Thursday, February 28, 2013

Yo Ghana! Files for 501(c)3 Status

Thanks to the generosity and expertise of the law firm of Thompson and Bogran, Yo Ghana! has officially filed for 501(c)3 status.  Taking this step required overcoming two (internal) sets of reservations.
1) Acquiring and maintaining 501(c)3 status, which enables contributors to deduct their contributions on their tax returns, is tedious and time consuming;
2) The primary purpose of Yo Ghana! is for students to learn from each other by sharing letters.  Encouraging American students to raise money for schools in Ghana might interfere with that.

Over time, compelling rejoinders to these concerns occurred to me.  For the first: Small is beautiful.  Many people are motivated to give to a cause because they know someone who is intimately involved with it.  Small nonprofits also tend (at least this one will!) to spend little money on staff or overhead.  It's all about volunteering so that as much money as possible goes to the people who need it.  For the second: Yes, it is challenging to mix global friendships and financial support.  In fact students are encouraged to give not to individuals, but to the larger school.  The school leadership decides how the money can best be spent for the school as a whole.  With Purity School, for example, we are funding a library for everyone, not giving away laptops to a few.  The library will draw more students and, therefore, increase the school's income, which means better pay for staff.  Furthermore, part of what American students learn from people in poorer countries is that our world contains extreme inequality, inequality that often leads to suffering.  Those of us who have way more than we need have a lot of power to change that.

Check out our new website: http://www.yoghana.org/

Friday, February 22, 2013

Why Professors (Often) Teach Poorly: Part III

Over the past two weeks I have argued that professors often teach poorly because of how our training and early professional development is structured.  Both graduate students and assistant professors are acutely aware that getting and retaining a professorship depends largely on the quantity and quality of their publications.  So a decade or more will pass between the time that a student enters graduate school until she or he has the job security to focus on teaching.

But most associate and full professors continue to put more emphasis on publication than teaching.  This is partly a matter of habit.  Our recently tenured professor has been trained to value publishing.  Raises and further promotions--or jobs at more prestigious institutions--usually hinge on distinction as a researcher.  Publishing a prestigious book or in a top journal is a sure way to win the notice and respect of one's peers--inside and outside one's department and university.

And what about teaching?  One of my professors at the University of Oregon back in the early 1980s referred to it as "making mud pies."  Most professors wouldn't go that far, and I knew some very, very dedicated teachers at the University of Oregon.  But being a good--let alone great--teacher is optional at far too many universities.  We are trained to push the boundaries of research at the edges of our fields, not to get beginning or intermediate students excited about material we consider basic.

I have found that  most people outside academia are surprised to learn that most professors focus on research rather than teaching.  Given the daunting challenges that all of us face, the growing interconnectedness and complexity of the world, we need to find a way to get professors more focused on educating their students rather than researching and writing for each other.

Friday, February 15, 2013

Why Professors (Often) Teach Poorly: Part II

Last week we examined the socialization of professors, how the experience of graduate school draws them more and more deeply into isolated, highly specialized research while neglecting to teach them much about teaching and then releases them into an extremely competitive job market in which publications--or the possibility of publications--is the easiest way to stand out from the other hundreds of applicants.  So our beginning professor is heavily pre-disposed toward researching and writing books and articles that will reach a small, highly specialized, audience.

Teaching classes to large numbers of undergraduates will not necessarily change that.  Many professors in fact start out as instructors, are hired to teach a class or classes for a term or a year.  Again, getting published is one's best bet at gaining a more stable and remunerative job.  Professors who do gain such jobs cannot rest on their laurels, however, for the tenure clock starts to click as soon as their appointment begins.

Publications usually loom large in tenure and promotion.  The first time I was reviewed for promotion, many years ago at a university far, far away, a great deal of attention was paid to my publications, both by the exterior referees and the committee members.  When it came time to review my teaching evaluations, the day before the committee's report was due, it turned out that they had been lost.  This was not a major concern, for my publications were numerous and well regarded.  A friend of mine who failed to get tenure at an elite university despite a book with a top publisher and a fabulous reputation as a teacher was told by a full professor: "It's good to have good teaching recommendations.  But not too good."

Now, not all professors at all colleges feel that way.  Some colleges focus more on teaching than on research.  But there is much truth in the slogan "publish or perish."  Every hour devoted to constructing a lecture or grading papers is, from that perspective, time wasted.

Saturday, February 9, 2013

Why Professors (Often) Teach Poorly: Part I

Graduate School

Most professors decided on their occupations as undergraduates.  They get excited about learning, maybe get to know some of their professors well and think that teaching college looks like a good job--the life of the mind, working with motivated students, maybe writing books.  So far, so good.

Then graduate school comes along, and the world shrinks.  The amount of time spent in class declines.  The amount of time spent around people not like you declines.  In fact, the amount of time spent around other humans of any sort declines.  The initiate is being socialized, and she or he is also competing.  Our aspiring professor is likely going to a very strong graduate school.  Getting scholarships or other aid is often competitive, and so is getting strong recommendations.

Graduate students have three ways to distinguish themselves from the pack: 1) Stand out in seminars by offering brilliant insights in your oral and written work; 2) Ace your field exams in your major and minor field; 3) Write a brilliant dissertation and get an article or two published.  The third point is by far the most important.  All of this requires a great deal of time on one's own, reading and researching and writing.

One may grade some papers, lead some discussion sessons, maybe teach some classes.  But theses tasks are a means to an end, a way to fund one's "real work": the original scholarship that will enable you to both graduate and to have a decent chance of getting a job after you graduate.

The graduate student will also notice that her or his mentors, the professors at these prestigious universities, do not teach very often and may not teach very well.  But the great majority of them care deeply about their research, and they derive a great deal of status and pleasure from their publications.  One may even tell you, as the head of graduate studies once told us, not to let teaching get in the way of scholarship.  Indeed, few graduate students (outside, I suppose, of schools of education) take classes on teaching.  There just isn't time for that sort of thing.

Friday, February 1, 2013

Violence in the News

The recent outbreak of tragic shootings raises two questions for me: 1) Why our nation's long and intense relationship to violence? 2) What sort of violence draws our attention?  Right now, I'll focus on the second.

The intense news coverage of the shootings in the Portland Area mall and the Connecticut school reminded me of the summer of 1996, when I set out to publicize my brand new (and first) book: What Trouble I Have Seen: A History of Violence against Wives.  Though you wouldn't know it from the title, the book focused on Oregon, and it was published by Harvard University Press.  So I figured that Oregon newspapers and radio stations would be lining up to interview me.  Ha!  What a fool I was.  It turned out that violence against wives was not news unless some sort of sensational case has just occurred.  As the thesis of my book was that violence against wives was a deeply ingrained part of everyday life and culture, my book was not newsworthy.  And I got the distinct impression that having a big-name press attached to the book simply underscored its irrelevance.

But finally the day arrived when my umpteenth call to Portland's leading news radio station bore fruit.  An estranged husband had just kidnapped at gunpoint their child.  This was news.  Call back at noon, and my book would get its five minutes of fame.  I called back, of course, but I was given about 15 seconds.  An airliner had just crashed, killing scores of people, and a bloody airline crash trumped a kidnapping any day.

I relate this story not to suggest that mass killings or airline crashes are not tragic or worthy of our concern, but rather to point out that they are newsworthy precisely because they are rare.  If we are interested in understanding--and of course preventing--more typical forms of violence and death, we must of course consider less publicized acts: accidental shootings and fatal automobile crashes, for example.