moving day

Thought I'd check out the neighborhood at Blogspot since I can't stay on this server forever. Feel free to visit: it's still probably me

the conference conundrum

I love the week of the Big Education Conference. All the profs are at the conference; lots of grad students are right beside them, presenting on joint research projects or well-supervised dissertation research. The entire building clears out; classes are cancelled; email is quiet. It's like a second spring break, a working vacation. I can get into a rhythm with my work, actually accomplish something - like those teacher workdays when we actually got to work in our rooms rather than attending some ridiculous in-service on classroom management run by well-coiffed ladies who'd never set foot in a high school classroom.

Of course, there's always that nagging feeling that I should be presenting at the conference myself. I should have submitted a proposal last August. I should be farther along with my research. I should have someone working with me, pushing me harder than I'll push myself.

I'm torn about conferencing. I know it's not really about the presentation. It's the line on the CV, the schmoozing with people more important than you, the networking with people who can hire you, the seen-and-be-seen atmosphere to propels the academic reputation. I've never been very good at that game. I know I have to learn the rules pretty quickly, though, with the end of grad school just over the horizon (perhaps wishful thinking but I have great plans for the summer) but I don't have to like that I'm joining in.

I did enjoy that last conference I went to, though. Having someone there to introduce me to people, let me tag along for lunches, invite me to join group dinners, made the whole situation much more pleasant. I can speak in social situations, I just need to feel some sort of connection to the person with whom I'm sharing the spring rolls.

It's hard for me to talk about what I do. I always seems to downplay it, pass it off as something not fully formed or very interesting. I'm much more likely to make a quick quip and ask a question about their work than I am to launch into a lengthy explanation about the potential of weblogs in teacher education. Strange. It isn't as if I'm not committed to what I do. The half-read books piled around my apartment, the lack of social invitations on weekends, the notes to self taped to my office walls, the computer screen tan - I wouldn't choose this life if I didn't believe in what I was doing. Still, I find myself at a loss for words when faced with questions about what I'm researching or writing or working on at the moment. All of which makes me more than a little reluctant to submit to the scrutiny of the educational establishment. Not exactly the best state of mind for somehow who does indeed want to find a faculty position in the academy.

fate

Despite having a nice day shopping with my sister and niece, I can think of other places I'd like to be. For instance...

You Belong in London A little old fashioned, and a little modern. A little traditional, and a little bit punk rock. A unique woman like you needs a city that offers everything. No wonder you and London will get along so well. What city do you belong in?

sanity restored

After twelve hours of uninterrupted sleep, I have regained an alert and conscious state today. In order to maintain that state for a bit longer, I have managed - quite successfully, too - to do nothing strenuous: took a nice slow walk to admire the beginnings of spring; gathered a few wildflowers to adorn the apartment; sat on the porch and continued reading Teacher education and the social conditions of schooling (Liston & Zeichner); started skimming Narratives from the classroom: An introduction to teaching (Miller, ed). My dinner is on the stove; I can choose from my heap of unread books and my hours of unwatched tv; and I can go to bed at any point.

This is exactly what I needed.

seeing double

Absolutely exhausted. Thought very seriously about sitting down on a chair in the bathroom for a short nap during a break in our afternoon meeting at nearby university. I have reached new lows of pathetic-ness. Heading toward the couch now - I don't think I can make it to the bedroom.

where's my bed?

I am so incredibly tired. Nothing pithy tonight, I'm afraid. Between my inconsistent sleep patterns for the last month, trying to organize an in-house symposium for May and dealing with all the emails that entails, hosting grad students from a fellow institution today and tomorrow, and managing my overwhelming guilt over not working on my dissertation in two months - exhausted.

exactly my point

How very interesting that Bitch. PhD is addressing the exact same argument I had with someone tonight - and I quote from her exquisite blog:

Children are not "goods." They are--are you sitting down? They are human beings. Actual members of society. Who, yes, happen to be in a dependent position. Nonetheless, inasmuch as they are members of society, they have a claim on society to help care for them in their dependence so that they do not starve....I am saying we have to deal with each other because refusing to do so is wrong, anti-social, anti-human. Everything else comes after that. Now, some of these issues are indeed economic ones. And it is totally cool to talk about the economics of children, the economics of families. It is important to do so, in fact. But boiling kids down to economics is wrong, just like it would be wrong to claim that society is a purely economic institution. There are human needs that are not all about the bottom line, and that is okay, and people should not have to choose between economic survival and their other human needs.

My argument actually revolved around the homeless, extending to the helpless (often one and the same), and finished up with children. Still, I was trying to make the same point: you cannot boil societal decisions that are often moral and ethical down to the bottom line on a spreadsheet. Yet, someone I am quite close to does just that, and it really puts a kink in our friendship.

I can't get past his insistence that some established board should have the right to determine medical treatment for certain groups (and by established board, he obviously means people who agree with him). For instance - and I pull from our lengthy conversation - people who knowingly put themselves in harm's way (by smoking, by riding a motorcycle without a helmet - perhaps for being born a dumb ass?) should not drain thousands of dollars of treatment away from more deserving people. Who qualifies as deserving, I'm not sure, as "Sam" is adamant that people, in possessing free will, are responsible for their lives, their choices, their outcomes. And because of free will, they cannot accuse society, television, parents, friends, mental issues, heavy narcotics, and/or stupidity for any mess they may find themselves in - they're responsible, so they should accept the blame.

As for medical treatment, what gives us the right to expect extraordinary measures? (My argument that too many people cannot afford practical medical care, much less extraordinary, and wouldn't it be great to expect decent medical care regardless of your need somehow supports his argument that we think only of ourselves and not the public good - I'm still working on that one.) We pour too much money into medical treatment for the elderly, for the incurably ill, for that one person rather than putting that same money into measures that would save dozens of people. But - and I think this is important - for those who have the money to burn, they are welcome to use their resources on those extraordinary measures.

So! Am I crazy or does this sound like an argument for fiscally-determined euthanasia? And didn't the Germans espouse something very similar when they started weeding out the "damaged" citizens of the Third Reich?

I'm tired, so I'm probably overreacting. And I know that I'm more likely to argue the emotional side of an issue than the - and again, I quote - rational side when I get into it with Sam. Still, there's something there that really bothers me, and I think Professor B managed to say it: we lose something essentially human when we start thinking of people as commodities.

further evidence of my insanity

The last graduate student association meeting of the semester starts in half an hour and I am, indeed, going to run for president again. As if I don't have enough to do - even if I rarely do it. Still, there's that nagging voice in the back of my head reminding me that there's still more to accomplish with the grad students before I leave. There's always more to do! And for some reason, I feel like it's my job to get it done. Nothing like an over-developed sense of responsibility.

Of course, putting my name on the ballot doesn't exactly guarantee an extension of my position. Then again, I haven't heard anyone else express interest. Perhaps I cut some people off at the knees when I said I'd run again - there is a small streak of politeness running through the grad community that avoids confrontation (we prefer the passive-aggressive standing around in the hallways and picking each other apart instead) - but I do have some momentum going this year. We put on a conference; we're organizing an in-house symposium as I write; we've instituted a Monday coffee hour; we've garnered more support from the Dean's office with budget increases and increased access to the big guy.

Attendance is still sporadic at our events - socials, formal meetings, brown bag lunches - but (call me the fox jumping too low for the grapes) I think much of that is attributed to the strange population that makes up education. Most people have spouses, if not children; we're returning students with lives off campus; and we're an odd mix of people with our devotion to education providing our only commonality. Perhaps that's just this place, I don't know...