Haven't written for ages, because work has been hellacious. One thing I have realized is that this hellaciousness is cyclical. It took three times to see the pattern but now it is as clear as day. Fall goes pretty well and the whole chairing a department thing seems manageable. Come the new year, it starts to get a little more tense, and by around about now, things are impossible. And now I know why. Spring is when we vet graduate applicant files and the turf battles about who to admit, who to fund and who should make these decisions erupt. When we started this job we had dreams of merit based decisions, a director of graduate studies who finally brought our actions into compliance with graduate school rules, and initiating a departmental conversation about building a graduate program that capitalized on the diversity that makes us unique. But, it turns out the traditional programs don't want that. Instead, they demand the great leap backward: Please let us admit anyone who is a native speaker of our target language and give them a teaching assistantship; Let us, continue to teach graduate seminars that draw a crowd of, say, three; While we're at it, there is someone who loves reading novels who would like to do a PhD... why not?
I heard the refrain: know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em and proposed that we give the people what they want. You want the decision making authority for admissions and funding in your program? You got it. You also got, writing the letters of acceptance and rejection, filing the paperwork with the grad school, drafting the teaching contract, etc. Turns out this was not quite what was envisioned. "But, that's so much work?" "Can't the secretary write those letters?" "Do you really expect us to keep track of graduate school deadlines?" Um, yup.
Stay tuned, people. The gloves are off.
