So, we are afraid of PW getting the only tenure track hire in the department, after they repeatedly reassured us last year that they wouldn't be seeking any tenure-track hires? Maybe we should remind them of that. It's true Huatong left, but I think everyone knew she was gone before all of the PW paperwork went through. Not sure about that, though. At any rate, they reassured us they wouldn't need to hire any new faculty to support their major. They went further, and said that they would only allow the major to grow as much as it could be supported by the resources they already had.
We have to propose a tenure track position, so that the department can rank our request higher than theirs? Isn't it possible that the department could just vote their proposal down? Or just rank the lecture position higher than their tenure-track position? Aren't proposing the lecture position because we don't think the department will get any tenure-track hires?
I see us losing if we propose both a lectureship and this hybrid position. It doesn't really make sense to say, yes, we need the lectureship and the hybrid thing. What if we end up with the hybrid thing? I'm open to discussing this. I just have a lot of questions.
Margaret Luongo
Associate Professor, Creative Writing
Department of English
356 Bachelor Hall
Oxford, OH 45056
513-529-5221
________________________________________
From: Miami University Creative Writing Faculty [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Goodman, Eric [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2011 3:53 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Hiring
Ah, I wish I'd known about this. There's been a good deal of discourse on the Lit list I've also been reading, and I'm not sure that the two I've mentioned, a lecturer, and the hybrid, are mutually exclusive.
Part of the issue, is that there needs to be tenure track positions put forward by CW, perhaps, and Lit, certainly, otherwise only PW/Comp Rhet will be proposing one.
From: "Cheek, Christopher F. Dr." <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Reply-To: Faculty <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 15:46:36 -0500
To: Faculty <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Subject: Fwd: Hiring
imho and in support of Margaret and David here, i did inform the LIt cohort of our decision yesterday morning . in response to Kaara's question
x
c
Begin forwarded message:
From: cris cheek <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Subject: Re: Hiring
Date: November 10, 2011 2:35:26 PM EST
To: "Peterson, Kaara L. Dr." <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Cc: "[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Breaking cover here, as one who is on the Lit elist and a member of the CW cohort .
i can confirm that we decided at our CW cohort meeting yesterday morning to press forwards with a request to convert the VAP position, currently occupied by Jody Bates, into a lectureship - IF we can possibly do so. We have also been advised that it might be easier to get another VAP . . . but i cannot speak to that.
Under those circumstances it makes good sense for Literature to identify its most pressing need. As an insider - outsider to the core Literature faculty (i teach Lit classes but that is not my foregrounded profile) i would support the needs outlined by Tobias here.
In an ideal world a hybrid hire might seem attractive. However, this is far from an ideal world.
cris
On Nov 10, 2011, at 2:11 PM, Peterson, Kaara L. Dr. wrote:
To follow up on Andrew and Tobias, are we even absolutely certain what CW as a group's priorities are for this hire? Are *they* looking for a specific sub-genre, a tenure-track person, etc.?
If the point is primarily to get a hire out of the dean for the good of the whole dept but really primarily for CW, then couldn't we make a stronger, united case for a hire if CW tells us first what they want prioritized and then we just simply throw all of our support behind it, benefitting as we may?
all best, Kaara
________________________________________
From: English Dept Literature Faculty [[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On Behalf Of Hebard, Andrew Dr. [[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>]
Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2011 1:40 PM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Hiring
I also think that a hybrid position would be great, but am also a bit
worried about how we are going to cover periods that the current
organization of our major requires us to cover. A joint CW/Lit hire means
that we are likely to hire someone working on 20th century literature, a
period that we have pretty well covered. I am not saying that we
shouldn't do this, but am wondering how it addresses our current staffing
needs in literature.
Best,
Andrew
On 11/10/11 1:29 PM, "Morgan, Susan J. Dr." <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
I absolutely agree with Mary Jean about the best shot.
-----Original Message-----
From: English Dept Literature Faculty
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Corbett, Mary Jean
Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2011 1:16 PM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Hiring
I think "they" stand a much better chance if they include "us" in a more
than perfunctory way...a cross-program hire is perhaps our collective best
shot!
mjc
On 11/10/11 1:10 PM, "Kaara Peterson" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
Hi everyone,
I can vote for a CW hire still taking priority this year, however they
want to
frame it for their hire. If we benefit, great.
all best, Kaara
________________________________________
From: English Dept Literature Faculty [[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>]
On
Behalf Of Morgan, Susan J. Dr. [[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>]
Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2011 12:50 PM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Hiring
Hi Tobias and everyone,
Please do read that ³template² about hiring from Phyllis via Kerry,
that I
sent earlier.
It is explicit that replacing someone will not be an effective
argument, and
that we need to produce a new statement, with some kind of evidence.
I would say that so far we have, in order:
CW/ethnic American literature, particularly Latino/a or African/American
literature (not exactly as a subfield, but Tobaisıs point is good).
Long eighteenth century, with transatlantic
Medieval
And I plan to submit something Monday. Moreover, surely the dept.
meeting is
for discussion, not everything already set beforehand.
Susan
From: English Dept Literature Faculty
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Menely, Tobias Coyote Dr.
Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2011 11:31 AM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Hiring
I would argue against overly specific hybrid positions. I think it's
better to
identify a broad and legible field/period and then add desirable
subfields
instead of boxing ourselves in with an overly specific combination. For
example, the number of people doing 'transatlantic' eighteenth century
studies
is much smaller than the number of people working in the long eighteenth
century, so why not seek a hire in the eighteenth century, with
Romanticism
and/or transatlanticism as a desirable subfield? Similarly, why not
search for
a fiction writer, but add as a desirable subfield ethnic American
literature?
Tobias
On Nov 10, 2011, at 10:48 AM, Corbett, Mary Jean wrote:
Thatıs what I had in mind, esp the two former...mjc
On 11/10/11 9:46 AM, "Morgan, Susan J. Dr."
<[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]><x-msg:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
Eric has just pointed out that some sort of lit/cw hire would be
fabulous if
the field were latina/a or african american lit, perhaps even creative
non-fiction, though the latter may be being too precise. S
|
