next »

[mignon]

At my R1, we get a small fixed travel budget--enough for one modest conference--per year.  We're also given a half year paid sabbatical every 7 years, but we can take a full year at half pay.  My colleagues with employed spouses (lawyers, bankers, etc.) are able to give more papers, and take full-year sabbaticals, and then of course are applauded and rewarded by the university for their productivity.

But I am the sole support of my family and can't afford to go to conferences or do research trips on my own dime.  We have trouble paying the regular heat bill.  I do have tenure, but I'm starting to feel a little grumpy about the ways that research productivity links back to outside sources of income. 

Feel free to accuse me of whining.  I know, I'm lucky to have a job.  And life isn't fair.  But still.  Sigh.

[systeme_d_]

If that's whining, Mignon, then call me a whiner, too.  I am in the same situation, and also find this to be the case.

Of course I am grateful to be employed and tenured.  And of course life isn't fair.  But not being able to travel to do research, and having to limit conference participation truly does suck.

[clean]

Is it Envy?
We all have different sets of resources and skills.  It seems that the complaint/whining is more a function of others having more resources.

The department, from what I can see, is being 'fair'.  They have provided a level playing field (from their end) and  reward based on outcomes.

Would you fix this problem by having those that are married to 'resource rich' spouses less support?
Should we raise the publishing expectations for those people?

Is there a solution that anyone would care to offer?

Personally, I hope that I can help you vent, but if you are asking if there is something workable that could be done about it, I just dont see an answer that would be legal or 'fair' (whatever that is).

(Oh, and if you want Envy... We can apply for a sabbatical, but there are only a handful awarded over the entire university and they seem to be going to people that have been here for decades as some sort of survivor prize.  So for my whine, Ive never been 'given' sabbatical, and I doubt that I will 'earn' one anytime soon!)

As System_D pointed out too, be "grateful to be employed and tenured".  The grass is always greener somewhere!

One last thing.  At least here, the difference between being Excellent (exceeding what we are supposed to do) and being Outstanding (blowing away what we are supposed to do) is not all that much.  My Outstanding raise was 3.05% and my neighbor with the Excellent rating's raise was 3%.  I think that it worked out to be $15-$20 a month.  So what/how are these people "applauded and rewarded by the university" above you?

Finally, you have a lot to be proud of and thankful for.  It is not going to get you anywhere worrying about the rewards and applause of others.  Get what you can get done, and enjoy your life!  Remember, those poor bastards you are complaining about are Married to Lawyers and Bankers!!!  (Of course they throw themselves into their work and take a full year of sabbatical!!!)

[systeme_d_]

You are right, of course, Clean.  I do not wish my more fortunate colleagues had any less than they do.

I just reserve my right to complain -- and I take advantage of this right very infrequently, and never in front of anyone except those here on the fora!

[totoro]

You need to get a grant to cover this.

[systeme_d_]

Research and travel grants are very, very hard to come by in the humanities, Totoro.

Conference grants are even rarer birds.  So much so that I've never even heard of any, except for grad students and, occasionally, for people who live outside of the country in which the conference is held.

[notaprof]

You need to get a grant to cover this.

They give grants for complaining?  What's the deadline for the grant application?  I've got a chance at one of those!

[totoro]

I didn't say it was easy to get. But that's what I imagine your Dean would suggest. We had a similar travel allocation that would barely cover a conference a year in my last position in the US in an R-1. I got a couple of grants to write papers for Symposia which then covered my travel to them of course. I got some invites to speak with paid travel and I paid my own way occasionally (inside the US). And hey I met my wife to be at one of those conferences so that was a good investment :)

There aren't a lot of grants in economics either. But that's what we would be told we needed to do. And I was in the School of Humanities and Social Sciences.

[systeme_d_]

I didn't say it was easy to get. But that's what I imagine your Dean would suggest. We had a similar travel allocation that would barely cover a conference a year in my last position in the US in an R-1. I got a couple of grants to write papers for Symposia which then covered my travel to them of course. I got some invites to speak with paid travel and I paid my own way occasionally (inside the US). And hey I met my wife to be at one of those conferences so that was a good investment :)

There aren't a lot of grants in economics either. But that's what we would be told we needed to do. And I was in the School of Humanities and Social Sciences.

It doesn't matter what the Dean would suggest.  First, I wouldn't bother my Dean with such stuff, and second, my Dean is clueless about the state of my field.

In my field, you don't get grants to write papers for conferences, or to travel to conferences.  You can occasionally get grants from various archives or foundations to do research.  But the problem is that these grants are very small (a couple of thousand), and usually short-term.  As Mignon, the OP, posted, the heart of the matter is that others with disposable income can afford to supplement these grants, and stay to do research for extended periods.  Folks with limited incomes have a much rougher time.

This is because the model is outdated, and assumes that scholars have some personal funds at their disposal.

[totoro]

<i>This is because the model is outdated, and assumes that scholars have some personal funds at their disposal.</i>

I don't know about that. People here seem to be surprised when they realize I'm not living paycheck to paycheck. Well, they don't say it in those terms but are surprised that I'm not desperate to get any employment whatever it is. I'm 45, it's not like I'm a new PhD. I think the problem is that there are too many people trying to do research in those fields compared to how much society is willing to pay for them.

[breskvar]

In my opinion, this issue goes to the heart of what you really want from this career.  If your aim is to write more research, and in so doing comtribute to civilisation, then you should spend every last dollar to fund yourself.  Failing that, go out and find funding from every possible source, including rich spouse.

If your aim is not that, then there is a question mark over why you may want to spend any money on professional development at all.  If your academic job is there to give you money for a living, to provide for your children, and buy food and shelter for the family, then spending your own money on research can only be justified if it generates more return in the future.  Whether that is increased job security, or a better paying position elsewhere, or new consulting possibilities based on professional recognition, they are all there to give extra money for yourself/family.  If you are not going to use the research profile to generate this kind of opportunity, then you are subsidising your university.  I just don't understand why else do you want to subsidise your employer when you should be doing so to your family. 

 

[hegemony]

One thing to remember is that when people with employed spouses get grants to go elsewhere, e.g. the Triangle Research Park, often they can't because their spouses can't leave their jobs.

Sure, grants are hard to get.  But it's a numbers game.  We had a grant-writing workshop recently that showed the numbers.  The more you apply, the better you get at applying; and those who apply the most get the grants.  Keep working.

[systeme_d_]

Look, it is clear that I am banging my head against a wall here.

The problem is NOT "how to get grants," for goodness' sake.

I am going to let the OP take it from here.

[t_r_b]

One thing to remember is that when people with employed spouses get grants to go elsewhere, e.g. the Triangle Research Park, often they can't because their spouses can't leave their jobs.

Which is of little comfort to people in fields where grants to work at Triangle Research Park and the like are very rare, and/or whose teaching/service obligations wouldn't permit them to accept such grants even if they received them. Also, OP indicates that she has a family to support, which indicates that she isn't all that mobile herself despite not having a banker spouse. Worst of both worlds. And yes, it is a problem that the system for research funding was developed at a time when faculty were assumed to be relatively affluent and to have full-time homemaker spouses.

If I were unemployed, or at an institution that regularly grants leave for faculty to take external fellowships, I would be a very competitive applicant for some of the relatively few such fellowships available in my field. And I have been very successful in such applications in the past. But my institution will not allow me to take leave (funded or not) for many years to come. "Apply for more grants" really doesn't help here.

On the plus side, I have a TT gig, which puts me in a much better position than most recent PhDs in my field. I'm content with that trade.

[grasshopper]

You are right, of course, Clean.  I do not wish my more fortunate colleagues had any less than they do.

I do. I'm a total socialist when it comes to stuff like this.

I know, it's impractical and unsustainable, and it would be a nightmare to organize and administrate, and I would hate (hate!) to be the person responsible for deciding who needs what and how much. But I would still like "need" to be included as a criterion for funding.