Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
University staff common room

This board is for university-based professionals. Find discussions about A Levels and universities on our Further education forum.

Original poster

Academics Chat Thread

999 replies

LRDtheFeministDragon · 02/09/2017 22:32

I believe the old Chat thread has fallen off the front page of this section, and I thought it might be time to reinstate it. I know it's only sporadically useful, but sometimes it's nice, right?

I am a lowly postdoctoral English Lit type. Finished my PhD in 2014, teaching associate for a couple of years, and now part-time while DD is a baby. I'm currently working frantically to get my book manuscript to the publisher by my deadline (October), and also trying to regain enthusiasm for the job market.

Who else is lurking around here?

OP posts:
impostersyndrome · 26/01/2019 14:03

Add

Ground-breaking
Defined new direction in
Established research group in
Paradigm shift (though that’s a biggie and I’m not sure I’d dare say that)

ommmward · 27/01/2019 15:27

Honestly, as someone reading promotion cases and CVs, I don't care about any of that sort of language. I want the specifics of what it is that is world leading, and how it is world leading, and what sort of person cares and why. Not self-promoting idioms, but explaining clearly what it is about your work that really matters (and it then becomes clear from the promotion case that it really really does).

ghislaine · 28/01/2019 11:49

That's interesting, because I have been given the exact opposite advice! No-one cares about the specrfics of your research, just about volume and metrics here....

murmuration · 28/01/2019 13:01

Similar here, ghislaine. We only get 200 words max to even explain our research. All the rest is lists of invited talks, grants, external examination and so on. They don't even want the title of grants - just the value! (although I suppose titles are often a bit long-winded and not that useful anyway, it just seems so... mercenary? to only ask for the value.)

I've been pondering stuff about the references, and realising how WEIRD academia is. I have the choice to tick whether or not I want the page with my special circumstances (where I've been advised to write how my disability limits things like international travel) to be released to references. I was thinking about asking advice on a disability group I'm part of, but then realised how strange it sounded - in order to get promoted, my employers are going to ask a bunch of other people, some of whose identities I will NEVER discover, how good they think I am. Are there any other jobs that do this? I know people write letters of reference to get employment, but do, I don't know, law firms ask other law firms if they'd let so-and-so be partner, given this record?

I'm coming down on the side of not sharing the info, just as for the people they contact I'll never know who it is, and it'd be weird knowing some people have this personal info and I may run across them - and they wouldn't want to say anything, as it would tip off that they wrote a letter (otherwise how would they know) and it could cause all sorts of awkwardness.

ommmward · 28/01/2019 14:51

I mean even within the 200 words. But it might be different in humanities. We don't do metrics much.

On the assessors thing: that's part of it, that they are independent assessors not referees. Different role. Dodgy as, though, giving away disability information. Could you get it onto the case but not sent out to the assessors? Ask HR?

murmuration · 28/01/2019 17:44

Doing my best in 200 words :) I think the funding value thing not very fair - some areas of science are just a lot cheaper than others, but hopefully the panel will have a range of expertise and so be able to calibrate. One hopes.

I can ask for the disablity stuff to be kept private to the institution, and I think I will do that. It was a strange thing to have to consider, but I think as long as the panel who decide know, and know the assessors don't know, they should be able to again, calibrate. Another weirdness there is that HR don't 'officially' know - despite lots of emails of me and my E&D coordinator asking how to let them know! I guess after this, they will...? Just worried it will look weird if not ticked in their database. I may need to ask opinions again. (now wishing I had cornered the HR E&D guy when I was in a room with him last week, I just wasn't thinking about it - I have a feeling there is a simple answer but people to busy to say - either that or they haven't yet thought about it!)

uzfrdiop · 28/01/2019 21:49

I don't think it would be weird that it's not in their database. Universities often don't have full records of protected characteristics: many academics choose not to disclose these. I think it is particularly common for people not to disclose mental health issues and ongoing chronic illness.

ghislaine · 29/01/2019 10:55

I think it's a bit strange that it's being suggested that your externals should be apprised - presumably their role is to comment on the quality of your scholarship, and it's for the university to use that assessment in light of what they know about the obstacles you face in its production?

worstofbothworlds · 30/01/2019 12:37

All this talk of promotion... I don't suppose anyone in STEM, with experience of judging promotion cases, could have a look at mine?
Senior colleague who normally does this is on sabbatical, suggested junior colleague who while lovely I feel doesn't have the experience.

worstofbothworlds · 08/02/2019 12:46

Me again.
I've just mooted giving a talk to our female UGs (I'm in STEM, we are not too bad for male/female undergrads but very few academics, classic leaky pipeline).
Gosh the pushback I'm getting. It's not egalitarian, we have to talk to all of them, you can't do it we have to have a panel etc. etc.

Two of those doing this are women - what is with them? One of them is our Athena Swan rep.

I've told them that it's fairly standard to have women-only groups, we have a lunch for women staff already, and a campus wide women's group. They can hold a general talk or a men's talk if they wish.

No idea where this has sprung from! I've asked what they "strongly object" to.

I particularly want to talk about sexual harassment in the academy (Warwick, some of the US cases etc.) and I am NOT talking about that in front of a mixed group, nor would I expect students who are women to be comfortable asking questions about it in a mixed group.
I'm also not interested in having to say NAMALT every 5 seconds.

I was also planning to talk about childbearing and reproductive issues but I haven't told the other women that yet!

NeverEverAnythingEver · 08/02/2019 15:29

It is not unfair if it is to redress historical injustices.

(I say this so often I can probably say it in my sleep ...)

I've just had a look at the history of university education for women (in the West, at least). If they want to know what's unfair they could have a look at that. Angry

ghislaine · 09/02/2019 12:19

I’m shocked that a women-only event in a male-dominated field (and even if your institution’s undergrad balance is ok, there’s the wider context to consider) is being objected to. What exactly is “unfair” about it? A panel might be acceptable - perhaps you could populate it with other women speaking of their experiences in STEM (postgrads, someone from industry etc) and explicitly flag the pregnancy/childcare, sexual harassment issues as something to be covered. I’d be surprised if any men would want to attend.

quing · 13/02/2019 10:08

I'm also surprised you're getting pushback.

However, I saw some research the other day that suggested targeting interventions around gender imbalances at everyone was more effective than just targeting them at women - it avoids "othering" of women, reduces differences between people of different genders, and reduces tension between men and women. But that if you target interventions at everyone, women disproportionately benefit.

This was around workplace discrimination in medicine, so I don't know how applicable it is to your field specifically. But I found it interesting, and maybe relevant.

worstofbothworlds · 13/02/2019 10:37

So advertise it to everyone but say we'll be talking about the experience of being a female academic and that we'll be touching on maternity, harassment, mansplaining?
And then the male students won't want to come?
apart from ones like the sole man who came to the gender pay gap meeting and told us it wasn't real

NeverEverAnythingEver · 13/02/2019 15:50

I agree that you should target men if you want to change behaviour. Sometimes, though, it's about a sharing of experience. Then you certainly don't want someone there telling you that you are being over sensitive/it's only in your mind/etc etc. (Disclaimer: NAMALT etc etc.)

MedSchoolRat · 13/02/2019 19:50

I particularly want to talk about sexual harassment in the academy

did you mean "in academia" ? I'm confused.
It does read like you'd end up preaching to a choir.

worstofbothworlds · 13/02/2019 19:53

Yes, I do kind of use the words to mean the same thing!

NeverEverAnythingEver · 20/02/2019 07:34

How is everyone doing? I am just over half way through my lecturing. I can vaguely see the light at the end of the tunnel.

worstofbothworlds · 20/02/2019 09:15

I'm done with teaching for the year! Well, there's one session with the students presenting. Got a fieldwork trip coming up (civilised location this time, not like the time I got bed bugs and had to wash everyone's bedding on a boil wash) and I've nearly finished a fairly gentle R&R.

murmuration · 20/02/2019 14:29

Ugh. I'm in the midst of everything. I find I am doing things more and more down-to-the-wire.

My promotion application is now at our internal dept review. I'm quite sick of it at this point, and starting to not care. Maybe a bit of time away from it will re-enthuse me. Then I have a chance to modify it further, and it just has to go to the Uni panel next...

murmuration · 25/02/2019 06:36

Well, that was a long wait for not much feedback. Internal review told me I "could be competitive" but recommended waiting a year (I don't have to - and I'm not! - but they told me to talk it over with my mentor), and then provided some rather negatively-framed criticisms. It will be somewhat useful, but I'm having to do a lot of interpretation to turn the comments around into something I can do stuff about (e.g., they said negative-thing-X about Y, how can I present it such that positive aspects Z, Q, W are more clear?).

I've heard advice to wait a while after feedback to process, as you tend to be angry at first and then can see the value. But I got this Fri, and the weekend has only made me more angry. I understand this internal review is a new thing as part of our equality and diversity process - what are they doing telling a woman that her application is good but not perfect, and to wait until it's even better? Even if they give the same message to men and women, the women will disproportionately listen.

The only saving grace is that it came less than a week before the Uni deadline, meaning that nearly everyone will have references already lined up (one of mine took well over a week of back and forth emails to secure) - it's not actually a factor in my decision to continue, but had I been wavering, the thought of telling the high-profile people I've asked that, actually, no I'm not going this round after all, you won't get a request, would make me less inclined to wait.

I had previously been pretty sanguine about the high likelihood that it will take several tries to get to Prof, but this feedback is making me want it first time out more! It feels like if I don't get it they will have been "right" to tell me to wait, and I really object to that. But I guess the only thing I can do about that is put forward the best application possible, which I was already planning to do. I suppose it has gotten me enthused again, as I'd hoped! :)

NeverEverAnythingEver · 25/02/2019 17:52

I'm sorry you got treated like that. Angry

I have met female academics who got similar feedback - why don't you wait until you look like a professor? Angry Angry While the man of similar age and achievements got promoted.

NeverEverAnythingEver · 25/02/2019 17:53

This year I refuse to participate in the promotions round. They always say if you don't apply you don't get promoted, but they don't factor in the emotional cost. I'm not paying that this year.

NeverEverAnythingEver · 25/02/2019 17:53

But best of luck! Show 'em what's what!

murmuration · 26/02/2019 13:29

Thanks, never. Sorry you're struggling with the whole process. I feel I'm ready to start getting rejected by the people who actually make the decision, rather than the people who are trying to second-guess them. That way feedback is likely to be considerably more relevant. So I'll see what happens...

Feel like I haven't actually changed the application that much, but then again, there wasn't that much feedback! I had several people decline to give me feedback because now we've got this internal committee. Next time (assuming there is a next time...), I'll push harder to get additional comments. The whole thing was billed as a group to "help you with your application" and I really wasn't expecting to be told to wait. Surely that's something one decides, well, more than a week before the deadline!

Also somewhat dubious of the internal committee's assessment - I got the same message (individually, not as a committee) before I went to SL, and yet I heard just about a year ago from a retired staff member who was on the promotions panel that year that my application "sailed through". Perhaps she wasn't meant to share that, and the whole decision-making team is completely different now, but given I've gotten the same advice both times and they were very wrong last time, I'm not feeling like it's a completely loss this time! So still have some hope, although trying to make sure I don't get too invested so I can gracefully deal with a rejection in the face of being advised to wait.