| Your Candy Heart Says "Hug Me" |
 A total sweetheart, you always have a lot of love to give out. Your heart is open to where ever love takes you! Your ideal Valentine's Day date: a surprise romantic evening that you've planned out Your flirting style: lots of listening and talking What turns you off: fighting and conflict Why you're hot: you're fearless about falling in love |
Thursday, February 14, 2008
Valentine's Day
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Reading for Pleasure Wednesdays: Dragon's Fire
Truly pleasure reading - one of the new releases in a series I have followed since I was a teenager. This is a series of books that I go to when I want something familiar and comforting. Something that I know I'll like and won't have to think too hard to get into. Because I've read and reread the Pern books I know and am comfortable with the world (which is incredibly rich, detailed, and scientifically accurate). The perfect antidote to a bad week or an overfull brain.The thing I have come to value about the Pern series is that Anne McCaffery and now her son Todd have the ability to tell the same story - the exact same events - from multiple equally valid and strong perspectives. I think this process of telling and retelling a story made me come to understand how important it is to understand what each person brings to the table.
As far as this particular book goes, although I generally like Todd McCaffery, I actually think the perspective taking breaks down. There is an odd break in the middle of the book that, if you haven't read the previous book in this time of Pern (Dragon's Kin) you would be completely and totally mystified. I'm not clear on the why the book is split the way it is. At several points details seemed missing and I was actually having trouble following the perspectives. This is unusual and I wonder if future books will be clearer. It is co-written with Anne and I thought at first that perhaps they each wrote half, but the voice stays the same. I am still looking forward to the next two books that Todd collaborates/writes: Dragonharper and Dragonheart. I assume they are all set in the same time but I hope that they are a bit smoother. I am very pleased that Todd is picking up the line of Pern stories - I will continue to look forward to the next one and the next one along the way.
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
What makes a good dissertation advisor?
I saw this question here and I think it was sparked by the problems Anastasia is having*.
Now, I've got my own experience as a student and the observations of the students who surrounded me at the time to inform my idea of what it means to be a good dissertation director. And since I've been a new asst. professor, I've been in a co-advisor situation with 1 student (which has made me swear off co-advising) and a mentor to two more students whose primary advisor is the same advisor as student 1. Oh, and 1 masters student who abandoned his/her thesis. But I haven't yet supervised a dissertation myself all alone. For the last two years I've been looking for a student to take on, but we haven't had a qualified applicant interested in my subject area. So with that caveat, the question rests on my mind - what makes a good dissertation advisor. And how do I be that person?
The best summary I've seen of different traits is located here. For those not able to go beyond the fire wall it is an article by Nature on Mentoring based on interviews with Mentors. Someone on another blog referred to it in the comments and I read it and I think it is fantastic. Beyond those things that the describe (fostering a professional and scientific community, understanding a continuum of hands on and hands off ness... etc), I think fit with a mentor is important. Someone may be a fantastic mentor to you and a crummy mentor to someone else. And vice versa. So what makes for a good fit?
Similar (but not identical) interests - This seems obvious, but it's much easier to work closely and collaborate with someone on research if the questions they are pursuing are INTERESTING to you. Not necessarily exactly what you do. In fact if they only overlap partially with you, I think it might be easier to establish independence, have a clear distinction between dissertation and previous/collaborative projects, and so forth. If there is no overlap though, it means that it will be hard for the advisor to be up to speed on key points and methods, there will be no way for the advisor to see missing seminal articles or major ideas in the lit review. And it means that the advisor might or might not be as interested in getting things out the door to publication. Working on a close project is more likely to make you a priority and get attention from a busy and distracted advisor.
Resources - Do they have funding? Can they help you find funding? Do they have the time to read and attend to your work? Do they have the emotional resources to be rational about critiques? Can they help you attend conferences? Do they have social captial to introduce you around?
Working style - If they are punctual and you are last minute or you are detail oriented and they are big picture or you are disorganized and they are a neat freak, you will have a harder time. Do they prefer to have so many projects going that they can't keep up? Or do they have myopic focus on a single project to the exclusion of all other ideas and perspectives? Do they prioritize fairness? harmony? safety? rule-following? Do their priorities match or at least complement yours? Your advisor will not be your twin. People with different styles can muddle along. But radically different priorities and styles in the workplace will lead to a much more difficult time all around.
Communication style - I made this be a separate one because I think that clear expectations and communication about what to expect is important. I, for instance, tend to be very direct and blunt in my comments. I can be extremely critical. I'm also effusive in my praise. If you need a warm nurturing person to be your advisor you might do better with someone else. On the other hand, if I had an advisor who sugar coated things; who was less than direct, that person would totally lose my trust. Communication in terms of deadlines, writing critiquing, and verbal organization in meetings can all be important. How do they foster your ideas as you work with them? How do they respond when they see that a mistake has been made? For me this included prompt, precise, clear feedback. Decisiveness. Freedom to work independently until I needed assistance and then as much help as I asked for.
Concern for the whole person - Do they have a life outside of work? Do they understand and respect your own non-doctoral program commitments? Do they demonstrate that they have compassion for family circumstances and personal crises in addition to professional deadlines and development? Training can be all consuming. Both a model for and permission to have a life is good.
Professionalism - I'm not sure if this is distinct from communication style but I think recognizing that this is a professional environment with professional expectations is key. It encompasses a variety of things for me. There will be boundaries between me as a faculty and you as a student. Respect. Show up for meetings. Work hard. No yelling at people. No harrassment. Concern for the whole person doesn't mean I'm going to be your counselor or best friend.
In your best interests - It's best to be working with someone who you believe is looking out for your best interests at all times. There may be times when your best interest isn't clear or when your best interest is wrapped up in things that are also your advisor's best interest (e.g. getting a grant that will fund both you and your advisor), but if you don't have this trust, it will be a long hard slog. One thing I truly valued about my advisor was that whatever recommendation he made for me (from jobs to projects, to writing advice) he was always trying to help me be the best scientist I could be in all ways. Even if he was wrong, the fact that I could trust his motives was a tremendous boost to dealing with the situation. For me this also included an understanding that this person would hold me to high expectations. For others it might mean they will work to get you through as quickly as possible to accommodate a child being born or a spouse moving on or assist with flexible timing of deadlines to allow for a combination of work and school or need to travel to care for family needs.
I should be quick to point out here that many people don't deserve such trust for many reasons. I am not advocating blind trust. But entering into a relationship where you know trust is lacking seems crazy to me. Some are truly selfish and self-centered and willing to throw the student under the bus to save themselves; some are unaware, clueless about others and not interested in their students' welfare; some are not in a place at the moment - for whatever
personal or professional reason - to place the student first in priority.
*This is emphatically not a comment on Anastasia's situation - more my own reflection on my own situation.
Now, I've got my own experience as a student and the observations of the students who surrounded me at the time to inform my idea of what it means to be a good dissertation director. And since I've been a new asst. professor, I've been in a co-advisor situation with 1 student (which has made me swear off co-advising) and a mentor to two more students whose primary advisor is the same advisor as student 1. Oh, and 1 masters student who abandoned his/her thesis. But I haven't yet supervised a dissertation myself all alone. For the last two years I've been looking for a student to take on, but we haven't had a qualified applicant interested in my subject area. So with that caveat, the question rests on my mind - what makes a good dissertation advisor. And how do I be that person?
The best summary I've seen of different traits is located here. For those not able to go beyond the fire wall it is an article by Nature on Mentoring based on interviews with Mentors. Someone on another blog referred to it in the comments and I read it and I think it is fantastic. Beyond those things that the describe (fostering a professional and scientific community, understanding a continuum of hands on and hands off ness... etc), I think fit with a mentor is important. Someone may be a fantastic mentor to you and a crummy mentor to someone else. And vice versa. So what makes for a good fit?
Similar (but not identical) interests - This seems obvious, but it's much easier to work closely and collaborate with someone on research if the questions they are pursuing are INTERESTING to you. Not necessarily exactly what you do. In fact if they only overlap partially with you, I think it might be easier to establish independence, have a clear distinction between dissertation and previous/collaborative projects, and so forth. If there is no overlap though, it means that it will be hard for the advisor to be up to speed on key points and methods, there will be no way for the advisor to see missing seminal articles or major ideas in the lit review. And it means that the advisor might or might not be as interested in getting things out the door to publication. Working on a close project is more likely to make you a priority and get attention from a busy and distracted advisor.
Resources - Do they have funding? Can they help you find funding? Do they have the time to read and attend to your work? Do they have the emotional resources to be rational about critiques? Can they help you attend conferences? Do they have social captial to introduce you around?
Working style - If they are punctual and you are last minute or you are detail oriented and they are big picture or you are disorganized and they are a neat freak, you will have a harder time. Do they prefer to have so many projects going that they can't keep up? Or do they have myopic focus on a single project to the exclusion of all other ideas and perspectives? Do they prioritize fairness? harmony? safety? rule-following? Do their priorities match or at least complement yours? Your advisor will not be your twin. People with different styles can muddle along. But radically different priorities and styles in the workplace will lead to a much more difficult time all around.
Communication style - I made this be a separate one because I think that clear expectations and communication about what to expect is important. I, for instance, tend to be very direct and blunt in my comments. I can be extremely critical. I'm also effusive in my praise. If you need a warm nurturing person to be your advisor you might do better with someone else. On the other hand, if I had an advisor who sugar coated things; who was less than direct, that person would totally lose my trust. Communication in terms of deadlines, writing critiquing, and verbal organization in meetings can all be important. How do they foster your ideas as you work with them? How do they respond when they see that a mistake has been made? For me this included prompt, precise, clear feedback. Decisiveness. Freedom to work independently until I needed assistance and then as much help as I asked for.
Concern for the whole person - Do they have a life outside of work? Do they understand and respect your own non-doctoral program commitments? Do they demonstrate that they have compassion for family circumstances and personal crises in addition to professional deadlines and development? Training can be all consuming. Both a model for and permission to have a life is good.
Professionalism - I'm not sure if this is distinct from communication style but I think recognizing that this is a professional environment with professional expectations is key. It encompasses a variety of things for me. There will be boundaries between me as a faculty and you as a student. Respect. Show up for meetings. Work hard. No yelling at people. No harrassment. Concern for the whole person doesn't mean I'm going to be your counselor or best friend.
In your best interests - It's best to be working with someone who you believe is looking out for your best interests at all times. There may be times when your best interest isn't clear or when your best interest is wrapped up in things that are also your advisor's best interest (e.g. getting a grant that will fund both you and your advisor), but if you don't have this trust, it will be a long hard slog. One thing I truly valued about my advisor was that whatever recommendation he made for me (from jobs to projects, to writing advice) he was always trying to help me be the best scientist I could be in all ways. Even if he was wrong, the fact that I could trust his motives was a tremendous boost to dealing with the situation. For me this also included an understanding that this person would hold me to high expectations. For others it might mean they will work to get you through as quickly as possible to accommodate a child being born or a spouse moving on or assist with flexible timing of deadlines to allow for a combination of work and school or need to travel to care for family needs.
I should be quick to point out here that many people don't deserve such trust for many reasons. I am not advocating blind trust. But entering into a relationship where you know trust is lacking seems crazy to me. Some are truly selfish and self-centered and willing to throw the student under the bus to save themselves; some are unaware, clueless about others and not interested in their students' welfare; some are not in a place at the moment - for whatever
personal or professional reason - to place the student first in priority.
*This is emphatically not a comment on Anastasia's situation - more my own reflection on my own situation.
Monday, February 11, 2008
Class Planning Frustration
In the middle of teaching class this week I thought of a fantastically improved layout of the material for the class. Big picture reorganization rather than individual lecture reorganization.
Unfortunately it involves taking the material of weeks 1-3 (which I've already taught) and redistributing that material throughout the material in weeks 4-8 (which I haven't taught yet). It won't help this term's class but hopefully will improve future classes. I think the students will find the info clearer, more straightforward and coming at them in bites the size they can more easily digest.
Essentially weeks 1-3 are theory. Weeks 4-8 are application problems. Reorganization is teaching content/data in week 4 with theory 1 & 2. Week 5, more practice on theory 2, introduce theory 3, and teach content data from week 5. This should lead to more problem sets. Teaching theories 1 or 2 at a time instead of in one fell swoop and giving the students the hooks to apply the theories to. No text books are organized this way, but I think it will work.
I keep trying to figure out how to apply this insight into this class's material but it seems not possible if we are still going to cover all material. How frustrating!
Unfortunately it involves taking the material of weeks 1-3 (which I've already taught) and redistributing that material throughout the material in weeks 4-8 (which I haven't taught yet). It won't help this term's class but hopefully will improve future classes. I think the students will find the info clearer, more straightforward and coming at them in bites the size they can more easily digest.
Essentially weeks 1-3 are theory. Weeks 4-8 are application problems. Reorganization is teaching content/data in week 4 with theory 1 & 2. Week 5, more practice on theory 2, introduce theory 3, and teach content data from week 5. This should lead to more problem sets. Teaching theories 1 or 2 at a time instead of in one fell swoop and giving the students the hooks to apply the theories to. No text books are organized this way, but I think it will work.
I keep trying to figure out how to apply this insight into this class's material but it seems not possible if we are still going to cover all material. How frustrating!
Sunday, February 10, 2008
This Week's Meals
This week was strange because it was filled with Blizzards and Job Searches. I actually ate out quite a bit and rather sucked at doing the dishes and keeping the kitchen clean once the work week started. On the other hand, other than coffee cups there wasn't much in my dish pile. Nonetheless, the kitchen is spotless now, so I'm starting fresh again.
Saturday: Roast Chicken, Roasted Potatoes, Frozen Veggies
Sunday: Roast Chicken Chimichangas --> Good, but too spicy. Leave out green chilis next time. Quick because of Sat's dinner. I ate/used as leftovers the thighs from a grocery store pre-roasted chicken and frozen vegetables. I used the breast meat from that chicken for this recipe and thus did very little cooking.
Question for the blogosphere: what to do with leftover Queso Fresco?
Monday: Leftovers from Sat & Sun for Lunch and Dinner respectively.
Tuesday: Lunch w/ Candidate; Dinner: Leftovers from Sun.
Wednesday: Lunch: Leftover Apricot Porkchops Dinner: Tomato Soup (from freezer) and Cheese Toast. The tomato soup is EASY and QUICK to make. Doubles well. And freezes well. I make it much more often once I got an immersion blender - much less of a mess than using a real blender to puree hot soup. Usually I make Ham & Cheese Scones to go with it for the fresh batch and then do Cheese toast for reheated rounds.
Thursday: Lunch w/ Candidate; Dinner from local coop - Palak Paneer & Curried Squash. My favorite meal from their deli and something I haven't figured out how to make on my own yet.
Friday: Lunch - Sandwich from coffee shop located between meeting 1 and meeting 2 (eaten during meeting 2); Dinner: Take & Bake Chicken Artichoke Pizza & Wine & Chocolates.
Saturday: Lunch - Leftover Pizza; Dinner French Toast with Ice Cream and Raspberries and Nuts (Ice Cream was mostly because I didn't have any whip cream).
Hopefully next week will be a little more lowkey and will help me to get back on track. Definately I have to make chili before Sunday. I am not sure what else I might make. Maybe chicken caccatori? Maybe something italian. I have to make a plan tomorrow so I can shop between church and
Saturday: Roast Chicken, Roasted Potatoes, Frozen Veggies
Sunday: Roast Chicken Chimichangas --> Good, but too spicy. Leave out green chilis next time. Quick because of Sat's dinner. I ate/used as leftovers the thighs from a grocery store pre-roasted chicken and frozen vegetables. I used the breast meat from that chicken for this recipe and thus did very little cooking.
Question for the blogosphere: what to do with leftover Queso Fresco?
Monday: Leftovers from Sat & Sun for Lunch and Dinner respectively.
Tuesday: Lunch w/ Candidate; Dinner: Leftovers from Sun.
Wednesday: Lunch: Leftover Apricot Porkchops Dinner: Tomato Soup (from freezer) and Cheese Toast. The tomato soup is EASY and QUICK to make. Doubles well. And freezes well. I make it much more often once I got an immersion blender - much less of a mess than using a real blender to puree hot soup. Usually I make Ham & Cheese Scones to go with it for the fresh batch and then do Cheese toast for reheated rounds.
Thursday: Lunch w/ Candidate; Dinner from local coop - Palak Paneer & Curried Squash. My favorite meal from their deli and something I haven't figured out how to make on my own yet.
Friday: Lunch - Sandwich from coffee shop located between meeting 1 and meeting 2 (eaten during meeting 2); Dinner: Take & Bake Chicken Artichoke Pizza & Wine & Chocolates.
Saturday: Lunch - Leftover Pizza; Dinner French Toast with Ice Cream and Raspberries and Nuts (Ice Cream was mostly because I didn't have any whip cream).
Hopefully next week will be a little more lowkey and will help me to get back on track. Definately I have to make chili before Sunday. I am not sure what else I might make. Maybe chicken caccatori? Maybe something italian. I have to make a plan tomorrow so I can shop between church and
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
