More on hiring. The hire I want, one person to replace a just-retired professor and a retiring instructor, will be a forward-looking person with at least some of these characteristics (and/or other similar ones):
* a research program they like, and that they can bring students in on, including for undergraduate research
* the ability to teach a wide range of upper-level courses, and be on theses and dissertations, as well as teach service courses effectively and in a modern way
* the ability to design new courses, join cross-disciplinary initiatives
* interest in shared governance, capacity to serve on university-wide committees of various kinds
* interest in developing cooperative initiatives with other universities, including universities abroad, and in developing study abroad options for students at all levels
* ideally, colleagues elsewhere to suggest as invited speakers and at an informal but useful level, program consultants
* willingness to actively support student activities
* very modern/current training in pedagogy
* willingness to help design and direct service learning, attract internships
* more, similar/related things both traditional and modern
If we just go for an instructor, what we’re realistically going to be able to get is:
* A person who does in fact speak Spanish
* A person interested mainly in teaching their 4/4 load of basic courses, in a traditionalist way, and going home
* A person who may be willing to do Quality Matters training for online delivery of commercially-produced materials
* A person who doesn’t read teaching or other journals, but is vulnerable to materials marketing by representatives who present as training a simulacrum of some things said in the said journals
* A person with an old-fashioned idea of what the field is
* A person who, despite having full salary/benefits/rights, does not want to go to meetings, support student activities or participate in governance
So I’m not talking about degrees, credentials, and prestige, I’m talking about job descriptions; it’s not realistic to expect most MAs in our state to be able to do the things we really need. And when I say research-oriented, part of that is just reading in field, interest in reading in field (not just production). My assessment of departmental needs corresponds to what someone with a PhD and possibly experience, like an associate professor, is most likely to be able to offer. If you can get me an MA willing and able to do all those things I won’t be picky about the degree, I’ll say they’ve got the equivalent of a PhD and argue to hire them with tenure and at the associate professor level, with full graduate faculty status. Am I really that old-fashioned or that elitist, to want to hire someone who can do all the things? I’m not saying we can’t also have the second person or may not also need them, but having people capable of some of the things on list #1 is kind of an existential issue for the program.
And no, I don’t fear change, I am just not resigned to dismantling; and finally, the reason we need these things is not because I want a research castle in the air, it’s because the students need them. For example, who trains high school and community college teachers? We do. Do you want your childrens’ teachers to work with faculty who are really up on things? I do, and you should. I had a good K-12 education because the local university, where the teachers came from, was forward-looking.
Axé.
coldhearted scientist وداد 