While preparing the tenure dossier, I re-read most of the blog, something that was immensely helpful to articulate my thoughts. I started writing for those reasons: to think out loud questions of pedagogy and syllabus design. I was motivated by what I found was the awfulness of textbooks to teach Latin American civilization courses, and the superficiality (to put it mildly) of most syllabus for that kind of courses I found online.
It is not a coincidence that my fourth post was titled: How to write a non-canonical contemporary Latin American civilization syllabus. I had decided to take the plunge: ditch the textbook and design a syllabus focusing on some specific issues, instead of a generalist survey course. It was risky at many levels. Unless I had a clear picture in my mind of what the goals of the course were, the course could become a confusing mess. I was giving my students material that in some cases could be to difficult for some of them. I was also including material in English, a big no-no for certain simple minded language pedagogy specialists. All of this without tenure, working at an institution where bad students evaluations can sink you.
Reading back some early posts, you can see that while I didn't know what my goals for the blog were very clearly, I was: a) articulating all the different ideas in my head, b) looking for a community of peers with whom to exchange practical ideas, and c) looking for validation. Regarding this last point, while there is plenty written regarding language pedagogy, very little has been written, from a pedagogical point of view, about this 300-level "content" courses that are a staple of most language majors in the US.* When I say I was looking for validation, I refer to two things: First, I was looking for somebody to engage with my ideas about how to teach such a course, offer suggestions, comment on the material I was using, etc. Second, I was trying to validate what I have felt from day one: that while both teaching and research are important to me, teaching is what I love doing more than anything else. And there is nothing wrong with that. I am not less than research-oriented people: not less serious, not less smart, not less important. And my scholarly production, while not that of an R1 professor in terms of quantity, is nonetheless of high quality. And sustained.
Did I achieve my goals? Beyond my wildest dreams. My "non-canonical" courses are really appreciated by my students, even if I might never mention Frida Kahlo or Fidel Castro in a Contemporary Latin American civilization course. Readers have given me great ideas both in the blog or by privately by mail. I feel like I have helped other readers (by the way, if you are reading this and would like suggestions, feel free to email me in private). I have no problem sharing the latest incarnation of each of my syllabus). As for the last point, I no longer need that validation. I am very self confident regarding my abilities in the classroom, and I know perfectly well my worth in the profession, both in the classroom and as a scholar.
The question, then, is what come next? If I feel like I have achieved the reason why I started the blog, what will I write about? That's been going through my head a lot lately. As usual, this post is already too long, so stay tuned for part 3...
*As a matter of fact, the typical division between language and content courses is in itself deeply problematic. For completely different reasons, I've been reading Claire Kramsch and similar scholars lately, and it's been enlightening.
I kind of wondered about the future of my blog, too, once I got a job. The blog was started as a way to vent frustrations about the job market and meet peers who were going through the same thing -- as well as meet people who might be able to mentor me through the grueling process. Now, I'm beyond the job-finding stage and struggle with the first job. That's sort of what the blog has become about, and the title has also become somewhat ironic. (I want work! Oh, wait, I have it... now what the hell do I do?)
ReplyDeleteI think there is a lot written about the beginning of the career and finding jobs. There's less out there about people in the tenure process and just beyond. There are people who are mid-career, but well beyond tenure. That won't be me (and lots of blog colleagues) for years. It would be nice to read more about the adventures of the newly tenured (because I KNOW you'll get it, if you haven't already).
Anyway - I hope you'll keep writing!
Fie:
ReplyDeleteI will keep writing, see new post. In a nutshell, because I never want to stop learning. Both my parents are college professors in Argentina. However, due to the political situation during their careers, they've been fired more than once, when there was a military coup. I guess that is why I was never desperate if I didn't find a job: I really wanted want, and this career, but it was always very clear to me that there were other options if this one didn't work out. My parents have gone back and forth with different jobs. My mother, to whom I resemble more than I ever thought I would, has alternated full time college teaching with part time teaching and jobs in the private sector and the public sector. In the past ten years, she has been very happy working in her area of expertise for the government. I have a lot of that in me: while security and stability are incredibly important to me, I need to try new things or I feel stagnant. So you are probably going to read things in that direction in the upcoming years.
By the way, I am really sorry I never got back to you. I never got your phone call, and only read the email the following Monday. And of course, I failed to reply. Again, I am sorry. It was great meeting you that weekend and showing you my beloved city. And I haven't forgotten the plans for a blogger meetup. It will happen.
It's no biggie. We had a great time at the hotel pool that day with the kids, and they were reluctant to go anywhere else. So it was fine. I would love for you and your husband to meet my hubby, though. I was thinking that it would be fun for hubby and me to come back to your town sometime without the kids for an overnight. If we do, it would be super fun to go out again. Let me know if you're interested! I know Dr. Koshary would like to hang out with us, too. You'd love him!
DeleteI'd love to meet your hubby, and B. said after we went out with you that he sounded like a very cool guy. You should definitely visit without the kids. And with Dr. Koshary. Our apartment is really small, but if you don't mind being a little tight, it can host three people crashing in the living room.
DeleteI'll keep you posted on a good time for us to come! I'll talk to Dr. K about it, too. :)
DeleteFrom a research standpoint it is generally accepted (and Kramsch is a good start) that the language content divide doesn't work well for language or content and there are many articles on this. I am not really sure what the teaching block is (probably time) but it is true that many places work on this outdated model.
ReplyDeleteWithout having taken a single linguistic course in my life, I instinticvly knew it. But most places I know reproduce this one way or another. Add to that that the AFCTL standards have been reduced to "oral proficiency" for a lot of people, and it's a recipe in frustration every time I teach a beginning language class. This semester, I finally took the common syllabus and re-wrote it to put a little more sense into it. I also modified the exams accordingly. My Beginnning Spanish II students survived even though I didn't teach them the use of "se" for unplanned occurrences.
ReplyDeleteI can't get into much detail here, but the reason while I started the research is because at some point in the future, my institution will revise its mandatory core curriculum. At this point, the students are required to take 6 credits (2 courses) of a foreign language. In my opinion, it should be much more, but that will not happen. But to defend the requirement you need much more than the standard: "taking a foreign language opens the student mind to different cultures in the world/ contributes to form a global citizen (?)" or similar variations. That is certainly not necessarily true in the abstract, and even less so with the way Lower Level language classes are taught in my institution. At some point, I would like to make those six credits more significant to the student, therefore having a better argument to defend the requirement when in the future every department on campus is going to be defending their turf.
By the way, how did your first semester on the TT go?
First semester was good! Hopefully, I'll get around to posting some reflections soon. You should check out the book "Alternative Approaches to SLA" edited by D. Atkinson for a good introduction to a variety of theories not so heavily based in theoretical linguistics and cognitive psychology
DeleteThe stronger argument for 6 credits of FL as part of Gen Ed, especially when is oriented toward proficiency and grammar, is that it means acquiring a system, and hones the mind the way math does.
ReplyDeleteThat, of course, keeps the language/culture/lit barricades up, and makes someone like me uninterested in teaching FL, not because I don't love grammar and all -- I do -- but because of time issues.
I am of course not for the language/the rest of it divide but the practical problem I see is the two-tier faculty. If you have a few who are professors, with good Ph.D.s and research programs, and many who are instructors, with a variety of kinds and qualities of M.A. and not entirely current, then you have a majority with certain views of how things "have to be" and who are not really aware of what happens at higher levels. If at the same time the decision makers are people who do not themselves teach FL and are also invested in the older curricular model as though it were nature, and not just one model, then you are kind of stuck.
I'm for content based instruction, with culture taught from the beginning and not just by throwing out some clichés the way many FL books do. This way it is possible to also develop intellectual skills, analytical and argumentation skills, etc. To do that, though, all faculty have to be on board and feel confident doing it.
On the Divide, I have also realized part of my own problem is not coming from a national language department or even an FL department. I majored in Comp Lit and had that not been possible I might have done Linguistics but wouldn't have done a single national language, or English. Well -- maybe if it were a harder language, like Arabic. But I don't actually see myself as a Hispanist first. What makes sense to me is to be teaching to the minor, the major, and up in Spanish, and then for service/other courses to be giving Comp Lit, literature in translation, freshman introduction to Latin American Studies (in English), etc. Doing that I feel I am in my own academic patria, as it were, but bridging instead to the FL courses I am participating in a different slicing up scheme than the one that fits my general mentality and interests.
One of the things to look at might be what is going on in English, where ESL isn't part of the curriculum and the service course is comp. It seems that nowadays, the rhet-comp people and the lit people are two entirely different groups, whereas in the past freshman comp was just step 1 on the way to the PhD and beyond, as it were. It is odd that they are separating while we are integrating.
Congratulations on revised blog direction, a bunch of great new posts, etc.!