Random Thoughts Anew

[aside]

Is there the slightest evidence that making people take training courses to educate them not to abuse students or staff has any effect on people's behavior?

Ah, but that's not what's it's all about.  It's about covering one's institutional hind end.

Of course. And who benefits when that gets done.

Everyone who is paid by the institution.  Everyone who has ever attended or supported the institution.  Everyone who might be spared abuse because the video did influence behavior.

[mahagonny]

Is there the slightest evidence that making people take training courses to educate them not to abuse students or staff has any effect on people's behavior?

Ah, but that's not what's it's all about.  It's about covering one's institutional hind end.

Of course. And who benefits when that gets done.

Everyone who is paid by the institution.  Everyone who has ever attended or supported the institution.  Everyone who might be spared abuse because the video did influence behavior.

Right, tenure track faculty are interested in adjunct faculty doing this extra labor gratis. We already knew that.

The basis for an extra stipend would be the piecework, temporary employee (as opposed to regular salaried employee) contract together with the insistence by the regular faculty that adjunct hiring is not meant for extended use, rather to 'fill in the gaps.'

But I suppose downer has the right idea. Do the training, give the right answers, don't sweat it. Go home.

[downer]

Yeah, this was online training and took 10 minutes since I skipped the videos and went straight to the quizzes. So not a big deal.

It is worth remembering that some of these well-intended programs are counter-productive. Notoriously, the "Scared Straight" program for high school students led to more crime. And continues to do so, since it has not been stopped.

I maintain unless a training program is evidence-based, states and universities have no place requiring it.

I am interested in thinking about what universities would look like if they were really committed to stopping faculty abuse of students as opposed to making token efforts.

[Cheerful]

Yeah, this was online training and took 10 minutes since I skipped the videos and went straight to the quizzes. So not a big deal.

Only 10 minutes and you can skip to the quizzes?!  Do you have any idea how fortunate you are?

Everyone who might be spared abuse because the video did influence behavior.

With all due respect, are you kidding?  Many of the training videos are awful, not to mention offensive.  Colossal waste of collective labor hours.

[marshwiggle]

Yeah, this was online training and took 10 minutes since I skipped the videos and went straight to the quizzes. So not a big deal.

It is worth remembering that some of these well-intended programs are counter-productive. Notoriously, the "Scared Straight" program for high school students led to more crime. And continues to do so, since it has not been stopped.

I maintain unless a training program is evidence-based, states and universities have no place requiring it.

I am interested in thinking about what universities would look like if they were really committed to stopping faculty abuse of students as opposed to making token efforts.

This would run up against the idea of having faculty develop personal relationships with students. It's hardly rocket science to codify keeping working relationships (including those with students) completely professional, but all of the pople trying to make the experience warm and fuzzy for students would complain bitterly and/or be out of a job.

Before someone points it out, obviously many, if not most, faculty can maintain healthy relationships while being cordial with students. However, the behaviours that cross the line are the result of pushing the boundaries of "cordial".  For instance, lots of stories involve the prof who socializes with his/her grad students. One scenario is the prof and grad students at a bar; students leave periodically until only one student is left. Problems happen after that. This situation happened because there was not a conscious effort to prevent it. Not allowing socializing together off-campus, and especially one-on-one would be reasonable rules to have in place.

[little bongo]

For suggesting this kind of "training" isn't a good use of resources? 

It's no wonder there are lots of people who don't embrace these initiatives when even questioning their value seems to be taken as equivalent to being guilty of the actions being sanctioned.

No, Marshwiggle. For being you.
[/quote][/quote]

I don't know whether you frequented the old forum back when Marshwiggle was opining that adjunct teaching should pay like babysitting as long as the market would bear it, and no one but me gave any pushback. They thought his idea was just dandy. Now that he's on a tack with showing less than the usual amount of respect for sensitivity training everyone's heart is bleeding. Sensitivity training fortifies the tenure track privileges and optics. That why people care about it. Keeping as much money as possible away from adjunct funding is also an aim of the tenure track. If you're on the tenure track and you want to show how much you care about your fellow human, it's not as easy as people think.



Well, it's interesting that you bring up old forum stuff. I think I actually do remember something about adjunct pay and babysitting, but I can't recall all the context. I remember Marshwiggle mainly playing Grover Dill to Polly_Mer's Scut Farkus whenever adjunct topics came up, although to be fair to Marshwiggle, he was actually voicing opinions back then (even if they were mostly Polly_Mer's).

It's too bad about adjunct discussion on the threads--I think it got off to a lively start, and participants could have hashed out some serious points. It devolved into Polly_Mer and protoplasm turning the whole topic into Abbott and Costello (Polly_Mer was Abbott in this case, if you're still following) Meet the Adjuncts. Although, I remember thinking if those two (that is, Polly_Mer and protoplasm) ever got together to pool their dueling posts, they would have the funniest academic book of all time (despite some critics probably saying that the characterizations were too cartoonish--little would they know...).

Now there's some random thoughts.

[marshwiggle]

Well, it's interesting that you bring up old forum stuff. I think I actually do remember something about adjunct pay and babysitting, but I can't recall all the context. I remember Marshwiggle mainly playing Grover Dill to Polly_Mer's Scut Farkus whenever adjunct topics came up, although to be fair to Marshwiggle, he was actually voicing opinions back then (even if they were mostly Polly_Mer's).

FWIW, the point I was raising is whether there is a legitimate category of intentionally part-time jobs.  Babysitters are hired to care for children, even though they don't have the training or pay of ECE workers. Should "babysitting" be made illegal and so the only way people can allow someone else to supervise their children is to formally engage licenced ECE workers?

Unless one thinks the health and safety of children is a trivial concern, then I think this raises some important points about what "paid employment" means.

In case anyone wants to discuss this, it can be moved to a more suitable forum; I just wanted to clarify the context.

[mahagonny]

FWIW, the point I was raising is whether there is a legitimate category of intentionally part-time jobs.  Babysitters are hired to care for children, even though they don't have the training or pay of ECE workers. Should "babysitting" be made illegal and so the only way people can allow someone else to supervise their children is to formally engage licenced ECE workers?

Which drew practically zero response from the tenure track, and probably surprised them that anyone thought there was a need to ask, since they all know that eliminating adjunct positions has never been a serious proposal.

[mahagonny]

Everything I eat is comfort food.

[aside]

Everyone who might be spared abuse because the video did influence behavior.

With all due respect, are you kidding?  Many of the training videos are awful, not to mention offensive.  Colossal waste of collective labor hours.

Nope, not kidding.  I did say someone "might" be spared abuse.  Do you have evidence that no such videos have ever influenced behavior?  Do you recall that my initial comment was that institutions require such videos in order to cover their hind ends more than out of a belief they will be effective?  Or perhaps you didn't read that.

[mahagonny]

Everyone who might be spared abuse because the video did influence behavior.

With all due respect, are you kidding?  Many of the training videos are awful, not to mention offensive.  Colossal waste of collective labor hours.

Nope, not kidding.  I did say someone "might" be spared abuse.  Do you have evidence that no such videos have ever influenced behavior?  Do you recall that my initial comment was that institutions require such videos in order to cover their hind ends more than out of a belief they will be effective?  Or perhaps you didn't read that.

Well it's a far better use of people's time, money and energy than the new mania about helping us learn to teach anti-racistly, which should collide with academic freedom protection. Hopefully.

[mahagonny]

New rule: 
When you see racism, sexism, institutional bias etc everywhere and you constantly write about it, you forfeit your right to show concern for the undue pressure on minority people whose ascendancy you are celebrating to fix everything related to race, including problems that aren't even necessarily problems. You are the one who is making it needlessly rough on them by making everything about identity, discrimination and parity.

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2020/11/24/kamala-harris-symbol-representation-black-women-work-remains

[mamselle]

Aaannddd...a new thread-killer has emerged in our midst.

It's not The Fiona, but I guess it'll have to do.

M.

[ergative]

Perhaps mamselle has the gift of life, for I have a new random thought anew:

I don't understand why all icings are not cream cheese icings. I have never met a buttercream that isn't outperformed by a cream cheese-based counterpart.

[downer]

I've got my xmas lights up, and I'm playing smooth jazz. If only I liked 420 more, I could just check out for the rest of the semester.