Topic: Bang Your Head on Your Desk - the thread of teaching despair!

[evil_physics_witchcraft]

Today's honors seminar included a discussion of Harriet Jacobs's Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl. We discussed the scene in which Mrs. Flint says she loves slave Nancy so much that she wants Nancy buried with her. Jacobs says that this illustrates the weird attachment and affection the owners have for their slaves. This exchange happened during the discussion:

Student: Of course Mrs. Flint feels attachment! If someone does favors for you her entire life, then you're going to feel affection for them.
Me: Not sure "favor" is the right word, because Nancy doesn't have any agency here.
Student: That's degrading! It's pretty racist for you to assume Nancy doesn't have agency.
Me: But that's one of the text's themes, of the perverse nature of having absolute control over someone else.
Student: It's not "absolute" control. There's always a choice.
Me: You're saying that Nancy chose to sleep outside of Flint's bedroom, and have a series of miscarriages over the course of her life?
Student: Yes.
Another student: Duuuuude
Student: She could have hidden or left, as Jacobs did. Slaves ran away all the time. Nancy chose to stay and help out Mrs. Flint, and you're racist if you think otherwise.

I mean, technically he's correct: there's no "absolute" control. But I don't know how to react to a "slaves chose to be slaves" rhetoric, especially when couched as "you're racist if you think slaves lacked agency." Anyone have experience diffusing such situations, or ways to avoid this kind of antagonism?

No advice here, but what a nutter!

[the_geneticist]

Great support staff are amazing and hard to find.  I have been working with someone who has been here "forever", but is not anyone's favorite choice.  They have never worked in a molecular lab, but they are in charge of the prep for our intro molecular labs.  They just don't seem to care that certain issues like broken equipment or not having the right size of racks to hold tubes makes it harder for the students to learn.  Giving students things like a broken microscope or a leaking pipette means setting them up to fail.  Giving students racks that easily tip over means we are losing money due to spills.
I'm tired of playing nice.  I'm documenting everything.  Our students deserve better!

[reverist]

Today's honors seminar included a discussion of Harriet Jacobs's Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl. We discussed the scene in which Mrs. Flint says she loves slave Nancy so much that she wants Nancy buried with her. Jacobs says that this illustrates the weird attachment and affection the owners have for their slaves. This exchange happened during the discussion:

Student: Of course Mrs. Flint feels attachment! If someone does favors for you her entire life, then you're going to feel affection for them.
Me: Not sure "favor" is the right word, because Nancy doesn't have any agency here.
Student: That's degrading! It's pretty racist for you to assume Nancy doesn't have agency.
Me: But that's one of the text's themes, of the perverse nature of having absolute control over someone else.
Student: It's not "absolute" control. There's always a choice.
Me: You're saying that Nancy chose to sleep outside of Flint's bedroom, and have a series of miscarriages over the course of her life?
Student: Yes.
Another student: Duuuuude
Student: She could have hidden or left, as Jacobs did. Slaves ran away all the time. Nancy chose to stay and help out Mrs. Flint, and you're racist if you think otherwise.

I mean, technically he's correct: there's no "absolute" control. But I don't know how to react to a "slaves chose to be slaves" rhetoric, especially when couched as "you're racist if you think slaves lacked agency." Anyone have experience diffusing such situations, or ways to avoid this kind of antagonism?

Depending on how "agency" is used, there's a distinction between "able to perform some action" and "agency." In philosophy, for example, if I place a gun to your head and tell you that you must transport these drugs across a border or I'll kill you, while you have the ability to refrain, you are not typically regarded to have moral agency; you're not held morally responsible. This is important because it can de-escalate the idea that it was the slaves' fault, or something. They could have left, but they're not responsible for not leaving. This preserves the intuition that they are not at fault for their own scenario while acknowledging the truth of action, and preserves the idea of supererogation, or moral heroism, for those who did escape and helped others escape.

[marshwiggle]

Depending on how "agency" is used, there's a distinction between "able to perform some action" and "agency." In philosophy, for example, if I place a gun to your head and tell you that you must transport these drugs across a border or I'll kill you, while you have the ability to refrain, you are not typically regarded to have moral agency; you're not held morally responsible.

Where does Stockholm Syndrome come in this?

[ergative]

Stu! The course has 300 people in it! You emailed me once back in November to explain that you have been ill and fallen behind and have anxiety about contacting your professors and that's why things got worse for you. That is the extent of our interactions. TAs taught your seminar and graded your work. I don't know you from Adam.

Why are you giving out my name as a reference in your job applications?

[reverist]

Depending on how "agency" is used, there's a distinction between "able to perform some action" and "agency." In philosophy, for example, if I place a gun to your head and tell you that you must transport these drugs across a border or I'll kill you, while you have the ability to refrain, you are not typically regarded to have moral agency; you're not held morally responsible.

Where does Stockholm Syndrome come in this?

That's a good question! I honestly hadn't thought of that. I'll have to think on it some more, or do what I usually do and copy and paste from Wikipedia...wait, that's our students who do that!

[marshwiggle]

Depending on how "agency" is used, there's a distinction between "able to perform some action" and "agency." In philosophy, for example, if I place a gun to your head and tell you that you must transport these drugs across a border or I'll kill you, while you have the ability to refrain, you are not typically regarded to have moral agency; you're not held morally responsible.

Where does Stockholm Syndrome come in this?

That's a good question! I honestly hadn't thought of that. I'll have to think on it some more, or do what I usually do and copy and paste from Wikipedia...wait, that's our students who do that!

There's kind of interthreaduality with this thread about The Cruelty of the Adjunct System by Alexandra Bradner.

Do adjuncts have agency? Do they have Stockholm syndrome?

[kaysixteen]

'Agency' is a buzzword that I began to notice maybe three or four years ago.   Like most all buzzwords, it is overused and rather pretentious, but the notion that undergirds it is real nonetheless.  So what about adjuncts' 'agency'?  Only those with full options to do x rather than negative-x, or even some alternative y, can really have 'agency' in any given realm of life.   Most adjuncts, despite the rather strident rhetoric seen here (and elsewhere) by many people who seem to think that for many if not most of them, it is merely a matter of will to do it (i.e., 'agency'), that would ensure that any adjunct so wishing could simply decide to exercise that 'agency' and leave academia and get a great professional-type job elsewhere, really have no such serious, realistic options, thus have no real 'agency', at least in this regard.

[marshwiggle]

'Agency' is a buzzword that I began to notice maybe three or four years ago.   Like most all buzzwords, it is overused and rather pretentious, but the notion that undergirds it is real nonetheless.  So what about adjuncts' 'agency'?  Only those with full options to do x rather than negative-x, or even some alternative y, can really have 'agency' in any given realm of life.   Most adjuncts, despite the rather strident rhetoric seen here (and elsewhere) by many people who seem to think that for many if not most of them, it is merely a matter of will to do it (i.e., 'agency'), that would ensure that any adjunct so wishing could simply decide to exercise that 'agency' and leave academia and get a great professional-type job elsewhere, really have no such serious, realistic options, thus have no real 'agency', at least in this regard.

Does getting a degree, including an advanced one, remove a person's agency? Given that a significant portion of the population has no degree, how is it that a person with an advanced degree has less agency?

[the_geneticist]

'Agency' is a buzzword that I began to notice maybe three or four years ago.   Like most all buzzwords, it is overused and rather pretentious, but the notion that undergirds it is real nonetheless.  So what about adjuncts' 'agency'?  Only those with full options to do x rather than negative-x, or even some alternative y, can really have 'agency' in any given realm of life.   Most adjuncts, despite the rather strident rhetoric seen here (and elsewhere) by many people who seem to think that for many if not most of them, it is merely a matter of will to do it (i.e., 'agency'), that would ensure that any adjunct so wishing could simply decide to exercise that 'agency' and leave academia and get a great professional-type job elsewhere, really have no such serious, realistic options, thus have no real 'agency', at least in this regard.

Google search for "learned helplessness" or "sunk cost fallacy".  Pretty sure that's what you are describing.

[OneMoreYear]

New rule from upper administration:
All full time faculty (NTT and TT) are expected to have 10 hours per week of in-person (in your campus office) office hours starting summer semester in which you are available for students to drop in.  Office hours will be posted in some type of centralized website TBD.

10 hours? Who has a schedule that allows 10 hours of office hours per week? I currently have 4 posted in-person office hours. No one comes to them. They send questions by email, or I meet with them virtually, but not always at my posted times. 

[downer]

New rule from upper administration:
All full time faculty (NTT and TT) are expected to have 10 hours per week of in-person (in your campus office) office hours starting summer semester in which you are available for students to drop in.  Office hours will be posted in some type of centralized website TBD.

10 hours? Who has a schedule that allows 10 hours of office hours per week? I currently have 4 posted in-person office hours. No one comes to them. They send questions by email, or I meet with them virtually, but not always at my posted times.

Wow. That's going to make people so pissed off or they will just ingore it. Will campus security be assigned to checking faculty are in their offices?

[the_geneticist]

New rule from upper administration:
All full time faculty (NTT and TT) are expected to have 10 hours per week of in-person (in your campus office) office hours starting summer semester in which you are available for students to drop in.  Office hours will be posted in some type of centralized website TBD.

10 hours? Who has a schedule that allows 10 hours of office hours per week? I currently have 4 posted in-person office hours. No one comes to them. They send questions by email, or I meet with them virtually, but not always at my posted times.

Wait, what?!  Do they mean "you must be in your office at least 10 hours a week"?  Or are they trying for the SLAC model of "keep your door open so students can just stop by" approach?
No way I'm devoting my time to being available for help than students are devoting to studying.

[OneMoreYear]

New rule from upper administration:
All full time faculty (NTT and TT) are expected to have 10 hours per week of in-person (in your campus office) office hours starting summer semester in which you are available for students to drop in.  Office hours will be posted in some type of centralized website TBD.

10 hours? Who has a schedule that allows 10 hours of office hours per week? I currently have 4 posted in-person office hours. No one comes to them. They send questions by email, or I meet with them virtually, but not always at my posted times.

Wow. That's going to make people so pissed off or they will just ingore it. Will campus security be assigned to checking faculty are in their offices?

Yes, pissed off seems to be the reaction so far. No clue if anyone will check.

Wait, what?!  Do they mean "you must be in your office at least 10 hours a week"?  Or are they trying for the SLAC model of "keep your door open so students can just stop by" approach?
No way I'm devoting my time to being available for help than students are devoting to studying.

So far, it appears to be "10 hours of office hours for students." I think it's part of the "student success initiative" gone awry. We are definitely not a SLAC, and modeling any policies off of SLAC policies will lead to failure. What would actually lead to better student success would be hiring more faculty to improve the student-faculty ratio and reduce class sizes and course loads (and also make sure departments have adequate administrative support) but of course what the upper administration is going to do is try to get more work out of the current faculty until we fully burn out. But this problem is not only in my university. This is just the latest ill-conceived policy here.

[FishProf]

Where the university sets a minimum, I see a maximum.  I will be in my office NO MORE THAN 10 hours per week.  Feel free to check.