Re: Professionalism (and then something else)

[Sara Kimball <skimball@uts.cc.utexas.edu>]

Well, let me insert a paradox into the discussion, since paradoxes have
the virtue of being both logical and illogical. Around here, anyway, it's
sometimes the people who are higher up on the admin ladder--the people who
are in that sense the mainstream institution--who are capable
of entertaining the geuninely radical thoughts about how institutions are
going to change if they are to survive, whether it's the integration of
computer and information technology into teaching and scholarship or
whether it's new kinds of academic careers that genuinely integrate
scholarship/teaching/service.  It's my colleagues in the faculty
(including those who rejoice in their radical political orientations) who
seem pretty clueless, whether it's only recognizing their own narrow
definitions of scholarship in discussions about promotions or raises, or
telling their grad students not to talk about teaching in job application
letters.  

Sara Kimball
UT Austin


On Mon, 7 Jul 1997, Jeanne H. Simpson wrote:

> James
> 
> Ok, maybe there is an enemy.  And maybe it is conventionality or
> conformity of some kind.  But I would like to suggest that, if we choose
> to be radical, non-conformists, if we choose to separate ourselves from
> the main systems of our institutions, then we cannot in the same breath
> complain about someone else (the infamous, wicked, all-purpose "they") having
> forced us into this situation with underfunding and a lack of
> understanding.  Well...I suppose we *can* argue both at the same time, but
> not logically.  
> 
> Jeanne Simpson
> csjhs@eiu.edu
>