguish. Give examples from both levels in your philosophy, calling courses by their name, rather than referring to them as language classes and content classes. At most schools the distinction is about ratios more than anything. You will probably be teaching some content re: Kramsch in the language classes, and at many schools you will still have to address grammar and vocabulary issues in the content classes.

[ruralguy]

My SLAC mostly has the "content" people, but every single one teaches an intro language. There is one linguist, but save for the most advanced courses, she teaches the same things as everybody else. In fact, shes actually qualified to teach intro for several languages.

I would just concentare on describing how your research and teaching fits in with the mold of a "typical" SLAC.
I would not focus on these professional distinctions that even most professors in an ML dept. wouldn't care that much about.

You might want to poke around the websites of some language depts at SLACs to see what folks are working on and teaching.

[sibyl]

At my SLAC, everyone has graduate training in literature, but they teach two language courses for every literature course because that's where the students are.  The languages department has decided that their language courses will integrate literature and culture into their language courses anyway.  Our catalog shows no courses specifically on subjects like the history of the language or linguistics, although I know a linguisticist in the English department who has been angling to develop a team-taught course on language structure and has found no takers so far.

It's unobjectionable to note the distinction between language and literature, though I'd suggest you say "language and literature" rather than "language and content" with its implicit judgment that language courses have no content.  Also, don't state or imply that language courses are fit only for grad students to teach.  You should expect to have to teach both kinds of classes at most if not all SLACs.  If you think teaching language is beneath you, don't apply, because you'll be very unhappy -- or, at the very least, don't confess this in your application.  Address how you teach both kinds of courses.

Good luck.