An Academic Position Statement on Holding an Academic Position
¶ 1 Leave a comment on paragraph 1 3 I did not grow up thinking I would ever become a teacher. It was not until I entered college, where I received several opportunities to become a writing tutor that I then began to seriously consider a teaching vocation, specifically in English. As an undergraduate, I ran English study groups for several areas of literature, and it was during these moments of shared learning that formed a small foundation for how I approach teaching in my English classrooms. When I began working on my Master’s, that foundation was even further broadened and strengthened, as I began to realize where I fit into the field as a scholar. One of my primary tasks in that program was to write a forty-page thesis, which was reflective of my theoretical approach and critical responses to a literary period. Much of my training has been in British literature, so I felt most comfortable in that particular time period, specifically exploring the ways in which Gilbert and Gubar examined nineteenth-century texts and the female writer. This research and study formed my own feminist perspective on texts I encounter both as a student and as an English instructor. This perspective on feminism was further heightened by reading Judith Butler’s “Subjects of Sex/Gender/Desire” because she asks a lot of questions, but does not always give us a solid answer. Too many times I feel like we are always on a journey, especially when reading critical theory, toward discovering some concrete definitions and answers to tough questions, like, for example this question of what it means to be or exist as a woman, or still further, what it means to be a woman writer. In some of my recent scholarship, I have moved beyond nineteenth-century feminine writing and into examining Arab American women’s fiction writing, which is distinctly different from so many other texts I have encountered. My theoretical approach to this body of work involves the texts of Homi Bhabha and his notions on “hybridity,” and on Gayatri Spivak’s theory of the “subaltern.” Fused together, all of these theoretical pieces form some of the ways in which I engage and experience texts, however, this is not to say that I want all of my students to read, analyze, and discuss in this same way.
¶ 2 Leave a comment on paragraph 2 1 As an instructor of literature, I am highly responsible for exposure. Some of the students who enter my classroom do not even know who half the authors are on the syllabus, while others enter the class thinking they know who an author is and what a certain text means. One of my duties as a teacher-scholar is to invite and encourage conversations and dialogue in the classroom that expands the students’ knowledge and process of critical thinking. One of the ways I accomplish this is by asking students to bring in questions regarding the texts we are reading. I want them to know that there is value in not fully understanding all that goes on within the margins of a text. For example, in my Introduction to Literature course last week, we were reading “The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock,” which is a long poem that usually puzzles and petrifies most students, but after going through their questions, and attempting to come to terms with some of the content and meanings in the poem, students seemed to pick up on and discuss issues even beyond the questions they had originally brought in. Will all of my students fully understand or enjoy every text I expose them to? Certainly not, but they will come to the realization that literature and the study of it is not something that is beyond their reach or scope of intellect. This is what I am responsible for as a teacher-scholar and strive toward achieving in my classrooms.
¶ 3 Leave a comment on paragraph 3 1 When considering the question, “Why are you here?” I am sent into a spiraling array of angles. I am here at IUP working on my PhD in English because I enjoy the collegial classroom discussion and environment; I would one day like to hold a full-time faculty position at a college or university; I cannot stop my drive toward learning more about literature; the more I learn, the better teacher I ultimately will be; to practice the performative act of academic, scholarly writing. This list is in no particular order because I hold them all in the same regard and all encompass the many wonderful reasons why I am here. When considering another, slightly different question: “Why I have chosen to be an intellectual?” however, the answer becomes quite simple: I would not be happy or content doing anything else. But the question of what an intellectual exactly is becomes much more problematized after reading Gramsci’s theories on intellectuals. The intellectual binaries Gramsci is most concerned with are the traditional/organic intellectuals. Gramsci calls for those in charge of knowledge to become organic intellectuals, who are responsible for creating “subaltern groups who will be capable of opposing and transforming the existing social order” (300). While I do understand the need for an organic approach to those who function as intellects within any given society, I am not necessarily sure that it can always work on a massive scale as Gramsci would have wanted. I am reminded of Azar Nafisi’s attempt to teach about women in her literature courses at the University of Tehran in Iran, but then leaves because of the scrutiny she received. What she does after leaving the university seems indicative of the organic intellectual Gramsci is seeking because she still continues to teach the controversial literature to female students, but on a much smaller scale. In a sense, this is an example of an organic intellectual who is attempting to challenge the authority of the ruling social structure. One of the important things to remember, as a teacher in academia, is that colleges and universities can sometimes operate as the vehicle driving the values of a certain social system.
¶ 4 Leave a comment on paragraph 4 0 Currently, the major system that is propelling institutions of higher education is the adjunct system of teaching labor. As a participant in this operation, many adjuncts do what Moten and Harney call “teaching for food” (102). When I read these words, I became somewhat horrified by the reality that attempting to obtain a full-time teaching position within higher ed can sometimes start at exactly this stage of “teaching for food.” Universities and colleges unquestionably need teaching labor, but for me, the question of how colleges go about creating that teaching labor force is ethical in nature. For example, I typically teach nine courses (on-line and in-seat) each semester, and make close to $40,000 annually doing that, while a full-time, tenure-track professor makes much more teaching a much smaller course load. As a result, we arrive at an ethical dilemma of being overworked and underpaid as adjunct instructors. While this is something I did not realize would be reality when I began teaching, I feel as though the opportunities for adjunct teaching have not always been wholly negative or oppressive. Yes, some institutions of higher ed are not as intellectually freeing as others are, but the students I have encountered along these three years have well been worth the upward climb. My students teach me on a regular basis about their own experiences of living in the world. Their worlds sometimes are even foreign to myself, and I welcome the knowledge they can bestow upon me as a way to reach beyond the confines and boundaries of my own world, both as an intellectual and as a natural, living, breathing human individual. I do not even consider teaching college level English as academic labor necessarily, but view it more as a mental vocation; it is a calling to actively participate in higher education and to become aware of both the values and flaws of the institution and attempt to help repair and strengthen the mission and goals higher ed.
This looks great, Jaclyn — but could you try separating the post into paragraphs (just hit return) so that we wil be able to comment on individual parts of it? Thanks!
Perhaps the choice of words was inadvertent, but the phrase “Too many times I feel like we are always on a journey” caught my attention. Juxtaposing this image of constant motion, development against the overall theme of “holding a position” seems central to me. I feel almost as though in the perspective you present that there is an understood nirvana at the end, a physical place of security for the professor and a mental plane of understanding. For myself, I am frightened of definitive ends and I embrace the process as the answer, but I can see the allure of such an philosophy.
I also never thought of being a teacher till college. I suppose I never connected the reading (nad entusiastic sharing) with teachers till a firend pointed it out to me. But it is as wonderful as it it startling to find that fit.
I find it interesting that you mention that your apporach involves a lot of theory, experience with the literature, and personal ideas fused together. I know I’m always more comfortable with such an approach than any pure theory alone… I think a lot of us are happier mix and matching that way.
I agree about being responsible for exposure, and even the ideas that I’m not sure I want students looking at lit (or the world) the same way I do. I think I want them to find the way they do (or can), instead, even if it is diferent from mine.
The bit about using tricky pieces to raise questions or talk about the confusion or difficulty of a piece is lovely. sometimes it isn’t about understanding, or having the right answer, or even thinking there is an answer somewhere… just asking questions. And helping students figure out not just that they can continue studying, or that it may be not just possible but worthwhile, is one of the things I also see as a major teacher’s goal (rather more than ‘giving answers’).
There are multiple answers for why we are here, and simple ones. I think none of us will disagree that we couldn’t be happy being anything else, or maybe even just could not be. Gramsci’s organic intellectual originally was, maybe, is the person who must think, cannot not think about the world, (like the quotes about the compulsion to write), and left ‘organic’ because they hadn’t hat an opportunity to be otherwise. Ithe class loyalties and comittment to social change are part of it, a big part, but maybe at least partly the result of this inequality, and not just the cause? it does make me wonder to what degree our intellectual ‘status’ is, well, volentary.
Learning the reality of academic labor (especially adjuncting) and its attendant financial politics also shocked me, when I heard. I think it’s wonderful you have found opportunities in this kind of exposure. And I agree that college level english is important, a way to teach students that they have acess to spaces they might not have considered, a way to actively participate in the ideas and realities of higher education.