GenX women in higher ed from around the globe

Author Archive

Confessions of a Field Research Addict

In Ponderings of a Peregrine Pinoy Professor on 2012/05/25 at 00:32
Rosalie Arcala Hall, writing from Iloilo, Philippines 
At a recent International Studies Association panel presentation about military mergers, I was asked how I got access to the ex-combatants-turned soldiers in Mindanao with whom I did a focus group discussion. I am often asked this type of question by foreign audiences, and my standard answer is: I have built a considerable personal network within the armed forces and have a decade of field experience in my belt; I know who to call or send text messages to. By comparison, I never get asked this sort of methodological questions by Philippine audiences, not for lack of critical spine, but because  field  exposure is considered de rigueur in any Social Science research project.

A colleague, who is now Assistant Secretary of National Defense, once told me he likes my work better than another similarly-inclined “strategist” whose conceptual anchor is notoriously rusty and whose data is suspect. He says the empirical data I bring gives an “added value” to my work. In retrospect, this is standard research practice to academics in my University. There’s an emphasis on primary data– interview, focus group discussions, and  direct observations. That this primary data is secured at a heavy cost (think days of fieldwork in remote and inhospitable locations; literal armies of survey enumerators tasked to hop household-to-household; hours of facilitation with bureaucrats to secure FGD participation) is commonplace where I come from. There’s an implicit understanding even about what it takes a lot to earn your “research” wings, including  a close brush or two with guns, long hours of trekking (forget about public transportation; there’s none) and a several nights of un-hygenic situations. None has beaten the record of my anthropologist-colleague Dr. Alicia Magos whose pioneering research on the Sulod-nons’ (indigenous people of central Panay highlands) oral tradition of epic chanting required her befriending communist rebel commanders and military officers alike at the height of insurgent conflict in the area in the late 1980s.

My research interest (civil-military relations) makes field research comparatively less interesting, but edgy. I have been accosted by armed militia; conducted an FGD with paramilitaries in a remote mountain-village and interviewed a group of coup plotters in an East Timor prison. From a battalion-size force that  responded to a mudslide in Southern Leyte province to  a mobile platoon chasing after communist insurgents in central Panay island, I encountered various faces of the armed forces. I listened to stories of losses, despair, courage and optimism among men and women in uniform, ever conscious of my reflexivity and ethical position. I have done fieldwork research in conflict areas in Mindanao, where most of my colleagues fear to tread. I have a heightened sense of adventure but am not reckless, relying on advice by trustworthy local field assistants who have a keener sense of the spatial politics of an area than I do. Where my “Chinese-like appearance” or my foreign-sounding surname may invite kidnapping threats, I don’t go.
But where I can take risk, I will not let others do so under duress or on promise of remuneration. I have been recently engaged as area field supervisor to a handpicked team of 8 to conduct focus group discussions, interviews and community observations throughout the Visayas region for a bilateral foreign aid-funded research project on anti-poverty. During the training for the field teams attended by representatives of the funding agency, I put up a protest over their supposedly randomized selection of field study sites because they did not cross check their selection with the security data of the Philippine military and police. Arguing both from a methodological perspective (how truly representative is their site selection, where poverty is not cross-checked with armed conflict indicators) and from the point of view of my crew’s safety, they finally caved in and changed one study site in Eastern Samar, but not the sites in Negros Oriental tagged by my military friends as “security threatened by communist rebel groups.” A small victory but meaningful, particularly since the overall project leader (a close friend) is even more gung-ho a field researcher than I was! To someone like her who has traipsed across communist front lines in Bicol province, I am a wimp.
I have never aspired to be an armchair academic, not after I had my first field research experience at 21. At middle age, I still have the physical constitution and energy to visit remote places in my country for research. I hope to continue doing this, surpassing even my field-research be-medaled friend Rufa who at over 60 is still running her racket across Mindanao. We belong to the happy sisterhood of indomitable traveling researchers. May our tribe increase!

This post was also published in Inside Higher Ed

Dreaming Away in the Winds of Change

In Ponderings of a Peregrine Pinoy Professor on 2012/05/04 at 01:46

Rosalie Arcala Hall, writing from Iloilo, Philippines

During the ritual of Strategic Planning that my University holds every time a new President is put in place, a new “goal” was announced: we were going to become a research University. Accordingly, a flurry of new programs were created to support publication-driven research projects, particularly targeting ISI-listed journals and reputable publication houses abroad. Publish or perish, which has been the mode since the 1990s just got deadlier and at the same time, more lucrative. Multiple monetary rewards await those who labor and toil according to these new rules (e.g. $1200 per published article in an ISI-listed journal; 3-year Scientist designation with a $10,000 bursary; foreign travel support to disseminate research findings, etc.) and those who don’t likely are confined to the dust of humdrum teaching unable to cross ranks.

To me, this is welcome indication of a new work ethic. My previous U Venus blogs have been mantras about scholarship being a key element in the academy and how some University policies (e.g. teaching overloads, not requiring publication as an output to research grants, etc.) create disincentives to building such a culture of scholarship.  As Division chair, in particular, it is an added boost that the current crop of University officials support efforts at my level to curb teaching overloads, provide funding for mentoring initiatives in research proposal preparation and journal article writing workshops, and generally push the faculty to re-focus their energies.

I rejoice in the fact that I am not a lone wolf among my colleagues. Recently, I have been invited to collaborate in an interdisciplinary, inter-campus, multi-year competitive research project on water governance involving 4 Philippine sites. I was also involved in crafting a new research program called Mentoring Initiative which will pair Scientists like myself one-on-one with a junior colleague to do a publication-driven research project on a smaller scale. Through this window, I hope to continue my work on civil-military relations in the Philippines, with the end view of inspiring another colleague to follow on my research interest.

There is a silver lining to this cloud of optimism. University officials are counting on the new pool of money available from within to entice faculty members to research and publish. The tagline “who wants to be a Philippine millionaire?” brandied about by one official may not work given the even MORE lucrative research and training consultancies that many of my better-positioned colleagues are involved in. The financial rewards for consultancies from foreign NGOs and institutions like the World Bank are ridiculously high; but with no added value to the University. Colleagues who do this don’t publish scholarly works, nor do they have proprietary claim on the data they gather. Sadly, this line of work is the typical money trail where pandering to funder themes and goals is the name of the game. To this group, the push for a new research ethos by the University has no effect.

There has never been a better time, at least for me, to be at my University. I could get more monetary rewards for the work I do without prostituting myself to the whims of donor-driven projects. I also am providing a better template to my junior colleagues about what being a University Professor is all about: scholarship NOT money for money’s sake. Doing research to make a contribution to the body of scholarly work; participating in the discipline or specializations conversation via peer-reviewed publication. The money is incidental, not the primary goal.

This post was also published in Inside Higher Ed

Who’s Afraid of K-12? Musings on University Life after 2018

In Ponderings of a Peregrine Pinoy Professor on 2012/03/30 at 07:04

Rosalie Arcala Hall, writing from Iloilo, Philippines.

Beginning school year 2012, incoming Philippine first graders will toil through 12 years of basic education instead of 10 years; high school freshmen will clock in 6 years rather than the usual 4. The two year addition is supposed to bring our students on par with other school systems in the region, and will also stream students into the more rational vocational versus college bound tracks that fill employment demands. While our legislature cooks up the sort of curricular changes and mandates for these two additional years, universities like mine fret and worry about the impact all of this would bring.

Over the past several months, I have donned my administrative hat as our faculty deliberated the assumption of having no college freshmen intake in 6 years time. In our planning horizon, this  is a major event. For a small undergraduate program like ours at the Division (made worse by consistently under populated majors like Community Development, History and Sociology), this is like doomsday. We have to quickly design a transition away from teaching (12 units or four undergraduate courses is the regular load per semester in a 2-semester year) simply because there will be fewer students to teach. While about 1/5 of my faculty is set to retire within the decade, simple Math tells me we will still have extra hands with no teaching load. What we do with these extra faculty is a cause for speculation. My Dean tells me they’ll be “downloaded” to teach General Education courses for high school; a Vice Chancellor says they’ll be compelled to do research consistent with the shift towards a research university; others say we will simply NOT fill in the vacant slots left personnel attrition thereby staving off supply.

I recently attended an orientation seminar for the Commission on Higher Education Technical panel for the Social Sciences, which advises the government body on aspects of tertiary program policies, criteria and guidelines. One of the presentations dealt with the proposed changes on the General Education curriculum (mandatory for all undergraduate programs) in view of the K-12 development. As an administrator, it is another bad omen: there will be even fewer GE courses offered and undergraduate programs are expected to be cut in length: 5 year programs into 4; 4 year programs into 3.

Like everything else in the Philippines, planning is not taken seriously. There is no transparency of information about what is going on to aid planning. It is amazing to me that this K-12 will start in June, yet no law has been passed (our lawmakers are too busy with the impeachment trial of the Supreme Court Chief Justice) nor is the Department of Education ready to divine how this feat could be carried out. There is that sense of “pakiramdam” (feeling through), with the expectation that no policy is set even if backed by the current President because after all, he will be gone from office in 4 years. And so, the system will expectedly muddle through.

This is obviously not a good time for any college administrator. I cursed the day I agreed to be chair when I had to produce actual figures for the 5 year budget plan, from personnel to maintenance and operating expenses. How much does it cost to run the Psych lab? My secretary’s original appointment is a lab technician? How many of my pool are willing to remain as a teaching faculty or be a research faculty? If my routine bureaucratic tasks are not enough, I now have to rally my young faculty to switch gears away from teaching into research and publication as a lifeblood. Down the K-12 road, there’s no other choice.

This post was also published in Inside Higher Ed.

Academic Busking: Philippine Style

In Ponderings of a Peregrine Pinoy Professor on 2012/03/05 at 00:41

Rosalie Arcala Hall, writing from Iloilo, Philippines

Academic conferences offer opportunities to test-run ideas before like-minded colleagues, to network, and to key into conversations within one’s discipline or specialization. For many academics, it’s an integral part of the job. In my University’s promotion system, considerable weight is given to presenting papers at academic conferences. Whether local, national or international, conferences provide venues for institutional promotion– a chance to showcase research outputs from our little corner of the world.

Despite its assumed importance, little support is available for conference participation in my perennially cash-strapped University. Priority is given to paper presentation (rather than mere attendance); financial assistance is capped ($500 dollars maximum for international conferences; roughly $220 for local/national conferences) and access is limited (once every two years for international and once a year for local/national). Within my Division, where there are some funds available, guidelines were further drawn to only award it to Instructors and Assistant Professors on a first-come-first-served basis.

Regardless, there is a strong ethos to “democratize” access. Conferences within Asia tend to be less cost-prohibitive with the wide availability of cheap airfare and accommodations. Most Asian countries also do not require visa for Philippine nationals.

But for many of us, the chance to present a paper to a US or European conference is almost out of reach– unless you do a version of academic busking, which I will elucidate:

1.      Apply for other travel grants for paper presentation in international conferences.

There are small pools of money available from government agencies, private institutions and foundations. The key is knowing where they are and applying ahead of time. In my years of busking, I know of at least three in the Philippines: Commission on Higher Education (every 3 years), Philippine Social Science Council (every 3 years) and Asia-Phil (every year). Like my home institution, the funds are limited but they allow, sometimes require, counterparts– that is parallel applications for funds elsewhere.

I am a “regular” grantee of these institutions. In fact, I reserve funding applications to these three bodies only to my “must-attend” conferences: American Political Science Association (APSA), Inter University Seminar on the Armed Forces and Society (IUSAFS), and Asian Political and International Studies Association (APISA). I reserve the funding from my home institution for the Philippine Political Science Association (PPSA).

2.     Use your Third World origin to get a conference fee waiver or subsidized accommodation. 

Travel grants by conference organizers are becoming rarer and rarer. Of those that still offer them, your Third World credentials would be a plus factor in getting the grant. I received APSA  and APISA travel grants in ALL my sorties. They probably have me in a permanent roster somewhere as a perennial applicant-in-need.

If there is no explicit mention of a grant, try conveying your need to your contact person; ask for a waiver of conference fee or a free or reduced rate for accommodation. In my experience, they are very receptive. Often, they have extra hotel rooms or University facilities with subsidized rates.

3.     Piggy-back your conference paper presentation to a research fund application

Dissemination through presentation in an academic conference is an acceptable research budget item. Unless the donor specifically prohibits this, include it along with a justification that research results are best utilized when made public and widely circulated, either through paper presentation or through publication. Donors like an image boost; having their name included in your paper is attractive.

A variation of this is a round-table or a panel presentation proposal. If your research budget allows it, presenting as a group always carries more impact (hence a bigger sell to donors) than an individual presentation.

4.     Plan ahead to decide which conference(s) to go to and tie it up with other personal/business activities.

Planning is key to make sure you have financial backing lined up for conference paper presentation. Calls for paper abstracts come 6-12 months ahead. Outside travel grant applications carry their own deadlines. Airfare is cheaper when purchased several months ahead, as do bookings for cheap hotels.

If you’re smart, you’ll be able to “stitch” together a seamless travel itinerary that also  will allow you a day or two of sightseeing, maybe do library research, visit family, or hold a business meeting. My travel abroad for conferences is usually like this. Because I have to fly to Manila to catch an international flight, I bookend travels with official meetings for which I am able to get a free domestic air ticket.

Living in scarce times should not be a deterrent to professional growth. There are ways to defray travel costs to attend a conference. But there’s no such thing as a 100% free lunch– you must always be prepared to shoulder some of the cost, which is a worthy investment for networking and getting peer-feedback on the quality of your work.

This post was also published in Inside Higher Ed.

Social Capital in Academia

In Ponderings of a Peregrine Pinoy Professor on 2012/01/19 at 02:16

Rosalie Arcala Hall, writing from Iloilo, Philippines.

The advent season invariably leads me to engage in a self-reflection on whether (and to what degree) I have been naughty or nice. Oftentimes, I am very confident I have done more good deeds than bad, mainly because I have little occasion to potentially do ill to somebody. As long as I did things on my own (as a professor, researcher and writer), my actions bear little direct consequence to others. I would like to think I have a modest amount of social capital after being in the academic profession for 20 odd years, which I could bank on in case I veer towards the naughty territory.

But my social capital account has seen some tectonic movements in the past year. On the credit side, I would like to think of points gained from the many social events I pursued in line with my being Division chair: arranging a memorial for a retired faculty member who passed on; celebrating the Deanship and the Scientist award given to colleagues; welcoming a colleague who returned from a leave of absence; attending a funeral for a parent of a faculty member; hosting student events such as the Best Undergraduate Research award and a graduation reception; and throwing several parties at our house marking the start and end of the school year. A big plus also came from my unerring attendance to University events: graduation, opening ceremonies, alumni homecoming, foundation day celebrations, lantern parade, etc. Where I use to “disappear” from the University social scene to do research field work, or attend a conference or meeting, I now find my schedule sufficiently “freed” to make room for exponentially-expanding social obligations attached to the chairmanship.

On the debit side of my social capital ledger are losses due to the bitter struggle against a faculty member who wanted concessions pertaining to faculty loading (she eventually resigned); junior faculty members who now feel “small” because I made public their student evaluation ratings; a falling out with a colleague from a collaborative project whose leadership style and decisions I strongly contested (she no longer talks to me); and a foreign colleague whose proposals for a co-authored journal article piece I turned down without saying so (he was very upset because I didn’t answer his emails).

I would like to think I have also added on to my social capital after having introduced some worthy managerial innovations. The Division yahoo group is buzzing with exchanges of information, queries, responses, well-wishes and even debates. I have collected each of my faculty members’ mobile phone numbers for collective text message sending. Weekdays, weekends, nights and early morning (I am up at 5am doing “office” stuff on my computer); I engage my faculty and staff. I am told when any of them is sick, on errand somewhere, traveling or in some kind of trouble. I doggedly tracked down and followed personnel, mundane (e.g. updating the faculty contact list) or quixotic (seeking “corrective” promotion, something NOT previously done in the University’s history) concerns. I introduced transparency in ALL of the Division’s transactions from conference attendance grant applications to faculty loading. I feel I have established sufficient trust that I can confidently expect timely and substantive output from faculty members when I ask them to. Alas, the yahoo group medium also sank some of my social capital. A yahoo group for a regional project I was involved in yielded less than satisfactory outcome: my natural inquisitiveness and demands for transparency were seen as un-collegial and high-handed. Several members simply tuned out.  I don’t expect them to come rallying in support of future proposals from me here on.  My virtual musings at University of Venus, which keyed in academic issues to on-the-ground realities of my factual University, equally earned me admiration and admonition. Two former bosses told me my writing was too spicy and bear little circumspection but the current one says he enjoys reading them. At least I can expect some accountability from here on (lest they want to get written about!).

Political Scientists have argued that social interconnectedness and its premise of generalized reciprocity are linked to positive collective human endeavors. Whether addressing poverty or reducing crime, things get done better where social capital is present. In the academe, one must be ready to earn or burn it accordingly. There is always the next year to start all over again.

This post was also published in Inside Higher Ed. 

Chairside Drama

In Ponderings of a Peregrine Pinoy Professor on 2011/12/07 at 00:01

Rosalie Arcala Hall, writing from Iloilo in the Philippines.

Of the things I never expected from being an administrator, bearing witness to dramas is at the top. I had my fair share of dramas from working with artist-colleagues before, but outside of academic settings. My past year as Division chair was replete with stories of conflict that made me appreciate the personality and emotional maturity required for a job that puts me in charge of 32 faculty members, 2 academic programs with 6 specializations and 470+ students (not to mention academic bosses who expect you to deliver). As drama goes, they produced a mix of happy and sad endings that were tough for the conscience and for relationships.

First dramatic narrative: choosing between your job and family. Early this year, I negotiated a reluctant return of a faculty member content with being a supporting husband to his PhD- pursuing wife in the US.  After a series of contentious email messages, the Division asserted its authority to demand for said faculty member to choose between his job with us (and the tenure that goes with it) or co-location with his wife and 2 kids. In the end, he returned to teach with one baby in tow; the wife and other child remained in the US. In the past semester, I wrestled with another faculty member who did not want to return full-time to a 4-course teaching load in Miagao because she needed to take care of her autistic son. She wanted concessions by way of a reduced load and post in the city, which given the poorly-staffed faculty could not be accommodated without great cost to the program. After an acrimonious and highly public exchanges over the matter all the way to the Chancellor level (during which I resorted to some extraordinary measures, i.e. bringing up student evaluation scores,  in contesting the higher bosses‘ violation of Divisional sovereignty), I won the argument based on principle and effected said faculty’s resignation. When forced to choose between the demands of her job and caring for her autistic son (which, in my opinion, could no longer be reconciled), she chose the latter.

Second storyline: weeping students and getting a pass. A group of students filed a complaint against a teacher for giving them failing marks; another group wants to get a class opened (for which they all failed previously) in order not to delay their graduation; a student appeals for re-admission after being kicked out from the University (for consistently failing 75%-90% of her classes semester after semester!). There was one too many sob stories about students being too poor to afford the jeepney fare to file their paperwork, of allowances not being sent on time hence their failure to accomplish class requirements, and of plain ignorance of deadlines.

I have never liked drama of any kind. They do not resolve themselves by simply appealing to reason or established precedent. One can’t just say “sorry, I am just doing my job” and expect commensurate understanding. With my colleagues in the two cases above, my outspokenness and defiant disposition (acculturated traits from my American spouse) proved to be trusty anchors in bringing the matters to their conclusion. But they came at a great cost to my relationships with them and others who may have thought I was too hard and uncompromising. With the students, their cases were resolved, but not without great investments on my part to listen, to mediate, to seek collective advice from other faculty members, and to make phone calls to the College Secretary’s office for policy guidance, and without loads of coffee and tissues. Being no Mother Theresa, my “passes” as they were came with a heavy dose of rebuke and admonition for their lapses and weakness of spirit. I will probably go down in the Division’s history as the most tyrannical chair.

Being an academic administrator sometimes requires making tough decisions for which heated exchanges and tears may ensue. The key is discerning what is called for by your job and getting a good night sleep after all is said and done. Weighing between personal and institutional interests; between adherence to rules and exemptions is difficult in an environment where smooth inter-personal relations is highly valued. In these trials, I have learned to keep advice and to seek broader support for my position to neutralize whatever subjectivity I may be accused of. When I get affirmations on the correctness of a decision from other colleagues, the more confident I am of overcoming these dramas. As to sleeping, it gets easier the more I recite the mantra that I only have to bear this for two more years.
This post was also published in Inside Higher Ed.

Getting into the [Dis]comfort Zone

In Ponderings of a Peregrine Pinoy Professor on 2011/10/31 at 10:59

Rosalie Arcala Hall, writing from Iloilo in the Philippines.

In travel, detours present unlikely possibilities. As an academic, I have taken very few of these in my quest to get published and move at the top of my specialization. I have always taken a purposeful approach towards my time and effort– whether attending a conference (network! find publication outlets! project collaborators!) or picking a topic to read or write about (must tie in with the military! build up, not out, onto existing corpus of personal publication!). I live my life like my subject of specialization: mission-oriented, parsimonious and driven. Stopping along the roadside to smell the flowers has never been my thing.

But in the past few weeks, I have embarked on activities which took me out of my well-trodden path as Political Scientist and military expert. I attended a university system-wide research workshop on the environment which brought together natural/physical and social scientists in one roof. This literal meet-and-greet was a first in my University, where faculty members are accustomed to talking only to their kind. Having a conversation with a marine biodiversity expert, an agricultural economist and a medical epidemiologist was an eye opening experience for me; it also brought to the forefront a long subsumed public policy analytical lens bequeathed to me by my professors from graduate school in Boston. Rather than being out of my element, I was buoyed by my ignorance of the scientific literature.

The second was another workshop that brought together faculty members from different universities in our region to introduce and socialize the idea of doing multidisciplinary research, this time under the auspices of the government Commission on Higher Education. Contrary to my previous roles as proponent, leader or resource person, I was engaged as a facilitator, to bring together a diverse group of ten overworked (they handle 8-10 classes per semester), teaching-focused academics to hammer out a proposal on “changing family structure” in two and 1/2 days. I had to suppress my natural instincts to dominate, impose and be goal-oriented (finish all the sections!) in this exercise. In the process, I learned to listen more attentively, to be inclusive, diplomatic and life affirming.

The third was a sociological conference, at which I presented a paper on the soft technology of counterinsurgency. While this is is not my first foray into another academic discipline (the other time was with a convention of statisticians!), the kind of questions I elicited from sociologists were insightful and refreshing. Moreover, the other papers read were so engaging, current, rooted and a tinged irreverent (case in point: ethnonationalist conflict between Muslims and Christians played in social network discourse), it made me reflect on how boring and pedantic by comparison the other conferences I have been to tend to be. It also made me want to read out into sociological theories.

This out-of-discipline experience considerably expanded and deepened my worldview and network. I am being invited to a play in a sandbox, for which concrete rewards (at least those that count) are not likely to come. I am not certain whether I would eventually decide to take up the invitation. Would I be involved in a research project with them? Publish in a sociology journal? These are daunting prospects for somebody like me, still trying to earn my wings. But I am glad to at least have taken the detour.

This post was also published in Inside Higher Ed

Grounding

In Ponderings of a Peregrine Pinoy Professor on 2011/09/26 at 21:51

Rosalie Arcala Hall, writing from Iloilo, Philippines

A friend and fellow academic from Monash University, Sunway Campus in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia recently came for a 4-day scoping visit in Iloilo. My husband I are helping him establish connections, line up resources and connections and scout for logistics for a study tour for 18-20 students in January 2013. The “In Search of Iloilo” visit is the 8th such activity in Southeast Asia he has independently planned and carried out for his home institution. Previously, he has brought different groups of students to Saigon, Yogyakarta and Baguio. In this four-day visit, I came to know more about his film documentaries (on street vendors; on informal sector workers) and the social activist streak he has successfully incorporated into his academic and artistic work. It made me reflect on the kind of scholarly path I have taken thus far, and how by comparison it lacks the kind of social imprint that my circle of academic friends have managed to pursue in their lives.

Having been elsewhere (abroad) for almost half of my 20-year academic career at UP Visayas gives me an added feeling that I lack local rooted-ness. I saw my career projected outward– competing for international research grants and presenting local realities to foreign audiences. Being in and out every two years also made me realize how little I know of the many good local community works my colleagues are doing– running a food subsidy program for poor students; embarking on an aggressive student recruitment drive among public high school students; providing technical assistance in coastal resource mapping for municipal governments. My colleagues have moved in the direction of providing substance to our university’s mandate of giving back to the public that provides us tax money.

Gender concerns, which was my original advocacy passion, has evolved in my region (Western Visayas) in collaborative directions through the UGSAD, the regional gender resource center. I was recently recruited as an affiliate to attend a consultation hosted by the Commission on Human Rights on Philippine compliance to various rights treaties. The attendees, drawn from a broad sector of civil society, had such rich discussion of their work with young persons in conflict with the law, people with HIV, sex workers, informal settlers… I felt so lame having just done field work with women in the army and police. In the company of these veteran civil society actors, I was a novice whose theoretical frames and foreign comparisons have little bearing on everyday realities. Non-governmental organizations in my region have branched into action research, which are giving academics like myself a run for our money.

The sum total of my socially-conscious engagements typify that of a materially-comfortable, educated and childless middle class woman; they include participating in a book drive, providing support to a parish feeding program for children, and extending assistance and advice to those looking for scholarships and grants. Career-wise, my template follows Western standards: publish in peer-reviewed journals, attend professional conferences, apply for competitive grants and fellowships, write policy-relevant pieces. However, it has taken me almost a decade to realize I have done so little in terms of giving back.

I resolve from hereon to know more about my city and region, and to look for meaningful engagements for which I am able to marry my scholarship and social commitments. Where one is surrounded by harsh realities of poverty and marginalization, it is unconscionable to see the academic profession as an ivory tower of learning. I will get out, get connected and go local.

This post was also published in Inside Higher Ed.

The Accidental Mentor

In Ponderings of a Peregrine Pinoy Professor on 2011/08/21 at 22:14

Rosalie Arcala Hall, writing from Iloilo in the Philippines.

On my way back from Bandung, Indonesia, I received two messages which set me hollering in joy in the crowded departure lounge of the Manila airport. A young colleague was awarded a Fulbright grant for a PhD in the US; two others were short-listed for Fulbright research grants in agriculture. What really touched me were the effusive thanks on their part for my encouraging them to apply and for believing in their competitiveness as applicants. Prior to that, a former thesis advisee had sent me an email thanking me for landing a job at a University in Mindanao. He had met the department chair at the Political Science conference where he presented a paper and for which he received travel assistance from me and my husband.

These messages made me reflect about how much (or how little, in my reckoning) I have done for others throughout my academic career. The university is full of newbies eager to receive guidance and guideposts from those who have been-there-done-that on a myriad of decisions: choosing the right graduate program to get into, working on a thesis or dissertation, preparing research proposals or publishing peer-reviewed articles. Unfortunately, not all called to academic life are organically cut out for mentoring. In an environment where one has to jostle for lucrative grants and consultancies, to mentor means to create a potential competitor. In some Manila-based universities where professors are so busy juggling multiple “moonlighting” activities, there simply is no time to nurture budding scholars along the lines demanded by mentorship.

I have had no mentor in the full sense of the word, but my whole academic career is a story of the boundless generosity of individuals who believed in my potential. There were Dr. Nemenzo and Dr. Caoili, Political Science professors who overlooked my ripped jeans and t-shirts with leftist messages to get me into teaching, with only a promise that I would hold my law degree ambitions in abeyance. Colleagues Lisa Baliao, Rose Asong and Luz Rodriguez initiated me to the joys of field-based research across rivers, on mountain tops, in crowded jeepneys or habal-habal (single motorbike carrying at least 9 passengers). Dr. Siason, my former Division chair pushed me to apply for a Fulbright fellowship when but a handful have ever been awarded at my University. I became a better writer and record-time PhD-holder through Bill Crotty, Suzanne Ogden and Chris Bosso. From Temy Rivera, Carol Hernandez and Jojo Abinales, Filipino scholars whose international successes inspire career templates, I have received good introductions which enabled me to do interviews, deliver lectures and make hosting arrangements in Japan and the US.

I did not set out to mentor; it just happened and was relatively easy to do. I have written so many personalized recommendation letters to colleagues and students applying for school admission or jobs. I recruited colleagues to apply for Fulbright and other competitive international grants I have previously received. I coached young faculty members to be bolder in connecting with foreign professors, to submit to ISI journal outlets, and to dream big and believe in the superiority of their achievements even if coming from the Philippine periphery. Upon assuming the Division chairmanship, I have carried out workshops and writing workshops for journal article and research proposal preparation. I have sat down with colleagues to figure out graduate school options in the Philippines and abroad. I have also wrestled with University administrators for faculty tenure and renewal of appointments and explored funding options for those attending professional conferences. I celebrate colleagues publishing an article, releasing a book, winning an award by writing about them in the University website and newsletter.

Paying small acts of kindness forward bears surprising psychic rewards.

This post was also published at Inside Higher Ed.


Beyond the Call for Duty: Three Exceptional People You’d Love to Meet at UP Visayas

In Ponderings of a Peregrine Pinoy Professor on 2011/08/04 at 12:13

Rosalie Arcala Hall, writing from Iloilo, Philippines

In the hustle and grind of academic life, there are those who are contented with their tenure position and just “teach and go.” Others labor under pressure to research and publish, churning in proposals, reports and manuscripts for the elusive promotion and recognition in their discipline. A few rise above these professional or livelihood imperatives to nurture and strengthen the University’s sense of community. They are problem solvers, social capital builders and serve as an overall repository of institutional memories. Their achievements often defy standard metrics for academic performance, but bring attention to core values of what the University as a social entity exists for.

We are a university strongly rooted in the local scene. Our students come mostly from the Western Visayas region or Ilonggo-speaking enclaves in Mindanao and from predominantly poor to middle class families. A large proportion of our students receive full or partial benefits under the University’s socialized tuition and financial assistance scheme. A good number are from fishing, farming or informal sector working families who could not afford to pay for their child’s board and dorm fees on a semester basis. Our graduates supply the region’s elite workforce: bank managers, lawyers, doctors, social and business entrepreneurs, government heads and local chief executives (as well as a handful of Communist rebels). Our 68-year presence is entwined with Iloilo City’s cultural legacy- from our American colonial-era buildings, to our collection of important works by local artists, to the wealth of our local history archives and academic studies on minorities (Sulod-non, Atis) and the marginalized.

There are three people (all academics), Lisa Baliao, Gilma Tayo and the late Henry Funtecha who exemplify the importance of grounding academic work where it matters most: to our community of students, staff, alumni and the city/town folks. Lisa, a dyed-in-the-wool UP maroon from high school onwards, leads the Alumni Office which for the past 3 years has raised more money, ran more alumni events (breakfasts, lunches, dinners, film screenings, cocktails, you name it) and has singlehandedly padded the donor list for university scholarships and grants. Her latest coup was raising in a year’s time most of the US$40,000 needed for a school bus. She has an enviable memorized Rolodex of her students from the past 30 years and their whereabouts; she is a great teacher, mentor and friend to many of these students who today when personally called upon, would instantly shell out or wire a $100 donation to Lisa. She’s indefatigable and a pillar of the University’s external engagements.

Gilma organized the UP Leaders in Food Trust in 2006, which provides “discreet” meal subsidies ($25-$50 a month) and food-for-work arrangements with the cafeteria to very poor University students. Because of delays in the University-provided allowance or their salaries as work assistants, we have quite a number of students who literally can’t afford to eat 3 square meals a day or merely subsist on a diet of US$0.10 noodles or can of sardines. Gilma independently fund raised by tapping UPV alumni in the US; UPLIFT eventually assisted about 2 dozen students, half of them already graduated and one dropout. They have a longer list of potential beneficiaries (which they document through rigorous interviews with classmates) but couldn’t accommodate all given donation shortfalls. She plans on building a soup kitchen to cut down cost and crafting a student-sponsorship scheme among better placed (income-wise) faculty members.

The late Sir Henry was a genuine scholar and a public intellectual. He pioneered groundbreaking research on the city’s local history; he ran a column in a local daily; he was a mainstay in many local radio programs dealing with everything from cuisine or arts and crafts to festivals; in addition, he authored readable and popular college History textbooks. At the helm of the University’s Center for West Visayan Studies, he brought local artisans to demonstrate and sell their crafts under the Living Museum and organized heritage-centered conferences that brought together government officials, business operators and academics in one table. Under his mentor-ship, students and colleagues grew to know, love and be proud of Iloilo.

These three peoples’ careers are not summed up by their respective degrees or academic rank. Their passion and dedicated investment to community-strengthening is humbling, particularly since they received little or no monetary reward for this type of service. Theirs is a skill set which is not recognized under a system obsessed with only rewarding those who publish in peer-reviewed and ISI outlets, yet they supply the very lifeblood of the University by making available extra resources in this era of declining budgets, enabling students to finish their degrees and cementing the University’s place in the larger society. They provide an alternative template of what it means to be an academic.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 109 other followers