Hello,
I have an idea for a course that I could develop based on my doctoral topic. I have good ideas of the weekly themes I'd want to address, how I'd want to structure the semester, what kind of assignments and presentations I would give, and the type of instructor I want to be. The thing is that I don't know if I can "pitch" my idea to my university or to the university I am considering for becoming a Visiting Research Scholar in 2021. I wouldn't teach it now, I would like to do it after comprehensive exams or even dissertation proposal.
I do have a lot of public speaking experience, so speaking in front of a group in English or French is not an issue for me. But I have never taught a class entirely on my own, at this stage. I have done a little bit of teaching and discussion facilitation as a TA (the prof would allow me to teach the first half of each class, and I have gotten excellent and solely positive reviews and comments from the students in evaluations at the end of the term). So I don't know if it's typical for a PhD Candidate to pitch a brand new course or if the university would trust me in doing so. Maybe I am also underestimating the amount of work it represents to develop a course from scratch. I have seen that there are mini-courses at my university on pedagogy in postsecondary institutions which I will probably enroll in as well.
What are your thoughts?
At my institution (R1), faculty can submit course proposals with the support of their department head. You usually have to list the description, learning outcomes, and topics. Once submitted, the proposal goes through some committees in the institution's governance body to ensure it doesn't conflict with any institutional or regents agreements (and other checks), then the entire governance body votes.
In my department, we probably wouldn't let a grad student submit a proposal unless it's for an intro-level class and a faculty member was on board to teach it as well.
Talk to your major professor about it.
Quote from: phattangent on January 19, 2020, 04:47:40 AM
At my institution (R1), faculty can submit course proposals with the support of their department head. You usually have to list the description, learning outcomes, and topics. Once submitted, the proposal goes through some committees in the institution's governance body to ensure it doesn't conflict with any institutional or regents agreements (and other checks), then the entire governance body votes.
In my department, we probably wouldn't let a grad student submit a proposal unless it's for an intro-level class and a faculty member was on board to teach it as well.
Talk to your major professor about it.
This is the important thing; no department wants to jump through the hoops to create a course that no one wants to teach in a couple of years (i.e. after you leave). Many places have something like a "special topics" course that allows people to teach one-offs; that may be an option.
FWIW, since you've never taught a complete course yourself, I' d suggest waiting until you've done that to propoae a new one, since you'll learn a lot from how things don't go as expected even when the course has been running for a while.
Hi,
If the university you're visiting has a center for faculty learning (or whatever they call it), I highly encourage you to take as many workshops/symposiums from them as you can. Build it in as a part of the expected outcomes of your visit. Also see about team teaching a class with a faculty member. I'm sure someone would be happy to share their load with you!
You can prepare the syllabus (and the pitch) now, and use it as part of your job market pitch and materials.
If you're considering doing this at the university where you will be a visiting scholar, you would be doing it as an adjunct. As many threads here will attest, adjuncting pays very little, almost starvation wages, for quite a lot of effort, and even more the first time you teach something. But there are two more pressing obstacles to teaching this course at the university you're contemplating. The first is that they probably have all the adjuncts they need, and they will not give you any particular preference just because you're a visiting scholar. In fact they will probably give you less, since you won't be around long-term to teach in future years. They'd probably much rather on-board someone local, who will be available in the future, if they're going to take on someone new — which, again, they may not be looking to do in any case. The second is that they hire adjuncts to teach the lower-level regular requirement-satisfying courses that come around the most often. Intro to Whatever, and the like. They don't hire adjuncts they have no prior experience with to teach a new course that does not fulfill any established university requirements. (Typically a course has to go through a long approval process to fulfill those requirements, and one criterion is that the course will continue to be taught regularly.) So the conventions of the planning and hiring process mean that it's very unlikely this would work. That's apart from the fact that you're going there to finish your dissertation, aren't you? Teaching a course is very time-consuming and would mean that your dissertation would not be finished on time.
You could inquire about teaching it at your home university, but my guess is that your grad student terms mean that you are required to do certain kinds of teaching, and that this is not one of those kinds. Generally people don't develop their own courses until they have some experience teaching already-established courses as the main instructor. But consult your advisor or the department scheduler for more details.
Well, my grad school had a fellowship where you could apply to teach a freshman seminar if you were ABD and I taught a course through that. It might be worth checking to see if something like that fellowship exists. That said, I'm not sure I'd be trying that hard to do this. Designing a course in your area of expertise is often harder than teaching a survey course. For one thing you have to come up with everything from scratch and don't have the benefit of borrowing notes and slides from colleagues and friends. It can also be hard when you're close to a topic to see how best to teach it to undergrads and you might tend to overcomplicate things.
Also remember that most future employers are going to care more about your ability to teach lower level courses than upper level courses that mirror your research interests. If you can teach a few of those, that's even better. I probably owe my continued employment to the fact that I started teaching the second half of the survey (the one further away from my research) as I was finishing grad school.
Your job as a grad student is research and your own studies. Teaching is a distraction at this point so don't do it unless that's how you're funding your own studies.
Quote from: Parasaurolophus on January 19, 2020, 11:27:56 AM
You can prepare the syllabus (and the pitch) now, and use it as part of your job market pitch and materials.
Yes, you can do this as well as no1capybara's advice on taking advantage of the many workshops etc. on teaching and developing courses offered wherever you can get them. But AFTER you have made good progress on your own classes as a student, research, and comprehensive exams. Don't waste any time at the moment on preparing classes you aren't currently teaching.
As others have written, do not waste energy now in trying to get the course approved for somewhere you have no permanent job and no one wants the additional course.
Do not invest much energy now in developing a brand-new upper-division elective course when you have zero experience as instructor of record. The public-speaking aspects of teaching are a fairly minor part of the instructor of record experience. Again, I will say: content knowledge is insufficient to teach well, as many people learn the hard way every term and then come here to ask necessary questions. Once you have taught some standard courses, have a permanent enough job, and know what is missing from the current curriculum in that place, then you can invest energy in the bureaucracy for teaching.
You could spend a half-hour outlining it for yourself if you have good ideas you want to remember.
Then start a 'splinter' file...that's what one of my advisors said she did to get an idea out of her mind and onto paper.... and then set it aside, so as not to be distracted by it. I have a pendaflex full of ' em now...
I pull stuff out of mine every now and again...I think in the "language of the syllabus," I like parsing the grammar in developing ideas and defining significant points with an audience in mind.
One such 'splinter' is in process now, in fact...paper to give in May, in fact, that started life as a very tentative course proposal...awhile ago...
M.
Quote from: Caracal on January 19, 2020, 06:14:43 PM
Well, my grad school had a fellowship where you could apply to teach a freshman seminar if you were ABD and I taught a course through that. It might be worth checking to see if something like that fellowship exists. That said, I'm not sure I'd be trying that hard to do this. Designing a course in your area of expertise is often harder than teaching a survey course. For one thing you have to come up with everything from scratch and don't have the benefit of borrowing notes and slides from colleagues and friends. It can also be hard when you're close to a topic to see how best to teach it to undergrads and you might tend to overcomplicate things.
Also remember that most future employers are going to care more about your ability to teach lower level courses than upper level courses that mirror your research interests. If you can teach a few of those, that's even better. I probably owe my continued employment to the fact that I started teaching the second half of the survey (the one further away from my research) as I was finishing grad school.
My university also has a competitive teaching fellowship like this for ABD grad students to teach an undergrad seminar in their research area, and I'm currently supporting one of my students to apply for it because she wants to explore and prepare for a possible career at a more teaching-focused college. A agree overall with Caracal though that this is only a good idea if you are ABD and making good progress on your dissertation, with strong time-management skills to balance that with the teaching.
I Chair our Curriculum Committee, and echo many of the comments above. We strongly discourage new courses from anybody if they haven't run once as "Special Topics". (The only exceptions are courses that we need on the books immediately for compliance reasons, an outside accrediting body, and/or a professional licensure requirement.) There are also other flavors of "Topics"; if you pursue this, look for things like "Topics in Modern Basketweaving" and the like. We would be very unlikely to consider a submission from a non-permanent faculty member, unless there were a compelling reason to add it to our course catalog. Changing the catalog is a pain, and so is doing all the paperwork for a new course.
Like others, I would discourage you from doing this right now, except as a "dream course", which you can pull out during an interview. I spend too much time in grad school teaching the kinds of courses that you are describing. By the time I graduated, I had more experience than most of the new tenure-track faculty hired around me. But I didn't have the publications, or the efficient time to degree, that would get me the interview that got the others their jobs.
Yes, some teaching experience is valuable, especially of the kind where you are running a classroom. You sound like you have that, as well as somebody who can write your "teaching letter of reference". But too much teaching experience can be a trap, particularly if the course are upper-division, highly specialized, and probably hard to take to a new institution.
I can do some teaching after comprehensive examination, there are some reserved spots for PhD students as lecturers in my departement. My advisor also once told me that it's important that I do get some experience. I do think he is right, but it's important to not have it being detrimental to me completing my thesis. In terms of developing my own course, it's a colossal task with a lot of imperatives I had not considered or were aware of. I agree with you all that it's probably more strategic for me to pitch my idea as part of my application package when I will apply for academic positions.
Thanks everyone for your input!
Quote from: adel9216 on January 20, 2020, 04:29:00 PM
I can do some teaching after comprehensive examination, there are some reserved spots for PhD students as lecturers in my departement. My advisor also once told me that it's important that I do get some experience. I do think he is right, but it's important to not have it being detrimental to me completing my thesis. In terms of developing my own course, it's a colossal task with a lot of imperatives I had not considered or were aware of. I agree with you all that it's probably more strategic for me to pitch my idea as part of my application package when I will apply for academic positions.
Thanks everyone for your input!
As someone who is on our curriculum committee, has developed and taught new courses, and trains graduate students how to teach I have some advice.
One, write down your idea! You are clearly very excited and feeling creative. I keep a running "list of neat ideas" and have developed some into full lessons/modules.
Two, DO NOT pitch it as a new course as a graduate student. You will be way, way too busy and it's not a requirement for your job.
Three, do see what kind of teaching experience you can get. As a warning - "opportunities to teach as a lecturer" = "we don't have enough money to pay you to do research for your entire Ph.D/we don't pay our faculty enough to teach in all of our courses/we're too cheap to pay our adjusts enough to keep them" in many places. Proceed cautiously.
Some of the advice here seems a little bit R-1/2 or bust. I did something similar to the OP (after I was ABD, which was crucial), during the summer session. Indeed, over the course of my program I offered four different courses as instructor of record and this (both lower level and upper level) was essential for being competitive for LAC and directional jobs, which are a big part of the market. My current LAC wouldn't consider someone without this as a minimum level. Some of the amount you should teach perhaps depends on your aspirations. If you goal is r1 or prestigious postdoc, then spending more time on research is a reasonable choice, but we should be clear that such a choice makes it very hard to get on the TT at a more teaching focused place (excluding SLACs that have R1 research goals) without doing something post PHD to gain more experience.
I certainly agree that you need to be able to make good progress on the dissertation. But teaching 1 class shouldn't undermine this. Of course, this should ideally be done in an environment where the ABD student is mentored both on how to teach and how to prep effectively. I think the utility of opportunities to teach depends on if it is "here are your 80 students, good luck" or "here is the program we've organized to help prepare you to develop your own course and to be effective in the classroom." If done properly, a course on someone's research topic should be easier to prep. If your program doesn't have a formal program, find a mentor who will work with you in learning how to develop a course, how to prep, and how to deliver effectively. Also, this person can write you a good teaching letter on the job market.
Also, OP, if you are in Canada, I would advise getting experience teaching in both French and English if possible. The colleagues I know who are truly capable of bilingual teaching have had a number of interesting opportunities.
Quote from: Golazo on January 23, 2020, 08:45:35 PM
Some of the advice here seems a little bit R-1/2 or bust. I did something similar to the OP (after I was ABD, which was crucial), during the summer session. Indeed, over the course of my program I offered four different courses as instructor of record and this (both lower level and upper level) was essential for being competitive for LAC and directional jobs, which are a big part of the market. My current LAC wouldn't consider someone without this as a minimum level. Some of the amount you should teach perhaps depends on your aspirations. If you goal is r1 or prestigious postdoc, then spending more time on research is a reasonable choice, but we should be clear that such a choice makes it very hard to get on the TT at a more teaching focused place (excluding SLACs that have R1 research goals) without doing something post PHD to gain more experience.
I certainly agree that you need to be able to make good progress on the dissertation. But teaching 1 class shouldn't undermine this. Of course, this should ideally be done in an environment where the ABD student is mentored both on how to teach and how to prep effectively. I think the utility of opportunities to teach depends on if it is "here are your 80 students, good luck" or "here is the program we've organized to help prepare you to develop your own course and to be effective in the classroom." If done properly, a course on someone's research topic should be easier to prep. If your program doesn't have a formal program, find a mentor who will work with you in learning how to develop a course, how to prep, and how to deliver effectively. Also, this person can write you a good teaching letter on the job market.
Also, OP, if you are in Canada, I would advise getting experience teaching in both French and English if possible. The colleagues I know who are truly capable of bilingual teaching have had a number of interesting opportunities.
Hello, I am fully bilingual (French-English) :)
Thank you everyone for the thoughtful advice :)
Quote from: Golazo on January 23, 2020, 08:45:35 PM
certainly agree that you need to be able to make good progress on the dissertation. But teaching 1 class shouldn't undermine this. Of course, this should ideally be done in an environment where the ABD student is mentored both on how to teach and how to prep effectively.
While teaching experience is important for being on the market, even at R1, the first teaching experiences should be the standard intro classes in the field, not an upper-division start-from-scratch elective. It's worth mentioning that adel9216 is not ABD or even close to ABD.
adel9216 has shared a lot of information in the past year regarding her field and plans. A key piece of information is adel9216 is in a field that has many good options for graduate-educated individuals of which academia is only one. adel9216 comes here with a new, exciting opportunity/idea/option about every month that, in isolation, is indeed very interesting. However, overall, the impression (and I say this with my best mentoring hat on, adel9216) is a continued chasing after shiny objects instead of a coherent plan on any one of the foreseeable paths (in no particular order):
* academic position at a teaching institution
* academic position at an institution with teaching and research
* non-academic position at an academic institution with a unique blend of tasks that may include some combination of teaching and research
* non-academic position that has research and publishing activities similar to academic expectations
* non-academic position that is not at all like academic expectations, but common in the field
* non-academic position that is less common for the field, but ideal for adel9216's specific expertise
* consultant that has a more flexible description built up from adel9216's specific expertise
This proposed class based on research area is just the latest in a string of ideas for someone who is less than one year into doctoral work who still has classes and comps to take and may not have even have assembled a dissertation committee yet to get started on the dissertation proposal.
So, yes, for the readers at home, people should get solid teaching experience as part of their graduate programs to have a shot at most academic jobs. The timing and exact nature of that experience is not recommended as "in one's first doctoral education year, start the formal process to get a brand-new, upper-division elective course approved for one's first experience as instructor of record".
Hello polly_mer,
Thank you for your remarks, but I would like to clarifiy many points here:
to reiterate, I have never said that I would pitch it in first year. I have never said I wanted to teach as a first year PhD student. That would just be pure non sense. That's not my priority at the moment.
I do have a dissertation committee. And although that details/research question, etc of my research project will change and evolve over the years in its details, my main topic is quite clear at this stage and won't change.
Additionnally, there is a lot I do not share here, because answer has been given to me by my advisor or by other sources of information. So there is a lot of background information you do not have about me and how I manage school and my studies. I'm very serious and committed to my studies, and am not "distracted" if that's what you're implying. I do know how to manage multiple tasks and commitments and being able to deliver. I don't take more than I am able to take. I have enough introspective capability about what I can and can't do. I am not "chasing the shiny stuff", I strongly disagree with that comment.
And to clarify, although I would like to get hired in academia, my career plans are not set in stone. If life brings me elsewhere, and that my heart feels it's the best thing for me, I will pursue, even if it is outside of academia. Just the fact that I am in grad school is an "accident" in many ways. I did not grow up telling myself I would do a PhD, far from it.
And as a final comment, yes, I do post a lot here. But a lot of the questions I ask is just out of curiosity. It doesn't mean that it is stuff I'd do tomorrow. It's just information that I feel I should know for 2-3-4 years ahead. Sorry if it comes across as being "distracted", but I'm totally opposite to being "distracted" and all over the place, I'm very focused as an individual and have always been.
I dearly hope you are correct, adel9216. However, I call 'em like I see 'em.
* request for information related to submitting to a conference when the research won't be done and refusing to discuss with advisor because the formal program doesn't start for months
* request for advice on how to write a chapter when it's not clear what would go into that chapter.
* request for advice on how to do an extended visit, possibly foreign, as a doctoral student to train in a particular research technique, possibly with a postdoc who is currently somewhere. Later, the request is for information on how to get mentoring as a visiting scholar. It is unclear how the timeline will work and the advisor doesn't seem to be in the loop.
* request for information on how to pitch a course at some future date hardly in the future (2020-2021 is in a few months), possibly while visiting another institution to learn research techniques or whatever a visiting doctoral candidate would be doing
* an assertion about wanting to be an academic during a request for information
* an assertion the same week about not having made up her mind yet on what the future holds
Judge Judy used to say, "Don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining". Go ahead and ask any questions you like, but don't claim you aren't asking about shiny objects as they cross your viewline.
Quote from: polly_mer on January 25, 2020, 04:55:16 PM
I dearly hope you are correct, adel9216. However, I call 'em like I see 'em.
* request for information related to submitting to a conference when the research won't be done and refusing to discuss with advisor because the formal program doesn't start for months
* request for advice on how to write a chapter when it's not clear what would go into that chapter.
* request for advice on how to do an extended visit, possibly foreign, as a doctoral student to train in a particular research technique, possibly with a postdoc who is currently somewhere. Later, the request is for information on how to get mentoring as a visiting scholar. It is unclear how the timeline will work and the advisor doesn't seem to be in the loop.
* request for information on how to pitch a course at some future date hardly in the future (2020-2021 is in a few months), possibly while visiting another institution to learn research techniques or whatever a visiting doctoral candidate would be doing
* an assertion about wanting to be an academic during a request for information
* an assertion the same week about not having made up her mind yet on what the future holds
Judge Judy used to say, "Don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining". Go ahead and ask any questions you like, but don't claim you aren't asking about shiny objects as they cross your viewline.
I am sorry, but you are being judgemental here. First off, you seem to misunderstand the content of my posts on many aspects because there are inaccuraties in what you've just raised. But I also think you are annoyed by my presence on this forum. I do know who I am, I am very purposeful in everything I do, and I still disagree with your point. I reiterate that I am very focused as a student, and am known by my professors (past and current) and community for being so as well. I am not worried about my future, and nobody around me is. I'm actually extremely excited for my future, and am not the only one. The day the closest people around me will manifest/express worry, I shall listen. But it is not the case, it's actually the opposite. There is a lot of background information about me you do not have, and you do not hang out with me on a daily basis to see how I manage my time, tasks, studies. You just have a glimpse into my reality/reflections/ideas when I post here. You do not have the whole picture, and this is a fact.
You can "hope" I am correct. What I am telling you, is that I am correct and am extremely sure about that.
And you are also very condescending in the way you are speaking to me. You do not seem to realize that you're still speaking to a stranger. It appears like I am sharing a lot here, but I am not. There is a lot of details about the things I have posted about that I have kept to myself. It might explain why you have this perception.
Additionnally, I don't understand why you are talking about "shiny objects". A lot of the things you're mentionning are activities I was engaged in prior to being a PhD student. It's stuff I was already doing anyway. Which is something you did not know.
You're talking about a "mentor hat" that you're putting on, but that's not a way to talk to a mentee. A mentor can offer criticism, suggestion, different perspective. But a mentor does so with respect for the intellect of their mentee. Which is entirely absent from your post. You're just annoyed by my presence here.
Which is great, but with teaching, actually teaching a class is always going to have a lot more impact than just stating an ability to do so. That's probably even more true w language ability where there are a lot of varying definitions of proficiency. According to my grad transcript, I'm proficient in Spanish, which means that in theory, with a lot of time and a dictionary, I could puzzle my way through something that wasn't too complicated. In practice I think that still oversells my skills. Similarly, I imagine some people who claim fluency can carry on basic conversations with ease but would struggle to express complex academic ideas. Since your language skills are of a different order, you really want to find ways to demonstrate that and college teaching experience is going to do that very well.
Quote from: adel9216 on January 24, 2020, 05:33:14 AM
Quote from: Golazo on January 23, 2020, 08:45:35 PM
Some of the advice here seems a little bit R-1/2 or bust. I did something similar to the OP (after I was ABD, which was crucial), during the summer session. Indeed, over the course of my program I offered four different courses as instructor of record and this (both lower level and upper level) was essential for being competitive for LAC and directional jobs, which are a big part of the market. My current LAC wouldn't consider someone without this as a minimum level. Some of the amount you should teach perhaps depends on your aspirations. If you goal is r1 or prestigious postdoc, then spending more time on research is a reasonable choice, but we should be clear that such a choice makes it very hard to get on the TT at a more teaching focused place (excluding SLACs that have R1 research goals) without doing something post PHD to gain more experience.
I certainly agree that you need to be able to make good progress on the dissertation. But teaching 1 class shouldn't undermine this. Of course, this should ideally be done in an environment where the ABD student is mentored both on how to teach and how to prep effectively. I think the utility of opportunities to teach depends on if it is "here are your 80 students, good luck" or "here is the program we've organized to help prepare you to develop your own course and to be effective in the classroom." If done properly, a course on someone's research topic should be easier to prep. If your program doesn't have a formal program, find a mentor who will work with you in learning how to develop a course, how to prep, and how to deliver effectively. Also, this person can write you a good teaching letter on the job market.
Also, OP, if you are in Canada, I would advise getting experience teaching in both French and English if possible. The colleagues I know who are truly capable of bilingual teaching have had a number of interesting opportunities.
Hello, I am fully bilingual (French-English) :)
Quote from: Caracal on January 26, 2020, 05:44:13 AM
Which is great, but with teaching, actually teaching a class is always going to have a lot more impact than just stating an ability to do so. That's probably even more true w language ability where there are a lot of varying definitions of proficiency. According to my grad transcript, I'm proficient in Spanish, which means that in theory, with a lot of time and a dictionary, I could puzzle my way through something that wasn't too complicated. In practice I think that still oversells my skills. Similarly, I imagine some people who claim fluency can carry on basic conversations with ease but would struggle to express complex academic ideas. Since your language skills are of a different order, you really want to find ways to demonstrate that and college teaching experience is going to do that very well.
Quote from: adel9216 on January 24, 2020, 05:33:14 AM
Quote from: Golazo on January 23, 2020, 08:45:35 PM
Some of the advice here seems a little bit R-1/2 or bust. I did something similar to the OP (after I was ABD, which was crucial), during the summer session. Indeed, over the course of my program I offered four different courses as instructor of record and this (both lower level and upper level) was essential for being competitive for LAC and directional jobs, which are a big part of the market. My current LAC wouldn't consider someone without this as a minimum level. Some of the amount you should teach perhaps depends on your aspirations. If you goal is r1 or prestigious postdoc, then spending more time on research is a reasonable choice, but we should be clear that such a choice makes it very hard to get on the TT at a more teaching focused place (excluding SLACs that have R1 research goals) without doing something post PHD to gain more experience.
I certainly agree that you need to be able to make good progress on the dissertation. But teaching 1 class shouldn't undermine this. Of course, this should ideally be done in an environment where the ABD student is mentored both on how to teach and how to prep effectively. I think the utility of opportunities to teach depends on if it is "here are your 80 students, good luck" or "here is the program we've organized to help prepare you to develop your own course and to be effective in the classroom." If done properly, a course on someone's research topic should be easier to prep. If your program doesn't have a formal program, find a mentor who will work with you in learning how to develop a course, how to prep, and how to deliver effectively. Also, this person can write you a good teaching letter on the job market.
Also, OP, if you are in Canada, I would advise getting experience teaching in both French and English if possible. The colleagues I know who are truly capable of bilingual teaching have had a number of interesting opportunities.
Hello, I am fully bilingual (French-English) :)
👍🏾
The fact is, we all chase after shiny objects from time to time....we're all fussy academic magpies.
Americans have less exposure and understanding in some cases to the extent to which bi, tri, and poly-lingual preparation happens in other places, too. The first time my sister and I visited Europe, we were bemused to discover that if we didn't know enough Italian to get a train ticket, there was always someone in the station who knew Italian and French.
We asked in French, they conveyed the question to the ticket agent in Italian, then conveyed the answer back in French, we discussed it in English, got what we needed, and everyone left with a handshake and smiles all 'round.
We met several people with more than one language fully on-board because of international marriages, etc.
My perception has been that Canada is more like Europe in that regard; I think everyone needs to know more than one language because it gives us a broader, more dimensional perspective from which to understand the world (my fourth language is dance.) So I'm reassured that the language issue is not going to be a problem.
My perception of Adel's comments and questions has shifted a bit, too....At the outset I might have felt a bit more like Poly, in that the questions seemed to lack context and did come from so many directions.
BUT my perceptions have shifted since her replies and increased understanding about things people say have also shifted.
In a way, we're exactly the kind of shiny-object-store a good grad student needs and wants to have available; it's part of the ethos here that people try to be careful about giving good advice and acknowledge the limited usefulness of some of those shiny objects (and even Igor's rustier, pointy ones, but those aren't at issue here...!), but as Adel points out, we are also limited in not knowing everything about each other, either.
As people continued to say "Check with your advisor," Adel began to catch that admonition and incorporate it into her posts.
That's learned behaviour in the necessary direction. It's important to acknowledge that.
We're also re-building threads here, too, which used to exist on the old forum, so some of those answers would have been more easily found (or not, given the dread search engine's constipative nature there) so maybe there's a slight bit of potential for grumpiness among longer-standing posters who are repeating statements learned long ago (I wish I knew how octo had the patience to uphold certain counterintuitive accounting truths over and over again).
And--as someone who likes to make jewelry, I've also learned that stringing together enough shiny things--in the right order and with attention to how they work together--will get you a decent necklace.
I have more than I dare count....
;--》
M.
Quote from: adel9216 on January 25, 2020, 05:39:26 PM
You're talking about a "mentor hat" that you're putting on, but that's not a way to talk to a mentee. A mentor can offer criticism, suggestion, different perspective. But a mentor does so with respect for the intellect of their mentee. Which is entirely absent from your post. You're just annoyed by my presence here.
Be annoyed all you like, adel9216. However, I am wearing my best mentor hat for the moment both for you in particular (yes, ask questions, but be open to the answers that draw on more than just the direct answer you want to hear) and the lurkers who need to know that these fora are not representative of academia or even holders of graduate degrees. I stand out as a voice because these fora are heavily weighted towards humanities faculty who do a lot of teaching. That's nowhere near representative of academia at large because humanities faculty are under 12% of all faculty. That's nowhere near representative of graduate school at large because many fields place only a small percentage of doctorate holders into academia. Thus, what looks like consensus among advice-givers may only be true in a tiny corner of the possibilities space, even in academia.
For the record,
* I am a chaser of shiny objects and that has paid off well for me professionally. However, I also know the pitfalls of chasing too many shiny objects at one go, so my bias is always towards the likelihood of too many shiny balls in the air at a given time.
* I am not annoyed by adel9216's presence. If anything, I'm encouraged by someone has generally different questions than what we get term after term. That's why adel9216 stands out in my mind as an individual who has an ongoing saga instead of a series of disconnected posts.
* If your mentor won't tell you uncomfortable truths based on observations, then your mentor is doing you a disservice. Yes, there's information I won't have. There's information no one person who isn't you won't have. However, there's also a blindspot that everyone has with regard to themselves. That's how students can say with a straight face that they are A students, despite all evidence to the contrary. That's how many of us end up saying that the paper is almost finished for months in a row and really mean it every time.
* I am fine with being Judgey McJudgerdaughter's Judger. I respect people by telling them what I'm thinking and what evidence led to that thinking. In this case, the main point is I see someone who is early in her doctoral studies, who is in a field with many fabulous opportunities with a doctorate beyond academia, and who keeps asking interesting questions regarding various opportunities. Thus, my judgment is that advice on the specifics of preparing for teaching a new elective is misguided because that's in weeds for the current situation. Better is to encourage adel9216 to continue to explore possibilities instead of getting locked into one vision of one job, as is implied by the sum of advice here that treats teaching as a given for a future doctoral holder employed in her field.
* I am annoyed, though, when people insist that everyone on a specific thread stick to the question at hand** and/or a given viewpoint that is only supportive of the original poster***. As I just wrote elsewhere, these threads exist for more than just the OP. The Golazo's post asserting that people should teach needed to be addressed for nuance both as advice to you, adel9216, and for the lurkers who don't always read widely enough to know the difference between general advice (yes, get wide teaching experience if you are in a field where most of the jobs in the field are teaching) and specific advice (adel9216 is in a field where teaching is one option for a job, the undergrad curriculum is pretty well set in that field, and adel9216's current situation is such that teaching a new class right now should not be a high priority).
**Q: How do I pitch a course I want to develop? Answer: The methods vary by institution. Check with your local experts and keep in mind that restrictions often exist on who is allowed to pitch a new course.
*** It's a great idea to be thinking now as a grad student about courses you can teach. Start a folder of ideas including syllabus, take pedagogy workshops as offered, and keep revising your ideas as you learn more. Having a course idea ready will be great when applying for academic jobs. Having teaching experience in your own courses is also extremely necessary for future success.
I will write from the perspective of someone on the other side -- tenure-track at three universities of varying sizes after two years as a VAP fresh out of grad school, now tenured, and until recently, a department chair. Assuming your career objective is a tenure-track academic position, designing and teaching a non-standard special topics course instead of focusing on dissertation research and writing is a waste of time. No one on a search committee is going to pay attention to the fact that you somehow managed to teach Neutrino Beam Target Physics at your R1 doctoral institution when most colleges only have undergraduate Physics I: Classical Mechanics and Physics II: Electromagnetism in their curricula. And the teaching-focused institutions that form the majority of employment opportunities are still going to prioritize publications over teaching when hiring because of the screwy incentive structure that exists in academe.
Generally a university department in Discipline X is going to look for a candidate with a PhD in Discipline X, who has a good track record of research, grants, and publications, and -- last on the list -- experience teaching Standard Intro to X that fulfills a gen ed requirement and perhaps the 200 X course that's a requirement for the major and is already in the curriculum.
I concur with Spork on the need to be able to hit the ground running on basic course teaching....I got several 'first gigs' teaching beginning art history and French, and there was definite pushback from people with more seniority everytime I thought of a cool, more specialized course to teach.
I'd propose it--someone else did the seniority tap dance of the chair's desk, and suddenly, voila!--they had the gig.
La vie...
I'm also wanting to return to another thought--really, a question, since I don't know the answer...
Friends of mine from European grad schools have mentioned to me how unfocused American grad students seem, because (my friends suggest) the US schools do general courses inbtheir undergrad programs much longer than European ones do.
By the time a European student starts their doctoral work (as I understand it) they've already done, in their BA-like and MA-like levels of work, a more focused program around their topical studies than US students have done.
The 《matrise》, as one friend explained it to me, was more on the level of one's comps--confirming that you're ready to do the dissertation (or, there, 《these de doctorat》).
So they are expected to be working further ahead, presenting, writing, etc., sooner than we are. (And everyone I every spoke to said teaching was the hardest to break into....when we were having most of these conversations, maybe 5 or so years ago, teaching assistantships didn't even exist in most fields, they said.)
So, my question is:
Is Canada more like that, or more like the US in those regards?
Maybe, it occurred to me, one source of the disjunction some people feel when students ask about more advanced work as early doctoral candidates, could be a difference like that in the two sets of structures and their related expectations.
Maybe it would be good to start a comparative thread for those purposes; maybe it could also look at differences between the humanities and the sciences, etc.
We're much more like a Lily Rosenberg mosaic than a bronze statue in terms of homogeneity, so maybe that's a part of the equation in this thread as well?
Sorry, "Mixed Metaphors" is my new favorite breakfast cereal...
;--》
M.
Quote from: mamselle on January 26, 2020, 10:44:05 AM
Friends of mine from European grad schools have mentioned to me how unfocused American grad students seem, because (my friends suggest) the US schools do general courses inbtheir undergrad programs much longer than European ones do.
By the time a European student starts their doctoral work (as I understand it) they've already done, in their BA-like and MA-like levels of work, a more focused program around their topical studies than US students have done.
The 《matrise》, as one friend explained it to me, was more on the level of one's comps--confirming that you're ready to do the dissertation (or, there, 《these de doctorat》).
So they are expected to be working further ahead, presenting, writing, etc., sooner than we are. (And everyone I every spoke to said teaching was the hardest to break into....when we were having most of these conversations, maybe 5 or so years ago, teaching assistantships didn't even exist in most fields, they said.)
So, my question is:
Is Canada more like that, or more like the US in those regards?
I'm a product of US universities, but I teach in Canada (at a bilingual university, a fact that will help anyone familiar with Canadian universities guess where I am). I can't compare to European universities directly, but within our PhD program, we require considerably fewer courses of our students than I took at my US university. I sometimes think our PhD students could use another year of coursework, at least as measured by their comprehensive exams, but they're always aghast when I tell them how many courses I took.
I think Spork and Mamselle are right, though, about the value of experience in basic courses. I've had three tenure track job offers in my time (I know, I'm incredibly lucky). The first came in part because I could teach a wide range of courses in the curriculum, and they needed someone to do that. The second and third came because, in addition to that, I am English-French bilingual, and the two schools needed someone who could teach in both languages. The program where I teach now turns out bilingual PhDs, and I expect that those who can teach in both languages will stand a good chance of landing a job in Quebec because there are very few PhD programs in French in my field.
Hello,
yes, there are probably differences across geographical locations and disciplines. Most PhD students/candidates I know are teaching or have taught part-time during the course of their PhD and it's kinda "expected", the opposite appears strange most of the time. Of course, you have to complete your thesis. And it's more strategic to do that after comprehensive exam. But even my advisor told me that it's good that I gain some teaching experience during my PhD, especially if I am considering an academic career after my studies.
But I am following your advice, and do agree when most of you say that I should not develop a course from scratch as a PhD student. I had not taught about the implications that most of you have mentionned, and it's wiser to wait and use my ideas more strategically when I will apply for positions.
Additionnally, like you've mentionned mamselle, yes, I have written a thesis at the master's level. I did course work in 1 year, and completed my thesis the following year. And because of the fact that I did an empirical thesis (did interviews, transcribed them, coded them, analyzed them, etc.), the profs that have read my thesis and commented on its final form said it ressembled a PhD thesis. Although the process at the PhD level is much more demanding and long-term, I am not completely unaware of what's ahead of me and what is expected of me to gain a PhD.
I'll say this as someone who has seem many flail. Use your coursework as a framework form your dissertation and/or journal articles. You don't need to worry about going to the latest workshop to meet the latest star who knows the latest hit method. You don't need to visit a department elsewhere to do be a great scholar.
You have several objectives. The first is finish coursework. Second is pass comps. Third would be defend a prospectus. Fourth and fifth are teach and write a dissertation.